Archaeological Investigations at Solitude
The historic property of Solitude received National Register of Historic
Places status in May 1989, without the need for archaeological
investigations. However, a log outbuilding to the northeast of the main
house had been scheduled for restorations to begin that same year.* The
work was intended to be carefully executed so as to preserve or restore
all the original properties of the building. One of the problems confronted
in achieving this goal was that little was known about the building. Its
original function was unknown. Some suggested it might have been a
slave dwelling, washhouse or kitchen. Learning the age of the structure,
as well as the original function would be important for an accurate
restoration. Gibson Worsham's Historic Structure Report on the
outbuilding, completed in 1988, revealed some important information.
Worsham was able to establish an approximate date of 1870 for its
construction, based on archival research and architectural clues.
Archaeological evidence supports this date, based on the analysis of
almost 10,000 artifacts collected from test units around the outbuilding.
The excavations at the Solitude outbuilding, carried out by Dr. Cliff
Boyd and his students from Radford University, consisted of thirty-one 1
m2 test units, strategically located around the building, using a grid
system. Units were placed abruptly adjacent to the side of the structure in
hopes of revealing a builder's trench. Artifacts from builder's trenches can
confirm the time period of construction because they are deposited and
buried during the construction process, often by the builders themselves.
Shallow trenches were encountered, and did indeed produce important
artifacts. Test units were also concentrated around the "back" door of the
building. A common method of household garbage disposal in the 19th
century was to simply to sweep or throw it out the back door. This is
referred to by archaeologists as the Brunswick Disposal Pattern. As
expected, this location was especially rich with artifacts. Those that were
found strongly supported the notion that the building originally served as
a kitchen. It was common long ago to prepare food outside of the main
house in the summer, to avoid heating the house. Plate fragments,
drinking glass and bottle glass fragments, and animal bones were
recovered in large quantities behind the building. Ceramic types included
porcelain, redwares, whitewares, stonewares, yellow wares, and
pearlware. Analysis of the ceramics provided a mean date of mid 1860s
(Figure A). Architectural artifacts such as foundation stones, brick
fragments and nails also made up a large percentage of the artifact
assemblage.
Also recovered from the test units were 341 prehistoric artifacts, of which
325 were lithic, or stone flakes (byproducts of stone tool manufacture).
Five pottery sherds and eleven projectile points were also found.
Collectively, these prehistoric artifacts indicate that the site was occupied
by more than one group of Native Americans between 2000 BC and 1000
AD, as a rough estimate. Unfortunately, due most likely to landscaping,
there was no intact stratigraphy around the building. This has somewhat
limited the chronological data that could be obtained through the
excavations thus far. Therefore, more investigations in other areas around
Solitude are imperative in order to recover any remaining data about the
property as a whole, before it is lost forever. Lack of funding has been a
continuous setback in this endeavor.
Artifact Analysis
Careful analysis of the artifact assemblage recovered from the
excavations was necessary in order to help provide answers to specific
questions about the structure. The first step of the analysis consisted of
sorting and classifying each artifact according to its function. For
example, nails and window glass were assigned to the "architectural
group", while glassware and ceramic vessel fragments were assigned to
the "kitchen group". Stanley South, a highly regarded American
archaeologist, developed this classification system. His system was well
suited for this project. It defines nine basic functional groups (Figure A).
Within each of these groups the artifacts can be further sorted and
classified. For instance, of over 100 existing types of historic ceramics, 8
different types were recovered here. Within each type of ceramic, we can
often classify further, based on characteristics such as decoration, type of
glaze, or properties of the paste. Ceramics are useful for establishing a
timeline for the history of the building, since the period of manufacture
of a specific type can be determined. We know, for example, that "shell
edge" whiteware, found at Solitude, was only manufactured from 1815 to
1900.
After all 658 ceramic fragments found at the site were grouped
accordingly, a mean or average date for all the ceramics was calculated.
A mean date was also calculated for the ceramics per each level
excavated (Figure A). This process made it possible to determine that
there was little "statigraphic integrity" in the areas that were excavated.
In other words, the fact that newer types of ceramics had been
encountered in the ground often mixed with or even below older types,
probably means that the archaeologists did not find them in the same
order as they were deposited. This may be due to disturbances such as
those incurred during landscaping.
Next, the total number of ceramic fragments per test unit was tabulated
and plotted on a site map, in order to allow the distribution to be more
easily studied (Figure B). The map depicts the excavated units in relation
to the outbuilding, and the proximity of doors and windows to each of the
units. It is interesting to note that 126 ceramic fragments were recovered
from a single unit, just outside the back door of the building. This makes
up 19.1% of the total ceramics found. In fact, 54.3% of the fragments
were found in close proximity to the back door, in units 7, 8, 9, 10, and
16.
The distributions of each of the other eight functional groups were
plotted in like fashion, on eight separate site maps (Figures A and B).
Ceramic Distribution by Type
Type of Ceramic
Whiteware
(undecorated)
Whiteware
(decorated)
Redware
Stoneware
Porcelain
Yellowware
Earthenware
Pearlware



Number of
Fragments
Recovered
Percentage of
Total
Recovered
243
37%
153
23%
96
73
68
13
4
3
15%
11%
10%
2.0%
0.5%
0.5%
Text and image editing by Michael Pulice, Masters of Science in
Architecture, VPI.
Information contained herein was derived from unpublished
primary documents, supplied by Dr. Cliff Boyd, and his students
at Radford University.
All photographs and images were obtained through courtesy of
Dr. Cliff Boyd and Radford University.
Figure A
Figure B