Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18AN1151 B. Smith
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The B. Smith Site (18AN1151) is the archeological remnants of a mid 18th century to early 20th century evolving farmstead near Hanover in northern Anne Arundel County, Maryland. The site deposits reflect the changing nature of rural Anne Arundel County across the centuries. The site is situated on the knoll and slopes of two nearby hills and on the flats above a filled-in stream bed situated between them that once ran towards an unnamed tributary of Stoney Run. The surrounding landscape is largely wooded in old growth pine. Soils at the site are Loamy and Clayey Land, Rumford loamy sands, and Evesboro sandy soils.
The site was first identified in 1999 as the result of a Combined Phase I/II investigation of a 116 acre area either owned or of interest to the Maryland Aviation Administration west of the BWI Airport. The work was conducted in the fall of that year to determine the impact of potential development of the area, related to airport operations. The nature of future development plans required archeological investigation to assess any potential adverse effects to any cultural resources present under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and Article 83B, paragraph 5-618 (g) of the Annotated Code of Maryland.
Phase I work in the vicinity of 18AN1151 entailed the excavation of 42 systematic shovel test pits (STPs) at 20 meter intervals. STPs were excavated according to stratigraphic layers and all excavated material was passed through hardware cloth screens for uniformity of artifact recovery.
The B. Smith Site was identified by a cluster of positive STPs roughly 277.4 X 137.2 m (910 X 450 ft) in area. The 42 Phase I STPs recovered 7 cut nails, 2 wire nails, a scattering of oyster shells, window, lamp, and bottle glass, coal, and a pipe bowl. Two pieces of gray-bodied stoneware, 34 pieces of whiteware, 1 piece of ironstone, 17 pieces of redware, and 22 pieces of creamware comprised most of the ceramics recovered in this concentration. The assemblage revealed artifacts dating from the early 18th up to the middle 20th centuries. These artifacts are tallied along with the Phase II materials described below (and in the tables above).
Based on the analysis of Phase I STPs, the decision was made to proceed to a Phase II level of testing and two 1 X 1 m test unit were excavated to examine soil stratigraphy and site integrity at 18AN1151. In addition, another 22 STPs were excavated to further define site boundaries, extending onto privately owned land to the east of the original site boundaries. One of the test units was situated near the top of the western-most of the two slopes, where a single STP produced a high density of 19th century artifacts. The other test unit was placed at the base of the north-facing side of this slope between STPs which contained yelloware, creamware, and buff-bodied stoneware.
Phase II testing verified the relatively large size of the site deposits. The total artifact assemblage consisted of 716 artifacts. Horizontal distribution peaks were as high as 71 artifacts recovered from a single STP, but primarily fell within the 10 to 20 range. Slightly less than half the assemblage was recovered from the Phase II test units (317 objects). Most material was recovered from the upper plowzone excavation level, but sufficient material was recovered from the second excavation level to suggest that subplowzone deposits are present.
Initial field results suggested a possible early 18th century to early 20th century site, including the presence of subplowzone deposits. Phase II investigations supported this conclusion, although no features were identified. The site boundary was expanded eastward as well. Some recent surface dumping was present in this eastern portion of the site.
The combined Phase I/II artifact assemblage from 18AN1151 included 2 activity items (lamp glass), 79 architectural artifacts (7 cut nails, 2 wire nails, an iron latch, an estimated 15 pieces of window glass, an estimated 15 pieces of brick, mortar architectural ceramics, and iron hardware), 205 kitchen-related artifacts, 1 personal item, 4 kaolin pipe fragments, 1 arms object, and 424 miscellaneous/modern objects (including 270 fragments of coal). The kitchen-related assemblage included 97 ceramic sherds (1 tin-glazed earthenware, 22 creamware, 3 pearlware, 1 porcelain, 37 whiteware, 1 ironstone, 4 unidentified refined earthenware, 2 unidentified coarse earthenware, 17 redware, 5 yelloware, and 4 miscellaneous stoneware sherds), 71 pieces of bottle glass, 6 other glass fragments, a metal can fragment, and 30 faunal remains (2 bones/teeth and 28 pieces of oyster shell).
In general, the Phase I/II assemblage recovered from 18AN1151, the B. Smith Site, reflects at least some areas of dense domestic deposits. Occupation dates would appear to cluster around two periods. The early occupation period is represented by the tin-glazed earthenware and creamware ceramics, and dates from the early to mid 18th century. A later period, represented by whiteware and cut nails, date from the latter part of the 19th century. Stratigraphic profiles indicate some disturbance to the surface stratum, but also suggest that intact deposits may survive beneath the upper plowzone. This site is considered to retain good integrity, and to possess potential to provide useful information.
Based on these findings and the fact that planned airport expansion could not be redesigned to avoid this site, 18AN1151 was subjected to Phase III data recovery in the spring of 2001. A significant component of the data recovery project was extensive archival research.
The archival research reveals that the property on which the site is situated was originally part of the 1762 patent of a 484 acre tract called “Plummer’s Pasture”. Plummer’s Pasture was consolidated from three earlier tracts, all of which are described in the land records as “vacant land”, indicating that no development of the parcels had taken place. The land patent was that of Yate Plummer, the son of Thomas Plummer and Elizabeth Smith, and a prominent Quaker in Anne Arundel County. Yate died only two years later in 1764. His will, dated September 1763, indicates that his “new dwelling plantation” was located on another tract, suggesting that he made no improvements to Plummer’s Pasture.
Yate Plummer’s will left the property to 4 of his 7 sons, who subdivided and also added to portions of it. Eventually, the land went to Yate’s son Daniel Plummer who is the first documented inhabitant of the tract. In 1783, Daniel Plummer was assessed for 115 acres of land worth $115, one horse worth $10, and “other property” worth an additional $2. At this time Daniel was apparently living alone, as his household is characterized as “1 white male from 16 to 50 years…”. He owned no slaves. Daniel continued to acquire property in the area and by 1798 his assessment lists 120 acres, 4 perches, part of “Plummers Pasture”. On this acreage sat a one story wood dwelling house 18 X 14 ft, a 16 X 12 ft outbuilding, and an additional 16 X 10 ft structure otherwise unidentified. Daniel also owned an additional 372 acres in common with 2 of his brothers.
In 1800, Daniel was still the only member of the household. Daniel’s household in 1810 consisted of himself, one white female aged 10 to 16 years, and 2 females older than 45 years. If Daniel Plummer ever married, he left no living issue when he died later in 1810. In 1814, Daniel’s brothers and heirs sold the property, now consisting of 127 acres, to John Harman of the Elk Ridge Landing vicinity. Some confusion arose, and a later deed notes that William Plummer (one of Daniel’s brothers) apparently retained his 1/7 interest in part of the parcel, and sold his portion to his son-in-law Beale Gaither.
Settlement of the site area became increasingly dense. In contrast to 11 households listed in the Plummer vicinity in 1810, the 1820 census lists 23 households in the vicinity. John Harman is not enumerated in this part of the district in either the 1820 or 1830 census, suggesting that Harman never moved onto the Plummer’s Pasture parcel. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that Harman’s heirs occupied the property. It may have been occupied by unknown tenants. The Harman heirs sold it to a brother-in-law, Basil Smith in 1848. Basil Smith married Mary Harman in 1819, and it is possible that they may have begun living on the parcel at that time. However, the only census listings located for a Basil Smith did not appear in the same areas as other of the Plummer’s neighbors, and there is other evidence to suggest that the Basil Smith homestead was actually south of the project area in the Severn vicinity. Basil and Mary had 13 children, and by the time of his death Basil Smith had acquired well over 500 acres of land in Anne Arundel County. Smith family oral history indicates that Basil Smith built a two-room log cabin when he purchased the land in 1848, but its exact location on his extensive landholdings is in question.
Basil Smith died in 1881, and a plat prepared at that time shows the division of his lands among his children. His son, Francis Marion Smith, inherited the portion of the property that includes the site, but Basil’s will notes that F. Marion Smith is already living on the parcel. Francis Marion married Angelina Gardner near the end of 1852. They may have moved onto the parcel soon after. A household appears on an 1860 map in the site locale and F. Marion Smith’s family is enumerated in the 1860 census. The couple had 3 children and real estate worth $7600, and $800 of personal property. Also listed in the household are John Hawkins (farmhand 18 years), G. Edwards (farmhand 24 years), and M.A. Gambrill (female, 19 years), all African American. Both the household before and after F. Marion in the census are also African American: The Wesley Innes household, and Gengo Burgess household. This latter residence is listed between the F. Marion and V.A. Elliott, and may represent a tenant living on one of these two properties.
The 1860, 1870, and 1880 federal and agricultural censuses, as well as tax valuations from these decades indicate that the F. Marion Smith farmstead was a comfortably wealthy and privileged household. The farmstead itself was also above average in size and both livestock and produce production. The land was consistently valued at higher rates than surrounding farms.
F. Marion Smith died intestate in 1896. His three children inherited the farm. Elizabeth Francis Smith married John King Waters and left the parcel, but retained her interest until 1914. Daniel Handy Smith and his sister Mary Loretta remained on the farm and worked together to make it a success. They continued to work the farm, raising and selling truck produce, until first Loretta Smith died in 1933, and then Daniel Handy Smith died in 1934.
Oral history accounts of the early 20th century at the site portray Daniel Handy Smith as a talented and thoughtful farmer who carefully maintained the productiveness of his lands. There was both a main house and a tenant house on the farm by this time. The main house is described as a large two storey frame structure, with a large front porch. The main house apparently set to the east side of a farm road, while the tenant house sat at the front end of the farm road. In the 1934 will of Daniel Handy Smith, he left the farm to his nieces Mary Elizabeth Clark nee Waters, and Ethel Marion Crane nee Waters. The parcel was sold in 1936 to Mike and Mary Sroka. The Srokas began breaking the parcel into smaller house lots in the 1940s Thereafter the parcels were largely used for residential lots, and other than plow disturbance to the site, no further deposition seems to have taken place. Subdivision continued up until the late 1950s by which time the Smith farm had ceased to exist as an entity.
Phase III field investigations in 2001 concentrated on two previously identified concentrations of domestic artifacts, one believed to be associated with the earliest occupation by the Quaker Plummer family (Concentration One), and the second (Concentration Two) believed to be associated with the later Smith family occupation. A third study locus was added to encompass the unanticipated identification of a small fieldstone foundation with associated domestic materials (Foundation One). Fieldwork included excavation of 98 additional shovel test pits forming 10 meter or 5 meter interval testing grids and a total of 53 formal test units. Fifty-one of these were full one meter square excavation units. Two units were half-units where only the southern half of the 1 X 1 was excavated to allow complete investigation of a foundation hearth. The final stage of field investigation included mechanical stripping of smaller high potential areas to check for significant subsurface features not previously identified.
STP excavation was conducted according to natural stratigraphy. All excavated soils were screened through hardware cloth. STPs were excavated at 10 meter intervals in Concentration 1 and Concentration 2. A smaller area around Foundation 1 utilized 5 meter STP excavation intervals. Test unit excavation was conducted using 10 cm arbitrary excavation levels to subdivide deep natural strata, where pertinent. In one exceptional case, a midden, 5 cm arbitrary levels were utilized in the hope of identifying finer grained depositional differences. Features were generally bisected for sampling. Feature fills were excavated and screened separately. All excavated soils were screened through hardware cloth. Most cultural material was collected, however, a 25% sampling strategy was used for the heavy mortar content units in the Foundation One area. In a few cases, large brick bats were noted but not collected.
The final stage of data recovery at the B. Smith Site (18AN1151) consisted of monitored mechanical stripping of soils to expose the subsoil surface in two areas of the site. This final stage began with tree removal from the stripping area. A machine was used to cut trees off above the ground surface before the archeological monitoring began, and the upper portion was removed from the work area, with little or no disturbance of the soil. Two members of the archeological team then monitored stump removal within the areas, which was done utilizing a small backhoe, and conducted with as little subsurface disturbance as was possible. Soils from the root balls were shaken off back into the stump hole, a process which did have an impact on later feature identification. Stripping was accomplished with a Gradall with a 5 ft flat bucket. The archeological monitor was responsible for directing the Gradall operator, and flagging visible soil disturbances as possible features for later investigation. In areas where the Gradall had completed stripping, one crew worked to identify flagged disturbances before sun bleaching washed them out. A second crew worked to hand cut the soil surface with a garden hoe to identify any features missed during the initial stages, and to clean the mapped features for documentation and bisection as necessary.
Concentration One was located in the southwestern portion of the B. Smith Site, and was the first portion of the site identified during the Phase I survey. A total of 40 Phase III STPs were excavated in this area to form a 10 meter testing grid. Combined with the original Phase I STPs which fell within the concentration boundaries, these STPs provided artifact density and distribution information which was subsequently used for the judgmental placement of later excavation units, and provided information about land use patterns presented later in this report.
Original survey distributions had identified Concentration One as a smaller concentration of domestic materials within the larger 18AN1151 perimeter. Phase III STP information supported this identification, and distinguished a 24.4 m (80 ft) area in the south of Concentration One. The first ten of these were placed according to a stratified random probabilistic sampling strategy. The subsequent ten excavation units, in conjunction with the two Phase II test units, represent judgmentally placed units intended to investigate areas not covered by the probabilistic sampling strategy, and distribution peaks identified from the previously completed STP 10 meter grid.
Mechanical stripping of the plowzone in Concentration One exposed an area of roughly 3 acres. Although a number of previous STP and excavation unit scars could be clearly identified at the subsoil surface, only one cultural feature was present. This feature represented a postmold in a post hole, probably from a more substantial fence line. All other soil anomalies identified were associated with the planted rows of pine timber present within Concentration One before stripping.
Most cultural material recovered from Concentration One was recovered from the plowzone. Chronologically diagnostic artifacts ranged from the mid 18th century through the mid 20th century, and also included modern intrusions representing surface litter from late 20th century trespasses for hunting and recreation.
Fieldwork within Concentration One discovered that this area had been subject to a number of small scale processes, interacting to result in complex stratigraphy. The most pervasive of these processes was agricultural disturbance. A plowzone was present across the entire concentration. Other processes effective within Concentration One included slope erosion from the adjacent northern slope, slopewash accumulation at the base of this slope, and siltation of an extinct streambed associated with a possible intermittent spring head near the western concentration boundary. Although many disturbances were documented in the Concentration One stratigraphy, at least one intact cultural strata was identified, restricted to a small area along the southern knoll and in places extending to the stream deposits.
A total of eight features were identified during fieldwork within Concentration One. Only three of these were ultimately determined to be cultural in origin. A fourth could not be conclusively classified, but was found to be very irregular and unlikely to represent deliberate human creation. Two of the cultural features represent postmolds from post of varying diameter and spacing, and probably reflect farm fencing used between agricultural fields. The third cultural feature was a small trench of unknown function.
The full Phase III artifact assemblage for Concentration One included 12 activity items (lamp glass), 464 architectural artifacts (including 305 pieces of brick, 16 mortar fragments, 81 window glass fragments, 3 wrought nails, 37 cut nails, 1 wire nail, 13 other nails, 2 other hardware fragments, 4 pieces of slate, and 1 miscellaneous architectural artifact), 1 clothing item, 415 kitchen-related artifacts (1 tin-glazed earthenware sherd, 16 creamware sherds, 15 pearlware sherds, 85 whiteware sherds, 1 ironstone sherd, 2 porcelain sherds, 1 refined earthenware sherd, 7 unidentified earthenware sherds, 30 redware sherds, 9 yelloware sherds, 2 stoneware sherds, 38 glass bottle glass pieces, 35 other domestic glass fragments, 149 faunal objects, and 3 botanical items), 2 arms objects, 6 tobacco-related items (kaolin pipe fragments), and 3,243 modern, utility-related, or unidentified objects.
Concentration Two consisted of a long eastern extension to the B. Smith Site identified during later Phase I survey work. A total of 31 Phase III STPs were excavated within Concentration Two to form a 10 meter testing grid. Eleven Phase I STPs also pertained to Concentration Two. Phase I survey results had identified Concentration Two as an area of denser mixed artifacts within 18AN1151. Stratigraphy had initially appeared to be undisturbed. No excavation units were placed in this area during the Phase II investigations. Phase III investigations contradicted the Phase I findings.
A total of 16 excavation units were placed within Concentration Two during the Phase III investigations. The first nine of these were placed according to a stratified random probabilistic sampling strategy. The remaining seven units were judgmentally placed to cover areas within the concentration not previously addressed by the probabilistic sample. Horizontal distribution patterns were more indicative of wide-scale field scatter, and distribution peaks played a lesser role in unit placement in Concentration Two.
A total of five features were identified in Concentration Two during Phase III investigations. Only two represent cultural features: Feature 1 (plowscars) and Feature 12 (relatively small diameter postmolds). The remaining features represent natural small scale soil anomalies (Features 2 and 4), and a small portion of a stream or erosion gully bed. Although the original project research design included mechanical stripping of the plowzone in Concentration Two, the Phase III excavation results from this testing locus were very disappointing, and the stripping plan was dropped.
Stratigraphy proved to be plowzone on subsoil in most locations. The primary visible process was slop erosion, with associated soil building at the northern slope base. A piece of streambed or large erosion gully was present in one northern excavation unit, but the main streambed would have passed through east-west in the parcel north of Concentration Two.
Cultural material recovered from Concentration Two was almost exclusively restricted to the plowzone (roughly 1400 artifacts total), or to contemporary topsoil developing out of the plowzone (roughly 500 artifacts). Diagnostic artifacts spanned the 19th and 20th centuries, and most strongly represented the last half of the 19th and first quarter of the 20th. A detailed description of the Concentration Two assemblage is not provided in the body of the Phase III report, therefore these artifacts are not included in the tallies in the table above.
Foundation One represents the unanticipated find of a small, roughly 4.88 X 5.49 m (16 X 18 ft) fieldstone foundation remnant south of the original Phase III work areas. This testing locus proved to be one of the richest, and the most intact of the three testing locations. The foundation deposits literally fell within the wider Phase I testing interval, with four Phase I STPs falling around the foundation lot perimeter. Subsequent Phase III investigations determined that the bulk of the cultural material associated with the Foundation One testing locus was either within the foundation itself, or part of the midden area south of the foundation.
A total of 27 Phase III STPs were excavated within the Foundation One testing locus, forming a five meter testing grid. Four Phase I STPs were also within the locus. Distribution information from these STPs is presented later, where it was used to interpret structural character, land use patterning, and trash disposal habits. They also indicated that little subsurface disturbance was present in the immediate foundation vicinity.
Stratigraphy north of the foundation differed from that found around and south of the foundation. In northern areas gravel content was much higher, and closer to the surface. Soils in the north were similar to those encountered beneath cultural layers under the foundation however, and probably do not reflect extensive cultural disturbance to this area. It is believed that the gravel-heavy soils of the northern slope represent erosion processes which did not impact the lower and flatter house yard.
A total of 18 excavation units were placed within the Foundation One testing locus: 16 one meter square units, and two .5 X 1 m units. Both half units, and 12 of the full units were placed on or in the foundation, while one remaining unit was in the southern house yard and three others were in the midden deposits. All units were comparatively artifact rich, and no extensive cultural disturbance was encountered in any of them.
A total of 15 features were associated with the Foundation One testing area. Two of these represent atypical lenses accumulated around the outer foundation walls. Four of these apparently reflect extensive rodent disturbance associated with the foundation hearth base. One feature, under the house interior, may represent a post hole, but no postmold was present. Six of the features represent trash disposal pits and lenses of varying size, as does the midden itself (also counted as a feature). The final feature was the foundation itself.
The cultural material recovered from the Foundation One testing locus was very dense in two locations (as noted above), and the bulk of the assemblage is provenienced either to the foundation or to the midden. Chronologically, the material is concentrated in the last half of the 19th Century, and the first quarter of the 20th Century. Material from the midden appears to be just slightly younger (3rd quarter of the 19th and 1st quarter of the 20th century). Smaller quantities of potentially older bottle glass and ceramics were recovered from both the foundation and the midden.
The Phase III artifact assemblage from the Foundation One area at 18AN1151 included 17 agricultural activity items (9 brass pickers checks, horseshoes and machinery hardware), 4,173 architectural artifacts, 31 clothing items (all but 1 were buttons), 1,187 kitchen-related artifacts, 10 personal items (at least 4 are gears from a watch), 1 tobacco related artifact (a stoneware pipe bowl), 5 arms objects, and 940 modern, utility-related, or unclassifiable objects. The kitchen assemblage is the only one for which detailed tallies are provided in the body of the Phase III site report, and that is primarily in reference to ceramics. The kitchen assemblage included 7 Cauliflower-ware sherds, 5 pearlware sherds, 129 whiteware sherds, 47 ironstone sherds, 25 porcelain sherds, 2 refined earthenware sherds, 10 redware sherds, 6 yelloware sherds, 11 stoneware sherds, 1 unidentified sherd, 315 faunal objects, 63 botanical objects, and 562 other kitchen-related artifacts (glass, tin can fragments, and other).
The analysis of the Phase I STPs had identified two areas within the site: Concentration 1, which yielded slightly earlier samples of artifacts dating from the 18th century, and Concentration 2, which yielded artifacts more consistently associated with the 19th century. In addition, the preliminary stages of the Phase III archeological investigation identified a previously unidentified resource, Foundation 1, the foundation of a small house which had remains with good integrity within it.
Concentration 1 as identified in the Phase I and Phase II work promised to yield intact layers from the 18th Century occupation of site 18AN1511. Phase III investigation identified two strata underlying a plowzone with material from the underlying strata. Unfortunately these deposits were thin and disappointingly sparse. No significant features were recovered from them. Most of Concentration 1 had, in fact, been disturbed by subsequent plowing.
Distributional analysis identified concentrations around a 24.4 m (80 ft) square suggesting the possible earlier presence of a structure. Architectural remains suggest that this building was not brick or frame construction, but without further evidence it was not possible to confirm if a log, or post-in-ground, or earthfast structure was once present. The artifacts recovered do indicate an occupation from the late 18th throughout the early 19th century. Analysis of the recovered artifact assemblage suggests that the remains do come from a settlement by a family of the middle to upper socioeconomic status, and with the 18th century date this would have been the Plummer family, specifically Daniel Plummer. However, there were no deposits recovered with sufficient integrity to allow any specific research to be addressed.
Concentration 2, also identified in the Phase I and II work, also promised to yield information from the 18th and 19th century occupation of the site. Unfortunately, Phase III investigations in Concentration 2 revealed that all of the deposits in Concentration 2 had been disturbed by later plowing. Analysis of the artifact collection suggests that this portion of the site dates to slightly later than Concentration 1. No evidence was found for a possible building location. The Basil Smith house was certainly located outside Concentrations One and Two. If so, the remains must have been subsequently completely obliterated, since the Phase I/II investigation around the property only located deposits without integrity in that area. The disturbed nature of the deposits and the small size of the collection, did not allow any meaningful interpretive statements to be made about Concentration 2.
Foundation 1 was an unexpected find that allowed the recovery of information about elements only hinted at in the archival evidence. Foundation 1 was 5.5 X 4.9 m (18 X 16 ft), a style and size often found in ruder houses constructed in the end of the 18th Century. While this would place its construction during the ownership by Daniel Plummer, it doesn’t match any of the structures described for Mr. Plummer in his various tax assessments. The artifacts recovered from Foundation 1 date more consistently to the 19th century. It is believed to have been constructed under the ownership of Basil Smith or possibly John Harman, following a conservative architectural model in its then rural setting. The artifacts recovered are consistent with a tenant level of occupation, representing the lower portion of socioeconomic usage. The structure was apparently abandoned around 1934, or at least certainly by 1954. The period after abandonment is represented by a thick deposit of debris and mortar from the structure as it collapsed and decayed. Beneath this, three subsequent strata contain intact deposits containing artifacts that were deposited through gaps in the floor during the 19th and early 20th century use of the structure. Adjacent to the structure, a midden deposit was identified with two strata of deposits related to the house (based on cross mends of artifacts from both locations). Distribution of nails and glass suggest that some of the material was deposited on the midden after the destruction of the structure on the foundation, or some other structure.
The artifacts recovered are consistent with usage from roughly 1840 on, during a period when the transition to truck farming was taking place, as railroads opened up urban markets to farmers in the area. The material recovered was reviewed carefully to try to establish who the occupants of Foundation 1 were. A few high status artifacts (such as gears from a watch) were recovered. At first the hypothesis was considered that the Foundation 1 structure was originally occupied by a younger son or poorer relative of the land owner family. However, review of the domestic ceramics is consistent with a poorer occupant without access to or use for more complete sets of dishes. The Foundation 1 structure was consistent with tenant farm or small farmholder occupation. All evidence, from artifacts to faunal material, supported occupants from lower socioeconomic classes.
Archival analysis of agricultural censuses identified the shift during the 19th century of the B. Smith farm from grain production to truck farming. The structure on Foundation 1 was in use during this period. Because the material from Foundation 1 corresponds with the period when truck farming was the primary agricultural activity, the material was examined to see if Foundation 1 might represent a “picker’s shed”. These facilities, which served as dormitories for migrant workers who often came in from neighboring cities during times of intensive labor needs, might be expected. However, Foundation 1 does not appear to have been such a facility. The recovery of a clothing iron, scissors, and other domestic materials suggests a family occupied Foundation through its lifespan. No evidence was found in the yard of cooking and other activities that would be expected with a picker’s shed. While picker’s checks were recovered from the midden/trash dump associated with Foundation 1, it was suggested that these were discarded after they stopped having value, and were not lost by pickers themselves. There was no evidence in the material collected from the foundation or from the associated midden to suggest European ethnic populations like those that composed the pickers in the late 19th and e
|
