HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"J. H. Brothers" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:53:47 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (46 lines)
Yes it was deliberately simplistic.  The "bad" old days I was referring to were
those of classical archaeology and Egyptology.  Where former circus strong men
worked as archaeologists and people hired river pirates to hijack the cargoes
of other museums.  But the concentration on fabulous treasure and large
buildings manifested here in the South as plantation archaeology.  The money
went to places like Monticello and other homes owned by the important
families.   In many cases the emphasis was on understanding the big house or
the grounds.  Only recently has it shifted to the outbuildings and workers.

Monticello and Mount Vernon have done good work in terms of excavating out
buildings and developing a better understanding of how plantations were
organized and operated.   In terms of metallurgical sites, both the nailery at
Monticello and the forge at Montpelier were excavated.  But, where is the
technical analysis?  I know that Montpelier never analyzed the slag that they
recovered.  As a result they still do not know if they had a simple forge
(large blacksmith shop) or a bloomery.  As far as Monticello is concerned,
again where is the metallurgical analysis of the artifacts recovered?  These
artifacts can tell us a great deal about the technology employed and the
expertise of the craftsmen doing the work.  But only if we ask the right
questions and follow through with appropriate analysis.  Otherwise much of what
has been produced by the nailery excavation is little more than another pile of
wrought nails.

Jamie Brothers

Barbara J Heath wrote:

> Jamie,
> I think your argument for the "bad" old days is simplistic, as you probably
> meant it to be.  Contrary to your argument, the first real archaeological
> excavations at Monticello, done by Oriol Pi-Sunyer (1957) and Vladimir
> Markotic (1958), centered on the industrial buildings of Mulberry Row and
> looked at the garden.  While "digging" was done by folks interested in
> architectural restoration through the 1950s (without much archaeological
> expertise), relatively little work at Monticello has focused on the mansion
> as compared to the ornamental landscape, quarters, industrial buildings and
> broader plantation.
>
> Barbara Heath
> Director of Archaeology
> Thomas Jefferson's Poplar Forest
> P.O. Box 419
> Forest, VA 24551
> (804) 525-1806
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2