HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Robert L. Schuyler" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 11 May 2010 15:37:01 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (132 lines)
Like all typologies the different types eventually blend. For example, 
in back yards of individual households the residents dug pits (or used 
natural pits) and dumped discrete trash (usually kitchen or sometimes 
building items). These "dumps" were specific and created over brief 
periods. In contrast general "fall out" of trash into the soil - usually 
walked on and broken up - takes the form of "sheet trash." A midden sort 
of combines the two - usually a product of some type of specific 
activity (shell fish gathering), over a longer period of time, and 
usually more concentrated than "sheet trash" but more diffused in time 
and size than a "dump."

Does any one have any primary sources on what people who created such 
features originally called them, assuming they had any emic terminology? 
The only thing I remember was as a small child being told not to dig in 
the back yard because I would find "trash." Later (1950s) we had a dump, 
and called it  "a dump", of non-organic materials on the edge of our 
back yard going into the woods (on a downward sloping hill).

Such terminology would be different from period to period (colonial vs. 
19th-20th centuries), from culture to culture, and also from formal 
settings vs. general settings. (e.g. city trash collectors vs. 
individuals and home sites).
I do not think there is any agreed upon terminology among archaeologists 
and I wonder about "natives."

On 5/11/2010 2:24 PM, 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>
>>>        
>
>    

-- 
Robert L. Schuyler
University of Pennsylvania Museum
3260 South Street
Philadelphia, PA l9l04-6324

Tel: (215) 898-6965
Fax: (215) 898-0657
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2