Seminoles and Settlers on the Florida Frontier: Using Glass Bottle Analysis to Reconstruct Daily Life at Stranahan’S Trading Post, Fort Lauderdale

Home , Second Seminole War

SEMINOLES AND SETTLERS ON THE FLORIDA FRONTIER:

USING GLASS BOTTLE ANALYSIS TO RECONSTRUCT DAILY LIFE AT

STRANAHAN’S TRADING POST, FORT LAUDERDALE

Crystal Geiger

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of

The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts

Florida Atlantic University

Boca Raton, Florida

May 2015

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis would not have been possible without the efforts and encouragement of my thesis adviser, Dr. Arlene Fradkin. Thank you for all of your hard work on my behalf.

I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Michael Harris and Robert

Carr for their assistance with any questions or concerns that I had during my research.

Thank you to the Fort Lauderdale Historical Society and Broward County Historical

Commission, who opened their collections to me.

Many thanks are due to the Florida Public Archaeology Network who provided me with a graduate assistantship while I worked on the initial stages of this project. Sarah and Michele, I am indebted for your kind words, feedback, and excellent advice as I worked on this thesis.

I would also like to thank my parents, Linton and Dianna Geiger, for their love and support in all my endeavors.

iv ABSTRACT

Author: Crystal Geiger

Title: Seminoles and Settlers on the Florida Frontier: Using Glass Bottle Analysis to Reconstruct Daily Life at Stranahan’s Trading Post, Fort Lauderdale

Thesis Advisor: Dr. Arlene Fradkin

Degree: Master of Arts

Year: 2015

The early economic and social development of Fort Lauderdale began in the late nineteenth century. Today’s well-known Stranahan House in downtown Fort Lauderdale was originally the Stranahan Trading Post and General Store, which was in operation from 1894 to 1906. Adjacent to this building was a campground, which was used by early Florida white settlers and Seminole Indians. This thesis presents a study of 204 whole glass bottles recovered from the Stranahan campground archaeological site

(8BD259). The analysis confirms that a greater proportion of the bottles were used when the property was a campsite. Moreover, soda/mineral water, not alcohol, was the more common type of beverage consumed at the site during this time.

v SEMINOLES AND SETTLERS ON THE FLORIDA FRONTIER:

USING GLASS BOTTLE ANALYSIS TO RECONSTRUCT DAILY LIFE AT

STRANAHAN’S TRADING POST, FORT LAUDERDALE

LIST OF TABLES ...... ix

LIST OF FIGURES ...... x

CHAPTER ONE. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES ...... 1

Objectives ...... 2

CHAPTER TWO. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY ...... 4

Historical Background ...... 4

Early Background-18th Century ...... 4

Seminole-White Relations: Nineteenth Century ...... 6

Seminoles and White Settlers in South Florida and New River ...... 8

Previous Archaeology ...... 11

Brickell’s Trading Post ...... 11

Stranahan House ...... 12

CHAPTER THREE. BOTTLE STUDIES, METHODS, AND MATERIALS ...... 14

Bottle Studies ...... 14

The Hoff Store ...... 14

Fort Riley ...... 15

vi Materials ...... 16

Methods...... 17

CHAPTER FOUR. BOTTLE GLASS DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS ...... 20

Alcoholic Beverage Bottles ...... 25

Wine ...... 25

Beer ...... 25

Liquor ...... 29

Malt ...... 30

Soda and Mineral Water Bottles ...... 31

Coca-Cola ...... 31

Soda Pop ...... 32

Mineral Water ...... 34

Medicinal Bottles ...... 38

Vaseline ...... 38

Listerine ...... 39

Painkillers ...... 40

Remedies ...... 41

Laxatives ...... 42

Unknown ...... 43

Culinary Bottles ...... 43

Salad Dressing ...... 43

Pepper Sauce ...... 44

Worcestershire Sauce ...... 45

vii Miscellaneous ...... 45

Indeterminate ...... 45

Manufacturing Method and Content: Statistical Analysis ...... 46

Historic Records and the Archaeological Glass Evidence ...... 48

CHAPTER FIVE. CONCLUSIONS ...... 51

REFERENCES ...... 53

viii LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Most Common Bottle Attributes...... 19

Table 2. Total Functional Bottle Categories and Percentages ...... 21

Table 3. Bottle Function and Shape ...... 22

Table 4. Bottle Function and Color ...... 22

Table 5. Bottle Function and Manufacturing Method ...... 23

Table 6. Bottle Function and Finish ...... 24

Table 7. Bottle Function and Manufacture Method ...... 48

Table 8. Chi-square Tests ...... 48

ix LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Percentages of whole bottles in the glass assemblage by function ...... 21

Figure 2. Fidelio beer bottle with embossments ...... 26

Figure 3. Thos. McMullen & Co. White Label bottle ...... 28

Figure 4. Close up of a soda pop crown finish ...... 33

Figure 5. Rounded mineral water base ...... 35

Figure 6. Applied blob finish on a mineral water bottle ...... 36

Figure 7. Cochran & Co. mineral water with embossments ...... 37

Figure 8. Close up of the indented base on mineral water bottle ...... 38

Figure 9. Vaseline bottle ...... 40

Figure 10. Hamlin’s Wizard Oil bottle with identifying embossments ...... 42

Figure 11. Close up of a screw top finish on a salad dressing bottle ...... 44

x CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Archaeology augments historical sources to offer an encompassing view that neither can offer alone. The wide sweeping generalizations that history offers is tempered by the realistic, gritty view that material objects provide. My thesis research involves the combined use of primary historical documents and archaeological material culture. The term historical archaeology applies itself readily to a variety of definitions, but, for purposes here, it is simply the use of historical research in tandem with archaeological method and theory (Sharer and Ashmore 2003). This interdisciplinary approach facilitates a more complete reconstruction of a past human population and its culture because it allows the consideration of quantifiable, physical data in conjunction with historical documents (Deetz 1977). The evidence focused upon here is a collection of glass bottles recovered from a late nineteenth-century archaeological site. These objects are currently housed by the Broward County Historical Commission under the auspices of Broward Libraries. The analysis of these glass objects will provide insight into a range of activities that took place among the site inhabitants.

This thesis is an archaeological and historical study of the campgrounds adjacent to the Stranahan Trading Post and General Store, formerly located along the banks of the

New River in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The trading post and store were owned and operated by Frank Stranahan from 1894 to 1906 and were one of Fort Lauderdale’s first

1 businesses. The operational years of this trading post/store coincided with the time when

Fort Lauderdale was still a frontier outpost. The Stranahan site thus represents an important period of early Fort Lauderdale development. Situated on the property of the

Stranahan business, this campground was used by both early Florida white settlers and

Seminole Indians (Kersey 2003) and hence served as a point of contact between the two populations. The goal of this study is to relate the archaeological glass bottles to the cultural activities and processes associated with this interaction.

The historical context is an important component to consider. It is through this lens that the glass bottles, viewed as reminders of daily life, represent the people who inhabited the site. Postmodern theoretical concepts, such as Bourdieu’s habitus, describe human agency as based on a set of unrecognized, unconscious assumptions (Bourdieu

1977). Human motivation, by this definition, is part and parcel of the larger social and cultural forces that are at work within the individual’s frame of experience (Linn 2010).

In this thesis, I use concepts like habitus to describe human agency but in a different way.

The microcosm of the trading post and store represents a singular event on the Florida frontier. It is the convergence of different beliefs and cultures at the turn of the century that are here defined through the material objects.

Objectives

The goal of this thesis research is to demonstrate how the glass bottles can inform the historical sources and provide information on the ways in which early frontier life was negotiated in South Florida. The project analyzed the assemblage of glass bottles recovered from the Stranahan Campsite (8BD259) in conjunction with historical documentation. The research accomplished the following objectives:

2 • Classify the glass bottles according to the standardized typologies established

by the Canadian Parks Service (Jones et al. 1989) and the Society for

Historical Archaeology (SHA 2012). These typologies are based on both

glass form and function. The latter is informed by markings on the bottles as

well as historical writings.

• Determine the relative frequency of each bottle type by creating frequency

seriation charts and using descriptive statistics.

• Integrate the archaeological findings with the historical records to determine

past cultural activities and patterns of use at the site.

3 CHAPTER TWO

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY

Historical Background

Early Background-18th Century

The historic origins of the Seminole people lie firmly in the Southeastern Indian tribes of North America. During the early years of the eighteenth century, white settlers from farther north began to push for legislation that would allow them to penetrate deeper into the fertile and abundant lands of the Southeast. Consequently, the Indian tribes that inhabited this region were being pressured to move farther from their ancestral homelands (Wickman 1999). A number of the Lower Creeks, who traditionally inhabited parts of Georgia and Alabama, began to flee en masse farther south to Florida. Other displaced tribes, loosely connected to the Creeks through a similar lifestyle and culture, also fled to Spanish-controlled Florida (Gannon 2003; Garbarino 1989). This amalgamation of people would eventually become the Seminoles of Florida. Despite their diverse origins, the Seminoles would come to assert an individual tribal identity by the mid-nineteenth century.

In 1715, the Yamassee War in North Carolina represented a failed attempt by the

Creeks and Yamassee Indians to oust the British out of the Carolinas. The defeat contributed toward a long-standing enmity between the Creeks and those native peoples who had sided with the British. In addition, the Creeks became fearful of British retaliation (Fairbanks 1978; Weisman 1999). After the war, the Spanish began sending

4 agents to the Lower Creeks in Georgia and Alabama, inviting them to settle depopulated territories in Florida. By this time, the native Florida peoples had been greatly reduced in numbers as a result of European contact and subsequent disease and warfare. Much of

Florida was thus unoccupied. Spain hoped that these Creeks would act as a buffer between its holdings in Florida and British-occupied Georgia. Some of the Creeks accepted this invitation as they were seeking protection and refuge from the British and moved south into Florida. This was the earliest settlement of Creeks in Florida. Groups of

Creeks continued to migrate into Florida over time. According to a number of scholars, these Creeks established permanent settlements, or towns, in north-central Florida by the early 1700s (Fairbanks 1978; Weisman 1999).Several scholars, however, claim that these early Creek groups in Florida were actually seasonal hunting parties and that Creek permanent settlements were not present in Florida until the 1760s (Hawkins 2011).

Consequently, it remains unclear as to when the Creeks actually called Florida “home.”

Georgia officially became a British colony in 1733, thus intensifying the already strained relations between the two competing colonial powers of Spain and Britain. The

French and Indian War, called the Seven Years’ War in Europe, ended with the Treaty of

Paris in 1763. This treaty stipulated that Spain give Florida to Great Britain in exchange for Cuba (Fairbanks 1978; Gannon 2003). To learn more about Florida, the British

Crown sent William Gerard DeBrahm, a surveyor, to create a map of this region in 1765

(Devorsey 1971). It was DeBrahm who was the first to use the term “Seminolskees” in referring to the Creek Indians he encountered in Florida. This term became Anglicized into “Seminole” after the Creek term for “wild ones,” or “separatists.” The word

“cimarrones,” meaning runaways, found in the popular literature, was the name used by

5 the Spanish in referring to these people. Also, in 1765, the Treaty of Picolata was signed whereby certain tribal leaders gave away their rights to Florida east of the St. Johns

River. The Seminole chief Cowkeeper, however, declined to participate in the proceedings, thus further separating the Seminoles in Florida from the Creeks in Georgia.

During the 1770s, naturalist and botanist William Bartram traveled through north-central

Florida where he visited and spent time at Cowkeeper’s settlement. He described these people as already living in settled communities, characterized by open villages surrounded by farmland. The Seminoles were herding cattle and cultivating orange groves left behind by the Spanish. European influence was also evident in their style of dress and some of their domestic items as they became more dependent on European trade goods (Bartram 1791; Fairbanks 1978; Gannon 2003). At the end of the American

Revolution in 1783, the Treaty of Paris ensured Florida’s return to Spain. The Seminoles would experience tension with white settlers traveling from the newly formed United

States into Florida (Gannon 2003). By this time, the Seminoles had already begun to form a separate identity from their Creek roots, which at its core was simultaneously an adaptation to European influence while retaining many of their tribal characteristics.

Seminole-White Relations: Nineteenth Century

During the nineteenth century, the Seminoles coalesced into a single unified tribe due to the policies and machinations of the United States government. The Creek War of

1813-1814 was fought in Georgia among several divisions of the Creek Indians. General

Andrew Jackson was sent to southern Georgia to quash the conflict. Jackson defeated the

Red Stick Creeks, who were the most aggressive division and also part of the Lower

Creeks. In the subsequent Treaty of Fort Jackson, the Red Stick Creeks were forced to

6 cede their traditional lands in southern Georgia and southern Alabama to the United

States. The Red Sticks left for Florida and joined the Seminoles in north Florida.

Consequently, the Seminole population greatly increased and some of them moved, expanding into central and south Florida. Tensions continued between the Red Sticks who joined the Seminoles and the U.S. government. This eventually led to the First

Seminole War (Fairbanks 1978; Garbarino 1989). During this war, General Jackson led federal troops against the Seminoles in north Florida. The conflict was over quickly and only lasted from 1817 to 1818.

Spain sold Florida to the U.S. on February 22, 1821, and Florida became a U.S territory. Two years later, the Seminoles were forced to cede 28 million acres of their land in central Florida to the U.S. and retained only another 4 million acres for themselves. In 1830, the Indian Removal Act required that all Indians were removed

West. Land was set aside in present- day Oklahoma, then called Indian Territory, for

Indian occupation in exchange for Indian lands in the east (Mahon 1967). Some

Seminoles escaped by moving farther south, seeking refuge in isolated wilderness areas such as the Everglades and other wetlands (West 1985; Wickman 1999). The Second

Seminole War (1835-1842) provided the catalyst for creating a distinct Florida Seminole identity in both northern and southern Florida. Organized resistance to the maneuvers of the U.S. government which sought to remove them allowed the Florida Seminoles to assert themselves and gain greater control over their contacts with outsiders (Weisman

2007). In 1838, the federal government carried out the forced removal of Indians.

Thousands of Indians had to leave their homes in the East and were marched West. In addition to the 16,000 Cherokees removed, over 3,000 Seminoles were also sent by the

7 end of the Seminole War in 1842. Osceola, a Seminole leader and great warrior, participated in the Second Seminole War and eventually was captured, being deceived under a flag of truce. He perished in a prison in South Carolina before the war’s end

(Mahon 1967; Wickman 2006). The Second Seminole War was one of the costlier wars in U.S. history in terms of lives and money. Estimates put a monetary cost on the war at

$30 to 40 million with exact figures being difficult to produce. It is unknown how many

Seminoles perished in the war, but the death rate for soldiers was about 14 percent of those served, with an overwhelming majority of the cause of death attributed to disease

(Mahon 1967). Interestingly, the Seminoles never signed a peace treaty with the U.S. at the end of the war; hence, the Seminoles have since referred to themselves as “the unconquered people.”

In 1855, Billy Bowlegs, a Seminole warrior, led an attack on U.S. Army surveyors outside of Fort Myers (Tebeau 1971). This action led to the Third Seminole

War which lasted till 1858 and ended with Bowlegs’ capture. Only a few hundred

Seminoles were left in Florida with most of them living in Big Cypress and other isolated, remote areas in South Florida. The U.S government abandoned attempts to find and remove Seminoles due to the difficult environment (Covington 1993). By the close of the nineteenth century, the Seminoles were a tribe of loosely associated family groups, struggling to maintain their own self-sufficiency.

Seminoles and White Settlers in South Florida and New River

The history of south Florida and, in particular, the New River, also involves several waves of immigration and development and eventual interactions between early white settlers and Seminoles. One of the earliest white settlers was Charles Lewis, a

8 Bahamian “conch,” who resided along the New River during the early 1790s. A Spanish official report written in 1793 describes his homestead as a small house with a barn, chicken coop, and pier. Within the next few decades, other whites moved to south

Florida and also built homes along the river. Many of them were attracted to the area to take advantage of opportunities afforded by the small industry developing around the coontie plant. The starch extracted from this natural resource was shipped up north where it was commercially processed and used as leavening for biscuits and breads (Kersey

2003). By the 1820s, coontie starch extraction had become a full-blown industry and approximately 60 to 70 whites were residing along the New River (Carr 2006).

Interestingly, there is no written documentation pertaining to the presence of Seminoles in the South Florida region until the mid-nineteenth century.

In 1824, William Cooley, an entrepreneur originally from Maryland, settled along the New River where he established a flourishing starch manufacturing business for 12 years. Cooley also supplemented his income by participating in different wrecking ventures. “Wreckers,” as they were called, salvaged the cargoes of shipwrecks along the

Florida coast. Despite his business acumen, Cooley is best remembered for the 1836 attack that a group of Seminoles made on his home (Kersey 2003; Weidling and

Burghard 1966). Cooley was not present at the time of the attack. His wife, children, and the children’s tutor were killed and his home and mill were burned to the ground (Kersey

2003: 8). This is one of the first incidents which records the presence of Seminoles in the

New River region. Pine Island, in present-day Davie, was the probable launch of the attacks, as the Seminoles were known to frequent this area (West 1985).This outbreak of hostilities caused the white settlers to flee the New River area en masse.

9 It was not until approximately 25 years later, in the 1870s, that people would again come to inhabit the New River region. In 1870, Mary and William Brickell migrated from Ohio to settle in South Florida. Upon reaching the area, the Brickells promptly began to buy up large tracts of land along the Miami and New Rivers. They would become the largest landowners in South Florida and operate a successful trading post at the mouth of Biscayne Bay. Their investments allowed the Brickells to exert a great deal of control and influence over economic matters in the region (Carr 1989;

Kersey 2003; Weidling and Burghard 1966). In 1893, another entrepreneur, Guy

Metcalf, decided to take advantage of the developing settlement along the New River and set up a camp for new arrivals. He also began a ferry service across the New River. His cousin, Frank Stranahan, came from Ohio the same year to help manage the camp and operate the ferry. A year after he arrived, Stranahan decided to go into business alone.

With 10 acres of land purchased from William Brickell’s widow, Mary, Stranahan set up his own camp and ferry line farther up the river from where his cousin Guy had previously operated. Stranahan also opened a trading post and served as Fort

Lauderdale’s first postmaster (Carr 1989: 9-11). In 1900, Stranahan married Ivy

Cromartie, Fort Lauderdale’s first school teacher. This marriage brought some changes to his business as he decided to move his trading post and general store farther back from the river. In 1901, he added an upper floor which served as home for him and his new bride. The store was in operation for five years at this location. Stranahan subsequently moved the general store and trading post farther west along the river and took over the entire former store for their residence (Kersey 2003). This building still stands today and is known to locals and tourists as the Stranahan House.

10 Over time, the settlement along the New River grew as more people migrated to the area. The extension of Henry Flagler’s East Coast Railway established a train stop at

Fort Lauderdale in 1896. This provided further inducement to settle in the area and in

1911 the city of Fort Lauderdale was incorporated. A year later, digging for the New

River Canal began. This canal was part of a larger system constructed during this period which provided the groundwork for draining the northern and eastern parts of the

Everglades region (Kersey 2003; Weidling and Burghard 1966).The drainage of the

Everglades ushered in a land boom as people competed for a chance to own a piece of

Florida’s fertile interior. This era of prosperity that would last in the area until the late

1920s.

Previous Archaeology

Information on the trading posts of South Florida is sparse, but there are several archaeological studies that fill in the gaps. Excavations at the site of Stranahan House, the Brickell Trading Post in Miami, and bottle studies from other regions have all contributed to this study.

Brickell’s Trading Post

The Brickell store existed as an active trading post from 1871 to 1900. Much like the Stranahan store, the Brickells paid the Seminoles silver for their items and the

Seminoles would buy ready-made goods that were typically unavailable to them (Kersey

1975: 31). The Seminoles would trade such things as skins, alligator hides, feathers, pumpkins, and sweet potatoes for convenience items such as alarm clocks and sewing machines (Carr 1981). Robert Carr originally excavated the site in 1961 and discovered that it had been much damaged by looters. Carr reports that collectors carried off an

11 estimated “tens of thousands of beads” prior to excavation (Carr 1981:184). Out of the four areas examined, the highest concentration of artifacts came from the cellar and crawl space beneath the house. In 1969, the house was demolished and the cellar consigned to rubble. The site was used as a parking lot until 1980 when the Holiday Inn began construction of a new location on the property. At that time Carr was contacted to begin a period of archaeological investigation under the auspices of the Dade County Historic

Preservation Office. Mixtures of prehistoric and historic artifacts were found in the vicinity of the site of the Brickell House. Over 30 varieties of glass beads were excavated and remain the most documented of the artifacts recovered (Carr 1981). Among the glass materials recovered were several patent medicine bottles, a mason jar, and a Jamaican ginger beer bottle (Carr 1981: Table 1).

Stranahan House

Field work began in the spring of 1982 on the location of Stranahan’s Trading

Post and General Store. Excavations conducted over a three week period by Bob Carr concluded that four different structures were used on the property beginning with a small thatch building in 1894 or 1895, succeeded by a small wooden building in 1895, and then a larger wooden structure that was built the same year. The two-story home, which was originally built in 1901, is still standing. The excavations revealed that there was a significant prehistoric as well as historic component. A large amount of artifacts were recovered associated with Seminole trade, such as a sample of 49 glass beads and other ornaments in the location of what had been a “chickee” hut that Stranahan built for his

Seminole guests (Carr 1982: 35). This “chickee” was located east of the store at what is now that U.S. 1 tunnel in Fort Lauderdale.

12 The Brickell and Stranahan House sites are significant to this study because they provide a glimpse into the types of artifacts associated with trading posts and homes in

South Florida during the late nineteenth to early twentieth centuries. My research proceeds a step further because I used the glass bottles as indicators of daily life, but also as objects relating to trade. Both the Brickell and Stranahan House sites did not have a large collection of bottles. Instead the most significant glass items recovered were beads.

This led the research towards a trade-centered focus. My focus is, not only on the interplay of market and trade forces in the region, but also how daily life was structured and negotiated on the Florida frontier.

13 CHAPTER THREE

BOTTLE STUDIES, METHODS, AND MATERIALS

Bottle Studies

The Hoff Store

Excavated in 1986, this archaeological site is located in what is now San

Francisco’s financial district. Originally a store during the late 1840s until the Great San

Francisco Fire of 1851, the fire preserved some glass bottles, with many still containing their original contents (Pastron 1990: 7). All complete bottles, bases, and finishes were collected from the site. Any sherds determined not to be diagnostic were discarded. A total of 3,983 pieces of bottle glass were collected, representing 874 bottles with 77 bottles remaining intact. The bottles were divided into 5 functional categories: alcoholic, culinary, medicinal, toiletry, soda and mineral water bottles; bottles of indeterminate function did not fit into any of the aforementioned categories. Measurements were taken of the bottle height, basal dimension, and volume capacity if applicable (Macdougall

1990: 58-60). The typologies used by this study were based on the Canada Parks Glass

Glossary (1985) and Julian Toulouse’s 1969 primer on mold seams. Historic documents were also utilized in determining a bottle’s function. The largest class, as determined by original function, was alcohol bottles which accounted for 45 percent of the assemblage.

Culinary bottles represented 30 percent and medicinal were 20 percent (Macdougall

1990: 72-73).These were the largest functional representations. The functional aspect of the bottles was only one part of the study. As Macdougall stated, “the collection will also

14 be viewed with the specific goal of determining whether the production methods exhibited help define either the nascent or terminal dates currently associated with 19th century bottle production technologies” (Macdougall 1990:58). In this study, the researchers concluded that the bottle analysis yielded clues about a more settled and domestic population rather than transient miners. The conclusions about production techniques yielded discussion of refinement in bottle chronologies based on production techniques (Macdougall 1990: 72).

Fort Riley

In 2011 members of the Bottle Research Group (BRG) undertook a thorough investigation of glass bottles that were recovered from the hospital privy at Fort Riley,

Kansas. The hospital at Fort Riley was constructed in 1855, and the privy was dug at the same time. This privy was previously excavated by students at Kansas State University

(KSU) in 1984. The focus of the BRG study was on the finer aspects of dating glass bottles and the application of those dates to different levels within the site. Using the preliminary glass analysis from the KSU students, the BRG were able to separate each bottle according to method of manufacture and makers mark (Lockhart 2012:4). The bottles were also divided into four categories: liquor flasks, medicinal, other containers, and export beer bottles. It was discovered that dating sites using both the production technique and manufacturer’s logo provides the most reliable range of dates (Lockhart

2012: 1).

The bottle studies from the Hoff Store site and Fort Riley are integral to my research because they both provide details on methods for dating bottles and determining their function. The interpretations that have come from both studies are also valuable in

15 determining which typologies to use. My research differs from both studies in that I am going deeper into a discussion about what these bottles say about early Florida settlers.

Both studies serve as fantastic references for more technical aspects of bottle analysis, but lack the focus on the link between material culture and history that this thesis seeks to discuss.

Materials

The archaeological assemblage of glass bottles examined in this study were recovered from excavations conducted at the Stranahan Camp Site (8BD259) in 2005 and

2006 by the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC), supervised by Ryan

Franklin under the general direction of Robert Carr. The archaeological site sits on 1.6 acres of land located south of Las Olas Boulevard and west of U.S. 1 in downtown Fort

Lauderdale along the north bank of the New River. A developer purchased this parcel of land for a building project, but construction was halted when archaeological remains were discovered. It was determined that a full scale archaeological investigation was required prior to further development. A combination of archival research and subsurface excavations were utilized during the archaeological investigation. A total of ninety-one shovel tests, seven trenches, and forty-five unit excavations revealed that the site consisted of two cultural components: a pre-Columbian black earth and shell midden along the southernmost portion of the site, and a historical component dating to the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This latter historic component is the focus of this study.

The majority of bottles were located in a creek feature that ran north to south through the parcel and were deposited in observable stratigraphic layers. This creek

16 feature encompassed the part of the site which retained the most integrity. Other areas were negatively impacted by development and consequently consisted of disturbed levels

(Carr 2006). The creek was excavated through trenching, and the artifacts were recovered at various segments along the trench. The source documents that pertain to the site’s historical occupation consist of personal papers such as letters and memoirs, as well as business correspondence in the form of receipts, ledgers, and inventories. These materials are housed at the Fort Lauderdale Historical Society within the dedicated Stranahan

Collection. This study combined the archaeological material of glass bottles with these historical documents in order to discuss, analyze, and interpret the recent past.

Methods

The formal characteristics considered in bottle analysis indicate the age and function of the object. The characteristics that lead to age identification include mold seams, body shape, base type, presence or absence of embossing, pontil or rod marks, and closure type (Berge 1980; Jones et al 1989.; Sutton and Brook 1996). The presence of mold seams is one of the most important diagnostic tools to clarify bottle age. Molds indicate manufacturing technology, which allows the researcher to set up accurate dates for the material under examination (Jones 1989; Newman 1970; Sutton:1996). Function, or the bottle’s original contents, is assessed through color, shape, and the presence of embossment. Each bottle is divided into a category based on its original use. Medicinal, spirits, culinary, soda, and miscellaneous other containers are the categories in which each bottle will be placed. Limitations in using coloration as a distinguishing marker of bottle use are well documented (Busch 1987; Jones 1989). It is my belief that the other

17 factors under consideration, such as the shape and writing present on the bottles, add a more reliable indicator of bottle contents.

The research methodology is taken from a variety of sources. The most applicable information on bottle analysis comes from the published reports of several archaeological agencies. Olive Jones et al. and The Parks Canada (1989) compiled a glass glossary that serves as the foundational text for this research. The categories, container descriptions, and dating techniques were all taken from this source. Definitions and specific nomenclature regarding the bottles were also taken from a report by the Bureau of Land

Management Utah. Dale Berge (1980) gathered information based on a year-long investigation of an historic site in Simpson Springs Station located in Western Utah. The host website of the Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA) has also been a source of information about bottle definitions and categories. The information that exists on glass bottles tends to lend itself to the collector and not the archaeologist. However, the compendiums published by the above agencies and organizations contributed to the forming of my research methods.

In order to more correctly identify the exact variation among the bottle typologies, only whole bottles were used in this study. The whole bottles represent a statistically significant portion of the glass assemblage, numbering at 204, and therefore ensure reliability of analysis. The use of whole bottles cuts down on the likelihood of statistical error that can occur when attempting to predict object counts from sherds (Busch 1987).

Quantification of the glass bottles include the total number of bottles identified within each functional category. A record of each specimen identified, noting the presence of particular characteristics (Table 1) relating to form and function has been created.

18 TABLE 1 Most Common Bottle Attributes

Finish Neck Shoulder Body Color crown tapered round cylindrical aqua oil straight sloped down kidney light green double oil bulged champagne square emerald green champagne flat sloped down oval green external screw non-existent rectangle olive amber clear

19 CHAPTER FOUR

BOTTLE GLASS DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS

A total of 204 complete bottles were examined in this study. These bottles are divided into four major functional classes: alcoholic beverage, soda and mineral water, medicinal, and culinary. Two additional classes include those bottles that either were categorized as miscellaneous or could not be identified into one of the four classes, respectively.

Alcoholic beverage bottles are represented by a total of 89 bottles, constituting 44 percent of the assemblage. A great majority of those bottles are dark colored liquor bottles. Other alcoholic beverage bottles consist of wine, beer, and malt beverages. The malt and beer bottles are easily identified due to the embossments present. Soda and mineral water bottles represent the second largest functional class with 80 bottles present or 39 percent of the total assemblage. Bottles in this class include Coca-Cola, soda pop, and mineral water. The Coca-Cola and mineral water bottles have distinct embossments that clearly identify manufacturer and function. Medicinal bottles comprise the third functional category of bottles. These total 20 bottles or 10 percent of the assemblage.

These include Vaseline, Listerine, painkillers, remedies, and laxatives. Culinary bottles form a small minority of the total and include 3 bottles, or 1.5 percent of the assemblage.

Bottles of this type include salad dressing, Worcestershire sauce, and hot sauce. Only one bottle fell within the miscellaneous functional category and was a “Three in one” engine oil bottle with embossments. A total of 11 bottles were not identified as to their function

20 and represented 5 percent of the entire assemblage. Table 2 and Figure 1 present the major functional categories and their percentage representation within the total assemblage.

TABLE 2 Total Functional Bottle Categories and Percentages

Bottle Categories Count Percentages Alcoholic beverages 89 43.6% Soda/mineral water 80 39.2% Medicinal 20 9.8% Culinary 3 1.5% Misc. 1 0.5% Indeterminate 11 5.4% Total 204 100.0%

FIGURE 1. Percentages of whole bottles in the glass assemblage by function. (Figure by author, 2015)

21 The bottles within each of the major classes are subdivided and described below according to their more specific uses. The assemblage is further described in terms of manufacturing method, color, finish, overall shape, and embossment (manufacturer’s mark or logo). Tables 3-6 present the functional categories according to these various descriptive characteristics. A statistical analysis is also conducted to compare and determine bottle function and age based upon manufacturing method.

TABLE 3 Bottle Function and Shape

Bottle Bottle Shapes Categories Cylinder Kidney Square Oval Rectangle Octagon Totals Alcoholic 83 0 1 5 0 0 89 beverages Soda/mineral water 80 0 0 0 0 0 80 Medicinal 7 0 0 5 7 1 20 Culinary 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 Misc. 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Indeterminate 10 1 0 0 0 0 11 Totals 183 1 1 10 8 1 204

TABLE 4 Bottle Function and Color

Bottle Bottle Colors Categories Aqua Light Emerald Green Olive Amber Clear Totals Green Green Alcoholic beverages 13 3 1 1 26 30 15 90 Soda/mineral water 44 29 3 0 0 0 4 80 Medicinal 1 1 0 2 0 0 16 20 Culinary 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 Misc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Indeterminate 1 4 0 2 0 3 1 11 Totals 59 37 4 6 26 33 39 204

22 TABLE 5 Bottle Function and Manufacturing Method

Bottle Categories Bottle Manufacturing Method Mouth Blown Machine Made Turn Mold Unknown Totals Alcoholic beverages 43 26 18 2 89 Soda/mineral water 65 14 0 1 80 Medicinal 9 10 0 1 20 Culinary 1 2 0 0 3 Misc. 1 0 0 0 1 Indeterminate 6 3 0 2 11 Totals 125 55 18 6 204

23 TABLE 6 Bottle Function and Finish

Contents Bottle Finishes App. Cham- App. App. Double App. Cap- pagne Club Collared Double Double Ext. Re- Wide Blob Crown Oil Oil Bead Blob Brandy Blob seat Flat Sauce Ring Crown Oil Ring Screw Flared Oil Packer Patent Extract Rx Mouth TOTALS Alcoholic Beverages 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 15 0 1 12 24 0 7 0 20 0 0 1 0 0 89 Soda/ Mineral Water 2 1 0 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 80 Medicinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 1 2 0 2 0 8 1 20 Culinary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Misc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Indtrm. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 11 TOTALS 5 1 1 8 1 1 3 0 1 15 1 2 71 28 1 14 1 36 1 3 1 8 1 204

Alcoholic Beverage Bottles

Alcoholic beverage bottles consist of four types: wine, beer, liquor, and malt beverages. Each type is described more fully below.

Wine

Wine bottles total 24 specimens in the overall alcoholic beverage class and were all molded from dark olive glass. The basic profile of the wine bottles consist of a cylindrical body, a rounded, sloped, or champagne style shoulder with a tapered neck.

Fifteen bottles display faint, concentric rings around the body signifying a turn mold manufacturing method. The remaining 9 bottles, however, exhibit mold seams running horizontally across the shoulder of the bottle, thus indicating a three-piece mold process.

Deeply indented “push-ups” are present on the base of 21 of these bottles. A flat, champagne style finish reminiscent of modern wine bottles is characteristic of 15 specimens. Oil, double oil, and blob finishes are present on the remaining 9 bottles. Of the latter, two bottles exhibit characteristics consistent with an applied finish, blob and double oil, respectively. None of the wine bottles show any distinctive markings, embossments, or manufacturer’s mark.

Beer

The assemblage includes 22 beer bottles made up of different colored glass, including amber, aqua, clear, green, light green, and olive. The bottles are cylindrical in shape with rounded shoulders, tapered necks, and a variety of finishes. One bottle, a

“Fidelio” beer (Figure 2), had a distinctive, bulged-out neck with a plain oil finish.

FIGURE 2. Fidelio beer bottle with embossments. Note the bulged neck on this bottle, otherwise it exhibits a typical oil finish, cylindrical body, and amber color of most beer bottles. (Photo by author, 2015)

Finishing included double oil for 19 specimens, crown finish for 2 bottles and oil for 1 bottle. Most of the bottles (17) in the beer class were mouth blown. There were 3 specimens that were machine made and 2 made with a turn mold. Embossments, manufacturer’s mark, and etchings were prominent on the beer bottles thus allowing for ease in classification.

26 Out of the 22 beer bottles present, 17 exhibit the “A.B.G.M Co.” manufacturer’s mark on the base. This logo wraps around a letter and number which appear to represent specific plant codes. Morphologically, these bottles look alike despite differences in coloration. All of the bottles are mouth blown and manufactured by the Adolphus Busch

Glass Manufacturing Company. This particular company was begun by Adolphus Busch, son-in-law of Eberhard Anheuser, and was one of the first to employ pasteurization in the brewing process. This allowed for better shelf stability while shipping the contents across the country, which certainly would have been welcomed by new settlers in the humid

New River region. The mark is arched across the base which was employed by the company during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Lockhart et al. 2010).

Embossments are present on the two beer bottles made with the turn mold process. Comparatively both bottles exhibit identical morphological and decorative characteristics. Both are blown from dark olive glass and contain a tapered neck, rounded shoulder, and double oil finish. The base has a slight push-up, not so deeply indented as most wine bottles, with no other distinctive markings present. Faint lines across the body indicate a turn mold manufacturing process. A vine and leaf motif is embossed or etched on the body of both bottles, but only one contains the name of the manufacturer (Figure

3). The label “THOS MCMULLEN & CO WHITE” refers to importer Thomas

McMullen. He imported Bass Pale Ale, Guinness, and Bass Ale under his company’s

White Royal Crest label beginning in 1854. McMullen & Co was one of the largest and most popular importers of Bass Ale, importing empty bottles to their factory in New

York and then filling them. By 1937, McMullen & Co. lost its contract with Bass when a rival company took over all U.S. Bass sales (Hughes 2006).

FIGURE 3. Thos. McMullen & Co. White Label bottle. This bottle is dark green with a double oil finish. The etched design and label is unusual and indicative of this brand. (Photo by author, 2015)

28 The three machine made beer bottles were all embossed, also exhibiting marks referring to the manufacturer or brewing company. Although there was a lack of background information on the particular companies marked on the bottles, the function of these bottles may be reliably inferred by the embossments. “Fidelio Beer,”

“Chattanooga Brewing Company,” and “Liebmann Breweries” were the companies represented. These bottles were morphologically similar except for the “Fidelio” beer bottle mentioned above. Both the “Chattanooga Brewing Company” bottle and the

“Liebmann” bottle had crown finishes.

Liquor

A total of 36 liquor bottles were identified and were made from amber, clear, and emerald green glass. These bottles exhibit a range of profiles from short, squat bottles to a more slender, cylindrical shape or a flask-like construction. Diversity in the type of finishes reflect the variation present in this class of alcoholic bottles. Finishes include oil, crown, double oil, brandy, and external screw thread. The remaining bottles have either bead, re-extract, capseat, or an applied blob finish. Most of the liquor bottles (22) exhibit characteristics of the machine manufacturing process, 13 are mouth blown, and 1 turn mold. The original cork is still intact in 5 of the bottles with 2 containing an unknown liquid. Identifiable manufacturer’s marks and embossments are present on some of the liquor bottles.

Eight bottles have “FEDERAL LAW FORBIDS SALE OR RE-USE OF THIS

BOTTLE” embossed across the shoulder. All liquor sold in the U.S. was required to have this embossment as of January 1, 1935 after the repeal of Prohibition. Bottles with this particular embossment are datable from 1935 through the mid-1960s. Their function was

29 inferred because only liquor bottles, not wine or beer, were required to have this embossment (Busch 1987). Morphological characteristics skew more towards an oval, flask- like body with external screw thread finishes. One bottle retained the original red, screw-on metal cap. All of these bottles are machine made.

Manufacturer’s marks and embossments were found on 14 of the liquor bottles.

Nine bottles exhibit Owen’s marks or scars on their base, which is a maker’s mark that identifies the bottle with Owen’s Illinois Glass Company. A “Made in Scotland” embossment was one of the machine made bottles, providing evidence that some bottles were imported. Three other machine made bottles have the logo Streator Bottle & Glass

Company, of Streator, Illinois, embossed across the base with unknown plant codes also present. One “Hayner Distilling Company” bottle was identified. This particular company, which was a mail order whiskey distributer, disbanded after Prohibition went nationwide in 1920 (Munsey 2013).

Malt

The assemblage includes 7 malt alcohol bottles made up of dark amber glass. The bottles are cylindrical with rounded shoulders, bulged necks, with oil, collared ring, or brandy finishes. The profile for these bottles are squat and cylindrical with one larger slender malt whiskey bottle. One bottle is machine made with the rest exhibiting mouth blown manufacturing characteristics. Unlike the other bottles in different subcategories, the malt bottles consist of two different brands, easily identifiable by the embossments present on the base.

Six bottles are embossed with the “LIEBIG MALT EXTRACT CO” logo on the base. Malt extracts were typically sold as quasi-medicinal tonics until Prohibition. This

30 particular class of bottles is included in the alcoholic beverage section of the study according to the Society of Historical Archaeology classification system (Lindsey 2014).

They are treated as separate grouping within the larger alcoholic beverage category due to their ambiguous nature. It is likely that the contents were carbonated and bore more of a resemblance to a malted beer than any other substance. The Liebig bottles are squat, dark amber bottles with an oil finish and mouth blown manufacture.

The one other bottle in the malt category, the “THE DUFFY MALT WHISKEY

COMPANY,” bears little morphological resemblance to the smaller Liebig bottles, although it is also mouth blown. This bottle is taller with a longer body, non-existent neck, and a brandy finish.

Soda and Mineral Water Bottles

Soda and mineral water bottles consist of three types: Coca-Cola, soda pop, and mineral water.

Coca-Cola

The Coca-Cola bottles are a distinctive light green glass and include 2 specimens.

The basic profile of the Coca-Cola bottles consists of a cylindrical body, rounded shoulder with a tapered neck, and a crown finish. Both bottles are machine made and have embossments on the base. The embossments indicate place of origin: one from West

Palm Beach and the other Miami. The Miami bottle has the patent date of December 25,

1923 (also called “Christmas Cokes”) which was embossed on their bottles from 1928 to

1938. Patent D-105529 is embossed on the base of the West Palm Beach bottle and that particular bottle was manufactured from 1937 until the patent expired in 1951 (Lockhart

31 and Porter 2010). Both bottles exhibit a distinctive “hobble skirt” associated with Coca-

Cola bottles of that time period.

Soda Pop

The assemblage includes 55 soda pop bottles made up of aqua, clear, emerald green, and light green glass. The bottles are cylindrical with rounded or sloped down shoulders, tapered necks, and crown finish (Figure 4). Most of the bottles (43) in the soda pop class are mouth blown. There were 11 machine made and 1 bottle of unknown manufacture. Some of the brands or manufacturers represented in this category include

Hires, Hydrox, and one locally made bottle from the Crown Bottling Works of Fort

Lauderdale.

Embossments allowed for easy identification of the soda pop bottles, because of their association with prominent soda manufacturers. Seventeen bottles are embossed with the “HIRES” logo on the base. Hires was first sold as a mixture by its creator,

Philadelphia pharmacist Charles Elmer Hires, until he began bottling the concentrate as a soda pop beginning in 1893. It was touted as a beverage to tranquilize nerves and improve digestion (Atwater 2001). Hires was an active participant in the temperance movement and marketed his soft drink as a popular alternative to alcohol (Bennet 1998).

The Hires bottles in the collection have identical features with aqua colored glass, crown finishes, tapered necks, and rounded shoulders. All exhibit characteristics consistent with mouth blown manufacture and possibly date to the earliest bottling of Hires Root Beer in the late nineteenth century. The American Bottle Company and EHE Co. were among the other bottle companies embossed on the base of soda pop bottles.

FIGURE 4. Close up of a soda pop crown finish. (Photo by author, 2015)

33 In addition to these embossments, it was the body characteristics that allowed for classification. Because these beverages contain carbonation and so they had to be carefully shipped, these bottles were all very similar in shape and other attributes as previously described. These bottles likely contained a variety of flavored carbonated soda and are distinct from the mineral water class.

Mineral Water

A total of 23 mineral water bottles were identified and were made from aqua and light green colored glass. These bottles exhibit identical profiles with rounded shoulders, tapered necks, and a rounded (Figure 5) or indented base. All of the bottles are mouth blown with blob, crown, and oil finishes. Applied finishes (Figure 6) are present on 11 of the bottles. Embossments are present on 5 of the bottles with the manufacturer

“COCHRAN & CO. BELFAST” (Figure 7) embossed on the body; these bottles have a slightly indented base (Figure 8). One other bottle without embossments exhibits similar features with an indented base. The remaining 17 bottles without embossments have a rounded base. These rounded base bottles were not intended to stand upright. Instead, most of these rounded bottom bottles were designed to lay on their side and act as ballasts when imported from overseas. Also, this position ensured that the cork would not dry and shrink so that the carbonation was not lost (Lockhart 2014). It is likely that these bottles were imported.

FIGURE 5. Rounded mineral water base. These bottles were expected to lay on their sides and act as ballasts in the hold of ships carrying them across the ocean. (Photo by author, 2015)

FIGURE 6. Applied blob finish on a mineral water bottle. Applied finishes often indicate an earlier age range. (Photo by author, 2015)

FIGURE 7. Cochran & Co. mineral water with embossments. Note the base on this bottle is flat, allowing it to stay upright. (Photo by author, 2015)

FIGURE 8. Close up of the indented base on mineral water bottle. (Photo by author, 2015)

Medicinal Bottles

Medicinal bottles consist of five types: Vaseline, Listerine, painkillers, remedies, and laxatives. Several medicinal bottles could not be identified as to their original content.

Vaseline

This category consists of 1 bottle made of clear glass with a straight neck and sloped down shoulder. It is machine made with a prescription finish. Embossed on the body is “CHESEBROUGH MFG CO. VASELINE” manufacturer’s mark. The embossment indicates one of the earliest known versions of the Vaseline bottle and most

38 likely dates to the 1880s or 1890s. Vaseline bottles were among the earliest bottles to be machine made and later examples would have screw tops and paper labels (Lockhart

2014). It is uncertain from the historical records whether or not Frank Stranahan sold this particular brand in his store, or if it belonged to an individual staying at the campsite.

Listerine

There is only 1 Listerine bottle (Figure 9), and it is made of clear glass with a straight neck, sloped down shoulder, and a prescription finish. It is a machine made bottle with “LISTERINE” embossed on the body. “LAMBERT PHARMACAL COMPANY” is embossed on the heel portion of the base and an Owens mark is present. Listerine was first created as a surgical anesthetic in 1879 by Dr. Joseph Lawrence and Jordan Wheat

Lambert. It was not until 1895 that it was sold to dentists, and in 1914 it became the first over-the- counter mouthwash sold. It is difficult to pinpoint an exact date for this bottle as little changed in the Listerine bottling process until the later decades of the 20th century

(Leavitt and Dubner 2009).

FIGURE 9. Vaseline bottle. Considered more of a wide mouth bottle, these were among the first to be machine manufactured. (Photo by author, 2015)

Painkillers

The painkiller category consists of 1 machine made bottle of light green glass with a straight neck, sloped down shoulder, and double ring finish. It is rectangular in cross section with flat panels on its sides and body. “PAINKILLER” is embossed on the right side panel. The left side panel is partially missing but “ETABLE” letters are visible.

“DAVIS” is embossed on one side of the body. It is highly likely that this bottle brand is

Davis Vegetable Painkiller. This particular brand was first trademarked in 1853 by a

Massachusetts shoemaker and sold as a cure all during most of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In 1945, it was rebranded as “Perry Davis Liniment”

(Griffenhagen and Bogard 1999).

40 Remedies

The 2 bottles in this category are made of aqua and clear glass with straight necks and sloped down shoulders. Both are mouth blown bottles. The aqua bottle has

“HAMLIN'S WIZARD OIL” (Figure 10) embossed on the body with a double oil finish.

The clear bottle is rectangular in cross section with flat paneling on one side of the body and the other side rounded. “NATIONAL REMEDY COMPANY NEW YORK” is embossed on the body with a patent finish.

Hamlin’s Wizard Oil was introduced to the American public in 1861 by two brothers, John Austen and Lysander B. Hamlin. It was primarily sold and used as a liniment for rheumatic pain and sore muscles, but Hamlin’s often oversold its medicinal properties as a “cure all.” Traveling performance troupes would come into town for as long as 6 weeks advertising the medicine with well-known figures, such as American poet James Whitcomb Riley, participating in the advertisements. Hamlin’s son was fined

200 dollars in 1916 for claiming that the oil could cure cancer. This began the end to

Hamlin’s colorful shows and indiscriminate promises (Anderson 2000).

FIGURE 10. Hamlin’s Wizard Oil bottle with identifying embossments. (Photo by author, 2015)

Laxatives

This category consists of 2 larger-sized bottles. Both have identical characteristics, contain embossments, and are of mouth blown manufacture. They are green bottles with a champagne shoulder, tapered neck, and oil finish. There is a devil figure embossed on the base with “PLUTO” underneath. This particular brand of laxative was known as Pluto Water. Billed as “America’s Physic” it was a natural water product

42 which was very popular in the early twentieth century. The water’s high native content of mineral salts generally made it effective within one hour of ingestion, a fact that the company played up in their promotional literature (Whorton 2000).

Unknown

Thirteen of the medicinal bottles could not be identified for specific contents and were of unknown brand or manufacture. Machine made bottles made up 7 of the specimens, 5 were mouth blown, and 1 was of unknown manufacture. All of these bottles were rectangular or oval in cross section with straight necks, sloped down shoulders, and different finishes. Finishes consisted of prescription, patent, screw thread, and collared ring finishes.

Culinary Bottles

Culinary bottles consist of three types: salad dressing, pepper sauce, and

Worcestershire sauce.

Salad Dressing

There is 1 bottle in this category. It is machine made with clear glass and a sloped down shoulder, non-existent neck, and external screw finish (Figure 11). “E.R. Durkee &

CO. SALAD DRESSING NEW YORK” is embossed on the body going vertically.

“BOTTLE PATENTED APRIL 7 1877” is located on the base with an unknown makers mark. This brand is still in use today and was a very popular condiment during the latter nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A cookbook published in 1875 contributed to the sauce’s appeal as did a massive advertising campaign (Smith 2013). This bottle was made at a later date due to its finish type and machine made manufacture. It is possible

43 that this salad dressing dates to the time that the Pioneer House restaurant was in operation.

FIGURE 11. Close up of a screw top finish on a salad dressing bottle. (Photo by author, 2015)

Pepper Sauce

The pepper sauce category consists of 1 clear glass bottle with a tapered neck, rounded shoulder, and an external screw finish. It is a machine made bottle with “MEXI-

PEP” embossed on the body with decorative fluting on the shoulder and on the heel portion of the base. The black screw top is still intact on the bottle. Little reliable information is available on this particular company, but the bottle’s screw top finish and plastic cap indicate a post-1950s manufacture.

44 Worcestershire Sauce

There is 1 mouth blown Worcestershire sauce bottle, which is made of green glass with a sloped down shoulder, tapered neck, and a club sauce finish.

“WORCESTERSHIRE SAUCE” is embossed on the shoulder with “LEA &PERRINS” across the body. John Wheeley Lea and William Perrins of Worcester, England, first introduced their sauce in 1835 and by the early 1870s began the international marketing of their product. This sauce was so successful that it remains one of the most ubiquitous and common bottles found in historical archaeological sites (Lunn 1981).

Miscellaneous

There is one miscellaneous bottle within the assemblage. It is clear glass with a patent finish, straight neck, and sloped down shoulder. It is rectangular at cross section with flat panels both sides, and is embossed with “3 IN ONE OIL CO.” and “THREE IN

ONE OIL CO” on each panel. In 1894, George W. Cole, a resident of New Jersey, created 3 In One as an overall lubricant, rust preventive, and cleaner. The flat, squared off patent finish indicates that a cork was used on this bottle. This bottle therefore must date to post-1910 as the company began making bottles with metal screw caps after that date

(Munsey 2013).

Indeterminate

Eleven bottles which could not be specifically included in any single functional type previously described comprise the remainder of the bottles. These bottles are made up of amber, aqua, clear, green, and light green glass. Ten are cylindrical with rounded, sloped down, or champagne shoulders; the necks are tapered, bulged, or non-existent, and the finish are either screw, oil, packer, double oil, or crown. The remaining bottle is

45 kidney-shaped in cross section with panels. Six of the bottles are mouth blown, 3 are machine made, and 2 are of unknown manufacture. The lack of clear embossments indicating content or the presence of ambiguous attributes make any further functional determination difficult.

Manufacturing Method and Content: Statistical Analysis

Previous archaeological studies focusing on glassware have rarely included statistical analysis. Glass in one medium that particularly lends itself to such an analysis, due to the discrete and manageable categories used to describe this kind of material culture.

A statistical analysis was conducted in order to determine whether there were any significant correlations among the various attributes of the bottles examined in this study.

Two variables were tested. The first variable is the method of manufacture, which would indicate the age of the bottles. Mouth blown bottles were produced prior to 1906 which was when the trading post/camp site was in operation. Machine made bottles were widely distributed after that date at which time the Stranahan property was no longer a trading post and rather was used over time as a garage, food mart, and gas station. The turn mold manufactured bottles were not included as the dates these bottles were produced constituted too wide a range for reliable interpretation. The second variable examined was the contents/function of the bottles. For this statistical analysis, only the three largest functional categories―alcoholic beverages, soda pop/mineral water, and medicinal―were used.

The overall sample size for this statistical analysis consisted of 167 bottles.

Method of manufacture was determined by the kind of mold seam present on the bottles.

46 Mold seams on mouth blown bottles terminate or stop halfway up the neck, before the very top of the lip, and the finish is often applied later. Mold seams on machine made bottles, on the other hand, run the length of the bottle from the base to the very top of the lip. The entire bottle is made in one piece (Lindsey 2014). The widespread licensing of the Owens Automatic Bottle Machine, beginning in 1905, created a revolution in bottle making technology (Miller and Sullivan 1984). After this date, older technology utilizing mouth blown glass in molds became much less prevalent and in 1906 a large portion of the glassmaking industry switched to machine made bottles. For the purposes of this thesis, the date 1906 is particularly significant as that is the year Stranahan moved his trading post to another location farther west (Carr 1989; Kersey 2003). Consequently, the bottles that are mouth blown are assumed to have association with those activities relating to the trading post. The bottles that are machine made are assumed to be more closely identified with that time period when the trading post/campsite was no longer in operation. Within the sample examined, a greater proportion of the bottles were mouth blown (70%) rather than machine made (30%) (Table 7), thereby indicating that most of these bottles were being used and discarded when the property was a trading post/campsite. People at the campsite were consuming and using goods during their stay there.

In order to determine whether there is a potential correlation between manufacturing method and bottle function, a chi square test was conducted. Tables 7 and

8 conclusively show that there is a significant correspondence between bottle age and function. The greater proportion (56%) of the mouth blown bottles were used for soda/mineral water. A significant percentage (52%) of the machine made bottles were

47 used for alcoholic beverages. It may have been more acceptable for soda rather than alcoholic beverages to be consumed in public at the time the property was a campsite as

Mrs. Stranahan was known to be a teetotaler (Kersey 2003). Apparently, consuming alcohol became more prominent after 1906 when the property was used for other activities, i.e. garage, food mart, and gas station.

TABLE 7 Bottle Function and Manufacture Method

Bottle Categories Tested Bottle Manufacture Method Tested Mouth Blown Machine Made Totals and Percentages Alcoholic Beverages 43 (36.8) 26 (52.0) 69 (41.3) Soda/Mineral Water 65 (55.6) 14 (28.0) 79 (47.3) Medicinal 9 (7.6) 10 (20.0) 19 (11.4) Totals and Percentages 117 (p=100) 50 (p=100) 167 (p=100)

TABLE 8 Chi-square Tests

Value Df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-square 12.258 2 .002 Likelihood Ratio 12.231 2 .002 N of Valid Cases 167 2 .002

Historic Records and the Archaeological Glass Evidence

Historic source documents related specifically to Stranahan’s trading post augment the information gleaned from the archaeological analysis. The earliest days of

Stranahan’s residency on the New River are documented in a letter he wrote to his brother, Will, dated to January 31, 1893. In this letter, he extolled the virtues of life in

48 this new place, including a description of the wildlife and native population. In regard to the Seminoles he declared that they spoke very good English and predicted that “…I will get along with them all right.” In the same letter he told his brother not to pay any notice to reports of a family being murdered at their camp and to make his way down to the new settlement. Perhaps he felt the need to reassure him that there was nothing to fear from the Seminoles, but the inclusion means that people were still nervous about settling in the area. An undated written recollection of the New River camp by Mrs. Stranahan states that the trading post/general store served the community including settlers and “a hundred or two Indians who learned they could get fair prices…” She described the pageantry of seeing canoes coming down the river, the Seminoles bringing all their earthly possessions for stays of 2 weeks or more in “civilization.” Further association with the Seminoles and

Frank Stranahan’s store is supplied with receipts that specify no particular date, but are from the early 1900s. These papers include a list of people with credit at Stranahan’s general store. There is a long list of Seminole names such as Robert Osceola, “Old Dr.

Girl”, and last names such as “Tiger” and “Osceola” dominate. This is significant as there is minimal archaeological evidence tying the Seminoles to the camp site. Some glass beads attest to their presence, but the historical sources show that they were a fixture in

Stranahan’s business.

The archaeological materials provide information about what settlers may have used, bought, or sold at the New River camp, but a bill to Frank Stranahan from a general merchandise store dated to 1894 may hold additional clues. This bill includes an itemized list of materials that Frank bought from M.B. Lyman, a dealer in general merchandise from Lantana that filled mail orders by boat. It is dated to January 25, 1894 and includes

49 a list of items that other newly arrived settlers may have purchased from him to begin their new life. Staples such as sugar, coffee, and rice are listed along with such things as loaded shells and fishing lures. It is also interesting to see at the bottom a charge of 50 cents for “Jamaica Ginger.” This was a patent medicine and type of “cure all.” Jamaica

Ginger contained 70-90 % alcohol and was known to produce a type of paralysis called

“Jake leg” in those who imbibed too much of the stuff (Lindsey 2014; Munsey 2006). It is possible that Stranahan was self-medicating as a receipt dated to 1893 for dental work indicates he may have had some teeth troubles. Other settlers would also have limited access to professional care and likely used patent medicines as a way to soothe their aches and pains.

Glass bottles were rarely mentioned in the historical records. Nevertheless, as already indicated, there was much documentation on the various companies that produced the bottles examined in this study.

50 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS

The dearth of historical archaeology done in South Florida can easily be attributed to the lack of charismatic or salient structural remains. Most often Florida historic archaeology is associated with North Florida and its array of Spanish Colonial forts and mission sites. The neglect that South Florida historic archaeology has suffered in the archaeological journals does not serve to detract from its importance. Research on the early social and economic development of late nineteenth century Fort Lauderdale illuminates some of the activities that were occurring in Florida at the turn of the century.

Despite the fact that the structural remains of the store are no longer accessible in the archaeological record, the artifacts themselves cross the divide between the historic documents and the objects recovered. The glass bottles recovered from the Stranahan site fill in the gaps about the types of things that people would have utilized at different times during the sites’ occupation.

This thesis examined the daily life of early settlers and Seminole Indians who frequented Stranahan’s Trading Post and General Store during the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century. Whole glass bottles were classified according to form and function in order to provide an archaeological context for the historic source materials.

This study indicated that, in the years Stranahan’s Trading Post was operational, more glass bottles were used and discarded on site. Furthermore, an examination of bottle contents revealed that soda pop and mineral waters were the most prevalent type of

51 beverages consumed at the trading post/campsite. Although alcohol was used to mitigate the harsh conditions of daily life in South Florida, such bottles were represented in much smaller numbers. Apparently, soda/mineral waters were a more acceptable drink.

Documentary and archaeological evidence conveys the importance of Stranahan’s

Trading Post and General store in the development of the New River. There have only been a few studies focusing on South Florida trading posts. In such studies, any glass remains recovered were either beads or several bottle sherds. This study contributes to the body of archaeological data related to South Florida trading post and frontier sites.

Results support and enhance existing evidence for patterns of use and social values of the early settlers that came to Florida after the end of the Seminole Wars. When combined with historical data, this study lends insight into the ways early Florida settlers negotiated life on the New River.

52 REFERENCES

Anderson, Ann 2004 Snake Oil, Hustlers and Hambones: The American Medicine Show. McFarland Publishing, Jefferson, NC.

Atwater, William 2001 An Annotated Catalogue of the Edward C. Atwater Collection of American Popular Medicine and Health Reform: A-L. University of Rochester Press, Rochester, NY.

Bartram, William 1791 Travels through North and South Carolina, Georgia, East & West Florida. Dover Publications, NY.

Bennett, E. 1998 Local Historians Argue over the Root of the Story of How Hires First Brewed Beer That Made Millions. The Press of Atlantic City 28, June. Pleasantville, NJ.

Berge, Dale 1980 Simpson Springs Station Historical Archaeology in Western Utah. Utah State Office Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, UT.

Bourdieu, Pierre 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Richard Nice, translator. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.

Busch, Jane 1987 A Second Time Around: A Look At Bottle Reuse. Historical Archaeology 21:67-80.

Carr, Robert 1981 The Brickell Store and Seminole Indian Trade. Florida Anthropologist 34:180-199. 1982 Archaeological Excavations at the Stranahan House. Report to the Stranahan House, Inc., Fort Lauderdale, Florida. 1989 Archaeological Excavations at the Stranahan House Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Florida Anthropologist 42:7-33. 2006 An Archaeological Assessment of the Icon Las Olas Parcel Broward County, Florida. AHC Technical Report No. 758, Davie, FL.

53 Covington, James 1993 The Seminoles of Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Deetz, James 1977 In Small Things Forgotten. Doubleday, New York, NY.

Devorsey, Louis 1971 De Brahm’s Report of the General Survey in the Southern District of North America. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.

Fairbanks, Charles H. 1978 The Ethno-Archeology of the Florida Seminole. In Tacachale: Essays on the Indians of Florida and Southeast Georgia During the Historic Period, Jerald T. Milanich and Samuel Proctor, editors, pp. 163-193. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Fort Lauderdale Historical Society 1893 Stranahan Manuscript Collection. Fort Lauderdale Historical Society, Fort Lauderdale. 1894 Stranahan Manuscript Collection. Fort Lauderdale Historical Society, Fort Lauderdale. 190- Stranahan & Co. Account Books. Stranahan Manuscript Collection. Fort Lauderdale Historical Society, Fort Lauderdale.

Gannon, Michael 2003 Florida: A Short History. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL.

Garbarino, Merwyn 1989 The Seminole. Chelsea House Publishers, New York, NY.

Griffenhagen, George B., and Mary Bogard 1999 History of Drug Containers and Their Labels. American Institute of Pharmacy, Madison, WI.

Hawkins, Philip 2011 The Textual Archaeology of Seminole Colonization. Florida Anthropologist 64:107-113.

Hughes, David 2006 “A Bottle of Guinness Please”: The Colourful History of Guinness. Phimboy, Berkshire, UK.

Jones, Olive, and Catherine Sullivan 1989 The Parks Canada Glass Glossary. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

54 Kersey, Harry A. 1975 Pelts, Plumes, and Hides: White Traders among the Seminole Indians, 1870- 1930. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL. 2003 The Stranahans of Fort Lauderdale: A Pioneer Family of the New River. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL.

Leavitt, Stephen, and Stephen Dubner 2011 Freakonomics. Harper Collins, New York, NY.

Lindsey, Bill 2014 Bottle Typing (Typology) & Diagnostic Shapes. Society for Historical Archaeology Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website, University of Montana, Missoula http://www.sha.org/bottle/. Accessed 28 August 2015.

Linn, Meredith B. 2010 Elixer of Emigration: Soda Water and the Making of Irish Americans in Nineteenth Century New York City. Historical Archaeology 44:69-109.

Lockhart, Bill 2012 New Insights from the Bottles Excavated at the Fort Riley Hospital Privy. Bottle Research Group, Klamath Falls, OR.

Lockhart, Bill, and Bill Porter 2010 The Dating Game: Tracking the Hobble Skirt Coca-Cola Bottle. Bottles and Extras September-October 2010:42-52.

Lockhart, Bill, Pete Schultz, Carol Serr, and Bill Lindsey 2010 The Adolphus Busch Glass Factories. Bottles and Extras November- December 2010:42-52.

Lunn, Kevin 1981 Identification and Dating of Lea and Perrins’ Worcestershire Sauce Bottles on Canadian Historic Sites: Interpretations Past and Present. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 5:1-17.

Macdougall, Dennis 1990 The Bottles of the Hoff Store Site. In The Hoff Store Site and Gold Rush Merchandise from San Francisco California, Allen Pastron and Eugene Hattori, editors, pp. 4-18. Braum-Brunfield, Ann Arbor, MI.

Mahon, John K. 1967 History of the Second Seminole War: 1835-1842. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL.

55 Miller, George, and Catherine Sullivan 1984 Machine-made Glass Containers and the End of Production for Mouth-blown Bottles. Historical Archaeology 18:83-96.

Munsey, Cecil 2013 Hayner Distilling Company (1866-1920). Society for Historical Archaeology Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website, University of Montana, Missoula http://www.sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/MunseyHaynerDistilling.pdf. Accessed 28 August 2014. 2005 Paralysis in a Bottle. Bottles and Extras Winter 2006:7. 2006 The Oldest “3-IN-ONE-OIL” Container. Bottles and Extras Fall 2006:75.

Newman, T. Stell 1970 A Dating Key for Post Nineteenth Century Bottles. Historical Archaeology 4:70-75.

Pastron, Allen 1990 Historical Background of the Hoff Store Site. In The Hoff Store Site and Gold Rush Merchandise from San Francisco California, Allen Pastron and Eugene Hattori, editors, pp. 58-74. Braum-Brunfield, Ann Arbor, MI.

Sharer, Robert J., and Wendy Ashmore 2003 Archaeology: Discovering Our Past. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Smith, Andrew 2013 Food and Drink in American History: A “Full Course” Encyclopedia. ABC- CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA.

Stranahan, Ivy Undated Personal Recollection. Stranahan Manuscript Collection, Fort Lauderdale Historical Society, Fort Lauderdale.

Stranahan, Frank 1893 Letter to William Stranahan, 31 January. Stranahan Manuscript Collection. Fort Lauderdale Historical Society, Fort Lauderdale.

Sutton, Mark, and Brooke Arkush 1996 Archaeological Laboratory Methods: An Introduction. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, IL.

Tebeau, Charlton 1971 A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables, FL.

56 Weidling, Philip J., and August Burghard 1966 Checkered Sunshine: The Story of Fort Lauderdale. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL.

Weisman, Brent 1999 Unconquered People: Florida’s Seminole and Miccosukee Indians. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, FL. 2007 Nativism, Resistance, and Ethnogenesis of the Florida Seminole Identity. Historical Archaeology 41:198-212.

West, Patsy 1985 Seminoles in Broward County: The Pine Island Legacy. New River News Fall:5-11.

Wickman, Patricia 1999 The Tree that Bends: Discourse, Power, and the Survival of the Maskoki People. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, AL. 2006 Osceola’s Legacy. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, AL.

Whorton, James 2000 Inner Hygiene: Constipation and the Pursuit of Health in Modern Society. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.