Accompanied by J. L. Henson, Chas. Scheel and John Jr., we began work on
the site. For the last few weeks we have removed our stakes after each
day’s work because of the farming expected on the site. This causes an
extra amount of work each trip that could have been used so badly in the
excavation.
After removing the plowzone, the square was scraped off, and there was
no pattern or postmold to be seen. We removed all potsherds, bone, and
stone F. S. (Field Specimen) 83 DD 6.5 to 7.0, and again scraped off the
soil, and again there was no pattern. We also found a projectile point
in the above mentioned level F. S. 84. We removed the next 6 in. of the
square collecting potsherds, etc., F. S. 85. Also in this level the soil
changed from the strong midden rich brown in color to that color of the
subsoil, which is of a light sandy brown to yellow. This soil presented
a problem, it was of a mottled color, the same as found through the
subsoil. There is so little difference between this soil and the
absolute sterile soil. This soil has been checked the entire length of
the site in the new seep ditch, which is over 6 ft. deep and there is no
doubt of its being sterile. This situation is of great concern because
of the burials that have been found in what appears to be the subsoil.
There is positively no connection between this burial and the dark brown
midden in the soil above. There is no sign of a pit leading to the
burial, but there is a difference in pottery styles, texture, even the
feel of the material found in what appears to be the subsoil, and in
that found in association with the dark brown midden.
Mr. Scheel, working in the square with me, commented on the change of
color, and I asked him what he would think if I told him there was a
burial below where he was working. He asked me how I knew, and I told
him of the legs being in the last square we worked, and he said it would
be Woodland, as there was no connection with the Mississippi midden
above the soil we were then working in. We were being pressed for time
at this part of the square so we narrowed the square to 5 × 10 ft. and
when we reached the burial, we also reached water. The river at this
time was over the banks and seemed to boil up in the square; this
presented a real problem. We debated as to whether we should quit the
square and fill it up or do the best we could. We thought of filling in
the 10′ × 10′ square and reopening it a year later but decided that we
would finish since we had lots of decisive facts and we needed the rest
to complete forms. We gathered up boards to stand on to keep from
sinking in the sand, and the condition of the bone was so poor, being
wet, it was just impossible for us to remove it. Though I did get the
skull taped up before trying to remove it, the other bones were so soft
they crumbled when handled, so the skull was all the bone that I could
remove in one piece. There were three pottery vessels with this burial,
a bottle, which was upside down, a bowl beside the head (it too was
upside down) and a jar by the right arm which was right side up.
While working in square 37R5 this burial was partly in it (37R5) and
there weren’t feet present (see photo 34). The absence of feet has
occurred before and it is a trait that may be distinctive.
While removing the skull of this burial, which was on the line (R6), the
arm of another burial, in square 38R6, was found. It was not removed,
but was left for future investigation since the conditions are the same
as the above mentioned burial. The soil color in the levels below the
midden is of great concern in this area; there seems to be a
discoloration in what appears to be the top part of the subsoil. There
will be a thorough check made of the soil.