The variety of objects here would be not too far from those found on a
set of shelves in a pantry and would have had to be disposed of with
colapse of shelf unit except horse shoe....
The possible reasons for the assemblage being together can be infinite.
One would also not want to rule out damage through transport as things
often arrived broken. (check to see if ceramic damage was due to edge
impact wear and tear or crushing (more pieces smaller pieces and impact
in centers) If accidental damage then you would see larger pieces as
well. Also new or used- scratch marks wear would indicate accident
rather than shipping is more likely.
I would find the reason for cache deposit more interesting than reason
for the assemblage itself
Digging a pit is a lot of work. Was this the primairy disposal means in
the region?
Was this urban or rural.
if rural then certainly other dumping disposal methods would have been
used- it would have been taken to property boundary and dumpped or
drumped into any swale or
unplowable area.
How far from a residence?
One suggestion for the pit would be that somehow the assemblage had been
tainted or smelled, or was involved with a messy spill something that
one would not want around on the surface or would not want people or
animals getting into. Perhaps the cans are key here....
If the deposit was in public setting then perhaps it was done to hide it
however even at cemetaries open dumping on the perimeter was the norm
If this was near the foundation check in to drainage. It could have been
house cleaning over time dumpped into a hole to serve as a dry well to
for settled water to drain into also very common.
Lots of possibilities have fun networking it out. Most interesting- did
they dispose of all their trash in this careful way. What tidy folk indeed.
Conrad
Jay and Beth Stottman wrote:
> Perhaps it was a house cleaning episode associated with a change in
> occupancy. I have seen such deposits (mostly with privies) where
> large amounts of household debris, such as sets of dishes, glassware,
> etc. were dumped when a change occurred in the function of the
> property (from residential to commercial) or in occupants (a long term
> resident moves and downsizes). The deposits coincided with documented
> changes in occupancy found in the archival record.
>
> Jay
>
> M. Jay Stottman
> Staff Archaeologist
> Kentucky Archaeological Survey
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John M. Foster, RPA"
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 2:51 PM
> Subject: Questions about residential deposit
>
>
> We have recently excavated a tightly dated deposit (1890s) of residential
> artifacts. The majority of the deposit appears to be ceramics from at
> least
> four British makers. Other items include pressed glass, glass candy dish,
> perfume caddy, horse shoe (one), one French toothbrush, one large
> comb, couple
> of decomposed cans of indeterminate size, pickle jar, several Prosser
> buttons,
> condiment bottle, sets of glass stemware, window glass, and one
> ceramic doll or
> figurine face. There was no cutlery, cooking ware, tools, and very little
> bone.
>
> Based on weathering of broken edges, it appears that the items were
> broken
> elsewhere, as opposed to fresh fractures from excavation, and then
> deposited in
> a prepared pit (3 x 3 x 2 feet). Only one whole bottle was recovered.
> All the
> ceramics were broken and appear to be from several sets of plain white
> earthenware dishes. The artifacts appear to be average or slightly
> above in
> cost. We are investigating the possibility that the artifacts may have
> resulted
> from a single episode of deposition. The question is what might have
> occasioned
> mass destruction of a collection of dining ware? We are investigating
> earthquakes which are well-known for the area but would be interested
> in other
> possibilities, which brings us to this list. Any comments or
> suggestions would
> be appreciated.
>
> John M. Foster, RPA Greenwood-Associates.com 310.454.3091 tel/fax
> 310.717.5048
> cell
>
|
