Most refuse is processing related- Kitchens process food for example. 
Shell middens contain cooking areas, processing, genrall dumpped 
material it is just that shells dominate.
Again I think it is simply Brittish for Dump possibly archaic term. I 
also seem to think that middens were at point of harvesting rather than 
dwelling....

Mark Branstner wrote:

> Conrad,
>
> By your own definition, you appear to be separating middens and dumps 
> ... A shell midden is far more than just a dump site ... it is a 
> working area resulting from the processing of molluscs.
>
> I agree with Andy ... middens are accretionary deposits associated 
> with distinct activity areas, and dumps are remote refuse disposal 
> sites.  We have had the same discussion here in Illinois relative to 
> nineteenth century farmsteads.
>
> Mark
>
>
> At 2:16 PM -0400 5/11/10, Conrad Bladey wrote:
>
>> I have seen middens described as containing many different types of 
>> deposit- even burials.
>>
>> I believe that it is the same as a dump. Refuse
>>
>> Most likely it is a British Term or archaic American term for a dump.
>>
>> Middens are often qualified by type as in Shell, bone   but so are 
>> dumps.
>>
>> Shell middens were often some ways from settlements at the sites of 
>> gathering of shellfish for example lightening the load
>>
>> Conrad Bladey
>> Peasant
>>
>> Andy Sewell wrote:
>>
>>> I also tend to think of a midden as something that gradually 
>>> accumulates as a result of disposal activities over time, while a 
>>> dump may represent a discrete occurrence of disposal, often of just 
>>> a few classes of artifacts (bottles, broken dishes). A dump may also 
>>> be located at some distance from the place of residence, or 
>>> deposited in a specific landform, such as a ravine, whereas I tend 
>>> to think of a midden as something that would likely be found around 
>>> a domestic structure, such as a kitchen. I also think that using a 
>>> term that a historical occupant or producer of such a deposit would 
>>> use might be a good approach to consider.
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrew R. Sewell, MS, RPA
>>> Principal Investigator
>>> Hardlines Design Company
>>> ? Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
>>> Jeanette Mckenna
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 1:57 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: terminology
>>>
>>> I tend to think of "midden" and household or more organic waste, while
>>> trash dump or refuse may include many other items - like industrial 
>>> waste,
>>> metals, etc.
>>>
>>> Jeanette McKenna
>>> California
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> [Original Message]
>>>> From: Chuck Carrig <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> Date: 5/11/2010 10:53:55 AM
>>>> Subject: terminology
>>>>
>>>> Is there a consensus on the proper terminology for the discussion of
>>>> historic refuse concentrations?
>>>>
>>>> I've always used the terminology historic midden as opposed to 
>>>> historic
>>>> trash dump.
>>>>
>>>> Chuck Carrig - RPA
>>>> Archaeologist
>>>> BLM - Dillon Field Office
>>>> 1005 Selway Drive
>>>> Dillon, MT 59725
>>>> (406)683-8029
>>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>