Tilling the Earth Georgia’s Historic Agricultural Heritage A Context Tilling the Earth Georgia’s Historic Agricultural Heritage - A Context Georgia Department of Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division 156 Trinity Avenue, SW Suite 101 Atlanta, GA 30303-3600 Georgia Department of Transportation Office of Environment/Location 3993 Aviation Circle Atlanta, Georgia 30336-3600 Denise P. Messick; J. W. Joseph, Ph.D; and Natalie P. Adams - Authors New South Associates, Inc. 6150 East Ponce de Leon Avenue Stone Mountain, Georgia 30083 October 1, 2001 TILLING THE EARTH Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the numerous authors would also like to thank the helpful staff at the individuals who assisted in this project, especially the Georgia Agrirama in Tifton, the Jarrell Plantation in Jones farmers and other landowners who permitted us to visit County, the Bland Farm complex at Georgia Southern and photograph their properties. These include Joyce University in Statesboro, and the Hofwyl-Broadfield Ethridge and Susan Chaisson in Jackson County, Walter Plantation in Glynn County. Brenda James Griffin, Zoller in Effingham County, Herman Ariail and the Assistant Commissioner, provided us with publications McConnells in Banks County, owners of the Hemphill and other information from the Georgia Department of Farm in Murray County, Mack and Mary Griffin in Agriculture. Faith Meader of New South Associates con- Berrien County, and many others who allowed access to tributed historical research to this project while Brody their properties. This project would not have been pos- Fredericksen researched the Georgia Archaeological sible without their cooperation. Several of the regional Site Files. Tracey Fedor and Tony Greiner prepared preservation planners throughout the state contributed graphics, while Ms. Fedor designed the report. At the their valuable time and expertise. Jorene Martin and Georgia Department of Transportation, we wish to rec- David Ray each spent several hours driving through their ognize the assistance and advice given by Dr. Gail respective regions with the researchers and introducing D’Avino, Dr. Rowe Bowen, Emily Olin, Eric Duff, and us to important agricultural resources. Burke Walker, other members of the cultural resource and environmen- Robert Ciucevich, James Horton, Kevin McAuliff, Robin tal staff. Finally, we would like to thank the staff at the Nail, Dan Latham and Ann Floyd each made valuable Georgia Historic Preservation Division for their assis- suggestions and provided information on persons to con- tance: Amy Pallante, Gretchen Kinnard, Ken Thomas, Dr. tact or places to visit in their areas of the state. The Kenneth Gibbs, Dr. David Crass and Dr. Richard Cloues. ii TILLING THE EARTH Table of Contents iii I. Introduction (Joseph) 1 II. An Agricultural Overview of Georgia (Adams, Joseph and Messick) 4 The First Agriculturalists 4 1730-1750: The Trustees’ Search for Staple Crops 6 1750-1785: The Establishment of Plantation Slavery 7 1785-1865: Rice, King Cotton and the Establishment of Staple Crops 15 1865-1920: The Postbellum Era, Cotton, and the Agrarian Revolution 27 1920-1950: The Death of King Cotton and the Birth of Successful Agricultural Diversity 38 III. An Agricultural Typology (Joseph and Messick) 49 Introduction 49 Time and Typology 53 Region and Typology 56 Crops and Typology 56 Ethnicity and Typology 57 IV. Agricultural Landscapes, Buildings and Structures: An Overview and Description (Messick and Joseph) 60 The Landscapes of Agriculture 60 Farm Buildings and Structures: An Aid to Identification 67 V. Inventory of Agricultural Buildings and Structures in Georgia (Messick) 92 Inventory of National Register, Survey and Centennial Farms 92 Guide to Research on Agricultural Resources in Georgia 100 VI. Inventory of Archaeological Sites (Joseph) 105 Archaeological Sites Recorded in the State Site Files 105 Archaeological Excavations of Agricultural Sites in Georgia 107 Issues Regarding the National Register of Historic Places Eligibility of Agricultural Archaeological Sites and Recommendations/Evaluations 109 VII. National Register Eligibility and Recommendations (Messick) 112 Recommendations and Conclusions 121 References Cited and Consulted 123 Appendix A 141 iii TILLING THE EARTH iv TILLING THE EARTH I. Introduction 1845). Cities and towns grew primarily as points of trans-shipment where agricultural produce was brought, Since its beginnings, Georgia’s history has been an agri- packed, and sent on to market. By the later 19th century cultural history. Native Americans, the state’s first resi- railroads would connect cities and towns in an effort to dents, are believed to have developed horticulture about move this agricultural bounty more efficiently, and by the 3,000 years ago and by the time of European contact 20th century roads would follow the railroads and trucks had created complex societies whose existence was would take on some of the task of moving the state’s based largely on the agricultural production of their vil- crops. While it may not now be evident, much of the lage fields and farms. The agricultural bounty of the state’s current physical character can be traced to this region was one of the aspects touted in journals and agrarian past. Environment and geography influenced other promotional literature of the Colonial period and agriculture in the state. This map shows was the primary lure that drew immigrants to the colony. the geographic regions used in this con- text. The counties in each region are A series of land annexations and expansions would shown in Table I in Section V. draw successive waves of settlers and their servants with the promise of agriculturally productive lands. Georgia’s The geographical size of industrial origins were tied to agriculture as textile mills Georgia, the largest moved south to gain proximity to cotton fields (Gregg state east of the Mississippi, and the Georgia grew through a series of land grants and acquisitions, and environmental diver- this figure shows the state’s development over time. Source: sity expressed from Coleman (1991). the Atlantic shore at the southeastern edge of the state, to the inner Gulf plain to the west, to the heart of the Appalachian mountains on the State’s northern edge, when coupled with a population which drew its origins from across Europe and the Americas as well as Africa, produced a complex agricultural mosaic on the land. Our discussion of the state’s agricultural heritage is root- ed in its geography, dividing the state into six regions: the Ridge and Valley, Mountains, Piedmont, Upper Coastal Plan, Central Coastal Plan, and Sea Islands and Coast. Understanding the cultural manifestations of this agrarian past is the objective of this context. Agricultural sites consist of three components: below-ground - the archaeological evidences of earlier occupants and struc- tures no longer standing; above-ground - the dwellings, barns, and outbuildings which contribute much of what we think of as agricultural sites today; and the ground itself - the remnants of a cultural landscape expressed in 1 TILLING THE EARTH the locations of fields, orchards, and other human a familiar past, for those of us born in the post World imprints. War II era which signaled a shift away from agriculture, this is still a foreign past, and as we enter the next mil- This historical context for agriculture in Georgia was pre- lennium it is evident that agricultural sites will become pared with funding provided by the Georgia Department less common and that our understanding of agriculture of Transportation (DOT), in cooperation with the Federal will become less clear. This is a critical juncture; the time Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Georgia to look at the agrarian past and recognize what is both Historic Preservation Division (HPD) of the Department of familiar and foreign. Natural Resources (the State Historic Preservation Office or SHPO). It represents a collaborative effort by the This duality within agricultural sites - their familiarity and DOT, the HPD, the FHWA and New South Associates to foreignness - is most notable when attempting to evaluate examine Georgia’s agrarian history, identify the types of their significance for nomination to the National Register resources – historic structures, archaeological remains, of Historic Places. On the one hand, agricultural sites and landscapes – associated with this history, and to can be argued to be mundane properties incapable of provide recommendations on the assessment of agrarian fulfilling the requirements of either Criteria A, B, C, or D. resources for nomination to the National Register of On another, agricultural sites embody and exemplify the Historic Places. This study is a result of primary research most significant element of Georgia’s history, and hence undertaken by New South Associates coupled with the could all be argued eligible. Somewhere between these input and recommendations of the SHPO and DOT as extremes lies reality. This context attempts to determine developed during a series of meetings in which various where. topics were analyzed and discussed. Representatives of the Federal Highway Administration also attended and Section II provides a brief overview of Georgia’s agri- participated in some of these meetings. The result is a cultural history. This overview is intended to be a point study guide whose intent is to help the user understand of origination for understanding Georgia’s agrarian past, the agrarian past, accurately