Feature #2 - Midden

A common feature we run into at the Hahn site is a midden.  This feature has multiple purposes, but a majority of the time it is largely a trash pit for domestic and "kitchen" waste or even a hole for a latrine.  The way that we can tell the difference between the two is that a trash pit, obviously, has "trash" in it (which we archaeologists see as treasures) and the latrine usually has nothing in it at all.  Here, we have a trash pit:

As described in the previous post, we are able to tell this is a distinctive feature because it has different coloration and texture than the surrounding soil.  In this picture above, we can see that the concentration of shells and bones as well as the dark color make it distinctive as a feature.  What makes the feature as a trash pit is that it demonstrates that the objects in the pit were once utilized (i.e. the mussel shells had been cracked open and the bones had cut marks or were burnt for cooking).  In order to excavate this feature, we divide the pit into halves, then excavate one half at 10 cm intervals and pay attention to any change in the soil along the way.  We know we reach its bottom when we encounter gravel and sand, which show natural features rather than man-made features.  After we map the first half, we can then excavate the second half according to horizons, not necessarily by 10 cms.  Each horizon is that distinction between layers of soil in the pit, whether it is the layer of artifacts of the way in which the soil is colored.  What is beneficial from excavating in trash pits it that we are able to uncover artifacts like broken sherds of pottery to see various styles attempted and used by Fort Ancient Indians.  We can also see broken flakes of flint or utilized tools that had been used to their capacity and then discarded.  I find it extremely fascinating and exciting to be able to reach into the past and see what these Native Americans were thinking and doing and eating and creating each day as well as see how we can compare our behavior today to theirs in the past.

Finally, we have our latrine.  The way we know that is was a latrine was that there was barely anything in the sediment when we put it through the screens.  The pit looked like a feature due to its change in color and texture, but because it had close to nothing in it, save for an occasional pebble or piece of flint, we knew it was a latrine.  So, like the midden, we separated the pit into two halves and dug by 10 cm levels, but after we realized there was nothing in it, we then excavated the whole thing all at once.  Though I feel like this is a flawed way of excavating, it was still effective because we did not damage any artifacts and were able to get through the dirt more effectively.  From these experiences, we are able to learn various techniques needed in archaeology but also allow ourselves to judge what we think is more correct and proper methodology in excavation.