A New Archaeology W Iny the New Deal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NEW DEAL ARCHAEOLOGY A NEWW ARCHAEOLOGYY IN THE NEWW DEAL THE RISE OF HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGYY IN THE 1930S Benjamin C. Pykles Benjamin C. Pykles is ann Assistantt Professorr inn thee Departmentt off Anthropologyy att the State University off New York att Potsdam. istorical archaeology—the archaeologyy off the Mod- only standing architectural ern World (approximately the last 500 years off remains from the seven- Hhuman history)—has its disciplinaryy roots in the teenth century. It was not historic preservation movementt off the United States during until 1934, however, when the late nineteenth and earlyy twentieth centuries (Pykles the National Park Service 2008). Historical archaeology’s true institutional beginnings, (NPS) secured possession of however, are tied to the federally sponsored archaeologyy proj- the main portion of ects conducted under the auspices off the Neww Deal pro- Jamestown Island, that a grams off the 1930s. Chieff among those projects in terms of large-scale archaeological the developmentt off historical archaeology in the United program at the site was insti- States were the 1934–1941 excavations at Jamestown, Vir- tuted, relying on the labor of ginia, directed byy J. C. Harrington (Figure 1). During this young African-American critical time in the historyy off the field, Harrington estab- men enrolled in the Civilian lished some off the fundamental methods and practices used Conservation Corps (CCC). Figuree 1. Jeann Carll Harrington by historical archaeologists todayy and did much to promote Because there were few, iff any, (1901-1998), the “founding and legitimize the emerging discipline. As a resultt off these professionally trained archae- ffather”” off historicall archaeology efforts, Harrington is widely recognized as the “founding ologists with any experience, in the Unitedd States. Courtesy of father” off historical archaeologyy in the United States (Miller let alone interest, in excavat- the Archives off The Church of 1998:5). ing historic sites at this time, Jesus Christ off Latter-dayy Saints. the NPS looked to Henry C. There are numerous isolated examples off excavations att U.S. Forman, an architectural his- historic sites from the seventeenth through early twentieth torian, to direct the neww Jamestown archaeologyy program. centuries, some even at the site off Jamestown (Hosmer 1981; From the beginning, the NPS initiated a peculiarr division off Linebaugh 2005; Schuyler 2001). However, itt was not until labor between Forman’s crew and that off the other bona-fide the passage off the Historic Sites Actt off 1935, which clearly archaeologists hired to assist in the project. Essentially, For- outlined the National Parkk Service’s preservation mandate, man and his creww were to excavate the foundations scattered coupled with the generously funded New Deal workk pro- throughout the townsite, while the trained archaeologists grams, that the preservation movementt in the United States and their men were assigned to dig in the “non-architectur- reached a level off coherentt organization and professional- al” parts off the site, searching for things like colonial-period ism, under which historical archaeology gained an institu- ditches and fence rows thatt would help delineate historic tional foothold (Hosmer 1981). propertyy boundaries. Highlighting this bizarre division off labor was an alleged “three-foott rule” thatt forbade the archae- The preservation efforts at Jamestown were central to this ologists from coming closer than three feett to a foundation development. Leading the way earlyy on was The Association in their excavations (Harrington 1984:35). for the Preservation off Virginia Antiquities (APVA), which acquired a portion off the original Jamestown town site in Over the next two years this bifurcated program off excava- 1893 and eightt years later (1901–1902) sponsored explorato- tion led to jealousy, mistrust, and in-fighting, which ulti- ryy excavations off the ruins behind the old church tower, the matelyy resulted in the resignation, dismissal, or reassign- 38 The SAA Archaeological Record • May 2011 NEW DEAL ARCHAEOLOGY mentt off the entire supervisory stafff in the summer off 1936 with absolutely no context. To his credit, during the five years (Harrington 1984:36, 1994:4; Hosmer 1981:612). Into this (1936–1941) in which he presided over the Jamestown dig, void stepped J. C. Harrington (Figure 1), who att the time was Harrington reversed this practice and began to record the completing graduate workk in archaeologyy at the Universityy off provenience off recovered artifacts and store them by excava- Chicago. Harrington, in many ways, was seen as the ideal tion units, rather than by type. candidate for the Jamestown job. Prior to enrolling in gradu- ate school to study archaeology, he had earned a bachelor’s Harrington’s contributions to the formalization off historical degree in Architectural Engineering at the Universityy off archaeology in the United States, however, go far beyond his Michigan and worked as an architect in both Neww Mexico methods in the field and lab. Indeed, his greatest contribu- and Indiana. Significantly, as part off his undergraduate edu- tions, and perhaps the principal reason he is considered the cation he spentt the summer off 1923 working with the School “founding father” off historical archaeology, were his efforts for American Research in Santa Fe, making measured draw- to make this new kind off archaeology at Jamestown publicly ings off nine earlyy Spanish Mission churches and visiting visible and legitimate. To appreciate this fully it is important prominent archaeologists, including Edgar L. Hewettt and to understand the cultural and intellectual climate in which Alfred V. Kidder, att their excavations. It was during this time Harrington’s archaeological work at Jamestown took place. Harrington developed more than a passing interest in As the nation struggled with the economic woes off the Great archaeology. When the Great Depression seized the U.S. Depression, political and intellectual leaders began to pro- economy, however, in the early 1930s, Harrington lostt his mote a usable past, one that soughtt to inspire the public with architectural job in Indiana and was faced with one off three a neww sense off nationalism and provide a remedy for the choices: “either working for the Government, selling apples, depressed morale off the citizenry at large. The passage off the or going back to school and doing graduate work” (Harring- 1935 Historic Sites Act and the historical work assigned to ton and Harrington 1971:2). Although he chose the latter, manyy off the New Deal work programs, including the CCC enrolling at the University off Chicago in 1932, itt was only excavations at Jamestown, can be understood as part off this four years later when the NPS offered him the job at overall history-making agenda (Hosmer 1981; Pykles 2008; Jamestown (Harrington 1994; Miller 1998; Pykles 2010). Schuyler 1976). Indeed, all off the historians, archaeologists, architects, and otherr researchers involved in the historical The NPS saw Harrington’s background in architecture and programs off the Neww Deal served as “missionaries who gave his graduate training in archaeology as the ideal suite off American history a new dimension” (Hosmer 1981:6). skills for the Jamestown archaeology project. Like other his- torical archaeological projects at the time, the digs at In addition to participating in the nationalistic proselytizing Jamestown were architecturallyy oriented. Emerging as they program of the time, Harrington viewed his work att did from an interest in preserving and interpreting the his- Jamestown as an effortt “to spread the gospel off historical toric builtt environment, the goals off these early excavations archaeology” (Harrington 1984:41). One off the first things he were “to uncover foundations and secure architectural infor- did upon arriving att Jamestown in 1936 was take down the mation aboutt the original buildings...forr the purpose off bet- high board fence erected by his predecessors to keep “the ter on-site interpretation for the visiting public.” (Harrington curious and bothersome tourists awayy from the excavations.” 1984:31–32). Artifacts, when collected, were “viewed as sec- Not only did Harrington recognize that “such an atti- ondary items appended to architecture and serving the goals tude...was quite inconsistentt with the policies off and philos- off restoration” with the result thatt “the museum case rather ophyy off both the APVA and the National Parkk Service,” butt than the scholarlyy monograph is the benefactor” (Schuyler he also realized thatt “the CCC (and the Depression) would 1975:3–4). This emphasis on historic site restoration domi- nott lastt forever.” Thus, sensing thatt “the public understand- nated the neww field in its earlyy years. Indeed, the majorityy off ing and acceptance off historical archaeologyy was essential,” archaeologists involved early on with this kind off work used and thatt “The Jamestown project presented a golden oppor- the term coined byy Harrington himselff to describe their tunityy to promote this cause,” Harrington and his colleagues activities—”historic site archaeology” (Harrington 1952). tookk various measures to showcase and interprett historical This is perhaps bestt illustrated byy the way the Jamestown archaeology to the visiting public, providing one off the earli- artifacts were treated during the two years off excavation pre- est examples off public archaeology in the United States