• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

THE OTHER SIDE OF CHARLESTON: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE SAKS FIFTH AVENUE LOCATION, CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA ~I~ 9f1W- CHICORA FOUNDATION RESEARCH SERIES 45 THE OTHER SIDE OF CHARLESTON: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE SAKS FIFTH AVENUE LOCATION, CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA Research Series 45 Michael Trinkley Debi Hacker With Contributions by: S. Homes Hogue Chicora Foundation, Inc. P.O. Box 8664 • 861 Arbutus Drive Columbia, South Carolina 29202 8031787-6910 April 1996 ISSN 0882-2041 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publications Data Trinkley, Michael. The other side of Charleston : archaeological survey of the Saks Fifth Avenue location, Charleston, South Carolina / Michael Trinkley, Debi Hacker. p. cm. -- (Research series, ISSN 0882-2041 ; 45) Includes bibliographical references (p. ). 1. Charleston (S.C.)--Antiquities. 2. Excavations (Archaeology)­ -South Carolina--Charleston. I. Hacker, Debi. II. Title. III. Series: Research series (Chicora Foundation) ; 45. F279.C441T75 1995 975.7'915--dc20 93-3792 CIP The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences - Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. 00 Charleston sums up this tragedy of the South. It is a lovely city, warm and graceful; but over it hangs a pall of obsession, distorting thoughts and perverting motives, turning almost every conversation into a rude clash of prejudices. -- James Morris ABSTRACT This study provides the results of an by modern construction, and by recent archaeological and historical survey of the block in environment remediation projects, there are areas Charleston, South Carolina proposed for the of deep, and intact, nineteenth century deposits. It construction of the new Saks Fifth Avenue is likely that these deposits have the potential to department store. The historical research and field help us better understand the changing character investigations were conducted during late of Charleston and especially how the lower December 1994, immediately prior to the closing socioeconomic classes lived during much of the on the site and the anticipated construction start city's history. As a consequence, the site, defined date - necessitating a very tight investigative as the study block, is eligible for inclusion on the schedule. National Register of Historic Sites. The study area - bounded to the east by In consultation with the S.c. State Historic King Street, to the south by Princess Street, to the Preservation Officer a data recovery program was west by Archdale Street, and to the north by developed to very briefly explore five specific site Market Street - was for much of its history in the areas - one associated with a standing structure heart of Charleston's Fourth Ward. The area used as a saloon and grocery throughout its began developing during the second quarter of the history, two associated with free persons of color, eighteenth century and by the turn of the century one associated with a middle income white family, the lot was intensively occupied, with the building . and a fifth associated with the rear alleyway of a pattern interrupted only by Charleston's fire of businessman's hotel during the nineteenth century. 1838. While the data recovery included the excavation of only a single 5-foot unit in each of these areas, the By the late antebellum period the King information recovered helps to better understand Street frontage was characterized by a mix of a side of Charleston which has received relatively commercial and domestic activities - stores with little investigation. second and third floor domestic quarters, as well as the Victoria Hotel on the northwestern comer of The study may also help emphasize the King and Princess streets. On Archdale Street importance of focusing on survey and data there was a mix of neighborhood groceries and recovery efforts early in the project planning stage. middle class residences. Market and Princess Otherwise it will be almost impossible to undertake streets to the north and south began as rather the type of research necessary to appropriate mixed neighborhoods, including both whites and address the wide range of questions unique to free persons of color. Charleston's urban setting. Perhaps as early as the late antebellum, although certainly by the postbellum and continuing into the twentieth century, the project area had fallen into disrepute. It was a haven for saloons, pool halls, gambling, and prostitution - the other side of Charleston. Archaeological survey revealed that although portions of the block have been damaged 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables i:x List of Figures xi Acknowledgements xiii Introduction 1 Development of the Project ·1 Goals and Research Objectives of the Project 4 Evaluation Process Sites and Disturbance in Urban Archaeology Research Questions The Natural Setting 9 Physiography, Geology. and Soils Health and Climate Natural History of the City Curation 16 Previous Archaeological and Historical Research 17 Charleston's Historic Preservation Plan 17 Archaeological Research 20 Archaeological Preservation Plan Recommendations For the Project Area 23 A Historic Synopsis 25 An Overview of Charleston History 25 Maps and Plats Showing the Project Area 32 Evidence of Owners and Occupants 54 Prostitution and the Unholy City 54 Free Persons of Color in the Project Area 64 The Archaeological Survey 67 Strategy and Methods 67 Findings 70 Artifacts 78 Survey Summary and Recommendations 83 Historical Findings 83 Archaeological Findings 87 National Register Assessment and Future Research Options 88 Excavations 95 Strategy and Methods 95 Unit 1 at 40 Archdale Street 98 Unit 2 at 163 Market Street 98 Unit 3 at 38 Archdale Street 101 Unit 4 at 16-18 Princess Street 105 Unit 5 at the lot behind the Victoria Hotel 108 v ----------------------------------------------------------------- Artifacts 111 Introduction 111 Laboratory Processing, Conservation, and Analysis 111 Unit 1 at 40 Archdale Street 113 Kitchen Group Artifacts 113 Architecture Group Artifacts 116 Furniture Group Artifacts 116 Anus Group Artifacts 117 Tobacco Group Artifacts 117 Clothing Group Artifacts 117 Personal Group Artifacts 117 Activities Group Artifacts 117 Unit 2 at 163 Market Street 118 Kitchen Group Artifacts 118 Architecture Group Artifacts 121 Furniture Group Artifacts 121 Anus Group Artifacts 121 Tobacco Group Artifacts 121 Clothing Group Artifacts 121 Personal Group Artifacts 121 Activities Group Artifacts 121 Feature 1 121 Unit 3 at 38 Archdale Street 125 Kitchen Group Artifacts 126 Architecture Group Artifacts 127 Furniture Group Artifacts 128 Anus Group Artifacts 128 Tobacco Group Artifacts 128 Clothing Group Artifacts 128 Personal Group Artifacts 128 Activities Group Artifacts 128 Features 2 and 3 128 Unit 4 at 16-18 Princess Street 128 Kitchen Group Artifacts 129 Architecture Group Artifacts 131 Furniture Group Artifacts 131 Tobacco Group Artifacts 131 Clothing Group Artifacts 131 Personal Group Artifacts 132 Activities Group Artifacts 132 Feature 4 132 Unit 5 at the Lot Behind the Victoria Hotel 133 Kitchen Group Artifacts 133 Architecture Group Artifacts 135 Furniture Group Artifacts 135 Anus Group Artifacts 135 Tobacco Group Artifacts 136 Clothing Group Artifacts 136 Personal Group Artifacts 136 Activities Group Artifacts 136 Features 5 and 5 136 Dating Synthesis 137 Artifact Pattern Analysis 140 Status and Lifestyle Observations 144 VI Faunal Materials . S. Homes Hogue 151 Introduction 151 The Units 151 Materials and Methods 152 Identified Fauna 154 Domestic Mammals 154 Domestic Birds 155 Wild Mammals 155 Wild Birds 155 Reptiles 155 Pisces 156 Commensal Species 156 Results and Discussion 156 Faunal Representation 156 Cuts of Meat 161 Bone Modifications 163 Conclusions 164 Summary and Conclusions 167 The Lot at 40 Archdale Street 167 The Areas of 163 Market and 16-18 Princess Streets 168 The Area of 38 Archdale Street 170 The Area at the Rear of the Victoria Hotel 171 Comparison with Charleston Place 171 Conclusions 173 Sources Cited 175 vii Vlll LIST OF TABLES Table I. M;tjor Charleston hurricanes 14 2. Owners and occupants in the study tract 55-61 3. Artifacts recovered from the study tract 79 4. Comparison of the project area assemblage to composite artifact patterns 80 5. Mean ceramic date for the study tract 80 6. Major pottery types from Unit 1 113 7. Shape and function of ceramic vessels from Unit 1 114 8. Mean ceramic date for Unit 1 114 9. Buttons recovered from Unit 1 116 10. Major pottery types from Unit 2 118 ll. Shape and function of ceramic vessels from Unit 2 119 12. Mean ceramic date for Unit 2 119 13. Major pottery types from Feature 1 122 14. Shape and function of ceramic vessels from Feature 1 122 15. Mean ceramic date for Feature 1 124 16. Major pottery types from Unit 3 126 17. Shape and function of ceramic vessels from Unit 3 126 18. Mean ceramic date for Unit 3 127 19. Major pottery types from Unit 4 129 20. Shape and function of ceramic vessels from Unit 4 129 2l. Mean ceramic date for Unit 4 130 22. Mean ceramic date for Feature 4 133 23. Major pottery types from Unit 5 134 24. Shape and function of ceramic vessels from Unit 5 134 25. Mean ceramic date for Unit 5 135 26. Buttons recovered from Unit 5 136 27. Mean ceramic date for Feature 6 137 28. Mean ceramic dates 137 29. Artifact patterns for excavation units and selected features 142 30. Comparative archaeological patterns 143 3l. Ceramic decorative types 144 32. Vessel forms 145 33. Ceramic index values 147 34. Percentages of status indicators 149 35. Minimum number of individuals, number of bones, weight, and estimated meat yield 154 36. Minimum number of individuals, number of bones, weight, and estimated meat yield for Unit 1 157 37. Minimum number of individuals, number of bones, weight, and estimated meat yield for Unit 2 157 38. Minimum number of individuals, number of bones, weight, and estimated meat yield for Unit 3 158 39.

Load more

  194

Copy Link