king 1988 comparative midden analysis

7/29/2019 King 1988 Comparative Midden Analysis

1/23

J ULIA A . KING

A Comparative Midden Analysisof a Household and Inn in St.Marys City, MarylandABSTRACT

This paper investigates the nature of functional variation asreflected on an intra-site level. Although a site generally hasone function, most sites contain material evidence ofnumerous activities occurring at different times and placesamong different groups of people. Distributions and asso-ciations of archaeological materials are analyzed using dataderived from the St . Johns site , an early 17th centurytobacco plantation which later served as an inn, adjacent toSt. Marys ity. Variation between the Household and theInn phases of occupation is described, and variation in thelocations of activities at the site is demonstrated. However,differences between the Household and Inn occupationsappear more subtle and may be due to a number of factorsas well as functional variation. The analysis demonstratesthe need for more studies of a similar type in order toaddress differences in function and differences among siteoccupants.

IntroductionAn important research issue in historical archae-

Although a site may have had only one func-tional identification, most sites contain materialevidence of numerous activities, occumng at dif-ferent times and places among different groups ofpeople. These activities are sometimes inferredfrom the types of artifacts recovered, generallyusing implicit assumptions about the form of anartifact and its function. Minimal attention is paidto context except on a chronological level. Theresult is frequently a mere laundry list of the typesof activities for which archaeological evidence ispresent. Little research has been done to investi-gate specifically how these activities were orga-nized spatially, although this information is avaluable source of information on the relationshipsamong site occupants.Prehistorians have long been concerned withintrasite spatial analysis for elucidating prehistoricbehavior; historical archaeologists have not beenas quick to follow suit, probably because of thedetailed kinds of information already available onthe site level and the existence of an often richdocumentary record (Noble 1983: 1). This is not todeny the existence of an awareness of intrasitespatial analyses; many creative and insightful stud-ies have emerged in historical archaeology (cf.,Keeler 1978; Neiman 1980; Noble 1983; Miller1986). Clearly, more studies are needed if histor-ical archaeologists intend to build a comparativedata base. Such information is present in thearchaeological record and its recovery should be-


2/23

18Household and Inn Spatial Organization:Previous Research

Historians and archaeologists alike have beenactively interested in the layout and organization ofthe 17th century Tidewater household. Historianshave used probate inventories to infer the structureand organization of these households. They havefound that Chesapeake dwellings contained anaverage of only three rooms, less space than eventhe poorest homes of English farm laborers (Main1982). Although each room had a primary func-tion, mainly dairying, cooking, sleeping or eat-ing, rooms did not serve specialized functions andoften many activities took place in the same areas(Main 1982; Walsh 1983).A preliminary archaeological study of the Che-sapeake homelot used the St. Johns site as itsfocus (Keeler 1978). Changes in the organizationof the 17th century homelot were correlated withthe evolution of Tidewater frontier society. AsChesapeake society stabilized and matured, home-lots grew from simple and impermanent dwellingssurrounded by wattle fences and a few outbuild-ings, through stages of greater elaboration andincreasingly formalized spatial division. A moredetailed analysis of the nearby van Sweringenhomelot indicated that, during the late 17th cen-tury, midden deposits were consistently associatedwith the hall and the kitchen, and yet there were no

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 22from drinking vessel forms. Tavern site artifactcollections also contained larger percentages ofwine glasses and pipe stem fragments than con-temporary domestic sites.

In a comparative study of four colonial tavernsites in urban and rural contexts, Rockman andRothschild (1984) found that the artifact assem-blages of urban taverns were more specialized thanthose from rural areas. Urban taverns were thesetting for drinking and other socializing activ-ities, while a rural tavern assemblage suggestedfood preparation and consumption as well. Theylink this to the accommodation functions served byrural taverns.Rockman and Rothschild (1984: 113) note thathistorical and archaeological research indicate thata number of different activities occurred incolonial taverns, both urban and rural. This state-ment is not only true of taverns, but colonialhouseholds as well. In this analysis, the actuallocations and spatial relationships of middens froma domestic household and an inn of the 17thcentury will be presented and compared.In order to analyze and compare the intrasitespatial patterning of archaeological materials be-tween a household and an inn, artifact assemblagesand spatial data from documented sites of knownfunction were required. Further, it was essentialthat these samplesbe excavated using comparablemethods of data recovery to facilitate analysis. The


3/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARY 'S CITY. MARYLAND 19


4/23

20 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 22

Figure 2 The St J ohns dwelling foundation after excavation (Photograph courtesy Historic St Mary s City)


5/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLDw

I FlreplaceI C. 1678 Flreplace

i 0 20I Pen j -..... ... ...... ... .......i..........ii KITCHEN,. ,

i Nur se r Y

Figure 3. Plan view of the St. Johns site. North is at top ofpage.

AND I N N IN ST. MARYS CITY, MAR YLAND 21King 1976). During the second half of the 17thcentury, St. Marys City became more urbanized,and much more the focus of political and economicaffairs in the colony. The inn at St. Johns pro-vided services to visitors at least until 1690, andprobably 1695.In the 167Os, the main building was extensivelyrenovated. The fireplace and chimney were relo-cated against the north wall of the house to createa more formal entranceway and a more modernstaircase, and the clapboard roof was replaced withpantile, a Dutch roofing tile. A new porch wasadded to the front door giving the dwelling aRenaissance look (Stone 1982: 315-17).From 1638 until c. 1666, St. Johns served asthe domestic household for a series of elite occu-pants, their families and their servants. Althoughthree different families occupied the dwelling dur-ing this time, these families possessed strikingsocial and cultural similarities. Overzee and Cal-vert were among the richest men in the colony, andthough Lewger lost more financially than hegained, he was of an intellectual and social stand-ing that kept him quite intimate with Lord Balti-more and the Calvert family. All three men weremarried, a noticeably unusual situation on a fron-tier dominated by young, unmarried adult males.All three men had married women born in Englandand together oversaw large households made up ofrelatives and servants. And, all three men used St.


6/23

22undertaken in order to illuminate other differencesin material goods not always apparent in thearchaeological record.During both phases of occupation (Householdand Inn), large numbers of people were at St.Johns. However, the nature of habitations weredifferent in their function and relationships be-tween occupants are expected to vary. By isolatingthe two types of occupations and analyzing thedistributions and compositions of archaeologicalmaterials from each, it should be possible toidentify how material culture, space use and activ-ities varied between a tobacco plantation and apublic inn in the same physical space. Althoughthe assemblages discussed here have been createdby a variety of occupations, any noise shouldbe secondary to strength of function.

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY , VOLUME 22(Figure 4). It was removed in 5-by-5- and 10-by-10-foot units and screened through 3I8-inch mesh.Soil samples for chemical analysis were alsotaken. All artifactual and faunal materials werewashed, catalogued and are presently curated atHistoric St. Marys City.For the first phase of analysis, computer-generated artifact density maps were made usingthe SYMAP graphics program (Dougenik andSheehan 1979). Artifact densities were calculatedby square foot of excavated plow zone. Areas ofmidden deposition were identified from the result-ing maps using overlapping clusters of temporallydiagnostic artifacts. Once midden areas were iden-tified for each occupation, plow zone materialsfrom squares located within the middens werecombined and quantified using standard statisticalmethods (SPSS, Inc. 1983). Because of the unfor-tunate problem of overlapping Household and Innoccupation middens, only materials dating se-curely to each of the two occupations were used inthis analysis. Certain classes of artifacts, includingbone and most bottle and table glass from the plowzone, could not be satisfactorily dated to eitheroccupation and were therefore not included in theanalysis. This admittedly limits the scope of thestudy. Nonetheless, information on the locationsand organization of activities is still available fromthe remaining artifacts in these plow-disturbedcontexts.

MethodsThe St. Johns site was excavated between 1972and 1976 and again in 1982 by the St. Marys CityCommission under the direction of Garry WheelerStone. The site had been subjected to post-

occupational plowing, and this plow zone coversthe site evenly to an average depth of about eightinches. This disturbance affected all of the surfacemiddens at the site. Despite its disturbed nature,the plow zone is extremely important for studying


7/23

A COMP ARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARY'S CITY, MARYLAND

N'PlL i m i t o f S t u d y A r e a 3

~0L i m i t o f S t u d y A r e a 3 ~/!-!-lJ-L 0

I ,0(8110(

23


8/23

24S T J O H N ' S

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 22S T JOHN'S

".0 - .15 .21 - .2 5

0 . 1 6 - .20 . 2 6 - .47r t t i

Figure 5.The distribution of pre-1665 ceramics at the StJ ohn's site.

early ceramics. A third midden associated with thedwelling is found in the yard adjacent to the frontdoor, and contains early pipes, terra cotta pipes

rill 0 0 - 0 3 m.050.04 m.06 - .I3

Figure 6. The distribution of pre-1665 tin-glazed earthen-wares.

projection map. A one-to-one correlation cannotand should not be expected among artifact types.However, detailed visual inspection of these maps


9/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND I N N I N ST. MARYS CITY, MARYLAND 25ST J O H N ' S

0 . 2 4 - .65Figure 7. The distribution of terra cotta clay pipe frag-ments.

The midden at the far southern end of the sitecontinued in use until ca. 1680. Neither NorthDevon nor Staffordshire slipped wares occur inthis area, and there are few 2.4 and 2.6 mm pipes,

S T J O H N ' S

0 . 0 3 - .w

Figure8.The distributionof white clay tobacco pipes withbore diameters of 3 . U . 2mm.

Two midden deposits appear about 1680 inassociation with the parlor. One occurs in theeastern back yard and the other was created off theeast gable end of the parlor.


10/23

26S T J O H N ' S

HISTORICAL A RCHAEOL OGY, VOLUME 22S T J O H N ' S

0.05 - .c6 .08 - .0 9Figure 9. The distribution of white c lay tob acco p ipes wi thbore diam eters of 3.6 mm. Figure 10. The distribution of white c lay tobacco p ipeswith bore diameters of 3.4 m m .

consumption activities. Domestic activities in-volving ceramics-all phases of food processing,preparation and consumption-seem not to havevations. The fi iplace was moved to accommodatea formal entranceway, and a pantile roof wasadded. A Renaissance-style porch was also added


11/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUS EHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARY'S CITY, MARYLAND 27S T JOHN'S

S T J O H N ' S

Figure 11. Midden areas during the Household phase, c.1638 to c. 1666.

the use of space in more detail, it is necessary toturn to an analysis of the composition of thevarious middens associated with each type of

0 20

0 - .JO m.41 - .51- 0 . 3 1 - . 4 0 .5 2 - .60Figure 12. The distribution of white clay tobacco pipeswith bore diameters of 3.0 mm.The Household assemblage contains only 15percent ceramics, with the remaining 85 percentconsisting of tobacco pipe fragments (Table 1).


12/23

28ST JOHN'S

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 22S T J O H N ' S

/\I

u 35 - .62 .77 - .8 9 0 . 7 2 - .28 E4 .35 - .5 7Figure 13. The distribution of white clay tobacco pipeswith bore diameters of 2.8 mm.

increase in ceramics is expected for an inn, basedon Bragdon's (1981) observations, but it is alsolikely that this difference reflects the relative

3Figure 14. The distribution of white clay tobacco pipeswith bore diameters of 2.6 mm.

more than half (56 percent) of the collection con-sists of milk pan fragments-large earthenwarepans primarily used in the dairy and kitchen. Bowls,


13/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARY 'S CITY, MAR YLAND 29S T J O H N ' ST JOHN'S

0 - .a7 .IO - .I2 10 - .a7 .IO - .I20.08 - .09 . I 3 - .26

Figure 15. The distribution of Morgan J ones ceramics. Figure 16. The distribution of North Devon Gravel-tempered ceramics.

of containers, probably barrels. Ceramic cookingvessels, primarily pipkins and patty pans, are alsopresent in the assemblage, although iron and cop-per vessels probably made up the bulk of cooking

times in proportion, as do food and beveragestorage vessels. Ceramic cooking vessel ratios aresimilar in both assemblages.The comparison of the Household and Inn artifact


14/23

30 HISTOR ICAL ARC HAEOLOGY , VOLUME 22S T J O H N ' ST J O H N ' S

0 - .07 .12 - .140.08 - .ll .15 - .3 6

Figure 17. The distribution of Staffordshire slipwares.

Unlike the plantation, the 17th century innperformed a service function. Still, householdmaintenance for the innkeeper, his family andservants was an important consideration. Evidence

Figure 18. Midden areas during the Innphase, c. 1667 toC. 1680.

forms are also involved (Brown 1972; Deetz 1977:58 ; Miller 1983). Beverage consumption was avery traditional activity associated with inns, andceramics were, at least in the short run, less


15/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSE HOLD AND INN IN ST. MARYS CITY, MARYLAND 31S T J O H N S

0 20IillFigure 19. Midden areas during the Inn phase, c. 1680 toc. 1695.

TABLE 1.Total diagnostic artifact assemblages byphase, St. J ohns.

Household InnPhase Phasen w n 46

TABLE 2.Functional classificationof ceramics by phase,

St. J ohns.Household

Phase Inn PhaseDairyingStorageCookingDrinkingDiningMedicinalUnidentified FoodTotal

b e s s i n g

n w n w185 70.3 59 12.36 2. 3 131 27.212 4 .6 22 4. 615 5. 7 249 51 .841 15.6 12 2.54 1.5 1.7 8263 48 1

Dairying: milk pans, bowlsStorage: pots, jars, bottlesCooking: patty pans, pipkinsDrinking: all beverage containersDining:Medicinal: galley pots

plates, dishes, porringers, miscellaneous tablewares

11). These include the middens in the backyardbehind and west of the dwelling; adjacent to thekitchen and at the end of the front yard. The countsand frequencies of early ceramics and white andterra cotta clay tobacco pipes are presented inTable 3. Tobacco pipes account for the majority ofartifacts in all of these samples. The middenslocated west of the dwelling and at the far south


16/23

32 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY,VOLUME 22TABLE 3.

Total Diagnostic Artifact Assemblages by Midden, Household Occupation, St. J ohns.Front Back West southDoor Yard Yard Front Yard Kitchen

~ ~~~~

n n n n n 9666Ceramics 16 8. 3 73 10.8 30 25.9 130 25.9 16 16.2White Clay Pipes 138 71.9 491 72.5 61 52.6 338 67.3 31 31.3Terra Cotta Clay Pipes 38 19.8 113 16.7 25 21.6 34 6.8 52 52.5- - - - - - - - - -Total 192 677

locus for refuse disposal from a food consumptioncontext.Unfortunately, only 16 ceramic fragments fromthe kitchen yard midden could be securely dated tothe Household phase of occupation at St. Johns(Table 4). This is partially due both to the build-ings earliest use as a storage facility and to thelarge amounts of unidentified coarse earthenwaresassociated with this building. Despite the smallsample size, the identified vessel forms are thoseexpected in a utilitarian context. Food storagevessel fragments are present along with milk pansherds and pipkin and patty pan fragments, thelatter two types used for cooking.The large midden in the far south front yardcontained the largest number of pottery sherds, andalmost 90 percent of these fragments are from

1I6 502 99

Most service activities were restricted to thehall, kitchen and rear yard of the St. Johnshomelot. The hall also functioned as a kitchen, andan associated dairy with a subterranean cobblefloor had been added to the back side of the St.Johns dwelling very early. The storage building,later converted to a kitchen was also located in theback yard. A small stockpen with a flimsy woodenanimal shelter stood in this back yard, approxi-mately 40 feet behind the dwelling (Figure 3).Finally, domestic refuse from these activities wastossed into the back yard and in the yard west ofthe building.In contrast, the front yard was cleaner. Somemidden build-up occurred beside the front door,but the yard remained fairly clean for at least fiftyfeet from the main house. This two-part spatial


17/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARYS C ITY, MARYLAND 33TABLE 4 .

Functional classificationof ceramics by Midden, Household Occupation, St. J ohns.Front Back West SouthDoor Yard Yard Front Yard Kitchen

n n n n- - - - - -Dairying 8 50.0 49 67.1 9 30.0 115Storage 1 6.3 3 4 .1 1Cooking 1 6 . 3 4 5.5 1 3.3 1Drinking 3 4. 1 9 30 .0 1Dining 6 37.5 12 16.4 1 1 36.7 12Medicinal 2 2.7n88.5 4

0.8 10.8 50.8 29 .2 2

- %25.06 .331.312.512.5

-Total 16 73 30Dairying: milk pans, bowlsStorage: pots, jars, bottlesCooking: patty pans, pipkinsDrinking: all beverage containersDining:Medicinal: galley pots

plates, d ishes, porringers, miscellaneous tablewares

130 16

ment in these structures, including large numbersof earthen pans (Main 1982: 83, 227). The evi-dence suggests an important service building in thefront yard, but at least 50 feet away from the maindwelling.Analysis of the Household middens providesadditional insight into the use of buildings androoms within buildings. These inferences arebased on the assumption that trash generated fromdomestic activities was tossed into surface mid-

preparatiodcooking function with some evidencefor food consumption and leisure time activities. Itis possible that servants also lived in the kitchen,since kitchen buildings are often noted as havinglofts or beds, or both (Main 1982: 162).The lack of almost any refuse associated withthe parlor indicates little or none of the activities ofgeneral food preparation and consumption oc-curred in this room. In most 17th century Chesa-peake dwellings, parlors were formal rooms used


18/23

34 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY , VOLUME 22

. .

. .

Figure 20. Artist's conception of St. J ohn's, c. 1640 (Courtesy Historic St. Mary's City).


19/23

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARYS CITY, MARYLANDTABLE 5.

Total Diagnostic Artifact Assemblages by Midden, Inn Occupation, St. J ohns.35

Back West south Shade

n % n % n % n % n % n % n %Yard Yard Parlor Kitchen Quarter Front Yard Tree

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -ceramics 180 29.1 51 32.5 43 27.2 13 24.5 63 38.9 94 26 .4 18 18.8WhiteClay Pipes 43 8 70.9 85 62.5 11 5 72.8 40 75.5 99 61.1 262 73.6 78 81.2Total 618 I38 158 53 162 . 356 96

addition, a small cluster of materials was created inthe front yard about 25 feet south of the dwelling.This midden apparently formed under a large treestanding in this spot.The large back yard midden associated with thedwelling hall again represents a mix of domesticrefuse (Tables 5 and 6). Thirty percent of theceramic fragments are from food storage vessels. Itis quite likely at this time that the nursery addition,constructed by Charles Calvert during the last partof the Household occupation (cf., Figure 3), nowserved the function of a buttery or pantry. Thisframe addition to the dwelling was located on thenorthwest corner of the dwelling and would haveserved as a good storage facility. These vesselsmay have contained foodstuffs not produced on theSt. Johns homelot, but acquired to serve in the

and cooking vessels are also included in thisassemblage.Unexpectedly, this comparison has revealed lit-tle functional variation in artifact distribution andcontent at the main dwelling for both phases.These two Inn phase middens suggest a strongcontinuity in function of the hall and back yardspace from the Household occupation. Althoughmore storage and drinking vessels and less diningequipment occur in the Inn period, overall distri-butions strongly support a similar use for the halland back yard space as in the Household phase.Middens from this early phase of Inn occupationwere also found associated with the kitchen andwith the servants quarter in the front yard. Again,small sample size was a problem with the kitchenmidden assemblage. Only 13 vessel fragments

36 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 22


20/23

TABLE 6.Functional Classification of Ceramics by Midden, Inn Occupation, St. J ohns.

Back West South ShadeYard Yard Parlor Kitchen Quarter Front Yard Treen % n % n % n % n % n % n %_ - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - -Dairying 27 15 .0 4 7. 9 1 2. 2 4 30.8 12 14.6 1 1 11.7Storage 53 29. 4 4 7.9 4 9.1 3 23.1 38 46 .4 27 28.7 2 1 1 . 1Cooking 13 7. 2 4 7. 9 - 2 2 .4 2 2 .1 1 5 .6Drinking 81 45 .0 39 76 .5 36 80.0 6 46.2 25 30.4 47 50.0 15 83.3Dining 6 3. 3 I 2 .2 - 3 3.6 2 2.1Unidentified Food Processing 1 2 .2 - 2 2 .4 5 5.3

Total 180 51 43 13 82 94 18Dairying: milk pans, bowlsStorage: pots, jars, bottlesCooking: patty pans, pipkinsDrinking: all beverage containersDining: plates, dish es, pom ngers, miscellaneous tablewares

a quarter, the assemblage should reflect domesticactivities for servants, and this is the case. Thequarter middens contain a mix of ceramic vesselsherd types. The distribution of ceramic vesselforms is similar to that found for the hall. Bothmiddens contain similar frequencies of dairyingand dining vessel sherds, and both contain largeproportions of storage and dining vessel frag-ments. Cooking pan fragments are also present inboth assemblages. The overall similarity of thesedistributions indicates a variety of domestic activ-

S T J O H N S

A COMPARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYSIS OF A HOUSE HOLD AND INN IN ST. MARYS C ITY, MARYLAND 37


21/23

also strongly resembles the distribution of vesselforms in the back yard, with similar proportions ofdairy, storage, cooking and drinking vessel frag-ments. This midden may simply represent trashcarried from the dwelling across the front yard tothe fence line, or it may also be refuse derivedfrom the quarter. However, this area also con-tained concentrations of table glass (Figure 21) andthe very few porcelain fragments recovered at St.Johns were found here. Although most of thetable glass fragments are not dated, those fewdatable pieces generally appear to be from thesecond half of the 17th century, suggesting themajority of table glass dates to this period (HenryMiller, personal communication 1987).The possibility also exists that another buildingwas constructed here, across the courtyard fromthe quarter. As noted earlier, midden evidencesuggests the presence of a milkhouse or similarservice structure at this location during the House-hold occupation. A single large structural post holeand mold were found in this area during theexcavation of the front yard (cf. Figure 3). Arti-facts recovered from the post hole fill were similarin both number and types to those found in the postholes of the nearby quarter, indicating the solitaryhole has a likely date of construction of ca. 1660.N o other post holes and molds were found inassociation, but that could be due to the limitedexcavation in this area (cf. Figure 4). Post molds

Around 1680, several changes occur in middenlocation. Two new midden deposits, both adjacentto the parlor, appear in the archaeological record.The middens in the far front yard disappear, asdoes the small midden in the mid-front yard. Thefront yard becomes entirely clean, and middendeposits are now restricted to the sides and rear ofstructures.Because of the short life span of the two parlormiddens (c. 1680 to 1690-1695), the artifactsample is small, and the two assemblages havebeen combined for analysis (Tables 5 and 6).These middens contain 80 percent drinking vesselsand a comparatively large proportion of diningvessels. A small frequency of storage vessels arepresent in this sample, and other categories arerepresented, but only in trace amounts. Overall,the parlor during this last phase of the Inn periodappears to have been used more frequently fordrinking, eating and socializing. However, thedaily domestic activities associated with the pro-cessing of food and the preparation of mealsapparently still did not occur in this room.

ConclusionThe organization of the Household phase home-lot includes at least three specialized areas integralto farm and plantation maintenance. Evidence for

38 HISTOR ICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, VOLUME 22


22/23

the dwelling, served a similar function during theHousehold and Inn periods, both as a utilitarianstructure and as a living space. he quarter pro-vided yet another living space for, in this case,servants. A possible third structure across the frontyard from the quarter may also have served asliving space, although this suggestion awaits fur-ther excavation.These changes were undoubtedly stimulated bya number of factors. The maturation of a frontiersociety, the increasing urbanization of St. MarysCity, the introduction of Georgian ideas, as well asthe change in site function from a plantationhousehold to a colonial inn, contributed to thepatterns ultimately discerned in the archaeologicalrecord. This analysis has presented the archaeolog-ical evidence from a single site adjacent to St.Marys City. Comparative evidence is, obviously,necessary. Spatial patterns evident at other Chesa-peake sites throughout the colonial period: poor,middling and other elite tobacco plantations, innsboth in St. Marys City and in the rural environ-ment, for example, can only be elucidated throughdetailed study.The compilation of this sort of informationshould provide a rich data base, not just on thedistributions and associations of architecture andarchaeological materials and their inferred func-tions, but on the nature of social relations amongthe various inhabitants (e.g., planters, servants,

REFERENCESA R C H I V E SF M A R Y L A N D1883 Archives of Maryland, edited by William Hand.

Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore.B E A U D R Y , A R YC., J A N E T LONG,H E N R YM . M I L L ER ,F R A S E R . N E I M A N ND CARRYHE E L E R T ON E1983 A Vessel Typology for Early Chesapeake Ceramics:

Th e Potomac Typological System. Historical Archae-ology 17 (1): 18-43,

BINFORD , EWISR . A N D S A L L Y . B I N F OR D1966 A Preliminary Analysis of Functional Variability inthe Mousterian of Levallois Facies. American Anthro-pologist 68:238-95,

B R O W N ,M A R L E Y . , 1111972 Ceramics from Plymouth, 1621-1800: T he Documen-tary Record. In Ceramics in America. edited by IanQuimby , pp. 4 1-74. Winterthur Conference R epor t,Winterthur M useum, W ilmington, Delaware.

B R A G W N ,K A T H L E E N.19 81 Occupational Differences Reflected in Material Cul-ture. Northeast Historical Archaeology 10:27-39.

~ D E E T Z ,AMES J . F .Garden City.1977 In Small Things Forgotten. Natural History Press,

D O U G E N I K ,AMES A. AND D A V I DE. S H E E H A N1979 SYMAP U ser s Reference Manu al. Laboratory forComputer Graphics and Spatial Analysis, HarvardUniversity, Cambridge.

GLASSIE,H E N R Y1975 Folk Housing in Middle Virginia. University of Ten-nessee Press, Knoxville.

H E N R Y , U S A NL .

A COMP ARATIVE MIDDEN ANALYS IS OF A HOUSEHOLD AND INN IN ST. MARY S CITY, MARY LAND 39


23/23

nience Surface Pattern. In Plowzone Archaeology:Contributions to Theory and Technique, edited byDavid S. Lewarch and Michael J. OBrien, pp 7-50.Vanderbilt Un iversity Publications in Anthropol-ogy 27, Nashville.

1982 Tobacco Colony. Princeton University Press, Prince-ton.

M A I N ,G L O R I A

M A R K H A M ,E R V A S E1614 Cheape and Good Husbandry. The English Experi-ence, No. 139. De C a p Press, New Y ork. (Reprinted1969.)

M I L L E R , E N RYM .1983 A Search for the Citty of Saint M aries: A Report onthe 1981 Excavations in St. Marys City, Maryland.St. M aries City Archaeology Series No. 1.1986 Discovering Marylands First City. St. Marys CityArchaeology Series No. 2.

N E I M A N ,RASER .1980 The Manner House Before Strarford. Robert E.Lee Memorial Association, Stratford.

N O B L E ,V E R G IL . , JR .1983 Functional Classification and Intra-Site Analysis inHistorical Archaeology: A Case Study From FortOuiatenon. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Depart-ment of Anthropology, Michigan State University.

R I O R D A N , I M O T H Y .1988 Th e Interpretation of 17th Century Sites through PlowZone Surface Collections: Examples from St. Marys

City, Maryland. Historical Archaeology (this vol-ume).

ROCKMAN,D I A N A I Z . AND N A N A . R O TH S CH I LD1984 City Tavern, Country Tavern: An Analysis of FourColonial Sites. Historical Archaeology 18(2): 112-21.1984 The Role of Pewter as Missing Artifact. Paper pre-

sented to the annual meeting of the Society forHistorical Archaeology, Williamsburg.S M A R T , N N M .

S O U T H ,S T A N L E Y1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology. Aca-demic Press, New York.SPSS, I N C .

1983 SPSSx Users Guide. McGraw-Hill Book Company,New York.1982 Society, Housing an d Architecture in E arly Maryland:John Lewgers St. Johns. Unpublished Ph.D. disser-tation, Department of American Civilization, Univer-

sity of Pennsylvania.1983 Urban Amenities and Rural Sufficiency: Living Stan-dards and Con sum er Behavior in the Colonial Chesa-

peake, 1643-1777. Journal of Economic History

S T O N E ,C A R R Y .

W A L S H , ORENA .

43(1); 109-117.JULIA A . K I NGJEFFERSON PATTERSONA R KS T . L E O N A R D , A R Y L A N D0685AND M U S E U M

king 1988 comparative midden analysis

Documents