All,
My apologies for hijacking the post for a second and steering the topic away from the topic of deposition of trash in privies. Hearing about so many people digging in privies, it occurred to me to plug one fruitful aspect of privy excavations that is often overlooked, namely, the examination of privy soils for evidence of parasites. Parasites have had a significant impact on people in the past and still do today, although the general population in the US tends not to think about such things. Parasites have killed influential historical figures, have contributed to the loss of battles and wars, and responsible for an untold amount of death and suffering through the world. We really do need to pay more attention to parasites in archaeological discussions of past populations.
Evidence of parasites can be extracted from soil samples collected from privies or other waste disposal features, and the results of testing can provide information about diet, health and sanitation, and even migration of people within households or within communities. Of course parasite data can be collected from other types of samples as well, including coprolites, samples from mummies, or soil samples from burials. Essentially, to collect a soil sample for parasite testing from burials you would collect about 25-50 grams of soil depending on what types of tests you want done. Samples should be collected in sturdy zip top bags and labeled with the provenience information. Tools used in collecting the samples should be cleaned after each collection so as not to contaminate subsequent samples. Control samples should be collected from outside of the waste-disposal feature in a location unlikely to have been contaminated with human waste.
In the lab, the samples can be subjected to various analytical techniques that would allow you to recover evidence of parasites in the samples. Traditional microscope analyses can be used to identify the eggs of a number of intestinal parasites (e.g., round worm, whipworm, flukes, etc.).
The problem with only utilizing microscope testing, however, is that many of the parasites that plague humans do not leave eggs that can be found through the aforementioned testing method. Among these are the intestinal protozoa (e.g., Giardia, E. histolytica, and Cryptosporidium), which are responsible for a large proportion of diarrheal diseases and cases of dysentery recorded in the historical record, and which form cysts that are very rarely preserved intact in archaeological soil samples. In order to identify the above protozoa, you can run the soil samples through immunological tests called ELISAs. ELISAs can test for the presence of cyst wall antigens specific to the protozoa mentioned above, so even if the cyst has been broken up into a thousand little pieces, you can still identify their presence. ELISA testing requires less equipment, is quicker, and is less complicated than microscope methods; however, the up front cost of testing materials
themselves is generally more. The real downside of the ELISA tests is that each test is manufactured to test for a specific parasite, and are not able to identify a suite of parasites all at once. However, because the parasites for which ELISAs can test typically cannot be identified in microscope analyses, they are quite useful if you have reason to suspect the presence of the parasite in your samples.
I would be happy to discuss this topic further with anyone who has an interest in, or a current need for such analysis. Thank you for your time.
Best,
Jeremy W. Pye, PhD, RPA
Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. (CRA)
Field Supervisor
[log in to unmask]
Lousiana Office
7330 Fern Avenue
Suite 1104
Shreveport, LA 71105
318.525.8526 direct
http://www.crai-ky.com
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 4/7/15, Nancy Davis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Subject: Re: Privies and house abandonment/cleanout
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2015, 3:27 PM
The New York State Museum
Cultural Resource Survey excavated a shaft feature (privy or
cistern?) in up-state New York that was stuffed full of
late-nineteenth to early-twentieth century household items
interpreted as a house clear-out after the owner of the
nearby house died. He was a Scottish immigrant who started a
very successful soda water bottling business in the
community and was well-off and well-respected. Besides the
typical bottles and broken ceramics there were also hundreds
of identical white clay smoking pipes barely used, clothing,
shoes, buttons, what looks like the contents of a shed or
cellar workshop, a pantry, storage trunks, and medicine
cabinet. There was at least one person in the family who
died of tuberculosis ca. 1902 and the shaft feature
artifacts included lots of bottled lung cures and medicinal
paraphernalia related to treating lung ailments (i.e.
Charles Marchand Hand Atomizer and Ozonizer) along with
glass syringes and drug vials.
The site report is published as part of the
CRSP series as Volume No. 5 available electronically on the
New York State Museum website:
http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/staffpubs/docs/20471.pdf
Nancy Davis
New York State
Museum
Cultural Resource Survey
Albany, New York
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Williams, Scott
Sent: Tuesday,
April 07, 2015 12:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Privies and house
abandonment/cleanout
We
recently excavated a late 19th century privy that was
packed-literally-with artifacts. What is curious to me is
the range of the artifact types: besides the usual medicine
bottles and broken bits of pottery were whole liquor bottles
(some half full), twelve shoes of different sizes, at least
one book, a metal pan, lots of metal cans, other household
goods such as condiment and perfume containers, and mattress
springs. We're thinking the privy was filled after the
house was vacated, either due to the death of the resident
or their eviction. The material doesn't look like it
was deposited in the privy over a long period, as if the
privy was abandoned and then the hole was used for trash
disposal over time.
The
privy is located in an area of packed glacial till, meaning
that excavating the privy shaft would have taken some effort
and filling it with trash while it was still in use seems
counterintuitive (and assuming no one stuffs a mattress into
a privy they are still using). A nearby privy of the same
age was more "typical", in that it was not packed
full of artifacts and had a much more limited range of
materials in it.
Has anyone
seen examples of privies that appear to have been
purposefully used for one large disposal event, such as
clearing out a house that became suddenly vacant? My
experience excavating privies is limited.
Thanks,
Scott S. Williams
Cultural
Resources Program Manager, WSDOT
Ph:
360.570.6651
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
WSDOT Cultural Resources Program<http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/CulRes/default.htm>
on the Web
"Development is not stifled by history,
but enriched by it."
|
