ART. 32 INDIAN VILLAGE SITE IN MISSISSIPPI — COLLINS 9 



We will first examine the evidence which seems to indicate that 

 the rows of post holes in House Eing No. 1 represent two or more 

 houses. It will be recalled that on the west side, immediately to the 

 south of the entrance, the outer trench C cut through the fill of B, 

 which from the point of junction decreased in width until at the 

 entrance it had practically disappeared. This shows unmistakably 

 that C was dug later than B. In the same way, the fire pit D would 

 appear to have been used after the walls of A and the inner square 

 had been razed; for the sides of the pit extended into the trench A 

 and across the line of post holes of the square. Under these condi- 

 tions the fire pit could hardly have been used while either of these 

 walls was standing but must have belonged to B or C. It might 

 also be mentioned that very little burnt wall material (clay) was 

 found in the fire pit, whereas a considerable amount might have been 

 expected had the fire pit been in use while either of the walls was 

 standing. Finally, there are no facts that run counter to the expla- 

 nation of the inner square and the three circular trenches being the 

 remains of single walls erected at different periods, while if a single 

 complex structure is represented there is uncertainty as to which of 

 the rows of posts was the wall and which merely roof supports. 

 There would be need for onty one wall, which would mean that three 

 of the rows of posts had served as roof supports or for some other 

 purpose; it is difficult to see the necessity of such a number of roof 

 supports so close together, especially as on the west side where for a 

 considerable distance the posts of B and C run closely parallel. 



Another explanation might be that the outer trench C was a later 

 enlargement of B and that the posts of the inner square and of A 

 had been utilized as roof supports for the later and larger house. But 

 a difficulty is still presented by the large fire pit, for as just noted 

 this could hardly have been in use while the walls of the inner square 

 and A were standing, since it extends over both, and if as therefore 

 seems likely, the pit belonged to either B or C, then at least those 

 posts of the square and A which were contiguous to the fire pit were 

 not standing when C formed the wall of the house. 



While the features just mentioned seem to point to the conclusion 

 that several different buildings are represented, the fact remains 

 that the circular trenches and the square are arranged in such an 

 orderly fashion as to suggest a single structure or possibly a single- 

 walled house that was later incorporated as part of a larger and 

 more complex structure. As Avill be seen, there are several descrip- 

 tions of Indian houses in the Southeast which had walls and roof 

 supports arranged in much the same vray as the lines of post holes in 

 House Ring No. 1. 



67125—32 2 



