The Fiske Center Blog

Weblog for the Fiske Center for Archaeological Research at the University of Massachusetts Boston.

September 23, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

Brown Bag Talk Series: Majolica and Margaritas

Majolica and Margaritas:
Summer 2015 Adventures in New Mexico

Heather Trigg

Monday, September 28, 2015 at noon
McCormack, first floor, room 503

2015 excavations in New Mexico

2015 excavations in New Mexico


In July 2015, we began excavation of a 17th-century Spanish ranch in New Mexico. This ranch was a multi-cultural household that included Spanish colonizers and indigenous Plains and Pueblo peoples who were forcibly incorporated into the ranch’s daily activities. This NSF sponsored project explores the social and environmental consequences of Spanish colonization in New Mexico. Come hear about the summer’s work and the research program.
Please join us and feel free to bring your lunch!

September 18, 2015
by John Steinberg
0 comments

Brown Bag Lecture Series: Our Digital Presence: UMB Archaeology on Social Media and the Web MONDAY NOON

Brown Bag Lecture Series

Our Digital Presence: UMB Archaeology on Social Media and the Web

 with

John Steinberg, Christa Beranek, and Douglas Bolender

 

Monday, September 21, 2015 at noon  McCormack, first floor, room 503

 

UMBWebpageWe currently have blogs, Facebook pages, and a Twitter account that we use to share our research and engage the public.  Come to this talk for a discussion of how to share your research via these applications, archaeological ethics and social media, and to provide your feedback on social media presentation.

Please join us for the first talk of the year, and feel free to bring your lunch.

September 1, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

Back to School: The 1827 School, Plymouth

For all of the students heading back to school…

This post is part of the “Further Research” series (see here). Research on the school and the artifacts was conducted by Justin Warrenfeltz, a graduate student in the MA program in Historical Archaeology.

Slate pencil fragments, pencil leads, and pen nibs from EU7, Burial Hill, Plymouth.

Slate pencil fragments, pencil leads, and pen nibs from EU7, Burial Hill, Plymouth.


During the 2014 excavations on Burial Hill in Plymouth, one of the units was placed near the former location of a school, constructed in 1827. Beneath a dense deposit of brick rubble, we found many school-related small finds including 32 slate pencil fragments, 4 pencil leads, 18 pen nibs, 6 slate fragments, a piece of an ink bottle, and a copper alloy fragments that has been interpreted as part of a compass. Other artifacts in the deposit were also small (beads, pins, a hook and eye, rodent bones), suggesting that this was material that had fallen through the gaps between the floor boards.

Other small items from the same deposit, including the possible compass fragment, bottom row, 3rd group from the left.

Other small items from the same deposit, including the possible compass fragment, bottom row, 3rd group from the left.

The school lot was acquired by the Committee of the Center School District in 1826 (PCRD 156: 288). Davis writes that the school was constructed in 1827, the year after the purchase, and sometimes called the “town school” (Davis 1899: 286). Davis recalls, in his memoirs:

A school called the town school, was kept in my day by Thomas Drew in a house built in 1827, which has been recently taken down. It stood also on School street, near the way up Burial Hill, a little distance south of the high school house. The boys attending that school were older and larger than the high school boys (Davis 1906:343).

A section of the 1874 Beers map of Plymouth showing the buildings along School Street.

A section of the 1874 Beers map of Plymouth showing the buildings along School Street.


Historic maps of the later 19th-century indicate some variability in the building’s function. Though 1874 and 1896 maps clearly label this building as a school, 1885 and 1891 maps label it as storage. This could have meant that the school was only taught part time, which is not uncommon for the time period, or that its school function was over, but the building was known by its former use. By 1901, the school building, as well as the other non-residential buildings along School Street, had been demolished.

Discussion of the possible compass fragment

Detail of a compass pencil holder, showing a parallel for the piece recovered archaeologically.  Photograph from Hambly 1988.

Detail of a compass pencil holder, showing a parallel for the piece recovered archaeologically. Photograph from Hambly 1988.


The first bow compasses got their name from the bow-shaped spring mechanism joining the two compass legs. These started appearing in drafting sets by 1650. Advancements in metal alloy production in the 18th century led to production of compasses in brass and sterling silver. During this early period, German manufacturers predominated, though major European cities such as London and Paris had their own accomplished instrument-making tradesmen (Hambly 1988:20-23). British manufacturers in the 18th century were the first to include pencil inserts for cedar-encased graphite rods in their bow compasses (Hambly 1988:66).
With the Industrial Revolution came the growth of mass production of these kinds of instruments, and in 1850, German manufacturers introduced a new alloy: German or ‘nickel’ silver. Also commonly called electrum due to its similarity in appearance to the Roman metal of the same name, this alloy of zinc, copper, and nickel was non-corrosive and more durable than both brass and sterling silver. Though skilled tradesmen were still needed to assemble the various parts of compasses, most of the manufacturing by the middle of the 19th century was handled by machines. By 1888, craftsmen were producing instruments more cheaply for use by students and professional surveyors. Also around this time, European immigrants to America began setting up their own instrument-making enterprises, first in Philadelphia, and later in New York, Chicago, St. Louis, and San Francisco. By 1900, American consumers were no longer relying on imports from London to sustain their growing need for scientific and mathematical instruments. William Kueffel, Hermann Esser, and Theo Altender – all prominent makers of scientific instruments in the 19th and 20th centuries – saw their business grow during this time period (Hambly 1988:28-30). A 1912 Sears and Roebuck catalog lists a drawing compass for sale:

Compass and Divider. Reliable in its work, useful for school children, artists, draftsmen, etc. Nickel plated, regulated by spring and screw adjustment, in boz. [sic] with nickel box containing six extra leads. Price … (Postage extra, 4 cents) … 16c. (Sears, Roebuck, & Co. 1912:956).

Comparative collections from other 19th century schools
As part of the research on this deposit, we surveyed the literature on other school sites in the northeast. Extensive work has been done on the Abiel Smith School, a mid-to-late 19th-century free public school for African-American children on Beacon Hill in Boston (Mead 1995; Pendery and Mead 1999; Landon 2007). These excavations have rightly focused on the School’s role as an important institution in the African-American community. These excavations uncovered numerous slate pencils and probable writing slate fragments. Excavations at another school on Beacon Hill – the early-20th century Peter Faneuil School – focused on deposits pre-dating the schools construction (Clayton et al. 1993).
UMass Amherst conducted field excavations on a site associated with a number of buildings, including a late-18th century schoolhouse in Deerfield, Massachusetts (Rotman et al. 2001). Excavations did not recover any intact features relating to the schoolhouse, though several slate pencils were recovered (Rotman et al. 2001:19). Researchers from the same University were more successful in their excavations of the schoolyard of a still-standing 1840 schoolhouse in Hadley, Massachusetts (Donta 1998). Archaeologists found 41 school-related items from 17 STPs: 30 slate fragments, 5 pieces of chalk, three slate pencil fragments, two pen nibs, and one thumb tack, accounting for 8% of the total artifact assemblage (Donta 1998:15). No mention is made of any copper-alloy artifacts that could potentially be school instruments.
Several excavations conducted by the Delaware Department of Transportation have recovered artifacts relating to public schools across the state (Catts et al. 1983; Bowers 1986; Catts et al. 1986; Walker 2009). Ranging from 1820 to 1920, artifacts recovered from the schools researched as part of these projects have included clay marbles, slate pencils and flat slate fragments, chalk, toys, an inkwell, a porcelain horse’s head figurine fragment, and a doll’s cup fragment.
Schools represent a unique opportunity to see how childhood was constructed materially in a setting where children were being enculturated to become productive adult members of society, yet school deposits are not generally studied through the lens of the archaeology of childhood. What items they had with them during the school day could tell archaeologists a great deal about what these children valued and how they mitigated the very rigorous structure of school life.

References
Bowers, Martha H.
1986 Architectural Investigations of the Route 7 North Corridor, Milltown of the Pennsylvania State Line, New Castle County, Delaware . In Archaeological Series No. 48, pp. 131-148. Delaware Department of Transportation, Dover, DE.

Catts, Wade P., Kevin W. Cunningham and Jay F. Custer
1983 Archaeological Investigation at the Welsh Tract School District No. 54, Newark, New Castle County, Delaware. Delaware Department of Transportation Archaeological Series No. 60. Dover, DE.

Catts, Wade P., Mark Shaffer, and Jay F. Custer
1986 Phase I & II Archaeological Investigations of the Route 7 North Corridor, Milltown to the Pennsylvania State Line, New Castle County, Delaware. In Archaeological Series No. 47, pp. 32-134. Delaware Department of Transportation, Dover, DE.

Clayton, David E., Ricardo J. Elia, and Nancy S. Seasholes
1993 Archaeological Investigations at the Peter Faneuil School Site on Beacon Hill in Boston, Massachusetts. Report of Investigations No. 113. Office of Public Archaeology, Boston University, Boston, MA.

Davis, William T.
1906 Plymouth Memories of an Octogenarian. Bittinger Brothers, Plymouth, MA.
1899 Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth, 2nd edition. A. Willliams and Company, Boston, MA.

Donta, Christopher
1998 Archaeological Intensive (Locational) Survey for the Proposed Hockanum School Stabilization Project, Hadley, Massachusetts. UMass Archaeological Services, Amherst, MA.

Hambly, Maya
1988 Drawing Instruments: 1580-1980. Sotheby’s Publications, New York, NY.

Landon, David B., ed.
2007 Investigating the Heart of a Community: Archaeological Excavations at the African Meeting House, Boston, Massachusetts. Cultural Resource Management Study No. 22. Andrew Fiske Memorial Center for Archaeological Research, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA.

Mead, Leslie A.
1995 Intensive Archaeological Survey at the Abiel Smith School House At Boston African American National Historic Site, Boston, Massachusetts Archaeology Branch, Cultural Resources Center, National Park Service, 400 Foot of John Street, Lowell, MA.

Pendery, Steve, and Leslie Mead
1999 Archaeological Investigations at the Boston African American National Historic Site, Boston Massachusetts. Archaeology Branch, Northeast Cultural Resource Center, Boston System Support Office, National Park Service, Lowell, Massachusetts.

Rotman, Deborah, Robert Paynter, Christopher Null, and Kai Heidemann
2001 Report of the 2000 University of Massachusetts, Amherst Field School Study of Lot 33 in Deerfield, Massachusetts. Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA.

Sears, Roebuck, and Company
1912 Catalog No. 124. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Chicago, IL.

Walker, Joan M.
2009 A Phase I and II Survey of Lancaster Pike (Route 48) from Newport Gap Pike (Route 41) to Centre Road (Route 141) and Phase III Investigations of the Oak Hill Schoolhouse, New Castle County, Delaware. Delaware Department of Transportation, Dover, DE.

August 19, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

A Fragment of a Grave Marker

This post is part of the Further Research series (see here). Research identifying the possible carver of this gravestone was conducted by Alexandra Crowder, a graduate student in the MA program in Historical Archaeology.

Gravestone fragment from EU3

Gravestone fragment from EU3


Rubbing of the fragment.

Rubbing of the fragment.


During the 2014 excavations on Burial Hill in Plymouth, a fragment of a carved slate gravestone was recovered from the fill layers of EU3, deposits associated with the destruction of stable buildings last owned by Zenas F. Leach, demolished between 1884 and 1885. The fragment was found in context 33, located approximately 77-120 centimeters below the ground surface and on a steeply sloped section of Burial Hill. Context 33 was interpreted as a fill layer of silty sand, and contained historic ceramics, architectural material, and industrial slag. The fragment appears to be gray slate with a green-tinge, and has several hand-carved designs on it. It is approximately 5 cm in length and 2.5 cm in width. The carvings on the stone consist of at least two swirls, two parallel lines forming some sort of border, and an unknown carved decoration. Based on the curved nature of the parallel lines, it is likely that the fragment is from the top, arched portion of a gravestone.
New England is well known for its gravestone designs. Well-documented and widely studied, gravestones in the region are recognized for their changing iconography over time. Studies by scholars have identified three main images present on gravestones: the deaths head, cherub, and willow & urn. The occurrence of these images appear to follow seriation patterns over time, which scholars have linked to changes in religion and attitudes about death (Baugher and Veit 2014: 7-8, Deetz 1996: 93-95). While there is noted variation between different carvers and local aesthetics, the three images were the main source of gravestone iconography (Deetz 1996: 95-96).
Drawings of the death’s head, cherub, and willow & urn gravestone iconography. (Image from NMSC Archaeology Lab).

Drawings of the death’s head, cherub, and willow & urn gravestone iconography. (Image from NMSC Archaeology Lab).


Of the 2,269 gravestones on Burial Hill, approximately 1,400 are slate, sandstone, or schist. These stones were the primary materials used for headstones until 1820, when granite and marble became more popular. The slate headstones are especially well documented, and over 950 of them were most likely carved locally. Many can be attributed to a specific carver (Berg and Friedberg 2012: 5, 17). Studies have shown that most New England gravestone carvers worked within small geographic areas and had distinctive styles (Deetz 1996: 91). Plymouth gravestones are well known for a complex stylistic evolution due to the area’s isolation as well as unique derivations of the death’s head motif (Deetz 1996: 108). This evolution is clearly visible in the stones present at Burial Hill and makes associating certain gravestones with specific carvers possible.

Examining different gravestone iconography and carving styles present in Burial Hill and the general region indicates that the gravestone fragment may have been part of a “Medusa”-style carving. A derivation of the death’s head motif, the Medusa motif is known for a face with wild, wavy or curly hair. Developed by Ebenezer Soule, the Medusa style follows its own evolution of imagery over time (Deetz 1996: 111). The gravestone fragment most likely came from an iteration that had curly hair (as opposed to wavy) and a border between the figure and the top of the headstone. According to James Deetz’s sequencing of Plymouth gravestones, this version was one that Soule produced in the early to middle portion of his career (Deetz 1996: 111).

Photograph of a Medusa style carved gravestone similar to the recovered fragment. The headstone belongs to Benjamin Cortiss of Halifax, and is dated 1756. (Image from the American Antiquarian Society, Farber Gravestone Collection.

Photograph of a Medusa style carved gravestone similar to the recovered fragment. The headstone belongs to Benjamin Cortiss of Halifax, and is dated 1756. (Image from the American Antiquarian Society, Farber Gravestone Collection.


Ebenezer Soule was a well-documented carver from Plympton, MA. Grave carving was often a family business and his five sons are listed as working with him (Eriquez, 2009: 36). Born in 1710, he completed most of his gravestone carvings from 1740-1772. Besides his Medusa style, Soule was known for often using local green slate (Eriquez 2009: 36). The majority of the fully developed Medusa carvings with spiral elements date from the 1750s-1760s (Deetz and Dethlefsen 1994: 35).
If the recovered gravestone fragment was a Medusa figure carved by Ebenezer Soule, it is possible to place a date range on when the original gravestone was sited in the cemetery. Examples of Soule’s gravestones can be seen throughout southeast Massachusetts, primarily in the Cape Cod area. There are at least two examples of Soule’s gravestone carving in the Medusa style present in Plymouth: the headstones of Joshua Bramhall (1763) and Ruth Turner (1755) (American Antiquarian Society). Neither of these two examples exactly match the gravestone fragment, however they show the likelihood that there are more Soule carvings present in the area. The Burial Hill National Register nomination form identifies the Hannah Cooper stone (d. 1763) as a Medusa style stone from the Soule family and the Perez Tilson stone (d. 1767) as a stone carved by Ebenezer Soule Sr. (Berg and Friedberg 2012: 7) The widespread nature of Soule’s work illustrates the extensive trade networks that would have made him successful as a carver and possibly allowed him to carve stones full time, instead of as they were needed.
Determining the motif on the recovered fragment helps situate it in its original context and may assist with determining whom the original stone belonged to in the future, if it is still extant. However, the stone was found a ways away from its original location and buried under several feet of sandy fill. This presents a unique opportunity for the gravestone fragment to not only provide information about the stone it came from, but also explain how it ended up where it was excavated. The sloped nature of the hill may help explain the deposition of the gravestone fragment. If it spalled off or was broken off of one of the tombstones up the hill, then it likely rolled down as the hill was being re-contoured. Its location within a fill layer suggests that it was deposited no earlier than 1884, the last year that the building uncovered in the unit was mentioned in the documentary record. If the fragment did spall off, then it may have been deposited during the winter when water in cracks of the stones would have frozen and expanded, breaking off pieces of the headstones. The alternative, that the piece was broken of instead of spalled off, may have happened during construction activities on the hill.

References
American Antiquarian Society
2014 The Farber Gravestone Collection. Accessed 15 December 2014.

Baugher, Sherene, and Richard F. Veit
2014 The Archaeology of American Cemeteries and Gravemarkers. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Berg, Shary Page, and Betsy Friedberg
2012 Burial Hill National Register Nomination Form. National Park Service, Plymouth.

Deetz, James
1996 In Small Things Forgotten: An Archaeology of Early American Life. Anchor Books, New York.

Deetz, James, and Edwin Dethlefsen
1994 Death’s Head, Cherub, Urn and Willow. In Interpreting Objects and Collections, Susan Pearce, editor, pp. 30-37. Routledge, New York.

Eriquez, Christina
2009 Our History In Stone: The New England Cemetery Dictionary. Sinematix, Brookfield.

August 11, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

Further Research: The Buildings on Burial Hill, part 2

Deed Research

This post is part of the Further Research series (see here for an explanation) and is continued from Part 1.

In researching the building foundations we uncovered during the 2014 excavations on Burial Hill in Plymouth, we georferenced historic maps and also did extensive deed research to determine who owned them and what were they used for.  There are maps from 1874 and 1885 that show the buildings along this stretch of School Street, but the two maps do not completely agree with each other, and one map contained a number of inconsistencies regarding building ownership, suggesting that we couldn’t use it to determine who owned the different buildings.

A section of the 1874 Beers map of Plymouth showing the buildings along School Street.  However, based on deed research the building owners listed on this map appear not to be correct in all cases.

A section of the 1874 Beers map of Plymouth showing the buildings along School Street. However, based on deed research the building owners listed on this map appear not to be correct in all cases.

A section of the 1885 Sanborn map showing buildings on School Street.  Note that some buildings have been demolished since the 1874 map and others have been reconfigured.

A section of the 1885 Sanborn map showing buildings on School Street. Note that some buildings have been demolished since the 1874 map and others have been reconfigured.

Over the course of the 2015-2015 academic year, we conducted deed research to trace the history of the properties in the excavation area. The task was complicated here because the modern property, owned by the Town of Plymouth, is made up of 10 separate 18th and 19th-century lots that were only consolidated in the early 20th century. We had to trace a lot of parcels to reconstruct the history of ownership along School Street! Usually, we needed to go back to a late 18th or early 19th-century deed to find parcel dimensions that allowed us to fit the historic parcels onto the modern landscape.

Advertizement from the 1890 Plymouth Directory  for the Chandler Livery Stables.  We did not uncover the foundations of this building, but excavation units 1 and 8 were inside the footprint of Albert and William Chandler’s “new stable” built between 1882 and 1884.

Advertizement from the 1890 Plymouth Directory for the Chandler Livery Stables. We did not uncover the foundations of this building, but excavation units 1 and 8 were inside the footprint of Albert and William Chandler’s “new stable” built between 1882 and 1884.

Ownership of the core of Burial Hill was always been retained by the Town of Plymouth, and the area was used for burials beginning in the late 17th century. However, in 1722, the Town began selling off parcels of land on the northern and eastern boundaries of Burial Hill, along present-day South Russell and School Streets, with most initial public sales of Town land on Burial Hill taking place between 1775 and 1825. Most of the lots along South Russell Street and the northern part of School Street were residential. School Street took its name from a grammar school, sometimes referred to as the central school, established in 1765 north of the Unitarian church at the south end of the street (the lot labeled “Engine House” on the 1874 Beers map). A second school, sometimes called the “town school” was established in 1827 in the middle of School Street, just south of the path up to Burial Hill, after the Central School District purchased a plot of land in 1826. This lot is still labeled as “School” on the 1874 Beers map. South of this school, the properties were primarily barns and stables (such as the Chandler Livery stable), many of them built by landowners living on the opposite side of School Street from the cemetery. In 2014, we found the foundations of two of these buildings as well as deposits relating to the 1827 school (which will be discussed in a later post).

Ad for Harlow and Bailey in the 1890 Plymouth Directory.

Ad for Harlow and Baily in the 1890 Plymouth Directory.

Excavation unit 2 crossed the back wall of a building that we identified as belonging to the firm of Harlow and Bailey. The land was first sold by the town in 1736 and 1740 and came under the ownership of the Jackson family in 1787 and 1790. After a number of intermediate transactions with the heirs of the Jacksons in the 1860s, the property, including a barn, was acquired by the firm of Samuel Harlow and J. C. Barnes, which became Harlow and Horace P. Bailey. Harlow and Bailey sold “stoves, furnaces, and kitchen furnishings, crockery and general hardware” at 18 Main Street. Harlow and Bailey seem to have encountered financial trouble in the 1890s and transferred all of their corporate property to a trustee in 1898 (PRCD 775: 122) with instructions to sell the property for cash to satisfy their creditors. Harlow and Bailey owned a business elsewhere in Plymouth and may have used this building for storage, which is how it is labeled on the 1885 Sanborn map, or they may have stabled horses that were used in support of their business.

Foundation of the Harlow and Bailey building in EU2.

Foundation of the Harlow and Bailey building in EU2.

Excavation unit 3 crossed the back wall of a building last owned by Zenas F. Leach. Leach owned land in several places along School Street, and was the last private owner of three lots at the south end of the street, which he sold to the town in 1884 at which time they contained “old stable buildings.” Davis outlines the complex early history of these lots in Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth (1899). They were all acquired by Caleb Rider in 1833 and 1843. The three lots were held by Rider until the 1860s, then all transferred several more times in the 1870s and 1880s before being purchased by Leach in 1882. These were among the first buildings on School Street to be demolished, probably soon after they were acquired by the town since they are absent from the 1885 Sanborn map.

August 7, 2015
by christa.beranek
0 comments

Further Research: The Buildings on Burial Hill, part 1

Georeferencing

This post is part of the Further Research series (see here for an explanation).

During the 2014 excavations on Burial Hill in Plymouth, we uncovered the foundations of two historic buildings and deposits from two additional building lots. One of our questions that needed follow up research was which buildings these were: who owned them and what were they used for? There are maps from 1874 and 1885 that show the buildings along this stretch, but tying the historic maps to the modern landscape is not always a straightforward task.

A section of the 1874 Beers map of Plymouth showing the buildings along School Street.

A section of the 1874 Beers map of Plymouth showing the buildings along School Street.

A section of the 1885 Sanborn map showing buildings on School Street.  Note that some buildings have been demolished since the 1874 map and others have been reconfigured.

A section of the 1885 Sanborn map showing buildings on School Street. Note that some buildings have been demolished since the 1874 map and others have been reconfigured.

The process of using GIS to place a historic map on the modern landscape is called georeferencing. To do this, you need points on the historic map that still exist on the modern landscape. In an urban area such a Plymouth, this is a challenge because there have been a number of episodes of urban redevelopment that have moved streets, reshaped the coastline and streams, and demolished or moved historic buildings. All of the buildings along School Street, our study area, for example, had been demolished since the maps were made. We found two points near our study area that seemed to be stable: the corner of a historic church and of the old jail. Both of these buildings exist on the maps and in the modern world, so we could go and take GPS points on corners of the buildings and use those points to relate the maps and the modern landscape. Using these two points, we georeferenced the maps. (Since we did this, the old jail on South Russell Street has been demolished, making this task even harder for future generations!)

 

Outlines of buildings from the 1874 and 1885 maps over the modern landscape.

Outlines of buildings from the 1874 and 1885 maps over the modern landscape.

Once we georeferenced the maps, we traced the buildings from them so that we could view the modern landscape and the historic building outlines. Looking at the outlines of the buildings from the two maps, it is clear that the relationship between the maps and the modern landscape is not straightforward. Many of the same buildings are represented, but they fall in different places (the two at the north [left] end of the view, for example). Some of the differences between the maps indicate actual changes to the built landscape between 1875 and 1885, such as the remodeling of the buildings on the lot immediately south of the 1827 school and the demolition of the most southern buildings. Other differences, however, raise questions about the accuracy of the different elements of the maps. For example, the 1827 school is depicted on both maps, but when both maps are georeferenced, the school building does not appear in the same location. The Beers map also shows buildings projecting well into the street (which is possible if the street was widened, or it may represent an error in the generation of the map), while the Sanborn map conforms somewhat better to the modern street layout. The Beers map also labels the buildings by owner or occupant, but the individuals listed in the project area (S. Bartlett and J. C. Barnes) were no longer property owners in 1874, and in fact, had both owned the same property in succession, not adjacent properties. It is not uncommon for historic maps not to conform to a modern survey of the same landscape: streets could be changed; buildings could be moved. More than that, however, historic maps are historic documents, like any other, that need to be read critically. Was the map maker concerned with accurately showing the streets, perhaps, but not the property lines or the locations of the buildings? With the limited amount of excavation data that we have, we cannot be certain about the accuracy of either map; both may be somewhat correct and incorrect in different ways. Critical evaluation of the maps indicated that we also needed to do deed research to trace the owners, uses, and sizes of the parcels on this part of Burial Hill.

To be continued…

August 4, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

Further research required…

Most of the posts on this blog are done during the field season to highlight ongoing work or new discoveries. Many of those show intriguing artifacts or features and end with statements like “further research is needed…” This is often true; we document our findings carefully in the field, but many artifacts need to be cleaned, researched, and compared to reference samples to be identified or interpreted. Often we need to look at artifacts as a group rather than individually to make sense of them; sometimes additional documentary research tells us more. One of the common sayings among archaeologists is for every hour a person spends in the field, three hours are required in the lab.

The next few posts will be part of a “Further Research” series on artifacts and features from the 2014 season on Burial Hill in Plymouth to show what we learned about them during a year of research. The 2015 material will undergo the same treatment over the fall and winter.

July 16, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

A Whimsical Find

Dog foot print on a handmade brick

Dog foot print on a handmade brick

The top 40 centimeters in our first unit against the house at Gore Place have been full of demolition debris — brick, mortar, building stone, slate, and marble tile fragments. We don’t save all of that architectural material, but we do look at the pieces to see if there is anything distinctive that would merit saving any as a sample. We were rewarded yesterday by a dog footprint on one of the broken bricks from the rubble! A footprint like this is made when an animal walks over the wet bricks, at the manufacturing site, before they have been fired. This find doesn’t shed any light on the questions that we are trying to answer about Gore Place, but it’s a cool and very evocative bit from the past, and the first find of this type by anyone on the crew.

July 14, 2015
by Fiske Center
0 comments

New Territory at Gore Place

Kellie and Justin opening the first of two planned units against the north face of the building.

Kellie and Justin opening the first of two planned units against the north face of the building.


We are doing a short, 3 week project at Gore Place this summer, a historic property in Waltham, Massachusetts, where we have done a number of previous seasons of research on the formal and agricultural landscape, including excavating the remains of an early 19th-century greenhouse. During our first week and a half, we have been following up on earlier work in the drive circle. Yesterday, we started exploratory work in a totally new area, against the historic house. We are looking for evidence of cellar and ground floor entrances that no longer exist, but since it is a new area, do not know what to expect!

June 28, 2015
by allisoncarlton001
0 comments

Finishing Up the Field Season

Dr. Mrozowski showing the students how to excavate levels systematically.

Dr. Mrozowski showing the students how to excavate levels systematically.

Throughout the Grafton Field School this summer there were many exciting finds and revelations that pushed Dr. Mrozowski to contemplate the future of this project. The crew worked longer hours this week and worked harder to recover every possible piece of information they could before backfilling their units. For many students, it was their first field school experience and for others, it was their first time excavating unique features.

 

Dr. Mrozowski explains the importance of soil in interpreting archaeological sites.

Dr. Mrozowski explains the importance of soil in interpreting archaeological sites.

FullSizeRender-4

Fragments of a slip-decorated redware vessel.

 

Skip to toolbar