CHOICES on the LAND Identity, Influence, Power, and Conflict in a Historic Place Michael O. Hartley a Dissertation Submitted To
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHOICES ON THE LAND Identity, Influence, Power, and Conflict In A Historic Place Michael O. Hartley A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Anthropology. Chapel Hill 2009 Approved by: Carole L. Crumley Robert E. Daniels Dorothy Holland John Florin Leland Ferguson UMI Number: 3366347 Copyright 2009 by Hartley, Michael O. All rights reserved INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ______________________________________________________________ UMI Microform 3366347 Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. _______________________________________________________________ ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 ©2009 Michael Orion Hartley ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT MICHAEL O. HARTLEY: Choices on the Land Identity, Influence, Power, and Conflict in a Historic Place (Under the Direction of Carole L. Crumley) There are many activities relating to the maintenance of historical significance in the United States that fall under the label “Preservation,” and the National Register of Historic Places and related programs have formalized much of that activity. This dissertation presents a case study of some of the intended and unintended results of the use of preservation tools in the historic town of Bethania, North Carolina. This study examines the results of the application of the National Register of Historic Places, National Historic Landmark designation, conservation land acquisition, and the use of public money resulting from these programs over a period of approximately two decades in Bethania. This examination treats ethical considerations involved in the application of these tools, based on results of their application, and a particular issue addressed here is the use of the tools of preservation to achieve political authority and power. The listing of 500 acres of Bethania landscape on the National Register of Historic Places altered, in a dramatic way, the town’s visibility, prestige and ability to gain access to the benefits of public money, political autonomy and cultural prestige that would not otherwise be available. This gained increase in political power and access to benefits is in contrast to the inability of another group, contiguous to, but outside the National Register boundaries, to also gain access to these benefits. This occurred even though the excluded group also claims a deep relationship to historically significant iii landscape directly related to Bethania. The rigid formula of the National Register plays a role in this exclusion, as does the absence of other tools that might allow recognition and empowerment of the excluded group. These issues immediately emerged after the creation of the municipality of Bethania, purportedly based on the National Register Boundaries. The fact that the included group was largely white and the excluded group black, added racial conflict to the situation. These issues were carried to the Supreme Court of North Carolina as well as in a long and ongoing debate in the public media. The issues are still present and viewed as unresolved by the excluded community. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I must thank the Department of Anthropology, UNC-CH for their gracious and courteous welcome back of a student (myself) who had been away many years, and for guidance in the pathways toward this document and degree. I also thank those who agreed to serve on my committee. They were of great assistance as I worked through past history in this dissertation and learned new things. I appreciate Carole’s willingness at the outset to chair my committee. Her initial reading of the paper and encouragement is especially appreciated, as is Leland’s valuable editorial advice. Bob, Dottie, and John contributed with their wise criticism. Old Salem Museums & Gardens, my employer, was also helpful in this and in many endeavors through the years. And as always, my wife Martha has contributed invaluable support, meaningful discussion, critique and final editorial comment. She was and continues to be a fully engaged participant in the work. Finally, I acknowledge the people who bear a relationship to that historic place that is Bethania, North Carolina, both within and without today’s town. v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………viii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………….ix Chapter I. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………1 II. THE PROBLEM………………………………………………………...5 III. THE CONTEXT…………………..…………………………………...17 Bethabara………………………………………………………………25 Bethania………………………………………………………………..26 Salem and the Country Congregations………………………………...28 Slavery and Militarism………………………………………………...32 Industrialization and a New County…………………………………...35 Secular Salem……………………………………………………….…38 IV. THE TWENTIETH CENTURY AND PRESERVATION OF IDENTITY……………………………………43 Preservation as Reaction to Threats…………………………………...44 The Wachovia Study…………………………………………………..55 V. BETHANIA THREATENED…………………………………………59 The Bethania Town Lot Study………………………………………...62 Preservation Tools……………………………………………………..65 vi The Preservation Plan…………………………………………………66 The National Register of Historic Places……………………………...68 The National Register Amendment and Boundary Increase…………..70 Loesch Lane……………………………………………………………72 The Bethania Town Lot Archaeological Study………………………..80 Conclusion of the Bethania Town Lot Study………………………….90 VI. IDENTITY, INFLUENCE, POWER, AND CONFLICT…………..…92 The 1839 Act of the General Assembly……………………………….93 A New Bethania……………………………………………………….94 VII. ETHNICITY AND BOUNDARIES………………………………….110 EPILOGUE…………………………………………………………………………...128 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………….140 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Selected Chronology……………………………………………………...138 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Wachovia in Carolina…………………………………………………...132 2. Bethania Town Lot……………………………………………………...133 3. Moravian Resources in Forsyth County………………………………...134 4. The Bethania Town Lot with National Register boundaries……………135 5. African American areas within the Bethania Town Lot………………...136 6. Contested Landscape……………………………………………………137 ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Over the course of several years in the 1980s and 1990s, I was the Director of a study of the Wachovia Tract of North Carolina, 100,000 acres of land sold to Unitas Fratrum, or Moravians, a pietistic group of Protestants, by Lord Granville, the last Lord Proprietor of Carolina, in 1753. Called Der Wachau, or Wachovia, this tract is now wholly contained in Forsyth County, North Carolina. The focus of the work, initiated under the auspices of Old Salem, Inc., was the identification and recording of historic resources relating to this tract of land for purposes of future scholarship, advocacy and re-emergence of general awareness of this significant body of land. I was joined in this work by Martha Brown Boxley (now Hartley), a trained Preservation Planner, and our combination of skills was productive of meaningful findings. In the initial phase of the work, called The Wachovia Study, one of the colonial Moravian towns was identified as being seriously threatened, and the Wachovia Study moved to a phase two project, called the Bethania Town Lot Study, again with myself as Director and joined by Martha Boxley. This village, Bethania, was founded in 1759 by the Moravians, as part of their settlement of the much larger tract of 100,000 acres. Much of this work involved identification of the presence of this place and its people as it existed in the 1980s for purposes of advocacy and protection against the threatening dynamics being imposed from outside Bethania by a rapidly expanding urban palace, Winston-Salem. This work was successful to the extent that the most immediate threat to Bethania, the placement of a beltway corridor through the Bethania land, was prevented. In the process of selecting and applying tools to accomplish this, however, conflicting issues of identity and ethnicity were found in the community, issues that were reflected in boundaries created on the landscape and within groups of people. Among the issues that emerged during this work were “Moravian” identity and African American inclusion or exclusion in that identity in modern time. That topic involves the use of perceptions of historical boundaries on the landscape to create political entities, and the combination of constructed perception and formally delineated boundaries to achieve certain goals. Integral to this use of historically determined identity is the tension between inclusion and exclusion produced by manipulation of the historical identity of the landscape. The ability to achieve or deny that manipulation is a substantive element of those issues as discussed here. Within these manipulations, the role of “preservation” as formally embodied in the National Register of Historic Places, the National Historic Landmark program, and local preservation mechanisms is called