Domestic Brick Architecture in Early Colonial Virginia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2002 Domestic Brick Architecture in Early Colonial Virginia Douglas E. Ross College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Architecture Commons, History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Ross, Douglas E., "Domestic Brick Architecture in Early Colonial Virginia" (2002). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626356. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-695y-5722 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DOMESTIC BRICK ARCHITECTURE IN EARLY COLONIAL VIRGINIA A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Douglas E. Ross 2002 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts uthor Approved, April 2002 r / I Norman F. Barka Marley R. Brown HI Martin D. Gallivan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES vii ABSTRACT ix INTRODUCTION 2 CHAPTER I. A LITTLE HISTORY, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO BRICK DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE 6 CHAPTER E. THE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF TURKEY 40 ISLAND HISTORY 40 ARCHITECTURE 44 ARCHAEOLOGY 48 CHAPTER HI. TRENDS IN VIRGINIA’S BRICK DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE 54 THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 58 THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 68 INTERNAL COMPARISONS 79 EXTERNAL COMPARISONS 90 THE INFLUENCE OF GEOGRAPHY 98 CHAPTER IV. INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 112 DISCUSSION: BRICK ARCHITECTURE IN VIRGINIA 112 VARIATION AND THE CONCEPT OF STYLE 128 iii TURKEY ISLAND 136 CONCLUSIONS 150 APPENDIX. DATABASE OF EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BRICK HOUSES 153 REFERENCES CITED 177 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is dedicated to my parents, Kenneth and Sharon Ross, who have never questioned my career path or balked at its apparently never-ending series of stages and persistent financial requirements. The work included herein, particularly the results of the fieldwork at Turkey Island that inspired the entire project, would not exist without the encouragement and advice of Martin Gallivan, who constantly reassured me that it was possible despite its detractors, and the unwavering friendship of Courtney Birkett, who spent nearly as many weekends in the field as I did. Also integral to the realization of this project were the goodwill of the landowner, Mr. George Little, and the logistical support and encouragement of Dennis Blanton, who arranged for the pro bono use of equipment and transportation. Additional recognition must be granted to Jeremy Nienow, for taking time away from his thesis to volunteer his services in the field, and to David Brown, for his perpetual enthusiasm even at times when I was ready to throw in the towel, and for graciously sharing data on Fairfield. My two other committee members Marley Brown and chair Norm Barka provided valuable comments on the work in progress, and Willie Graham, Mark Wenger and Camille Wells shared with me some of the mystical knowledge from the realm of architectural history. Dan Mouer and Doug Sanford were kind enough to share details of their excavations at Curies and Germanna respectively. Finally, this research might have dragged on indefinitely had I not received the following words of wisdom one night in a Chinese restaurant: ‘You should evaluate the progress of a long-term project’. v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. 17th century brick houses 59 2. Entry, Chimneys, Ground Floor Rooms (17th century) 60 3. 18th century brick houses 69 4. Entry, Chimneys, Ground Floor Rooms (18th century) 70 5. Roof, Elevation, Depth (18th century) 70 6. 18th century brickwork 77 7. 18th century glazed headers 77 8. 18th century fa9ades 77 9. 17th and 18th century house area and volume 84 10. 17th and 18th century house area (sq. ft.) 85 a L 11. 17 century house volume (cu. ft.) 85 12. 18th century house volume (cu. ft.) 85 13. Average house size, 1646-1720 (Upton 1980) 93 14. Average house size (brick data) 93 15. Distribution of 17th century brick houses across naval districts 105 16. Distribution of 18th century brick houses across naval districts 105 17. Coefficients of variation for 17th and 18th century volume data 133 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Cross passage and lobby entry plans 17 2. Excavated foundations of Corotoman 21 3. Adam Thoroughgood House, Virginia Beach 25 4. Turkey Island, plan of excavations 1999-2001 51 ^1* 5. 17 and 18 century porch towers 64 6. 17th and 18th century direct entries 64 7. 17th and 18th century lobby entries 64 8. 17th and 18th century end chimneys 65 9. 17 til and 18th century interior chimneys 65 10. 17th century one- to two-room houses 66 11. 17 tli century three- to four-room houses 66 12. 17th century five- to six+-room houses 66 13. 18th century entry type 73 14. 18th century ground floor rooms 73 15. 17th and 18th century house area (sq. ft.) 86 16. 17th and 18th century house volume (cu. ft.) 87 17. Naval districts 102 18. Brick houses in the early 17th century 103 19. Brick houses in the late 17th century 104 20. Distribution of brick houses in the 1st quarter of the 18th century 108 21. Distribution of brick houses in the 2nd quarter of the 18th century 109 vii 22. Germanna, plan of excavated foundations 126 23. Richness for data on entry, chimneys, ground floor rooms 132 24. Evenness for data on entry, chimneys, ground floor rooms 132 25. Tuckahoe, ground floor plan 140 26. Tazewell Hall, ground floor plan 142 27. Battersea, ground floor plan 142 28. Brandon, ground floor plan 143 29. Brick Kitchen at Curies Plantation 146 viii ABSTRACT The purpose of my research was to clarify the social and economic significance of brick domestic architecture in early eighteenth century Virginia, a period for which few if any well-dated examples are known from prior to c. 1720, and to use the findings to reevaluate the significance of brick for the entire first century and a half of English settlement in Virginia. An associated goal was to use this understanding to aid in interpreting the results of my excavations at Turkey Island, a seventeenth to nineteenth century tobacco plantation in Henrico County owned by the Randolph family. Structural data on all known brick houses built before 1750 were collected to develop an interpretive context for colonial brick architecture. These data were compared with existing studies of contemporary houses constructed partially or entirely of wood to determine the degree of similarity or difference in their developmental trends over time. Results indicated differences in such features as size and entry type between brick and earthfast structures across the first century and a half of English settlement in Virginia. Seventeenth century earthfast houses demonstrate characteristics related to the adaptation to an agricultural lifestyle in a new environment, whereas brick houses appear to be influenced more by architectural fashions in England. However, following a severe economic depression in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, which forced even the wealthiest colonists to build smaller houses, changing global economic conditions resulted in a convergence in the form of houses built of brick and of wood. It is at this time that size became more of a discriminating factor of wealth and status. Chronological data obtained from the database of brick houses suggest that the mansion at Turkey Island was not constructed until after 1750, and that the predecessor it was mistaken for was probably a much smaller house with no more than two rooms on the ground floor, having been built during the depression. One possible candidate for this earlier house was excavated at neighbouring Curies Plantation also owned by the Randolph family. DOMESTIC BRICK ARCHITECTURE IN EARLY COLONIAL VIRGINIA INTRODUCTION The study of Virginia’s early domestic architecture, like other aspects of its colonial past, has experienced a number of transformations since the late nineteenth century when interest in architectural history began to develop into a formalized discipline in its own right. These shifts in focus and methodology are readily apparent in the literature on the subject, as well as the intellectual background of the individuals producing it, and have been examined at length in review articles by Upton (1988) and Wells (1998). Initially, the focus was on exceptional houses, particularly eighteenth century brick dwellings once owned by the colony’s wealthiest inhabitants. These studies primarily examined issues of structure and design, and attempted to link individual homes to specific European precedents and local or imported builders. This type of scholarship has continued to the present, but was overshadowed beginning in the 1970s by a change in emphasis within the social sciences towards the social context of human behaviour (including the built environment), and towards the study of individuals poorly represented in traditional histories. In the realm of architectural history it meant increased attention to what came to be known as vernacular architecture, particularly post-built structures, as well as a concern with landscapes and how house design reflected and also helped to alter or maintain the social status quo. There was also an increased emphasis on variation and change over time between these two interrelated aspects of human behaviour. Concurrent with these developments was a broadening in the range of 2 3 disciplines that tackled the study of colonial architecture in Virginia, expanding from preservationists and professional architectural historians to include folklorists, cultural anthropologists and archaeologists.