I have seen a late nineteenth to early twentieth century septic system that is very similar to what you have. If it is a septic system there should be another shaft adjacent to it where the clarified liquids were diverted. The waste came into the first shaft, the solids settled out, and the claridfied liquid fowed through a pipe in the side of the first "tank" into the second. I saw one like that excavated in Phoenix and observed a second one at the new Oxon Hill Manor in Maryland. It makes no sense as a cistern because of the lack of the hydraulic cement liner.
Pat Garrow
-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob Genheimer <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Nov 17, 2010 10:44 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Help identifying a 19th C. subsurface feature, a dry well?
>
>Alex
>
>This looks very much like a domed cistern, except for the fact that interior walls are not lime mortared. That would also explain pipe egress/ingress. The key is where in relation to the house is it located. Cisterns are fed from downspouts from the roof, and typically relatively close to the structure. But, it sure looks like a cistern orifice to me.
>
>Bob Genheimer, RPA
>George Rieveschl Curator of Archaeology
>Cincinnati Museum Center
>1301 Western Avenue
>Cincinnati, Ohio 45203
>513-455-7161 office
>513-846-4898 mobile
>513-455-7169 fax
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
>Alexander Keim
>Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 11:27 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Help identifying a 19th C. subsurface feature, a dry well?
>
>
>Hello! My name is Alex Keim, a PhD candidate in Historical Archaeology at Boston University, and I am hoping someone can help me identify a architectural feature I encountered while doing a on-site consultation in Lynn, MA. A link to photos is at the bottom of this message. The feature is located in the rear lot of a townhouse constructed in 1871. The feature in question is the remainder of a previously partially demolished brick dome or vault, about 1 meter below current surface level. Based on photographs (see link) of a very similar feature uncovered by construction crews about 30 meters away (but reburied before I could see it firsthand) I believe the feature was originally a dome with a circular opening at the top. This intact feature also had metal piping entering the dome near the base, but the partial feature I encountered had no surviving piping. The dome is roughly a meter from top to base, and the intact portion I saw was about 2 meters in diameter. The feature is
>
> constructed of bricks and mortar. It is set on a large circular pit, full of cobble sized rubble and rip-rap. I partially excavated the soil fill above the rubble and determined that it dates to after the feature's demolition, and I removed a portion of the rubble fill to try to determine the depth of the hole, but I encountered no sign of a bottom after 70 cm.
> I am thinking that this is some kind of dry well, or possibly a cesspool (but there were no cessy conditions or residue on the interior), but I have never dug something like this before and would welcome confirmation or other interpretations. If anyone has encountered a similar feature I would greatly appreciate some feedback. Following is a link to a webpage that should give you access to some photographs of the intact feature I did not see firsthand, and the partial feature I worked on. Thanks for your time!
>
>Sincerely,
> Alex
>
>http://img72.imageshack.us/i/intactbrickvaultfeature.jpg/
>http://img512.imageshack.us/i/afterpartialremovalofru.jpg/
>http://img204.imageshack.us/i/detailoffillremoval.jpg/
>http://img217.imageshack.us/i/featureafterexcavationb.jpg/
>http://img594.imageshack.us/i/featureafterexcavationb.jpg/
>http://img143.imageshack.us/i/featureafterexcavationb.jpg/
>http://img138.imageshack.us/i/intactbrickvaultfeature.jpg/
|
