Earlier reports noted several different types of mound fill, sometimes in alternating bands or discernible basket loads. These were mostly observed in the walls of the tunnels. Much of the upper half of the eastern profile is currently exposed, but is open to the elements and little of stratigraphic interest is currently visible without scraping back the outer layer. Investigations of the mound in 2004 included scraping clean several small areas of the exposed profile. In order to minimize damage to the mound and reduce the risk of further erosion, the cleaned areas were relatively small and separated from one another. No overall view of mound stratigraphy was therefore obtained, but several suggestive features were exposed.

Figure 13 shows a cleaned portion of the profile about 10 meters south of the open tunnel. Individual loads of darker sediment are clearly visible in this area. The dark loading features are very dark gray (10YR3/1) silt loam, and the surrounding matrix is composed of brown (10YR4/3) and yellowish brown (10YR5/4) silt loam. The sediment expressed a weak blocky structure, but this is likely due to weathering from the recently exposed profile. Within the matrix around the dark loading features were also a few small (2-4 cm diameter) distinct clods of pale yellow (2.5Y7/4) sediment. Exposed in this small window alone, then, are at least three different types of fill. Earlier reports also noted several different types of fill, including sediment with and without pebbles. It seems unlikely that all the different fills originated in the area immediately surrounding the mound. Where the different sediments came from and how far they were transported remains an open question, as it does at many area platform mounds.

Extending from the open tunnel to about 10 meters south is a clear horizontal unconformity in the fill (Figure 14). Through the windows of small scraped areas on the profile, this line appears to run the entire length of the mound. Redox concentrations (iron staining) and ferromanganese concretions are concentrated along this unconformity, indicating differential water flow above and below the line. A horizon about 10 cm thick below the line appears to be compacted, and composed of slightly different fill than the sediment below it. This horizon is reminiscent of mound stage divisions noted in other area platform mounds, such as the Huntsville site (Sabo 1986), Goforth-Saindon (Kay et al. 1989), Harlan (Bell 1972) and Norman (Vogel et al. 2004).

Figure 13. Loading features visible in eastern mound profile, about 10 m south of open tunnel.

Figure 14. Mound stage division visible in eastern mound profile, about 5 m south of open tunnel.