Making Stone Tools the Hardaway

Making Stone Tools the Hardaway: A Paleoindian Artifact from the Graceland Site, Randolph County, North Carolina

By Joe Blondino

It’s no surprise that archaeologists like old things. That’s why we get particularly excited when we find artifacts dating to the Paleoindian period, which spans from at least as early as 12,000 BC (Carr 2018, Carr and Adovasio 2002, Goodyear 2005) to approximately 8,000 BC (Ward and Davis 1999). This period represents the earliest occupation of North America, when people were settling into new environments that would ultimately shape the way their culture and technology evolved in different parts of the continent.

For September we will look at a Paleoindian artifact that continues our series highlighting materials recovered from the Asheboro Bypass Project in Randolph County, North Carolina. Among the sites identified during this project was the Graceland site (31RD1568). Dovetail Cultural Resource Group conducted excavations at this site on behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), guided by the Scope of Work authored by NCDOT (Overton 2015) and coordination between Dovetail, NCDOT, and the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology. The majority of the 3,661 artifacts recovered from the site date to the Morrow Mountain and Guilford phases of the Middle Archaic period, spanning a date range from approximately 5,000 to 3,000 BC (Blondino and Proper 2018). However, a Hardaway side-notched point dating to the late Paleoindian period indicates that the site was being used much earlier. Excavations at the Slade site in southeastern Virginia suggest a date range of 8,250–8,050 BC for the Hardaway phase (McAvoy and McAvoy 1997), making these points approximately 10,000 years old!

Hardaway side-notch point photo

Hardaway side-notched point from the Graceland site.

The Hardaway point from the Graceland site is made of a metavolcanic rock common to this part of North Carolina and quarried by the prehistoric occupants of the site as a material from which to make projectile points and other stone tools. The site itself is located on a slight slope near a natural drainage which channels surface water during heavy rain. As a result, there is more erosion here than in nearby areas, exposing the bedrock and making it easier to get to. The distribution of artifacts across the site suggests that people were obtaining stone from near the drainage, where it could be found closer to the surface, and then taking it up to the flatter land above to work it into tools. Prehistoric people would visit sites like this when their stone toolkit was in need of rejuvenation. Stone tools like projectile points and knives can be re-sharpened, but this process removes material, and eventually the tool is too small to be used and simply must be replaced. It is likely that this was the case with the Graceland Hardaway point. You might notice from the photograph that the point is a little lopsided- if you look at the tip of the point, it is not directly above the center of the base. This often happens because the point has been re-sharpened more on one side than on the other, perhaps because it was being used more as a knife than as a projectile point. When its owner visited the Graceland site during the late Paleoindian period, they may have made themselves a new point (or a few of them), and simply discarded this one, only to have Dovetail archaeologists find it again 10,000 years later. Now that’s doing things the Hardaway!

Graceland Excavation Site - Image

Excavations at the Graceland site. The Hardaway point was recovered from the excavation unit under the canopy on the right.

 

References:

Blondino, Joseph R. and Earl E. Proper
2018    Addendum: Archaeological Survey and Testing of Newly Defined Areas of Potential Effects for the Asheboro Bypass, Randolph County, North Carolina. Dovetail Cultural Resource Group, Fredericksburg, Virginia.

Carr, Kurt
2018    Peopling of the Middle Atlantic: A Review of Paleoindian Research. In Middle Atlantic Prehistory: Foundations and Practice, edited by Heather A. Wholey, and Carole L. Nash, pp. 219–260. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland.

Carr, K.W., and J.M. Adovasio
2002    Paleoindians in Pennsylvania. In Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania, edited by Kurt Carr and James Adovasio, pp. 1–50. Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology, No. 2. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Goodyear, Albert C.
2005    Evidence of Pre-Clovis Sites in the Eastern United States. In Paleoamerican Origins: Beyond Clovis, pp. 103–112. Center for the Study of the First Americans, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.

McAvoy, Joseph M. and Lynn D. McAvoy
1997    Archaeological Investigations of Site 44SX202, Cactus Hill, Sussex County. Virginia Department of Historic Resources Research Report Series n. 8, Richmond, Virginia.

Overton, Brian
2015    Request for Proposal: Intensive Archaeological Survey and Evaluation, Asheboro U.S. 64 Bypass. North Carolina Department of Transportation, Human Environment Section, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Ward, H. Trawick, and R.P. Stephen Davis Jr.
1999    Time Before History: The Archaeology of North Carolina. The University of North Caroloina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

A Brush with a Hog

A Brush with a Hog: Cleaning Your Teeth in the Nineteenth Century

By Kerry Gonzalez

In 2018, archaeologists from the Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration (MDOT SHA), Applied Archaeology and History Associates, Inc., and Dovetail Cultural Resource Group worked on four sites along Frederick Road (MD 144) in Howard County, Maryland. The survey is part of a stewardship initiative by MDOT SHA to explore the history and development of the MD 144 corridor, known historically as the Baltimore and Frederick-Town Turnpike and the National Road. As part of this work, Dovetail will be processing the field and artifact data, as well as producing a final report on four sites. While the archival research and data analysis is ongoing, the site appears to be a mid nineteenth century dwelling that may have served as a store.

This month’s blog highlights a bone toothbrush recovered from the Poplar Springs excavations (Photo 1 and Photo 2). Mid- to late nineteenth century examples like this one, once contained animal hair bristles held in place by copper alloy wiring (Photo 2). While hog bristles were the preferred hair for toothbrushes, horse and badger hair were also used at various times (Pittman 2018).

Bone Toothbrush Fragment image

Photo 1: Bone Toothbrush Fragment Recovered From Excavations at Poplar Springs Site.

Close up of toothbrush - Image

Photo 2: Image Taken with Microscope Showing Intact Bristles and Copper Wire.

Mid-to-Late 19th Century Bone Toothbrush - Image

Photo 3: Mid-to Late-Nineteenth Century Bone Toothbrush Recovered From Clagett’s Brewery (18BC38) in Maryland (JefPat 2018).

 

The first bristled toothbrush was invented during the Tang Dynasty (AD 619–907) in China (Library of Congress 2013). While the bone or bamboo toothbrush with hog bristles was used throughout China during and after the Tang Dynasty, it was some time before this invention reached Europe. Prior to this, Europeans would clean their teeth (if they chose to do so) with a rag or chew stick (Samford 2002). It was not until 1780 that William Addis reportedly invented what we know today as the toothbrush. The legend says:

Addis became involved in a dispute that got out of control, and was thrown into Newgate prison, charged with starting a riot. Languishing in a dark and dank jail cell, Addis had time on his hands, and a foul-tasting mouth. The story has it that he spied a broom in a corner of a room, and was struck with inspiration. Retrieving a bone from the jail cell floor, he somehow drilled holes into it and obtained bristles from a sympathetic jailer. [Museum of Everyday Life n.d.]

Toothbrushes were being mass-produced across Europe by the 1840s, and by 1857 the first U.S. patent was filed by H.N. Wadsworth. This patent outlines how the new and improved angle of the bristles “keeps the gums healthy and vigorous” among other things (Samford 2002). However, while toothbrushes likely cleaned better than the previously used rag or stick, the bristles often broke off leaving sharp ends that punctured the fragile gum tissue and thus led to nasty oral infections. Animal hair continued to be used in toothbrushes until 1938 when the first toothbrush with nylon bristles was presented to the market (Pittman 2018). The bristles on this new and improved toothbrush were still very coarse and it was not until the 1950s that softer bristles were introduced.  So, while you are brushing your teeth tonight, be thankful that the toothbrush was invented and that you are not using a chew stick or rag to clean your teeth.

 

References:

Museum of Everyday Life
n.d.      Prison, Suicide, & the Cold-Climate Hog. Electronic document, http://museumofeverydaylife.org/exhibitions-collections/previous-exhibitions/toothbrush-from-twig-to-bristle-in-all-its-expedient-beauty/a-visual-history-of-the-toothbrush. Accessed August 2018.

Library of Congress
2013    “Who Invented the Toothbrush and When Was it Invented?” Everyday Mysteries:  Fun Science Facts from the Library of Congress.  Website accessed February 23, 2017 at http://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/mysteries/tooth.html.

Pittman, Bill
2018    Thomas Jefferson’s Toothbrush. Electronic document, http://www.history.org/history/teaching/enewsletter/may03/iotm.cfm. Accessed August 2018.

Samford, Patricia
2002    Bone Handled Toothbrushes. Electronic document, https://www.jefpat.org/diagnostic/SmallFinds/Toothbrushes/index-BoneHandledToothbrushes.html, accessed August 2018.

Turning and Burning

Turning and Burning: Locally Made Pottery from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Assemblage

By D. Brad Hatch

July continues our series of posts highlighting the artifacts recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site (31Rd1426/1426**) in Randolph County, North Carolina. Dovetail Cultural Resource Group conducted data recovery excavations at this site on behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), guided by the data recovery plan authored by NCDOT (Overton 2014). Of the over 8,000 ceramic sherds recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site, nearly half (3,826) were made in North Carolina. These locally produced wares underscore the importance of the ceramic industry to the economy of piedmont North Carolina and the reliance of residents on locally manufactured goods. This blog post focuses on some of the wares whose makers can be identified in order to illustrate the number of potters in the region and how far people would go to buy their goods. For a more detailed treatment of these ceramics click here.

Marked, or otherwise identifiable, wares from at least six different potters were identified in the collection gathered from the site (Table; Photos 1–7). Dates of production for these potters, when they were not known from historical references, were estimated by adding 20 years to their birth date and extending the span to the date of their death. While the production span for some of these wares may be slightly shorter or longer, they are probably not exceedingly different. The majority of these potters began production prior to 1850. However, most had a production range that extended through the latter half of the nineteenth century. Notably, all of these potters had kilns in Randolph County during at least some portion of their career. Jacob Craven had at least three kilns during his lifetime, one of which was in Randolph County, while the remaining two were located just south of the county line in Moore County. All of the kilns used by these potters during their periods of production were located within 14 miles (22.5 km) of the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site and half were within 10 miles (16.1 km) (Figure).

PotterKiln LocationDate of Production
Jacob D. CravenRandolph and Moore Counties, NCca. 1847-1895
Enoch S. CravenRandolph County, NCca. 1830-1893
William N. CravenRandolph County, NC1842-1857
Nathan B. DicksRandolph County, NCca. 1875-1918
Alfred L. MoodyRandolph County, NCca. 1880-1924
Chester WebsterRandolph County, NCca. 1840-1882
Table: Identified Potters Represented in the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Assemblage.

A brief glimpse of this extraordinary grouping of locally made ceramics from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site provides important insight into the development of the ceramic industry in Randolph County from approximately 1840 to the early-twentieth century, a period when the potting tradition in this region was flourishing. It also suggests that local residents were paramount in supporting these artisans throughout history, allowing potters and their families to put down roots and prosper in the region. As a result, many of the descendants of the potters identified in this assemblage still produce ceramic wares in the area and pottery production remains an important aspect of the economy in the North Carolina piedmont.

Photo 1: Locally Made Coarse Earthenware Jar Fragment with Sine Wave Decoration, Attributed to Nathan Dicks.

Photo 1: Locally Made Coarse Earthenware Jar Fragment with Sine Wave Decoration, Attributed to Nathan Dicks.

Photo 2: Locally Made Earthenware Chamber Pot with N.B. Dicks Mark.

Photo 2: Locally Made Earthenware Chamber Pot with N.B. Dicks Mark.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 3: Locally Made Stoneware Jug with W.N. Craven Mark.

Photo 3: Locally Made Stoneware Jug with W.N. Craven Mark.

Photo 4: Locally Made Stoneware Pot with E.S. Craven Mark.

Photo 4: Locally Made Stoneware Pot with E.S. Craven Mark.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 5: Locally Made Stoneware Jug or Pitcher with J.D. Craven and Capacity Mark.

Photo 5: Locally Made Stoneware Jug or Pitcher with J.D. Craven and Capacity Mark.

Photo 6: Locally Made Stoneware Vessel with A.L. Moody Mark.

Photo 6: Locally Made Stoneware Vessel with A.L. Moody Mark.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo 7: Locally Made Stoneware Jug with Bird Decoration Attributed to Chester Webster.

Photo 7: Locally Made Stoneware Jug with Bird Decoration Attributed to Chester Webster.

 

Figure: Map Showing Location of Kilns for Identified Potters in Relation to the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Site.

Figure: Map Showing Location of Kilns for Identified Potters in Relation to the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Site.

References:

Overton, Brian
2014    Archaeological Data Recovery Plan: Site 31Rd1426, Randolph County, North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Transportation Human Environment Section, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Check out Jefferson Patterson Park’s Diagnostic Artifacts webpage for more images of stonewares recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Site.

Discussions with local North Carolina potters, scholars, and collectors of North Carolina pottery were instrumental in the identification of the locally produced wares from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site. Specifically, I would like to express my gratitude to Hal Pugh and Eleanor Minnock-Pugh of New Salem Pottery, Mary Farrell of Westmoore Pottery, and Tommy Cranford. 

Medicine in a Glass

Featured Fragment – Mexican Mustang Liniment for Man and Beast: Patent Medicines at the Squirrel Creek Site

By Michelle C. Salvato

This month we are once again returning to our series highlighting the artifacts recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site (31Rd1426/1426**) in Randolph County, North Carolina. Dovetail Cultural Resource Group conducted data recovery excavations at this site on behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), guided by the data recovery plan authored by NCDOT (Overton 2014). Nearly 2,000 glass artifacts were recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site with approximately 5 percent of the recovered glass shards definitively determined to be medicine bottles. At least 10 different medicines were definitively identified during the analysis of the site.

Diagnostic Patent Medicine Bottles Recovered from 31Rd1426/1426** (Meyer 2011; Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. 2017). 
Manufacturing CompanyPatent Medicine NameDate Range
Abraham B. Sands & CompanySands' Sarsaparilla1835-1875
Andrew's Manufacturing CompanyPortion of Bottle Not RecoveredUnidentified
Dr. David Jayne’s “Family Medicines”Dr. D Jayne's Vermifuge TonicMid-1830s – 1906*
Fleming Brothers CompanyDr. Mclane's American Worm Specific1844-1906*
H.E. Bucklen & CompanyDr. King’s New Discovery (Sample Bottle)1878-1906*
H.E. Bucklen & CompanyDr. King’s New Discovery for Consumption1878-1906*
The Herb Medicine CompanyLightning Hot DropsUnidentified
Lyon Manufacturing CompanyMexican Mustang Liniment1850s-1906*
National Remedy CompanyPortion of Bottle Not RecoveredUnidentified
UnidentifiedRamons Nerve & Bone LinimentUnidentified
*Date reflects passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 when end date was not identified

Archaeologically, patent medicine bottles include an incredibly diverse assortment of styles, colors, and sizes, and their content include a wide variety of concoctions. From bitters and tonics to sarsaparillas, a vast range of home remedies were available to the population for personal use. Remedies were often strengthened using ingredients such as morphine, cocaine, or opium but then sold to the public to cure anything from colic in infants to venereal diseases to “female complaints” (Hagley Museum and Library n.d.). Many of the bottle fragments found at the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site contained large enough portions of embossed lettering to identify which patent medicine it contained, thus helping to more accurately date the site.

Dr. King’s Discovery Patent Medicine Sample Bottle Recovered From Site 31Rd1426/1426**.

Dr. King’s Discovery Patent Medicine Sample Bottle Recovered From Site 31Rd1426/1426**.

Almost Complete “Ramon’s Nerve and Bone Liniment” Patent Medicine Bottle Recovered From Site 31Rd1426/1426**.

Almost Complete “Ramon’s Nerve and Bone Liniment” Patent Medicine Bottle Recovered From Site 31Rd1426/1426**.

Two of the recovered bottle fragments are sample- and full-size “Dr. King’s New Discovery” medicine bottles. This medicine, nationally recognized by the mid-1880s, was marketed as a cure for consumption, known today as tuberculosis (Meyer 2011). A circa-1907 ad even claims that the remedy is “the greatest life saver of all time” (Griffin 2013). Like so many other patent medicines of the time, “Dr. King’s New Discovery” contained questionable ingredients by today’s medical standards. A 1905 article by Samuel Hopkins Adams in Colliers Magazine warns, “As it is a morphine and chloroform mixture, ‘Dr. King’s New discovery for Consumption’ is well calculated to strike terror to the doctors or to any other class or profession, except, perhaps, the undertakers” (Meyer 2011).

A circa-1907 Dr. King’s New Discovery Ad Claiming the “Life-Saving” Properties of the Remedy (Griffin 2013).

A circa-1907 Dr. King’s New Discovery Ad Claiming the “Life-Saving” Properties of the Remedy (Griffin 2013).

A fragment of a “Mexican Mustang Liniment” bottle was also recovered from the site. Also dating to the latter half of the nineteenth century, this medication serves as yet another example of the supposed versatility of these patent medicines. Not only did they claim to cure almost any human ailment, one particular ad advertises that the medicine was to be used on animals and humans alike! Another late-nineteenth-century ad for “Mexican Mustang Liniment” shows an oversized bottle of the medicine as well as a small bottle in a young girl’s hand. Ads like these are incredibly helpful to archaeologists as they often note the ingredients and uses of the bottle while also containing an image of the bottle itself.

A circa-1880s Ad For “Mexican Mustang Liniment” Produced By The Lyon Manufacturing Company Shows That The Medicine Can Cure Both Horses And Humans (Meyer 2012).

A circa-1880s Ad For “Mexican Mustang Liniment” Produced By The Lyon Manufacturing Company Shows That The Medicine Can Cure Both Horses And Humans (Meyer 2012).

A Circa-1880s Ad For “Mexican Mustang Liniment” That Rather Helpfully Shows A Full Size Bottle Of The Medicine. Surrounding the bottle are a young girl and a number of adorable animals all presumably taking the “safe” medicine (Meyer 2012).

A Circa-1880s Ad For “Mexican Mustang Liniment” That Rather Helpfully Shows A Full Size Bottle Of The Medicine. Surrounding the bottle are a young girl and a number of adorable animals all presumably taking the “safe” medicine (Meyer 2012).

Patent medicines very quickly fell out of favor with the public following the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906 which required the listing of remedies’ contents. It is no wonder that the inhabitants of the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site had so many different kinds of patent medicine bottles leading up to this act though; most medicines did not work to actually cure any disease but just masked the symptoms with a bad combination of drugs and alcohol. Luckily for us we do not have to take concoctions of morphine and chloroform (and who knows what else!) in order to cure common ailments today.

References:

Griffin, Jessica D.
2013    Dr. King’s New Discovery for Coughs and Colds, H. E. Bucklen & Co., Chicago, ILL.  WordPress.com.  Electronic document, https://oldmainartifacts.wordpress.com/, accessed May 2017.

Hagley Museum and Library
n.d.      History of Patent Medicine. Electronic document, https://www.hagley.org/research/digital-exhibits/history-patent-medicine , accessed June 2018.

Meyer, Ferdinand, V
2011    Peachridge Glass Website. Electronic document, http://www.peachridgeglass.com/, accessed May 2017.

Meyer, Ferdinand, V
2012    Peachridge Glass Website. Electronic document, http://www.peachridgeglass.com/, accessed June 2018.

Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc.
2017    Odyssey’s Virtual Museum Website. Electronic document, http://odysseysvirtualmuseum.com/, accessed May 2017.

Overton, Brian
2014    Archaeological Data Recovery Plan: Site 31Rd1426, Randolph County, North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Transportation Human Environment Section, Raleigh, North Carolina.

“I’ll Skip My Turn Thanks!”

Featured Fragment – Civil War-Era Tourniquet Clamp from Henrico County, Virginia

By Kerry S. González

For hundreds of years the tourniquet has been used on extremities, primarily arms and legs, in an effort to stop hemorrhaging during an amputation. For this month’s blog post we are highlighting a Civil War-era tourniquet found during a recent archaeological survey in Henrico County, Virginia.  This device is composed of cast brass with “Brinkerhoff” stamped on the handle. Leather fragments, representing the no-longer-extant strap, are present as well.

Civil War-Era Tourniquet Recovered by Dovetail Staff During a Recent Archaeological Survey in Henrico County, Virginia.

Van Wyck Brinkerhoff was a minor supplier of surgical instruments and medical sets during the Civil War and the tourniquet recovered by Dovetail was likely part of a larger set which would have included a bone saw, knives, bone forceps etc. (Echols and Arbittier 2016). The surgical set shown below (missing a tourniquet and forceps) was made by Brinkerhoff between 1860 and 1862 and illustrates the number of tools needed to perform an amputation.

Civil War-Era Brinkerhoff Amputation Set (Medical and Surgical Antiques n.d.).

According to Robert L. Mabry’s article, Tourniquet Use on the Battlefield (2006), the tourniquet is fundamentally unchanged from its original form when it was first used on the battlefield in 1674 (Mabry 2006). However, prior to this, Hans Von Gersdoff, a German surgeon, was a proponent for the use of tight bands around an amputation site, as illustrated in his book Feldtbuch der Wundtartzney (Field Book of Surgery) published in 1517 (Mabry 2006). Over the years, the tourniquet evolved as surgeons tried to find safer and more effective ways to reduce blood flow during an amputation while at the same time reducing the risk of causing nerve or tissue damage to the limb. In 1718 Jean Louis Petit created a tourniquet which included a strap and a screw device, similar to the one recovered by Dovetail, which could be tightened around the appendage thus negating the need for an assistant to hold the tourniquet in place (Welling and Rich 2012).

During the Civil War amputations were a common procedure as the Minié Ball, a widely-used bullet in rifles during the war, caused terrible damage to the body. An 1879 description gives grim details of the extent of the damages caused by these projectiles: “bones are ground almost to power muscles, ligaments, and tendons torn away, and the parts otherwise so mutilated, that loss of life, certainly of limb, is almost an inevitable consequence” (Helmuth 1879).

Approximately 60,000 amputations were performed during the Civil War, some done with no anesthesia (U.S. Library of Medicine 2013). This left soldiers fearful of the surgeons, especially the younger, more inexperienced doctors who were overly enthusiastic to perform amputations. These zealous surgeons, nicknamed “butchers” by the soldiers, were sometimes criticized by the more experienced doctors and were accused of using the battlefield as a way to improve their skills instead of having the patient’s best interest in mind (U.S. Library of Medicine 2013).

Amputation Being Performed in a Hospital Tent, Gettysburg (Tipton 1868–1925).

Unfortunately, many amputations during the Civil War resulted in infection from lack of sterilization which inevitably lead to death. Tourniquets continued to be used on and off the battlefield to help stop the flow of blood on an open wound or to perform an amputation. A historical account from World War II states that, once again, tourniquets were being misused, sometimes resulting in unnecessary amputation. “Soldiers—whether medical or non-medical—regularly misused tourniquets. They applied them unnecessarily; left them unloosened for too long; and occasionally evacuated patients with tourniquets concealed by blankets or clothing, and hence not discovered until the limb was doomed” (Welling and Rich 2012). A modern version of the tourniquet is still used today but with much greater care and awareness on the part of the medical professional administering the device.

References: 

Echols, Michael, and Doug Arbittier
2014    Archaeological Data Recovery Plan: Site 31Rd1426, Randolph County, North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Transportation Human Environment Section, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Helmuth, William Tod
1879   A System of Surgery. Hahnemann Publishing House, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Mabry, Robert
2006   Tourniquet Use on the Battlefield. Electronic document, https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/171/5/352/4577893, accessed May 2018.

Medical and Surgical Antiques
n.d.   The Civil War Period Amputation and Surgical Sets Collection. Electronic document, http://medicalandsurgicalantiques.com/the-civil-war-period-collection.html, accessed May 2018.

Tipton, W.H.
1868–1925   Amputation Being Performed in a Hospital Tent, Gettysburg. Glass Negatives of ‘Tipton’s Photographic Views of the Battle of Gettysburg and other Photographs of General Interest”, 1868–1925. Available online https://catalog.archives.gov/id/520201, accessed May 2018.

U.S. Library of Medicine
2013   Maimed Men. Electronic document, https://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/lifeandlimb/maimedmen.html, accessed May 2018.

Welling, David R., and Norman M. Rich
2012   A Brief History of the Tourniquet. Electronic document, https://www.jvascsurg.org/article/S0741-5214(11)02470-0/pdf?code=ymva-site, accessed May 2018.

A Not So Perfect Match

Featured Fragment – Nineteenth-Century Table Settings

By D. Brad Hatch, Ph.D. and Kerry S. González

This month’s blog continues our series highlighting the artifacts recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site in Randolph County, North Carolina. On behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Dovetail Cultural Resource Group conducted data recovery excavations at the site, guided by the data recovery plan authored by NCDOT (Overton 2014).

The grouping of artifacts highlighted in Photo 1 were chosen to reflect ceramic consumption patterns at the site. While analyzing and processing the assemblage Dovetail staff decided to do a mock-up of a nineteenth-century table setting, mostly with artifacts recovered from the site. [Note: The kerosene lamp is a reproduction however several pieces of glass from the chimney of a similar lamp were recovered at the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site.] The photograph below was taken in the basement of Belle Grove Plantation, birthplace of President James Madison, which provided a historically accurate setting for our recreation.

Photo 1: Nineteenth-Century Table Setting Recreated with Artifacts Recovered from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Site. Note blue-edged plates.

 

The primary purpose of staging this photograph was to highlight that matched sets in a table setting, like we have today, were not always the norm. What we learned from analyzing the collection was that the inhabitants of the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site appear to have chosen decorated refined earthenwares from various decorative categories (transfer printed, hand painted, and dipt/edged wares) (Photo 2). The assemblage illustrated that there was a stronger preference for the less-expensive decorative types (edged wares) which was mixed with a lower density of more expensive ceramics that were transfer printed.

Perhaps the most important factor influencing ceramic use at the site was socioeconomic status. Based on historical and archaeological evidence, the inhabitants of the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site appear to have been lower-middling to middling in terms of their status. In a general sense, the known status of the site occupants appears to correlate well with their respective decorative ceramic assemblages.

Photo 2: Sample of Various Decorative Motifs Recovered From Trogdon-Squirrel Creek Site. From left: brown transfer print, hand painted, and dipt.

 

The fact that many of the transfer printed vessels from the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site were mismatched underscores the economic constraints of the site inhabitants, since they were unable to make the large capital outlays necessary to purchase full sets of these costly wares. While the majority of the transfer printed ware in the assemblage were decorated with blue ink, suggesting at least an attempt to match the color palette, there were also black, red, and brown printed vessels. Residents at the Trogdon-Squirrel Creek site do appear to have possessed matching, or at least almost matched, place settings of blue-edged wares. These cheaper wares would have been less of a financial burden, but still would have allowed the site occupants to display their knowledge of fashionable dining practices.

Keep this in mind the next time you are out shopping for new dishes. Perhaps you don’t need to worry about everything matching and instead just keep with a similar color palette. In fact, there are several articles available online that give a step by step guide on how to mismatch your tables wares which suggest picking a color or playing with different shapes.

References: 

Overton, Brian
2014    Archaeological Data Recovery Plan: Site 31Rd1426, Randolph County, North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Transportation Human Environment Section, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Pipes and Patriotism

Featured Fragment – Showing Irish Pride in Nineteenth Century Washington, D.C.

By Lauren McMillan, Ph.D.

For this month’s blog we have a guest author, Dr. Lauren McMillan, Assistant Professor at the University of Mary Washington and noted pipe researcher. She is going to discuss the ‘Home Rule’ tobacco pipe bowl recovered by Dovetail during a 2017 excavation in Washington, D.C.

 

“Home Rule” Pipe Recovered by Dovetail in Washington, D.C.

 

Tobacco use and its meanings in North America have evolved over the past 3,000+ years from ingestion as a religious act in the prehistoric period to the secular and habitual in the colonial and post-colonial eras. Today, smoking has a contested social meaning due to our understanding of the health risks involved with smoking, but also through a renewed (or continued) recognition among some Native American groups of the sacred nature of tobacco (Rafferty and Mann 2004; Snyder 2016). Until relatively recently, the primary way tobacco was ingested was via pipes of various forms. By the mid- to late-seventeenth century, smoking had become ubiquitous among all levels of society (Photo 1).

 

Photo 1: The Old Drinker. Showing Seventeenth Century Pipe in Gentleman’s Hand (Metsu 1663).

 

However, in the nineteenth century, pipe smoking was often associated with members of the working class (Photo 2), particularly the use of short stemmed, or “cutty,” pipes as this style of pipe could be held in the mouth by the lips alone, leaving one’s hands free to perform various tasks (Cook 1989; Fox 2016).

 

Photo 2: Old Man Smoking Pipe. Showing Nineteenth Century Pipe (Whistler 1859).

 

The pipe recovered by Dovetail in Washington, D.C.—the subject of this blog post—was stamped with a harp, clover sprigs, and the motto “Home Rule.” This type of pipe would have been mass produced in Europe and imported into the United States in the late-nineteenth century.

The Home Rule movement started in Ireland in 1870 and represented Irish independence from British Rule; this movement continued into the first two decades of the twentieth century until the passage of the Fourth Irish Home Rule Act in 1920 which gave full independence to Northern Ireland and partial rule in Southern Ireland (McCaffrey 1995). Knowledge of the Home Rule movement made its way to the United States in the late 1870s and became a prominent social and political ideology among Irish immigrants, providing a common rallying point and community bond for newly transplanted groups of people (Reckner 2001).

Clay tobacco pipes with Irish imagery of all sorts (harps, clovers, “Home Rule,” and “Erin Go Bragh”) have been recovered from archaeological sites throughout the United States, from the East Coast to the West Coast (Pheiffer 2006), but most notably in large cities in the Northeast and Middle Atlantic where there were large Irish neighborhoods in the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. While these pipes can be used to easily identify the ethnicity of the people archaeologists are studying (“Irish people smoked pipes with Irish imagery”), they can also be used to form a more nuanced understanding of the social and political environment of late-nineteenth-century America. Paul Reckner (2001, 2004), in his research into political imagery on pipes recovered from Irish neighborhoods in New York and New Jersey, argues that people were purchasing and using these pipes as a way to not only demonstrate pride in their homeland, but also as a way to reject and resist nativist, anti-Irish rhetoric.

Beyond the obvious and explicit imagery on this pipe (“Home Rule,” harp, and clover), the placement of the motto and motifs also have meaning (McMillan 2015). These symbols were placed on the back of the bowl of the pipe, facing the smoker and not the outside world; this implies that the intended audience of the imagery was the smoker themself, not other people. Every time the smoker took a drag from the pipe, they would be face to face with these words and images. These symbols would have served to remind the smoker of their homeland, their political stances, and their place within a larger Irish community during a time when the Irish (and other immigrant populations) were facing discrimination and oppression in their new country. Might they have taken comfort and a renewed sense of purpose from not only the tobacco they were ingesting, but also the powerful and meaningful images placed on the pipe?

So, while you are celebrating St. Patrick’s Day this year (if you partake), think of people of Irish decent over the past several centuries who embraced Irish imagery daily as a reminder of their heritage, not just once a year.

For more information and images please visit
http://www.jefpat.org/CuratorsChoiceArchive/2013CuratorsChoice/Mar2013-ErinGoBragh-TobaccoPipesAndIrelandsStruggleForIndependence.html

 

Mr. Oldham and his Guests c.1735-45 (Joseph Highmore 1692-1780).

References: 

Cook, Lauren J.
1989 Tobacco-Related Material Culture and the Construction of Working Class Culture. In Interdisciplinary Investigations of the Boott Mills, Lowell, Massachusetts, Vol. III: The Boarding House System as a Way of Life, edited by Mary C. Beaudry and Stephen A. Mrozowski, pp. 209–230. Cultural Resources Management Study, No. 21, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, North Atlantic Regional Office, Boston, Massachusetts.

Metsu, Gabriel
1663 The Old Drinker. Electronic document, https://fineartamerica.com/featured/the-old-drinker-1663-gabriel-metsu.html, accessed March 2018.

Fox, Georgia L.
2016 The Archaeology of Smoking and Tobacco. The University of Press of Florida, Gainsville.

McCaffrey, Lawrence J.
1995 The Irish Question: Two Centuries of Conflict. University Press of Kentucky, Lexington.

McMillan, Lauren K.
2015 Community Formation and the Development of a British-Atlantic Identity in the Chesapeake: An Archaeological and Historical Study of the Tobacco Pipe Trade in the Potomac River Valley ca. 1630–1730. Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Pheiffer, Michael A.
2006 Clay Tobacco Pipes and the Fur Trade of the Pacific Northwest and Northern Plains. Phyolith Press, Ponca City, Oklahoma.

Rafferty, Sean M., and Rob Mann
2004 Introduction. In Smoking and Culture: The Archaeology of Tobacco Pipes in Eastern North American, edited by Sean M. Rafferty and Robb Mann, pp. xi–xx. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

Reckner, Paul E.
2001 Negotiating Patriotism at the Five Points: Clay Tobacco Pipes and Patriotic Imagery among Trade Unionists and Nativists in a Nineteenth-Century New York Neighborhood. Historical Archaeology 35(3):103–114.

2004 Home Rulers, Red Hands, and Radical Journalists: Clay Pipes and the Negotiation of Working-Class Irish/Irish American Identity in Late-Nineteenth-Century Paterson, New Jersey. In Smoking and Culture: The Archaeology of Tobacco Pipes in Eastern North America, edited by Sean M. Rafferty and Rob Mann, pp. 241–271. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

Snyder, Charles M.
2016 Restoring Traditional Tobacco Knowledge: Health Implications and Risk Factors of Tobacco Use and Nicotine Addiction. In Perspective on the Archaeology of Pipes, Tobacco and other Smoke plants in the Ancient Americas, edited by Elizabeth A. Bollwerk and Shannon Tushingham, pp. 183–198. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland.

McNeill Whistler, James
1859 Man Smoking a Pipe, circa 1859. Electronic document, https://www.wikiart.org/en/james-mcneill-whistler/man-smoking-a-pipe, accessed March 2018.

Highmore, Joseph
1735–1745 Mr. Oldham and His Guests. Electronic document, http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/highmore-mr-oldham-and-his-guests-n05864, accessed March 2018.

More than Just Another Brick in the Wall

Featured Fragment – A Mysterious Artifact from the Squirrel Creek Site

By D. Brad Hatch, Ph.D.

This month’s blog continues our series highlighting the artifacts recovered from the Squirrel Creek site in Randolph County, North Carolina. On behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Dovetail Cultural Resource Group conducted data recovery excavations at the site, guided by the data recovery plan authored by NCDOT (Overton 2014). The artifact discussed below initially appeared to be one of the most unassuming in the collection, but in the end, was one of the most confounding for us in terms of its use.

During the excavations around a standing stone chimney, archaeologists recovered a cast iron block measuring 8.5 inches long by 3 inches tall by 4.5 inches wide and weighing 24.5 pounds (Figure 1). This object, known in the field as the “iron brick” due to its size and shape, was discovered in a layer of fill that extended into the western hearth and appeared to have been pushed up against the chimney sometime during one of the logging episodes that occurred on the property in the twentieth century, after the site’s occupancy (Figure 2). The purpose of the object was the focus of much speculation on site and continues to be, even now.

Figure 1: Iron Block Recovered from the Squirrel Creek Site.

 

Figure 2: View of the Western Hearth where the Iron Block was Found.

Based upon its association with the hearth, several hypotheses have been put forth relating its use to heat or food. Some have suggested that it could have been used as a source of heat. Having been heated in the fire, the iron block could have been placed in a container to act as a foot, bed, or food warmer. Another hypothesis is that it could have been used a small anvil for light metal working in or around the house. Perhaps the best-documented hypotheses for the use of this object comes from one of the descendants of a previous owner of the site.

Hal Pugh is the fourth great grandson of Samuel Trogdon, who owned the property on which the site is located in the late-eighteenth century, approximately 30 years before the dwelling at the site was constructed. Mr. Pugh was consulted extensively, both during and after the excavation, due to his expertise on North Carolina pottery (more on this to come in a future post). However, when he saw the iron block, he immediately recognized a similar object passed down through his family (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Pugh Family Iron Block (Courtesy of Hal Pugh).

According to Mr. Pugh, the cast iron block in his possession is 6.25 inches long by 2.25 inches tall by 5 inches wide. This block sat “on my grandparent’s hearth… [and] they used it as a base for cracking nuts…(usually walnuts and hickory nuts). My dad said they kept it on the fireplace hearth. He said they would sit around the fire in the fireplace in the fall & winter, crack the nuts and throw the shells in the fire. When they got through any smaller fragments of nutshells left over were simply swept in the fire.”

Considering that the iron block at the Squirrel Creek site was found in the hearth as well as the familial and local connections of the block in Mr. Pugh’s collection, it seems logical that both objects served similar purposes. Unfortunately, we have not found any other examples of an object like this in North Carolina or elsewhere, so we have been unable to confirm this interpretation. It is our hope that this post has shed a little light on this unique object and the process of artifact interpretation, and it may encourage other people to come forward with similar artifacts for comparison. If you have seen one of these, please let us know (Figures 4 and 5). You can contact me at bhatch@dovetailcrg.com.

Figure 4: Pugh Family Iron Block. Dog for scale (Courtesy of Hal Pugh).

 

Figure 5: Iron Block Recovered from the Squirrel Creek Site. Dog for scale.

 

References: 

Overton, Brian
2014    Archaeological Data Recovery Plan: Site 31Rd1426, Randolph County, North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Transportation Human Environment Section, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Let’s get ‘fired’ up!

Featured Fragment – Cast Iron Andirons

By Kerry S. González

In October 2016 Dovetail Cultural Resource Group conducted data recovery excavations at a multi-component site with the primary core representing an early-nineteenth through early-twentieth century domestic occupation (31RD1426&1426**) located in Randolph County, North Carolina. The project was completed on behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, in compliance with their Data Recovery Plan, and the overall Phase III assemblage contained nearly 25,000 artifacts. This blog is the first in a series of entries highlighting the plethora and variety of objects recovered from the site.

The first artifacts discussed in this series are a pair of cast iron andirons, sometimes referred to as fire dogs. These form a matching pair but neither is complete however they mirror the pair shown in the image below.  They are in different stages of corrosion and were recovered from separate contexts approximately 20 feet apart on either side of the central chimney once associated with a standing dwelling.

Andirons Recovered From Site 31Rd1426/1426**.

 

Image Showing Complete Set of Andirons in the Same Style as Those Recovered From Site 31Rd1426/1426** (Wiles 2017).

Andirons were used in fireplaces to elevate large burning logs. This allowed oxygen to easily circulate around the logs and feed the flames, rendering a more efficiently burning fire. Because fireplaces often served two purposes, heating a room and as a heat source for cooking, it was important to have a constant fire in the hearth; this was greatly aided by the andirons.

Eastman Johnson Painting “The New Bonnet” Showing Andiron in Similar Style to the Ones Recovered From Site (The Metropolitan Museum of Art [MET] 2017).

Andirons have been used in fireplaces for centuries. For those with means, andirons were often highly embellished and served in both their utilitarian capacity and as an interior decoration.  The practice of using andirons as a canvass for artistic expression began during the medieval period when blacksmiths began adding embellishments to andirons. For example, an andiron from the fourteenth century was forged with a serpent head extending from the top (Apartment Therapy 2018). Throughout the Renaissance period and into the eighteenth century, andirons continued to be designed with motifs such as ancient Greek and Roman statuary or molded in the form of animals. An elaborate set of andirons on display at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston were reportedly used by Marie Antoinette at Hameau de la Reine, the Queen’s rustic retreat, located in the park of the Chateau de Versailles. These andirons display two goats eating grapes from a central urn. Beneath the goats is a relief of cupids and grape vines (Museum of Fine Arts Boston 2018).

French Andirons (Museum of Fine Arts Boston 2018).

While decorative andirons clearly reflected the tastes of their owners, the andirons found at site 31RD1426&1426**—although plain—speak volumes. The occupants of the site were tenant farmers who eked out a meager existence in the North Carolina Piedmont but they still sought technological items that helped to render a more efficient (and warmer!) household.

So, as you are sitting in your home this winter trying to stay warm, contemplate the possible shapes and styles of andirons and what you may have commissioned if you had the monetary freedom to do so.

References: 

Apartment Therapy
2018    Quick History: Andirons. Electronic document, https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/quick-history-andironsretrospe-149729, accessed January 2018.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art
2017    The New Bonnet, Accession Number 25.110.11. Electronic document, https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/25.110.11/, accessed January 2018.

Museum of Fine Arts Boston
2108   French Andirons. Accession Number 27.521.1-2.11. Electronic document, http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/andiron-505383, accessed January 2018.

Wiles, Tom
2017   Repurposed fireplace andirons holds planter box. In Pinterest [Personal Page]. Electronic document, https://www.pinterest.com/pin/314266880220703842/, accessed June 2017

When Wearing a Cage Was All the Rage: Crinoline and Hoop Skirts in the 19th Century

Featured Fragment – Cage Crinoline Fragments

By Kerry S. González

In January 2017, Dovetail conducted excavations at the site of a proposed Riverfront Park in Fredericksburg, Virginia. This was the third time Dovetail visited the area along Sophia Street in downtown Fredericksburg—reflecting its abundant prehistoric and historic activity. Over 10,000 artifacts were recovered from the three separate excavations, but for this month’s blog we are highlighting the cage crinoline fragments that were recovered from a feature identified as a Civil War trench (for more on the trench see our blog from January 2017).

The cage crinoline fragments recovered during the excavations were made of an iron alloy with some fragments sheathed in a copper alloy (see below). The cage crinoline became popular in the mid-nineteenth century, and by 1856, W.S. Thomson received a patent for the metal-caged crinoline (Thomas 2014).

 

Sample of Cage Crinoline Fragments Recovered From the Riverfront Park Site.

 

The purpose of the cage crinoline was to create a structure for the fabric of a woman’s skirt that was laid over top of the structural system. This cage was constructed of wire hoops and woven tapes, and the metal wire hoops were used to create the cage “that supported the ever-widening hems without the extra weight of layered petticoats” (Rivers Cofield 2015). The hoops were held in place by white metal alloy tubes that cinched around the wire hoops. However, the space created under the skirt by the cage made pantaloons, essentially baggy pants, vital for the virtue of the wearer to remain intact as well as to help keep the legs warm.

 

Image of Circa 1858 Cage Crinoline (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2017: Accession number C.I.45.79.10).

 

Example of Wrapped Wire Hoops and Metal Attachment Tubes (Rivers Cofield 2015).

 

The small fragments recovered from the Riverfront Park site displayed a typical composition, with the ferrous metal hoop fragments and copper alloy tubes very apparent. This type of artifact is a great example of a ‘small find’ that could be easily misidentified, especially considering the fragmentary nature of the object. It is our hope that this blog can shed some light on this type of artifact and help lead to more accurate archaeological identifications.

 

References: 

Victoriana Magazine
2016   The Crinoline or Hoop Skirt. Online documentation. http://www.victoriana.com/Victorian-Fashion/crinoline.htm, accessed December 2017.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art
2017   Cage Crinoline, Accession Number C.I.45.79.10. Electronic document, http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/104430, accessed March 2017.

Rivers Cofield, Sara
2015   Houston-LeCompt Personal Adornment. Appendix I of the Archaeological Data Recovery at the Houston-LeCompt Site (7NC-F-139;N-14517), New Castle County, Delaware. Dovetail Cultural Resource Group, Fredericksburg, Virginia.

Thomas, Pauline W.
2014   Crinoline Fashion History. Electronic document, http://www.fashion-era.com/crinolines.htm, accessed March 2017.