Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery ...

Contract Publication Series WV01-111

Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) in Kanawha

County, West Virginia

By Alexandra D. Bybee, MA, RPA

With contributions by Susan R. Butcher, Dee DeRoche, and Annette G. Ericksen

C U L T U R A L R E S O U R C E A N A L Y S T S , I N C .

About the Cover Portrait of Colonel John Reynolds courtesy of Ann Bird.


Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) in Kanawha

County, West Virginia

By Alexandra D. Bybee, MA, RPA



Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) in Kanawha County, West

Virginia

by

Alexandra D. Bybee, MA, RPA


Prepared for:

Dr. Robert F. Maslowski Huntington District Corps of Engineers

502 Eighth Street Huntington, West Virginia 25701-2070

Voice: (304) 529-5006

Prepared by:

Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. 3556 Teays Valley Road, Suite 3 Hurricane, West Virginia 25526

Voice: (304) 562-7233

______________________________ C. Michael Anslinger, MA, RPA

Principal Investigator January 31, 2002

Lead Agency: Huntington District Corps of Engineers

ABSTRACT

Between May 17 and August 8, 2001, Cultural Resource Analysts’ personnel completed Phase III excavations for the relocation of the Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) in Kanawha County, West Virginia. The project, which was conducted at the request of Dr. Robert F. Maslowski on behalf of the Huntington District Corps of Engineers, was conducted to mitigate anticipated impacts the cemetery would suffer by the proposed Marmet Lock Replacement Project. The site was recommended as potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.

Investigation of site 46Ka349 included the identification, excavation, and exhumation of 31 historic graves. Analysis of cultural material recovered indicates that interments were made in the cemetery between 1832 and 1900. Early interments (1832-1860) were identified primarily by the presence of hexagonal shaped coffins constructed with utilitarian hardware, while later interments (1860-1900) were identified by rectangular shaped caskets made with elaborate and mass-produced hardware. Other materials recovered included clothing items, such as buttons and shoes, personal adornment items, such as hair combs and jewelry, and unusual items, such as a full upper denture made of porcelain and rubber.

Skeletal preservation was poor across the site and only fragmentary cranial and long bone remains were recovered from 19 of the 31 burials. Moderately well preserved tooth crowns were present in 18 burials. Dental elements offered a variety of information regarding health and genetic affinity. Dental caries were abundant in the population, but only a few incidences of linear enamel hypoplasia were identified. Although shovel shaped incisors have been documented for non-Mongolid populations, their frequency of occurrence in the Reynolds family population is suggestive of Native American affinity.

Site 46Ka349 was a small rural cemetery containing interments of the founding Reynolds family and perhaps later residents after the Reynolds family moved. The spatial organization was characteristic of an upland south folk cemetery. Burials were aligned in rows and in clusters of children and possible family units.

All of the human remains and associated items recovered from the 31 burials at Reynolds Cemetery were reinterred at Montgomery Memorial Park near London, Kanawha County, West Virginia. The reinterment graves are located in the southeast part of the cemetery overlooking the Kanawha River to the west. Reinterment was conducted on four separate occasions between December 7, 2001 and January 17, 2002. The general location of the reinterments will be marked by a monument made from black granite, while individual reinterment graves will be marked with flat grave markers and upright headstones of gray granite. The flat markers will be used for the 26 graves that lacked associated headstones. The five upright headstones, manufactured to resemble the originals that were recovered from Reynolds Cemetery, will mark the reinterment graves of Col. John Reynolds, Fenton Mercer Reynolds, Van Bibber Reynolds, Elizabeth P. Reynolds, and James C. Reynolds.

i

Acknowledgements Completion of this report was made possible by a number of individuals and institutions. First we

would like to acknowledge the Huntington District Corps of Engineers for funding the relocation of this historic era cemetery. A special thanks is given to Huntington District Corps archaeologist Dr. Robert F. Maslowski, not only for his long-standing interest in the Marmet Archaeological Project, but also for having the excavation and analysis of the Reynolds Cemetery conducted as an archaeological project. Dr. Maslowski provided valuable information and insights throughout the course of excavation and analysis. With his constant support and upbeat attitude, Mike Worley, the Corps Project Manager, made our work at the site a more pleasant experience than it would otherwise have been. Only rarely have we encountered a Project Manager having such a deep and sincere interest in our work. Also, we would like to thank Contracting Officer Cheryl Parsons for her efforts in making sure the project operated smoothly, as well as for having the interest to visit us in the field and laboratory on several occasions.

Dr. Dee DeRoche graciously took time from her busy schedule to examine a sample of the fabric recovered from the cemetery, and Dr. Annette Ericksen examined coffin wood recovered from several of the graves. Their efforts are greatly appreciated. Numerous employees of Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. also deserve to be recognized. Susan Butcher managed the laboratory aspect of this project from artifact cleaning to analysis. Michael Anslinger provided project management, technical assistance, and editorial guidance. The field crew, Angie Behner, Louis Bubb, and Steve Glasgow, should be commended for their hard work and good attitudes in often-difficult weather conditions. Shawn Parsons took care of our technical needs while in the field and built the reinterment coffins. Trip Smith and Will Updike were always available for consultation and to provide assistance when necessary. Finally, Darla Spencer was responsible for technical editing, layout, and publication of the report.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................ 1

Project Description............................................................................................................................. 3

Research Orientation .......................................................................................................................... 5

Chapter 2. Environmental Background ................................................................................................. 10

General Project Setting .................................................................................................................... 10

Reynolds Cemetery Setting.............................................................................................................. 10

Modern Climate ............................................................................................................................... 11

Local Vegetation .............................................................................................................................. 12

Chapter 3. Historic Context and Previous Archaeological Studies ....................................................... 13

Historic Overview of Kanawha County ........................................................................................... 13

Historical Overview of the Area Around Burning Spring Branch ................................................... 14

Previous Archaeological Studies...................................................................................................... 23

Chapter 4. Methods ............................................................................................................................... 31

Field Procedures............................................................................................................................... 31

Worker Safety .................................................................................................................................. 36

Laboratory Methods ......................................................................................................................... 37

Chapter 5. Cultural Materials Recovered .............................................................................................. 40

Cemetery Artifact Analysis.............................................................................................................. 40

Mortuary and Cultural Material ....................................................................................................... 46

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................ 58

Chapter 6. Osteological Analysis and Burial Summaries...................................................................... 61

General Osteological Methods ........................................................................................................ 61

Burial Summaries............................................................................................................................. 64

Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 137

Chapter 7. Site Structure and Organization ......................................................................................... 144

Spatial Dimensions of Cemetery Use............................................................................................. 145

Socio-Historical Interpretations ..................................................................................................... 148

Conclusion...................................................................................................................................... 151

Chapter 8. Treatment of Remains and Reinterment Plan .................................................................... 152

Storage and Transportation of Remains ......................................................................................... 152

Reinterment Plan............................................................................................................................ 152

Grave Markers and Monuments ..................................................................................................... 156

Landscaping ................................................................................................................................... 158

iii

Chapter 9. Summary............................................................................................................................ 159

References Cited ............................................................................................................................ 162 Appendix A. Scope of Services Appendix B. Geneaological Information for Reynolds Family

Appendix C. Testing Procedures for Historic Cemeteries

Appendix D. Chain-of-Custody Record Form

Appendix E. Materials Recovered

Appendix F. Skeletal Material Inventory

iv

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Location of Kanawha County .............................................................................................. 1

Figure 1.2. Location of Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) ........................................................................ 2

Figure 1.3. Photograph of headstones encountered at Reynolds Cemetery during Phase I Survey, looking east ................................................................................................................................ 4

Figure 1.4 Photograph of headstones encountered at Reynolds Cemetery after removal of toposoil during current investigation, looking south ............................................................................... 6

Figure 1.5 Schematic plan map of site 46Ka349 showing locations of grave shafts, grave markers, and original cemetery boundary defined by the Huntington District Corps............................. 7

Figure 4.1. Overview photograph of Reynolds Cemetery during excavation, looking north............... 32

Figure 4.2. Overview photograph of Reynolds Cemetery during mechanical stripping, looking northwest ............................................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 4.3. Photograph of typical grave shaft outline at base of topsoil, looking west........................ 33

Figure 4.4. Photograph taken at base of Level 1 when coffin outline was apparent, looking west...... 34

Figure 4.5. Photograph taken at base of Level 3 after removal of all cultural and skeletal material, looking west .......................................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 4.6. Schematic map of excavation zones for Level 3................................................................ 35

Figure 5.1. Utilitarian coffin hardware, including tacks, cut nails, and hinges .................................... 46

Figure 5.2. Mass-produced hardware, including screws, thumbscrews, and screws with escutcheons............................................................................................................................................ 48

Figure 5.3. Mass-produced swing bail and short bar handles............................................................... 49

Figure 5.4. Oval viewing glass window ............................................................................................... 50

Figure 5.5. Sample of buttons, including: black glass; white porcelain; painted porcelain; and red glass with star design............................................................................................................................. 51

Figure 5.6. Child’s finger ring made of agate-like stone...................................................................... 53

Figure 5.7. Glass bead necklace .......................................................................................................... 54

Figure 5.8. Tortoise-shell hair combs................................................................................................... 55

Figure 5.9. Vulcanzied rubber hair comb............................................................................................. 55

Figure 5.10. Shoe soles and heels......................................................................................................... 56

Figure 5.11. Full upper denture ............................................................................................................ 57

Figure 6.1. Schematic plan map of burials at the Reynolds Cemetery................................................. 62

Figure 6.2. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 1 (Unit 5)....................................................... 65

Figure 6.3. Schematic plan map of Burial 1 (Unit 5) during excavation.............................................. 66

Figure 6.4. Photograph of soil stain from the head- and footstone anchors of Burial 1 (Unit 5), looking west .......................................................................................................................................... 67


v

Figure 6.6. Photograph of Burial 2 (Unit 3) after excavation, looking west ........................................ 69

Figure 6.7. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 3 (Unit 1)........................................................ 70

Figure 6.8. Photograph of in situ head- and footstone anchors in Burial 3 (Unit 1), looking west ...... 71


Figure 6.10. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 4 (Unit 19)................................................... 73

Figure 6.11. Schematic plan map of Burial 4 (Unit 19) during excavation.......................................... 74

Figure 6.12. Schematic plan map of Burial 5 (Unit 2) during excavation............................................ 76

Figure 6.13. Photograph of Zones D and E, Level 3, Burial 5 (Unit 2), looking east. ......................... 77


Figure 6.15. Photograph of in situ head- and footstone bases in Burial 6 (Unit 8), looking west........ 80


Figure 6.17. Photograph of oak leaf motif short bar handle lugs recovered from Burial 7 (Unit 4) .... 82

Figure 6.18. Photograph of in situ viewing glass window from Burial 7 (Unit 4), looking west ........ 83

Figure 6.19. Photograph of full upper denture recovered from Burial 7 (Unit 4) ................................ 83


Figure 6.21. Photograph of Burial 8 (Unit 7) after excavation, looking west ...................................... 86

Figure 6.22. Photograph of fragmentary thumbscrews recovered from Burial 8 (Unit 7) ................... 86

Figure 6.23. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 9 (Unit 6)..................................................... 87


Figure 6.25. Photograph of mass-produced hardware recovered from Burial 9 (Unit 6)..................... 89

Figure 6.26. Schematic plan map of Burial 10 (Unit 9) during excavation.......................................... 91

Figure 6.27. Photograph of mass-produced hardware recovered from Burial 10 (Unit 9)................... 91

Figure 6.28. Photograph of in situ viewing glass window from Burial 10 (Unit 9) ............................. 92

Figure 6.29. Schematic plan map of Burial 11 (Unit 14) during excavation........................................ 93

Figure 6.30. Photograph of Burial 11 (Unit 14) during excavation, looking west ............................... 94




Figure 6.34. Photograph of Burial 14 (Unit 10) after excavation, looking west ................................ 100

Figure 6.35. Schematic plan map of Burial 15 (Unit 15) during excavation...................................... 101

Figure 6.36. Photograph of Burial 15 (Unit 15) after excavation, looking west ................................ 102

Figure 6.37. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 16 (Unit 16)............................................... 103


Figure 6.39. Photogarph of child’s ring recovered from Burial 16 (Unit 16) .................................... 104


vi

Figure 6.41. Photograph of in situ hair comb from Zone A of Level 3, Burial 17 (Unit 11), looking west ........................................................................................................................................ 107

Figure 6.42. Schematic plan map of Burial 18 (Unit 17) during excavation....................................... 108

Figure 6.43. Photograph of Burial 18 (Unit 17) during excavation, looking west. ............................ 109


Figure 6.45. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 20 (Unit 20)................................................ 112

Figure 6.46. Schematic plan map of Burial 20 (Unit 20) during excavation....................................... 113

Figure 6.47. Photograph of swing bail handles recovered from Burial 20 (Unit 20) ......................... 113


Figure 6.49. Photograph of slotted screws recovered from Burial 21 (Unit 21) ................................ 116


Figure 6.51. Photograph of plain hinges recovered from Burial 22 (Unit 22) ................................... 118


Figure 6.53. Photograph of Burial 23 (Unit 23) after excavation, looking west ............................... `120


Figure 6.55. Photograph of Burial 24 (Unit 24) during excavation, looking west. ............................ 122


Figure 6.57. Photograph of Burial 25 (Unit 25) during excavation, looking west .............................. 124

Figure 6.58. Photograph of “foot” end of Burial 26 (Unit 26) coffin within “head” end of grave shaft for Burial 31 (Unit 26), looking west ......................................................................................... 125


Figure 6.60. Photograph of mass-produced hardware recovered from Burial 26 (Unit 26)................ 127

Figure 6.61. Photograph of in situ viewing glass window and coffin lid with carved edge, looking west...................................................................................................................................................... 128



Figure 6.64. Photograph of Burial 28 (Unit 28) during excavation, looking west ............................. 131



Figure 6.67. Photograph of dental elements from Burial 31 (Unit 26)............................................... 136


Figure 6.69. Age estimations of individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery............................... 138

Figure 6.70. Sex estimations of individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery................................ 139

Figure 6.71. Racial affinity estimations of individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery............... 140

Figure 6.72. Dental pathology identified for individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery ........... 141

Figure 6.73. Linear enamel hypoplasias identified for individuals in the Reynolds Cemetery.......... 142

vii

Figure 7.1. Photograph of Reynolds Cemetery location taken in 1977, orientation of photograph unknown (photograph provided by Mrs. Ann Bird)............................................................................ 144

Figure 7.2. Schematic plan map of Reynolds Cemetery showing spatial organization and interment sequence .............................................................................................................................. 146

Figure 7.3. Photograph of Col. John Reynolds’ headstone ................................................................ 148

Figure 7.4. Photograph of Col. John Reynolds’ footstone ................................................................. 149

Figure 7.5. Photograph of Fenton Mercer Reynolds’ headstone ........................................................ 149

Figure 7.6. Photograph of Van Bibber Reynolds’ headstone ............................................................. 150

Figure 7.7. Photograph of Elizabeth P. Reynolds’ headstone ............................................................ 150

Figure 7.8. Photograph of James C. Reynolds’ headstone ................................................................. 151

Figure 8.1. Portions of USGS 7.5’ Cedar Grove and Montgomery quadrangles showing

location of Montgomery Memorial Park ............................................................................................. 153

Figure 8.2. General view of reinterment activities on December 7, 2001, looking west ................... 154

Figure 8.3. Photograph showing rough box being placed in vault ..................................................... 154

Figure 8.4. Photograph showing vault lid being secured ................................................................... 155

Figure 8.5. Photograph of vault being lowered into grave shaft ........................................................ 155

Figure 8.6. Photograph showing vault in grave shaft prior to being backfilled ................................. 156

Figure 8.7. Diagram showing location of reinterment graves with burial plot numbers at

Montgomery Memorial Park ............................................................................................................... 157

viii

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1. Relative percentage of tree taxa in a Kanawha County tract in 1872.................................. 12

Table 3.1. Col. John Reynolds’ property values in the Burning SpringBranch area............................ 16

Table 3.2. Personal property taxes paid by Col. John and Merriam Reynolds, 1792-1834 ................. 17

Table 3.3. Personal property taxes of Van Bibber Reynolds................................................................ 18

Table 3.4. Personal property taxes of Franklin Reynolds..................................................................... 18

Table 3.5. Individuals possibly interred in the Reynolds Cemetery..................................................... 23

Table 5.1. Summary of results of wood taxa identification.................................................................. 44

Table 5.2. Materials recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery .............................................................. 58

Table 5.3. Occurrence of fabric at Reynolds Cemetery ....................................................................... 59

Table 5.4. Occurrence and identification of coffin wood recovered from Reynolds Cemetery........... 60

Table 6.1. Dentition Codes................................................................................................................... 63

Table 8.1. Reynolds Cemetery Reinterment Data .............................................................................. 158

Introduction

Chapter 1. Introduction

Between May 17 and August 8, 2001, Cultural Resource Analysts’ (CRAI)

personnel completed the excavation of a total of 31 burials at the historic Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) located between the communities of Belle and Dupont City, Kanawha County, West Virginia (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). The project was initiated at the request of Dr. Robert F. Maslowski, on behalf of the Huntington District Corps of Engineers. Fieldwork was completed by Angela Behner, Alexandra Bybee, Louis Bubb, and Steven Glasgow. Ms. Bybee also directed the excavations and supervised the recording and removal of all human remains and associated items. Approximately 1700 person hours were expended to complete the excavation.

All human skeletal remains and associated material recovered from the graves during the course of excavations will be reinterred at Montgomery Memorial Park in London, West Virginia, as per the Scope of Work (Scope) defined by the Huntington District Corps of Engineers (Appendix A). Stone grave markers will either be retained by the Corps at the new Marmet Lock Facility, or perhaps another museum. New markers will be purchased by the Corps for placement at the new grave sites.

The Scope also required the construction of wood boxes for reinterment purposes. Temporary curation of the photographs, notes, and other attendant data generated during this project will be at the West Virginia office of CRAI. However, as space becomes available these materials will be relocated to the West Virginia Division of Culture and History, Collections Management Facility at Moundsville, West Virginia.

This report is organized into eight chapters. The current chapter provides a description of the project area, an introduction to investigations conducted at the Reynolds Cemetery, and a discussion of the research orientation and design. Chapter 2 provides a description of the environmental background for the project area. Chapter 3 discusses the historic context and summarizes previous archaeological investigations at other historic North American cemeteries. The field and laboratory methods are presented in Chapter 4, while the analysis of the cultural materials recovered is included in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 presents the results of the osteological analysis and summarizes individual burials. The structure and organization of the site are described in

Figure 1.1: Location of Kanawha County. The excavation was conducted to

mitigate anticipated impacts to the cemetery resulting from the proposed construction of a new lock chamber at the existing Marmet Lock and Dam facility. The site was assessed as being potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D (Anslinger et al. 1996:113).

1

Introduction

Figure 1.2: Location of Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349). Adapted from the 1958 (photorevised 1976) Charleston East and Belle, WV, USGS 7.5’ quadrangles. Scale: 1”=2000’.

2

Introduction

Chapter 7 and the full results of the excavation and analyses are summarized in Chapter 8.

Project Description Project Area Description

As described in the Phase I and II report (Anslinger et al. 1996), the project area consists of approximately 48 hectares (118 acres) of relatively level bottomland located on the east side of the Kanawha River (Figure 1.2). The downriver, or northern, boundary of the project area is located near Kanawha river mile 66.9, while the southern boundary is located adjacent to the DuPont Corporation’s South Belle Plant, near river mile 68.4. The Kanawha River forms the western boundary of the project area, with the eastern boundary being irregularly shaped and passing through the residential portion of the community of Lower Belle, along the west side of old U.S. 60.

As proposed, a single new lock will be constructed on the right descending bank of the Kanawha River to provide more efficient navigation. The maximum area of impact will incorporate 8.1 hectares (20.0 acres) of government-owned land situated in close proximity to the existing lock and dam, 18.2 hectares (45.0 acres) of residential land incorporating approximately 250 residences, 4.9 hectares (12.0 acres) of commercial land incorporating 11 business and 16.0 hectares (40.0 acres) of undeveloped land, which will be used as a disposal area. The latter area forms the northernmost portion of the project area and is bisected by Burning Spring Branch.

Site Description The Reynolds Cemetery was located on

the north side of Burning Spring Branch, near the center of the planned disposal area for the proposed Marmet Lock construction project (Figure 1.2). The cemetery was identified during the Phase I investigation conducted by CRAI personnel in 1995. The following description reiterates site

information provided in the Phase I and II report (Anslinger et al. 1996:109-112). A summary for a geophysical survey conducted at the site in 1998 is also presented, followed by a description of the site as it was observed at the beginning of the current investigation.

Original Survey At the time of the original survey, the

cemetery was overgrown and was not maintained or fenced (Figure 1.3). It was situated near the edge of a terrace surface elevated approximately 6 meters (20 feet) above the valley floor of Burning Spring Branch. No cemeteries were depicted for this area on the 1911 topographic map of Kanawha County, or the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute Charleston East topographic quadrangle (1958, photorevised 1971, 1976). In addition, the cemetery was not plotted in the Soil Survey of Kanawha County (Van Houten et al. 1981:Sheet Number 36).

On the basis of identified gravestones, the cemetery was known to include the graves of Van Bibber Reynolds, his wife Elizabeth P., and their son James C. (hereafter referred to as Elizabeth and James) (Figure 1.3). Discussions with local residents suggested that additional burials might be present. It was indicated to the original field crew that the cemetery was vandalized in the past and that some gravestones were removed. Attempts to relocate displaced gravestones in the weedy vegetation surrounding the cemetery proved unsuccessful, and a search of cemetery records maintained at the West Virginia Division of Culture and History, Archives Library (Gardman 1983; Gates 1981; Stinson 1980; Stinson and Gardman 1982), failed to find a listing for the cemetery.

With the exception of a single standing footstone, all identified grave markers at the site were overturned (Figure 1.3). Rather than being placed directly into the ground, the headstones and footstones for Van

3

Introduction

Figure 1.3: Photograph of headstones encountered at Reynolds Cemetery during Phase I survey, looking east.

Bibber and Elizabeth Reynolds were anchored to large slabs of dressed sandstone. Each sandstone anchor had a linear slot cut into it, within which the headstones and footstones were placed. Similar sandstone anchors were not identified during the original investigation for the grave of James Reynolds, and the placement of his broken headstone on top of the sandstone anchor, which is undoubtedly associated with Elizabeth’s headstone, indicates that some grave markers had been moved from their original positions. The location of James Reynolds’ grave was not identified.

The dressed sandstone anchors were approximately 80 by 50 centimeters (32 by 20 inches) in size. The headstone for Elizabeth Reynolds, which is the only complete headstone at the cemetery, was 1.0 meter (3.3 feet) in length and 45 centimeters (18 inches) in width. It appears that the headstones for Van Bibber and James Reynolds were of similar dimensions.

Headstones and footstones were made from non-local stone.

Archival information concerning the Reynolds family indicated that Colonel John Reynolds (hereafter referred to as John Reynolds) was a prominent developer of lands near the mouth of Burning Spring Branch in the early 1800s. He and his sons, including Van Bibber, played an important role in the development of the Kanawha Valley’s early salt industry. Based on available archaeological and archival information, site 46Ka349 was considered to be potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Recommendations for future treatment of the site were based on the wealth of information that might be recovered from archaeological and bioanthropological analysis of the cultural and skeletal materials interred at the cemetery. It was recommended that the cemetery be excavated archaeologically and

4

Introduction

that the area around the cemetery be examined for additional graves. Identified graveshafts were to be mapped and excavated, and the skeletal remains subjected to a skeletal biological analysis by a qualified physical anthropologist (Anslinger et al. 1996:200).

Geophysical Survey In December 1998, CRAI conducted a

geophysical survey of the Reynolds Cemetery (Clay 1999). The survey was designed to explore the nature of the cemetery, identify the three known graves, and establish the presence or absence of additional graves.

The survey techniques were used within what was thought to be the cemetery boundary. Within this area, conductivity survey was unable to distinguish grave shafts. Magnetic survey, on the other hand, was thought to have identified at least one of the three expected grave shafts. In both cases, the near surface geophysical survey was hindered by the presence of modern and/or historic debris around the cemetery and on the banks of the adjacent water course (Clay 1999). In summary, due to the amount of debris within the vicinity of the cemetery, the geophysical survey failed to provide conclusive evidence for the locations of the three known graves or any additional graves.

Current Condition The archaeological excavation of the

Reynolds Cemetery began on May 17, 2001. At the time, the site was covered in moderately heavy vegetation consisting primarily of weeds and saplings. The headstones, footstone, and gravestone anchors identified during the Phase I investigation were relocated. The north to south orientation of these stones was considered odd because, as will be discussed in detail later in this report, Christian burials are most often made in an east to west alignment, with the heads to the west and feet to the east. If the orientation of Van

Bibber and Elizabeth Reynolds’ head- and footstones were correct, their burials would have been made in a non-traditional orientation.

Excavation began with removal by hand of the topsoil from around the previously identified stones. The stones were situated on and within the topsoil and did not extend into the subsoil (Figure 1.4). All of the previously identified stones had apparently been moved at some point because, once they were removed from the site, no north to south oriented grave shafts were identified. In addition, three gravestone anchors similar to those observed previously were identified in situ at the head and foot ends of two graveshafts. The remaining area within the 10 by 10 meter (33 by 33 feet) cemetery boundary defined by Huntington District Army Corps of Engineers personnel, was also stripped by hand over the next few weeks. Within this boundary, a total of 18 burials were either completely or partially included. Mechanical stripping of the area outside the original cemetery boundary allowed for the identification of an additional 12 graveshafts, yielding 13 burials (Figure 1.5).

Research Orientation The overall goals of the project were to

gain an understanding of the burial practices of a nineteenth century rural population whose financial wealth varied throughout the century, and to gain insight into the general health of the population. This information could then serve as part of a broad database for comparisons with other nineteenth century populations. All of the interpretations regarding the Reynolds Cemetery were made in the context of nineteenth century life and attitudes toward death. Chapter 3, Historic Context and Previous Archaeological Studies, serves as a backdrop for the research.

The following section presents a discussion of nineteenth century views of death, a description of the traditional southern folk cemetery, and a summary of

5

Introduction

Figure 1.4: Photograph of headstones encountered at Reynolds Cemetery after removal of topsoil during current investigation, looking south.

the typical spatial arrangement within a rural cemetery. This is followed by a description of the research design that was developed to guide the gathering, analysis, and interpretative efforts of the current study.

The Beautification of Death The “beautification of death” tradition

of the nineteenth century is a prominent issue of analytical concern for bioarchaeological studies. The archaeological data from the Reynolds Cemetery was examined in association with common notions concerning nineteenth century funerary customs in the United States. These customs are described below.

The Romanticism of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries celebrated nature, and death was seen as part of the natural design, linking the deceased with the universe (Buikstra et al. 2000:18). This Romantic view of death grew during the

nineteenth century, bringing an idealization of death and heaven (Bromberg et al. 2000:148). Death was beautified, with rituals becoming more elaborate and the period of mourning prolonged. Mortuary items, such as gravestones and coffin hardware, began to incorporate symbols of beauty from the Romantic era, such as: angels; birds; urns; and foliage. Coffins began to function not only as receptacles for the deceased, but allowed for more beautiful presentation (Bell 1990:55-58; Farrell 1980).

Changes in the American view of death during the nineteenth century were fueled by urbanization, industrialization, and developments in medicine and science (Farrell 1980). Services associated with death, including the mass-production of coffins and coffin hardware and the appearance of undertaking enterprises, aided

6

Introduction

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 15

Burial 28

meters

0 1 2

46KA349Reynolds Cemetery

Grave Shaft

Grave Marker

Burial 8

Burial 10

Burial 16

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 12

Burial 11

Burial 14

Burial 13

Rough Field Stone Markers

Sandstone Anchors (in situ)

Engraved Headstones (displaced)

Broken Engraved Headstoneand Footstone Bases

Engraved Headstone (displaced)

Sandstone Anchors (displaced)

Cemetery Boundary

Figure 1.5: Schematic plan map of site 46Ka349 showing locations of grave shafts, grave markers, and original cemetery boundary defined by the Huntington District Corps.

in the reinterpretation of death (Farrell 1980). The increased sentimentality in death and dying created a market for cultural materials associated with the beautification of death movement (such as elaborate coffin hardware) and technological and transportation improvements enabled them to become affordable and available to all segments of the population. This, in turn, fueled the acceptance of the concepts of the beautification of death in American society

(Bell 1990:57). The cultural trend of the “beautification of death” was most prominent during the second half of the nineteenth century (Bell 1990:57), particularly the late 1860s through 1870s (Little et al. 1992).

Traditional Southern Cemeteries

The folk cemetery has been characterized as a simple, non-sanctified

7

Introduction

family graveyard that is situated far from the confines of the church (Jordan 1982:13). Over time, and as settlement in an area intensifies, families other than the founding family often inter their deceased in the same general location. These small cemeteries often evolve gradually as people move away from or into the area. The cemetery eventually becomes more communal, ending perhaps with several generations of extended family or several non-related families. The southern folk cemetery is unique to North America and is derived from European, African, and Native American mortuary manifestations (Jordan 1982; Ragon 1983).

Single-family burial grounds are more common in the rural South than in the North, and most likely originated on the grounds of plantations, where the owners were often buried on their property (French 1975:72-74). The location of rural southern cemeteries may also have been influenced by fears of the danger of contamination from dangerous diseases such as smallpox, cholera, yellow fever, and diphtheria. Diseases such as these were common on the American frontier from the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries.

The traditional upland south folk cemetery is characterized by “hilltop location, scraped ground, mounded graves, east-west grave orientation, creative decorations expressing the art of ‘making do’, preferred species of vegetation, the use of graveshelters, and cults of piety” (Jeane 1989:108). When gravemarkers are found, they are often pieces of fieldstone placed at either end of the grave, and a name or date will occasionally be inscribed. Some graves have only a wooden stake at the head of the grave. Jeane (1989:114) states that what is decidedly missing from upland south folk cemeteries is the frequent use of commercially produced gravestones of granite or marble.

Spatial Arrangement Rural southern cemeteries were

arranged spatially to reflect the Christian burial tradition. Individuals were aligned with their heads to the west and feet to the east, enabling them to rise up and meet Jesus during the Second Coming as he arrived from the east, or to hear Gabriel’s horn from that direction (Jordan 1982:30). Those committing unforgivable sins, such as suicide, were often aligned north to south as punishment. Wives were placed to the left of their husbands following the Judeo-Christian account of Creation (Eve created from the left rib of Adam) (Guldan 1966:253; Jordan 1982:31).

Burial arrangements in rural southern cemeteries are usually in two forms: family clusters and rows. The family cluster includes blood relatives or those related through marriage centrally located within the confines of a square or rectangular plot. Fences made of stone, brick, iron, wood, or bushes often border these plots (Jordan 1982). The row arrangement consists of related or unrelated individuals buried in a series of rows. A mixture of both spatial arrangements can be seen in many cemeteries (Winchell et al. 1992:27). The mixture of arrangements may be attributed to the use of a cemetery by multiple families, or by later generations of the same family. The “cluster” arrangement of a founding family in a cemetery may have become outmoded with the interment of unrelated or distantly related individuals.

Research Design The following section presents a

discussion of the research design developed to guide the gathering, analysis, and interpretative efforts of the current study. The research design was structured to address general themes that are used widely in historic archaeology, including: treatment of the dead; landscape studies; rural lifeways; and intrasite patterning (LeeDecker 1995:8). Four objectives were defined for the historical and archaeological

8

Introduction

research conducted at the Reynolds Cemetery:

• Locate historic documents and records that could be utilized to generate a list of individuals possibly interred in the Reynolds Cemetery;

• Determine the spatial organization of the cemetery;

• Document potential changes in the economic and social status of early vs. late burials; and

• Document the health status of the population and determine genetic affinity.

All of these research objectives were addressed to some extent with the data derived from the archival research and recovered cultural and skeletal materials. A search of deeds and other historic records suggested the presence of a number of individuals possibly interred in the cemetery, including individuals not known to be related to the Reynolds family. The archival information, reviewed in conjunction with recovered cultural material, provided a basis for inferences about economics and social status. The spatial organization of the cemetery provided clues about potential family groupings. Although skeletal preservation was poor, the recovered dental remains allowed for an examination of the overall health of the population, and the genetic affinity of a small group of individuals was inferred from the presence of non-metric traits.

9

Environmental Background

Chapter 2. Environmental Background

General Project Setting

T he Marmet Lock Replacement project area, including site 46Ka349, is located

in the Kanawha Section of the unglaciated Appalachian Plateau physiographic province in Kanawha County, West Virginia (Figure 1.1). The terrain is rugged but not atypical for the region. Uplands adjacent to the project are underlaid by Pennsylvania bedrock of the Allegheny, Kanawha, and New River formations (Cardwell et al. 1968). However, the entire project area is located within the Kanawha Valley. Here, landforms are composed of unconsolidated alluvial sediments consisting of sand, gravel, silt, and clay. Based on geological and archaeological data, these landforms date to the late Pleistocene and Holocene.

Within the local area, two major geomorphic features dominate the landscape: dissected upland and the Kanawha River Valley (Figure 1.2). The dissected upland is characterized by narrow ridges and long, steep sideslopes. Numerous first and second order intermittent streams flow through narrow, high gradient V-shaped valleys. Some of the larger third and fourth order streams, such as Burning Spring Branch, have lower gradients and have developed narrow flood plains along their lower reaches. The highest ridgetops in the area reach elevations of approximately 411 meters (1350 feet) above mean sea level (AMSL).

The relatively level and featureless terrain of the Kanawha Valley stands in sharp contrast to the dissected upland within which it is tightly nestled. The valley floor

does undulate, however, with ridge and swale topography being common in some areas. The Kanawha River, constricted within a narrow, steep sided valley, meanders gently through the general project area. The width of the valley ranges from approximately 0.8 to 1.0 kilometer (0.5 to 0.6 mile) at Marmet and Lower Belle. Along the right descending bank of the Kanawha, surface elevations range from about 181 to 186 meters (594 to 610 feet) AMSL, while some isolated knobs located in the extreme northeastern part of the project area along old U.S. 60 approach 188 meters (617 feet) AMSL.

The Kanawha River provides primary drainage of the project area. However, within the planned disposal area located at the north end of the project, the majority of surface drainage is provided by Burning Spring Branch (Figure 1.2).

Reynolds Cemetery Setting

The Reynolds Cemetery is located on a Holocene alluvial landform, the genesis of which is probably associated with both Burning Spring Branch and the Kanawha River. The cemetery is situated near the edge of a steep scarp formed by the entrenchment of Burning Spring Branch. Topography at the cemetery is nearly level, with surface elevation being approximately 183 meters (600 feet) AMSL.

When the site was recorded during the Phase I survey in 1995, it was overgrown with weedy vegetation and small saplings, with only a few large trees being present (Figure 1.3). Conditions at the time excavations were initiated in 2001 remained

10


virtually unchanged, although some clearing of vegetation did occur in advance of the geophysical survey, which was completed in 1998.

Information obtained from the Soil Survey of Kanawha County, West Virginia indicates that the Reynolds Cemetery and an area of higher elevation to the north are mapped as Cotaco loam (Van Houten et al. 1981:Sheet Number 36). Cotaco series soils have fine-loamy texture and are deep and moderately well drained (Van Houten et al. 1981:45). The soils in this series formed in acid alluvium derived from uplands underlaid by sandstone, siltstone, and shale. The typical pedon of Cotaco loam is described as having Ap, B1, B21t, B22t, B3t, and C horizons. The thickness of the solum ranges from 76 to 122 centimeters (30 to 48 inches). Depth to bedrock is usually more than 150 centimeters (59 inches).

Topsoil at the site consisted of a very dark grayish brown (10YR3/2) silt loam. Once the topsoil was removed, grave shafts were identified by the presence of rectangular shaped soil anomalies that generally consisted of a dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4 to 10YR4/6) silty clay loam mottled with dark brown (10YR3/3) silt loam. Subsoil at the site was dark yellowish brown (10YR4/6) fine silty-clay.

Within the lower parts of the graves (within the coffins) the soil ranged from black (10YR2/1) silty clay to dark yellowish brown (10YR3/4) silty clay. Mixtures of decomposed coffin wood and human remains probably influenced texture. In all but one instance, the coffins had collapsed, leaving the majority of the cultural, mortuary, and human materials compressed in the lower 5 to 10 centimeters (2 to 4 inches) of the grave shaft.

Evidence for recent disturbance at the cemetery was generally lacking, although pieces of badly rusted metal and a small, loosely constructed pile of brick were present a short distance northwest of the identified gravestones. However, information obtained from aerial

photographs, the USGS 7.5’ Charleston East Quadrangle (Figure 1.2), and the Soil Survey of Kanawha County, West Virginia indicated that areas in very close proximity to the cemetery had been impacted at various times during the last 65-70 years. The activities responsible for the disturbance appear to have been related primarily to agriculture and the construction of buildings. Whether these activities were responsible for the breakage and movement of the grave markers discussed in the Phase I report was not known, though a report by a local resident suggested the disturbance was the result of vandalism (Anslinger et al. 1996:109-113). However, information provided in 2001 to Dr. Robert Maslowski by Anne Bird, a distant relative of John Reynolds, suggests much of the damage to the cemetery was caused by horses stabled in a structure that once existed adjacent to the cemetery. In fact, because of the damage being inflicted to the gravestones by the horses, Mrs. Byrd had the headstone of John Reynolds and another unmarked stone moved to her home in Charleston.

Modern Climate Kanawha County is influenced by a

humid continental climate in which continental polar and maritime tropical air masses come into play (Guernsey and Doerr 1976). Climate can vary drastically from one year to the next, but the trend is toward warm summers and relatively mild winters. Prevailing winds are from the southwest to northwest.

Data compiled between 1951 and 1974 by the National Climate Center, Asheville, North Carolina, for the Soil Conservation Service, indicate the average temperature in Kanawha County during the winter is 2.2 degrees Celsius (36.0 degrees Fahrenheit), with the average daily minimum temperature being –2.8 degrees Celsius (27.0 degrees Fahrenheit). The lowest temperature on record is –24.4 degrees Celsius (-12 degrees Fahrenheit) recorded at Charleston in 1963. During the summer, the average temperature is 22.8 degrees Celsius

11


(73.0 degrees Fahrenheit), and the average daily maximum temperature is 28.9 degrees Celsius (84.0 degrees Fahrenheit). The highest recorded temperature, 38.9 degrees Celsius (102.0 degrees Fahrenheit), was recorded in Charleston in 1954.

Average annual precipitation is 105.0 centimeters (41.3 inches). Of this total, 56.0 centimeters (22.0 inches), or 54 percent, typically falls between April and September. The average seasonal snowfall is 76.0 centimeters (29.9 inches). On average, 2.5 centimeters (1.0 inches) or more of snow covers the ground for 11 days per year. The growing season occurs between April and November, with an average of 184 frost-free days.

Local Vegetation Site 46Ka349 is included in the Mixed

Mesophytic Forest Region. The forest associations found in this region are the oldest and most complex of the deciduous forests. Mesophytic refers to a climax community where dominance is shared by several species.

Data regarding forest composition in a 3,200 hectare (8,000 acre) tract of virgin timber in the vicinity of Coalburg, West Virginia is presented in Table 2.1. The data were compiled by the eminent naturalist William H. Edwards in 1872 (Krebs and Teets 1914:602). Coalburg is located approximately 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) up the Kanawha River from the Marmet project.

The study tract included a range of topographic variation typical for the county, although information concerning the relative percentage of ridges, sideslopes, hollows, and valley bottoms is not available. Nevertheless, the data should provide a reasonably accurate reflection of historic period forest composition for the area prior to deforestation.

Table 2.1. Relative percentage of tree taxa in a Kanawha County tract in 1872.

Taxon Number Percent

Yellow poplar 9,831 19.0

Oaks 31,710 61.4

Beech 2,497 4.8

Maple (red) 301 0.6

Chestnut 2,510 4.9

Pines 1,190 2.3

Basswood 671 1.3

Gum 509 1.0

Hickories 1,463 2.8

Ash 122 0.2

Birches 111 0.2

Sugar Maple 660 1.3

Black Walnut 62 0.1

Sycamore 5 0.0

Buckeye 3 0.0

Total 51,645 99.9

12

Historic Context and Previous Archaeological Studies

Chapter 3. Historic Context and Previous Archaeological Studies

Historic Overview of Kanawha County

I n 1789, Kanawha County was formed from portions of Greenbrier and Montgomery

counties. At the time of its formation, it was approximately 192 kilometers (120 miles) long, almost 160 kilometers (100 miles) wide, and nearly an unbroken wilderness (Atkinson 1876). In the following years, the original area of the county was greatly reduced, and 14 counties would be formed wholly or in part from it. These included Mason (the first, in 1804), Cabell, Nicholas, Logan, Fayette, Jackson, Braxton, Gilmer, Boone, Putnam, Calhoun, Roane, Clay, and Lincoln (the last, in 1867) (Comstock 1973). Charleston, the county seat, is also West Virginia’s capital; although that has not always been the case. For a few years, between 1873 and 1885, the state’s capital fluctuated between Charleston and Wheeling. In an act passed in February 1877, it was decided that the selection of a permanent capital would be decided by a vote. On the first day of May 1885, Charleston was the elected capital (Comstock 1973).

Natural Resources Kanawha County had many natural

resources that were exploited for their economic potential and individual use. The county contained vast bottomlands along its rivers, which were a prime area for cultivation. Building stone of excellent quality was available throughout the county. The vast deposits of bituminous coal, however, were the principal source of Kanawha County’s wealth (Comstock 1973).

Salt, which was obtained by boiling brine extracted from underground sources, brought the most notoriety to Kanawha County. Elisha

Brooks started the first commercial salt operation in 1797. On his leased land, he had 24 iron kettles in a double row “with a flue beneath a chimney at one end and a fire bed at the other” (Food machinery and Chemical Corporation 1960). Brooks obtained his brine by sinking gums (hollowed-out logs, 8-10 feet in length) into the mire and quicksand of the salt lick. The brine was then dipped out by using a bucket attached to a long pole, called a swape or sweep. Brooks was able to produce approximately 68 kilograms (150 pounds) of salt per day.

Brooks did no settling or purifying of the brine, so the salt contained the natural impurities that were found in the brine. Iron impurities made the brine turn red upon heating and as a result, the salt was also red. Kanawha salt soon gained a reputation as the red salt that had a pungent taste and a superior curing quality for meat and butter. The “red salt from Kanawha” became known as the best salt produced in the country. The Ruffner brothers, David and Joseph, perfected the extraction and distillation of brine and salt. In 1817, the brothers, whose salt works was on the Great Buffalo Lick, were the first to use coal to boil the brine. This abundant form of fuel was also more efficient. As a result, the majority of the salt works in the valley were connected to a nearby coal vein that supplied the furnaces. Natural gas was also used as a fuel for heating the brine. After it’s accidental discovery in 1841, natural gas, which burns hotter and cleaner than coal, was supplied by pipelines to many of the salt works throughout the county. These improvements in boiling technology, along with improvements in kettles, furnaces, and drilling equipment, allowed a greater amount of salt to be produced. Between 1817 and 1830, production jumped from 200-300 bushels to

13


900-1,000 bushels of salt per unit per week (Cook 1935).

The Civil War had a great impact on the salt industry. Battles left many works destroyed. The greatest blow to the salt industry came when the center for meat processing and packing moved from Cincinnati and Louisville to Chicago. It soon became more economic to purchase salt from Michigan instead of Kanawha County. The local salt industry began to subside, and all but one of the works was shut down by 1890. The only salt works left in operation, J. Q. Dickinson, closed in 1945 (Cohen 1987).

The Civil War Kanawha County was party to the realities

of the Civil War. During 1861, the Great Kanawha Valley was part of active military operations. Both sides looked at the vast fields and salt production as two essential factors in the maintenance of the armies being levied (Comstock 1973). Henry A. Wise, ex-Governor, was sent to Charleston in early 1861 to gain and hold possession of the Kanawha Valley. He opened a headquarters in Charleston and a recruiting office where hundreds of men enrolled. At the same time a Federal force was collecting at Gallipolis, Ohio, in order to drive General Wise’s forces east of the Alleghenies. On July 17, 1861, the federal troops crossed the Kanawha to the south side and began their march toward Scary. At mid-day, the opposing forces met and the Battle of Scary Creek began (Comstock 1973).

“For five hours charging battalions were marching and counter-marching over the field...As the sun was shedding his last rays upon the scene the Confederates began to waver; but at the critical moment... a mounted force came up and turned the tide of battle... A retreat was ordered and the Federals fell back to Pocatalico” (Comstock 1973).

During the war, a number of military facilities were constructed in the Kanawha Valley. Fort Scammon, a Union fortification,

was constructed by order of Col. Rutherford B. Hayes. It was located strategically on top of Fort Hill overlooking the Kanawha River and the vitally important James River and Kanawha Turnpike (Andre et al. 1995:138). Also, a number of camps were constructed along the Kanawha River between Charleston and Gauley Bridge to the east. Camp White was the primary Union camp in Charleston, while Camp Reynolds was located upriver at Kanawha Falls. Camp Piatt is of particular relevance to the Marmet area. This Union camp was named for Col. Abraham Piatt, Ohio Zouaves. The camp was strategically located along the right descending side of the Kanawha River, adjacent to the James River and the Kanawha Turnpike. In addition, it was located in the immediate area of the Kanawha salt industry, the product of which was of considerable importance to both Union and Confederate forces. Of interest is the fact that Rutherford B. Hayes and William McKinley, both of whom would eventually become American presidents, were stationed at Camp Piatt in 1863.

Historical Overview of the Area around Burning Spring Branch

The proposed disposal site for the Marmet Lock Replacement Project occupies a tract of land bisected and drained by Burning Spring Branch on the east bank of the Kanawha River, above Charleston, West Virginia (Figure 1.2). The immediate area and the stream are both named for the famous “Burning Spring,” once located a short distance downstream but having long since disappeared. Nineteenth-century historian Dr. John P. Hale described the geologic curiosity as:

…simply a hole in the ground, which filled with water when it rained, and up through which issued a jet of gas, giving the water the appearance of boiling and when lighted burned with a bright flame till blownout by a high wind (Cook 1935:66).

14


The first Europeans to record its existence were pioneer explorers Captain Matthew Arbuckle, Rev. Joseph Alderson, and John and Peter Van Bibber in 1773. Surveyors mapped the area in 1775. In 1780, Governor Thomas Jefferson of Virginia issued a patent for 100 hectares (250 acres) around the spring to George Washington and Andrew Lewis. Other early landholders in the vicinity of Burning Spring Branch were Colonel John Dickinson, John Steele, and George Alderson (Cook 1935:64-65).

It was not the spring but the rich underground streams of salt brine that occasionally bubbled to the surface along the river’s banks that led to the area’s rapid economic development in the early nineteenth century. In 1797, Elisha Brooks leased ground from Joseph Ruffner (at modern Malden) and sank three hollowed-out sycamore trunks, called “gums,” 3 meters (10 feet) into the ground to access brine. Brooks used the abundant local timber to fuel his furnace, which produced up to three bushels of salt per day (Stealey 1993:9-10).

A few more furnaces sprung up along the Kanawha “salines” and the industry grew slowly for a decade. The United States declared war on Great Britain in 1812, and large government orders for salt sparked a boom. Furthermore, the Gulf coast and eastern seaboard faced salt shortages because the British blockade curtailed imports. Prices went to a dollar a bushel, and the western Virginia industry expanded to produce over 600,000 bushels annually. Between 1810 and 1815, the number of Kanawha salt furnaces expanded from 16 to 52 (Stealey 1993:17).

Peace caught the Kanawha salt makers grossly over expanded as decreased demand sent prices tumbling. In order to stabilize their industry, the leading Kanawha producers created the Kanawha Salt Company in 1817. This was the first industrial cartel in American history. A board of directors set production quotas and uniform prices for all producers to follow. In its first year, the cartel reduced production to 450,000 bushels. This organization was the first of a series of cartels

that controlled the Kanawha Valley salt industry until the Civil War (Stealey 1993:26-27).

The Reynolds Family and Other Salt Makers along Burning Spring Branch

Colonel John Reynolds was a leading developer of the lands near the mouth of Burning Spring Branch in the early nineteenth century. Unfortunately, only sketchy information about his life has been found. In 1794, he was a town trustee of Point Pleasant on the Ohio River, and sometime thereafter moved to Kanawha Salines. A 1797 document shows a John Reynolds “county clerk” residing on the west side of the Kanawha River above Charleston (Hale 1931; Anonymous 1797).

Sometime after coming to the valley, he married Miriam, a daughter of Matthias Van Bibber, a leading pioneer and close associate of Daniel Boone. Jesse Boone, Daniel’s son, and Andrew Donnally Jr., were also son-in-laws of Van Bibber. Reynolds obtained considerable land around Charleston and vicinity, and social prominence followed (Cohen 1987:18). He served as county delegate to the Virginia legislature from 1806-1810 (Hale 1931:299). By 1814, he had apparently retired from politics and gone into the salt business. In 1817, he joined the original salt cartel with a quota of 12,000 bushels for the year 1818 (Stealey 1993:27).

By 1818, he had obtained a substantial interest in George Washington’s old Burning Spring’s tract. Table 3.1 shows the amount of property John Reynolds owned in the Burning Spring Branch area and the value of the property. Andrew Lewis had died in 1781, leaving the entire Burning Spring tract to Washington. Either through a misunderstanding or outright chicanery, Lewis’ son sold what he claimed to be his upper half, or 50 hectares (125 acres), of the tract to John Morris in 1795. Morris apparently resided on the property until he sold his land to Aaron Stockton and John Reynolds in 1818, reserving cemetery rights (Cook 1935:66). This raises the possibility that a

15


Morris cemetery, dating to the early nineteenth century, may exist on part of the Burning Spring tract in the planned disposal area.

After Washington’s death, his nephew, Lawrence Washington, rightfully inherited the whole of the tract, and sought for years to establish his claim to it. The disputed land title was eventually resolved in 1820, when surveyors found that the tract actually contained 167 hectares (418 acres) rather than the 100 hectares (250 acres) described in the deed. Washington reached a compromise with Reynolds and Stockton, and validated their claims by dividing the land into two parts. A road running perpendicular from the river to the Burning Spring became the boundary (Cook 1935:67-68). Table 3.1. John Reynolds’ Property Values in the Burning Spring Branch area.

Date Acres Value 1812 85 acres $42.50 1813 85 acres $42.50 1814 85 acres $85.00 1815 - - 1816 - - 1817 85 acres $85.00 1818 - - 1819 85 acres $85.00 1819 140 acres $60.00

150 acres $37.50 1820 85 acres $4,972.00

140 acres $280.00 150 acres $300.00

1821 - - 1822 85 acres $300.00

Also in 1820, John Reynolds and William Tompkins obtained an undivided 14.07 hectares (35.18 acres) of 160 hectares (400 acres) John Warth had obtained from John Steele in 1814. Steele and Donnally retained a one half interest in coal reserves on the property. This sale included most of the land inland and around the mouth of Burning Spring Branch. Tompkins and Reynolds divided their purchase with all the land above

the first right-hand fork of Burning Spring Creek going to the latter.

Reynolds also controlled another 34 hectares (85 acres) known as the Conrad Smith tract. It was located just upriver from the mouth of the branch, and adjoining his part of the Steele tract. In 1803, George Alderson sold the land to Conrad Smith and, in 1811, Smith passed it on to Reynolds. In 1823, Reynolds obtained another 26.8 hectares (67 acres) of land from Goodrich Slaughter and Charles Neale. It was made up mostly of “back lands,” valuable for coal and timber, essential in the salt-making process (Santee 1965:6).

The salt making process witnessed constant evolution through the ante-bellum years. The Reynolds family was very aware of these fundamental shifts in salt making technology. During 1821, John Reynolds and his son Franklin R. (hereafter referred to as Franklin) made an agreement with Issac Reed to supply Reed with brine from their well “a few rods” above the mouth of Burning Spring Branch. Reed was to construct a “common size coal furnace.” Reed was also to share the expense of “digging, cutting, drawing, hauling, boating, or other wise hauling the coal to the furnace.” The Reynolds’ were to share the expense of constructing “a shed, machine house, and machinery” as well as the “necessary dwellings for Reed and his family, and the hands or workmen necessary about the said furnace”. Reed was also given a 0.4 hectare (1.0 acre) lot for his house and garden. Besides providing the coal, Reed was to supply either pans or kettles, or both. Interestingly, the Reynolds would allow Reed to use wood if it was available, however coal was the preferred fuel. Furthermore, Reed was to be the supervisor of the works for the first three years of the agreement, after that Reed was free to ‘dispose of his interest” (Deed Book E:481). Unfortunately, this agreement does not specify the location of the furnace, although it seems reasonable to suggest that the furnace was close to the well and within the current project area.

16


It was during this period that John Reynolds owned his maximum number of slaves (10) (Table 3.2). The taxable value of this property also greatly increases during this time from $85.00 to $4972.00, further suggesting that Reynolds had constructed a furnace and made furnace related improvements at this time. Table 3.2. Personal Property Taxes Paid By John and Merriam Reynolds, 1792-1834.

Date Slaves

Over 12 Years

Slaves Over 16 Years

HorsesTotal Tax Paid

1793 1796 2 1801 1 1 1 1802 2 1806 2 5 1807 2 11 1809 2 8 1810 3 7 1811 5 8 1812 4 6 1813 4 12 1814 4 12 1816 8 8 $7.40 1817 3 10 $3.90 1818 2 6 6 $6.68 1819 6 9 $5.82 1820 5 10 $5.30 1821 10 6 $6.11 1822 6 8 $4.26 1823 6 4 $3.30 1824 1 $0.12 1825 3 1 $1.53 1828 3 1 $1.53 1829 2 3 $1.10 1830 2 3 $0.94 1831 3 3 $0.93 1832 3 3 $0.93 1833 2 $0.50 1834 2 $0.12

In 1823, John Reynolds made an agreement with Josiah Harrison to construct a “common sized coal furnace” using brine from his well “a few rods above the mouth of

Burning Spring Branch.” Like the earlier agreement, Reynolds and Harrison were to share the cost of mining, however Harrison alone incurred the expense of erecting a furnace shed, building the chimney and walls for the furnace, assembling the pan, and erecting all necessary buildings. Harrison shared the expense of building the machine house and machine to draw water for two furnaces. Harrison was to pay half the expenses of opening a new coal bank. Like Reed, Harrison was to personally supervise the work at the furnace for a period of five years (Deed Book F:235). Again, this agreement does not state where this furnace was to be located. Perhaps it was to be located near the well and the earlier furnace because the machinery for drawing water, possibly a steam powered pump, was to supply two furnaces.

The 1830s saw new techniques including the “Guiteau Process” and, as it was known, the “Kanawha Grainer Process” which brought about changes to the physical plant of the furnaces. Having obtained a sizable piece of valuable river front land, Reynolds gave his sons (Van Bibber, Ellicott, Franklin, Fenton Mercer, [hereafter referred to as Fenton] Vernon, and John Jr.), a one-half undivided interest in the whole (Deed Book F:238). Through later agreements, each son seems to have obtained his own plot and followed his father into salt making. Thereafter, the story becomes rather complex, as the Reynolds family repeatedly mortgaged their considerable properties in a series of agreements to stave off creditors. John Reynolds died on February 29, 1832, deeply in debt (Salt Case, 9:1845). Like their father, Van Bibber and Franklin both owned their maximum number of slaves during the 1820s (Table 3.3 and 3.4.).

17


Table 3.3. Personal Property Taxes of Van Bibber Reynolds.

Date Slaves

Over 12 Years


Horses Total Tax Paid

1817 1 $0.18 1818 1 $0.18 1820 1 $0.18 1821 1 1 $0.66 1822 3 2 $1.86 1823 1 3 $0.83 1824 1 $0.12 1826 1 1 $0.59 1827 2 $0.24 1828 2 6 $1.66 1829 3 8 $2.00 1830 2 2 $0.86 1831 1 2 $0.37 1832 1 5 $0.55 1833 2 5 $0.80 1834 1 2 5 $1.05 1835 1 1 $0.31 1836 1 $0.25 1837 2 1 $0.56 1838 2 1 $0.68 1839 1 1 1 $0.68

Table 3.4. Personal Property Taxes of Franklin Reynolds.

Date Slaves

Over 12 Years


Horses Vehicles Total Tax Paid

1823 1 $0.12 1824 2 3 2 $2.59 1825 1 $0.12 1826 4 2 $2.12 1827 3 2 $1.65 1828 2 $0.24 1833 2 $0.12 1834 1 3 2 $1.12 1835 1 1 carry all $50 $1.31 1836 1 1 1 carry all $30 $1.31 1837 1 1 Barouche valued at $315 $3.46 1838 1 1 Barouche valued at $300 $3.38 1839 2 1 1 carriage $300 $3.68 1840 1 1 1 carriage $300 $3.38

18


The Reynolds family’s largest creditor was James C. McFarland, a Charleston merchant and, after 1832, president of Kanawha County’s first bank, the Bank of Virginia (Cohen 1987:17). In 1829, he married one of John Reynolds’ daughters. Despite the family connection, McFarland seems to have made hard bargains and came to control more and more of the Reynolds property. In 1830, John Reynolds and his sons gave McFarland one-half interest in the 43 hectare (85 acre) Conrad Smith tract and other upland properties (Reynolds 1846:6).

An 1835 deed suggests that the brothers were residing on the property only through the willingness of McFarland not to call in their debts:

…the said James C. McFarland hath permitted the said Van B. and Ellicott, to occupy that part of the said Conrad Smith tract which lies above and south of the Burning Spring Branch, in confidence that they -- the said Van B. and Ellicott, would comply on their part with his said propositions. . .

Another 1836 agreement partitioned most of John Reynolds’ former land below that mouth of the branch into three parts. Franklin Reynolds retained his tract of 6.8 hectares (17 acres) just below the mouth of the branch. His brother Vernon’s tract of 9.7 hectares (24.25 acres) just below that was sold to the Lewis and Shrewsbury Company, and the most northward parcel of 8 hectares (20 acres) went to McFarland (probably only Franklin Reynolds’ tract sat in the project area) (Santee 1965:10). Furthermore, Franklin’s mother was to retain that portion of the Conrad Smith Tract that was below Burning Spring Branch and adjacent to Franklin’s 6.8 hectare (17 acre) tract.

Nevertheless, the Reynolds family continued to make salt. For the two year period of 1830-1831, the John Reynolds and Sons furnace (or furnaces), which were probably located just above the mouth of Burning Spring Branch, produced over 50,000 bushels of salt (Salt Case 1845:30). But

technological changes made greater and greater outlays of capital necessary to compete. By the 1830s, larger furnaces were rapidly replacing those built in the 1810s.

During the winter of 1834 and 1835, Ellicott and Van Bibber Reynolds made substantial, and no doubt costly, improvements to their property along Burning Spring Branch. Both already owned a house on the Conrad Smith tract and now each constructed a salt furnace capable of making 50,000 bushels of salt per annum (Santee 1965:11). They built a railroad that crossed the creek and ascended its west side to a coal bank (Santee 1965:9). They were overextended, however, and Ellicott had to borrow another $1000 from McFarland and give the pre-emption rights in his coal properties as a guarantee (Santee 1965:12).

In May 1835, the two brothers leased their furnaces: Ellicott’s to William C. Wakeland and Moses W. Keeney; and Van Bibber’s to Benjamin Severance. Each lease was for a term of three years and they retained their homes on the site (Santee 1965:10). The brothers were so deeply in debt by this time (Van Bibber owed about $13,000 and Ellicott $7000), that their creditors stepped in and forced the new tenants off the property. They then rented it to one of the associate stockholders of the salt monopoly and took one furnace out of production (Reynolds 1846:1-2).

Despite his chronic indebtedness, Van Bibber Reynolds was elected a delegate to the Virginia legislature for a one-year term in 1839 (Hale 1931:300). Then his world fell apart. By the time he returned home from Richmond he suffered from a “disease of the lungs.” To add to his misery, in 1840, the county sheriff arrested him for unpaid debts. This time Ellicott had to co-sign a deed of trust to keep him out of jail and in his home (Salt Case 1845:19).

The 1840 Census for Kanawha County enumerated Van Bibber’s household as having two male children, one adult male 40-50 years old, and one adult female 60-70 years old, suggesting that an elderly lady (most likely his mother) was living with him, or he was living

19


with her. In 1841, his wife Elizabeth died. Van Bibber followed her to the grave the next year leaving two orphaned sons, aged nine and 13, in the hands Ellicott (Salt Case:13). The couple was buried in a small plot near the banks of Burning Spring Branch, along with their son James who died in 1852.

Ellicott could not meet the deed of trust agreement. He later claimed that McFarland had assured him that he would not lose his property over Van Bibber’s debts. Whatever the truth, McFarland and his associates put the property up for sale in December 1843, but found no takers, perhaps because the country was just emerging from a sharp depression and credit was tight. The property was advertised a second time in July 1844, and salt maker John D. Lewis bought it for $9000 (Reynolds 1846:6-7). According to an October 1844 court complaint of Ellicott Reynolds, Lewis and an armed gang took forcible possession of the place, leaving him only his house and garden (Salt Case 1845:23).

Ellicott, believing that he had been swindled, fought a quixotic battle to get his property and furnaces back. In March 1845, he filed a long complaint in the Circuit Superior Court of Kanawha County. He complained that he and his brother “were inexperienced in matters of the law” (Reynolds 1846:5) and that he was not aware that the 1840 agreement required him to be responsible for Van Bibber’s debts. He should have been better informed, for his signature on the document led to the Reynolds family being permanently evicted from the valuable salt property around Burning Spring Branch. The county court dismissed his suit in February 1846, so he appealed to the state Court of Appeals in Richmond (Reynolds 1846)

Ellicott finally recognized the writing on the wall and arranged a settlement in 1849. He and Henry William Reynolds, the son of Van Bibber, accepted Lewis’s title to the land and dropped all litigation for a mere $700.

John D. Lewis took over and operated the more upstream of the two Reynolds Furnaces. Exactly how Crockett Ingles came into possession of the furnace at the mouth of

Burning Spring Branch is unknown. Ingles purchased the Franklin Reynolds tract of 6.8 hectares (17 acres) and the portion of the Conrad Smith tract north of the creek in 1847. With this purchase Ingles also acquired Franklin Reynolds interest in the remainder of the Conrad Smith tract which may account for his presence on the 1850 map (Deed Book Q:334).

The 1850 Census of Industry details the activities of both Lewis and Ingles. The census enumerated 33 manufacturers of salt in Kanawha County. The average salt works had 33 male employees and 1.72 female employees. The furnaces on average expended $737 for male wages and $17 for female wages per year. The furnaces made on average 92,270 bushels of salt, with an average income of $18,323.84. Salt furnaces owned or leased 1,497 slaves. Of these, 1135 were male, with the 15-39 age group accounting for 64 percent, and 362 were female. Other interesting data from the manufacturing census records includes the number of barrels, boats, and metalwork items made in Kanawha County during 1849-1850.

All of these commodities and services were necessary for the salt industry to maintain itself, as well as to market salt in distant cities. However, by 1860, changes had occurred causing drastic reductions in salt production and associated trades.

The 1860 Census of Manufacturing enumerated only nine salt manufacturers. The average furnace employed 31.6 men and 1.2 women. Furnaces expended $834 in wages for men, and $14 in wages for women. The average furnace manufactured 140,213 bushels of salt, with an average value of $27,520.44.

Total salt production in 1860 was 1,261,915 bushels, a decrease of 58 percent from 1850 levels. Salt producers were making more salt at individual furnaces, however the overall production was down. This was the result of a number of factors, including the recovery from the Panic of 1857, the increase of production in areas such as Ohio and Michigan, and the emergence of Chicago as a

20


meat packing center, eclipsing Cincinnati (Stealey 1993)

The effects of the decline of salt production can readily be seen in the amounts of business of the ancillary industries. In 1860, all ancillary industries were making far less than they made in 1850. The Kanawha Salines would see further decline with the coming of the American Civil War.

The Civil War and Postbellum Period

In 1861, civil war broke out in the United States. A primary objective of both the Union and Confederate armies was to control the Kanawha Valley salt works. One of the articles necessary to life is salt, and the Confederacy was lacking the resources to produce it. Before the war would end, the Confederacy would be reduced to leaching soil from smoke houses and boiling seawater (Wilson 1889:73). The Confederacy quickly moved to hold the Kanawha Valley, but soon lost control. After Cox’s army arrived, they went into camp above Charleston at Camp Enyart, at the mouth of Witcher Creek on the Kanawha. The Union forces also camped at Kanawha Falls, scouting and fighting various Confederate forces in the mountains to the east.

The great Kanawha Valley flood of 1861 was probably a turning point for the salt-making industry in the vicinity of Burning Spring Branch, as well as in the Kanawha Valley. Beginning in September, heavy and persistent rains began falling in the mountainous watersheds of the Gauley and New rivers. Charleston was devastated as waters rose 6.4 meters (16 feet) above flood stage and inundated neighborhoods and homes long thought to be safe from high water. This was the highest water ever recorded on the river and it could not have come at a worse time for a salt industry in decline and a border region ripped by civil war (Wintz 1993:101). The flood of 1861 also flooded Camp Enyart and caused the Federals to move the camp down river to Camp Piatt, which was primarily

located on land now occupied by DuPont’s Belle Plant.

In September of 1862, war again returned to the Kanawha Valley. Joseph Lightburn, now in command of Federal forces in the Kanawha Valley, was attacked by a Confederate force under the command of General W. W. Loring. Loring moved down the Kanawha, causing Lightburn to retreat to Point Pleasant. During his retreat, Lightburn had to abandon the Kanawha Valley salt works after an unsuccessful attempt to destroy them.

Loring wrote a report stating, “the saltworks prove uninjured, preserved by our activity from fire, and only lack labor to supply the whole Confederacy. The Negroes, by whom they were formerly worked have been carried off by the enemy” (Official Records 1880-1901 19:1071). While in control of the works, Loring quickly moved to procure as much salt for the Confederacy as he could. He requested that the Confederate Ordinance Department send him 100 kegs of blasting powder to mine coal for the salt works, of which the department sent him 750 pounds, all they could spare (Official Records 1880-1901 19:611). The importance of the gain of the salt works was not lost on General Robert E. Lee, operating in the lower Shenandoah Valley. Lee wrote that Loring should hold the Kanawha Valley, stating “If you can hold retain possession of the salt-works at Charleston and keep the enemy out of that country I think it is probable the best service your army can perform” (Official Records 1880-1901 19:666). Loring was forced from the Kanawha Valley by Lightburn, and was replaced by John Echols who could not retake the valley (Official Records 1880-1901 19:690-691).

After October 1862, there was no active campaigning in the Kanawha Valley, and the Union army retained possession until the war ended in 1865. During the war, Dr. John P. Hale tried to create a new cartel to control salt production. Among the directors was Henry W. Reynolds, Van Bibber’s son (Hale 1864).

A final blow to the once prosperous salt industry came after the war, when the

21


American meat-processing industry, heretofore centered in Louisville and Cincinnati, established new roots in Chicago. Michigan salt shipped over Lake Michigan quickly became cheaper than Kanawha salt, which had little market.

The 1870 and 1880 manufacturing censuses confirm this decline. In 1870, nine firms were enumerated. These companies had on average 28 male employees, and no female employees. Wages on average cost $9611.11 per year. The furnaces made on average 210,222 bushels of salt, with an average value of $44,680.55. As in 1860, production at the furnaces was on the increase, however, the increase in production was short lived. With the change of meat packing centers from Cincinnati to Chicago, Kanawha salt had far fewer markets, and by 1880 only two furnaces were in operation, making 420,000 bushels valued only at $65,000.

After the Civil War, there is little evidence for furnace operations in the Burning Spring Branch area. Crockett Ingles does not appear in the 1860, 1870, or 1880 manufacturing censuses. John D. Lewis and Son were enumerated in the 1870 census, however this furnace(s) may have been located down river, near Malden. Some furnaces continued to operate for several decades, but for all practical purposes the West Virginia salt industry was finished. Only the J. Q. Dickinson works remained in operation after 1890, ceasing production in 1945.

Other uses for brines were found in the chemical industry. As early as 1872, it was realized that using the brine coal and natural gas in the region for chemical manufacturing would be more profitable than making salt for meatpacking or table use (Strother 1872:12). It was the byproducts of salt making, the bittern used for making bromides and the brines and other natural resources, that brought the chemical industries into the Kanawha Valley that remain to the present. Just up river from the project area is the DuPont Chemical Plant. This plant has used these natural resources to make products including anti-

freeze, fertilizer, nylon, and plastics (Edwards 1976:17).

Who’s Buried at the Reynolds Cemetery?

Because of the number of unmarked graves at the Reynolds Cemetery, an effort was made to compile a list of persons that could be buried there. The headstones for John Reynolds, his sons Van Bibber and Fenton, Van Bibber’s wife, Elizabeth, and their son, James, were all recovered during the course of fieldwork at site 46Ka349. It seems most likely that John and Van Bibber’s immediate families may be represented in the cemetery. In addition, Ellicott Reynolds, another son of John Reynolds, is reported to have been living on the property in 1835, thus it is possible that he and his immediate family were also interred in the cemetery (Appendix B).

Both earlier and later occupants of the tract of land near Burning Spring Branch could be interred in the Reynolds Cemetery. Early records indicate that John Morris owned the property from 1795 until 1818. When Morris sold the property, he reserved cemetery rights. Although the location of this early cemetery is not known, it is possible that Morris’ family could comprise the earliest interments at site 46Ka349.

In addition, the 1870 census records show that Allen Belcher and his family (wife Rebecca and five children: Sally; William; Mary; Thomas; and James) were residing on the property. In 1880, Allen and his wife remained on the property with eight of their nine children (four others were born between 1870 and 1880: Joseph; Margret; Frank; and Florella). Sally, born in 1860, was not listed in the 1880 census record. In 1880, she would have been 20 years old and may have been married and moved to another residence by that time. Alternately, she may have passed away between 1870 and 1880, and been interred in the Reynolds Cemetery.

Allen Belcher was murdered (cause of death unknown) sometime between 1880 and 1884 and may also be buried in the cemetery. It is unlikely that any of the other members of

22


the Belcher family listed above are interred in the Reynolds Cemetery because only one of the interments (an infant) dates past 1880 (the burial dates between 1887 and 1900). All of the listed individuals would have been at least 11 years of age in 1890.

The following table (Table 3.5) contains the names of individuals that may be interred at site 46Ka349. The information provided is

derived from the Kanawha County records, the January 24, 1884 issue of the Greenbrier Independent (in the Van Bibber Pioneers E-Newsletter, Volume 2, No. 11), and the five inscribed headstones (see Appendix B of this report for a genealogical listing of all the known nineteenth century descendents of John Reynolds, including known birth and death dates).

Table 3.5. Individuals possibly interred in the Reynolds Cemetery.

Name Birth Date Death Date Other Information

Col. John Reynolds 1758 1832 Headstone present

Van Bibber Reynolds 1795 1843 Headstone present

Elizabeth P. Reynolds 1802 1841 Headstone present

James C. Reynolds 1832/1833 1852 Headstone present

Fenton Mercer Reynolds Unknown Unknown Headstone present

Miriam Reynolds Unknown ca. 1850 John Reynolds’ wife

Mary Reynolds Unknown Unknown Van Bibber and Elizabeth Reynolds’ daughter

Ellicott Reynolds 1804 or 1806 Unknown John and Miriam Reynolds’ son, known to

reside on property Elizabeth Reynolds 1807 Unknown Ellicott Reynolds’ wife

Franklin R. Reynolds 1797 or 1799 Unknown John and Miriam Reynolds’ son

Abigail Reynolds 1810 Unknown Franklin Reynolds’ wife

Vernon Reynolds 1794 or 1816 Unknown John and Miriam Reynolds’ son

Irena/Joan/Joena Reynolds 1818 Unknown Vernon Reynolds’ wife

Althea McFarland 1804 Unknown John and Miriam Reynolds’ daughter

James McFarland Unknown Unknown Althea Reynolds husband

Child McFarland Unknown Unknown Child of Althea and James McFarland

Allen Belcher 1832 1880-1884 Resided on the property from at least 1870-1880

Rebecca Belcher 1843 Unknown Allen Belcher’s wife

Sally Belcher 1860 Unknown Allen Belcher’s daughter, not residing on the

property in 1870 (either moved or passed away)

John Morris Unknown Unknown Owned the property from 1795-1818, reserved cemetery rights

Wife/Children/Other Morris Unknown Unknown Immediate family of John Morris

Previous Archaeological Studies

Over the past few decades, several historic cemeteries have been excavated

archaeologically. The results of these investigations have offered a variety of insights into burial practices during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in North America. Several of these investigations are described in detail below.

23


Arkansas Cedar Grove

The Cedar Grove Site (3La97) in Lafayette County, Arkansas was a historic African American cemetery that was excavated in 1982 (Rose 1985). A total of 79 graves were excavated and the artifacts recovered indicated that interments occurred between 1890 and 1927.

Rose (1985) inferred from the cultural material that differential mortuary treatment by age, and possibly economic resources, occurred at the site. Analysis of the recovered skeletal remains showed that the population represented a stressed, but normal, biological population. High frequencies of anemia, rickets, scurvy, and protein malnutrition were observed in the skeletal population. Degenerative joint disease was also prevalent, indicating a hard and rigorous lifestyle, which suggests that the amount of physical labor required of African Americans had not changed dramatically since slavery (Rose 1985).

California Rincon Cemetery (CA-RIV-3372) The Rincon cemetery, an unmarked, late

nineteenth to early twentieth century cemetery located in Prado Basin, California, was subjected to a preliminary investigation, which included a proton magnetometer survey and archaeological excavation of four of the possible 90 burials located at the site (Brock and Schwartz 1991). The first recorded use of the cemetery was in 1889, while the most recent recorded burial was in 1935.

All four of the excavated burials contained hexagonal coffins constructed with wood and cut nails. Only one of the coffins held elaborate hardware (swing bail handles and a cast metal plaque). This individual is thought to have had higher socio-economic status than the others (Brock and Schwartz 1991:87). All of the excavated burials were aligned slightly west of true north, following the Hispanic tradition, rather than the Anglo-Christian

tradition (heads to the west, feet to the east—facing Jerusalem, so the deceased can rise to Gabriel’s horn during the second coming). In the Hispanic tradition, burial orientations typically reflect such things as the direction towards a church building, a central cemetery cross, the cemetery gate, or away from the village (Jordan 1982:70).

Connecticut Walton Family Cemetery

The Walton family cemetery, located in Griswold, Connecticut contained a total of 28 graves dating from 1750 to 1830 (Bellantoni et al. 1993). The burials were located in clusters, rather than neat rows, and most were buried with the heads to the west and feet to the east (a few were oriented northeast to southwest). Coffin shapes consisted of hexagonal (N=12) and rectangular (N=11) (five were of indeterminate shape), and all were made of wood (white pine and red or white oak). All of the rectangular coffins contained sub-adult remains.

Coffins were fastened with nails along the top and bottom edges of the sideboards. All nails were hand-wrought, suggesting that the burials pre-dated the 1830s. Of the 28 graves in the Walton family cemetery, only 11 contained artifacts other than coffin hardware. These items were brass and silver straight pins, which may have been used to hold burial shrouds in place.

Two unusual mortuary behaviors were noted for this cemetery. First, two of the hexagonal coffins were “surrounded on all sides with a single course of unmortared bricks and covered over with large flat fieldstones before the grave was filled with earth. Both had initials and, presumably, age of death delineated on the lids with brass tacks” (Bromberg, et al. 2000:11). Bellantoni and Poirier (1995:30) note that this was a common decorative treatment during the eighteenth century in Connecticut. The second unusual mortuary behavior was a burial in which the skull and femora had been placed in a “skull and crossbones” pattern over the chest region.

24


25

The grave was thought to have been opened 5 to 10 years after initial interment. Bellantoni et al. (1993:15) interpret this mortuary behavior as evidence that New Englanders during this period believed in vampires.

Delaware Mother Union American Methodist

Episcopal Church Cemetery The Mother UAME Church, located in

Wilmington, Delaware, was excavated in 1996 (Thomas et al. 2000). This African-American cemetery, which dated from 1855 through 1908, contained a total of more than 352 burials within a 12 by 52 meter (40 by 172 foot) cemetery plot. The cemetery contained a range of age groups, including what is thought to be an Infant’s or Children’s Garden, and several possible family plots.

Both hexagonal (N=308) and rectangular (N=14) coffins were identified at the Mother UAME Church (27 had indeterminate shapes and two had no shape recorded). Most of the coffins were made of pine, yellow poplar, or other hard woods, such as mahogany or walnut. The earliest possible hexagonal coffin dated to 1861, while the latest dated to 1900; the earliest rectangular coffin dated from 1867, while the latest dated from at least 1908. Although hexagonal and rectangular shaped coffins co-existed through the mid-1850s, the date spans for the hexagonal coffins at the Mother UAME Church cemetery (1861 through 1900) are thought to reflect a general conservative trend in the community, where more traditional styles were adhered to, regardless of general trends.

Several types of coffin hardware were recovered from the Mother UAME Church cemetery, including: handles; caplifters; thumbscrews; screws; studs; escutcheons; rings; and plaques or nameplates. Personal items recovered, such as coins, toys, cutlery or tableware handles, and a tobacco pipe, were thought to reflect the personal habits or possessions of the deceased (Thomas et al. 2000).

Small Family Cemetery (7S-F-68) In 1992, a total of nine burials were

excavated at site 7S-F-68, a small, unmarked family cemetery located in Sussex County, Delaware (LeeDecker et al 1995). The cemetery was in use during the late eighteenth century, most likely from 1752 until 1799. All of the burials contained hexagonal coffins constructed with utilitarian hardware, and all of the individuals were buried in shrouds. The burials were aligned with heads to the west. The assemblage was composed of seven adults (three males, four females), one young child, and one infant.

LeeDecker et al. (1995) consider the cemetery to conform to the general pattern of rural family burial grounds used from the Colonial period through the mid-nineteenth century. The dispersal of colonial populations among scattered farms and plantations likely led to the use of small family burial plots, with this pattern well established by the late eighteenth century.

Georgia Nancy Creek Primitive Baptist

Church Cemetery The Nancy Creek Primitive Baptist Church

Cemetery, located near Atlanta, Georgia, contained a total of 56 burials dating from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (Garrow et al. 1985). Both hexagonal and rectangular coffins constructed with utilitarian and mass-produced hardware were identified at the site. Burials were thought to date from around 1850 until 1979.

Skeletal preservation was generally poor, but the recovered remains offered a variety of information. A primary pathological condition observed in the population was dental caries, the presence of which suggests a general lack of professional dental care. Of the excavated skeletal remains, only four individuals showed any evidence of dental care. These included two gold fillings from a single individual, a plate, and two dentures.


26

Oakland Cemetery The Oakland Cemetery in Atlanta, Georgia

was reported on by Blakely and Beck (1982). A total of 391 burials were identified at this cemetery, which was used by all classes of Atlanta’s residents between 1850 and 1884. The burials were found to be placed in north to south oriented rows, with the heads to the west. Only 17 of the 391 burials were excavated archaeologically and three shapes of wooden coffins were identified: hexagonal; octagonal; and rectangular. The hardware used was generally utilitarian, although one oval glass viewing plate was recovered from a rectangular coffin. Personal artifacts recovered included buttons and buckles, and one interment produced a brass ring and 600 black glass beads (Blakely and Beck 1982:188, 189, and 199).

Illinois Grafton Cemetery

The Grafton cemetery, located in Grafton, Illinois, contained a total of 252 burials, all of which were excavated in 1995 (Buikstra et al. 2000). The cemetery was thought to have been in use from 1834 to 1873. Both hexagonal and rectangular coffin shapes were identified, in addition to a single metal casket. The cultural materials recovered generally date to the nineteenth century, and include: coins; vulcanized rubber hair combs; rings and buttons; hinges; handles; and escutcheons. The clothing styles observed in many burials also reflect this period (Buikstra et al. 2000:143).

The cemetery displays the typical Anglo-Christian burial pattern, with east-west orientation, and row structure expected for a mid-nineteenth century community cemetery (Buikstra et al. 2000:143). The socio-economic status of the Grafton population at large was considered neither particularly wealthy nor particularly poor. The effect of a middle class lifestyle is evidenced in grave wealth, including the use of silk and elaborate coffin hardware (Buikstra et al. 2000:144). The overall health of the population was good, when compared to contemporaneous

populations from poorhouses and disadvantaged rural cemeteries.

Kentucky Holmes-Vardeman-Stephenson

Cemetery A total of 68 burials at the Holmes-

Vardeman-Stephenson cemetery, located northwest of Crab Orchard, Kentucky, were excavated in 2000 (Linebaugh and Phillips 2001). Interments in the cemetery are thought to date from the 1830s to 1940s. Analysis of the cultural and skeletal remains recovered from the site is ongoing, but preliminary information is available.

Two metal caskets were recovered from the site. These provided excellent preservation of the individuals that were interred in them, allowing for specific osteological analyses to be conducted (Linebaugh and Phillips 2001).

Site 15Mc24 Site 15Mc24 was a small, rural cemetery

located in Metcalfe County, Kentucky (Ross-Stallings 1995). The cemetery contained a total of 18 graves, but only three were excavated archaeologically. The earliest headstone dated to 1829, while the most recent interment was thought to date sometime after 1880.

Of the three burials excavated, two contained hexagonal coffins made with cut nails, while the third coffin was rectangular in shape and held together with wire nails. None of the coffins contained elaborate, mass-produced hardware. The cemetery was laid out in the typical Anglo-Christian pattern (east to west) and appears to fit the definition of a southern rural cemetery as defined by Jordan (1982).

Maryland Facility Cemetery (18Cr239)

The Sykesville Law Enforcement Driver Training Facility Cemetery (the Facility Cemetery), located in Carroll County,


27

Maryland, was identified in 1997 during construction activities (Slaughter 2001). A total of 14 individuals were interred in this cemetery between 1790 and 1825. All of the burials were oriented east to west (heads to the west) and were situated in three rows aligned north to south.

Of the excavated burials, at least 11 were interred in hexagonal coffins (the other burials were too disturbed to determine coffin shape). None of the coffins contained elaborate, mass-produced hardware. Personal items recovered included buttons and straight pins.

Floral remains were also recovered and are thought to have been associated with funeral offerings reflecting regional burial practices and folk beliefs (Slaughter 2001:29). These remains included sassafras, pokeweed, and blackberry or raspberry seeds. Sassafras, blackberry, and raspberry produce short-lived flowers during early spring. Intentional presence of these floral types was thought to be related to an African burial custom or folk belief, such as that seen at the African American cemetery at the Catoctin Furnace in Frederick, Maryland (Burnston 1997). The skeletal remains of the individuals recovered from the Facility Cemetery were of European descent. Slaughter (2001:30) contends that the use of such plants in a funerary context is most likely a regional tradition that crosses ethnic boundaries.

Massachusetts Uxbridge Almshouse Burial Ground

The Uxbridge Almshouse Burial Ground was a paupers’ cemetery located in Uxbridge, Massachusetts (Elia and Wesolowsky 1991). Interments were made between 1831 and 1872, and the cemetery was laid out in six rows oriented north to south. Although 31 burials were excavated, only 16 rough, uninscribed stone markers and one inscribed marble headstone were identified at the site. Both hexagonal (N=29) and rectangular (N=2) coffins were found at the site, and pine was the predominant material used in their construction (yellow-poplar and chestnut were also used).

Recovered coffin hardware consisted of hinges, screws, tacks, and nails. Viewing glass plates (N=2) were also recovered from one hexagonal and one rectangular coffin. Elia and Wesolowsky (1991:286) contend that the coffins did not appear to be custom made, rather they were of the manufactured variety.

New York African Burial Ground

Portions of an eighteenth century African American cemetery, located in Manhattan, New York City, were excavated in 1991 and 1992. More than 400 burials were excavated and an additional 200 remain undisturbed at the site, which is now a National Historic Landmark (Thomas et al. 2000:12). The final report for this excavation is not yet available, but preliminary information indicates that the cemetery was used between 1712 and 1795. Almost half of the interments were children, and gabled and tapered trapezoidal wooden coffins were recovered. Personal items recovered from the burials include: shroud pins; buttons; finger rings; coins; and beads. One female individual had modified teeth, one shaped like an hourglass and another shaped like a peg (LaRoche 1994:3-11).

North Carolina Vawter-Swaim Cemetery

The Vawter-Swaim cemetery, located in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, was excavated archaeologically in 1983 (Woodall et al. 1983). The cemetery dates from 1843 to 1885 and contained a total of eight burials. All of the burials were oriented east to west, with the heads to the west, in two rows aligned north to south. All of the coffins were hexagonal and constructed with cut nails and brass tacks. The only mass-produced hardware was a set of lid fasteners made of white metal (Woodall et al. 1983).


28

Ontario, Canada St. Thomas Anglican Churchyard

The St. Thomas Anglican Church cemetery, in Belleville, Ontario, Canada, was the place of worship for the relatively affluent church congregation from 1821 to 1874. A total of 579 graves were identified, 576 of which were excavated. The analysis has not yet been completed, but a comparison of 27 child burials to 64 adult burials has been presented (McKillop 1995). These individuals and their burial dates were identified specifically (through headstones and archival information), and dated between 1825 and 1873. Children’s coffins were typically found to have four handles, while adult coffins had six handles. Another difference in child vs. adult burials was the number of buttons and/or shroud pins found (children’s burials tended to have few, if any, of each). In summary, the children’s graves were found to have identifying characteristics such as: coffin length; number and size of coffin handles; and decoration on coffin handles (McKillop 1995).

Pennsylvania First African Baptist Church

Cemeteries Two cemeteries of the First African

Baptist Church, located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, were excavated in 1984 and 1990 (Crist et al. 1997; Parrington 1987). The first cemetery, which was in use between 1810 and 1822, contained 89 burials (56 adults, 33 infants and children). All of the coffins were hexagonal and constructed with wood. Personal artifacts recovered included: buttons; shroud pins; a whalebone comb; kaolin pipestem fragments; coins; and silk stockings and ribbons.

The second cemetery, which dated from 1822 to 1843, contained 140 burials. All of the coffins were hexagonal and constructed with wood. Personal artifacts recovered included: buttons (in male burials only); coins (found in the eye sockets or near the head); single leather shoes on top of six coffins; and two ceramic

dinner plates over the abdomen (Cotter et al. 1992:286).

Ravenscraft Site The Ravenscraft Site, in Fayette County,

Pennsylvania, was investigated by the Carnegie Museum in 1954 (Swauger 1959). A total of seven graves were excavated which dated to the first quarter of the nineteenth century (based solely on buttons recovered from one burial). Skeletal material was found in only one burial, but the sizes of the graves suggested that five were adults or adolescents and two were children. Swauger (1959:38) identified the way in which the grave shaft was dug prior to interment. First, a hole was dug that was slightly larger than the coffin itself, then a rectangular hole, measuring the length of the grave, two feet wide and one foot deep, was dug in the floor of the grave. Short wood planks were set inside the new hole as coffin supports and, once the coffin was set inside, flat planks were placed across the entire length of the coffin, overlapping the clay subsoil beside the inset coffin.

Tennessee Cool Branch Cemetery (40Hk9) A total of five individuals (two adults and

three infants) were excavated from the Cool Branch Cemetery in Hancock County, Tennessee (Matternes 1998). The cultural materials recovered suggest the interments were made between 1800 and 1830. The site was identified by the presence of shallow oval-shaped depressions and/or vertical uninscribed field stone markers. Burials were situated in an east-west orientation and were aligned in rows (Matternes 1998:74). Recovered coffin hardware included machine cut nails, and the only personal items recovered were five buttons from an adult male burial. All of the graves were constructed as two stage burial chambers, in which an external shaft was first excavated, then stepped in, and an interior shaft conforming to the shape of the coffin was excavated (Matternes 1998:75).


29

Human skeletal remains were recovered from three of the five excavated burials. Although preservation was generally poor, the skeletal evidence suggested a difficult life. Available food likely consisted of what could be obtained from the farm and surrounding areas, and the resulting carbohydrate-rich diet would have placed stress on the health of the population. Health stress probably contributed to the comparatively early age of death suggested for the population (Matternes 1998:83).

Texas Freedman’s Cemetery

Excavations were conducted in the early 1990s at a freedman’s cemetery in Dallas, Texas. Although little has been reported on the site, it is thought to have contained as many as 2,000 freed slaves who were buried between 1869 and the early twentieth century (Thomas et al. 2000:12). Artifacts recovered from on top of the graves included a pocket watchcase, a carved stone doll, and a glass vase (Belkin 1990:A12).

Sinclair Cemetery (41Dt105) Site 41Dt105, the Sinclair family

cemetery, located northeast of Dallas, Texas, was excavated archaeologically in 1989 (Winchell et al. 1992). A total of 16 unmarked burials were identified at the site. Most of the coffins were hexagonal (N=15), while only one was rectangular in shape. Over 2,400 non-osteological remains were recovered, and included coffin hardware (nails, lining tacks, and screws) and personal items (buttons, shoe parts, jewelry, buckles, and hooks). All of the recovered hardware was utilitarian (Winchell et al. 1992). Demographically, site 41Dt105 consisted of 10 fully mature adults, one young adult, one adolescent, two young children, and two infants under ten months old.

Site 41Dt105 was determined to be a small rural cemetery containing the interments from two or three families, in addition to a possible founding family. Artifacts recovered suggest the cemetery was first used in the 1850s, was

used intensively in the 1860s and 1870s, and was abandoned in the late 1870s or early 1880s (Winchell et al. 1992).

Virginia Christ Church Graveyard

Burials were made in the Christ Church graveyard, located in Alexandria, Virginia, primarily between the 1760s and 1810, with an additional mass grave of Confederate soldiers in 1879, and individual burials in 1839 and 1986 (Creveling 1987). Although only 86 markers were identified at the cemetery in 1986, it is thought that between 1,000 and 2,000 burials are present. A total of 52 burials were excavated.

Grave shafts were identified by subtle variations in soil color and texture. Skeletal remains consisted of a few bone and tooth fragments and, typically, the only visible evidence of the bodies were dark soil stains where the skeletal remains had decomposed (Creveling 1987). All of the excavated burials contained hexagonal coffins and the only recovered coffin hardware was nails. No personal artifacts were recovered, suggesting that the individuals had been interred in burial shrouds (Creveling 1987).

Preston Plantation Graveyard A total of 46 burials were removed from

the Preston Plantation Graveyard, also located in Alexandria, Virginia, in 1933 (Calvert and Chapman 1946). The cemetery was in use from 1763 until at least 1923, and Calvert and Chapman (1946) provide accounts of the appearance of the coffins and the exhumed bodies. Preservation of the skeletal and cultural material was excellent and provided for descriptions of period clothing, hairstyles, and facial features.

Quaker Burying Ground Archaeological fieldwork at the Quaker

Burying Ground, located in Alexandria, Virginia, was conducted from 1993 until 1995 (Bromberg et al. 2000). The cemetery served as the burial place for the Alexandria Monthly


30

Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Alexandria’s Friends) from 1784 until the 1890s. A total of 159 burials were identified at the cemetery, but only 66 were located in areas that would be disturbed by construction of a library (93 were left in situ). Demographically, the sample contained 32 adults (nine males, ten females, 13 of unknown sex) and nine were identified as children.

Coffins were primarily hexagonal in shape and held little ornamentation. Personal items, such as buttons and hair combs, were considered by Bromberg et al (2000) to be plain, as were the gravestones when present. The authors attributed the “plainness” of the interments at the Quaker Burying Ground to be an attempt by Alexandria’s Friends to uphold the value of simplicity central to Quaker philosophy.

Weir Family Cemetery The Weir family cemetery, located in

Manassas, Virginia, was excavated archaeologically in 1989 (Little et al. 1992). This cemetery, which contained 24 burials, was used from the 1830s until 1907. Hexagonal (N=15), rectangular (N=8), and hexagonal cast iron (N=1) coffins were identified. Most of the coffins were constructed with either white or yellow pine. Personal items recovered from the burials consisted of buttons, hair combs, and monogrammed cuff links.

Wisconsin Stoltz Site

The Stoltz Site, located in Mequon, Wisconsin, was a nineteenth century German-American cemetery that was excavated in 1989 (Meer 1990). Ten burials were excavated, all of which were oriented with heads to the west. Of the recognizable coffins, all were rectangular in shape and all coffin hardware was utilitarian. No elaborate, mass-produced hardware was recovered and the author considered this to be an example of the frugality of early German settlers, or the

general lack of funds for such ornamentation (Meer 1990:25).

Methods

Chapter 4. Methods

T he following discussion presents the general field and laboratory methods

followed by CRAI for the archaeological excavation of the Reynolds Cemetery. Methods specific to recommendations made from the Phase I investigation of the site were generally followed; however, slight deviations from these recommendations were made to conform to the Scope, as well as when it was deemed necessary based on observations made in the field.

2) base of the grave shaft, showing the coffin stain and/or arrangement of coffin hardware when first encountered; and

3) base of the coffin, once all cultural and skeletal material had been exposed.

Trackhoe Stripping A trackhoe with a toothless bucket was

used to remove the plowzone from the periphery of the cemetery (Figure 4.2). This was done in order to identify any unmarked graves that might have been located outside the 10 by 10 meter (33 by 33 feet) cemetery boundary originally defined by the Huntington District Corps.

Field procedures were designed with the objective to excavate all human remains and associated personal items and coffin hardware. The data collected was to be used for establishing the social and historic contexts of the burials. Investigations proceeded in a series of stages, with data derived from each stage utilized to direct the next stage of investigation.

Hazard Testing Because both biological and chemical

hazards can be associated with the excavation of historic cemeteries, CRAI established a protocol for the excavation of the Reynolds Cemetery. The protocol followed Borstel and Niquette’s (2000) Testing Procedures for Historic Cemeteries (Appendix C).

Field Procedures Excavation of the burials located at the

Reynolds Cemetery involved two phases: grave location and grave recovery. The location and excavation of each burial required several stages of investigation, all of which are described below.

Based on the age of known interments at the Reynolds Cemetery and lack of evidence for sealed metal coffins, the primary health risk was believed to be associated with chemicals used in the embalming process – especially arsenic, rather than any biological agents. The lack of evidence for sealed metal coffins was based on the results of probing with a metal rod and the geophysical survey completed by Dr. Clay. Although the latter investigation was hindered by the presence of surface metal, the presence of metal coffins probably would have been detected.

Mapping During the current investigation, an

arbitrary datum for mapping was established at the site and all excavation units were mapped in reference to this datum point. As excavation units were assigned to the burials, detailed maps were drawn, depicting various stages of excavation (Figure 4.1), including:

1) pre-excavation, showing the grave shaft as identified at the base of the plowzone;

In order to obtain the necessary data to evaluate the cemetery for chemical hazards, a series of soil samples was collected from

31

Methods

Figure 4.1: Overview photograph of Reynolds Cemetery during excavation, looking north. Pin flags in foreground mark grave shaft corners; field crew member mapping in

background.

Figure 4.2: Overview photograph of Reynolds Cemetery during mechanical stripping, looking northwest.

32

Methods

provenienced contexts. The samples were collected with a 10 centimeter (4 inch) diameter hand operated bucket auger. To the extent possible samples were collected from contexts above, within, and below a sample of the graves. These determinations were made on the basis of depth and soil characteristics. In addition, control samples were collected from several near-by off-site locations at elevations slightly above the cemetery.

As they were collected, the recordation and storage of the samples followed guidelines developed by the Analytical Services Division of AC & S, Incorporated. The guidelines included placing the samples in new glass containers, labeling each container with appropriate information for provenience and context, placing the samples in an ice filled cooler, and transporting them immediately to the AC & S laboratory in Nitro, West Virginia. At the laboratory, Chain of Custody Records were completed (Appendix D).

In total, 18 samples were collected from nine locations. Of these, 12 were from suspected graves and six were controls. Analysis was for arsenic, mercury, and formaldehyde.

Excavation The excavation of each burial was

conducted in several stages. To begin, the grave shaft outline was drawn in plan view and photographed (Figure 4.3). The grave shaft was then excavated with shovels and trowels (Level 1). The fill from the first two grave shafts was screened through 0.64 centimeter (0.24 inch) mesh hardware cloth. From these first two grave shafts, it was found that no information pertinent to the historic context of the cemetery was obtained from screening the fill. This was not surprising, as the grave shaft fill was a disturbed deposit and typical materials recovered from it consisted of prehistoric lithic artifacts and a few pottery sherds. When prehistoric or historic artifacts were encountered in Level 1, they were bagged by

provenience. Level 1 was terminated when either coffin hardware or an outline of the coffin lid or top sides of the coffin were identified in the floor of the grave shaft (Figure 4.4).

Figure 4.3: Photograph of typical grave shaft outline at base of topsoil, looking

west. Level 2 consisted of the top of the coffin

to just above the skeletal remains. Light shovel skimming was used in the upper portions of Level 2, while only trowels and bamboo splints were used for excavation of the lower section of this level. Level 2 was terminated when skeletal remains were encountered, or when a steel probe inserted near the foot end of the coffin indicated that only around 10 centimeters (4 inches) of fill remained in the burial shaft (through decomposition, skeletal and cultural remains were generally compressed into the final 5 to 10 centimeters of fill within the grave shaft). The entire fill from Level 2 was screened through 0.64 centimeter (0.25 inch) mesh hardware cloth and recovered cultural materials were bagged by provenience.

33

Methods

• D) right lower quadrant of the skeleton, including pelvis and sacrum and associated cultural material; and

• E) left lower quadrant of the skeleton and associated cultural material.

The skeletal and cultural remains from each section were bagged separately. This method insured that human remains were pre-sided for the osteological analysis prior to arrival in the laboratory.

Figure 4.4: Photograph taken at base of Level 1 when coffin outline was apparent,

looking west. Level 3 typically consisted of the final 5

to 10 centimeters (2 to 4 inches) of fill within the grave shaft and included the skeletal remains and associated personal items (Figure 4.5). All excavated fill from Level 3 was screened through 0.64 centimeter (0.25 inch) or 0.32 centimeter (0.125 inch) mesh hardware cloth (the finer mesh cloth was used only for Zone A). Use of the smaller mesh screen was done in an attempt to recover small items, such as tooth fragments. Level 3 was broken into five zones (Figure 4.6):

Figure 4.5: Photograph taken at base of Level 3 after removal of all cultural and

skeletal material, looking west. The excavation of materials in Level 3

involved the careful use of bamboo splints, brushes of various sizes, spoons, dental tools, and trowels. Detailed notes were taken regarding the condition and orientation of coffin hardware, personal items, and skeletal remains as they were uncovered. When applicable, basic osteometric dimensions and other pertinent biological data were collected prior to disturbance of the skeletal remains. This

• A) head region, including the skull and cervical vertebrae, and associated cultural material (personal items and coffin hardware);

• B) right upper quadrant of the skeleton, including ribs and vertebrae, and associated cultural material;

• C) left upper quadrant of the skeleton and associated cultural material;

34

Methods

A

B C

D E

A

B C

D E

Level 3 Excavation Zones

A Head and Neck RegionB Right Upper Quadrant

D Right Lower QuadrantC Left Upper Quadrant

E Left Lower Quadrant

Figure 4.6: Schematic map of excavation zones for Level 3.

35

Methods

was done to record data that might otherwise have been lost due to deterioration of bone during extraction or transport. In cases where skeletal elements were too fragile to be removed intact, field data was the primary source of biological information for the individual. Recovered skeletal materials were packed in aluminum foil to prevent damage and further deterioration from drying. When possible, skeletal materials and the associated cultural material was fully recorded and excavated on the same day they were uncovered.

Once the excavation, photography, and mapping of a burial were complete, a steel probe was used to assess the possibility of other burials being located within each grave shaft. The probe was placed in at least two areas of the fully excavated grave (usually the “head” and “foot” regions) to check for loose soil that may be indicative of other grave shafts.

Daily Records Check The Project Archaeologist and each

crewmember kept detailed field records of the investigation to fully document the techniques, methods, observations, and results of the field work. The Project Archaeologist was responsible for checking the accuracy of all maps, level and burial forms, and that notes were completed properly. She also checked every bag containing artifacts and/or skeletal material at the end of each day to insure that these were properly labeled and entered into the bag inventory. This daily check has been shown to prevent many potential problems caused by an accidentally mislabeled or lost bag.

Worker Safety Prior to fieldwork at the Reynolds

Cemetery, the project’s Principal Investigator prepared a Site Specific Health and Safety Plan following guidelines established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The plan detailed the health risks that could be associated with

the excavation of historic cemeteries and provided information on methods that could limit or eliminate these risks. Each crew member was required to read and sign the plan prior to excavation of any burials.

Although excavation of historic burials offers a very low risk for infection from the organisms that caused past disease (Crist 2001:100), other non-biological hazards may be present. Most prominent of these are fluids used for embalming during the last half of the nineteenth century, including arsenic, formaldehyde, and mercury. A general overview of the safety protocol followed during the excavation of the Reynolds Cemetery is provided below. The protocol is based on Borstel and Niquette’s (2000) Testing Procedures for Historic Cemeteries (Appendix C).

Personal Hygiene An area outside the cemetery boundary

was designated for use by the crew members for drinking, eating, and smoking. This area was established far enough away from the work area so that drinking water and the like would not be exposed to potentially contaminated soils. City water was run from a local waterline to the site and antibacterial soap was provided for hand and face washing.

Protective Clothing The results of soil sampling conducted

at the Reynolds Cemetery prior to and during the archaeological investigation were not available until several of the burials had already been excavated. In an effort to combat the handling of potentially hazardous materials (e.g., arsenic, formaldehyde, or mercury), protective clothing was worn by all crew members. This clothing was worn while excavating burials, screening the fill, or otherwise handling recovered skeletal or cultural material.

Protective clothing available consisted of Tyvek coveralls with booties, latex gloves, and facemasks with respirators.

36

Methods

Tyvek coveralls were worn by crew members actively working within a grave (crew members screening fill, drawing maps, etc. were not required to wear coveralls). Latex gloves were worn by crew members working within a grave, screening fill, or anytime cultural or skeletal material was handled. Facemasks with respirators were available, but were not used during this excavation. The soils encountered at the Reynolds Cemetery were fairly wet and there was little danger of dust generation during excavation and screening.

Once the results of the soil sampling were available (negative for arsenic and formaldehyde, insignificant traces of mercury), use of the protective clothing was made optional to the crew members. The area designated for drinking, eating, and smoking was retained.

Laboratory Methods All historic and prehistoric cultural

material recovered from the site was transported to the CRAI Hurricane, West Virginia office for processing and analysis. Human skeletal material was subsequently transported to the CRAI Lexington, Kentucky office for analysis.

Historic Materials Laboratory methods used to complete

the data recovery for the Reynolds Cemetery were consistent with those recommended by the West Virginia Division of Culture and History (1991, as amended). These methods were designed to generate the type and quality of data required for addressing project tasks defined in the Scope. All aspects of the laboratory work followed procedures in operation at CRAI.

All non-osteological materials were returned to the CRAI Hurricane, West Virginia office for standard processing and analysis. Artifacts were checked in, cleaned, sorted by type, and analyzed by CRAI laboratory technicians. The results were entered into a database where tables

and totals were generated for each category type.

Because the cultural and skeletal remains of the Reynolds Cemetery are to be reinterred at Montgomery Memorial Park in London, West Virginia, long-term preservation techniques were unnecessary. All coffin wood was kept in polyethylene bags and aluminum foil. Fabric samples, shoes, and other perishable items were placed in a refrigerated climate to prevent decay until further study could be completed. The remaining artifacts were kept in polyethylene bags labeled with provenience information.

Wood samples were later sent from the CRAI laboratory facility for analysis. All coffin wood was sent to Dr. Annette G. Ericksen in Milton, West Virginia. Before the wood left the CRAI laboratory, the individual samples were recorded on standardized CRAI laboratory tracking forms (form 31) to keep accurate records of where the materials were at all times. A sample of fabric was examined at CRAI’s Hurricane Office by Dr. Dee DeRoche of the West Virginia Division of Culture and History.

Botanical Materials By Annette G. Ericksen

Wood samples submitted for analysis were wrapped in aluminum foil and stored in sealed plastic bags. Samples varied in their overall condition from very dry and brittle to moist and even wet. Compression of the wood resulting from the collapse of the coffin was a common condition of the wood samples. Many wood fragments remained embedded within the soil matrix. Wood specimens chosen for further examination were removed from the larger field sample in an attempt to select the best-preserved elements and to obtain a representative sample of visually distinct woods and/or portions of the coffin.

Wood specimens were either “excavated” in the lab with dental picks or examined “as is” if no soil adhered to the

37

Methods

specimens. Once recovered, the condition of each specimen determined the process by which the piece was examined. If dry and well preserved, wood specimens were snapped in half and their cross section examined visually. Specimens that were unstable, either as a result of mineralization, fungal infestation, or high moisture content, were embedded in paraffin, and thin sections were cut with a single edge razor blade for microscopic examination. Specimens were mounted on glass slides with distilled water. In some instances, the cross section of the stabilized fragment could be examined with low power microscopy without further preparation. In two cases, the wood fragments were too brittle for visual examination. The specimens were prepared in an extraction of distilled water to recover chemical data.

Osteological Materials Human skeletal materials recovered

from the Reynolds Cemetery were transported from West Virginia to CRAI’s offices in Lexington, Kentucky. The skeletal remains from each burial were placed in individual, hand-made coffins constructed by CRAI personnel. Anytime the skeletal remains traveled from the site to the laboratory, or between West Virginia and Kentucky, they were packed inside individual coffins and transported in a covered vehicle. Attached to the lid of each coffin was a brass plaque engraved with the cemetery name and burial number.

Once at the laboratory, all skeletal remains were deposited in a refrigerated environment to deter further drying prior to cleaning. The recovered skeletal material was extremely friable and cleaning was done using alcohol, cotton swabs, tweezers, and bamboo tools. If it was determined that further cleaning would compromise the bone preservation, the decision was made to analyze the material “as is”, rather than risk destruction.

Two microscopes were used as the need presented itself. Low power microscopy was conducted with a Bausch and Lomb stereo zoom microscope with a magnification range of 7x to 30x. High-powered microscopy was conducted with a Bausch and Lomb monocular compound microscope with the following objectives 35x, 100x, and 430x.

The poor condition of the recovered bone was not surprising and is fairly commonly encountered when analysis of nineteenth century or earlier material from historic cemeteries is conducted (Swauger 1959:38; Lebo 1988:115; Shogren et al. 1989; Joseph et al. 1991; Winchell et al. 1992; Walker 1995:33). Shogren et al. (1989:38) provide a summary of the preservation issue: “Almost every bone recovered from 1MA305 has lost at least its outer cortical layers to erosion, many have lost all but splinters of internal cortical bone to such dissolution”. In this context, erosion referred to complete destruction of bone tissue through simple dissolution into the surrounding acidic environment.

Comparative evaluation of wood morphology was achieved with printed keys and descriptions of wood structure (Core et al. 1979; Hoadley 1990; Panshin and deZeeuw 1970) in conjunction with a comparative wood collection housed at the paleoethnobotanical laboratory. The morphology of the wood cross section served as the basis for the identification of taxa. The arrangement of earlywood and latewood pores, as well as the size and frequency of multiseriate rays, formed the basis of hardwood classification. Softwood identification relied on the texture of tracheids, the presence or absence of resin canals, and the relative frequency of canals once identified. Measurements of specimens and observations were made either with a calibrated eyepiece micrometer in the stereo zoom microscope or with Mitutoyo digital calipers as appropriate.

Following the recommended procedures in Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994), specific data sets were recorded for each individual where preservation allowed. These data included:

38

Methods

skeletal and dental inventories; age-at-death estimations; sex assessments; presence of pathology; and both metric and non-metric observations.

Due to the paucity of recovered skeletal remains, age assessments were generally based on dental development and wear, and sex designations were based solely on personal items recovered from the burials (such as buttons and jewelry). Non-metric dental traits were used to assess racial affinity in some instances.

Prehistoric Materials Because the recovered prehistoric

materials were from a disturbed context (all were recovered from within the grave shafts), no formal analysis of these materials was conducted. The recovered lithic and pottery artifacts were checked in, cleaned, and counted.

39

Cultural Materials Recovered

Chapter 5. Cultural Materials Recovered

Non-osteological materials recovered from site 46Ka349 consisted primarily

of historic artifacts associated directly with the cemetery (N=8193). Other materials recovered included prehistoric lithics (N=39) and pottery (N=4), and an indeterminate amount of modern, non-funerary debris. This chapter focuses solely on materials directly associated with the cemetery; non-funerary materials were not subjected to a detailed analysis. Appendix E provides a complete, provenienced listing of all funerary items recovered during the current investigation.

Cemetery Artifact Analysis

The cultural material recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery was used to determine the chronological placement of individual burials. An interpretation of the socioeconomic status of the burial population was also made through analysis of the material classes. Specific material analyses were conducted by three individuals. Dr. Annette G. Ericksen identified and reported on the macrobotanical samples recovered and Dr. Dee DeRoche analyzed a sample of the recovered fabric. Susan Butcher examined and reported on all other material classes.

The material classes were broken into five categories: grave shaft and coffin construction; coffin hardware; personal artifacts; unusual artifacts; and fabric. These broad categories were further subdivided into groups. Coffin construction was divided into two groups, shape and material, while coffin hardware was divided into utilitarian hardware and mass-produced

hardware. Personal artifacts were divided into buckles, buttons, jewelry, and personal adornment. Unusual artifacts included items that did not fit into any previously specified category. Due to the paucity of identifiable fabric, the description of the analyzed sample was not sub-divided; rather, the material was described in general by burial.

Grave Shaft and Coffin Construction

Grave Shaft Construction The excavation of grave shafts, in

preparation for interments, during the early part of the nineteenth century, was often done in two stages. This approach consisted of the excavation of a lower burial pit within the grave shaft, large enough to accommodate the coffin (Atkinson 1987:47). Blakely and Beck (1982:188) provide a detailed account of this procedure. To begin, vertical grave shaft walls were dug and the floor leveled off. A smaller excavation pit was made in the exact shape of the intended coffin, with depths depending on the height of the coffin (roughly 30 centimeters [11.8 inches] for adults and 20 centimeters [7.9 inches] for children). After the coffin was lowered, it was covered with wood planks, referred to by Blakely and Beck (1982:188) as “grave arches.” These were situated over the coffin and across the dirt ledge to prevent the collapse of the wooden coffin under the weight of the fill dirt. Use of grave arches has also been referred to as “toe pinching” (Ward and Graham 1978:7). This type of grave shaft has been identified at several sites with burials dating to the nineteenth century, such as the Facility Cemetery

40


(Slaughter 2001), Oakland Cemetery (Blakely and Beck 1982), Ravenscraft (Swauger 1959), Cool Branch Cemetery (Matternes 1998), and the Vawter-Swaim Cemetery (Woodall et al. 1983). In addition, grave shafts were not often dug larger or deeper than necessary (Slaughter 2001:28).

The grave shafts for the majority of the burials at the Reynolds Cemetery were excavated in this staged approach. Only one burial (Burial 26) of the 31 excavated did not conform to this pattern. Burial 26 was the most recent burial (1887-1900) and was intrusive on an earlier burial (Burial 31, 1830-1860), thus the surrounding burial matrix had been disturbed previously, and no “ledge” was identified.

Coffin Construction Although the terms “coffin” and

“casket” are often used interchangeably, they denote two different types of burial receptacles. Coffins are generally hexagonal in shape, with the main function being encasement of the dead, while caskets are typically rectangular and are meant primarily for presentation of the dead (Lang 1984:30). Caskets were first introduced in 1849 and are thought to represent the change in attitude toward a concern for the appearance and display of the deceased (Lang 1984:2). According to Rotman et al. (2000:60), a “rectangular shape was less of a reminder of the body inside than the form fitting hexagonal coffin.” For the purposes of this report both hexagonal “coffins” and rectangular “caskets” will be referred to throughout the text as “coffins.”

The use of coffins was nearly universal among Americans by the 1790s (Larkin 1988). During the early part of the nineteenth century, few pre-made coffins were available, particularly in rural areas (Habenstein and Lamers 1981:152; LeeDecker et al. 1995:50). Instead, when an individual died, local cabinetmakers or carpenters were charged with the duty of building the coffin (Habenstein and Lamers

1981:155). According to Larkin (1988:99) when a cabinetmaker or carpenter was not available, a neighbor or family member would construct the coffin.

The construction of homemade coffins prior to 1860 was probably an expedient procedure, due to the fact that embalming generally was not practiced prior to this period (Habenstein and Lamers 1981). Coffins made prior to 1860 were most likely constructed to the dimensions of the deceased, and the types and amounts of materials used were probably limited to local availability and affordability of the materials. Typical hardware consisted of commonly available nails, tacks, and screws. The practicality of simple coffins was probably necessary to the nature of rural groups with limited means.

Local construction of coffins was the dominant trend until the Civil War (Taylor et al. 1986:43). The commercial production of coffins did not begin until the late 1860s, when manufacturers began producing elaborate coffin hardware specifically for mortuary contexts (Rotman et al. 2000:61). Pre-made coffins were typically built in standard sizes and in a more elaborate, although standard, manner. The standard sizes and constructions most likely differed among individual suppliers (Habenstein and Lamers 1981; Bell 1990).

Because coffins dating from the early 1830s (specifically 1832) through 1900 were recovered during the excavation of the Reynolds Cemetery, it is likely that a mix of both homemade and pre-made coffins is represented.

Shape Hexagonal was the predominant coffin

shape until the late 1850s (Rotman et al. 2000:60). Hexagonal coffins most often lack exterior decoration and formal hardware, such as that seen in the Facility Cemetery (Slaughter 2001:27). Several coffins at the Facility Cemetery were preserved well enough to observe how they were constructed. The hexagonal coffins

41


Wood specimens were collected from 15 burials within the cemetery. Of these, 13 provided suitable preservation to identify the wood taxon/taxa. The preservation was not suitable to document clearly the associated coffin part, except in a general manner. The results do offer some insights into the possible origin of the wood fragments.

contained at least six sections, which included “the bottom, two sideboards, the head and foot boards, and the lid” (Slaughter 2001:27). Although use was not common during the early twentieth century, hexagonal coffins did not become obsolete until 1927 (Lang 1984:46).

Although rectangular coffins were in use since at least 1830, they were not commonly used until after 1858 (Rotman et al. 2000:60). Rectangular coffins produced after 1858 often were pre-made and were stylistically more elaborate than the earlier hexagonal forms. The elaboration seen in rectangular coffins is generally synchronic with the “beautification of death” movement of the Victorian Period (see Chapter 1, Introduction, Research Design of this report for a discussion of the “beautification of death” movement).

Wood specimens appear to have been preserved in most cases as a result of mineralization from nails, tacks, and other hardware devices. The presence of paint and/or lacquer helped to preserve relatively large wood fragments. Given these conditions, it is likely that the assemblage is biased towards those portions of the coffin that were nailed, decorated with metal escutcheons and fabric, and/or painted.

A summary of results is presented in Table 5.1. Yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) is the most common wood taxon identified and is documented in nine of the burial contexts. Pine, and more specifically in some cases, Eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) is documented in five of the burial contexts. Black walnut (Juglans nigra) is documented from Burial 9 and white group oak (Quercus sp.) is documented in burial 27. Three burials indicated that both hardwoods and softwoods were used in the construction of the coffin (Burial 3, Burial 23, and Burial 26). Hardwoods were consistently associated with metal objects and exterior finishes that had enhanced their preservation. Pine is not associated with metal fasteners or painted surfaces and, as a result, may be underrepresented in the assemblage. A single exception is the indication of a fabric covered pine handle from Burial 10.

The majority of coffins located at the Reynolds Cemetery were hexagonal in shape (N=18). All of these were constructed with hardware that would have been commonly available, such as cut nails, hinges, tacks, and screws. The 13 remaining coffins were rectangular in shape and most held, to some degree, both common hardware (such as nails and tacks) and elaborate, mass-produced hardware (white metal screws, viewing glass plates, and ornate handles).

Raw Material By Dr. Annette G. Ericksen

Results

The types of wood used for building coffins depended greatly on local availability (LeeDecker 1995:59). Types of wood identified for coffins from various historic cemetery sites include pine and yellow poplar (Elia and Wesolowsky 1991:35), white oak and chestnut (Burnston 1997:97), and elm (LeeDecker et al. 1995:59). The results of the ethnobotanical analysis for the Reynolds Cemetery are presented below.

Burial 26 offered the best preservation of coffin wood within the collection of samples. Several fragments of yellow poplar boards, with an exterior finish presumed to be a white paint, were documented. These boards had an unpainted end surface in which nails had been placed, suggesting an area of overlap with other materials. The surfaces of several

42


In addition to the coffin wood assemblage described above, two burial contexts contained carbonized wood fragments that are assumed to be intrusive to the burial, perhaps as a result of the filling of the grave shaft. Burial 10 is associated with two fragments of carbonized hard maple (Acer sp.) fragments that appear to be natural in overall shape and are otherwise culturally unmodified. Burial 12 exhibits two fragments of carbonized maple wood. One specimen appears to have been fashioned into a disc with an estimated diameter of 10.5 millimeters (0.4 inches) and a thickness of 1.28 millimeters (0.05 inches). The fragment forms approximately one quarter of the finished object. Its origin and status as a cultural item are not determined.

boards were mineral stained with outlines of coffin hardware. The combination of painting, hardware, and nailed surfaces suggest that poplar was used as the coffin lid in this instance. Substantial amounts of unpainted eastern white pine materials suggest that this less expensive and softer wood was used for portions of the coffin that were not readily visible. A painted poplar board was also fashioned over the viewing plate.

All of the woods documented are available locally within the greater Kanawha Valley. Yellow poplar is a pioneering species of disturbed habitats and relatively pure stands are attained naturally in young forests that had been cleared for timber (Harlow et al. 1979; Mikan and Abrams 1993). Its presence as the dominant wood taxon documented is expected, given the state of the logging industry in West Virginia during the mid- to late-nineteenth century. Poplar is the wood of choice for cabinetmakers and its use in coffin making is not unexpected. Panshin and deZeeuw (1970) also note the use of yellow poplar for coffins and caskets. Eastern white pine is the most valuable species of the logging industry. It is the largest of the northeastern conifers and produces large segments of high-grade lumber (Harlow et al. 1979). Panshin and deZeeuw (1970) note that Eastern white pine is light and manipulated easily. The boards can be nailed and/or have screws applied without splitting. They also list the wood as used in the construction of caskets. White oak group woods are suitable for coffins and caskets due to their impermeability to liquids and strength (Panshin and de Zeeuw 1970). Black walnut is a furniture grade wood that is very durable and often a choice for caskets and coffins because of its pleasing appearance and workability (Panshin and deZeeuw 1970). The use of black walnut in the coffin associated with Burial 9 may indicate the choice of a more visually pleasing, and thus more expensive product. Pigment chips suggest also that at least a portion of the wood was covered with paint.

Summary

Wood specimens from 15 burials documented within the Reynolds Cemetery have been examined for speciation. Four individual taxa have been identified and are listed in frequency of occurrence: yellow poplar; Eastern white pine; white oak group; and black walnut. Because the hardwoods are mineralized and/or have painted or lacquered surfaces, these materials may be disproportionately represented. Several instances indicate that the caskets were constructed of a combination of hard and soft woods. Presumably, the hardwoods were chosen to provide a pleasing appearance as well as a durable medium to hold fasteners, hardware, and nails. Several of the yellow poplar specimens are preserved as linear segments in which decorative tacks and fabric has been applied. All of the woods noted are suitable for coffin making as a factor of their workability, durability, and accessibility within the local economy. The single instance of black walnut may indicate that some social stratification may be present within the burial assemblage.

43


Table 5.1. Summary of Results of Wood Taxa Identification. Unit Burial Provenience Method Taxon Comments3 2 Level II Ma Poplar Wood mineralized, associated with + 26 decorative and non-decorative

tacks, nails, fabric (brocade?), fabric extends over 3 finished corners, one of which may be mitered.

2 2 Zone E (foot) Ma, Mi, Em

Poplar Wood mineralized, associated with decorative tacks, nails, fabric (brocade?).

1 3 Level IZone A

Ma Unidentifiable Sample consists of a dry organic stain.

1 3 Level III Zone A

Ma, Mi, Em

Unidentifiable hardwood

Sample dry and brittle.

1 3 Zone B Mi, Ex Pine (?) Extraction produced a resinous, highly volatile substance (terpenes?), wood mineralized, associated with fragment of wool felt.

19 4 Level II Ma Poplar Wood compressed, fungi present. 2 5 Ma Poplar Wood dry, fungi present. 3 5 Level II Ma Poplar Wood mineralized, associated with 26 decorative tacks placed at

approximately 1.5 cm intervals, fabric (brocade?), fabric covered over mitered end.

4 7 Ma Unidentifiable Pigment chips, red-black-white layered in cross-section, appx. .25 mm in thickness.

4 7 Zone A Ma, Mi, Em

Poplar Wood damp, associated with slotted, bugle head screws, slight mineralization, screws “countersunk” resulting in minor compression, evidence of thin 0.25mm paint layer.

4 7 Level II Ma Poplar Lacquer (?) and white pigment. 6 9 Level III

Zone A Ma Unidentifiable Fragment of ivory or enamel, pigment chips.

6 9 Level IIIZone A

Ma Black walnut Wood mineralized, associated with screws (heads absent), painted finish (white).

9 10 Level II Ma,Em, Ex

Unidentifiable Extraction failed to produce resin, wood highly compressed, red-black-white pigment.

44


9 10 Level II Ma Poplar Wood wet, associated with multiple screws, layered pigment, black-red-black –white-brown.

9 10 Level III Zones A,B,C

Ma No coffin wood documented

Pigment chips, lacquer (?)-red-white, small conchoidal glass fragment, sample recovered over viewing plate, two fragments of carbonized wood – maple, intrusive.

9 10 Level III Ma, Em Poplar, Pine (soft)

Pigment on poplar, red-black-white, associated with bent nail and mineralization. Pine is rounded wood specimen, 17 mm in diameter, tapered end, fabric covered, handle fragment (?).

13 12 Level IIIZones B, C

Ma No coffin wood documented

Sample contains two fragments of carbonized maple, one specimen is disc shaped, cut across the grain, approximate diameter of 10.5 mm, thickness 1.28 mm.

20 20 Level IIIZones A,C

Ma Poplar Relatively large, flat pieces.

22 22 Level III Ma Pine (soft) Wood specimen wet, obvious resin canals. 23 23 Level III Ma Poplar,

Pine (soft) Poplar wood mineralized, associated with decorative tacks (+72) and nails, fabric (brocade?) placed over 90 degree corner and face of wood fragment. Pine not clearly associated with tacks or nails.

26 26 Level II Ma Poplar Located above viewing plate, white paint. 26 26 Level III

Zones A-E Ma Poplar,

Pine (soft) Multiple samples. Poplar typically painted with mineralization as a result of applied hardware, consist of cut wood boards 50 to 100 mm wide, 13 to 16 mm thick, painted white, associated with nails and small unusual decorative tack. Pine not painted and not preserved in board form.

27 27 Level III Ma Oak (white group)

Wood dry.

28 28 Level III Ma Poplar Wood dry. 26 31 Level III

Zone A Ma Unidentifiable Wood dry and brittle.

Key: Ma- Macroscopy, Mi – Microscopy, Em – Embedded in paraffin, Ex- Extraction.

45


Mortuary and Cultural Material

By Susan R. Butcher

Coffin Hardware Utilitarian Hardware

Utilitarian coffin hardware recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery consisted of plain nails, screws, lining tacks, and hinges (Figure 5.1). Materials such as these were common and easily accessible. A total of 20 burials contained only utilitarian hardware (Burial 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 29, 30, and 31). Recovered utilitarian hardware types are described below.

Nails Cut Nails

The majority of nails associated with burials from the Reynolds Cemetery were of

the machine cut variety. Cut nails were introduced in 1790 and originally had a machine cut body with a handmade head. It was not until technological advances around 1815 that completely machine made cut nails began to replace earlier hand-wrought nails in the construction industry (Nelson 1968).

Cut nails are made from steel or iron plates that are sheared off the end at an angle. They are easily recognizable by the fact that they are tapered on two sides, forming a blunt point. Cut nails manufactured in the early nineteenth century may possess a tapered, sharp point. Cut nails remained the preferred construction nail until wiredrawn nails were introduced around the turn of the twentieth century (Nelson 1968:8).

Every burial at the Reynolds Cemetery contained cut nails. Based on its period of popular use, a general date of 1830 to 1880 is assigned to this artifact type.

Figure 5.1: Utilitarian coffin hardware, including tacks, cut nails, and hinges.

46


Lining Tacks Wire Nails The manufacturing technique for tacks

was similar to that of screws. Most of the coffin tacks recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery are of the utilitarian, unslotted design and were made of iron. These were likely used to attach a cloth lining to the inside of the coffin. This style of tack was popular across the cemetery and was found in all but two burials (Burial 11 and Burial 25).

The first wiredrawn nails were introduced into the United States from Europe by the mid-nineteenth century. Early wire nails were used primarily for box construction and were not well adapted for the building industry until the 1870s. Wire nails were made in the United States with imported French machines as early as 1875, and full-scale production of wire nails began in 1880.

Hinges The manufacture of wire nails begins with feeding the end of a roll of wire into clamps that grasp the length of the shaft with a short length projecting past the clamp. The wire is held in place by teeth in the clamp that make a series of lateral scores along the upper shaft immediately below the head. The wire projecting from the clamp is mechanically upset to form the head. While still in the clamp, cutter dies squeeze the point on to the shaft, while separating it from the wire roll. The clamp then opens and drops the finished nail (Clark 1978:192-193). This process gives wire nails their characteristic lateral incisions under the head.

Folding, sliding, and hinged coffin lids commonly date from 1865-1930 (Lang 1984:64) and butterfly and dowel hinges were often used in coffin construction during the nineteenth century. The purpose of hinges on a coffin is to allow the lid to be opened and closed, or to allow viewing of one specific region within the coffin. Plain hinges were found only in Burial 22. Four butterfly hinges were recovered, all composed of copper alloy, with nails and cloth fragments adhering to them. The position of hinges within the coffin suggests that the coffin opened to allow viewing of the upper region (head, neck, and upper torso) of the body. The fact that Burial 22 contained a hinged lid is somewhat anomalous, due to the fact that hinged lids generally date to 1865 and later; the proposed date of interment for this burial is 1843 (see Chapter 6, Osteological Analysis and Burial Summaries of this report for further discussion of Burial 22).

Wire nails were recovered from a single burial (Burial 26) at the Reynolds Cemetery. The coffin in this burial was constructed with a total of twelve wire nails, although cut nails (N=43) were also present.

Screws Screws were used to secure the lid of the

coffin to the coffin box. The manufacture of screws involved soldering or otherwise attaching the top slotted portion onto an iron alloy screw body (Bell 1991:271). Utilitarian screws found at the Reynolds Cemetery were composed metal caps attached to iron screw bodies. In several instances, only the iron body remained. Because of its long duration of use, beginning and ending dates of manufacture for plain screws could not be assigned. Utilitarian screws were recovered from four interments (Burials 3, 7, 26, and 30).

Mass-Produced Hardware Unlike utilitarian hardware, which was

available locally and easy to access, mass-produced hardware had to be special ordered. These items were typically ornamental and elaborately crafted, with their date of manufacture beginning in the middle of the nineteenth century. Decorative hardware types recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery included: ornamental screws; slotted tacks; hinges; escutcheons; thumbscrews; handles; and viewing glass windows. A total of 11 burials contained mass-produced coffin hardware

47


(Burials 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 20, 21, 24, 26, and 28). These materials are described below.

Screws As mentioned previously, screws were

used to secure the lid of the coffin to the coffin box. Unlike utilitarian screws, mass-produced screws offered a decorative appearance to the coffin. Decorative screws, and other mass-produced hardware, were often made of white metal, also known as paktong or German silver (Rotman et al. 2000:63).

Mass-produced screws made of white metal were recovered from four interments (Burials 5, 14, 20, and 21) (Figure 5.2). These materials were decorated with filigree, ornamental openwork of delicate or intricate design bands. An age range of 1850 to 1900 is attributed to these types of screws (Bell 1991:271; Hacker-Norton and Trinkley 1984:49-50).

Slotted Tacks Slotted tacks were manufactured much

like screws and lining tacks. These items were functional, but added a decorative style to the coffin lid. Slotted tacks recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery were made of both iron and copper alloy, and were recovered from Burials 9, 19, 20, 21, 24, and 28.

Hinges As described previously, hinges were

used on a coffin to allow the lid to be opened or closed, or to allow for viewing of a specific region within the coffin. Mass-produced hinges often had surface decorations, ornate shapes, or both. Burial 9 produced three decorative dowel hinges. These were recovered from the chest region, and likely allowed for viewing of the upper region of the body.

Figure 5.2: Mass-produced hardware, including screws, thumbscrews, and screws with escutcheons,

48


Escutcheons Escutcheons are decorative ornamental

plates stamped from thin metal sheets. These hardware items were used at regular intervals around the lid of the coffin, and in conjunction with decorative screws or thumbscrews (see below) to secure the lid of the coffin and offer a decorative style. Escutcheons were used from 1865 to the early twentieth century (Shogren et al. 1989:162).

Escutcheons were recovered from six burials at the Reynolds Cemetery (Burials 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, and 26) (Figure 5.2). All of these items were composed of white metal. Thumbscrews were found in association with the escutcheons. Thomas et al. (2000:5.23) cite that escutcheons and thumbscrews were often sold together as matched sets.

Thumbscrews With the “beautification of death”

movement of the mid-nineteenth century (see Chapter 1, Research Design of this

report) came a shift from the use of plain screws as coffin lid fasteners, to the more ornate thumbscrews. White metal thumbscrews, used in conjunction with escutcheons, were found in Burials 7, 8, 9, 10, and 26 (Figure 5.2). A usage period of 1875 or 1880 to the mid- twentieth century is suggested for ornate thumbscrews (Shogren et al. 1989:162).

Handles Carrying handles were placed along the

long sides of the coffin. Adult burials typically had six handles (three on each side), while children’s coffins normally contained only four (two handles on each side) (McKillop 1995).

Two handle types were identified from the Reynolds Cemetery: swing bail handles and short bar handles (Figure 5.3). Swing bail handles are composed of two lugs connected by a bail swing arm. These date from 1860 to 1900 (Trinkley and Hacker-Norton 1984:7, 11-12). Swing bail handles were identified in Burials 9, 10, and 26.

Figure 5.3: Mass-produced swing bail and short bar handles.

49


Short bar handles are made with lugs that have swing arms connected by a bar made of either wood or metal (the bar would sometimes be covered in cloth). Short bar handles were identified in Burials 7 and 10. One short bar handle recovered from Burial 10 was made of wood and had been covered in cloth.

Viewing Glass Windows Although use of viewing glass windows

date as early as 1848 (Habenstein and Lamers 1955:263, cited in Rose et al. 1985:68), they were not introduced widely until around 1860 (Blakely and Beck 1982:188), and had fallen out of use by 1910 (Lang 1984:50). Viewing glass windows allowed for the deceased to be observed in a natural setting before modern embalming techniques were developed. Use may also have been inspired by concerns about disease, fear of apparent death, or the increasing importance placed on display of the dead (Bell 1990:58).

Rectangular viewing windows could have been made from windowpane stock, but oval or trapezoidal shapes may have been more specialized forms (Bell 1990:58). Coffins containing viewing windows were likely more expensive than others during the latter half of the nineteenth century (Blakely and Beck 1982:188).

One intact oval viewing glass window was found in Burial 26 (Figure 5.4). Burials 7 and 10 each contained oval viewing glass windows, but these examples were broken (the shape of the windows was identified during excavation).

Personal Artifacts Personal artifacts include any cultural

item buried specifically with the deceased. These materials could include clothing, toys, or items used in everyday life. Personal items recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery consisted mainly of buttons, although other materials were also recovered, such as buckles, jewelry, and items of personal adornment.

Buckles Buckles generally served as fasteners on

belts and suspenders, although they were also used on chinstraps of uniform caps. A total of three buckles were recovered from two burials at the Reynolds Cemetery. Burial 3 had two buckles; the placement of which suggested the individual was wearing suspenders and a belt. The single buckle recovered from Burial 30 was probably from a belt.

Figure 5.4: Oval viewing glass window.

Buttons Buttons were identified in 12 of the 31

burials at the Reynolds Cemetery (Burials 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 20, 26, 29, and 30) (Figure 5.5). Various colors and styles were represented, including glass, metal, shell, fabric-covered, and ceramic. Each type of button is described in detail below.

Glass Buttons The manufacture of glass buttons began

in the fifteenth century, but did not gain popularity until 1840 (Ford 1943:100).

50


Figure 5.5: Sample of buttons, including: black glass; white porcelain; painted porcelain; and red glass with star design.

There are two distinct groups of glass buttons: clear/colored glass and black glass. The manufacture and decoration of glass buttons includes most techniques available to the glass industry (Epstein 1990:48), and glass color is achieved by adding various minerals to reach a desired hue. Glass button colors observed in the Reynolds Cemetery include red and black.

During the mid-nineteenth century, American glassmakers began to produce black glass buttons, which had previously been manufactured in Bohemia. Black glass buttons were produced in the United States originally to answer the demand for real jet buttons, and between 1840 and 1965, black glass buttons were produced in the millions (Osborne 1993:66). Black glass buttons are found in a variety of shapes and sizes, often with either stylized flowers or geometric designs as patterns (Albert and Kent 1949:53). Black glass buttons were recovered from two burials (Burials 5 and

20). A single black glass four-hole, sew-through button was recovered from the lower torso region of Burial 5, suggesting the button was from either a shirt or undergarment.

Burial 20 had two buttons, both of which were of the two-hole sew-through variety. Each had a stylized flower pattern around the boarder. The proximity of these buttons to shoe heels recovered from this burial suggest they had been associated with either shoes or boots. Shoe buttons were sewed on leather- and fabric-top shoes for fastenings (Luscomb 1967:180). Black and white buttons were typically used for shoes because they matched the color of most shoes produced during the nineteenth century. Luscomb (1967:180) warns, however, that it is difficult to differentiate shoe buttons from small dress buttons, unless they are attached specifically to the shoes.

51


A total of 10 red glass buttons were recovered from Burial 30. These buttons were very small (5 millimeters in diameter), domed, and had a 7-pointed white star design painted in the center. These buttons had likely been set in metal shanks, as evidenced by their placement during excavation. Although glass buttons set in metal are not generally classified as glass buttons (instead they are metal buttons decorated with glass) (Hughes and Lester 1981:95), because none of the buttons adhered to the shanks, they were classified separately (the metal shanks are included in the Metal Buttons section below). The red glass buttons in Burial 30 were likely associated with a shirt.

Metal buttons Brass, an alloy, and copper, a native

metal, have been used in the manufacture of buttons since the sixteenth century (Albert and Kent 1949:8). Because brass and copper are ductile and durable, changes in industrialization and technology continued to improve the manufacturing process. Brass buttons were manufactured in the United States from the early eighteenth century and, by 1807, Waterbury buttons of stamped brass were in production. Because the metal buttons recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery were not well preserved, no identification of morphological characteristics could be made. Several authors suggest dates for various types of metal buttons manufactured during the nineteenth century, including: 1812-1820 (Olsen 1963:552); 1800 to the present (Orser 1981:83); 1847-ca. 1900 (Brown n.d.: 126-127); 1837-1865 (South 1964:115, 124); and 1890-1920 (Luscomb 1967:191).

Metal buttons were recovered from Burials 3, 5, 8, 17, 26, 29, and 30. These buttons could have been associated with outer garments (coats or vests), shirts, or trousers. The placement of most of these buttons in the burials suggests they were used primarily on outer garments or shirts.

Shanks are small pieces of material (often metal) that are used to attach a button

to a garment. Several metal shanks were identified in Burial 30. As mentioned previously, the shanks were found in association with small red glass buttons. Although shanks are often used to date a button, no date of manufacture could be assigned to these items.

Shell Buttons Shell buttons are cut from the iridescent

lining of the shells of sea creatures, usually bivalved mollusks (Albert and Kent 1949:58). Button makers in the United States retrieved freshwater mollusks from streambeds at an early date, but the timing is not known precisely. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the best shell buttons were manufactured by hand.

By 1850, machines with tubular saws and other mass-production devices replaced the hand manufacture of shell buttons (Albert and Kent 1949:59). During the button making process, shells were softened in an acid bath, and then pressed against revolving tubular saws. Button blanks were automatically cut from the thick shells. Metal shanks were then fastened to the shell button in a method now known as the expansion shield. A hole with a narrow aperture was drilled halfway through the disk. The stem of the shank was hollowed at its lower end and a slight tap of a hammer spread the metal of the shank to fill the wide space under the entrance hole (Albert and Kent 1949:59).

Only one burial at the Reynolds Cemetery (Burial 26) produced shell buttons (N=2). South (1964:122) dates shell buttons to between 1800 and 1865, while Parmalee (1967:1) suggests that mass production of shell buttons began between 1887 and 1890.

Fabric Covered Buttons Factory manufactured buttons were first

produced in the United States during the nineteenth century (Albert and Kent 1949:46). By 1850, the inexpensive cloth covered button had replaced the metal button in general popularity. After 1860, fabric covered buttons manufactured of the same material as the garment onto which

52


they were placed became the fashion. Manufacturing buttons of this type involved embossing the pattern on the surface of a mold and treating the fabric cover with glue. Together, the mold and fabric were pressed through a die containing an intaglio designed to coincide with the embossed pattern. Fabric covered buttons produced during the Victorian era were often decorated with glass centers (Albert and Kent 1949:48). Fabric covered metal buttons were recovered from five burials at the Reynolds Cemetery (Burials 5, 8, 10, 17, and 20). The location of these buttons within these burials suggests they may have been associated with outer garments, shirts, trousers, or dresses.

Ceramic buttons Ceramic buttons include any buttons

that are manufactured out of fired clay (Albert and Kent 1949:32). The ceramic button manufacturing process, referred to as the Prosser process (in honor of Richard Prosser, who patented it) received a patent in 1849. This process combined high-fired clays to produce a glass or vitrified appearance. The most common colors for porcelain buttons were black, white, and a color similar to opaque pressed glass. Prosser buttons can be identified from glass buttons by the dimpled-like surface on the back. Porcelain buttons date from 1840 to 1920 (Luscomb 1967:31, 156).

White porcelain buttons were recovered from nine burials at the Reynolds Cemetery (Burials 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 21, 29, and 30). The placement of these buttons within the burials suggests they were used for shirts and undergarments.

Jewelry Few jewelry items were recovered from

the Reynolds Cemetery and only three burials produced jewelry items (Burials 9, 16, and 20). Burial 9 contained what appeared to be a copper alloy, gold-plated brooch (it was highly corroded). This item was found in the neck region of the burial.

A small brown and white agate stone finger ring was recovered from the left side of the chest region of Burial 16 (Figure 5.6). The ring was cut intricately in a diamond pattern along the outer edges.

Figure 5.6: Child’s finger ring made of stone, tentatively identified as agate.

Burial 20 contained three distinct jewelry items: a glass bead necklace; earrings; and a brooch. The glass bead necklace was found in the neck region and consisted of 38 beads in multiple sizes (Figure 5.7). Larger beads were located toward the center of the neck, and progressively smaller beads were positioned to the left and right. No chain or other item used to link the beads was recovered; the linking material was probably fibrous and did not preserve. Earrings were recovered from the left and right sides of the fragmentary remains of the cranium. The earrings were probably copper alloy, but were poorly preserved, making identification impossible. The brooch was located just below the majority of the beads from the necklace. The condition of this item was similar to the brooch recovered from Burial 9.

Personal Adornment Personal adornment items consisted of

hair combs and hairpins. Combs and pins were used to secure the hair on the crown of the head, often in a style referred to as a chignon.

53


Figure 5.7: Glass bead necklace.

Hair combs were recovered from three burials (Burials 2, 9, and 17). During the early part of the nineteenth century, tortoiseshell was a popular material used to manufacture combs. Tortoiseshell combs were replaced by a vulcanized rubber variety after circa 1850. Tortoiseshell hair combs were recovered from Burial 2 (N=1) and Burial 17 (N=2) (Figure 5.8). A single vulcanized rubber hair comb was recovered from Burial 9 (Figure 5.9).

Only two hairpins were recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery. One vulcanized rubber pin was collected from Burial 9, while a fragmented metal pin was recovered from Burial 15.

Shoes The remnants of shoes were recovered

from three burials at the Reynolds Cemetery (Burials 5, 9, and 20) (Figure 5.10). Methods used in the construction of shoes provide the best information for dating. A

summary of chronological information for shoe construction is provided below. The information is taken from: IMACS (1984) and Anderson (1968).

Prior to 1812, wooden pegs were used to join the sole and uppers of shoes. These wooden pegs were later replaced by square cut iron or brass nails, which were subsequently (1829) replaced by metal fasteners that were made primarily of wire. In 1860, Lyman R. Blake of Massachusetts patented a sewing machine that sewed the sole to the upper of the shoe. Blake’s 1860 machine did not stitch the heel or toe. Improvements to Blake’s machine in 1862 allowed seams to be made completely around the shoe. After 1895, shoes were generally made with an all rubber heel.

The shoe fragments recovered from Burial 5 exhibited a sole sewn to the upper and a heel nailed to the shoe with square iron pegs. These construction methods date

54


Figure 5.8: Tortoiseshell hair combs.

Figure 5.9: Vulcanized rubber hair comb.

55


Figure 5.10: Shoe soles and heels.

this shoe between 1829 and 1862. Only the shoe soles were preserved in Burial 9. These shoes had been constructed with the soles sewn to the uppers, thus they date after 1860. Only the remnants of heels were recovered from Burial 20. Nail holes were identified in the heel, but the heels were very fragile, and further analysis was not attempted. No date could be assigned to the shoes recovered from Burial 20.

Unusual Artifacts The only artifact recovered from the

Reynolds Cemetery assigned to the Unusual Artifact category was a complete set up upper dentures (Figure 5.11). The teeth and gums were composed of porcelain, and the palate of an orange unidentified substance that might be rubber. In 1851, John Allen of Cincinnati patented “continuous-gum teeth,” a prosthesis consisting of two or three porcelain teeth fused to a small block of

porcelain colored like the gingivae. These blocks could be attached to a denture base as needed (Ring 1985:204). This artifact was recovered from Burial 7.

Fabric Little fabric recovered from the

Reynolds Cemetery was preserved well enough for analysis. Dr. Dee DeRoche performed a preliminary assessment of some of the fiber-containing samples. The results are presented below.

Burial 2 A combination of wood, tacks, and

fabric that likely was coffin lining was recovered from Burial 2. This fabric was a balanced plain weave of 20 threads per centimeter in each system.

56


Figure 5.11: Full upper denture.

Burial 3 The small quantity of fabric recovered

from Zone A of Burial 3 was identified as a plain weave, possibly a portion of a ribbon. Fragments of a fibrous material were tentatively identified as leather.

Burial 5 A piece of black folded fabric with a

width of at least 50 millimeters (2 inches) was recovered from Burial 5. This sample is composed of two systems of plant fiber: one has 20 relatively thick, two-ply threads per centimeter; the other has between 60 and 80 very fine threads per centimeter. This material appears to be a plain weave repp fabric.

Burial 7 Burial 7 produced large quantities of

fabric similar to that recovered from Burial 2. It may have been coffin lining, a shroud, or a winding sheet.

Burial 9 A plain weave fabric of dark purplish

appearance, with thread counts of 20 per centimeter in one system and 40 per

centimeter in the other, was recovered from burial.

Burial 10 Several pieces of fabric were recovered

from Burial 10. Zone A produced a fragment with very fine, two-ply threads interlaced in a braided pattern or circular knitting system. From Zone B, multiple layers of fabric, some with balanced plain weave and some repp, were recovered. In addition, fibrous material that was probably part of a leather belt was recovered.

Zone C produced the left lapel of a coat or jacket with the underlying material. This material was coated thickly in mud, and the fibers and weave structure were mostly obscured. Where visible, the fabrics appeared to have two systems of threads. Both construction stitches and topstitching were visible on the jacket and the folded lapel. A rusting metal button was possibly fabric covered.

Zone D produced several layers of material that may have been pleated or folded. This material was of balanced plain weave, with 7 or 8 threads per centimeter.

57


Zone E produced a fragment of fabric that had a twill-woven selvedge on what appeared to be plain weave cloth with 20 threads per centimeter in the warp and 14 threads per centimeter in the weft. Several other recovered pieces were plain weave, while others appeared to be missing all or part of the system of threads, resembling a gauze weave or a fabric composed of different fiber types in warp and weft (such as linsey woolsey).

Conclusion A variety of coffin hardware and

personal artifacts was recovered from the funerary population at the Reynolds Cemetery. The overall assemblage is not remarkable, as most of the items recovered are typical for the period of use within this region of the United States. The most useful method of dating the interments came from the analysis of coffin hardware, with several types having identified dates of manufacture. Clothing artifacts provided insights for what type of garments individuals were interred in, and often offered insights into the sex of the deceased. In addition to expressing trends in fashion styles, jewelry and personal adornment aided in the sexing of an individual.

Recovery of items such as dentures provided information on hygienic practices.

Excluding gravestones, a total of 8,193 artifacts were recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery (Table 5.2). This total does not include fabric or coffin wood. Information for the occurrence of these remains is provided in Tables 5.3 and 5.4. Of the 8193 artifacts reported in Table 5.2, 8059 (98.4 percent) were identified as hardware, with 134 (1.6 percent) being personal items. Within the hardware category the most abundant and ubiquitous type of artifact was cut nails, comprising 48.6 percent (N=3920) of all hardware recovered. Lining tacks and unidentified metal were also well represented (Table 5.2). The most abundant and ubiquitous artifact category in the personal group was buttons, with the 102 recovered specimens accounting for 76.1 percent of group (Table 5.2). Specific provenience and contextual data for the assemblage is presented by individual interments in Appendix E.

The following chapter, Chapter 6, Osteological Analysis and Burial Summaries, provides descriptions of the mortuary and cultural characteristics of the Reynolds Cemetery. These descriptions are based largely on the recovered cultural material described above.

Table 5.2. Inventory of material recovered from Reynolds Cemetery.

Hardware Count Percent of Hardware Percent of Total Cut Nails 3,920 49.0 48 Wire Nails 88 1.0 1.0 Lining Tacks 2,703 34.0 33.0 Plain Screws 33 0.5 0.5 Decorative Tacks 105 1.0 1.0 Hinges 12 <0.1 <0.1 Handles 31 <0.1 <0.1 Lugs 9 <0.1 <0.1 Escutcheons 15 <0.1 <0.1 Thumbscrews 43 0.5 0.5 Viewing Glass 3 <0.1 <0.1 Kick Plates 4 <0.1 <0.1 Unidentified Metal 1,093 13.5 13.5

Total 8,059

58


Personal Count Percent of Personal Percent of Total Buttons 102 75.5 1.0 Buckles 3 2.0 <0.1 Hair Combs 4 3.0 <0.1 Hair Pins 2 1.5 <0.1 Earrings 2 1.5 <0.1 Brooches 2 1.5 <0.1 Necklaces 1 1.0 <0.1 Finger Ring 1 1.0 <0.1 Denture 1 1.0 <0.1 Safety Pins 8 6.0 <0.1 Snap Fastener 1 1.0 <0.1 Eyelet 1 1.0 <0.1 Shoes 6 4.0 <0.1 Total 134 100 Grand Total 8,193

Table 5.3. Occurrence of fabric at Reynolds Cemetery. Burial Unit Fabric Present/Absent

1 5 Absent 2 3 Present (analyzed) 3 1 Present (analyzed) 4 19 Absent 5 2 Present (analyzed) 6 8 Absent 7 4 Present (analyzed) 8 7 Absent 9 6 Present (analyzed)

10 9 Present (analyzed) 11 14 Absent 12 13 Absent 13 12 Absent 14 10 Absent 15 15 Absent 16 16 Absent 17 11 Absent 18 17 Absent 19 18 Absent 20 20 Present (not analyzed) 21 21 Absent 22 22 Present (not analyzed) 23 23 Present (not analyzed) 24 24 Absent 25 25 Absent 26 26 Absent 27 27 Absent 28 28 Absent 29 29 Absent 30 30 Absent 31 26 Absent

59


Table 5.4. Occurrence and identification of coffin wood at Reynolds Cemetery. Burial Unit Wood

Present/AbsentType Paint/Pigment

1 5 Present Unidentified Unidentified 2 3 Present Poplar Unidentified 3 1 Present Unidentified Unidentified 4 19 Present Poplar Unidentified 5 2 Present Poplar Unidentified 6 8 Present Unidentified Unidentified 7 4 Present Poplar Red, Black, White 8 7 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 9 6 Present Black Walnut Ivory 10 9 Present Poplar and Soft Pine Black, Red, White, Brown 11 14 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 12 13 Present Unidentified Unidentified 13 12 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 14 10 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 15 15 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 16 16 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 17 11 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 18 17 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 19 18 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 20 20 Present Poplar Unidentified 21 21 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 22 22 Present Soft Pine Unidentified 23 23 Present Poplar and Soft Pine Unidentified 24 24 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 25 25 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 26 26 Present Poplar and Soft Pine White 27 27 Present Oak Unidentified 28 28 Present Poplar Unidentified 29 29 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 30 30 Absent Unidentified Unidentified 31 26 Present Unidentified Unidentified

60

Osteological Analysis and Burial Summaries

Chapter 6. Osteological Analysis and Burial Summaries

H uman remains were recovered from 19 of the 31 burials located at the Reynolds

Cemetery (Figure 6.1). This skeletal sample, if perfectly preserved, would offer a rare opportunity to examine the health of a population whose socioeconomic status ranged widely from generation to generation. However, the nature of the soils in which the deceased were interred promoted the dissolution of tissues. All skeletal elements had undergone considerable physical and chemical decomposition, resulting in the collapse and deterioration of most skeletal aspects. Because of this, the amount of information available from the skeletal remains was limited severely, and recovered skeletal material was usually so fragmentary that no gross paleopathological analysis was attempted.

Information from recovered dental elements, however, was vastly more substantial. Being that tooth enamel is the hardest naturally occurring material in the human body (Steele and Bramblett 1988:72), tooth crowns were often the only non-degraded human remains recovered from the burials. The recovered dental remains provided insights into the overall health of those interred at the cemetery. In almost all instances, tooth crowns were the only recovered dental elements; teeth with roots still present were found in only a few burials. Roots that were recovered were typically fragmentary and very fragile.

The following chapter provides an overall summary of each burial, including osteological, mortuary, and cultural characteristics. Osteological characteristics summarize the analysis of the recovered skeletal and dental remains. It includes an inventory of the recovered remains, and assessments of skeletal preservation, age, sex, stature, racial affinity, and pathology.

Mortuary characteristics include descriptions of grave orientation, grave shaft size, coffin shape and size, and the material used in coffin construction (wood and hardware types). Cultural characteristics provide descriptions of the materials buried with the deceased, such as clothing and personal items. A summary, including the proposed burial date based primarily upon the mortuary and cultural characteristics, is included at the end of each burial description.

General Osteological Methods

The goals of this analysis were to characterize the individuals in regard to such factors as age, sex, stature, pathology, and racial affinity. Appendix F provides a full provenienced listing of all recorded osteological information.

Several standard osteological methods for data recovery were used in the current analysis. Due to the overall lack of viable skeletal material in the assemblage, the methods used pertained exclusively to recovered dental elements.

To begin, throughout this chapter, the dentition will be referred to in standard shorthand that unambiguously identifies each tooth (White 2000). Table 6.1 provides a listing of the codes used to define individual permanent and deciduous teeth.

Estimation of age for sub-adults was made from assessments of dental eruption. Illustrations of dental development were consulted for comparative purposes (Ubelaker 1989; Moorees, et al. 1963a, 1963b; Stermer and Risnes 1994). Also, the chronology of tooth development has been reported on extensively by Hillson (1996) and Scheurer and Black (2000).

61


62

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


Hexagonal Coffin

Rectangular CoffinPost Mold

Figure 6.1: Schematic plan map of burials at the Reynolds Cemetery.

Age assessments for adults were based primarily on wear patterns on the occlusal surfaces of the teeth. Dental attrition is defined by Hillson (1996:231) as “wear produced by tooth-on-tooth contact, between neighboring teeth or opposing teeth, and it produces wear facets on the occlusal surface or at the contact points between teeth.” Patterns and rates of wear are influenced by

developmental sequences, tooth morphology, size, internal crown structure, tooth angulation, non-dietary tooth use, chewing, and diet (McKee and Molnar 1988; Walker et al. 1991). Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994:343) state that if the rate of wear within a population is fairly consistent, the extent of wear should be considered a reflection of age.


63

Table 6.1. Dentition codes.

Permanent Dentition Tooth Code

Left or Right Upper First Incisor L or RI1 Left or Right Upper Second Incisor L or RI2 Left or Right Upper Canine L or RC1 Left or Right Upper First Premolar L or RP3 Left or Right Upper Second Premolar L or RP4 Left or Right Upper First Molar L or RM1 Left or Right Upper Second Molar L or RM2 Left or Right Upper Third Molar L or RM3 Left or Right Lower First Incisor L or RI1 Left or Right Lower Second Incisor L or RI2 Left or Right Lower Canine L or RC1 Left or Right Lower First Premolar L or RP3 Left of Right Lower Second Premolar L or RP4 Left or Right Lower First Molar L or RM1 Left or Right Lower Second Molar L or RM2 Left or Right Lower Third Molar L or RM3 Deciduous Dentition Tooth Code

Left or Right Upper First Incisor L or Rdi1

Left or Right Upper Second Incisor L or Rdi2 Left or Right Upper Canine L or Rdc1 Left or Right Upper First Molar L or Rdm1

Left or Right Upper Second Molar L or Rdm2

Left or Right Lower First Incisor L or Rdi1 Left or Right Lower Second Incisor L or Rdi2 Left or Right Lower Canine L or Rdc1 Left or Right Lower First Molar L or Rdm1

Left or Right Lower Second Molar L or Rdm2

Several researchers have developed

systems for recording and quantifying the amount of dental wear on adult specimens. Smith’s (1984) system developed for assessing wear on permanent incisors, canines, and premolars, Scott’s (1979) system developed for permanent molars, and Lovejoy’s (1985) system for full dentition were utilized in this study. The teeth recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery were seriated using a comparative nineteenth century population from site 41Dt105, a small rural cemetery containing a Euro-American population of fairly comparable socioeconomic status (Winchell et al. 1992). This population was analyzed using the Scott method (1979).

Pathology, in the form of dental caries and linear enamel hypoplasias, was identified for many of the recovered dental elements. Sutter (1995:186) defines dental caries as “a disease process that results from the demineralization of a tooth’s enamel surface by acids created by bacteria.” Dental caries are described as being dark eroded regions on the enamel to gaping cavities in a tooth (White 2000:401).

Enamel hypoplasias were identified for five individuals recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery. Systemic stressors, such as malnutrition and infectious disease, occurring during the developmental period can produce this abnormality (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994:56). Hypoplasias are deficiencies in enamel thickness that are characterized by transverse lines, pits, and grooves on the surface of tooth crowns (White 2000:401). Because dental maturation occurs along a predictable schedule, age-specific health patterns for sub-adults can be reconstructed from studies of adult dentitions (Rose 1985; Goodman and Rose 1990). The ages of occurrence established by Reid and Dean (2000) for enamel hypoplasia were utilized in this study, while descriptions provided by various authors were used for identification (Bass 1987; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994; Hillson 1996; and White 2000).

Assessment of racial affinity was established for five individuals based on the presence of shovel-shaped incisors. Shovel shaping generally involves a “lingual extension of the lateral borders of the incisors” (Bass 1987:283). Shoveling has been shown to be most common in permanent and deciduous maxillary incisors (Hanihara 1963), but has also been observed in mandibular incisors (Hillson 1996:86). The highest incidence of this trait has been recorded for Native American and Asian populations, and the lowest among Europeans (Carbonell 1963). Descriptive plaques created by Arizona State University (reproduced in Hillson 1996, Figure 3.4) and descriptions provided by Bass (1987:283) were used for identification of this trait in the current population.


Burial Summaries Burial 1 (Unit 5)

Osteological Characteristics Skeletal Preservation and Inventory As was the case for most of the burials

producing skeletal remains at the Reynolds Cemetery, the preservation of this skeleton was very poor. Skeletal remains recovered from Burial 1 consisted of a very small amount of cranial and post-cranial material. Cranial bone consisted of unidentifiable vault fragments (N=4) and four fragments of the mandible. Long bone remains consisted of shaft fragments of the left femur (N=8).

The crowns of several teeth were recovered from Burial 1. Due to fragmentation and/or extreme dental wear, identification of tooth position was not possible for most teeth. A total of 21 identifiable teeth were recovered from this burial, but only five could be identified to specific position: LC1; RC1; RM1; RM2; and RM3. Teeth that could not be identified by position due to fragmentation and/or wear included: all six mandibular molars; two maxillary incisors; one mandibular incisor; two maxillary premolars; and five premolars (these could not be assigned as either maxillary or mandibular). Nineteen unidentifiable tooth fragments were also recovered. It was not possible to determine whether the 11 missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent. They may also be fragmentary and included within the unidentified tooth fragments.

Age This individual exhibited a fairly high

degree of dental wear, suggesting an age ranging from 35 to 45 years. A comparison of wear on the occlusal surfaces of the molars from this individual to others in the population (Burials 2, 3, 4, 19, 20, and 22) suggests that this person may have been in the upper end of the 35 to 45 year age range (perhaps 40-45). As discussed below, this burial is thought to be

that of Elizabeth Reynolds, who died in 1841 at the age of 39.

Sex Due to the paucity of recovered skeletal

material, no assessment of sex could be made for this individual. Further, this burial lacked cultural material that could be used to infer sex (such as buttons or hair combs). Again, as discussed below, this burial is probably Elizabeth Reynolds.

Stature No skeletal elements were sufficiently

complete to allow for measurement of stature, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin and the fragmentary skeletal remains recovered. This individual could have been between 150 and 165 centimeters (4 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 4 inches) tall.

Racial Affinity No evidence with regard to this biological

parameter was identified from the recovered skeletal material.

Pathology Dental caries were identified in three

molars for this individual. Due to fragmentation and/or wear, the position of only one of the molars could be identified (RM2); the other two teeth involved were left and right mandibular molars. All of the carious activity was located on the occlusal surfaces and the cavity of RM2 had been treated with a gold filling (Figure 6.2). The filling in this tooth was one of only two instances of dental work identified for the Reynolds Cemetery.

The left maxillary canine exhibited a non-linear array of pits across the lingual surface (Figure 6.2). This enamel defect may have been caused by a non-systemic factor, such as a local trauma or inflammation that generally influences only one, or at most, a few adjacent teeth. Systemic metabolic stressors commonly produce defects in multiple locations (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994). Because the right maxillary canine and the two recovered maxillary incisors did not exhibit this enamel defect, the pathology was most likely due to an unidentified non-systemic factor.

64


Figure 6.2: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 1 (Unit 5). Canine exhibits non-linear array of pits, while molar has a gold filling in the center of the occlusal surface.

Mortuary Characteristics Burial Orientation

Burial 1 was oriented with the head to the west and feet to the east. In traditional Christian burials, alignment of graves in this orientation is thought to enable the deceased to rise up and meet Jesus of Nazareth during the Second Coming as he arrives from Jerusalem to the east, or to hear Gabriel’s horn from that direction (Jordan 1982:30).

Grave Shaft The long axis (east to west) of the grave

shaft measured 294 centimeters (115 inches) and the short axis (north to south) measured 109 centimeters (42.5 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed, was 161 centimeters (63 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 191 centimeters, or just over six feet deep. According to the Aurora Casket Company, Inc. (2001), the idea of burying bodies at a depth of six feet materialized during the period before people were interred with outer containers made of substances such as concrete, metal, or

fiberglass. The depth was thought to be deep enough to prevent animals from digging up the grave.

Coffin Shape and Size The coffin for Burial 1 was hexagonal in

shape (Figure 6.3). The long axis (east to west) measured 176 centimeters (69 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 28 and 25 centimeters, respectively (11 and 10 inches). The shoulder is typically the widest point of a hexagonal coffin, and, in this case, measured 52 centimeters (20 inches).

Material The type of wood used for the coffin in

Burial 1 is unknown. Similar coffins in this assemblage were constructed of poplar and pine.

Hardware This coffin was constructed using only

utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=8 whole, N=142 fragments) and lining tacks (N=125).

Cultural Characteristics Clothing

No evidence of clothing was found in this burial. Although no pins were recovered, this individual may have been interred in a burial shroud. Use of burial shrouds was popular during the late eighteenth through early nineteenth centuries and would most likely be present in hexagonal coffin interments. It is also possible that, because this burial probably contained a female, the deceased was interred wearing a dress that was not adorned with buttons or other decorations

Jewelry and Personal Adornment No jewelry or items of personal adornment

were recovered from Burial 1.

Unusual Artifacts No unusual artifacts were recovered from

Burial 1.

65


Burial 1 (Unit 5)

Skeletal Material

Horizontal Nail

Coffin OutlineGrave Shaft

cm

0 25 50

Figure 6.3: Schematic plan map of Burial 1 (Unit 5) during excavation.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date This burial is thought to be that of

Elizabeth Reynolds. This is based on the location of the grave (left of the burial thought to be her husband, Van Bibber), and the presence of dark soil stains at the base of the plowzone where head- and footstone anchors once rested (Figure 6.4). Elizabeth is known to have died at the age of 39 years, which corresponds to the age assigned to the recovered dental remains (40 to 45 years). Of the 21 teeth identified from this burial, only three had evidence of dental caries. This was

only one of two individuals in the Reynolds Cemetery that appears to have had dental work (gold filling in one cavity).

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of hardware recovered, Burial 1 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins). Elizabeth Reynolds died in 1841, which is consistent with the proposed burial date.

66


Figure 6.4: Photograph of soil stains from the head and footstone anchors of Burial 1

(Unit 5), looking west.

Burial 2 (Unit 3) Osteological Characteristics

Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The skeletal remains recovered from

Burial 2 were not very well preserved and consisted of cranial fragments, femora and tibiae shaft fragments, and tooth crowns. Cranial material included unidentifiable vault fragments (N=24) and a single fragment of the occipital. Fragments of both the left and right femora (N=7 and N=20, respectively) and left and right tibiae (N=9 and N=4, respectively) were recovered. All of these were from the mid-shaft.

The crowns of only a few teeth (N=7) were recovered from Burial 2, all of which were mandibular: RI1; RC1; RM1; LI1; LI2; LC1; and LP3. Two unidentifiable tooth fragments were

also recovered. It is not possible to determine whether the 25 missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent. Some may also be fragmentary and included within the unidentified tooth fragments.

Age This individual exhibited a low degree of

dental wear, suggesting a young adult age range, probably 16 to 22 years. A comparison of the overall wear on the occlusal surfaces of the teeth from this individual to others in the population suggests this person may have been in the lower end of the 16 to 22 year age range, perhaps between 16 and 19 years.


material, no assessment of sex could be made for this individual. A hair comb was, however, recovered from this burial, suggesting that the individual was female. As discussed below, this burial is thought to be that of Mary Reynolds, the daughter of Van Bibber and Elizabeth Reynolds.


complete to allow for measurement of stature, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin and the fragmentary skeletal remains recovered. This individual could have been between 170 and 180 centimeters (5 feet 5 inches and 5 feet 9 inches) tall.



Pathology Single incidences of dental caries were

identified in three maxillary teeth for this individual. These included: RC1 (distal aspect, mid-crown); LI1 (medial aspect, mid-crown to occlusal surface); and LP3 (medial aspect, full length of crown).

67


68


Burial 2 was oriented with the head to the west and feet to the east.

Grave Shaft The long axis of the grave shaft measured

227 centimeters (89 inches) and the short axis measured 99 centimeters (39 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically,

after the topsoil had been removed) was 166 centimeters (65 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 196 centimeters, or 6 feet 4 inches.


shape (Figures 6.5 and 6.6). The long axis measured 229 centimeters (89 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 40 and 43 centimeters, respectively (16 and 17 inches). The shoulder measured 85 centimeters (33 inches).

Burial 2 (Unit 3)

Skeletal Material

Horizontal Nail


0 5025

cm



Figure 6.6: Photograph of Burial 2 (Unit 3) after excavation, looking west.


Burial 2 was identified as poplar. This type of wood was common and readily available throughout the Kanawha Valley during the nineteenth century.




No evidence of clothing was found in this burial. Although no pins were recovered, this individual may have been interred in a burial shroud. It is also possible that, because this burial probably contained a female, the deceased was interred wearing a dress that was not adorned with buttons or other decorations.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment A single tortoise-shell hair comb was

recovered from this burial.


Burial 2.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date This burial is thought to contain Mary

Reynolds, the daughter of Van Bibber and Elizabeth Reynolds. This is based primarily on the location of the grave (in Row 3, which contains individuals thought to be her father, mother, and brother). Her birth and death dates are unknown, but she is known to have died “young and unmarried,” as did her brother James (he died at the age of 19 years). The estimated age for the individual in Burial 2 is 16 to 19 years. Only seven teeth were identified for this individual, three of which had dental caries present.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Tortoise-shell combs were replaced by those made of vulcanized rubber during the 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of cultural materials recovered, Burial 2 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins and tortoise-shell hair combs).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Skeletal preservation in Burial 3 was poor

and the only skeletal material recovered consisted of two unidentified cranial vault fragments. Dental remains, however, were abundant and the majority of a full adult dentition was recovered. Recovered materials included: RC1, RP3, RP4, RM1, RM2, RM3, LC1, LP3, LP4, LM2, LM3, RM3, RM2, RM1, RP4, RP3, RC1, RI2, RI1, LI2, LC1, LP3, LP4, LM1, LM2, and LM3. A total of 22 unidentifiable tooth fragments were also

69


collected. It is not possible to determine whether the six missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent. They may also be fragmentary and included within the unidentified tooth fragments.

Age The dental wear identified for Burial 3 was

comparable to that of Burial 2. Burial 3 also had a low degree of dental wear, suggesting a young adult age range, probably 16 to 22 years. The overall wear on the occlusal surfaces was almost identical to that of Burial 2, thus an age range of 16 to 19 years is suggested for this individual. This burial is thought to contain James Reynolds, who died at the age of 19 years and the dental evidence supports this assumption.


material, no assessment of sex could be made for this individual. Personal items recovered from Burial 3 included buttons and a buckle, suggesting the individual was buried in a jacket or vest and suspenders. These types of clothing are generally assumed to have been worn by males. Again, this burial is thought to contain James Reynolds and the clothing provides evidence for the interment of a male.


complete to allow for measurement of stature, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin and the fragmentary skeletal remains recovered. This individual could have been between 175 and 185 centimeters (5 feet 7 inches to 6 feet 0 inches) tall.

Racial Affinity Evidence of shoveling was noted on the

three identified maxillary incisors (Figure 6.7). This non-metric trait suggests a Mongoloid affinity, most likely Native American ancestry.

Pathology Dental caries were identified on both the

left and right mandibular third molars. The right molar had a single cavity on the distal

aspect (mid-crown), while the left molar had two cavities (one occlusal surface, buccal aspect and the other on the distal aspect, mid-crown). Neither of these teeth showed evidence of dental work.

Figure 6.7: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 3 (Unit 1). Two maxillary

incisors exhibit slight shovel shaping on lateral margins (a third incisor was not

photographed to avoid further deterioration).




242 centimeters (94 inches) and the short axis measured 87 centimeters (34 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 152 centimeters (59 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 182 centimeters, or 5 feet 9 inches.

In addition, upon removal of the topsoil from this burial, headstone and footstone anchors were identified (Figure 6.8). The anchors were made of sandstone and slots had been cut into the center for vertical placement

70


Figure 6.8: Photograph of in situ head and footstone anchors in Burial 3 (Unit 1),

looking west. of head- and footstones. The size of the slot in the headstone anchor matched the dimensions of the headstone inscribed with James Reynolds’ name found at the site.


shape (Figure 6.9). The long axis measured 202 centimeters (79 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 27 and 28 centimeters, respectively (11 and 11 inches). The shoulder measured 56 centimeters (22 inches).




utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=2 whole, N=206 fragments), lining tacks (N=252), and plain screws (N=6).


Clothing items recovered from Burial 3 included buttons (N=5) and a buckle. All of the buttons were shanked fabric covered and all were recovered from Zones B and C. The placement of these in the burial suggests they were from an outer garment, such as a suit jacket or vest. The buckle was most likely associated with suspenders.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment No jewelry or personal adornment artifacts



Burial 3.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date This burial is thought to be that of James

Reynolds, who died in 1852 at the age of 19 years. The dental remains suggest an age between 16 and 19 years, while the clothing indicates the individual was male. This individual had two teeth exhibiting three dental caries and shovel shaped incisors were identified.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Fabric covered buttons have an 1850 beginning date of manufacture. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of cultural materials recovered, Burial 3 was probably interred between 1850 (beginning date of manufacture for fabric covered buttons) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins). This proposed date of interment coincides with James Reynolds’ known date of death.

71


Burial 3 (Unit 1)Coffin OutlineGrave ShaftHorizontal Nail

0

cm

25 50

ButtonBuckleSkeletal Material



Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Skeletal preservation in Burial 4 was poor

and the only skeletal material recovered

consisted of the fragmentary remains of the right humerus (N=3), left and right femora (N=2 and N=1, respectively), and the left and right tibiae (N=1 and N=4, respectively). All of these were fragments from the mid-shaft regions.

72


Recovered dental remains consisted of most of a full adult dentition: RP3, RM1, RM2, RM3, LC1, LP3, LP4, LM1, LM2, LM3, RM3, RM2, RM1, RP4, RP3, RC1, RI1, LI2, LC1, LP3, LP4, LM1, LM2, and LM3. A total of 21 unidentifiable tooth fragments were also collected. It is not possible to determine whether the eight missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent. They may also be fragmentary and included within the unidentified tooth fragments.

Age The dental wear identified for this

individual was moderate, suggesting a young to middle adult age range (25-35 years). A comparison of wear on the occlusal surfaces of to others in the population suggests that this person was probably in the upper end of the 25 to 35 year age range (perhaps 30 to 35).


material, no assessment of sex could be made for this individual. Further, no clothing or personal items were recovered to use as a basis for sex assessment.


complete to allow for measurement of stature, but estimation was made from the length of the coffin and the fragmentary skeletal remains recovered. This individual could have been between 180 and 195 centimeters (5 feet 9 inches to 6 feet 4 inches) tall.



Pathology Dental caries were identified on two

mandibular teeth: LM1 and RM2. The left molar had a single cavity on the buccal aspect of the occlusal surface, while the right molar had one cavity on the mesial aspect (mid-crown). Neither of these teeth showed evidence of dental work.

Linear enamel hypoplasias were identified on both the left and right maxillary canines (Figure 6.10). On each tooth, two hypoplastic lines were identified; one toward the distal end of the tooth and one toward the base of the crown. Reid and Dean (2000) identify the age of occurrence for these as 2.2 to 3.0 years and 3.0 to 4.3 years, respectively. Hypoplasias could not be identified on any other recovered anterior teeth (LC1, RI1, and LI2) because they were fragmentary.

Figure 6.10: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 4 (Unit 19). Each maxillary

canine exhibits two hypoplastic lines (one near the distal end, another near the base

of the crown).





73


Coffin Shape and Size The coffin for Burial 4 was roughly

hexagonal in shape (Figure 6.11). The long axis measured 230 centimeters (90 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 35 and 37 centimeters, respectively (14 and 14 inches). The shoulder measured 53 centimeters (21 inches).


Burial 4 was identified as poplar. This type of

wood was common and readily available throughout the Kanawha Valley during the nineteenth century.



Burial 4 (Unit 19)

Coffin Outline

250

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material50

cm

Vertical Nail


74



No evidence of clothing was found in this burial.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment No clothing or personal adornment items

were recovered from this burial.


Burial 4.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Burial 4 contains an adult probably aged

between 30 and 35 years. No skeletal or cultural indicators of sex were present in the burial. Of the 24 teeth identified, only two exhibited dental caries. Linear enamel hypoplasias were also identified. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of hardware recovered, Burial 4 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The preservation of skeletal materials in

Burial 5 was poor. Skeletal material recovered consisted of the fragmentary remains of the frontal (N=1) and occipital (N=1) bones and 11 unidentified fragments of the cranial vault. The remaining skeletal assemblage included the left and right femora (N=1 and N=1, respectively), and the left and right tibiae (N=1 and N=1, respectively) All of these were fragments from the mid-shaft regions.

A total of 19 teeth were identified from the recovered dental materials, although seven of these could not be identified as to position due to fragmentation and/or wear: RP3, RP4, RM2, RM3, LP3, LP4, LM2, LM3, RP4, RP3, LP3, LP4, one maxillary I1, two mandibular I1, two

mandibular I2, and two canines (position indeterminate). A total of 21 unidentifiable tooth fragments were also collected. It is not possible to determine whether the 13 missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent. They may also be fragmentary and included within the unidentified tooth fragments.

Age The degree of dental wear identified for

this individual ranged from moderate to high, suggesting a middle-to-old adult age range (35-55). A comparison of wear on the occlusal surfaces of the teeth from this burial to others in the population suggests that this person was probably in the middle of the 35 to 55 year age range (perhaps 40 to 50 years old).


material, no assessment of sex from the skeleton could be made for this individual. Buttons were the only personal items recovered, and the location of these in the “chest” region suggests the individual was buried wearing a shirt. Shirts were common burial attire for males.





Pathology Dental caries were identified on four

mandibular teeth: LM2, LM3, LP4, and RM2. The right second molar had two cavities: one on the lingual aspect of the occlusal surface and another mid-crown on the distal aspect. The left second molar had an occlusal cavity on the buccal aspect, the left third molar had a cavity on the mesial aspect of the mid-crown, and the premolar exhibited one cavity on the

75


76

mesial side of the tooth, from the mid-crown to the occlusal surface. None of the teeth showed evidence of dental work.




217 centimeters (85 inches) and the short axis measured 106 centimeters (41 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of

the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 156 centimeters (61 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin would have been buried at a depth of around 186 centimeters, or 6 feet 0 inches.



Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material

Horizontal Nail

0 25

cm

50

Coffin Outline

Burial 5 (Unit 2)

Button

Shoes





Hardware This coffin was constructed using both

utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=3 whole, N=342 fragments) and lining tacks (N=281). Elaborate hardware included white metal screws with filigree bands (N=7). Similar screws are advertised in the Russell and Erwin Manufacturing Company (1980) catalog of 1865 and the Sargent & Company catalog (1871).


Clothing items collected from Burial 5 included buttons (N=5) and shoes (N=2). A single black glass four-hole sew-through button and one fabric covered metal button were recovered from Zone B. The four remaining buttons were patterned mold covered and exhibited black glass centers. This style of button was made during the Victorian era (Albert and Kent 1949:48).

All of the buttons were recovered from Zones B and C. Placement of these in the upper- to mid-torso of the body suggests that they were associated with an outer garment (jacket or vest) and a shirt.

The shoes recovered from Burial 5 consisted of leather soles (Figure 6.13). The shoes were constructed with the leather sole sewn to the upper and the heel nailed onto the shoe. The iron pegs used to attach the heel were square and driven into the heel about 15 millimeters (0.5 inch) apart. Small holes flanked by feathering on each side provided evidence that the sole was sewn to the upper. The construction methods used date these shoes between 1829 and 1862.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment No jewelry or personal adornment items



Burial 5.

Figure 6.13: Photograph of Zones D and E, Level 3, Burial 5 (Unit 2), looking east. Fragmentary remains of left and right

femora and tibiae in foreground, shoe soles in background.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Burial 5 probably contained the remains of

a middle-to-older adult male-aged 40 to 50 years. Of the 19 teeth identified for this individual, four teeth had evidence of dental caries (N=5). Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal screws date from at least 1865. Hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s and the styles of buttons recovered date from at least 1840. The construction methods for the shoes suggest a date range of 1829 to 1862.

77


Based on the shape of the coffin and types of cultural materials recovered, Burial 5 was probably interred between 1860 (beginning date of manufacture for mass-produced hardware) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The only skeletal material recovered from

Burial 6 included left and right femoral shaft fragments (N=30 and N=20, respectively), all of which were from the mid-shaft. In addition, four unidentified tooth fragments were recovered.

Age Because of the lack of identifiable skeletal

and dental remains from Burial 6, no assessment of age from the skeleton could be made. This burial was, however, the only one located at the Reynolds Cemetery that was marked definitively with an engraved headstone. The individual was John Reynolds, who lived from 1758 until 1832. He was 74 years old at death.


material, no assessment of sex from the skeleton could be made for this individual. As noted above, however, the individual is known to have been male.





Pathology No evidence for skeletal or dental

pathology was identified for Burial 6.





Coffin Shape and Size The coffin for Burial 6 was rectangular in

shape (Figure 6.14). The long axis measured 211 centimeters (82 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 58 and 54 centimeters, respectively (23 and 21 inches). The middle measured 60 centimeters (33 inches).




utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=289 fragments) and lining tacks (N=81).

78


Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material

Horizontal Nail

0 25

cm

50

Coffin OutlineBurial 6 (Unit 8)

Figure 6:14: Schematic plan map of Burial 6 (Unit 8) during excavation.


No clothing items were recovered from Burial 6.




Burial 6.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Broken head- and footstone bases were

found in situ when the topsoil covering Burial 6 was removed (Figure 6.15). The bases of these stones were later matched with two ornately carved stones that had been removed from the cemetery around 30 years ago. The headstone was engraved with the name John Reynolds, who died February 29, 1832 at the age of 74 years. The recovered coffin hardware supports an 1832 date of interment, however, the rectangular shape of the coffin is somewhat anomalous. Rectangular coffins are known to have been used as early as 1830, but this was not common.

79


Figure 6.15: Photograph of in situ head and footstone bases in Burial 6 (Unit 8), looking

west.


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The preservation of skeletal materials in

Burial 7 was generally poor, although a good portion of the cranial vault was fairly well preserved. This skeletal element consisted of portions of the left and right parietals, although there were no discernible sutures. The only other skeletal material recovered consisted of the fragmentary remains of the left and right femora (N=3 and N=6, respectively). All of these were fragments from the mid-shaft region.

Only two teeth were recovered from this individual, both of which were mandibular (a full maxillary denture was also recovered from this burial). The recovered teeth consisted of

LP4 and one incisor (position indeterminate due to fragmentation). It is not possible to determine whether the 14 missing mandibular teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent.

Age The degree of dental wear on the two teeth

recovered for this individual was fairly high, suggesting a middle-to-old adult age range (40-55). Because so few dental elements were recovered, no comparisons between this dentition and others recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery were made.


material, no assessment of sex from the skeleton could be made for this individual. Buttons were the only personal items recovered, and the location of these throughout the upper and lower regions of the coffin suggests the individual was buried wearing a shirt. This sort of burial attire was common for males.





Pathology No skeletal or dental pathology was

identified for Burial 7.




248 centimeters (97 inches) and the short axis measured 109 centimeters (43 inches). The

80


grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 143 centimeters (56 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 173 centimeters, or 5 feet 6 inches.


shape (Figure 6.16). The long axis measured

194 centimeters (76 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 47 and 33 centimeters, respectively (18 and 13 inches). The middle measured 46 centimeters (18 inches).



50

Coffin Outline

Skeletal Material

Horizontal Nail

Burial 7 (Unit 4)

Button0 25

cm

Grave Shaft

Denture

Thumbscrew/LugViewing Glass



utilitarian and mass-produced hardware.

Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=4 whole, N=150 fragments) and lining tacks (N=27). Elaborate hardware included white metal lug pieces (N=28), thumbscrews (N=4),

81


escutcheons (N=4), and a viewing glass window (N=1). The lug pieces depicted a stylized oak leaf motif (similar to that found in Burial 26) and the shape of the lug hardware suggests the presence of short bar handles (Figure 6.17). The handles were most likely made of wood because no metal handles were identified in the assemblage. Reconstruction of the lugs showed that six handles had been present, with three along each side of the coffin. The thumbscrews evidenced an ornamental “urn” style on the tops, but no other decoration could be identified. Wooden fabric covered upholstery buttons were also recovered from this burial, indicating that the interior of the coffin had been lined.

The recovered viewing glass window had shattered, but the oval shape was observed

during excavation (Figure 6.18). This window would have allowed for viewing of most of the upper torso of the body. Garrow et al. (1985) report that the earliest shape for viewing glass windows was oval.


The only clothing artifacts recovered from Burial 7 were two white porcelain buttons. These were Prosser process four-hole sew-through buttons, dating from 1840 to 1920. Zones B and C each produced one button, suggesting the presence of a shirt.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment No jewelry or items of personal adornment


Figure 6.17: Photograph of oak leaf motif short bar handle lugs recovered from Burial 7 (Unit 4).

82


83

Figure 6.18: Photograph of in situ viewing

glass window from Burial 7 (Unit 4), looking west.

Unusual Artifacts A complete set of upper dentures was

recovered from Burial 7 (Figure 6.19). The dentures were composed of porcelain teeth and gums and a palate of an unidentified orange material that was probably vulcanized rubber. The process of making porcelain teeth and fusing them into a porcelain block colored to resemble the gums was developed in 1851.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Burial 7 probably contained the remains of

a middle-to-older adult, aged 40 to 55 years. Only two teeth were identified for this individual, neither of which had any pathology. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after 1860. The porcelain buttons date from 1840 to 1920, while the style of dentures recovered was first introduced in 1851.

Figure 6.19: Photograph of full upper denture recovered from Burial 7 (Unit 4).




Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The preservation of skeletal material in

Burial 8 was very poor. Only three unidentified cranial vault fragments were recovered and no dental elements were found.

Age The lack of dental and skeletal material

precluded the estimation of age for this individual. Because of the size of the coffin, the individual is assumed to be at least an adolescent (12-20 years of age), if not older.


material, no assessment of sex from the skeleton could be made for this individual. Buttons were the only personal items recovered, and the locations of these throughout the upper and lower regions of the coffin suggest the individual was buried wearing a shirt and trousers. This sort of burial attire was common for males.


complete to allow for measurement of stature, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin. This individual could have been between 170 and 180 centimeters (5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 9 inches) tall.



Pathology No skeletal or dental pathology was

identified for Burial 8.






shape (Figures 6.20 and 6.21). The long axis measured 196 centimeters (76 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 52 and 60 centimeters, respectively (20 and 23 inches). The middle measured 56 centimeters (22 inches).




utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nail fragments (N=119) and lining tacks (N=20). Elaborate hardware included escutcheons (N=2) and thumbscrews (N=6) (Figure 6.22). These materials were composed of white metal and the thumbscrews had urn-shaped tops with a bottom band of filigree.

84


25

Grave Shaft

Thumbscrew

Horizontal Nail

Coffin OutlineBurial 8 (Unit 7)

0

cm

50

Button

Skeletal Material



Clothing artifacts recovered from this burial consist entirely of buttons (N=21) with white porcelain accounting for the majority (N=13). These were four-hole sew-through and date from 1840 to 1920. The remainder consisted of three metal buttons that were highly corroded and five wooded shanked-

back buttons. These date throughout the nineteenth century. Most of the buttons were recovered from the lower region of the coffin, suggesting the individual was buried in trousers.



85




Burial 8.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Burial 8 contained an individual that may

be 12 years of age or older. The age range could not be defined more specifically due to the lack of skeletal material and size of the coffin. The individual is thought to be male.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. The style of thumbscrews recovered is depicted in catalogs beginning in 1865. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. The porcelain buttons recovered date from 1840 to 1920.


Figure 6.22: Photograph of fragmentary thumbscrews recovered from Burial 8 (Unit 7).

86


87


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The only preserved remains in Burial 9

consisted of unidentified cranial vault fragments (N=9), five teeth, and two unidentified tooth fragments. The identified teeth consisted of RM2, RM1, RP3, RI1, and LI1.

Age The degree of dental wear identified for

this individual was moderate, suggesting a young to middle adult age range (20-35). Because so few dental elements were recovered, no comparisons between this dentition and others recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery were made.


material, no assessment of sex from the skeleton could be made for this individual. Personal items recovered from the burial include a brooch and a hair comb. These items are typically associated with female burials during the nineteenth century.





Pathology Only one identified tooth (RP3) did not

exhibit any dental pathology. A total of seven carious lesions were identified on the four remaining teeth: the buccal aspect (base of the crown) and the center of the occlusal surface of RM2; the distal aspect (base of crown) and the buccal aspect (mid-crown) on RM1; the medial aspect (mid-crown) and distal aspect

(mid-crown) of RI1; and the medial aspect (mid-crown) of LI1.

Linear enamel hypoplasias were identified on the two mandibular first incisors from Burial 9 (Figure 6.23). Both of these teeth exhibited two hypoplastic lines, one mid-crown and one near the base of the crown. A comparison of these teeth to illustrations in Reid and Dean (2000) suggested that the incidences of stress occurred between 2.0 and 3.5 years of age. In addition, these teeth showed abnormal wear patterns on the mesial surfaces (Figure 6.23). This wear pattern could be attributed to use of these teeth as tools or from some personal activity, such as pipe smoking.

Figure 6.23: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 9 (Unit 6). Both mandibular

incisors exhibit two hypoplastic lines (one mid-crown and the other near the base of the crown). Each also has abnormal wear

pattern on the mesial occlusal surface.




239 centimeters (93 inches) and the short axis measured 103 centimeters (40 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 131 centimeters (51 inches). With the additional


30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 161 centimeters, or 5 feet 2 inches.




Burial 9 was identified as black walnut, which

was common throughout the Kanawha Valley during the nineteenth century. Black walnut is visually more appealing than others and was likely more expensive. This was the only burial in which black walnut was identified.


utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=155 fragments) and lining tacks (N=4). Elaborate hardware included slotted tacks (N=67), dowel hinges (N=4), and short bar handle pieces (N=5) (Figure 6.25). The elaborate hardware was composed of white metal.

Burial 9 (Unit 6)

cm

Skeletal Material

Thumbscrew

Coffin Outline

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

0 25

Button

50

Hinge

Shoes

Hair Comb


88


Figure 6.25: Photograph of mass-produced hardware recovered from Burial 9 (Unit 6).


The soles of a pair of shoes were the only clothing items recovered from Burial 9. The soles were sewn to the upper, suggesting a date of post-1860.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment Both jewelry and personal adornment

artifacts were recovered from Burial 9. The jewelry item was a gold-plated copper alloy brooch that was recovered from the neck region. The personal adornment item was a rubber hair comb.


Burial 9.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date The individual interred in Burial 9 was

likely a female aged 20 to 35 years. Her dental health was quite poor, with four of the five

identified teeth containing seven caries. Two incidences of childhood nutritional stress were also identified.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. Shoe soles sewn to the uppers date from at least 1860. Based on the shape of the coffin and types of cultural materials recovered, Burial 9 was probably interred between 1860 (beginning date of manufacture for mass-produced hardware and the style of shoe) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Preservation in Burial 10 was poor and the

only recovered skeletal material consisted of

89


90

unidentified cranial vault fragments (N=7) and fragments of the mid-shaft of the right femur (N=5). Dental material recovered included LI1, LI2, RI1, and one mandibular and one maxillary premolar (side and position indeterminate due to wear).

Age All of the dental elements recovered from

Burial 10 showed a high degree of wear, suggesting a middle-to-old adult age range (40-55). Because so few dental elements were recovered, no comparisons between this dentition and others recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery were made.


material, no assessment of sex from the skeleton could be made for this individual. Several buttons were found in the “chest” region of the coffin. These buttons may have been from a shirt, which was common burial attire for a male.





Pathology No skeletal or dental pathology was noted

for Burial 10.




225 centimeters (88 inches) and the short axis

measured 91 centimeters (35 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 119 centimeters (46 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 149 centimeters, or 4 feet 8 inches.



Material Two types of wood were identified for the

coffin in Burial 10: poplar and soft pine. These types of wood were common and readily available throughout the Kanawha Valley during the nineteenth century.


utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=68 fragments) and lining tacks (N=11). Elaborate hardware included white metal lug pieces (N=10), short bar handle pieces (N=9), thumbscrews (N=10), escutcheons (N=1), and a viewing glass window (N=1) (Figure 6.27). The recovered viewing glass window had shattered, but its oval shape was observed during excavation (Figure 6.28). This window would have allowed for viewing of most of the upper torso of the body. In addition, four unidentified iron pieces were recovered from the bottom four corners of the coffin (Figure 6.27). These items, which were in the shape of an “X,” may have been kick plates. These items were probably used to prevent damage to the corners of the coffin.


Grave Shaft

Horizontal Nail

Coffin Outline

Viewing Glass

cm

50

Burial 10 (Unit 9)

0 25

Button

Handle

Skeletal Material

Kick Plate



91


Figure 6.28: Photograph of in situ viewing glass window from Burial 10 (Unit 9).


A total of 14 buttons were recovered from Burial 10. One of these was white porcelain and the others were fabric covered. All of the fabric-covered buttons were collected from the leg region of the coffin, suggesting that the individual was interred in trousers.




Burial 10.


probably a male, aged 40 to 55 years. None of the five teeth recovered from this burial exhibited pathology. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. White porcelain buttons were manufactured between 1840 and 1920.



Skeletal Preservation and Inventory No skeletal or dental remains were

preserved in Burial 11.

Age Although no skeletal materials were

recovered from this burial, the small size of the coffin suggests that Burial 11 contained an infant (birth to three years of age).

Sex No estimation of sex could be made for

Burial 11.

Stature Only coffin size could be used to assess

the stature of this individual. The coffin for Burial 11 could have held a fully extended individual of not more than 75 centimeters (29 inches).

Racial Affinity No estimation of racial affinity could be

made for Burial 11.

Pathology No skeletal or dental remains from Burial

11 were recovered.

92



The orientation of the body in Burial 11 was indeterminate due to the lack of skeletal material. The coffin was, however, oriented east to west.


105 centimeters (41 inches) and the short axis measured 52 centimeters (20 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of

the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 79 centimeters (31 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 109 centimeters, or 3 feet 5 inches.



0 2010cm

Grave ShaftCoffin Outline

Horizontal Nail

Burial 11 (Unit 14)


93


Figure 6.30: Photograph of Burial 11 (Unit 14) during excavation, looking west.

Material

The type of wood used for the coffin in Burial 11 is unknown. Similar coffins in this assemblage were constructed of poplar and pine.

Hardware This coffin appears to have been

constructed using only cut nails (N=46 fragments). No lining tacks were recovered.


No clothing artifacts were recovered from Burial 11.




Burial 11.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Because of the small size of the coffin, this

burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880 and, although rectangular coffins were used as early as 1830, their use was not widespread until after 1858. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of cultural materials recovered, Burial 11 was probably interred between 1830 (earliest known date of use for rectangular coffins) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory The preservation of Burial 12 was poor,

and only a single tooth was recovered. This tooth was a fragmentary deciduous molar that had broken into eight pieces.

Age Although no skeletal or dental materials

were recovered from this burial that could be used for aging, the small size of the coffin suggests that Burial 12 contained an infant (birth to three years). Further, because the fragmentary tooth was identified as a deciduous molar, the individual would probably have been at least 12 months old.


Burial 12.




made for Burial 12.

Pathology No pathology was noted for the single

tooth recovered from Burial 12.

94


95




118 centimeters (46 inches) and the short axis measured 49 centimeters (19 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 90 centimeters (35 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this

grave would have been buried at a depth of around 120 centimeters, or 3 feet 9 inches.





Grave Shaft

Burial 12 (Unit 13)Coffin Outline

Horizontal Nail

Skeletal MaterialButton

100 20

cm






A total of two white porcelain buttons were recovered from Burial 12. These were four-hole sew-through and were located in Zones B and C. These may have been associated with a shirt or undergarments.




Burial 12.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Due to the small size of the coffin and the

presence of a deciduous molar, the individual interred in Burial 12 is thought to have been an infant aged one to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Porcelain buttons date from 1840 to 1920. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of cultural materials recovered, Burial 12 was probably interred between 1840 (beginning date of manufacture for porcelain buttons) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).





recovered from this burial, the small size of the coffin suggests that Burial 13 contained an infant (birth to three years).


Burial 13.




made for Burial 13.


13 were recovered.









96



utilitarian hardware. Materials used included

cut nails (N=62, fragments) and lining tacks (N=3).

Grave Shaft


Horizontal Nail

cm

0 10 20






Unusual Artifacts No unusual items were recovered from

Burial 13.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Due to the small size of the coffin, the

individual interred in Burial 13 is thought to have been an infant aged birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880

97


and, although rectangular coffins were used as early as 1830, their use was not widespread until after 1858. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of cultural materials recovered, Burial 13 was probably interred between 1830 (earliest known date of use for rectangular coffins) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).





recovered from this burial, the small size of the coffin suggests that Burial 14 contained an infant (birth to three years).


Burial 14.




made for Burial 14.


14 were recovered.










utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=106 fragments) and lining tacks (N=117). Elaborate hardware included white metal lid screws (N=4).

98


0

Veritcal NailHorizontal Nail


10 20cm

Burial 14 (Unit 10)







Burial 14.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date The individual interred in Burial 14 is

thought to have been an infant aged from birth to three years. This is based on the small size

of the coffin. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. Based on the shape of the coffin and types of cultural materials recovered, Burial 14 was probably interred between 1860 (beginning date of manufacture for mass-produced hardware) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).

99




Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Skeletal preservation was poor in Burial

15. The only preserved remains consisted of cranial vault fragments (N=13) and one unidentified tooth fragment.

Age Because of the lack of identifiable skeletal

and dental remains from Burial 15, no assessment of age from the skeleton could be made. The age for this individual, based on the size of the coffin, could range anywhere from adolescence (12 years) to adulthood.

Sex No estimation of sex could be made from

the skeletal remains recovered from Burial 15.

The presence of a hairpin, however, suggests that the individual was female.





Pathology No evidence of pathology was noted on

the skeletal and dental remains recovered from Burial 15.







100


Burial 15 (Unit 15)

Coffin Outline

0 25

cm

Horizontal Nail

50

ButtonSkeletal Material

Grave Shaft

Hairpin







A total of seven white porcelain four-hole, sew-through buttons were recovered from Burial 15. The positions of these within the burial suggest the individual was interred wearing a shirt or undergarments.

101


Figure 6.36: Photograph of Burial 15 ( Unit 15) after excavation.

Jewelry and Personal Adornment A metal hairpin was recovered from the

head region of Burial 15. This item was comparable to the modern bobby pin and was used to secure the hair.


Burial 15.


be 12 years of age or older. The age range could not be defined more specifically due to the lack of skeletal material and size of the coffin. The individual is thought to be female.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. White porcelain buttons were manufactured between 1840 and 1920. Based on the shape

of the coffin and type of coffin hardware and buttons recovered, Burial 15 was probably interred between 1840 (beginning date of manufacture for porcelain buttons) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory No skeletal remains were preserved in

Burial 16, but several teeth were recovered. Both deciduous and permanent teeth were recovered, including: Ldi1; Rdi1; Rdi2; LM2; LM1; LP4; LP3; RP3; RP4; RM1; RM2; RI1; RC1; RP3; RP4; RM1; RM2; LC1; LP3; LM1; and LM2. A total of 19 unidentified tooth fragments were also recovered.

Age An age for this individual based on

skeletal remains could not be estimated. The dental remains, however, provided a fair amount of information to base an assessment. The presence of both deciduous and permanent incisors suggest an age range of 4 to 8 years, while the presence of premolars indicate an age between 7.5 and 12.5 years. The occurrence of the first and second permanent molars indicates an age of between 7 and 11 years. From these estimates, an age for the individual in Burial 16 of between 7 and 12 years is suggested.


the remains recovered from Burial 16. The presence of a finger ring, however, suggests that the individual may have been female.

Stature No skeletal elements were recovered from

which a measurement of stature could be assessed, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin. This individual could have been between 120 and 125 centimeters (3 feet 9 inches to 4 feet 1 inches) tall.


one recovered permanent maxillary incisor.

102


This non-metric trait suggests a Mongoloid affinity, most likely Native American ancestry.

Pathology Linear enamel hypoplasias were the only

pathology noted for Burial 16. Three maxillary anterior teeth were identified with this enamel defect: RI1; RC1; and LC1 (Figure 6.37). A single defect was located near the base of the crown on the incisor and two hypoplastic lines were noted on the mid-crown of both canines. Reid and Dean (2000) identify the age of occurrence for these as 2.0-5.0 years (incisor) and 4.0-6.0 years (canines). Hypoplasias were not identified on any of the recovered deciduous anterior teeth.

Figure 6.37: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 16 (Unit 16). Incisor has one

hypoplastic line near the base of the crown; canines have two mid-crown hypoplastic

lines.














Jewelry and Personal Adornment A small brown and white stone finger ring,

tentatively identified as agate, was recovered from this burial. The ring was cut intricately in a diamond pattern along the outer edges (Figure 6.39). The ring was found in the left side of the chest region.


Burial 16.


probably a female, aged 7 to 12 years. No dental caries were identified, but three teeth did have linear enamel hypoplasias. In addition, the single recovered maxillary incisor exhibited shoveling. Cut nails were the only diagnostic artifacts recovered and these date generally from 1830 to 1880.

103


Burial 16 (Unit 16)

Skeletal Material

cm

Button0 10 20

Coffin OutlineGrave ShaftHorizontal Nail


Figure 6.39: Photograph of child’s ring recovered from Burial 16.

Although rectangular coffins were used as early as 1830, their use was not widespread until after 1858. Based on the shape of the coffin and the presence of cut nails, Burial 16

was probably interred between 1830 (earliest known date for use of rectangular coffins) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Preservation of skeletal material in Burial

17 was poor. The only skeletal material recovered consisted of unidentified cranial vault fragments (N=6) and fragments of the right tibia (N=2, mid-shaft). Identifiable dental remains included only two mandibular premolars (LP4 and RP4). One other fragment of a premolar was also identified, but its position was indeterminate. A total of 14 unidentified tooth fragments were also recovered. It was not possible to determine whether the missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally

104


105

absent. They may also be fragmentary and included within the unidentified tooth fragments.


skeletal remains could not be estimated. As for dental remains, the two premolars exhibited minimal wear similar to that observed in Burials 2 and 3, thus an age range of 16 to 22 years is suggested for Burial 17.


the remains recovered from Burial 17. The presence of earrings in this burial, however, suggests that the individual may have been female.





Pathology A single incidence of dental caries was

observed on either the lingual or labial aspect of the unidentified premolar (due to fragmentation, the exact position of the cavity could not be determined).










utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=104 fragments) and lining tacks (N=79). In addition, twelve small, unidentified pieces of metal were also recovered.


Clothing items recovered from Burial 17 consisted of two fabric-covered buttons, the top part of a snap fastener, and safety pins. Fabric covered buttons date throughout the nineteenth century. The origin of snap fasteners is not well documented. If American made, they may date from 1889 to the 1950s (Rose 1985:43).


106

Grave Shaft

0

cm

25 50


Horizontal Nail

Veritcal Nail

Hair Comb

Skeletal Material


Jewelry and Personal Adornment Tortoise-shell hair combs (N=2) were

recovered from the head region of this burial (Figure 6.41). These were commonly used throughout the first half of the nineteenth century.


Burial 17.


probably a young female, aged 16 to 22 years. Only three teeth were recovered, one of which exhibited a cavity. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of hardware recovered, Burial 17 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning


date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).

Figure 6.41: Photograph of in situ hair comb from Zone A of Level 3, Burial 17

(Unit 11), looking west.


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory No skeletal remains were preserved in

Burial 18 and only a few tooth fragments were recovered (N=11). One fragmentary mandibular molar (RM1) was identified from the dental remains.

Age Because of the lack of skeletal and

identifiable dental remains from Burial 18, no assessment of age from the skeleton could be made. The age for this individual, based on the size of the coffin, could range anywhere from adolescence (12 years) to adulthood.


the remains recovered from Burial 18. Further, no personal items that could be used to infer sex were found in this burial.





Pathology No pathology was identified for the dental

remains recovered in Burial 18.







107


Coffin Outline

250

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material50

cm

Burial 18 (Unit 17)











Burial 18.


be 12 years of age or older. The age range could not be defined more specifically due to the lack of skeletal material and size of the coffin. No skeletal or cultural indicators of sex were identified in this burial.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of hardware recovered, Burial 18 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).

108


Figure 6.43: Photograph of Burial 18 (Unit 17) during excavation, looking west. Coffin

outline beginning to appear at base of grave shaft.



Burial 19 were not very well preserved and consisted of cranial fragments, femora and tibiae shaft fragments, and tooth crowns. Cranial material included unidentifiable vault fragments (N=5). Fragments of both the left and right femora (N=1 and N=2, respectively) and left and right tibiae (N=8 and N=10, respectively) were recovered. All of these were from the mid-shaft.

The crowns of several teeth were recovered: RI1; RI2; RC1; RP4; RM1; RM2; LI1; LI2; LC1; LP3; LP4; LM1; LM2; LM3; LM1; LP4; LI2; LI1; RI1; RI2; RC1; RP3; RM1; and RM2. A

total of 27 unidentifiable tooth fragments were also recovered. It is not possible to determine whether the eight missing teeth were lost pre- or post-mortem, or if they were congenitally absent. The unidentified tooth fragments may represent some of the missing teeth.

Age This individual exhibited a moderate to

high degree of dental wear, suggesting an age ranging from 35 to 55 years. A comparison of wear on the occlusal surfaces of the teeth from this burial to others in the population suggests that this person was probably in the middle of the 35 to 55 year age range (perhaps 40 to 50).


the remains recovered from Burial 19. Further, no personal items that could be used to infer sex were found in this burial.


which a measurement of stature could be assessed, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin. This individual could have been between 190 and 195 centimeters (6 feet 1 inch to 6 feet 4 inches) tall.



Pathology A total of four dental caries were noted on

two teeth recovered from Burial 19. A right maxillary molar (RM1) had two cavities on the occlusal surface, both of which were on the buccal aspect and a left mandibular premolar (LP3) had two occlusal surface cavities (one on the buccal aspect and one on the lingual aspect).




219 centimeters (85 inches) and the short axis

109


measured 92 centimeters (36 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 145 centimeters (57 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 175 centimeters, or 5 feet 7 inches.



Coffin Outline

250

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material50

cm

Burial 19 (Unit 18)






110







Burial 19.


probably between 40 and 50 years old at death. Only two of the 24 recovered teeth exhibited pathology (a total of four dental caries). Because of the lack of skeletal and cultural indicators, no estimation of sex could be made for this individual. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of hardware recovered, Burial 19 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).



Burial 20 were not very well preserved and consisted of cranial fragments, femoral and tibial shaft fragments, and tooth crowns. Cranial material included an occipital fragment with a small portion of the left parietal (the suture was not observable due to deterioration), one right parietal fragment, and fragments of both the left and right temporal bones (petrous portion only). Several unidentifiable vault fragments were also recovered (N=30). Fragments of both the left and right femora (N=1 and N=1, respectively) and left and right tibiae (N=1 and N=1, respectively) were recovered. All of these were from the mid-shaft.

An entire adult dentition was recovered from Burial 20, although some were fragmentary (20 unidentified tooth fragments were also recovered). Two teeth (LM2 and LM3) were still attached to a small mandible fragment (Figure 6.45).

Age This individual exhibited very little dental

wear, suggesting an age ranging from 16 to 22 years. The dental wear was comparable for that observed in Burials 2, 3, and 17.


the remains recovered from Burial 20. Personal items, however, suggested the individual was a female. These items included a glass bead necklace, a brooch, and a rubber hairpin.


which a measurement of stature could be assessed, but an estimation was made from the length of the coffin and the position of recovered skeletal material. This individual could have been between 185 and 190 centimeters (6 feet 0 inches to 6 feet 2 inches) tall.

Racial Affinity Evidence of shoveling was noted on all

four maxillary incisors (Figure 6.45). This non-metric trait suggests a Mongoloid affinity, most likely Native American ancestry.

A protostylid was observed on the left mandibular third molar (Figure 6.45). This non-metric trait is found only on the lower molars and consists of a paramolar cusp on the buccal surface of the first cusp (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994:76). This trait ranges from a pit in the buccal groove to a prominent cusp (exhibited in this case) and may be present in up to 40 percent of any population (Hillson 1996:97).

111


Figure 6.45: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 20 (Unit 20). All maxillary

incisors exhibit slight shovel shaping on lateral margins, while the left third molar

exhibits a protostlid.

Pathology Dental caries were identified on two

premolars (RP4 and RP4). On both teeth, the cavity was located on the medial aspect (mid-crown). Neither of these teeth showed evidence of dental work.







shape (Figure 6.46). The long axis measured 213 centimeters (83 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 60 and 56 centimeters, respectively (23 and 22 inches). The middle measured 58 centimeters (23 inches) for Burial 20.




utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=126 fragments) and lining tacks (N=108). Elaborate hardware included swing bail handles (N=4) (Figure 6.47), screws (N=9), and a single escutcheon.


Clothing items recovered from Burial 20 included buttons (N=10), a safety pin, and a pair of shoes. Four types of buttons were recovered: white porcelain four-hole sew-through (N=2); white porcelain two-hole sew-through (N=1); black glass two-hole sew-through (N=2) and fabric covered metal shanked (N=5). The location of the white porcelain buttons within the burial suggests they may have been associated with undergarments, while the metal buttons could have adorned an outer garment or dress. The two black glass buttons were found adjacent to the shoes and were likely associated with them. The shoes consisted only of the heels.

112


Burial 20 (Unit 20)

Coffin Outline

Hairpin

250

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material

50

cm

Jewelry

ButtonHandleShoes

Necklace (beads)

Earrings

Brooch

Hairpin


Figure 6.47: Photograph of swing bail handles recovered from Burial 20 (Unit 20).

113


Jewelry and Personal Adornment Burial 20 was interred wearing a variety of

jewelry and personal adornment items, including a necklace of glass beads, earrings, a brooch, and a rubber hairpin. The necklace consisted of 38 beads in multiple sizes, with larger beads located toward the center, and progressively smaller beads to the left and right. No chain or other linking material was found in association with the beads. The earrings and brooch were probably made of copper alloy. These items were poorly preserved, making identification of shape impossible.


Burial 20.


probably a young female, aged 16 to 22. An entire adult dentition was recovered from this burial, of which only two exhibited evidence of dental caries. All of the maxillary incisors had traces of shovel shaping and one molar had a protostylid.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. The porcelain buttons recovered date from 1840 to 1920. Based on the shape of the coffin and types of cultural materials recovered, Burial 20 was probably interred between 1860 (beginning date of manufacture for mass-produced hardware) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory No skeletal or dental material was


Age Because of the lack of skeletal and dental

material, no assessment of age from the

skeleton could be made. The individual in Burial 21 was probably an infant (birth to 3 years) based on the size of the coffin.


Burial 21.




made for Burial 21.

Pathology No skeletal or dental remains were

recovered from Burial 21.







114





utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=72 fragments) and lining tacks (N=323). Elaborate hardware used in the construction of this coffin included slotted screws (N=19) (Figure 6.49).

Burial 21 (Unit 21)

Horizontal Nail


100 20

cm

ThumbscrewButton


115


Figure 6.49: Photograph of slotted screws recovered from Burial 21 (Unit 21).


Only two etched white porcelain four-hole sew-through buttons were recovered from Burial 21. These were found in the center of the coffin and may have been associated with an undergarment.




Burial 21.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860.

The porcelain buttons recovered date from 1840 to 1920.



Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Although poorly preserved, Burial 22

offered the best-preserved skeletal remains from the Reynolds Cemetery. Several distinct cranial elements were recovered. These included: left temporal (N=1); right temporal (N=1); occipital (N=1); left parietal (N=1); left maxilla (N=1); mandible (N=1); and several vault fragments (N=11). The maxillary and mandibular fragments both held teeth (maxilla: LC1 through LM2; mandible: LM1 through

116


LM3; RP3 through RM1; and RM3). This was the only burial in which a fragment of a vertebra was recovered. This skeletal element was probably the 7th cervical vertebra. Fragments of the left and right femora (N=1 and N=1, respectively) and left and right tibiae (N=1 and N=4, respectively) were also recovered. All of these were from the mid-shaft.

Recovered teeth that were not attached to either the maxilla or mandible include: RI1; RI2; RP3; LI1; LI2; LM3; and RC1. Teeth still attached to bone were listed previously.

Age This individual exhibited a moderate to

high degree of dental wear, suggesting an age ranging from 40-55 years. This burial is thought to be that of Van Bibber Reynolds, who was born in 1795 and died in 1843 at the age of 48.


the skeletal remains recovered from Burial 22 and no personal items that could be indicative of sex were recovered. It is probable, however, that this burial is that of Van Bibber Reynolds.



Racial Affinity Evidence of shoveling was noted on three

of the four maxillary incisors. The lingual surface of one incisor (RI1) was missing, thus shoveling could not be identified. This non-metric trait suggests a Mongoloid affinity, most likely Native American ancestry.

Pathology No skeletal or dental pathology was noted

for Burial 22.







Material Soft pine was identified as the wood used

in the construction of the coffin in Burial 22. This type of wood was common and readily available throughout the Kanawha Valley during the nineteenth century.


utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=1 whole, N=119 fragments), lining tacks (N=182), and butterfly hinges (N=4) (Figure 6.51). The hinges were made of copper alloy and were rectangular in shape. The use of hinges on coffin lids was not popular until 1865.

117


Burial 22 (Unit 22)

Coffin Outline Button

250

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

Skeletal Material

50

cm

Vertical Nail

Hinge


Figure 6.51: Photograph of plain hinges recovered from Burial 22 (Unit 22).

118







Burial 22.

Proposed Burial Date Burial 22 is thought to contain the remains

of Van Bibber Reynolds. The skeletal age derived from the recovered dental material encompasses the known age at death of this individual (age 48). No dental pathology was noted for Burial 22, and the maxillary incisors were all shovel shaped.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of hardware recovered, Burial 22 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins). The presence of hinges in this burial is somewhat anomalous, however, because this type of hardware was not commonly used on coffins until 1865. Aside from the hinges, the recovered coffin hardware supports an 1843 date of interment.





recovered from this burial, the small size of the

coffin suggests that Burial 23 contained an infant (birth to 3 years of age).


Burial 23.




made for Burial 23.








shape (Figures 6.52 and 6.53). The long axis measured 72 centimeters (28 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 16 and 16

119


Burial 23 (Unit 23)

Horizontal Nail


0

cm

12.5 25Tacks



centimeters, respectively (6 and 6 inches). The shoulder measured 33 centimeters (13 inches).









120



Burial 23.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of coffin hardware recovered, Burial 23 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).





recovered from this burial, the small size of the coffin suggests that Burial 24 contained an infant (birth to 3 years of age).


Burial 24.




made for Burial 24.


24 were recovered.






shape (Figures 6.54 and 6.55). The long axis measured 72 centimeters (28 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 18 and 22 centimeters, respectively (7 and 9 inches). The middle measured 26 centimeters (10 inches) for Burial 24.




utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian hardware included cut nails (N=168 fragments) and lining tacks (N=133). Elaborate hardware consisted only of slotted tacks (N=20).

121


Burial 24 (Unit 24)Coffin OutlineGrave Shaft

100 20

cm

Horizontal NailSkeletal Material









Burial 24.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while mass-produced hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860.


122








Burial 25.




made for Burial 25.


25 were recovered.










Hardware This coffin was constructed using only cut

nails (N=13). No lining tacks were recovered.






Burial 25.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails were the only diagnostic artifacts recovered and these date generally from 1830 to 1880. Although rectangular coffins were used as early as 1849, their use was not widespread until after 1858. Based on the shape of the coffin and the presence of cut nails, Burial 25 was probably interred between 1849 (earliest known date for use of rectangular coffins) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).

123


100 20

cm

Burial 25 (Unit 25)Horizontal NailCoffin OutlineGrave Shaft










Burial 26.



124



made for Burial 26.





Grave Shaft Burial 26 and Burial 31 shared a grave

shaft (Figure 6.58). Because Burial 26 was

interred more recently than Burial 31, grave shaft dimensions are provided in the description of Burial 31 below. Only the depth of Burial 26 is reported here (80 centimeters below unit datum). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 110 centimeters, or 3 feet 6 inches.



Figure 6.58: Photograph of “foot” end of Burial 26 (Unit 26) coffin within “head” end of grave shaft for Burial 31 (Unit 26), looking west.

125


Burial 26 (Unit 26)

Horizontal Nail

CoffinGrave Shaft

100 20

cm

HandleViewing GlassButtonSafety Pin





utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials included cut nails (N=38 whole, N=5 fragments), wire nails (N=12), and lining tacks (N=3). This was the only burial at the Reynolds Cemetery in which wire nails were recovered. This artifact generally dates from 1880 to the present.

Several elaborate hardware types were collected, including: swing bail handles (N=4); thumbscrews (N=13); escutcheons (N=4); and

a glass viewing window (N=1) (Figure 6.60). Each of the handles measured 15 centimeters (6 inches) in length and was composed of iron covered with white metal and finished with a brass coating. Each handle exhibited a floral motif with a twisted rope design on the bail. Inscribed on all the handles and associated lugs was the manufacturer’s number 863, but no reference to this number could be found.

All of the thumbscrews were fragmentary and four were missing the decorative heads. The nine remaining thumbscrews were ornately designed, one of which was found in its escutcheon. This artifact had a bird (probably a dove) on the head and the associated escutcheon resembled a nest. Other thumbscrews had scallop shaped heads and the escutcheons exhibited the manufacturer’s number 19.

126


127


The glass viewing window was oval in shape and was complete. It measured 45 centimeters (18 inches) in length and 15 centimeters (6 inches) in width. The wooden coffin lid had not yet fully decomposed and the carved edge that surrounded the viewing window could still be seen (Figure 6.61)


Clothing artifacts recovered from Burial 26 included buttons and safety pins. Two varieties of buttons were recovered from this burial: metal and shell. The metal buttons (N=2) were four-hole sew-through. The shell buttons (N=2) were two-hole sew-through.




Burial 26.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Wire nails date generally from 1880 to the present, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. Although they were made throughout the nineteenth century, the recovered shell buttons were likely manufactured after 1887.

Based on the shape of the coffin and types of cultural materials recovered, Burial 26 was probably interred between 1887 (beginning date of manufacture for the shell buttons) and 1900 (ending date for use of the recovered mass-produced hardware).


Figure 6.61: Photograph of in situ viewing glass window and coffin lid with carved

edge, looking west.







Burial 27.


the stature of this individual. The coffin for Burial 27 could have held a fully extended

individual of not more than 75 centimeters (29 inches).


made for Burial 27.


27 were recovered.







Material Oak was the only wood identified for the

coffin in Burial 27. This was the only coffin in the Reynolds Cemetery in which this wood type was identified. White oak group woods are suitable for coffins and caskets due to their impermeability to liquids and strength (Panshin and de Zeeuw 1970). This type of wood was common and readily available

128


Burial 27 (Unit 27)

Horizontal Nail


100 20

cm


throughout the Kanawha Valley during the nineteenth century.


utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=62 fragments) and lining tacks (N=14). In addition, 20 unidentified small metal pieces were also recovered.






Burial 27.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of coffin hardware recovered, Burial 27 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).




129


130




Burial 28.




made for Burial 28.


28 were recovered.






shape (Figures 6.63 and 6.64). The long axis

Burial 28 (Unit 28)

Horizontal Nail


100 20

cm

Thumbscrew



Figure 6.64: Photograph of Burial 28 (Unit 28) during excavation, looking west.

measured 53 centimeters (21 inches), while the top and bottom widths were 26 and 24 centimeters, respectively (10 and 9 inches). The middle measured 26 centimeters (10 inches).




utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. Utilitarian materials consisted of cut nails (N=64 fragments) and lining tacks (N=129). White metal thumbscrews were the only elaborate hardware recovered (N=4).






Burial 28.


burial is assumed to have contained an infant, aged from birth to three years. Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while the mass-produced white metal hardware dates from at least 1860. Rectangular coffins were the primary burial receptacle after around 1860. Based on the shape of the coffin and types of cultural materials recovered, Burial 28 was probably interred between 1860 (beginning date of manufacture for mass-produced hardware) and 1880 (ending date for use of cut nails).



recovered from Burial 29


recovered from this burial, the size of the coffin suggests that Burial 29 contained an individual ranging in age from adolescence (12 to 20) to adulthood.


the remains recovered from Burial 29. Buttons were recovered from the “chest” area of the burial, suggesting the individual had been buried in a shirt. Shirts were common burial attire for males during the nineteenth century.

131




Racial Affinity No skeletal material was recovered from

Burial 29.

Pathology No skeletal material was recovered from

Burial 29.







Burial 29 (Unit 29)

Coffin Outline

Button250

Horizontal Nail

50

cm

Grave Shaft


132







Both porcelain and metal buttons were recovered from Burial 29. The porcelain buttons (N=2) were of the four-hole sew-through variety, while the metal buttons (N=3) had shanked backs. The positions of the buttons within the burial suggest the individual was interred wearing an outer garment, such as a jacket or vest (metal buttons) and a shirt or undergarments (porcelain buttons).




Burial 29.


have been 12 years of age or older. The age range could not be defined more specifically due to the lack of skeletal material and size of the coffin. The individual is thought to be male.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. White porcelain buttons were manufactured between 1840 and 1920. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of coffin hardware and buttons recovered, Burial 29 was probably interred between 1840 (beginning date of manufacture for porcelain buttons) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).





recovered from this burial, the small size of the coffin suggests that a child (3- 12 years of age) or adolescent (12-20 years of age) was interred in Burial 30.


Burial 30.




made for Burial 30.


30 were recovered.




207 centimeters (81 inches) and the short axis measured 84 centimeters (33 inches). The grave shaft was exposed after around 30 centimeters (12 inches) of topsoil had been removed from the cemetery. The total depth of the grave shaft (as excavated archaeologically, after the topsoil had been removed) was 95

133


centimeters (37 inches). With the additional 30 centimeters of topsoil, the coffin for this grave would have been buried at a depth of around 125 centimeters, or 4 feet 1 inches.






utilitarian hardware. Materials used included cut nails (N=4 whole, N=62 fragments), plain screws (N=2), and lining tacks (N=20).

Skeletal Material

25

Burial 30 (Unit 30)

0

Coffin Outline

Horizontal Nail

Grave Shaft

Button

cm

50


134



A variety of button styles were identified in Burial 30. Five white porcelain four-hole sew-through Prosser process buttons were recovered and each had been painted green (N=3) and red (N=2). Three metal buttons with shanks were also recovered, along with several small pieces of copper or brass that were probably the remnants of shanks. A total of ten small red glass buttons were also recovered. These were domed and decorated with a seven point white star design painted in the center. The red glass buttons had likely been set in the metal shanks, as evidenced by their placement observed during excavation. The placement of buttons in the burial suggests they were associated with a shirt.

A single buckle was also recovered from Burial 30. This item was located at the lower end of the torso and was probably from a belt.




Burial 30.

Summary and Proposed Burial Date Because of the size of the coffin, the

individual interred in Burial 30 is thought to be a child or adolescent, aged 3 to 20 years. No skeletal or cultural indicators of sex were found in this burial.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. White porcelain buttons were manufactured between 1840 and 1920. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of coffin hardware and buttons recovered, Burial 30 was probably interred between 1840 (beginning date of manufacture for porcelain buttons) and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).


Skeletal Preservation and Inventory Skeletal preservation in Burial 31 was

generally poor, but a few skeletal remains and several tooth crowns were recovered. Skeletal material consisted only of fragments of the left and right temporals (N=2 and N=1, respectively). Both deciduous and permanent teeth were recovered from Burial 31, including: Ldm1, Rdm1, Rdm2. This individual was missing only three teeth of a full adult dentition (RM3, LM3, and LM3). A total of 11 unidentified tooth fragments (both deciduous and permanent) were also recovered.


skeletal remains could not be estimated. The dental remains, however, provided a fair amount of information to base an assessment. The presence of both deciduous and permanent molars indicates an age range of 7.5 to 12.5 years. Ubelaker’s (1989) illustration depicts a fully erupted permanent dentition, minus the third molars, at the age of 12 years +/- 36 months (9-15 years of age). Thus, the age range of this individual established from the dentition is 7.5 to 15 years. This estimation changes, however, if coffin size is considered as a factor in aging this individual. The small size of the coffin indicates that a young child (roughly 3 to 9 years in age) would have been interred in Burial 31.


the skeletal remains recovered from Burial 31 and no personal items that could be suggestive of sex were recovered.



135



four permanent maxillary incisors (Figure 6.67). This non-metric trait suggests a Mongoloid affinity, most likely Native American ancestry.

Pathology Dental caries were present on three molars

(RM1, RM3, and LM1). Each tooth held a single cavity on the occlusal surface. The cavities in the left and right first molars were small, while the cavity in the third molar covered most of the occlusal surface.

Linear enamel hypoplasias were identified on all four canines (Figure 6.67). All of the incisors were fragmentary and were not investigated for enamel defects. The canines exhibited single defects in the mid-crown region. Reid and Dean (2000) identify the age of occurrence for these as 2.3 to 4.6 years for mandibular canines and 2.7 to 4.0 years for maxillary canines.

Figure 6.67: Photograph of dental elements from Burial 31 (Unit 26). Maxillary incisors exhibit pronounced shovel shaping, while

canines exhibit single mid-crown hypoplastic lines.
















Burial 31.

136


Burial 31 (Unit 26)

cm

Coffin OutlineGrave ShaftHorizontal Nail

0 10 20

Skeletal Material



probably a child or adolescent, aged 3 to 9 years. No skeletal or cultural indicators of sex were found in this burial. Three dental caries were identified, in addition to enamel hypoplasias and shovel shaped incisors.

Cut nails date generally from 1830 to 1880, while hexagonal coffins were the primary burial receptacle until the late 1850s. Based on the shape of the coffin and type of coffin hardware and buttons recovered, Burial 31 was probably interred between 1830 (beginning date of manufacture for cut nails)

and 1860 (ending date for use of hexagonal coffins).

Conclusions Skeletal remains were recovered from 19

of the 31 burials excavated at the Reynolds Cemetery. Cultural materials, such as clothing and jewelry, were collected from 16 of these, while mortuary items (coffin hardware) were recovered from all of the burials. The analysis of the materials provided information on the general demographics and health of the population and changes in mortuary behavior over time. Conclusions drawn from the analyses are provided below.

137


Age The interred population from the Reynolds

Cemetery was comprised of individuals ranging in age from birth to at least 74 years (Figure 6.69). Ages were broken into 6 groups: infants, 0 to 3 years; children and adolescents, 3 to 20 years; adolescents to adults, 12 plus years; older adolescents to young adults, 16 to 22 years; young to middle adults, 20 to 40 years; and middle to old adults, 40 plus years.

Sub-adults (birth to 20 years of age) comprised just over half (N=14, 52 percent) of the individuals whose age could be clearly defined (N=27). The age of four other individuals could be estimated at only 12 plus

years (these individuals could be anywhere from adolescents to old adults).

Of the 27 individuals with identified ages, the infant group comprised the majority of the population (N=11, 41 percent), which is not surprising because infant mortality rates were high during the nineteenth century. Two children, aged 3 to 9 and 7 to 12 years, and one child/adolescent, aged 3 to 20 years, comprised 11 percent of the identifiable population.

Late adolescents to young adults (16 to 22 years old) comprised 15 percent of those with identifiable ages (N=4), while young to middle adults (20 to 40 years) made up only 7 percent. Middle to old adults (40 plus years) comprised the final 26 percent of the population (N=7).

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


0-3 years

3-20 years12 plus years

20-40 years

40 plus years

16-22 years

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Figure 6.69: Age estimations of individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery.

138


The mortality profile for the Reynolds Cemetery appears average for a nineteenth century rural population. A pattern of decreasing mortality by age for sub-adults and young to middle adults (up to 40 years of age) was noted for the assemblage. The highest mortality rate was for the infant age group, with the lowest rate recorded for young to middle adults.

Weiss (1973) maintains that the general pattern of human sub-adult mortality in anthropological populations is one of very high infant mortality. This mortality is highest during the first year of life, decreases between the ages of 1 and 5, and declines further

between the ages of 10 and 15. This pattern is reflected in the sub-adult mortality rate for the Reynolds Cemetery.

Sex Sex estimations for the Reynolds

Cemetery population were based only on mortuary and cultural materials recovered. These included associated headstones and clothing and jewelry items. In all, a total of seven females and eight males were identified and most were adults (Figure 6.70). The sex of none of the infants and only one of the children could be estimated (a female aged 7 to 12 years).

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


Male

FemaleUnknown

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Figure 6.70: Sex estimations of individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery.

139


Individuals falling in the 12 plus year age range consisted of two males, one female, and two of unknown sex. The 16 to 22 year age range was comprised of three females and one male, while the 20 to 40 year age range included one female and one individual of unknown sex. Five males were identified for the 40 plus year age range, while only one female was assigned to this age (the sex for one other individual could not be determined).

In general, adult females in this population appeared to have died at an earlier age than adult males. Three females aged 16 to 22 and one female aged 20 to 40 were identified, while only one male aged 16 to 22 and no males aged 20 to 40 were present (one individual of indeterminate sex was identified in the 20 to 40 year age range). Alternately, five males were identified in the 40 plus years

age range, while only one female was identified (the sex for one other individual could not be determined). This difference in mortality age between males and females may reflect a lack of health care during prime childbearing years.

Racial Affinity Although the ancestry of the Reynolds

family is European, evidence of Mongoloid genetic affinity was identified for five individuals (Figure 6.71). The identities of two of these individuals are thought to be Van Bibber Reynolds (Burial 22) and his son, James Reynolds (Burial 3). The names of or relationships between the three remaining burials exhibiting shovel shaped incisors are not known.

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


Shovel Shaped Incisors Present

Shovel Shaped Incisors AbsentUnknown Incisor Shape

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Figure 6.71: Racial affinity estimations of individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery.

140


Shovel shaping on the maxillary incisors is common in Native American populations and may indicate Native American ancestry in this skeletal population. The trait can be passed on for several generations, thus Van Bibber Reynolds’ potential Native American ancestry could have derived from any number of relatives (i. e., parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.). Van Bibber’s father, John Reynolds, did not exhibit this trait and burials that could include his mother, Miriam, did not have preserved maxillary incisors in which an assessment of the trait could be made. No archival information has been found to date to

suggest Native American ancestry in the Reynolds family.

Dental Pathology A total of 15 individuals in the Reynolds

Cemetery sample had identifiable teeth (N=248). Of these, 10 individuals (67 percent) exhibited pathology in the form of dental caries (Figure 6.72) With regard to all identified permanent teeth (from sub-adults and adults combined) only 11 percent (26 of 248) were carious, with 33 incidences of carious lesions identified.

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


Dental Elements Present (No Caries)

Dental Elements Present (Caries)No Dental Elements Present

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Figure 6.72: Dental pathology identified for individuals interred in the Reynolds Cemetery.

141


Diet during the nineteenth century consisted primarily of bread, meat, and potatoes (Cummings 1941; Mesick 1970; and Shryock 1931). Improved methods of milling and refining brought about the greater use of processed flour and sugar. The high incidence of dental caries in the Reynolds Cemetery sample suggests the population had access to sugar or other refined foods, such as flour. In addition, limited access to dental care for this population was evidenced by the presence of a single gold filling and one full upper denture.

An examination of the presence of enamel hypoplasia in all sub-adult and adult anterior teeth (incisors and canines) in the Reynolds Cemetery sample yielded a frequency of only 16 percent (12 of 75 teeth). The 12 affected

teeth were from four individuals, or 31 percent of the population in which anterior teeth were recovered (N=13) (Figure 6.73). The percentage of affected individuals in this population is considerably less than that recorded for other contemporaneous cemeteries, such as the Monroe County Poorhouse in New York in which 73 percent had the defect (Lanphear 1990) and the Cross Homestead in Illinois in which 67 percent exhibited hypoplasia (Larsen et al. 1995). The relatively low incidence of linear enamel hypoplasia in the current population may be skewed, however, by the lack of anterior dental elements in over half of the burials.

Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


Anterior Teeth Present (No Hypoplasia)

Anterior Teeth Present (Hypoplasia Present)No Anterior Teeth Present

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Figure 6.73: Linear enamel hypoplasias identified for individuals in the Reynolds Cemetery.

142


The study of dental wear in the Reynolds Cemetery sample revealed that the diet contained a fair amount of abrasive material. Abrasive materials could have come from the incorporation of abrasives into the food during preparation. For adults in the sample, all permanent teeth exhibited occlusal surface wear to some degree.

Mortuary Characteristics A total of 18 hexagonal and 13 rectangular

coffins were excavated at the Reynolds Cemetery. The majority of hexagonal coffins were constructed using only utilitarian materials, while the majority of rectangular coffins were constructed with a mixture of both utilitarian and mass-produced hardware. With only a few exceptions (Burials 5 and 14), all of the hexagonal coffins are thought to date from 1830 to 1860. Although hexagonal in shape, Burials 5 and 14 were constructed with mass-produced hardware, suggesting they date from 1860 to 1880.

Of the rectangular coffins, three were constructed with only utilitarian hardware and are thought to date between 1830 and 1880 (Burials 11, 13, and 25). These burials are all of infants (birth to three years). Nine of the remaining rectangular coffins date from 1860 to 1880 and had various mass-produced hardware items, such as thumbscrews, escutcheons, slotted tacks, handles, and viewing glass windows. One final rectangular coffin was constructed with cut nails, wire nails, and mass-produced hardware, and dates from 1887 to 1900.

A total of five formed headstones with engraved names were identified for the Reynolds Cemetery. All of these stones are associated with Reynolds family burials dating from 1832 to 1852. At least one other burial (Burial 5) was marked with rough fieldstones set vertically into the head and foot ends of the grave shaft. Burial 9, adjacent to the south side of Burial 5, may also have been marked with rough fieldstones because a few loose sandstone blocks were found at the base of the topsoil in the center of the graveshaft. Both Burial 5 and 9 date from 1860 to 1880.

Other formed or rough fieldstone grave markers may have existed at the Reynolds Cemetery in the past. These may have been removed by later descendents of the Reynolds family (as was the case for John Reynolds’ head- and footstones), or they may have been removed during field clearing activities for agricultural use. It is also possible that many of the burials were marked with wood stakes that later decomposed.

Cultural Characteristics Clothing items were recovered from a total

of 14 burials in the Reynolds Cemetery. Those without evidence of clothing, such as buttons or buckles, may have been interred wearing either burial shrouds or clothing that may not have required fasteners, such as dresses. No shroud pins were identified in the assemblage, but it is possible that at least some of the earlier interments (1832 to 1840s) were buried in shrouds, as this was a common practice in North America during the first half of the nineteenth century. The earliest known burials (1832 to 1843: John Reynolds, Van Bibber Reynolds, and Elizabeth Reynolds) did not produce any clothing related items.

The recovered clothing materials suggested a variety of items were worn. These probably included outer garments, vests, shirts, trousers, dresses, and undergarments. At least three individuals were buried wearing shoes. The clothing materials present revealed that little more than plain garments were probably worn.

Jewelry and personal adornment items were found in six burials, all of which were thought to be female. A single plated-metal jewelry item was recovered from the site. No jewelry made of precious metal, coins, or expensive jewelry was present within the burials. In four instances, glass beads and copper alloy earrings and brooches that were probably of inexpensive manufacture were the only decorative goods recovered. This, in addition to the relatively plain garments worn, suggests interment situations where the family chose not to bestow valuable personal possessions with the deceased.

143

Site Structure and Organization

Chapter 7. Site Structure and Organization

A total of 31 graves were located on the east end of a terrace surface elevated

roughly 6 meters (20 feet) above the valley floor of Burning Spring Branch. The Reynolds Cemetery was located approximately 130 meters (426.5 feet) northeast of 46Ka142, the historic residence of John Reynolds and his heirs. At the time of the excavation, the cemetery was overgrown with mature trees and saplings and a dense understory of brush and weeds. No evidence for a fence was found. The cemetery had obviously not been maintained in several years. A photograph provided to

the field crew by Ms. Ann Bird (a distant relative of John Reynolds) showed that, in 1977, the cemetery had already overgrown with trees and brush (Figure 7.1).

This chapter documents the structure of the site through description of the historic burials and their placement in the cemetery. The use of space is an integral part of mortuary practices. The spatial aspect of the cemetery will be evaluated in light of expected ideological and economic trends during the nineteenth century.

Figure 7.1: Photograph of Reynolds Cemetery location taken in 1977, orientation of the photo unknown (photograph provided by Mrs. Ann Bird).

144


Spatial Dimensions of Cemetery Use

As noted in Chapter 1 of this report, burials in southern folk cemeteries were oriented typically from west to east, with the heads to the west and feet to the east. They were often arranged in family groupings or rows, or a combination of both.

Aside from the east to west orientation, the earliest nineteenth century cemeteries, referred to as pioneer cemeteries by Jeane (1989), often exhibited fairly limited spatial arrangement of graves (Winchell et al. 1992). Later cemeteries (dating to the last half of the nineteenth century) in the eastern and southern United States were somewhat more structured. These cemeteries, referred to as transitional, had greater spatial organization, defined family plots, and decorative vegetation (Jeane 1989:110). The shift from pioneer cemeteries to transitional cemeteries is often referred to as the rural cemetery movement. It originated during the third and fourth decades of the nineteenth century. The earliest known interment in the Reynolds Cemetery is 1832 and, because of the date and layout of the cemetery, it is assumed to correspond with the rural cemetery movement. This movement saw a trend toward an emphasis on family and individual social position.

Organization The Reynolds Cemetery was arranged in

a series of rows oriented north to south, with interments aligned east to west (head to the west and feet to the east). This is the general orientation characteristic of rural cemeteries in the transitional stage (Jeane 1989). A total of three distinct rows (Rows 1, 2 and 3) were identified, but groupings of children and possible family clusters were also observed (Figure 7.2).

Row 1 consisted of four or five adult burials (Burials 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10) (Figure 7.2). Burial 8 contained no age defining skeletal material, but the size of the coffin suggested the presence of an individual of at

least 12 years of age or older. Four of the burials were clustered with no space between for other interments. Burial 10 was spatially segregated and was located approximately 3 meters (10 feet) to the north of Burial 8. Burials 7 and 8 were oriented slightly off the traditional east to west alignment, suggesting they may have been related and/or died around the same time. All five of the burials in Row 1 have proposed burial dates of 1860 to 1880.

Row 2 consisted of four or five adult burials (Burials 4, 6, 17, 18, and 19). Burial 18 contained no age defining skeletal material, but the size of the coffin suggested the presence of an individual of at least 12 years of age or older. Three post molds were found immediately north of Burial 17 (the northernmost burial in this row), followed by a small grouping of five sub-adult burials (Group 1— Burials 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16) (Figure 7.2). Row 2 contained the earliest known grave at the Reynolds Cemetery: John Reynolds, who died in 1832. His grave (Burial 6) is the southernmost burial in Row 2. The remaining burials in this row were all fairly equally spaced and in the same east to west orientation. Aside from John Reynolds’ grave, all of the burials in Row 2 had proposed burial dates of 1830 to 1860.

Row 3 consisted of five adult burials (Burials 1, 2, 3, 15, and 22). The burials in Row 3 are flanked on the south side by another grouping of sub-adult burials (Group 2—Burials 23 through 28 and 31) and to the north by a post mold that is probably associated with Burial 29 (Figure 7.2). All of the burials were fairly evenly spaced and all were aligned in the same east to west orientation. Burial 1 is thought to be that of Elizabeth Reynolds, who died in 1841, while Burial 2 might be her daughter, Mary, whose death date is unknown. Burial 3 was probably James Reynolds, who died in 1852, while Burial 22 likely contains the remains of Van Bibber Reynolds, who died in 1843. The cultural material recovered from these four burials is consistent with the

145


Burial 20

Burial 21

Burial 9

Burial 7

Burial 5

Burial 11Burial 10

Burial 8

Burial 27

Burial 24

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 17

Burial 18

Burial 19

Burial 22

Burial 25

Burial 26

Burial 23

Burial 1

Burial 2

Burial 3

Burial 14

Burial 12

Burial 13

Burial 16

Burial 15

Burial 29

Burial 30

Burial 28

Burial 31

meters

0 1 2


1830-1860*

1860-18801887-1900

*Burials 11, 13, 16, and 25 may date up to 1880, but due to the lack of mass-produced hardware, were included in the 1830 to 1860 period.

Group 2

Group 3

Row 2

Row 3

Row 1

Group 1 Group 4

Figure 7.2: Schematic plan map of the Reynolds Cemetery showing spatial organization

and interment sequence.

146


known death dates. No name could be associated with Burial 15, but the proposed date of burial is 1830 to 1860.

The sub-adult burials in Group 1 were roughly aligned in two rows positioned at the end of Row 2, but between Row 1 and Row 3 (Figure 7.2). Three of the burials contained infants aged from birth to 3 years (Burials 11, 13, and 14), one contained an infant from 1 to 3 years (Burial 12), and one contained a child aged 7 to 12 years (Burial 16). The proposed burial date for three of the graves was 1830 to 1880 (Burials 11, 13, and 16), while Burials 12 and 14 were probably interred from 1840 to 1860 and 1860 to 1880, respectively. All of these burials were aligned in the same east to west orientation.

The sub-adult burials in Group 2 consisted of seven graves and only one distinct row could be discerned (Burials 23, 24, and 25) (Figure 7.2). All but one of the burials contained infants from birth to 3 years of age (Burials 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28). Burial 31 contained a child aged 3 to 9 years. The proposed burial date for three of the burials was 1830 to 1860 (Burials 23, 27, and 31), while Burial 25 was dated to between 1830 and 1880. Two burials dated between 1860 and 1880 (Burials 24 and 28). The most recent interment in the Reynolds Cemetery was Burial 26, which dated from 1887 to 1900. Burial 26 was also the only intrusive burial found at this cemetery. It was positioned over a portion of the “head” end of the coffin in Burial 31 (Figure 7.2).

Two small and somewhat segregated groups of individuals were also identified (Groups 3 and 4) (Figure 7.2). Group 3 was located southwest of the southernmost grave in Row 2 and consisted of two burials (Burials 20 and 21). Burial 20 was that of a female, aged 16 to 22. This individual was interred in a rectangular coffin with only four handles. McKillop (1995) has suggested that the use of four handles on a coffin suggests a sub-adult burial, but the size of this coffin was average for the adults in this sample. It is not clear whether the individual interred in Burial 20 was viewed socially as a child (if she was

toward the lower end of the 16 to 22 year age range, she might have still been a “child” to her immediate family), or if the use of four handles was a matter of necessity at the moment. The individual in Burial 20 was also the most heavily adorned person in the Reynolds Cemetery.

Burial 21 was that of an infant, from birth to 3 years of age. Both Burials 20 and 21 were interred between 1860 and 1880 and both were oriented in the same direction as Burials 7 and 8 in Row 1 (Figure 7.2). It is possible that the individuals in Burials 20 and 21 died at roughly the same time as those in Burials 7 and 8. Although there is no evidence, it is also possible that Burial 21 is the offspring of the young woman in Burial 20.

Group 4 consisted of Burials 29 and 30. This group was located north of the northernmost burial in Row 3, and was bound by two post molds (Figure 7.2). Both of these graves were interred between 1840 and 1860, with Burial 29 probably containing an adult male and Burial 30 containing a child or late adolescent (3 to 20 years of age). Because these burials were segregated in location and further bound by posts, it is likely that they were related.

Interment Sequence The earliest known interment in the

Reynolds Cemetery is that of John Reynolds, who was buried in 1832 (Burial 6), and there is no cultural or archival evidence of any earlier burials having been made in the cemetery. John Reynolds’ grave is located the farthest south in Row 2 (Figure 7.2). If his was the first interment in the cemetery, all other burials would have been placed sequentially in relation to his.

A considerable amount of data has been presented throughout this report to provide a basis for reconstructing the sequence of interments in the Reynolds Cemetery. The proposed sequence detailed below is conjectural, but three phases of interments are estimated. These date from: 1830 to 1860; 1860 to 1880; and 1887 to 1900.

147


The first phase of interments likely involved the burials in Rows 2 and 3, several of the sub-adult burials in Groups 1 and 2, and the two individuals in Burials 29 and 30 (Figure 7.2). John Reynolds is the only individual known specifically to be located in Row 2, but his wife, Miriam, and son, Fenton whose dates of death are unknown, are probably interred in this row as well.

Row 3 is thought to include Van Bibber, Elizabeth, James, and Mary Reynolds. Mary is the only individual of these whose death date is unknown; the others died between 1841 and 1852. The unknown individuals in Burials 11, 12, and 13 of Group 1, Burials 23, 25, 27, and 31 of Group 2, and the two individuals in Group 4 (Burials 29 and 30) were also interred during the 1830 to 1860 period.

The second phase of interments involved the individuals in Row 3 (Burials 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10), one individual in Group 1 (Burial 14), two individuals in Group 2 (Burials 24 and 28), and the two burials in Group 4 (Burials 20 and 21) (Figure 7.2). All of these burials date from 1860 to 1880. The relationship between these individuals and John Reynolds’ immediate family is unknown.

The final interment phase (1887 to 1900) includes a single burial (Burial 26) (Figure 7.2). This was the only burial at the Reynolds Cemetery that was constructed with wire nails, and the only burial with materials dating past 1880.

The 1830 to 1860 interments constitute the core of the cemetery. Building from John Reynolds’ grave, a series of rows and groups of individuals were interred primarily to the north, northeast, and northwest. Burials post-dating 1860 were all positioned on the north, west, and southwest peripheries of the cemetery. This suggests that, although few grave markers were encountered during the archaeological investigation, some form of markers (such as wooden stakes) probably existed at some point in time. By 1887, at least some of these markers may have deteriorated, making grave locations difficult to discern. This may be evidenced by the intrusive nature of the most recent burial

(Burial 26) on one of the earliest interments (Burial 31).

Sociohistorical Interpretations The historic context of the cemetery

included the end of a financially prosperous period for the Reynolds family, which was followed quickly by destitution and debt. Although only a few grave markers were identified from the cemetery most that were encountered were elaborate and ornately carved (Figures 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, 7.7, 7.8).

Figure 7.3: Photograph of John Reynolds’ headstone.

John Reynolds was the family patriarch

and as such, his status may have influenced his treatment in death. John’s family accorded him elaborate head- and footstones. He was interred in a rectangular shaped coffin, which appears to have been a very uncommon practice for the 1830s, when hexagonal shaped coffins were the norm.

148


149

Figure 7.4: Photograph of John Reynolds’ footstone.

Interestingly, no headstone engraved with John’s wife’s name, Miriam, was encountered during the investigation. There are a few hypotheses regarding this missing stone. First, there is no definite record of Miriam Reynolds having been interred in the cemetery, thus she simply may not be present. Second, she may not have been accorded as much familial status as her husband and no elaborate stone was made upon her death. Third, she may have died at a time when the Reynolds family could not afford to mark her grave with an elaborate stone, choosing instead a less expensive marker made of wood that eventually decomposed. Finally, the stone may have been removed from the cemetery, as had John’s marker, and never been recovered.

John and Miriam’s son, Fenton Reynolds, was also buried at the cemetery, as evidenced by the recovery of a partial headstone. This stone was similar to John Reynolds’ in that it was highly ornate. The stone could not be

associated with any of the burials and Fenton’s date of death is not known.

Figure 7.5: Photograph of Fenton Reynolds’ headstone.

Van Bibber Reynolds, his wife Elizabeth, and their son, James all had similar engraved stones that were set in formed sandstone anchors. A daughter, Mary, may also have had similar stones because a footstone anchor was found at the end of what is thought to be her grave. The stones recovered for Van Bibber’s family were not as elaborate as those of John and Fenton Reynolds.

The coffins associated with Van Bibber’s immediate family were hexagonal in shape and constructed with utilitarian hardware. The only notable difference between Van Bibber’s coffin and the others was the use of hinges on the coffin lid. Hinged coffin lids were not common until after 1865, more than 20 years after Van Bibber’s death. As with John Reynolds, Van Bibber may have been venerated by his family and accorded special treatment in death. The hinged lid of the coffin would have allowed for viewing of the upper torso and head regions of Van Bibber’s body.


Figure 7.6: Photograph of Van Bibber Reynolds’ headstone.

Only two other burials at the Reynolds Cemetery had evidence of grave markers. Both of these dated from 1860 to 1880 and were situated side-by-side (Burials 5 and 9). These markers were made of rough fieldstone and only one burial (Burial 5) was definitely marked, with the stones still vertical in the ground. The coffins in both of these were constructed with mass-produced hardware and both individuals were interred wearing shoes (only one other burial at the site contained evidence of shoes).

Changes in attitudes toward death during the nineteenth century were inferred from the mortuary materials recovered from the Reynolds Cemetery. This change is thought to be part of the “beautification of death” movement, which was an ideational shift fueled by social and material transformations during the nineteenth century, specifically 1831 to 1872 (Bell 1990:56; Little et al. 1992). This movement saw ostentation and elaboration of mortuary behavior, including the use of increasingly complex burial receptacles and hardware, elaboration of funeral costumes, and increasing displays of wealth during the funeral.

Figure 7.7: Photograph of Elizabeth P. Reynolds’ headstone.

This change can be seen most interestingly in the use of elaborate headstones at the Reynolds Cemetery. All of the recovered engraved headstones were associated with early burials constructed with utilitarian hardware (1832 to 1852). Conversely, rough fieldstones were identified only for later burials containing elaborate hardware (1860 to 1880). From this small sample, it appears that elaboration and display of wealth during mortuary activities shifted through time. From the 1830s through early 1850s, the Reynolds family displayed wealth in a more permanent manner by erecting ornate grave markers. Interments made during the height of the beautification of death period had short-term, rather than lasting, displays of wealth. The elaborate coffin would only be seen for a short period of time during the funeral, and then the final resting place may have been marked only

150


with rough fieldstones or perhaps wooden stakes.

Figure 7.8: Photograph of James C. Reynolds’ headstone.

Conclusion The Reynolds Cemetery was organized

spatially in the traditional rural folk cemetery arrangement. This consisted of rows and groupings of individuals placed with their heads to the west and feet to the east. The earliest burials were aligned in two rows with groups of children to the north and south. Later interments were positioned along the periphery of the cemetery. The sporadic use of stone grave markers at the site is suggestive of both the socioeconomic status of the Reynolds family during the nineteenth century and also of the general trends in mortuary behavior at the time.

151

Treatment of Remains and Reinterment Plan

Chapter 8. Treatment Of Remains And Reinterment Plan

Introduction

All work involved in the disinterment, transportation, analysis, and reinterment

of the remains followed requirements provided in the Scope (Appendix A). These activities were completed in a professional and respectful manner.

Storage and Transportation of Remains

Human remains and all associated items recovered from individual graves were placed in “rough boxes” constructed to standards provided in the Scope (Appendix A). Each box was constructed from 2.46 centimeter (0.75 inch) thick high-grade plywood free of noticeable blemishes. After construction, the interior and exterior surfaces of the boxes were painted white. For the purpose of identification, a brass plate engraved with the name of the cemetery and burial number, or the name of the individual (if known) was attached to the outside lid of each box. Nine of the rough boxes were 65-x-50-x-33 centimeters (25.6-x-19.7-x-13.0 inches) in size, with the remaining 22 being 42.0-x-36.0-x-26.0 centimeters (16.5-x-14.2-x-10.2 inches).

To protect the remains and prevent mixing, lids were secured to the boxes at the end of each workday with screw nails. Then the boxes were placed in a closed conveyance and transported to CRAI’s laboratory, in Hurricane, West Virginia, a distance of approximately 48 kilometers (30 miles). Once at the laboratory the boxes were placed in a secure location. In instances where fragile human remains were present, they were refrigerated to reduce deterioration. All

refrigerated remains were placed in labeled bags. Following analysis, the remains and associated items were placed back in their assigned box.

Reinterment Plan All of the human remains, personal

artifacts and associated items, and coffin hardware recovered from Reynolds Cemetery were reinterred at Montgomery Memorial Park in London, Kanawha County, West Virginia (Figure 8-1). Montgomery Memorial Park is located on the east bank of the Kanawha River approximately 25.7 kilometers (16.0 miles) east of Reynolds Cemetery.

Following the submission and review of the report draft and reinterment plan, the Corps provided CRAI notice to initiate the reinterment process. The remains, still contained in the rough boxes, were transported to Montgomery Memorial Park in a closed conveyance. This process, which took place on four separate occasions between December 7, 2001 and January 17, 2002, was coordinated with Montgomery Memorial Park to insure that the appropriate grave plots were opened.

Once at Montgomery Memorial Park, CRAI personnel unloaded the rough boxes and placed them adjacent to their respective grave plot. Personnel from Montgomery Memorial Park completed the remainder of the reinterment process. For each individual burial, the rough box was placed in a vault and lowered by hand into the pre-excavated shaft. Once the vaults were in place, mechanical equipment was used to backfill the grave shafts. Representative photographs for this process are provided in Figures 8.2 to 8.6. A schematic drawing showing the location of the reinterment graves and accompanying

152


Figure 8.1: Portions of USGS 7.5’ Cedar Grove and Montgomery quadrangles showing location of Montgomery Memorial Park. Scale: 1”=2000’.

153


Figure 8.2: General view showing reinterment activities on December 7, 2001, looking west.

Figure 8.3: Photograph showing rough box being placed in vault.

154


Figure 8.4: Photograph showing vault lid being secured.

Figure 8.5: Photograph of vault being lowered into grave shaft.

155


Figure 8.6: Photograph showing vault in grave shaft prior to being backfilled.

information for the Reynolds remains are provided in Figure 8.7 and Table 8.1.

Grave Markers and Monument

Replacement markers will be manufactured for all 31 graves, as the original headstones and footstones will either be maintained by the Corps at a new Marmet Lock facility, or perhaps another local museum. The replacement stones, all made from gray granite, will consist of 26 78.7 x 39.4 centimeter (24 x 12 inch) flat markers and five upright headstones manufactured to the approximate dimensions of the originals. The flat makers will be used to the mark graves of individuals for which headstones were not found in association. The headstones will be manufactured for the reinterment graves of Col. John Reynolds, Fenton Mercer Reynolds, Van Bibber Reynolds, Elizabeth P. Reynolds, and James C. Reynolds. The headstones for these individuals were recovered during the excavation.

In addition to the grave markers, the Corps intends to place a monument at the location of the reinterments graves. The monument, which will probably be made from black granite, will include an etching depicting a scene of early saltworks near the Marmet project area. The monument will also include the following text:

The Reynolds Cemetery, circa 1830 - 1900, was located near the mouth of Burning Springs Branch, West Belle, Kanawha County. The 31 graves were relocated by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in 2001 as part of the Marmet Lock Replacement Project. Colonel John Reynolds and his sons were early Kanawha Valley Saltmakers. Five headstones were recovered, but based on local burial practices and the clustering of the graves it is believed that the ten graves identified here belong to the Reynolds family. The five granite headstones were designed after the original headstones that were preserved and

156


Figure 8.7: Diagram showing location of reinterment graves with burial plot numbers at Montgomery Memorial Park.

157


Table 8.1. Reynolds Cemetery Reinterment Data.

Burial Number

Identification Montgomery Memorial Park Plot

Number

Reinterment Date

Type of Granite Replacement Stone

1 Elizabeth Reynolds 347-2 12-7-01 Upright Headstone 2 Mary Reynolds 347-1 12-7-01 Flat Marker 3 James C. Reynolds 348-1 1-16-02 Upright Headstone 4 Unknown Reynolds 344-2 1-16-02 Flat Marker 5 Unknown 342-3 1-17-02 Flat Marker 6 Col. John Reynolds 344-1 12-7-01 Upright Headstone 7 Unknown 342-4 12-14-01 Flat Marker 8 Unknown 343-3 12-14-01 Flat Marker 9 Unknown 341-4 12-14-01 Flat Marker

10 Unknown 343-4 12-14-01 Flat Marker 11 Unknown 341-3 12-14-01 Flat Marker 12 Unknown 342-1 12-7-01 Flat Marker 13 Unknown 342-2 12-7-01 Flat Marker 14 Unknown 343-1 12-14-01 Flat Marker 15 Unknown Reynolds 348-2 1-16-02 Flat Marker 16 Unknown 343-2 1-17-02 Flat Marker 17 Unknown Reynolds 346-1 1-16-02 Flat Marker 18 Unknown Reynolds 345-2 12-7-01 Flat Marker 19 Fenton Mercer Reynolds 345-1 1-16-02 Upright Headstone 20 Unknown 338-1 1-17-02 Flat Marker 21 Unknown 339-1 1-17-02 Flat Marker 22 Van Bibber Reynolds 346-2 12-7-01 Upright Headstone 23 Unknown 350-1 12-7-01 Flat Marker 24 Unknown 336-2 12-14-01 Flat Marker 25 Unknown 336-1 12-14-01 Flat Marker 26 Unknown 335-2 1-17-02 Flat Marker 27 Unknown 335-1 12-14-01 Flat Marker 28 Unknown 334-1 12-14-01 Flat Marker 29 Unknown 349-1 12-7-01 Flat Marker 30 Unknown 349-2 12-7-01 Flat Marker 31 Unknown 334-2 12-14-01 Flat Marker

curated by the Corps of Engineers. This monument is dedicated to the Reynolds family and the other salt-making pioneers in the Kanawha Valley.

Landscaping In the spring of 2002, after the replacement

headstones and makers are set and the soil in the graves has settled, the area will be leveled and seeded. In addition, eight shrubs of the same species will be planted to form a hedge between the reinterment graves and the cemetery maintenance building. Based on requirments of the Scope, the shrubs will be Red Cedar, American Holly, or Japanese Yew.

158

Summary

Chapter 9. Summary

J ohn Reynolds was a leading developer in the Kanawha Valley region during the early part

of the nineteenth century. By 1814, he had gone into the salt business and was doing well, holding a sizable piece of valuable river front land, half of which he eventually split amongst his sons. The 1820s appeared to have been a prime financial time for John Reynolds and his sons Franklin and Van Bibber, with each owning his maximum number of slaves during this period. By the late 1820s, however, the Reynolds were experiencing financial difficulties, and mortgaging their properties to stave off various creditors. At the time of John Reynolds’ death in 1832, he was deeply in debt. In the 1830s, Van Bibber and his brother, Ellicott, made considerable improvements to their land, and by 1835 were thousands of dollars in debt. In the following years, John Reynolds’ sons never recovered financially and the family eventually moved from the property.

Excavation of the Reynolds Cemetery yielded a substantive amount of cultural and biological data. All of the research objectives outlined in Chapter 1 of this report were, to some extent, addressed during the excavation and subsequent analysis of the recovered skeletal and cultural remains. The four objectives of the current project included: identification of individuals possibly interred in the Reynolds Cemetery through archival research; identification of the spatial organization of the cemetery; documentation of the changes in economic and social status of early versus late burials; and identification of the health status and genetic affinity of the interred population.

Although it was expected that only around five graves would be encountered at the Reynolds Cemetery, a total of 31 burials were identified. Through archival research and the identification of engraved headstones, a list of

at least 20 individuals that lived on or near the Reynolds’ family property during the nineteenth century was compiled. Any of these individuals could potentially have been interred in the cemetery but, because no written records pertaining to the cemetery were found during the course of research, few could be associated with graves. Based on the presence of engraved headstones, these individuals are known to have been interred in the cemetery: John Reynolds; Fenton Reynolds; Van Bibber Reynolds; Elizabeth Reynolds; and James Reynolds.

The Reynolds Cemetery was organized spatially in the traditional Christian pattern. This consisted of burials made on an east to west alignment, with heads to the west and feet to the east. Also in keeping with the Christian tradition, it appears that Elizabeth and Miriam Reynolds would have been buried on the left sides of their husbands (no adult burials were located to the right of either John or Van Bibber’s graves). The cemetery was also organized in rows and groups and this spatial pattern fits the definition of an upland south folk cemetery.

Changes in the economic and social status of early versus late burials at the cemetery were somewhat difficult to document. This was due, in part, to the lack of archival information and identification of individuals interred at the cemetery. John and Van Bibber Reynolds may have been accorded special treatment in death based on status within the family, as evidenced by the use of a rectangular coffin and a hinged coffin lid. Both of these mortuary features were uncommon for the period in which they were used.

The use of both highly elaborate and rough field stone grave markers at the cemetery is suggestive of the funerary ideologies of the population. The earliest interments marked with gravestones at the cemetery (1832 to

159

Summary

1852) were highly elaborate, while the later interments with gravestones present (1860 to 1880) were marked only with rough, uninscribed fieldstones. Nineteenth century elaboration of mortuary behavior was most prominent during the beautification of death movement, particularly the period from the 1860s through 1870s. In the Reynolds Cemetery, elaboration during this period (1860 to 1880) appears to have been bestowed upon the less visible coffin, rather than the permanent grave marker, as was seen in the earlier burials.

The economic status of the Reynolds family is known to have shifted during the 1820s and 1830s from affluent to heavy indebtedness. This shift is not observed in the mortuary characteristics of the known burials dating from 1832 to 1852. It appears that, although basically financially insolvent by the mid-1830s, no expense was spared in treatment of the deceased. The use of ornately engraved head- and footstones during this financially unstable period suggests the Reynolds’ family attempt to maintain an appearance of wealth.

Although skeletal preservation was poor, the overall health of the population could be assessed from the recovered dental remains. Identifiable dental remains were recovered from 15 individuals, most of which were adults. Dental pathology was evidenced in the form of caries and enamel hypoplasias. Dental caries were present in 67 percent of the population with identified dental elements. Although the size of the sample is small, the recorded incidence of this pathology in the current population is about average when compared to other nineteenth century samples. This population is thought to have had access to cariogenic processed foods, such as refined sugar and flour. Professional dental care appears to have been limited for this population, as only two instances of dental work were identified.

Linear enamel hypoplasias were noted for four individuals out of 13 with anterior teeth present. The incidence of this characteristic is low when compared to contemporaneous samples. This suggests that childhood stresses,

such as malnutrition and infectious disease, may not have been as prevalent in this population as others.

Demographically, the Reynolds Cemetery population was composed of roughly equal numbers of adult males and females. Although the sample size was small, a disproportionate number of women died in early adulthood than did men. This may have been due to a general lack of health care during prime childbearing years. Infant mortality rates were high during the nineteenth century and the majority of the sub-adult burials at the Reynolds Cemetery were those of infants from birth to three years of age.

Shovel shaped incisors were noted for five individuals out of ten with maxillary incisors present. According to Dahlberg (1951:Table 22; cited in Bass 1987:Table 53), although not common, shovel shaped incisors have been identified for Euro-Americans that have no known Native American or Asian affinity. In Dahlberg's study, American whites had the smallest frequency of the trait when compared to American Negroes, several Native American groups, Eskimos, Mongols, and Chinese populations. Of the groups considered in the study, all of the Native American, Eskimo, Mongolian, and Chinese populations had trait frequencies in at least 84 percent of the study sample, with most exhibiting the frequency in more than 90 percent. In the American white sample, just over 8 percent exhibited the trait, while the trait was identified in 12 percent of the American Negro sample. The high frequency of shoveled incisors associated with the Reynolds remains at the site suggests that, without more complete information for the family lineage, a more conclusive statement cannot be made at this time.

The Reynolds Cemetery developed in 1832 as a resting place for John Reynolds, a leading developer in the Kanawha Valley and patriarch to a large family involved in the local salt making industry. The majority of interments in the cemetery are most likely comprised of John Reynolds’ immediate family, including his wife, at least two of his

160

Summary

sons and one daughter-in-law, and at least two grandchildren. Later residents on the property apparently made use of the already established cemetery, placing their loved ones along the periphery. The final burial was made between 1887 and 1900.

All of the human remains and associated items recovered from the 31 burials at Reynolds Cemetery were reinterred at Montgomery Memorial Park near London, Kanawha County, West Virginia. The reinterment graves are located in the southeast part of the cemetery overlooking the Kanawha River to the west. Reinterment was conducted on four separate occasions between December 7, 2001 and January 17, 2002. The general location of the reinterments will be marked by a monument made from black granite, while individual reinterment graves will be marked with flat grave markers and upright headstones of gray granite. The flat markers will be used for the 26 graves that lacked associated headstones. The five upright headstones, manufactured to resemble the originals that were recovered from Reynolds Cemetery, will mark the reinterment graves of Col. John Reynolds, Fenton Mercer Reynolds, Van Bibber Reynolds, Elizabeth P. Reynolds, and James C. Reynolds.

161

References

References Cited

Albert, L. S. and K. Kent 1949 The Complete Button Book. Doubleday

& Company, Inc. Garden City, New York.

Anderson, Adrienne 1968 The Archaeology of Mass Produced

Footwear. Historical Archaeology 2:56-65.

Andre, R., S. Cohen and W. Wintz 1995 Bullets & Steel: The Fight for the

Great Kanawha Valley 1861-1865. Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, Inc. Charleston, West Virginia.

Anonymous 1797 Map of Early Landholders in the

Burning SpringArea. Copy on file with Southern Land Company, Charleston, West Virginia.

Anslinger, C. M., H. S. McKelway, and J. G. Mauck

1996 Phase I and II Archeological Investigations for the Marmet Lock Replacement Project, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Contract Publication Series 96-08, Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky.

Atkinson, G. W. 1876 History of Kanawha County, from its

Organization in 1789 Until the Present Time. Charleston, West Virginia.

Atkinson, J. R. 1987 The Blackburn Cemetery: An

Abandoned Burial Site on the Old Natchez Trace in Maury County, Tennessee. Part 1, The Blackburn Cemetery Excavations. Southeast Archaeological Center, National Park Service, Tallahassee, Florida.

Aurora Casket Company, Inc. 2001 Web page concerning depth of burials.

Http://www.funeralplan.com/askexperts/grave.html.

Bass, W. M. 1987 Human Osteology. 3rd edition. Special

Publication Number 2. Missouri Archaeological Society, Columbia.

Belkin, L. 1990 Unearthing of Freed-Slave Cemetery

May Put Dallas Road Project on Hold. The New York Times National, August 13, p. A12.

Bell, E. L. 1990 The Historical Archaeology of

Mortuary Behavior: Coffin Hardware from Uxbridge, Massachusetts. Historical Archaeology 24(3):54-78.

1991 Artifacts from the Almshouse Burial Ground. In Archaeological Excavations at the Uxbridge Almshouse Burial Ground in Uxbridge, Massachusetts. British Archaeological Reports International Series No. 564, edited by R. J. Elia and A. B. Wesolowsky, pp. 254-283. Tempus Reparatum, Oxford.

Bellantoni, N. F. and D. A. Poirier 1995 Family, Friends and Cemeteries. CRM

18(3):29-31.

Bellantoni, N. F., P. S. Sledzik, and D. A. Poirier

1993 Rescue, Research and Reburial: Walton Family Cemetery, Griswold, Connecticut. Manuscript on file at Alexandria Archaeology, Alexandria, Virginia.

162

References

Blakely, R. L. and L. A. Beck 1982 Bioarchaeology in the Urban Context.

In Archaeology of Urban America: The Search for Pattern and Process, edited by R. S. Dickens, Jr. pp. 175-208. Academic Press, New York.

Borstel, C.L., and C.M. Niquette 2000 Testing Procedures for Historic

Cemeteries. ACRA Edition Volume 6, No 5.

Brock J. and S. J. Schwartz 1991 A Little Slice of Heaven:

Investigations at Rincon Cemetery, Prado Basin, California. Historical Archaeology 25:78-90.

Bromberg, F. W., S. J. Shepard, B. H. Magid, P. J. Cressey, T. Dennee, and B. K. Means

2000 “To Find Rest From All Trouble” The Archaeology of the Quaker Burying Ground Alexandria, Virginia. Alexandria Archaeology, Office of Historic Alexandria, City of Alexandria, Virginia.

Brown, D. F. n. d. Button Parade. Lightner Publishing Co.,

Second Edition, Chicago, Illinois.

Buikstra, J. E., J. A. O’Gorman, and C. Sutton (editors)

2000 Never Anything So Solemn: An Archaeological, Biological, and Historical Investigation of the Nineteenth-Century Grafton Cemetery. Kampsville Studies in Archeology and History No. 3. Center for American Archeology, Kampsville, Illinois.

Buikstra, J. E. and D. H. Ubelaker 1994 Standards for Data Collection from

Human Skeletal Remains. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series No. 44. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville.

Burnston, S. A. 1997 The Invisible People: The Cemetery at

Catoctin Furnace. In In Remembrance: Archaeology and Death, edited by D. A. Poirier and N. F. Bellantoni, pp. 93-103. Bergin & Garvey, Westport, Connecticut.

Calvert, H. C. and S. M. F. Chapman 1946 A History of the Chapman and

Alexander Families. Dietz Printing Co., Richmond.

Carbonell, V. M. 1963 Variations in the Frequency of Shovel-

Shaped Incisors in Different Populations. In Dental Anthropology, edited by D. R. Brothwell, pp. 211-234. Pergamon Press, London.

Cardwell, D. H., R. B. Erwin, and H. P. Woodward

1968 Geologic Map of West Virginia, (slightly revised 1986). West Virginia Geologic and Economic Survey, Morgantown.

Clark, D. (editor) 1978 The Encyclopedia of How It’s Made.

A&W Publishers, New York.

Clay, R. B. 1999 Geophysical Survey of the Van Bibber

Reynolds Cemetery (46KA349), Marmet Lock Replacement Project, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Contract Publication Series 99-01, Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky.

Cohen, S. 1987 Kanawha County Images: A

Bicentennial History 1788-1988. Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, Charleston.

Comstock, J. (editor) 1973 Hardesty’s West Virginia Counties.

Vol 4. Richwood, West Virginia. Reprinted from Hardesty’s Historical and Geographical Encyclopedia, Illustrated. Written By H. H. Hardesty. Copyright 1883, Chicago.

163

References

Cook, R. B. 1935 Washington’s Western Lands.

Shenandoah Publishing, Strasburg, VA.

Core, H. A., W. A. Cote, and A. C. Day 1979 Wood Structure and Identification.

Syracuse University Press.

Cotter, J. L., D. G. Roberts, and M. Parrington 1992 The Buried Past, An Archaeological

History of Pennsylvania. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Creveling, D. K. 1987 Archaeological Investigations at Christ

Church, Alexandria, Virginia. Alexandria History VII:30-37.

Crist, T.A.J. 2001 Smallpox and Other Scourges of the

Dead. In Dangerous Places; Health, Safety, and Archaeology, edited by D. A. Poirer and and K.L. Feder, pp. 79-106. Bergin & Garvey, Westport, Connecticut.

Crist, T. A., R. H. Pitts, A. Washburn, J. P. McCarthy, and D. G. Roberts

1997 “A Distinct Church of the Lord Jesus”: the History, Archaeology and Physical Anthropology of the Tenth Street First African Baptist Church Cemetery, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. John Milner Associates, Inc., West Chester, Pennsylvania.

Cummings, R. O. 1941 The American and His Food: A History

of Food Habits in the United States. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Dahlberg, A. A. 1951 The Dentition of the American Indian.

In The Physical Anthropology of the American Indian, edited by W. S. Laughlin, pp. 138-176. Viking Fund, New York.

Deed Records n. d. Kanawha County Clerk, Kanawha

County Courthouse, Charleston, West Virginia.

Edwards, L.J. The History of Belle and the Area. Belle

Womens Club, Belle, West Virginia.

Elia, R. J. and A. B. Wesolowsky (editors) 1991 Archaeological Excavations at the

Uxbridge Almshouse Burial Ground in Uxbridge Massachusetts. BAR International Series 564. Archaeological and Historical Associates, Oxford, England.

Epstein, D. 1990 A Collector’s Guide to Buttons. Walker

and Company, New York.

Farrell, J. J. 1980 Inventing the American Way of Death,

1830-1920. Temple University Press, Philadelphia.

Food Machinery and Chemical Corporation, Chlor Alkali Division.

1960 The Salt Industry in the Kanawha Valley. South Charleston, West Virginia.

Ford, G. H. 1943 The Button Collector’s History. Pond-

Ekberg Company, Springfield.

French, S. 1975 The Cemetery as Cultural Institution:

The Establishment of Mount Auburn and the “Rural Cemetery” Movement. In Death in America, edited by D. E. Stannard, pp. 69-91. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Gardman, W. P. (compiler) 1983 Kanawha Valley Cemeteries, Vol. II.

West Virginia Genealogical Society, South Charleston, West Virginia.

Garrow, P. H., S. A. Symes, and H. W. Case 1985 Physical Anthropology and

Archaeological Investigations of the Nancy Creek Primitive Baptist Church Cemetery, Chamblee, Georgia. Garrow & Associates, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia.

Gates, E. (compiler) 1981 Kanawha Valley Cemeteries, Vol. I.

Kanawha Valley Genealogical Society, Inc., South Charleston, West Virginia.

164

References

Goodman, A. H. and J. C. Rose 1990 Assessment of Systemic Physiological

Perturbations from Dental Enamel Hypoplasias and Associated Histological Structures. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 33:59-110.

Guernsey, J. L. and A. H. Doerr 1976 Principles of Physical Geography.

Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., Woodbury, New York.

Guldan, E. 1966 Eva und Maria: Eine Antithese als

Bildmotiv. Graz and Cologne: Hermann Bohlaus.

Habenstein, R. W. and W. M. Lamers 1981 The History of American Funeral

Directing. National Funeral Directors Association, Milwaukee.

Hacker-Norton, D. and M. Trinkley 1984 Remember Man Thou Art Dust: Coffin

Hardware of the Early Twentieth Century. Research Series 2. Chicora Foundation, Inc., Columbia, South Carolina.

Hale, J. P. 1931 Trans-Allegheny Pioneers. Kanawha

Valley Publishing, Charleston, West Virginia.

Hale, J.P. 1864 Constitution of the Kanawha Salt

Company. Moore, Wilstach & Baldwin, Printers, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Hanihara, K. 1963 Crown Characteristics of the

Deciduous Dentition of the Japanese-American Hybrids. In Dental Anthropology, edited by D. R. Brothwell, pp. 105-124. Pergamon Press, London.

Harlow, W. M., E. S. Harrar, and F. M. White 1979 Textbook of Dendrology. McGraw-

Hill, New York.

Hillson, S. A. 1996 Dental Anthropology. Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge.

Hoadley, R. B. 1990 Identifying Wood: Accurate Results

with Simple Tools. Taunton Press.

Hoff, F. J. 1937 The Centenary of the First American

Phsiological Society Founded at Boston by William A. Alcott and Sylvester Graham. Bulletin of the Institute of the History of Medicine V:714.

Hughes, E. and M. Lester 1981 The Big Book of Buttons. Boyertown

Publishing Company, Boyertown, Pennsylvania.

IMACS 1984 Intermountain Antiquities Computer

System.

Jeane, D. G. 1989 The Upland South Folk Cemetery

Complex: Some Suggestions of Origin. In Cemeteries & Gravemarkers: Voices of American Culture, edited by R. E. Meyer, pp. 107-136. Utah State University Press, Logan.

Jordan, T. G. 1982 Texas Graveyards: A Cultural Legacy.

University of Texas Press, Austin.

Joseph, J. W., M. B. Reed, and C. E. Cantley 1991 Agrarian Life, Romantic Death:

Archeological and Historical Testing and Data Recovery for the I-85 Northern Alternative, Spartanburg County, South Carolina. 2 volumes. Technical Report No. 39. Report on file. South Carolina Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Columbia, South Carolina.

Krebs, C. E. and D. D. Teets 1914 Kanawha County. West Virginia

Geologic Survey, County Geologic Reports, Wheeling, West Virginia.

Lang, K. A. 1984 Coffins and Caskets: Their

Contribution to the Archaeological Record. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Justice Studies. University of Idaho, Boise.

165

References

Lanphear, K. M. 1990 Frequency and Distribution of Enamel

Hypoplasias in a Historic Skeletal Sample. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 81:35-43.

Larkin, J. 1988 The Reshaping of Everyday Life, 1790-

1840. Harper and Row, New York.

LaRoche, C. J. 1994 Beads from the African Burial Ground,

New York City: A Preliminary Assessment. Beads 6:3-20.

Larsen, C. S., J. Craig, L. Sering, M. J. Schoeninger, K. Russell, D. L. Hutchinson, and M. A. Williamson

1995 Cross Homestead: Life and Death on the Midwestern Frontier. In Bodies of Evidence: Reconstructing History through Skeletal Analysis, edited by A. L. Grauer, pp. 139-159. Wiley Liss, New York.

Lebo, S. A. 1988 An Archaeological and

Bioarchaeological Perspective: The Tucker (41DT104) and Sinclair (41DT105) Cemeteries of Delta County, Texas. Institute of Applied Sciences, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas. Submitted to the U. S. Department of the Army, Fort Worth District, Corps of Engineers.

LeeDecker, C., J. Bloom, I. Wuebber, M. Pipes, and K. R. Rosenberg

1995 Final Archaeological Excavations at a Late 18th-Century Family Cemetery for the U. S. Route 113 Dualization, Milford to Georgetown, Sussex County, Delaware. Delaware Department of Transportation Archaeology Series No. 134. Louis Berger and Associates, Inc., East Orange, New Jersey.

Linebaugh, D. W. and S. Phillips 2001 Exploring a Silent City: Excavation

and Analysis of the Holmes-Vardeman-Stephenson Cemetery, Lincoln County, Kentucky. Paper presented at the Eighteenth Annual Kentucky Heritage Council Archaeological Conference, March 4, 2001.

Little, B. J., K. M. Lanphear, and D. W. Owsley

1992 Mortuary Display and Status in a Nineteenth-Century Anglo-American Cemetery in Manassas, Virginia. American Antiquity 57(3):397-418.

Lovejoy, C. O. 1985 Dental Wear in the Libben Population:

Its Functional Pattern and Role in the Age Determination of Adult Skeletal Age at Death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:47-56.

Luscomb, S. 1967 The Collector’s Encyclopedia of

Buttons. Bonanza Books, New York.

Matternes, H. B. 1998 Who Are the People in Cool Branch

Cemetery (40HK9)? A Bioanthropological Case Study. Tennessee Anthropologist 23(1-2):73-85.

McKee, J. K. and S. Molnar 1988 Measurements of Tooth Wear Among

Australian Aborigines: II. Intrapopulational Variation in Patterns of Dental Attrition. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 76:125-136.

McKillop, H. 1995 Recognizing Children’s Graves in

Nineteenth-Century Cemeteries: Excavations in St. Thomas Anglican Churchyard, Belleville, Ontario, Canada. Historical Archaeology 29(2):77-99.

Meer, R. M. 1990 Report of Investigation of Skeletal

Remains Recovered from the Stoltz Site (B0Z0048/198807), Ozaukee County, Wisconsin. State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Burial Site Preservation Program.

166

References

Mesick, J. L. 1970 The English Traveler in America,

1785-1835. Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut.

Mikan, C. J. and M. C. Abrams 1993 Vegetation, Edaphic, and Historic

Analysis of Charcoal Hearths at Hopewell Furnace National Historic Site, Pennsylvania. School of Forest Resources, submitted to National Park Services, Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, Division of Resource Management and Visitor Protection, Philadelphia.

Moorees, C. E., E. Fanning, and E. Hunt 1963a Age Variation and Formation Stages

for Ten Permanent Teeth. Journal of Dental Research 42(6):1490-1502.

Moorees, C. E., E. Fanning, and E. Hunt 1963b Formation and Resorption of Three

Deciduous Teeth in Children. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 21:205-213.

Nelson, L. H. 1968 Nail Chronology as an Aid to Dating

Old Buildings. American Association for State and Local History, Technical Leaflet 15.

Official Records 1880-1901 The War of the Rebellion: A

compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.

Olsen, S. J. 1963 Dating Early Plain Buttons by Their

Forms. American Antiquity 28(4):551-554.

Orser, C. E. Jr. (editor) 1981 A Guide for Historical Archaeology in

Illinois. Mid-American Research Center, Research Paper Number 1, Loyola University, Chicago.

Osborne, P. A. 1993 Button Identification and Price Guide.

Schiffer Publishing, Atglen, Pennsylvania.

Panshin, A. J. and C. deZeeuw 1970 Textbook of Wood Technology.

McGraw-Hill, New York.

Parmalee, P.W. 1967 Freshwater Mussels of Illinois. Popular

Science Series No. 8, Illinois State Museum, Springfield.

Parrington, M. 1987 Cemetery Archaeology in the Urban

Environment: A Case Study from Philadelphia. In Living Cities: Current Research in Urban Archaeology, edited by E. Staski, pp. 56-64. Society for Historical Archaeology Special Publications Series 5.

Ragon, M. 1983 Space of Death: A Study of Funerary

Architecture, Decoration, and Urbanism; translated by Alan Sheridan. University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Reid, D. J. and M. C. Dean 2000 Brief Communication: The Timing of

Linear Hypoplasias on Human Anterior Teeth. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 113:135-139.

Reynolds, E. 1846 Ellicott Reynolds vs. James C.

McFarland, Virginia Court of Appeals, 1846. Microfilm at West Virginia Archives and History, Charleston, West Virginia.

Ring, M. E. 1985 Dentistry: An Illustrated History.

Abradale Press, New York.

Rose, J. C. (editor) 1985 Gone to a Better Land: A Biohistory of

a Rural Black Cemetery in the Post-Reconstruction South. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series Number 25. Fayetteville.

167

References

Ross-Stallings, N. 1995 Bioanthropological Analysis of the

Historic Interments in 15MC24, Metcalfe County, Kentucky. In A National Register Evaluation of Twelve Sites in Adair, Cumberland and Metcalfe Counties, Kentucky, edited by M. A. Hughes. Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 95-69, Lexington, Kentucky.

Rotman, D. L., J. Adams-Graf, K. Jakes, M. Schroeder, and C. Fulton

2000 The Material Culture of Mortuary Behavior: Artifacts from the Grafton Cemetery. In Never Anything So Solemn: An Archeological, Biological, and Historical Investigation of the Nineteenth-Century Grafton Cemetery, edited by J. E. Buikstra, J. O’Gorman, and C. Sutton, pp. 60-90. Kampsville Studies in Archeology and History, No. 3, Center for American Archeology, Kampsville, Illinois.

Russell and Erwin Manufacturing Company 1980 Illustrated Catalogue of American

Hardware of the Russell and Erwin Manufacturing Company: An Unabridged Reprint of the 1865 Edition. Association for Preservation Technology.

Salt Case 1845 Kanawha County Chancery Court,

Court Case. Reynolds, McFarland, Schrewsburgy, et al. Microfilm on file, West Virginia Archives and History.

Santee, Donald E. 1965 Report on Burning SpringLands.

Southern Land Company records, Charleston, West Virginia.

Sargent and Company 1871 Price List of Illustrated Hardware

Manufactured and for Sale. Sargent and Company, New York.

Scott, E. C. 1979 Dental Wear Scoring Technique.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology 51(2):213-218.

Scheurer, L. and S. Black 2000 Developmental Juvenile Osteology.

Academic Press, San Diego.

Shogren, M., K. Turner, J. Perroni (editors) 1989 Elko Switch Cemetery: An

Archaeological Perspective, pp. 191-228. Alabama Museum of Natural History, Division of Archaeology Report on Investigations No. 58, Birmingham.

Shryock, R. H. 1931 Sylvester Graham and The Popular

Health Movement. Mississippi Valley Historical Review XVIII:172-183.

Slaughter, B. W. 2001 Old Bones Beneath the Earth Do Lie:

Archeological Excavations at the Facility Cemetery (18CR239), near Sykesville, Carroll County, Maryland. Maryland Archeology 37(1):18-34.

Smith, B. H. 1984 Patterns of Molar Wear in Hunter-

Gatherers and Agriculturalists. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 63(1):39-56.

South, S. 1964 Analysis of the Buttons from

Brunswick Town and Fort Fisher. Florida Anthropologist 17(2):113-133.

Stealey, J. E., III 1993 The Antebellum Kanawha Salt

Business and Western Markets. University Press of Kentucky, Lexington.

Steele, D. G. and C. A. Bramblett 1988 The Anatomy and Biology of the

Human Skeleton. Texas A & M University Press, College Station, Texas.

Stermer, E. M. and S. Risnes 1994 Radiographic Analysis of Dental

Development Used in Age Determination of Infant and Juvenile Skulls from a Medieval Archaeological Site in Norway. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 4:299-304.

168

References

Stinson, H. S. (compiler) 1980 Kanawha County, West Virginia.

Cemeteries. Vol. III.

Stinson, H. S. and W. P. Gardman 1982 Assorted Cemetery Listings in West

Virginia.

Strother, D.H. 1872 The Capital of West Virginia and the

Great Kanawha Valley: Advantages, Resources, and Prospects. Journal Office, Charleston, West Virginia.

Sutter, R. C. 1995 Dental Pathologies Among Inmates of

the Monroe County Poorhouse. In Bodies of Evidence: Reconstructing History through Skeletal Analysis, edited by A. L. Grauer, pp. 185-196. Wiley Liss, New York.

Swauger, J. L. 1959 An American Burial Technique of the

Early 19th Century. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 29(1):38-39.

Taylor, A. J., A. A. Fox, and I. W. Cox 1986 Archaeological Investigations at

Morgan Chapel Cemetery in Bastrop, Texas. Archaeological Survey Report 146. Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio.

Thomas, R. A., B. C. Zebooker, C. M. Hazel, and D. L. Weinberg

2000 Archaeological Investigations at the Mother UAME Church Cemetery (7NC-E-132), Wilmington, Delaware. MAAR Associates, Inc., Newark, Delaware.

Trinkley, M. and D. Hacker-Norton 1984 Analysis of Coffin Hardware from

38CH778, Charleston County, South Carolina. Research Series No. 3. Chicora Foundation, Columbia, South Carolina.

Ubelaker, D. H. 1989 Human Skeletal Remains. Aldine,

Chicago.

United States Geological Survey 1958 (photorevised 1971, 1976) Charleston

East, West Virginia 7.5 minute series topographic quadrangle.

1965 (photorevised 1971, 1976) Cedar Grove, West Virginia 7.5 minute series topographic quadrangle.

1965 (photorevised 1976) Montgomery, West Virginia 7.5 minute series topographic quadrangle.

Van Bibber Pioneers E-Newsletter n.d. Greenbrier Independent, January 24,

1884, Volume 2, No. 11.

Van Houten, D. G., F. D. Childs, C. C. Teets, R. Estepp, and F. A. Doonan

1981 Soil Survey of Kanawha County, West Virginia. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

Walker, P. L. 1995 Problems of Preservation and Sexism

in Sexing: Some Lessons from Historical Collections for Paleodemographers. In Grave Reflections: Portraying the Past through Cemetery Studies, edited by S. R. Saunders and A. Herring, pp. 31-47. Canadian Scholars’ Press, Toronto.

Walker, P. L., G. Dean, and P. Shapiro 1991 Estimating Age from Tooth Wear in

Archaeological Populations. In Advances in Dental Anthropology, edited by M. A. Kelley and C. S. Larsen, pp. 169-178. Wiley-Liss, New York.

Ward, T. and M. Graham 1978 The Archaeo-Osteology of Three

Historic Cemeteries in Person County, N. C. Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Weiss, K. M. 1973 Demographic Models for

Anthropology. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 27. Society for American Archaeology, Washington D. C.

169

References

West Virginia Division of Culture and History, Historic Preservation Unit

1991 Guidelines for Phase I Surveys, Phase II Testing, Phase III Mitigation and Cultural Resource Reports. MS on file at Division of Culture and History, Charleston, West Virginia.

White, T. D. 2000 Human Osteology, 2nd edition.

Academic Press, San Diego.

Wilson, N. 1889 Confederate Makeshifts. Oveland

monthly and Out West magazine 13:73.

Winchell, F., J. C. Rose, and R. W. Moir 1992 Bioanthropological Investigation of

Nineteenth Century Burials at Site 41DT105. Archaeology Research Program, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas.

Wintz, W. D. 1993 Annals of the Great Kanawha. Pictorial

Histories Publishing Company, Charleston, West Virginia.

Woodall, J. N., J. K. Pitts, and D. S. Weaver 1983 Excavation and Analysis of the Vawter-

Swaim Cemetery, 31FY714, Forsyth County, North Carolina. Wake Forest University. Submitted to Stonewood Corporation.

170

APPENDIX A

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Scope of Services Van Bibber Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) Relocation

Marmet Lock Replacement Project Kanawha County, West Virginia

1. Background. The Marmet Locks and Dam are located in Kanawha County, West Virginia, on the Kanawha River a short distance above Charleston, West Virginia, at River Mile 67.7. The navigation pool stretches 15.1 miles to London Locks and Dam. Normal pool elevation is 590’ A.M.S.L. In authorizing Survey Studies for the Kanawha River Navigation System, the Congress demonstrated its interest in maintaining a modern, safe, and efficient navigation system on the Kanawha River. A single new lock on the right bank, landward of the existing locks has been determined to be the only workable, economically feasible alternative. The 800’ x 110’ alternative has been designated the National Economic Development (NED) Alternative since it has the greatest net annual benefits of the plans investigated in detail. A new lock and continued use of the old chambers at the present facility (as auxiliary chambers) will adequately provide for projected needs of navigation. The project area consists of approximately 118 acres of land that includes 20 acres of government land, 45 acres of residential land (250 residences), 12 acres of commercial land (11 businesses) and 40 acres of undeveloped bottomland. The Van Bibber Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349), also referred to as Marmet Cemetery 501C in Section C and the cemetery relocation map, is located in the undeveloped bottomland. The site was recorded in a cultural resources survey of the area that was completed in 1996. Three tombstones were identified indicating the graves of Van Bibber Reynolds, his wife Elizabeth, and their son James (Clay 1999; 1). All had been displaced from their original locations; although, crudely cut sandstone sockets existed for two of the headstones and one foot stone was still standing in a similar, but smaller, sandstone socket. These indicated interment in approximately 1843 for Van Bibber Reynolds, 1841 for his wife, and 1852 for the one son. The one foot stone was labeled “E.P.R.” suggesting that it is the foot of the grave of Mrs. Reynolds. The two graves, which could be identified by headstone sockets, and the one foot stone were oriented approximately north/south with the headstone located at the southern end of the grave. The grave of John Reynolds (born 1758) was also reported in the cemetery (Belle Women’s Club 1976:45). His tombstone and another tombstone without a name are in the possession of Ann Bird of Charleston. The limited archival work done at the time of the initial survey indicated that Col. John Reynolds was a prominent developer of lands near the mouth of Burning Springs Creek. He and his sons, including Van Bibber, played an important role in the development of the Kanawha Valley’s early salt industry (Anslinger et al. 1996:113). There was no indication that this cemetery contained other than the close family of the one son, Van Bibber Reynolds, and his immediate family. Remote sensing (Clay 1999) delineated the boundary of the cemetery but was unable to identify individual grave shafts.

The site was determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. This data recovery plan is being developed under the terms of the Kanawha Navigation Improvement Project, Programmatic Agreement with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the West Virginia State Historic Preservation Office, which was executed October 6, 1999. This contract covers scientific excavation, analysis and relocation of all graves located in the Van Bibber Cemetery (46Ka349). The excavation, analysis and relocation will be accomplished in compliance with all State and County laws. 2. Services required. The cultural resources services required of the Contractor shall consist of the excavation, analysis and re-interment of all human remains for the Van Bibber Cemetery. All excavation will be done using hand tools and no power equipment will be used to remove topsoil or excavate grave shafts. Analysis will include the description and identification of all skeletal material, grave goods and coffin furniture, and a discussion of the social and historic context of the burials. Re-interment will include the cost of coffins, vaults, opening and closing of graves and landscaping. The contract price will be for the excavation and relocation of five (5) graves. The contractor shall provide a price per grave for any additional graves in the event that additional graves are discovered. Eight burial plots have been reserved at the re-interment cemetery in the event that additional graves are uncovered. The Contractor will be responsible for the transfer of the two tombstones from Mrs. Bird’s house to the Contractor’s laboratory. The Corps will purchase new tombstones under a separate purchase order if it is decided that the original tombstones can be used in an interpretive display. The re-interment can be subcontracted to the Montgomery Memorial Park, but the Contractor will be responsible for coordinating and paying the subcontractor. Specifications for disinterment and re-interment are found in Section C of the Cemetery Relocation Plan. 3. Materials Provided by the Government. The Huntington District will provide the contractor with the following:

A. Detailed project maps showing the project work limits. B. Marmet Archaeological GIS. C. Cemetery Relocation Plan. Mapping will be provided in a digital format (DGN or TIFF) whenever possible.

4. Reports. The Contractor shall prepare a brief letter report following fieldwork on results and interpretations for use in the interim coordination with the SHPO.

The Contractor shall prepare a draft report for the District and other agency review and a final report that addresses all the comments resulting from the review and comment. Both draft and final reports shall be typed on 8 ½ x 11-inch paper with 1-inch top and bottom margins, and a 1 ¼-inch binding margin. The final report text shall be single-spaced and pagination shall conform to standard front-to-back printing requirements. The final report shall be typed on fully white, offset paper 60#. The reports shall be carefully proofread and edited by the Contractor to be reasonably free of error. Photographs and illustrations shall be included when appropriate. All photographs included in the final report shall be originals; the draft reports may use good quality photocopy reproductions. Oversized figures shall be formatted to an 11 x 17-inch page size with adequate margins.

Report Submittal. Five (5) copies of the draft report (four bound and one unbound) shall be submitted to the District for review and comment. One original unbound final copy and five (5) bound final copies of the report shall be submitted to the District. This final report shall be accompanied by one floppy disk or CD, formatted on an IBM-compatible computer, containing one copy of the report in Microsoft Word.

Publishing Restrictions. Neither the Contractor nor his representative shall release or publish any sketch, photograph, report, or other material of any nature obtained or prepared under this contract without specific written approval of the Contracting Officer or his authorized representative. Records of site locations are considered to be internal documents and are not for public distribution. All reports, drawings, maps, photographs, notes, and other material developed in the performance of this contract shall be and remain the sole property of the Government and may be used on any other work without additional compensation to the Contractor. The Contractor agrees not to assert any rights and not to establish any claim with respect thereto. 5. Schedule of Work. The Contractor shall follow this schedule: May 14, 2001 Begin Work June 1, 2001 Complete Disinterment June 15, 2001 Submit Letter Report August 15, 2001 Submit Draft Report September 15, 2001 Complete Re-interment October 15, 2001 Submit Final Report 6. References. Anslinger, C. Michael, Henry S. McKelway and Jeffrey G. Mauck

1996 Phase I and II Archaeological Investigation for the Marmet Lock Replacement Project, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Prepared by Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 96-08.

Belle Women’s Club 1976 Bicentennial Belle: 1776-1976. Privately Published.

Clay, R. Berle

1999 Geophysical Survey of the Van Bibber Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349). Marmet Lock Replacement Project, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Prepared by Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 99-01.

MLD01

Scope of Services Van Bibber Reynolds Cemetery (46KA 349) Relocation

Marmet Lock Replacement Project Kanawha County, West Virginia SECTION A PART A - BACKGROUND

A-1. The Marmet Locks and Dam are located in Kanawha County, West Virginia, on the Kanawha River a short distance above Charleston, West Virginia, at River Mile 67.7. The navigation pool stretches 15.1 miles to London Locks and Dam. Normal pool elevation is 590' A.M.S.L.

A-2. In authorizing Survey Studies for the Kanawha River Navigation System, the Congress demonstrated its interest in maintaining a modern, safe, and efficient navigation system on the Kanawha River.

A-3. A single new lock on the right bank, landward of the existing locks has been determined to be the only workable, economically feasible alternative. The 800' X 110' alternative has been designated the National Economic Development (NED) Alternative since it has the greatest net annual benefits of the plans investigated in detail. A new lock and continued use of the old chambers at the present facility (as auxiliary chambers) will adequately provide for projected needs of navigation.

A-4. The Project Area consists of approximately 118 acres of land, which includes 20 acres

of government land, 45 acres of residential land (250 residences), 12 acres of commercial land (11 businesses) and 40 acres of undeveloped bottomland.

A-5. The Van Bibber Reynolds Cemetery (46KA349), also referred to as Marmet Cemetery 501C in

Section C and the relocation map, is located in the undeveloped bottomland. The site was recorded in a cultural resources survey of the area that was completed in 1996. Three tombstones were identified indicating the graves of Van Bibber Reynolds, his wife Elizabeth, and their son James (Clay 1999:1). All had been displaced from their original locations; although, crudely cut sandstone sockets existed for two of the headstones and one foot stone was still standing in a similar, but smaller, sandstone socket. These indicated interment in approximately 1843 for Van Bibber Reynolds, 1841 for his wife, and 1852 for the one son. The one-foot stone was labeled "E.P.R." suggesting that it is the foot of the grave of Mrs. Reynolds. The two graves, which could be identified by headstone sockets, and the one-foot stone were oriented approximately north/south with the headstone located at the southern end of the grave. The Grave of John Reynolds (born 1758) was also reported in the cemetery (Belle Woman’s Club 1976:45). The limited archival work done at the time of the initial survey indicated that Col. John Reynolds was a prominent developer of lands near the mouth of Burning Creek. He and his sons, including Van Bibber, played an important role in the development of the Kanawha Valley's early salt industry (Anslinger et al. 1996:113). There was no indication that this cemetery contained other than the close family of the one son, Van Bibber Reynolds, and his immediate family. Remote sensing (Clay 1999) delineated the boundary of the cemetery but was unable to identify individual grave shafts.

A-6. The site was determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. This

data recovery plan is being developed under the terms of the Kanawha Navigation Improvement Project, Programmatic Agreement with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the West Virginia State Historic Preservation Office, which was executed October 6, 1999. The plan also complies with Corps of Engineers ER for the Relocation of Cemeteries.

*A-6*

MLD01

A-7. This contract covers scientific excavation, analysis and relocation of all graves located in the Van Bibber Cemetery (46KA349). The excavation, analysis and relocation will be accomplished in compliance with all State and County laws.

*A-7*

MLD01

*

SECTION B PART A - ARCHEOLOGICAL SERVICES REQUIRED

B-1. The cultural resources services required of the Contractor shall consist of the excavation, analysis and reinterment of all human remains for the Van Bibber Cemetery. The contract price will be negotiated for the excavation and relocation of three (3) graves. A price per grave will be negotiated for any additional graves in the event that additional graves are discovered. Eight burial plots have been reserved at the reinterment cemetery in the event that additional graves are uncovered. The reinterment can be subcontracted to the Montgomery Memorial Park, but the Contractor will be responsible for coordinating and paying the subcontractor. Specifications for disinterment and reinterment are found in Section C.

B-1*

MLD01

*

SECTION B PART B - REPORTS

B-2. The Contractor shall prepare a brief letter report following fieldwork on results and

interpretations for use in the interim coordination with the SHPO. B-3. The Contractor shall prepare a draft report for the District and other agency review and a

final report that addresses all the comments resulting from the review and comment. B-4. Both draft and final reports shall be typed on 81/2 x 11-inch paper with 1-inch top and

bottom margins, and a 11/4-inch binding margin. The final report text shall be single-spaced and pagination shall conform to standard front to back printing requirements. The final report shall be typed on fully white, offset paper 60#. The reports shall be carefully proofread and edited by the Contractor to be reasonably free of error.

B-5. Photographs and illustrations shall be included when appropriate. All photographs included

in the final report shall be originals; the draft reports may use good quality photocopy reproductions. Oversized figures shall be formatted to an 11 x 17-inch page size with adequate margins.

B-6. Report submittal. Five (5) copies of the draft report (four bound and one unbound) shall be

submitted to the District for review and comment. One original unbound final copy and five (5) bound final copies of the report shall be submitted to the District. This final report shall be accompanied by one floppy disk or CD, formatted on an IBM compatible computer, containing one copy of the report in Microsoft Word.

B-7. Publishing Restrictions. Neither the Contractor nor his representative shall release or

publish any sketch, photograph, report, or other material of any nature obtained or prepared under this contract without specific written approval of the Contracting Officer or his authorized representative. Records of site locations are considered to be internal documents and are not for public distribution. All reports, drawings, maps, photographs, notes, and other material developed in the performance of this contract shall be and remain the sole property of the Government and may be used on any other work without additional compensation to the Contractor. The Contractor agrees not to assert any rights and not to establish any claim with respect thereto.

B-8. The report will conform to the reporting standards of the West Virginia State Historic

Preservation Office.

B-2*

MLD01

*

SECTION B PART C - SCHEDULE OF WORK

B-9. The contractor shall follow this schedule: April 2, 2001 Begin Work

May 15, 2001 Complete Disinterment June 1, 2001 Submit Letter Report July 2, 2001 Submit Draft Report July 16, 2001 Complete Reinterment August 15, 2001 Submit Final Reports

B-10. References Anslinger, C. Michael, Henry S. McKelway and Jeffrey G. Mauck 1996 Phase I and II Archeological Investigation for the Marmet Lock Replacement Project,

Kanawha County, West Virginia. Prepared by Cultural Resources Analysts, Inc., Contract Publication Series 96-08.

Belle Woman’s Club 1976 Bicentennial Belle: 1776 – 1976. Privately Published. Clay, R. Berle 1999 Geophysical Survey of the Van Bibber Reynolds Cemetery (46KA349), Marmet Lock

Replacement Project, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Prepared by Cultural Resources Analysts, Inc., Contract Publication Series 99-01.

B-3*

MLD01

*

SECTION C PART A - DISINTERRING AND REINTERRING C-1. SCOPE. The work covered by this Scope of Work includes the removal of all bodies and remains, gravestones, markers, vaults, and monuments from the Marmet Cemetery 501C, the scientific analysis of all human remains and associated cultural material, and the reinterment of the bodies and remains, and vaults, the manufacture and setting of duplicate gravestones, markers, and monuments, the furnishing and setting of new grave markers, in the designated reinterment sites specified below and indicated on the General Data Sheets, the transportation and curation of existing gravestones, markers, and monuments, and the planting of a hedgerow. C-1.1. The Disinterment Cemetery. The number of identified graves to be reintered, and the reinterment sites are listed as follows: Disinterment cemetery Number of Graves Reinterment Site Marmet (Tract 108) 3 Montgomery Memorial Park Cemetery C-2. CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY. The Contractor shall be responsible for the entire work under this contract and for all labor, equipment, tools, appliances and property of every description used in the disinterring, transferring, and reinterring of all bodies and remains, all gravestones, headstones, grave markers, lot markers, and monuments. The Contractor shall specifically and distinctly assume all risks of damage or injury to persons or property resulting from any actions or operation under this contract, or in connection with the work, and shall protect and defend the United States and its officers and employees against all claims on account of injury or damage. All work shall be done in a manner consistent with due respect for the dead and for the sensitivities of the living. C-3. PERMITS, REPORTS, AND RECORDS. The Contractor shall be responsible for and shall obtain at his expense, all necessary permits from Federal, State, County and municipal authorities which may be necessary, and the Contractor shall furnish to the Federal, State, County or municipal authorities such reports or records as are required by law. The Government has secured a court order authorizing the removal and reinterment of bodies. The Contractor shall keep a daily record by name and location of all bodies disinterred. C-4. SANITARY PROVISIONS. The Contractor shall provide and maintain in a neat sanitary condition such accommodations for the use of his employees as may be necessary under the circumstances, and shall commit no public nuisance. C-5. GOVERNMENT SUPERVISION. An authorized representative of the Contracting Officer will be on duty at all times during the disinterring, transferring, and reinterring of bodies and during the removal and transfer of all monuments, headstones, gravestones, and grave markers, and the installation of new and duplicate grave markers at the Montgomery Memorial Park reinterment site. This representative will inspect the work as it is done in order to determine its acceptability to the Government. The presence of the Contracting Officer's representative will, in no case, relieve the Contractor from his liability under the contract. C-6. CONTRACTOR'S SUPERVISION. The Contractor shall give his personal attention to the work and shall be present or be represented by an authorized representative at all times during the progress of the work.

C-1*

MLD01

*

C-7 ACQUISITION OF NEW GRAVE SPACES. The owner of the Montgomery Memorial Park Cemetery has agreed to make available as many grave spaces as may be required for this relocation at the set rate of $2,458.00 dollars per grave space. This cost includes the Lots, Opening and Closing and Grave Marker Foundations. The Contractor shall pay the owner of the Montgomery Memorial Park Cemetery, $2,821.38 dollars each for the estimated 3 grave spaces, for a total amount of $8,464.15. The Contractor shall pay said amount of $8,464.15 dollars to the owner of said cemetery prior to the Contractor's excavation of any reinterment grave spaces. This cost includes the Lots, Opening and Closing, Processing Fee and Grave Marker Foundations. If additional grave spaces are required, as directed by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall pay the Cemetery owner for each additional grave space at the rate of $2,458.00 dollars per grave space. The Government will reimburse the contractor on the basis of a receipt or receipts showing the amount so expended under this contract. C-8. MARKING OF GRAVE SPACES. Each grave space shall be marked with a wood stake prior to any reinterment, and the grave identification marked on the stake for grave identification by the Government inspector and the Contractor. Stakes that protrude above the ground surface shall be removed prior to completion of the work. C-9. DISINTERRING. C-9.1. General. All work of disinterring shall be handled in a respectful and becoming manner. The topsoil over the identified graves will be removed by hand excavation to expose the grave shafts. Once the grave shafts are exposed, a three-foot strip of topsoil (approximately 100 square feet) will be removed by hand around the grave shafts to insure that any unmarked burials are identified. The Contractor shall refill the opened graves from which the bodies or remains have been removed. The Contractor shall secure all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for the disinterring. C-9.2. Opening Old Graves. All excavation in old grave locations shall be performed by hand excavation and shall be to the necessary depth and dimensions to properly remove any existing remains. If no remains are found, the excavation shall be carried to culturally sterile soil or to a depth of not less than 6 feet from the original ground surface with bottom dimensions of not less than 3 feet by 4 feet. At this location, if no remains are found, (1) and it is determined by mutual agreement between the Contracting Officer or his representative and the Contractor that no grave exists at that location, the site will be abandoned, backfilled for recording purposes, declared nonexistent, remuneration to the Contractor will subsequently be based solely upon the unit price for opening and backfilling existing graves, or (2) and it is determined by mutual agreement between the Contracting Officer or his representative and the Contractor that a grave probably does exist, and upon receipt of authorization in writing by the Contracting Officer or his representative, the Contractor shall collect not less than 1/2 cubic foot of the material at the bottom of the excavation and reinter such as the last remains; the Contracting Officer or his representative will retain a duplicate copy of such authorization for record purposes. When less than a complete casket or vault is found, at the discretion of the contracting officer, less than a full size rough box and vault may be used to transport and reinter the remains. After all bodies have been disinterred, the disinterment site shall be backfilled. C-9.3. Body and Articles to be Moved. All the body, or last remains, including such jewelry, identification marks, casket, coffin, vault, or other container, shall be removed from each grave, transferred to the Contractors laboratory for analysis and storage until it is ready to be suitably buried in the new grave. C-9.4. Rough Box. Except where the existing rough box is in good condition and can be moved intact and where existing vaults are encountered, the Contractor shall furnish a wood box constructed of boards or 3/4-inch plywood. The rough box shall be constructed as herein specified and as detailed on the

C-2*

MLD01

*

drawings. If constructed of boards they shall be of a good quality commercial lumber, sound, free of loose knots, and having a nominal thickness of 1 inch finished two sides and any splice on top, bottom or side panels shall be tongue and groove. If constructed of plywood, the plywood shall be not less than 3/4 inch thick having one side free of noticeable blemishes. Screw nails shall be used with plywood and driven through plywood into nailer strips as detailed on the drawings. Plywood of A-C grade is the minimum grade acceptable. If plywood boxes are used, top and bottom batten strips are not required. A separate box shall be furnished for each body or remains removed. Each box shall have affixed thereto a small brass identification plate on which shall be inscribed the name of the deceased, when known, the name of the cemetery from which removal was made and the number of the grave therein. The box shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the physical remains of the grave. The size of the smallest rough box shall be no less than 14.5 x 14.5 x 12 inches. A full size box is defined, as that required to contain an adult casket. The boxes and identification plates shall be made in accordance with the details shown on the drawings. The Contractor shall secure the approval of the Government inspector as to the size of each box used. The outside of the wood box shall be given one coat of a white paint, affording good coverage and shall be approved by the Contracting Officer prior to use. Should excavation reveal that the coffin is contained in a commercially obtained concrete or steel vault in satisfactory condition to allow such removal, upon approval of the Contracting Officer or his authorized representative, the remains may be transported and reinterred in such vault and the requirement for the wooden rough box and new vault will be waived. Properly sized rough boxes shall be furnished for metal caskets and wooden caskets. C-9.5. Removing and Transporting Bodies. The body or last remains, coffin, or other container shall be removed from the grave, placed in the properly sized rough box as determined by the contracting officer, sealed with cover, and identification plate attached. The remains shall then be transferred to the Contractor’s laboratory in a closed conveyance. After analysis the remains shall again be sealed and then be transferred in a closed conveyance to the designated reinterment cemetery and reinterred in accordance with regular burial practice. Where there is a burial vault or where the existing rough box is moved intact, the identification plate shall be suitably attached to the vault or rough box. Existing vaults shall be removed and transported with care in order to prevent any undue damage. Where existing vaults are found in a deteriorated condition, all reasonable effort shall be made to remove, transport, and reinter the vault and contents intact. Where existing vaults or caskets can be moved intact, they shall not be opened under any circumstances without first obtaining the proper legal authority to do so. C-9.6. Backfill. Materials for backfill of graves shall consist of the excavated material free of trash, lumber, large clods, or other undesirable debris or borrow materials as approved by the Contracting Officer. Backfill shall be placed in such a manner as to provide compaction of a density at least equal to the density of adjacent earth, so as to prevent settlement or shrinkage. Backfill material shall be mounded. All excess or unsuitable material from the new graves shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed and disposed of off the site. C-10. REINTERRING. C-10.1. General. All work of reinterring shall be handled in a respectful and becoming manner. During inclement weather the actual reburial work shall be accomplished under a tent or other suitable enclosure. During reinterment operations, the Contractor shall rope off local work areas as directed. The Contractor shall secure all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for the reinterring. C-10.2. Excavation. Prior to digging graves in the designated reinterment cemetery, the Contractor shall mow existing grass and DISPOSE OF ANY UNDESIRABLE GROUND COVER AND CLIPPINGS. The contractor shall remove sod from the gravesite prior to excavation, and replace the sod on the gravesite upon completion or reburial. The Contractor shall perform all excavation, of whatever nature encountered, including rock, for new graves to the necessary dimensions to permit free entry of the

C-3*

MLD01

*

bodies to be placed therein. The new graves shall be dug to a depth required by state, county, or municipal laws, or in the absence of such laws, shall be dug to a depth that will insure a minimum of 3-foot, 6-inches of cover over the rough box, or vault, said distance to be measured to the finished-graded ground surface. The use of explosives in any excavation for new graves IS PROHIBITED, EXCEPT AS MAY BE AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER. New graves shall not be excavated more than one day prior to reinterment, unless otherwise directed by the Contracting Officer. C-10.3. Burial Vaults. Where existing burial vaults are not found, or are not in satisfactory condition for reinterment, the Contractor shall furnish a burial vault. A separate vault shall be furnished for each body or remains reinterred. Should excavation reveal that the coffin is contained in a commercially obtained concrete or steel vault in satisfactory condition to allow such removal, upon approval of the Contracting Officer or his authorized representative, the remains may be transported and reinterred in such vault. C-10.4. Backfill. Materials for backfill of new graves shall consist of the excavated material free of trash, lumber, large clods, or other undesirable debris or borrow materials approved by the Contracting Officer. Backfill shall be placed in such a manner as to provide compaction of a density at least equal to the density of adjacent earth, so as to prevent settlement or shrinkage. Backfill material shall not be mounded, but shall be leveled off flush with the surrounding ground. Sod removed from the gravesites will be placed back on the site. Should any additional seeding be necessary to restore the reinterment site, the contractor shall use Scotts Bare Spots lawn seed mixture or equal. All excess or unsuitable material from the new graves shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed and disposed of off the site. C-11. GENERAL DATA SHEETS. Pertinent information concerning the graves to be relocated is shown on the Cemetery Relocation Plans. Data furnished on the plans consists of grave number, name of deceased, identification of headstones, footstones and bases, and reinterment cemetery section, block, lot and space, insofar as it has been practicable for the Government to obtain such data. The information is furnished only as an aid to the Contractor. The Contracting Officer assumes no responsibility for accuracy of the data regarding the dates of death, the types of casket and is furnished only as an aid to the Contractor in determining approximately the number and size of burial boxes.

C-4*

MLD01

*

SECTION C (Cont'd) PART B - MONUMENTS, GRAVE MARKERS AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS C-12. SCOPE. This part of the specifications covers the removal of existing monuments, and grave markers; and furnishing and setting of new grave markers; furnishings and installing bronze plaques; and planting hedgerow adjacent to reintered graves. C-13. REMOVAL OF EXISTING MONUMENTS AND GRAVE MARKERS. The contractor shall remove all monuments, headstones, footstones, gravestones, and grave markers, including all metal markers and ornaments of value from the existing cemeteries as indicated on the General Data Sheets, and transport and curate them at Delf Norona Museum, Moundsville, West Virginia, or another facility designated by the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer will determine those ornaments of value to be moved. The Contractor shall take all precautions to protect such articles from damage during his operations and shall, as determined by the Contracting Officer, either repair or replace at his own expense any such articles that may be broken or damaged in the process of relocation. Stones, which are too heavy to handle by hand, shall be handled with fiber or leather rope slings. Wire rope or chain slings will not be permitted. All stones shall be adequately supported and braced during transportation. Supports and bracing shall be of wood. C-14. SETTING OF NEW AND DUPLICATE MONUMENTS AND GRAVE MARKERS. Duplicate headstones, footstones, gravestones, and markers shall be obtained by the contractor and located at the new gravesites to replace all existing stones. Duplicate stones will be inscribed to match the existing stones as much as practicable. Montgomery Memorial Park requires the footstones to be set in a flat position. For unmarked gravesites, a concrete plaque base and bronze cemetery identification plaque will be obtained to mark the reinterment gravesite. The cemetery identification plaque will indicate that it is an unknown grave from the Reynolds Cemetery, circa 1840, or other identification as approved by the Contracting Officer. Monuments will be oriented such that the inscriptions on the stones can be read from the grave side of the stone, except that insofar as practicable, duplicate monuments shall be reset in their new location so as to face in the same direction, relative to the grave, as the existing monuments faced in the disinterment cemetery. The duplicate monuments shall be set in new concrete foundations as detailed on the drawings. Stones shall be set in mortar upon their foundations, with the exception that slab monuments shall be inserted in the concrete before it has attained its initial set, leaving approximately the same length of the monument above the concrete that was above the ground line in the original setting. ALL MONUMENTS SHALL BE SET PLUMB AND TRUE TO LINE. The methods used and the quality of the work to be done shall be in accordance with the accepted best practices. C-14.1. Mortar for Setting Monuments. Mortar for setting monuments on bases and for joining monuments of more than one piece shall be composed of one part by volume of Portland cement and one part by volume of hydrated lime to three parts by volume of sand (or one part masonry cement to three parts sand) thoroughly mixed with the minimum amount of water to produce a mixture of workable consistency. Mortar that has stiffened because of evaporation of water from the mortar shall be retempered by adding water as frequently as needed to restore the required consistency. Mortar shall be used and placed in final position within 2-1/2 hours after mixing. Masonry cement shall conform to the requirements of ASTM C 91 for "Masonry Cement," Type II.

C-15. LANDSCAPING

C-15.1. There are 8 shrubs to be planted forming a hedge between the reinterment graves and the cemetery maintenance building. Use all the same species to form the hedge. However, there are several species called out in the plant list to allow the contractor to pick one species based on availability. Spacing is to be 9’ on center and spaced at the corners of every grave lot (which includes 2 graves).

C-5*

MLD01

*

Topsoil and peat moss are to be used in all root ball holes to ensure adequate root development. For shrub hedge, please refer to the typical detail and plant list attached to the end of this spec.

C-15.2. The planting period for the shrubs is to be from March 15th – May 31st. After planting, the plants are to be watered once a week with a quantity of water sufficient to insure plant growth through out the summer months during the first growing season.

C-15.3. If the shrubs die during the first growing season, they are to be replaced at the expense of the Contractor. In the case that it may become necessary to replace plants, the appropriate planting times must be met, so plants will not be stressed. The fall planting window is September 1st – November 15th for most plants.

PLANTING LIST

Latin Name Common Name Size Total # 1. Juniperus virginiana ‘Burkii’ Red Cedar 3’-4’high 8 These will grow to 10’- 20’ feet high, and be a narrow to pyramidal evergreen small tree. 2. Ilex opaca American Holly 3’-4’ high 8 These will grow 20’ feet tall, and is a native small tree. 3. Taxus cuspidate ‘Nana’ Japanese Yew 3’-4’ high 8 This will grow 10’ – 20’ feet high, and is slow growing.

C-6*

MLD01

*

SECTION C (Cont'd) PART C - CONCRETE C-15. GENERAL. Concrete shall conform to ASTM C 94 except as otherwise specified. C-16. STORAGE. Materials shall be stored so as not to deteriorate or become contaminated. C-17. SUBMITTALS. C-17.1.1. Cementitious Materials. Cementitious materials will be accepted on the basis of a manufacturer's certificate of compliance. C-18. MATERIALS. C-18.1. Cement. Cement shall be Portland cement and shall conform to ASTM C 150 Type I or II, low alkali when used with aggregate requiring low alkali cement. Only one brand of any type of cement shall be used on the project. C-18.2. Aggregates. Aggregates shall comply with ASTM C 33. C-18.3. Curing Materials. Curing materials shall be impervious sheet or membrane-forming curing compound. Impervious sheet shall be white opaque polyethylene 4 mil thick, waterproof Kraft paper, or polyethylene-coated burlap. Membrane-forming curing compound shall be of commercial formulation, sprayable, nontoxic, and will form a film highly resistant to moisture loss from concrete while curing and will dry within 4 hours. Compound shall be clear with fugitive dye, resin-base or chlorinated-rubber-base-type. C-18.4. Form Coating. Form coating shall be nonstaining form oil or form release agent that will not deleteriously affect concrete surfaces nor impair subsequent applications. C-18.5. Form Materials. Form materials shall be plywood or hardboard especially made for concrete form use or other materials that will produce the specified finishes without adversely affecting the concrete surfaces. C-19. FORMWORK. Formwork shall provide for concrete conforming accurately to the indicated shapes, lines, dimensions, and with surfaces free of offset, waviness, or bulges. Exposed corners shall be chamfered, beveled, or rounded by moldings placed in the forms. Surfaces shall be thoroughly cleaned and coated before each use. Forms shall be removed at a time and in a manner that will not injure the concrete. C-20. FINISHING. Fins and loose material shall be removed. After placing, the concrete shall be floated to a true, regular surface with a wood float.

C-7*

MLD01

*

SECTION D PART A - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE D-1. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE. Inspection of services rendered will be made by the Contracting Officer or his authorized representative. Any work not meeting acceptable standards will be remedied to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer or his authorized representative, at no additional cost to the Government, prior to payment being authorized.

D-1*

MLD01

*

SECTION E PART A - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE E-1. COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984). The Contractor will be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 10 calendar days after the date the Contractor receives the notice to proceed, (b) to prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete the entire work ready for use not later than 140 calendar days after date of receipt of notice to proceed. The time stated for completion shall include final clean-up of the premises. E-1.1. Completion of Seeding Work. In the event the weather or other conditions are unfavorable for the performance of the seeding work to be done under this contract, and within the contract time, the Contractor will be required to perform seeding work during the next sowing season, and the contract time for the seeding only will be considered to be automatically extended to the end of that sowing season. (See Section C, Part C - SEEDING.)

E-1*

MLD01

1

*

SECTION F PART A - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS F-1. CONTRACT DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS F-1.1. Three Sets of Half Scale Contract Drawings. Three sets of half scale contract drawings will be furnished to the Contractor without charge, except applicable publications incorporated into the technical contract requirements by reference. At the request of the Contractor, full-scale sets of drawings will be substituted for half scale sets of drawings, up to a maximum of three sets. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to furnish any necessary copies of drawings and specifications to his suppliers and subcontractors. Additional sets will be furnished on request at the cost of reproduction. For all modifications, the Contractor will be furnished three prints of appropriate scale or, at his option, one reproducible and one print of the appropriate scale of all revised drawings. The work shall conform to the following contract drawings, all of which form a part of this Scope of Work and are available in the Office of the District Engineer, Department of the Army, Huntington District, Corps of Engineers, 502 Eighth Street, Huntington, West Virginia 25701-2070. Drawing No. Title 023-L2-22-103/1 Cemetery Site Layout and Location Map 023-L2-22-103/2 Cemetery No. 501C 023-L2-22-103/3 Reinterment Layout 023-L2-22-103/4 Cemetery Relocation Miscellaneous Details THE FOLLOWING DRAWINGS ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY Z2-107/1 Environmental Protection Measures Z2-107/2 Environmental Protection Measures F-1.2. Drawing Omissions. Omissions from the drawings or the Scope of Work of details of work which are manifestly necessary to carry out the intent of the drawings, or which are customarily performed, shall not relieve the Contractor from performing such omitted or described details of the work, but they shall be performed as if fully and correctly set forth and described in the drawings and Scope of Work. F-1.3. Drawing Discrepancies. The Contractor shall check all drawings furnished him immediately upon their receipt and shall promptly notify the Contracting Officer of any discrepancies. Figures marked on drawings shall in general be followed in preference to scale measurements. Large scale drawings shall in general govern small scale drawings. The Contractor shall compare all drawings and verify the figures before laying out the work, and shall be responsible for any errors, which might have been avoided thereby. F-2. CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE. Certificates for demonstrating proof of compliance of materials with Scope of Work requirements shall be furnished for all other material and shall be executed

F-1*

MLD01

2

*

in 4 copies. Each certificate shall be signed by an official authorized to certify in behalf of the manufacturing company and shall contain the name and address of the Contractor, the project name and location, and the quantity and date or dates of shipment of delivery to which the certificates apply. F-3. PURCHASE ORDERS. The Contractor shall furnish four copies of all purchase orders for material to be permanently incorporated in the construction work showing firm name and address, contract number, and promised delivery date. Such purchase orders shall be so worded or marked that each item, piece or member can be definitely identified in the Scope of Work or on the drawings. Purchase prices are not necessary and may be obliterated from the copies of the purchase orders furnished. F-4. PHYSICAL DATA. Data and information furnished or referred to below is for the Contractor's information. The Government shall not be responsible for any interpretation of, or conclusion drawn from, the data or information by the Contractor. (FAR 52.236-4) F-4.1. Physical Conditions. The indications of physical conditions on the drawings and in the Scope of Work are the result of site investigations by surveys at the site. F-4.2. Weather conditions. The Contractor shall make his own investigations as to weather conditions at the site. Data may be obtained from various National Weather Service offices located generally at principal cities, nearest to this project being: Charleston, West Virginia. F-4.3. Transportation Facilities. DuPont Avenue, off State Route 60 provides access to the disinterment site and State Route 60 provides access to the reinterment cemetery. F-4.4. Location of Project. The cemetery 501C (Van Bibber Reynolds) is located in Kanawha County, WV, approximately 0.5 miles north of the Marmet Locks and Dam as shown on drawing 023-L2-22-103/1 "Cemetery Site Layout and Location Map". The Montgomery Memorial Park Reinterment Site is located approximately 13 miles south of the Cemetery 501C as shown on drawing 023-L2-22-103/2 "Cemetery No. 501C". F-4.5. Field Information. Contractors who desire an escort at the site or who require field information should contact Dr. Robert Maslowski, Archeologist, Huntington District Office, Huntington, West Virginia 304-529-5712. F-5. AVAILABILITY OF SPECIFICATIONS NOT LISTED IN THE GSA INDEX OF FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS. The requirements in this solicitation may be obtained from the sources listed below. The request should identify the solicitation number and the specification requested by date, title, and number, as cited in the solicitation. (FAR 52.210-3) Specification, Standard or Publication May be obtained from ASTM Standards American Society for Testing and Materials 1916 Race Street Philadelphia, PA 19103

F-2*

MLD01

3

*

F-6. SAFETY. The Contractor shall perform all operations in accordance with all applicable Federal, State and Local laws and regulations and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual, EM 385-1-1, dated April 1981, revised October 1987

F-3*

MLD01

1

*

SECTION G BIDDING SCHEDULE

ITEM ESTIMATED UNIT ESTIMATED No. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1. Environment Protection 1 Job Sum $___________ 2. Stripping, Excavating and 3 Each $_________ ____________ Backfilling Graves in Existing Cemetery 3. Bodies and Remains Removed 3 Each __________ ____________ and Reinterred, Requiring Full Size Box 4. Bodies and Remains Removed 3 Each __________ ____________ and Reinterred, Requiring Less Than a Full Size Box 5. Burial Vaults 3 Each __________ ____________ 6. Analysis of Remains 3 Each __________ ____________ 7. Gravestones and Monuments 4 Each __________ ____________ Removed Weighing Less Than 100 Lbs. 8. Gravestones and Monuments 5 Each __________ ____________ Removed Weighing Less Than 500 Lbs. 9. Duplicate Anchor Stones, 10 Each __________ ____________ Gravestones and Monuments 10. Gravestones and Monuments 4 Each __________ ____________ Erected Weighing Less Than 100 Lbs. 11. Gravestones and Monuments 5 Each __________ ____________ Erected Weighing Less Than

G-1*

MLD01

2

* G-2*

500 Lbs. 12. Acquisition of New Grave Spaces 3 Each __________ ____________ in Montgomery Memorial Park 13. Grave Markers, Base and Plaque 1 Each __________ ____________ 14. Concrete 0.5 Cu.Yd. __________ ____________ 15. Shrubs 8 Each __________ ____________ 16. Shrub Planting 1 Job __________ ____________ 17. Seeding 25 Lbs. __________ ____________ 18. Curation of Gravestones and 3 Each __________ ____________ Artifacts 19. Report Preparation 1 Job __________ ____________ 20. Travel 1 Job __________ ____________ 21. Per Diem 1 Each __________ ____________

APPENDIX B

GENEALOGICAL INFORMATION FOR THE REYNOLDS FAMILY

John Reynolds (b. November 15, 1758, d. February 29, 1832) married Miriam Van Bibber (b. unknown, d. ca. 1850)

Ellicott (b. 1804 or 1806, d. unknown) married to Elizabeth Howe (Dowden/Drowen/Dround) (b. 1807, d. unknown) Althea (b. 1804, d. unknown) married James McFarland (b. unknown, d. unknown) Franklin R. (b. 1797 or 1799, d. unknown) married December 27, 1832 to Abigail McFarland (b. 1810, d. unknown) Vernon (Bernard) b. 1794 or 1816, d. unknown) married February 18, 1837 to Irena (Joan, Joena) Slack (b. 1818, d. unknown) Julia (b. unknown, d. unknown) married John Welch (b. unknown, d. unknown) Fenton Mercer (b. unknown, d. unknown), unmarried Minerva (b. 1802, d. unknown) married Philip Garland Todd (b. unknown, d. unknown)

Miriam (b. 1830, d. unknown) Rosamell (b. 1831, d. unknown) Ellen (b. 1835, d. unknown) Althea (b. 1837, d. unknown) Elizabeth (b. 1838, d. unknown) Charles H. (b. 1840, d. unknown) William F. (b. 1843, d. unknown) Ellicott (b. 1846, d. unknown) 1 child (b. unknown, d. unknown) Julia (b. 1834, d. unknown) married to Lewis Wood (b. unknown, d. unknown) Susan (b. 1836, d. unknown) Clark (b. 1838, d. unknown) Anna (b. 1840, d. unknown) Caroline (b. 1842, d. unknown) Paulina (b. 1846, d. unknown) Amelia (b. 1838, d. unknown-deceased as of January 24, 1884) John (b. 1842, d. unknown) Fanny (b. 1846, d. unknown) Aletha (b. 1837, d. unknown) married Richard Putney (b. unknown, d. unknown)

Morris Reynolds (b. unknown, d. unknown) married to Leah Schull (b. unknown, d. unknown) Silas Reynolds (b. unknown, d. 1815)

Van Bibber (b. December 28, 1795, d. December 5, 1843) married to Elizabeth Pollard Buster (b. October 18, 1802, d. September 1, 1841) Harvey (b. 1806, d. unknown) married to Elizabeth Greenlee (b. unknown, d. unknown) William (b. unknown, d. 1835) married to Sarah Armstrong (b. unknown, d. unknown) Clark (b. unknown, d. 1832 or 1833) married to Margaret Frazer (b. unknown, d. 1832 or 1833) both died of cholera Eliza (b. unknown, d. unknown) married to George W. Buster (b. unknown, d. unknown) Charles (b. September 20, 1802, d. March 31, 1847) married to Francis Dawson Slaughter (b. July 2, 1806, d. September 6, 1864)

James C. (b. early 1832 or late 1833, d. March 3, 1852) unmarried Mary (b. unknown, d. unknown) died young and unmarried Henry W. (b. September 15, 1830, d. February 6, 1906) married to Anne Whitteker (b. unknown, d. unknown) Fenton M. (b. 1833, d. unknown) 1 child (died in infancy) Silas (b. May 1, 1828, d. February 22, 1875) unmarried Eliza Maria (b. September 10, 1828, d. February 6, 1858) married to Lewis Fry Donnally (b. unknown, d. unknown) Emily Frances (b. November 6, 1832, d. August 8, 1912) married to Andrew Philip Fry (b. unknown, d. unknown) William Clark (b. March 12, 1836, d. August 2, 1911) married to Annie Lewis Ruffner (b. November 25, 1841, d. December 26, 1915) Helen Wood (b. January 16, 1840, d. December 10, 1860) unmarried Jane (b. March 1, 1842, d. November 16, 1843) Catherine Amelia (b. December 17, 1843, d. unknown) unmarried Charles Goodrich (b. March 27, 1846, d. unknown) unmarried

Ann Ruffner (b. December 24, 1814, d. December 24, 1879) married to Henry H. Wood (b. unknown, d. unknown)

Eliza (b. 1843, d. unknown) Margret (b. 1845, d. unknown) Lavinia (b. 1848, d. unknown) married to Napoleon B. Cabell (b. unknown, d. unknown) Fanny (b. 1850, d. unknown) James (b. 1853, d. unknown) Betsy (Bettie C.) (b. 1856, d. unknown) married to Jason H. Huling (b. unknown, d. unknown) Lucy (b. 1859, d. unknown) Data compiled from the original headstones and the following urls: http://www.rootsweb/~wvkanawh/marriage/1831-1840.html http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvkanawh/FamilyData/thayer.html http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/y/o/u/Reyolds-Young/index.html

http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvkanawha/FamilyData/thayer.html

http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvkanawha/FamilyData/thayer.html

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/y/o/u/Reyolds-Young/index.html

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/y/o/u/Reyolds-Young/index.html

APPENDIX D

CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD FORM

APPENDIX E

MATERIALS RECOVERED

Burial & Unit

Level

Zone Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal Unidentified Count

2 139-150 Cut Nails (N=26) Metal (N=3) 29

3

A

150-161

Cut Nails (N=42) Lining Tacks (N=52)

Metal (N=4) 98

3

B

150-161

Cut Nails (N=17) Lining Tacks (N=19) Coffin Wood (N=1)

37

3

C

150-161


Metal (N=1) 39

3 D

150-161 Cut Nails (N=28) Lining Tacks (N=13)

Metal (N=2) 43

Burial 1 Unit 5

3 E


Metal (N=6) 56

Subtotal 286 0 16 302

2


Metal (N=20) 179

3 A

157 Cut Nails (N=36) Lining Tacks (N=37)

Hair Comb (N=1)

Metal (N=9) 83

3 B


Metal (N=10) 64

3 C


Metal (N=11) 37

3 D


Metal (N=5) 103

Burial 2 Unit 3

3 E


Metal (N=10) 59

Subtotal 459 1 65 525

2

116-121

Cut Nails (N=34) Lining Tacks (N=28) Plain Screws (N=2)

Metal (N=12) 76

3

A

121-152


Metal (N=6) 137

3

B

121-152


Buttons (N=3) Buckle (N=1)

Metal (N=6) 68

3 C


Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=2) 64

3

D

121-152


Buckle (N=1)

Metal (N=2) 185

Burial 3 Unit 1

3

E

121-152


Metal (N=1) 130

Subtotal 624 7 29 660

Burial &

Unit Level Zone Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count


2 139


Metal (N=8) 43

3 A 152 Cut Nails (N=26) Lining Tacks (N=8)

Metal (N=10) 44

3 B 152 Cut Nails (N=6) 6

3 C 152 Cut Nails (N=4) Lining Tacks (N=5)

Metal (N=1) 10

3 D 152 Cut Nails (N=10) Lining Tacks (N=5)

Metal (N=5) 20

Burial 4 Unit 19

3 E 152 Cut Nails (N=37) Lining Tacks (N=8)

Metal (N=5) 50

Subtotal 176 0 49 225 1 10--88 Cut Nails (N=41) Metal (N=10) 51

2 92-128 Cut Nails (N=103) Lining Tacks (N=19)

Metal (N=6) 128

3 A 128-156


167

3 B 128-156

Cut Nails (N=61) Lining Tacks (N=35) Plain Screws (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=17) 116

3 C 128-156


90

3 D 128-156


Metal (N=10) 186

3 D-E 128-156 Cut Nails (N=10) Lining Tacks (N=6)

16

Burial 5 Unit 2

3 E 128-156 Cut Nails (N=34) Lining Tacks (N=48)

82

Subtotal 787 6 43 836


Metal (N=3) 10


3 A 160-165


Metal (N=30) 148

3 B 160-165 Cut Nails (N=13) Lining Tacks (N=3)

Metal (N=8) 24

3 C 160-165 Cut Nails (N=12) Metal (N=4) 16

3 D 160-165


Metal (N=19) 165

Burial 6 Unit 8

3 E 160-165

Cut Nails (N=44) Lining Tacks (N=14) Coffin Wood (N=1) Coffin Paint (N=1)

Metal (N=15) 75

Subtotal 385 0 97 482

Burial & Unit Level Zone

Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

1 5-116 Cut Nails (N=2) Metal (N=7) 9 2 116-136 Cut Nails (N=16) Metal (N=10) 26

3 A 136-143

Cut Nails (N=63) Lining Tacks (N=13) Escutcheons (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=4) Handles (N=2) Viewing Glass (N=1)

Denture (N=1) Eyelet (N=1)

Metal (N=49) 136

3 B 136-143 Cut Nails (N=1) Coffin Wood (N=1) Buttons (N=1)

3

3 B-C 136-143 Cut Nails (N=4) 4

3 C 136-143

Cut Nails (N=11) Lining Tacks (N=2) Handles (N=2) Buttons (N=1)

Metal (N=4) 20

3 D 136-143

Cut Nails (N=36) Lining Tacks (N=4) Plain Screw (N=1)

Metal (N=5) 46

3 D-E 136-143 Cut Nails (N=8) Thumbscrews (N=1) Fabric (N=1)

Metal (N=12) 22

Burial 7 Unit 4

3 E 136-143

Cut Nails (N=16) Lining Tacks (N=3) Escutcheons (N=3) Thumbscrews (N=8) Handles (N=2) Coffin Wood (N=1)

Metal (N=17) 50

Subtotal 207 5 104 316 1 4--74 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

2 74-85

Cut Nails (N=33) Lining Tacks (N=2) Escutcheons (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=5)

Metal (N=18) 60

3 A 85-86 Cut Nails (N=22) Lining Tacks (N=1)

Metal (N=8) 31

3 B 85-86 Cut Nails (N=2) Buttons (N=2) Metal (N=3) 7

3 C 85-86 Cut Nails (N=7) Lining Tacks (N=7)

Buttons (N=10)

Metal (N=5) 29

3 D 85-86

Cut Nails (N=28) Lining Tacks (N=6) Thumbscrews (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=8) 45

Burial 8 Unit 7

3 E 85-86 Cut Nails (N=27) Lining Tacks (N=4) Buttons (N=7)

Metal (N=1) 39

Subtotal 148 21 43 212


Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

1 30-113 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

2 113-128

Cut Nails (N=30) Lining Tacks (N=4) Decorative Tacks (N=6) Thumbscrews (N=3)

Metal (N=5) 48

3 A 128-131

Cut Nails (N=39) Decorative Tacks (N=23) Thumbscrews (N=2) Handles (N=2) Hinges (N=2)

Brooch (N=1) Hair Comb (N=1)

Metal (N=30) 100

3 B 128-131

Cut Nails (N=18) Decorative Tacks (N=16) Hinges (N=4) Escutcheons (N=1)

39

3 C 128-131

Cut Nails (N=8) Decorative Tacks (N=5) Hinges (N=2)

Metal (N=7) 22

3 D 128-131

Cut Nails (N=32) Decorative Tacks (N=8) Handles (N=3)

Metal (N=8) 51

Burial 9 Unit 6

3 E 128-131

Cut Nails (N=28) Decorative Tacks (N=8) Handles (N=3)

Metal (N=16) 55

Subtotal 248 2 66 316

Burial &


Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

1 10--95 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

2 95-113

Cut Nails (N=28) Lining Tacks (N=6) Thumbscrews (N=5) Lugs (N=5) Kick Plate? (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=23) 70

0 104 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

3 A 113-119

Cut Nails (N=14) Lining Tacks (N=5) Thumbscrews (N=1) Viewing Glass (N=1) Lugs (N=2) Kick Plate? (N=1)

Metal (N=22) 46

3 B 113-119

Cut Nails (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=3)

Metal (N=6) 12

3 C 113-119

Cut Nails (N=3) Lining Tacks (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=10) 19

3 D 113-119

Cut Nails (N=12) Handles (N=1) Kick Plate (N=1) Buttons (N=1)

Metal (N=6) 21

Burial 10 Unit 9

3 E 113-119

Cut Nails (N=7) Escutcheons (N=1) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=3) Lugs (N=2) Kick Plate? (N=1) Buttons (N=9)

24

Subtotal 113 14 67 194 2 55-76 Cut Nails (N=22) Metal (N=12) 34 3 A 76-79 Cut Nails (N=3) Metal (N=4) 7 3 B-C 76-79 Cut Nails (N=5) 5

Burial 11 Unit 14

3 D-E 76-79 Cut Nails (N=16) Metal (N=7) 23 Subtotal 46 0 23 69


Metal (N=5) 10


Metal (N=12) 45

3 B-C 84-90 Cut Nails (N=10) Buttons (N=2) Metal (N=4) 16

3 D 84-90 Cut Nails (N=18) Lining Tacks (N=1)

Metal (N=5) 24

Burial 12 Unit 13

3 E 84-90 Cut Nails (N=13) Metal (N=5) 18 Subtotal 80 2 31 113


Depth (cmbs) Hardware

Personal Unidentified Count

1 4-81 Cut Nails (N=1) Metal (N=3) 4 2 81-94 Cut Nails (N=10) Metal (N=3) 13 3 A 94-101 Cut Nails (N=18) Metal (N=4) 22 3 B-C 94-101 Cut Nails (N=7) 7

Burial 13 Unit 12


Metal (N=6) 35

Subtotal 65 0 16 81 1 3-54 Metal (N=1) 1 2 54-71 Metal (N=3) 3

3 71-95


Metal (N=4) 13


Metal (N=4) 17

3 A 95-107


Metal (N=4) 105


Metal (N=4) 16


5

3 D 95-107 Lining Tacks (N=11) Plain Screws (N=1)

Metal (N=2) 14

Burial 14 Unit 10

3 E 95-107


Metal (N=7) 83

Subtotal 228 0 29 257


Metal (N=3) 41

3 A 125-135 Cut Nails (N=46) Lining Tacks (N=36) Hair Pin (N=1)

Metal (N=4) 87

3 B 125-135 Cut Nails (N=18) Buttons (N=3) 21

3 C 125-135 Cut Nails (N=10) Lining Tacks (N=1) Buttons (N=4)

Metal (N=4) 19


Metal (N=6) 46

Burial 15 Unit 15

3 E 125-135

Cut Nails (N=37) Lining Tacks (N=25) Handles (N=1)

63

Subtotal 252 8 17 277

Burial &


Hardware Pesonal

Unidentified Count

2 78-93 Cut Nails (N=10) 10

3 93-103 Cut Nails (N=1) Finger Ring

(N=1) Metal (N=1) 3


10

3 B 93-103 Cut Nails (N=6) 6 3 C 93-103 Cut Nails (N=2) 2


Metal (N=4) 49

Burial 16 Unit 16


37

Subtotal 111 1 5 117


9

3 A 108-114 Cut Nails (N=37) Lining Tacks (N=32) Earrings (N=2)

Metal (N=9) 80

3 B 108-114


Buttons (N=1) Snap Fastener (N=1)

17

3 C 108-114


Buttons (N=1) Safety Pins (N=2)

Metal (N=2) 26


Metal (N=3) 43

Burial 17 Unit 11


36

Subtotal 190 7 14 211


Metal (N=10) 56


Metal (N=5) 74


29


Metal (N=2) 24


29

Burial 18 Unit 17


Metal (N=4) 52

Subtotal 243 0 21 264


6


Metal (N=6) 27


Metal (N=5) 20

3 C 141-145 Cut Nails (N=6) Metal (N=5) 11 3 D 141-145 Cut Nails (N=12) Metal (N=2) 14

Burial 19 Unit 18


Burial &


Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count


13

3 A 126-143

Cut Nails (N=55) Lining Tacks (N=43) Plain Screws (N=2) Handles (N=2) Coffin Wood (N=1)

Necklace (N=1) Hair Pin (N=1) Earrings (N=2) Safety Pin (N=1)

Metal (N=53) 161

3 B-C 126-143 Cut Nails (N=27) Lining Tacks (N=10)

Buttons (N=8) Brooch (N=1)

Metal (N=2) 48

3 D 126-143


Buttons (N=2) Fabric (N=1)

Metal (N=7) 20

3 C 126-143

Cut Nails (N=7) Lining Tacks (N=4) Escutcheons (N=1) Plain Screws (N=1)

Metal (N=3) 16

Burial 20 Unit 20

3 E 126-143

Cut Nails (N=32) Lining Tacks (N=44) Plain Screws (N=6) Handles (N=1)

Metal (N=23) 106

Subtotal 259 17 88 364

2 0 86-98

Cut Nails (N=22) Lining Tacks (N=41) Decorative Tacks (N=8)

Metal (N=8) 79 Burial 21 Unit 21

3 A-E 98-110


Metal (N=2) 345

Subtotal 414 0 10 424

2 0 76-99

Cut Nails (N=30) Lining Tacks (N=23) Coffin Wood (N=1) Fabric (N=1)

Metal (N=8) 63


Metal (N=8) 22

3 B 99-110

Cut Nails (N=21) Lining Tacks (N=34) Hinges (N=1)

Metal (N=1) 57

3 C 99-110


Metal (N=4) 76


Metal (N=4) 81

Burial 22 Unit 22


Metal (N=7) 48

Subtotal 314 1 32 347 Burial 23 Unit 23

2 56-75

Cut Nails (N=90) Lining Tacks (N=82) Coffin Wood (N=1) Fabric (N=2)

Metal (N=21) 196

Subtotal 173 2 21 196


Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

2 86-100


35

3 A 100-108

Cut Nails (N=54) Decorative Tacks (N=7) Lining Tacks (N=63)

Safety Pin (N=1)

Metal (N=4) 129

3 B-C 100-108


77

Burial 24 Unit 24

3 D-E 100-108


89

Subtotal 325 1 4 330 Burial 25 Unit 25 3 A-E 70-78

Cut Nails (N=13) 13

Subtotal 13 0 0 13

2 73-73

Cut Nails (N=27) Escutcheons (N=4) Thumbscrews (N=5) Plain Screws (N=2)


3 A-E 73-80

Cut Nails (N=12) Wire Nails (N=88) Lining Tacks (N=3) Escutcheons (N=1) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=4) Viewing Glass (N=1) Coffin Lid Wood (N=2)


Metal (N=12) 134

Subtotal 150 10 29 189 2 81-113 Cut Nails (N=12) 12 Burial 27

Unit 27 3 A-E 113-121


Metal (N=30) 112


3 A-E 96-106

Cut Nails (N=64) Lining Tacks (N=129) Thumbscrews (N=4)

Metal (N=21) 218

Subtotal 197 0 21 218

Burial &


Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

2 91-115 Cut Nails (N=42) Metal (N=6) 48 3 A 115-119 Cut Nails (N=19) Buttons (N=1) 20 3 B 115-119 Cut Nails (N=5) Buttons (N=1) Metal (N=10) 16 3 C 115-119 Cut Nails (N=4) Buttons (N=1) 5 3 D 115-119 Cut Nails (N=15) Buttons (N=2) Metal (N=10) 27

Burial 29 Unit 29

3 E 115-119 Cut Nails (N=11) 11 Subtotal 96 5 26 127

2 70-81 Cut Nails (N=4) Plain Screws (N=2)

6

3 A 81-95 Cut Nails (N=22) Lining Tacks (N=17) Buttons (N=1)

Metal (N=20) 60

3 B 81-95 Cut Nails (N=4) Buttons

(N=10) 14

3 C 81-95


Buttons (N=10) Buckles (N=1)

Metal (N=3) 30

3 D 81-95

Cut Nails (N=9) Lining Tacks (N=4) Coffin Paint (N=1)

Metal (N=11) 25

Burial 30 Unit 30

3 E 81-95


Metal (N=4) 18

Subtotal 92 23 38 153 2 122-138 Cut Nails (N=10) 10

3 A 138-156


45

3 B 138-156 Cut Nails (N=6) 6


Metal (N=7) 28


Metal (N=20) 43

Burial 31 Unit 26


Metal (N=9) 30

Subtotal 126 0 36 162 Grand Total

APPENDIX F

SKELETAL MATERIAL

Burial & Unit

Level

Zone Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal Unidentified Count


3 A


Metal (N=4) 98

3 B


36

3

C

150-161


Metal (N=1) 39

3 D


Metal (N=2) 43

Burial 1 Unit 5

3 E


Metal (N=6) 56

Subtotal 285 0 16 301

2


Metal (N=20) 179

3 A


Hair Comb (N=2)

Metal (N=9) 84

3 B


Metal (N=10) 64

3 C


Metal (N=11) 37

3 D


Metal (N=5) 103

Burial 2 Unit 3

3 E


Metal (N=10) 59

Subtotal 459 2 65 526

2

116-121


Metal (N=12) 76

3

A

121-152


Metal (N=6) 137

3

B

121-152


Buttons (N=3) Buckle (N=1)

Metal (N=6) 68

3 C


Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=2) 64

3

D

121-152


Buckle (N=1)

Metal (N=2) 185

Burial 3 Unit 1

3

E

121-152


Metal (N=1) 130

Subtotal 624 7 29 660


Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count


2 139 Cut Nails (N=17) Lining Tacks (N=17)

Metal (N=8) 42

3 A 152 Cut Nails (N=26) Lining Tacks (N=8)

Metal (N=10) 44

3 B 152 Cut Nails (N=6) 6

3 C 152 Cut Nails (N=4) Lining Tacks (N=5)

Metal (N=1) 10

3 D 152 Cut Nails (N=10) Lining Tacks (N=5)

Metal (N=5) 20

Burial 4 Unit 19

3 E 152 Cut Nails (N=37) Lining Tacks (N=8)

Metal (N=5) 50

Subtotal 175 0 49 224 1 10--88 Cut Nails (N=41) Metal (N=10) 51


Metal (N=6) 128

3 A 128-156


167

3 B 128-156


Metal (N=17) 116

3 C 128-156


90

3 D 128-156


Metal (N=10) 186

3 D-E 128-156 Cut Nails (N=10) Lining Tacks (N=6) Shoes (N=2)

18

Burial 5 Unit 2


82

Subtotal 787 8 43 838


Metal (N=3) 10



Metal (N=30) 147


Metal (N=8) 24

3 C 160-165 Cut Nails (N=12) Metal (N=4) 16


Metal (N=19) 164

Burial 6 Unit 8


Metal (N=15) 73

Subtotal 381 0 97 478 Burial &


Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

1 5-116 Cut Nails (N=2) Metal (N=7) 9 Burial 7 Unit 4 2 116-136 Cut Nails (N=16) Metal (N=10) 26

3 A 136-143

Cut Nails (N=63) Lining Tacks (N=13) Escutcheons (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=4) Handles (N=2) Viewing Glass (N=1)

Denture (N=1) Eyelet (N=1)

Metal (N=49) 136

3 B 136-143 Cut Nails (N=1) Buttons (N=1) 2 3 B-C 136-143 Cut Nails (N=4) 4

3 C 136-143

Cut Nails (N=11) Lining Tacks (N=2) Handles (N=2) Buttons (N=1)

Metal (N=4) 20

3 D 136-143

Cut Nails (N=36) Lining Tacks (N=4) Plain Screw (N=1)

Metal (N=5) 46

3 D-E 136-143 Cut Nails (N=8) Thumbscrews (N=1)

Metal (N=12) 21

3 E 136-143

Cut Nails (N=16) Lining Tacks (N=3) Escutcheons (N=3) Thumbscrews (N=8) Handles (N=2)

Metal (N=17) 49

Subtotal 205 4 104 313 1 4--74 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

2 74-85

Cut Nails (N=33) Lining Tacks (N=2) Escutcheons (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=5)

Metal (N=18) 60


Metal (N=8) 31

3 B 85-86 Cut Nails (N=2) Buttons (N=2) Metal (N=3) 7


Buttons (N=10)

Metal (N=5) 29

3 D 85-86

Cut Nails (N=28) Lining Tacks (N=6) Thumbscrews (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=8) 45

Burial 8 Unit 7

3 E 85-86 Cut Nails (N=27) Lining Tacks (N=4) Buttons (N=7)

Metal (N=1) 39

Subtotal 148 21 43 212


Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

1 30-113 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

2 113-128

Cut Nails (N=30) Lining Tacks (N=4) Decorative Tacks (N=6) Thumbscrews (N=3)

Metal (N=5) 48

3 A 128-131

Cut Nails (N=39) Decorative Tacks (N=23) Thumbscrews (N=2) Handles (N=2) Hinges (N=2)

Brooch (N=1) Hair Pin (N=1) Hair Comb (N=1)

Metal (N=30) 101

3 B 128-131

Cut Nails (N=18) Decorative Tacks (N=16) Hinges (N=4) Escutcheons (N=1)

39

3 C 128-131

Cut Nails (N=8) Decorative Tacks (N=5) Hinges (N=2)

Metal (N=7) 22

3 D 128-131

Cut Nails (N=32) Decorative Tacks (N=8) Handles (N=3) Shoes (N=1)

Metal (N=8) 52

Burial 9 Unit 6

3 E 128-131

Cut Nails (N=28) Decorative Tacks (N=8) Handles (N=3) Shoes (N=1)

Metal (N=16) 56

Subtotal 248 5 66 319

Burial &


Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

1 10--95 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

2 95-113

Cut Nails (N=28) Lining Tacks (N=6) Thumbscrews (N=5) Lugs (N=5) Kick Plate? (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=23) 70

0 104 Cut Nails (N=1) 1

3 A 113-119

Cut Nails (N=14) Lining Tacks (N=5) Thumbscrews (N=1) Viewing Glass (N=1) Lugs (N=2) Kick Plate? (N=1)

Metal (N=22) 46

3 B 113-119

Cut Nails (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=3)

Metal (N=6) 12

3 C 113-119

Cut Nails (N=3) Lining Tacks (N=2) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=1) Buttons (N=2)

Metal (N=10) 19

3 D 113-119

Cut Nails (N=12) Handles (N=1) Kick Plate (N=1) Buttons (N=1)

Metal (N=6) 21

Burial 10 Unit 9

3 E 113-119

Cut Nails (N=7) Escutcheons (N=1) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=3) Lugs (N=2) Kick Plate? (N=1) Buttons (N=9)

24

Subtotal 113 14 67 194 2 55-76 Cut Nails (N=22) Metal (N=12) 34 3 A 76-79 Cut Nails (N=3) Metal (N=4) 7 3 B-C 76-79 Cut Nails (N=5) 5

Burial 11 Unit 14

3 D-E 76-79 Cut Nails (N=16) Metal (N=7) 23 Subtotal 46 0 23 69


Metal (N=5) 10


Metal (N=12) 45

3 B-C 84-90 Cut Nails (N=10) Buttons (N=2) Metal (N=4) 16


Metal (N=5) 24

Burial 12 Unit 13



Depth (cmbs) Hardware

Personal Unidentified Count

1 4-81 Cut Nails (N=1) Metal (N=3) 4 2 81-94 Cut Nails (N=10) Metal (N=3) 13 3 A 94-101 Cut Nails (N=18) Metal (N=4) 22 3 B-C 94-101 Cut Nails (N=7) 7

Burial 13 Unit 12


Metal (N=6) 35

Subtotal 65 0 16 81 1 3-54 Metal (N=1) 1 2 54-71 Metal (N=3) 3


Metal (N=4) 12


Metal (N=4) 17

3 A 95-107


Metal (N=4) 105


Metal (N=4) 16


5

3 D 95-107 Lining Tacks (N=11) Plain Screws (N=1)

Metal (N=2) 14

Burial 14 Unit 10

3 E 95-107


Metal (N=7) 83

Subtotal 227 0 29 256


Metal (N=3) 41

3 A 125-135 Cut Nails (N=46) Lining Tacks (N=36) Hair Pin (N=1)

Metal (N=4) 87

3 B 125-135 Cut Nails (N=18) Buttons (N=3) 21

3 C 125-135 Cut Nails (N=10) Lining Tacks (N=1) Buttons (N=4)

Metal (N=4) 19


Metal (N=6) 46

Burial 15 Unit 15

3 E 125-135


63

Subtotal 252 8 17 277


Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Pesonal

Unidentified Count

2 78-93 Cut Nails (N=10) 10

3 93-103 Cut Nails (N=1) Finger Ring

(N=1) Metal (N=1) 3


10

3 B 93-103 Cut Nails (N=6) 6 3 C 93-103 Cut Nails (N=2) 2


Metal (N=4) 49

Burial 16 Unit 16


37

Subtotal 111 1 5 117


9


Hair Comb (N=1)

Metal (N=9) 79

3 B 108-114


Buttons (N=1) Snap Fastener (N=1)

17

3 C 108-114



Metal (N=2) 26


Metal (N=3) 43

Burial 17 Unit 11


36

Subtotal 190 6 14 210


Metal (N=10) 56


Metal (N=5) 74


29


Metal (N=2) 24


29

Burial 18 Unit 17


Metal (N=4) 52

Subtotal 243 0 21 264


6


Metal (N=6) 27


Metal (N=5) 20

3 C 141-145 Cut Nails (N=6) Metal (N=5) 11 3 D 141-145 Cut Nails (N=12) Metal (N=2) 14

Burial 19 Unit 18



Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count


13

3 A 126-143

Cut Nails (N=55) Lining Tacks (N=43) Plain Screws (N=2) Handles (N=2)

Necklace (N=1) Earrings (N=2) Safety Pin (N=1)

Metal (N=53) 159

3 B-C 126-143 Cut Nails (N=27) Lining Tacks (N=10)

Buttons (N=8) Brooch (N=1)

Metal (N=2) 48

3 D 126-143


Buttons (N=2) Shoes (N=1)

Metal (N=7) 20

3 C 126-143

Cut Nails (N=7) Lining Tacks (N=4) Escutcheons (N=1) Plain Screws (N=1)

Metal (N=3) 16

Burial 20 Unit 20

3 E 126-143

Cut Nails (N=32) Lining Tacks (N=44) Plain Screws (N=6) Handles (N=1) Shoes (N=1)

Metal (N=23) 107

Subtotal 258 17 88 363

2 0 86-98



3 A-E 98-110


Metal (N=2) 345

Subtotal 414 0 10 424

2 0 76-99 Cut Nails (N=30) Lining Tacks (N=23)

Metal (N=8) 61


Metal (N=8) 22

3 B 99-110


Metal (N=1) 57

3 C 99-110


Metal (N=4) 76


Metal (N=4) 81

Burial 22 Unit 22


Metal (N=7) 48

Subtotal 313 32 345 Burial 23 Unit 23 2 56-75


Metal (N=21) 193

Subtotal 172 0 21 193 Burial &


Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

Burial 24 Unit 24 2 86-100


34

3 A 100-108

Cut Nails (N=54) Decorative Tacks (N=7) Lining Tacks (N=63)

Safety Pin (N=1)

Metal (N=4) 129

3 B-C 100-108


77

3 D-E 100-108


89

Subtotal 324 1 4 329 Burial 25 Unit 25 3 A-E 70-78

Cut Nails (N=13) 13

Subtotal 13 0 0 13

2 73-73

Cut Nails (N=27) Escutcheons (N=4) Thumbscrews (N=5) Plain Screws (N=2)


3 A-E 73-80

Cut Nails (N=12) Wire Nails (N=88) Lining Tacks (N=3) Escutcheons (N=1) Thumbscrews (N=1) Handles (N=4) Viewing Glass (N=1)


Metal (N=12) 132

Subtotal 148 10 29 187 2 81-113 Cut Nails (N=12) 12 Burial 27

Unit 27 3 A-E 113-121


Metal (N=30) 112


3 A-E 96-106

Cut Nails (N=64) Lining Tacks (N=129) Thumbscrews (N=4)

Metal (N=21) 218

Subtotal 197 0 21 218


Depth (cmbs)

Hardware Personal

Unidentified Count

2 91-115 Cut Nails (N=42) Metal (N=6) 48 3 A 115-119 Cut Nails (N=19) Buttons (N=1) 20 3 B 115-119 Cut Nails (N=5) Buttons (N=1) Metal (N=10) 16 3 C 115-119 Cut Nails (N=4) Buttons (N=1) 5 3 D 115-119 Cut Nails (N=15) Buttons (N=2) Metal (N=10) 27

Burial 29 Unit 29

3 E 115-119 Cut Nails (N=11) 11 Subtotal 96 5 26 127

2 70-81 Cut Nails (N=4) Plain Screws (N=2)

6

3 A 81-95 Cut Nails (N=22) Lining Tacks (N=17) Buttons (N=1)

Metal (N=20) 60

3 B 81-95 Cut Nails (N=4) Buttons

(N=10) 14

3 C 81-95


Buttons (N=10) Buckles (N=1)

Metal (N=3) 30


Metal (N=11) 24

Burial 30 Unit 30

3 E 81-95


Metal (N=4) 18

Subtotal 91 23 38 152 2 122-138 Cut Nails (N=10) 10

3 A 138-156


45

3 B 138-156 Cut Nails (N=6) 6


Metal (N=7) 28


Metal (N=20) 43

Burial 31 Unit 26


Metal (N=9) 30

Subtotal 126 0 36 162 Grand Total

Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery ...

Documents

Transcript of Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery ...