Saturdays are always busy at the site. It was great to have so many people helping out, and to have Carol's advice. She believes that Laurie's theory on the location of St. George's Church is possible, but suggested that we investigate further before breaking any ground in that area. Even if Laurie's theory is right and the church was there, it's possible that people were buried there after the church was torn down in 1819, and we don't want to intrude on any graves.
Above, you can see Eliana identifying pre-1820 stones on a map of the cemetery. In this regard Laurie's theory holds up, as all of these stones are located on the fringes of, but not within, the area she suggested for the church. Our investigations always lead to more questions, though - like why is there a garden planted right in front of a row of graves? Our guess is that it was not simply put there for decorative purposes - the location is just too odd. Perhaps it was used to fill in a hole, or to cover a rise or mound of dirt from elsewhere.
Ralph filled in STP 1. Carol said that if we came back in the spring and dug up STP 1 again, we would find a soil pattern somewhat like that which we have found in the first few levels of STP 4. That is to say that STP 4 consists of soil that has been disturbed and consequently is not in its original position. Layers of soil are laid down naturally in sequence, with the top layer (or "A") gradually being covered by a new top layer, which is in turn replaced by another new top layer, and so on, so that layers get older as they go deeper. We saw these strata quite clearly in STPs 1 and 2 (shown in this photo). In STP 4, however, there is no clear sequence after the topsoil; everything is rearranged.
A good tool to help people understand stratigraphy might be one of those plastic jars that kids fill with layers of different colored sand (kids in the '90s, at least. I imagine there's an app for that now). I could only look at the thing so long before I had the urge to shake it, which would make all of the layers mix together. In the end you'd have a jumbled mess and you wouldn't be able to tell which order you put the colors in.
While STP 4 may not be the most exciting unit, it is the shadiest, at least in the morning. While we can't say for sure what caused the soil in STP 4 to be so disturbed, it's likely that it had something to do with the construction and/or maintenance of the walkway, or possibly the cemetery wall, which was built in the 1820s but has been altered since.
Meanwhile, work continues on STP 3 and STP 3B. In the photo above two people are digging, one is sifting, one is keeping track of the bags, and one is recording. There are a lot of separate tasks involved in excavation!
This is what the two units looked like at the end of the day. Along with the usual nails and bits of slate, we found a lot of mortar in these units. We have continued to encounter rocks as we go deeper, keeping with the theory that they represent part of the foundation wall of St. Mark's Church.
We also found a lot of mortar in Feature 1, pictured above as we were readying it for photographs. Feature 1, as you may recall, is what we believe might have been the old dry well. Do you remember what it looked like before we excavated it? This is what it looks like now, with all the rocks we've removed on the side of the unit, and many more rocks to go.
The number of rocks is making it very difficult to dig lower into the unit, other than in the northeast corner. Yet we are still making some interesting finds, such as these two rocks that are still stuck to each other with mortar.
The presence of so much mortar, and the fact that it resembles the mortar we are recovering from STPs 3 and 3B, makes me wonder if what we thought was a dry well was actually part of the foundation wall of St. Mark's Church. However, there are a lot more artifacts (in both number and variety) in Feature 1, which would support the theory that it was some sort of pit into which people threw their refuse.
In the picture above, you can see me talking to Pat, a member of the historical society. Above my head, in the background, you can see the original gate to the Methodist (or Hall) Cemetery, propped up against the trees. The line of trees separates the Methodist Cemetery, founded in the 1850s, from the Episcopal Cemetery, which is where we are working.
The cemetery is a really nice place to work. It's quiet, shady in places, has a bucolic atmosphere despite being close to many suburban amenities, and we don't have to walk more than a few feet from our cars with the equipment. The only real nuisance we've had so far is the leaves! It's difficult to get a unit ready for photographing when a dozen leaves blow into it every second.
Still, it's a really great site, and everyone seems to be enjoying the work. And archaeology isn't the only work that's been going on. Hans has been keeping up with the landscaping, making sure that the cemetery doesn't slip back into the rather dilapidated state it was in last year. And today a team of conservators came by to assess the condition of Charles Haight's crumbling gravestone.
You may recall that Charles Haight's stone currently looks like this. Of all the eighteenth-century sandstones in the cemetery, it's in the worst condition, which is rather sad considering that Haight himself donated the land for the use of the church and then built the actual church building itself.
I asked the conservator why Haight's stone was in such poor condition while his wife's stone (to the left in the photo above) looks excellent. She said that the stones were likely from different quarries and that the people who carved and erected them would have had no idea which ones would hold up best over the centuries. Though she can't restore what has already been lost from the stone, she will be able to stabilize it so that it will not decay as rapidly, and to smooth out the places where the stone has sloughed way to give it a neater appearance. I have seen some absolute marvels of gravestone conservation and repair at the Old Burying Ground in Fairfield, and am very optimistic that we will have a similarly successful result.
Enjoyed reading this post. It was a perfect day for working at the cemetery! LK
ReplyDeleteOK, I admit it. I’m enjoying your dig journal. Archaeology on this scale is about the basics that non-archaeologists can relate to. In Britain, what knowledge the layman has comes mainly from watching Time Team on the TV, most of which begins with ‘Let’s dig a trench there, and another one there, and another there.’ Then the JCBs move in, and by the next scene you’ve got 7ft holes everywhere. I suppose you can’t really do that in a churchyard. You’re also not expecting to find any Anglian helmets, which helps.
ReplyDeleteOn a personal level, I was intrigued by the reference to sand strata in jars. Seems to me there’s something lurking deep inside young Maddie. My guess is that you’re either a latent vandal or a potential Buddhist. I hope to stick around long enough to find out.
Glad you're both enjoying it.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I loved about England is that there was always some archaeology show on TV. We have a "History Channel" but it only ever has shows on extraterrestrials and/or Hitler.
I hope you can stabilize Haight's stone. The residents of the cemetery have become so familiar to through this blog. It is so moving to see how you have immortalised our memory of them.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time that I have been enjoying the wonderful revelations of your research into the cemetery I have been enjoying a book by an 'art detective' journalist called Kenneth Wilkie called 'The Van Gogh assignment' . It was published in 1978 and I have no idea what happened as a result of his 'discoveries' but it is an exhilarating and often hilarious read. He really does leap into the fanciful (not at all scientific like yourself) but I did find his willingness to go that bit further in his research when those before him had clearly not bothered fascinating. It always brought him the greatest rewards. I won't spoil the surprise if you would like to read it. It is part detective story, part family saga, part travelogue and part comedy of manners.