Colonial Williamsburg Digital Library

Structure A (Richard Kemp's Dwelling House)

Structure A is the dwelling used by Richard and Elizabeth Kemp. All that remains of this structure is an intact brick foundation and two hearths. Oriented north-south along its long axis, the front of the house faced west. It was constructed as a single pile, hall and parlor with a central fireplace, and as built around 1642 measured 35 feet long by 20 feet wide. While no datable artifacts were found in the building's meager builder's trench, early pipestems (9 64ths or greater) cluster in and around what remains of its walls (Figure 17).

Brick foundations two and a half courses wide demarcate the initial building phase of Structure A (Figures 18 and 19). The width of this foundation and the large quantity 18 Figure 16. Kemp's Rich Neck. Figure 17. Distribution of 9/64-inch diameter pipestems. 19 Figure 18. Dwelling house as originally built. Figure 19. Kemp's dwelling house. 20 of brick found in the plowzone establishes that the structure was executed entirely in brick. The builder's trench was excavated revealing one to two courses of poorly made bricks. Excavation also uncovered an H-shaped chimney foundation, with opposing hearths facing north and south, thus dividing the interior space to two heated rooms (Figure 20). The fireplace is off-center, with the northernmost room measuring approximately 16 by 14.5 feet from interior wall to interior wall, and the south room roughly 16 by 10 feet. Because the fireplace also abutted the back (east) wall rather than lining up along the centerline or axis of the house, the chimney stack would have risen behind the ridge of the roof. This placement towards the back wall created extra room on the opposite side of the fireplace, so that there would have been perhaps six feet of space between the fireplace and the west wall of the house, where the front door was likely placed. The western cheek of the fireplace formed the back wall of this space, creating a lobby entrance roughly six and a half feet deep (east-west) by six feet wide, with doorways leading into the two downstairs rooms piercing its south and north walls. Structure A could have been either 1½ or 2 stories tall. A stairway connecting the downstairs with upstairs would have been located either in the lobby or in one of the downstairs rooms.

The structure's fireplaces suggest that at least originally the northern room employed a dirt floor. The subsoil under the hearth in this room was burned, confirming that fires were built directly on its surface. If this room had wooden flooring, then the hearth floor would have had to been raised to the same level in order to prevent setting the floor ablaze. Conversely, if the hearth floor was raised to floor level, the soil under Figure 20. Closeup of central fireplace. 21 the hearth would not be burned. The lack of burnt subsoil under the southern hearth suggests its floor was raised, indicating that the adjoining room had a wooden floor from the start.

The dwelling clearly had glass windows installed sometime during its life. Distribution maps of window leads and flat glass show heavy concentrations of both in its interior and the vicinity immediately surrounding it. One window lead recovered from around the house was dated 1635, suggesting that the structure had glass windows from its inception.

Other architectural details are harder to discern. No indication of the original roofing material has survived, and later expansion of the building destroyed any possible evidence of a second exterior entranceway on the structure's east side.

Structure B
(The Kitchen)

Around the same time he was building his house, Kemp oversaw construction of a large brick outbuilding facing Structure A (Figure 21). Evidence indicates that this entire building was also executed entirely in brick, and that it served the plantation as its kitchen, servant's quarters, and storage facility.

The Kemp-period portion of the building was a roughly square room measuring 24 feet east-west and 20 feet north-south (Figure 22). The bricks of the 1640s walls were poorly made with the dry course consisting of laid brick bats — four and five Figure 21. Kitchen/quarter. 22 Figure 22. Kemp's portion of the kitchen. across. About eighteen rows of the center room's dry course are missing on the north wall and two rows are missing on the south wall. These gaps appear to be damage from nineteenth-century plowing rather than indications of structural features.

Structure B's foundation bricks strongly resemble those of Structure A's Kemp period component, and its four-brickbat-wide dry course footers are also the same. Window leads dating to the 1630s confirm an early construction date for the building. Only the dry courses of the room's east and west walls remain, with the remaining two walls being destroyed by later renovations.

The remains of the north wall's C-shaped hearth are of the same construction as the rest of the center room (Figure 23). The hearth measured 10 feet wide by 3 feet deep, indicating it was used for both cooking and heating. Only the east and west spurs survive, since the original rear wall was also lost in later renovation. The size of the hearth, especially in comparison with Structure A's two smaller hearths, strongly suggest that Structure B was built as a separate kitchen.

Inside the hearth were a series of clay floors, one laid on top of the next. The earliest of these probably dates to the Kemp period, with the lowest five contexts predating 1665. This configuration, along with the presence of root cellars and the shelving related post holes, suggest that the kitchen had a dirt floor for its entire life.

A number of often-replaced large root cellars were located around Structure B's fireplace, the earliest of which appear to date to the Kemp period (for detailed discussion of root cellars, see Chapter 5). Unfortunately almost all of this root cellar was 23 Figure 23. Closeup of fireplace. destroyed by later replacements. While no datable artifacts were found in the small portion that did survive, the absence of architectural material relating to the large-scale renovations suggests that this feature was abandoned and filled in before 1665.

Another feature found in the kitchen was a baking oven that incorporated the east spur of the hearth into its design (Figure 24). The brick oven had a square base measuring 5 by 5 feet, and while this is the only portion of the feature that has survived, several unglazed floor tiles were found in and around the structure that may have been part of the actual baking surface.

Located in front (south) of the baking oven were three overlapping pits, the earliest of which dates to the Kemp period. Small and circular in shape, and with vertical sides and a flat bottom, this pit measured 14 inches across and 10 inches deep. The pit was filled with charcoal, brick and mortar and was likely abandoned and refilled sometime after 1650, since it was subsequently disturbed by two later pits that date to the Thomas Ludwell period before 1665.

Kiln

Ground-penetrating radar identified a brick kiln south of the kitchen. Because it was located on a portion of the site owned by a commercial builder, we were able to excavate only a single one-meter test unit in this feature. The unit exposed what appears to be the rear wall of the kiln. The firebox cut 5 feet into subsoil and consisted of unlined clay walls. The fill contained three layers: (1) a clay layer containing brick fragments which sealed (2) a brick rubble and ash layer which in turn sealed (3) an ash and burned oyster shell layer which sat on the firebox floor.

Figure 24. Closeup of bake oven.

Once the fill was removed a single channel was identified. Two baked clay arch footings bracket and a flue measuring approximately 2 feet in width. The blackened outline of the flue was also evident on the rear wall.

The kiln appears to have been a semipermanent, rectangular updraft-type kiln. The use of arch footings made of clay is atypical. Normally, both benches and arches are built of unfired bricks that are fired as part of the kiln's load.

The layer of burned oyster shell covering the floor suggest that lime was also prepared in the kiln. Although mortar is an integral part of masonry construction, such evidence of mortar manufacturing is rare.

Three kilns of similar design have been identified within a five-mile radius of Rich Neck. Two of these are located on Jamestown Island, while the other was discovered at Bruton Heights in Williamsburg (Figure 25). All three date to the seventeenth century (Muraca and Hellier 1992: 58).

Several clay quarry pits associated with the kiln were the earliest features found at Rich Neck. All but one of these pits were relatively small, very deep, and irregularly shaped. These smaller pits were immediately backfilled by their seventeenth-century diggers with the same material removed during excavation, contained very few artifacts, and where stratigraphic relationships could be determined, were always the earliest feature. One good example was located underneath the bounding ditch south of the dwelling (Figure 26). Measuring 6.5 feet by 8 feet, this roughly rectangular feature extended 20 inches below the bounding ditch that surrounded the site. Filled with a single episode of redeposited subsoil, this feature and the other small pits seem to be failed attempts at finding suitable clay for brickmaking.

Figure 25. John Page's brick kiln.

Figure 26. Half-excavated small clay quarry pit.

Just east of the dwelling was the "successful" quarry pit (Figure 27). This large oval-shaped feature, measured 58 feet north-south and 50 feet east-west, and was dug over 5 feet below grade. Its relatively flat bottom contained rows of linear channels about 3 feet wide where clay had been shoveled out across the bottom of the pit (Figure 28).

The clay in the bottom was extremely sandy. Bricks made out of this material would have been of poor quality, similar to those found in the Kemp portions of the dwelling and kitchen. The clay may have received its initial processing while still inside the pit, since the impression of where a barrel had once stood was pressed into the floor of the southernmost channel.

Once the need for clay was satisfied, the pit took on a new role. Left uncovered, the lowest portions of its channels silted in completely and then additional silt accumulated over the entire bottom, in some areas to over 20 inches deep. These layers contained very few artifacts, suggesting that the pit was purposefully kept free of waste material. It also appears that the pit was at least seasonally wet, with the accumulated water serving to quench livestock.

Enclosures

Three enclosures were built during the Kemp period. The first encompassed the area between the dwelling and the kitchen. Using the foundation walls of both buildings in conjunction with five sections of fence, this enclosure formed a six-sided polygon that measured roughly 50 feet by 50 feet. One gate was located in the southwest corner of the enclosure.

The trenches were shallow, linear features generally measuring 6 to 8 inches in depth and 6 to 10 inches in width (Figure 29). Some had rectangular or circular Figure 27. Successful quarry pit. 27 Figure 28. First trench through quarry pit. Figure 29. Slot fence connecting kitchen to main E-W fence. 28 features associated with them, which were invariably located on one side of the trench, slightly cutting it, and extending deeper into the subsoil. No molds were apparent in any of the circular features, and they appear to be the remains of support posts for the pale fences.

The area inside the polygon contained fewer artifacts than any other space located adjacent to one of the brick structures. This is odd, because the area contained the main entranceways into both structures. Although seventeenth-century trash disposal practices usually employed tossing garbage out of all exterior entranceways, this area appears to have been purposely kept clean.

Scattered throughout the inside this enclosure were several plant related features, including bush holes, tree holes, and possible furrows (Figure 30). Although some postdate the Kemp period, it is possible that this area was employed as a garden as early as the 1640s (Figure 31). Soil chemistry and phytolith analysis shows that areas near the dwelling were cool, partially shaded, and damp, while closer to the kitchen it was shady and dry. The area just east of the kitchen also contained phytoliths from corn husks or cobs (Sullivan 1999).

The second enclosure was a bounding ditch that surrounded the structures, of which several large sections were exposed and excavated (Figure 32). No evidence was found on east side of the site, but this area was disturbed by road construction. Preservation varied from one area of the site to another. The least well preserved section was located at the northern end, where only the very bottom of the ditch survived road construction. The measurements from the best preserved section of the ditch indicate that it was originally over 5 feet wide and over 3 feet deep. The northern side was filled fairly early and replaced with a slot fence. The portions of the ditch south and east of the structure survived much longer, but they were also eventually replaced by slot fences. The southern section and possibly others were redug at least Figure 30. Plan view of planting hole. 29 Figure 31. Plan of garden area. Figure 32. Excavated section of bounding ditch. 30 once, presumably after the original channel had collapsed or silted in. Several depositional layers filled the ditch, consisting most often of silt.

At its western end the ditch tapered to a point creating a large opening designed to control admittance into the homelot complex. It is not clear how large this opening was because its opposite side was destroyed by road construction, but a gate was probably employed to limit access.

A similar feature was uncovered at Martin's Hundred's Site A, the 1630s administrative center. An oval-shaped ditch surrounding eight acres of the site was uncovered in 1970. The only break or entranceway was located to the south of the complex. This ditch was 3 feet wide and cut 1 foot deep into subsoil. There were no signs of a palisade associated with this ditch (Klingelhofer n.d.).

The last enclosure was a long fence that divided the site east-west (Figure 33). Running parallel to the brick structures and located between them and the northern section of the bounding ditch, this fence eventually replaced the northern half of the ditch, and became the most important fence on the site. Its center section was initially employed as one of the six sides of the polygon that bounded the space between the two main structures, and it was replaced and altered several times to meet the changing needs of the plantation.

Figure 33. Detail of main E-W fence.

Refuse Middens

Trash disposal during the Kemp period clustered in several spots. The largest area was located west of the kitchen and contained oyster shells, faunal remains, nails, ceramics and glass. Imported pipestems with 9 64ths bore diameters were found in this trash pit, as was a bottle seal displaying the initials "RK" (Figures 34 and 35).

Distribution maps of the site's earliest pipestems also show that three sides of the dwelling house received trash in the 1640s. A small concentration was located on the southern perimeter of the site near the bounding ditch. In order to get to this area, occupants would have had to walk through the enclosed area between the structures in order to dispose of their trash. A small ravine finger also attracted trash in the 1640s. Located just north of the dwelling, this area contained some early artifacts. Early pipestems and Kemp bottle seals were also found in the large quarry pit east of the house.

Structures Made of Brick

Around 1639, Richard Kemp had built one of the finest houses in Jamestown. As the first all-brick house in Virginia, this house set the construction standards for Jamestown as well as its hinterland. Upon Kemp's return to Virginia, he constructed a strikingly similar house at Rich Neck, which was possibly the first all brick structure constructed in the colony outside of Jamestown. The kitchen appears to be the first all brick dependency built in Virginia.

Together these buildings established a benchmark for later Middle Plantation construction. By the 1670s, brick Figure 34. Richard Kemp bottle seal. Figure 35. Bartmann bottle. 32 structures in Middle Plantation included John Page's house (Figure 36) and up to seven outbuildings, the dwelling house under Nassau Street (a 44 feet by 20 feet foundation and cellar) (Figure 37), and (by 1683) the Bruton Parish church (66 feet by 29 feet). Other brick structures that date to the Middle Plantation period included the College of William & Mary's Wren Building, and two structures (the larger of which measured 28 feet by 20 feet) located behind the George Wythe House. A group of related Middle Plantation structures were also found under the eighteenth-century Public Hospital. The dwelling house measured 37 feet by 23 feet and contained a brick lined cellar, water table bricks, window glass, and delft fireplace tiles with hand-painted nautical scenes. The support structure contained a brick-lined full basement, casement windows, and brick paving. On the western side of town, a cluster of five brick foundations have been uncovered near Bassett Hall. At least two of these structures seem related to the Brays, a prominent Middle Plantation family.

While all this brick construction was taking place at Middle Plantation, no brick structures were built at the neighboring settlements of Kingsmill or Martin's Hundred. Perhaps Kemp's brick structures served as an impetus for later Middle Plantation settlers.

Protection

At the time of its establishment Rich Neck was located near the Anglo-Powhatan frontier. Although it was part of Middle Plantation, Rich Neck was outside the area "protected" by the palisade of 1634 (see Metz et al. 1998 for a good description of this feature). Tension between the local Indian population and the English settlers was Figure 36. John Page house. 33 Figure 37. Nassau Street cellar. again approaching a high point as Rich Neck was being established. At the same time, a civil war was brewing in England between Parliament and King Charles I. Dangerous times call for precautions, and in Virginia this often meant wooden palisades. Palisaded settlements in the area include Nansemond Fort, Flowerdew Hundred, and the earliest sites at Martin's Hundred (Sites C and H).

Rich Neck was not surrounded by an archetypal palisade, but by a large ditch similar to one found at the administrative center at Martin's Hundred. While not a classic defensive barrier, this ditch may have acted as more as a psychological barrier that served to comfort inhabitants rather than actually protect them. The ditch probably also served to keep livestock out of the compound. The opening on the west side would have regulated foot and horse traffic, forcing visitors and inhabitants to pass by the kitchen before arriving at Kemp's dwelling house.

Landscape Design

The landscape of the early years at Rich Neck was characterized by concentric zones of modification (Figure 38). On the edge was the "wilderness" fashioned by the Powhatans, the least modified portion of the Rich Neck landscape. Large dark forests of mature trees containing little undergrowth would have dominated this area (Silver 1990). Some active and abandoned tobacco fields with girdled trees were probably located directly adjacent to the forest, giving the landscape a rough and tumble look. Closer to the dwelling were the two acres ringed by the bounding ditch, and bisecting the oval created by the ditch was a major fence that ran east-west. The area between the ditch and the fence was ideal for growing food crops and for establishing the plantation's orchard, and the area south of the dwelling would also have been well suited for planting food crops and fruit trees. The ditch would have prevented the 34 Figure 38. Landscape zones. livestock ranging in the nearby forest from destroying these crops. The center section of the primary fence was also used as the northern boundary of the innermost landscape zone, the area which was located between the two structures. Once visitors passed through the fences that enclosed this space behind, they entered a landscape that must have stood in stark contrast to the Virginia wilderness. Kemp used a combination of fences and structures to completely encircle this area. On one side was the front of the dwelling house with its main entryway located in the center. The front of the structure featured its most formal brick and glass facade. Directly across and facing Kemp's dwelling was the kitchen/quarter. This building's size and construction material made it equally impressive. It also featured glass windows, and had an entryway directly across from the dwelling's. Connecting the two main structures and completely enclosing the area between them were several paling fences, which defined a clean space that was purposefully kept clear of refuse even during the early days of Rich Neck. Distribution of 9/64th inch and 8 64th inch pipe stem bore diameters (the earliest pipes found on the site) show very few fragments were discarded in this area. In a very non-seventeenth-century fashion, trash was carried out to the edges of the enclosed area before disposal. Located throughout this clean space were features that once contained purposefully planted flora, including bush holes, tree holes and linear furrows. While they cannot be definitively tied to the Kemp period, these features appear be the remains of an early garden.

Further evidence of a garden comes in the form of flower pot fragments (Figure 39). While difficult to accurately date, these coarse earthenware vessels were frequently used to transport plants from England and other colonies such as Bermuda, and for potting and displaying plants. Fifteen flower pot fragments were found scattered around the area between the two structures.

Most early colonial gardens were kitchen related, except for a few ornamental plantings in the gardens of Virginia's wealthiest elites. Designed to be accessed from within the house with little or even no access from outside, this practice is reminiscent of English medieval gardens (Meatyard 2000). Documentary evidence of existence of early colonial gardens comes from Menefie's Littletown plantation with its orchard, roses, rosemary, sage, and thyme. Rich Neck provides an illustration of how these landscape features were possibly incorporated into a plantation's design.

Rich Neck's spatial layout was also unusual. While almost all the plantation seats at Middle Plantation employ at least two structures in their design, they were laid out in a different configuration. The Middle Plantation norm consisted of a multipurpose dwelling house and a support structure that operated as a kitchen and also housed servants. Kemp's plantation is no exception, but the spatial relationship of Rich Neck's structures is different from those of other Middle Plantation sites. The Page site is an excellent example of the typical Middle Plantation layout (Figure 40). Visitors to the house would have encountered the dwelling first, with the kitchen/quarter purposely Figure 39. Distribution of flower pot fragments. 36 Figure 40. Overview of Page site. located behind it and off to one side. Other Middle Plantation planters located their support structures directly behind their dwelling house (Muraca 1995). Unfortunately, archaeological investigation into these properties is incomplete when compared to Rich Neck. More extensive excavations around these early structures might have uncovered details of how these sites were situated in the landscape.

Structure G
(Agricultural Shed)

One of the more unusual architectural discoveries at Rich Neck was the uncovering of a seven-post structure located to the west of the kitchen (Figure 43). This building—Structure G—sat on roughly the same orientation as the site's other two buildings, and its south wall aligned with the north wall of Structure B.

Three aspects of Structure G are noteworthy. The first was its location near the site's other post structures in a low-use part of the site. Structure G predates these Figure 42. Lunsford's Rich Neck. 41 Figure 43. Overview of Structure G. structures and appears to have been razed by the time they were built. The second was that it was composed of an uneven number of posts. The third was that the postholes had been dug to markedly different depths at the time of the building's construction. Thorough examination of the surrounding area revealed no other features in the structure's immediate vicinity, excluding the possibility that these different-depth postholes were unrelated.

The three deepest postholes were along Structure G's south wall (Figure 44). Each of these postholes contained identifiable molds, and two—68AV-75 and 68AV-255—were cut by a later fence trench. That this trench cuts two of Structure G's postholes indicated that the structure was no longer standing at the time the fence was built around 1665.

Posthole 68AV-75 was Structure G's southeast corner and measured 28 by 24 inches and bottomed at a depth of 22 inches. The round post mold for this hole (68AV-192) measured 10 inches across and became visible only after the removal fence related trench. The next posthole to the west was 68AV-255, which measured 26 by 23 inches and had a flat bottom at 28 inches deep. Postmold 68AV-257 sat in the center of the posthole, was oval shaped, and measured 9 by 8 inches. Posthole 68AV-189 represented Structure G's southwestern corner. This posthole measured 35 by 26 inches and excavators found its flat bottom at 18 inches below the subsoil level. Its mold was round in plan measuring 12 inches across. These three features were the deepest of the seven and possessed the most pronounced postmolds.

Postholes 68AV-251 and 68AV-270 sat in line to the north of postholes 68AV-75 and 68AV-189. The easternmost, 68AV-251, measured 23 by 22 inches. Its flat bottom was found at 12 inches. The westernmost posthole 68AV-270 measured 25 by 28 inches. Excavators located its flat bottom at 5 inches. This posthole also contained a circular postmold 68AV-288, measuring 7 inches across and 5 inches deep. The shallowest of the seven postholes were the two that constituted Structure G's north wall. Posthole 68AV-215 measured 30 by 32 inches with a 42 Figure 44. Structure G. flat bottom at a depth of 6 inches. Posthole 68AV-217 measured 24 inches square had a flat bottom at 6 inches in depth. No mold was detected.

Structure G dates to the Lunsford period of occupation. The presence of wine bottle glass in its postholes indicates it was built after 1650. The number of features cutting this structure and the absence of artifacts dating from the 1660s indicates this structure did not last long. Several artifacts associated with the renovation of the kitchen were found in one of the molds, suggesting the structure was demolished around 1665.

Its unusual construction style suggests that this structure was a lean-to. The southern line of holes represent the tallest portion of the structure, with the northern line representing the lowest portion. This structure was clearly not used as a dwelling and probably served some agricultural function.

Enclosures

Lunsford added at least four new fences, and removed two others. The dismantled fences were part of the six-sided polygon that outlined the garden space between the dwelling and the kitchen. The sections of fence oriented on a diagonal were torn down and replaced with fence sections that were on the same orientation as the structures. Instead of a six- sided polygon this new arrangement formed a square.

Lunsford also began to subdivide the area north of the dwelling. A fence was built connecting the back of the dwelling and the northernmost portion of the bounding ditch. To the west, a second fence connected the bounding ditch and the east-west fence that bisected the site just north of the structures. This construction created two new enclosed areas on the site, both north of the dwelling. Between the dwelling and the east-west fence was one enclosure. Just north of this area was a second enclosed area between the bounding ditch and the east-west fence.

Structure A
(Thomas Ludwell's Dwelling)

Ludwell added two rooms to the rear of the dwelling that ran its entire length (Figures 50 and 51). The foundation for this addition was one-and-a-half brick courses wide and abutted the east wall of the original foundation. After the house was abandoned, workers removed portions of the east and north walls of the addition, leaving only a robber's trench. The addition was 10 feet deep and increased the overall dimension of the house to 35 by 30 feet. The east room measured 9.5 by 12.5 feet with a foundation that intruded subsoil over 18 inches (seven courses), suggesting the superstructure was made entirely of brick. The foundation for the addition's west room (9.5 by 20 feet) was shallower, suggesting a light foundation and wood-framed walls (Figures 52 and 53).

Exterior end chimneys built on the north and south walls replaced the central chimney, which was dismantled (Figure 54). These foundations were 2½ courses wide, with the hearths measuring 13 feet long by 2.5 feet deep and abutting the original portion of the house. Like the interior fireplace, they were offset behind the peak of the roof, one brick course shy of being flush with the back wall. The builder's trench for the chimneys was relatively shallow, measuring 9 inches deep and cutting the builder's trench for the original house. Tin-enameled fireplace tiles that decorated the south hearth featured paintings of children playing games, including archery and golf (Figure 55).

Figure 50. Dwelling during Thomas Ludwell period.

Figure 51. Rear room additions.

Figure 52. Reconstruction of Rich Neck, circa 1670. Drawing by David Brown.

Figure 53. Model of Rich Neck dwelling as a two-story structure. Designed by Cary Carson.

Figure 54. Closeup of exterior chimney.

Figure 55. Fireplace tiles featuring children playing games.

The brick used during this renovation appears to have been made off site. All of the quarry pits found were associated with the earliest occupation of the site. The renovation bricks are also of much better quality than the 1640s bricks, further suggesting they came from a different source.

In the hall, a large, deep root cellar or buttery was installed in front of the hearth. It measured 7.5 by 4 feet and was 3 feet deep. Casks of wine or beer were stored in butteries. This feature survived until the house was dismantled, at which time it was filled in a single episode.

A new roof, made of earthenware pan tiles, covered the entire structure (Figure 56). Held in place with shell mortar, thousands of broken tile fragments clustered around the dwelling.

Kitchen/Quarter/Workspace

In its day, Ludwell's kitchen was perhaps the largest brick outbuilding in Virginia. Located opposite of the plantation's residence, it also underwent renovations when Ludwell took control of the property. Like the dwelling house, these additions augmented the size and capacity of the building's original plan. Watertable bricks and very large quantities of brick rubble in and around the structure indicate that this building was executed entirely in brick, serving the plantation as a kitchen, quarter for servants, and as a combination workspace and storage facility. In addition to these functions, Ludwell reserved one portion of the structure for his own personal use.

The renovation of the kitchen included two new sections, with the entire structure being covered by a new pan tile roof (Figures 57 and 58). The final plan measured 36 feet north-south by 24 feet east-west, and was divided into three components. Flanking the roughly square center room were matching rectangular additions. Both of these additions measured 13 feet north-south and 24 feet east-west and contained full cellars 53 Figure 56. Pantile roof. Figure 57. Kitchen/quarter/work building. 54 Figure 58. Overall of kitchen. filled with bricks, tiles, mortar, and plaster from the demolition of the building. The bricks of the additions were well-fired and laid in a brick-and-a-half-wide English bond. Watertable bricks were found associated with both cellars. The foundations of the two additions were complete rectangles. Later, robbers removed most of the building's foundations.

A fairly uniform builder's trench surrounded the foundations of both additions, except for the exterior of the north wall of the north cellar, which featured a trench that ran the length of the wall truncating the top of the builder's trench. This feature, filled with deep-subsoil clay collected from somewhere off site, averaged 21 inches in width and 15 inches deep. The placement and characteristics of this clay packed feature suggests an attempt to prevent water from penetrating through the addition's subterranean wall. Under the clay fill was a 5-inch-wide builder's trench which matched the size, color, and artifact content of the foundation's other builder's trenches.

Key elements of the central room survived from the Kemp period including part of the hearth and the bake oven foundation (Figure 59). The dry courses of only the room's east and west walls remain, the north and south walls having been replaced by the internal walls of the cellar additions. This suggests that the subterranean courses of the cellar additions were under-dug and built beneath the center room's existing north and south wall. This technique, which would have destroyed the footers of the center room's north and south walls, including the original rear wall of the hearth, appears to be the same as that used in constructing Structure A's cellar addition (see Chapter 6).

In addition to a brick hearth along its north wall, the central room contained a number of large root cellars directly in front of the hearth and the remains of three small pits located in front of the bake oven.

Two of the small pits appear to be replacements for an earlier feature that dated to the Kemp period. The larger of the two measured 20 inches across and 10 inches 55 Figure 59. Kitchen center room. deep. Filled with sandy loam that contained a concentration of brick bats, this hole was flat bottomed. The second pit contained large quantities of ash and charcoal. While irregular in plan this feature was much shallower than its companion holes, measuring only 1 inch deep. These small pits seem to be small root cellars, purposefully created to preserve root vegetables and other perishables (Figure 60).

In front of the center room's substantial brick fireplace were the remains of three large root cellars. Because they virtually occupy the same space, only a small portion of the earliest cellar has survived, with a bit more of the second cellar remaining, and with all of the latest cellar surviving intact.

It is impossible to determine the original size of the earliest cellar. Only the easternmost portion of which has survived. Measuring 20 by 7 inches, this cellar had vertical sides and a flat bottom, and contained two layers of fill. The earliest layer mirrored the shape of what's left of the root cellar. This yellowish brown sandy clay loam contained charcoal, brick bits, and mortar. Over this layer was a yellowish brown sandy loam with charcoal flecking. The absence of renovation related artifacts suggests that this root cellar dated to either the Kemp or Lunsford period.

At some point the first root cellar failed and Root Cellar 2 replaced it. The remnants of this feature measured 9 feet E-W, 18 inches N-S, and extended over 3 feet into subsoil. Because of the placement of a later and larger root cellar, it is impossible to determine the original north-south measurement. The root cellar contained three layers, the earliest of which formed while the pit was still in use. This layer was less than an inch thick, was made up of a dark yellowish brown sandy loam, and contained large quantities of eggshell fragments and straight pins. On top of the layer was a collapsed portion of the northern subsoil wall which consisted of sterile yellow clay that covered only a small portion of the cellar. The rest of the cellar was filled during a single event with friable brown sandy clay containing significant quantities of charcoal and brick flecks. Artifacts recovered from this layer, include ceramics, pipestems, straight pins, lead, roofing and floor tiles. The cellar's abandonment and filling took place during Philip Ludwell's ownership based on a TPQ date of 1675.

Figure 60. Closeup of root cellar showing postholes.

Inside the root cellar were a series of related small postholes measuring roughly 12 inches square, and containing rectangular molds that measured 4 inches by 3 inches. The three postholes appear to be the remains of supports for a wooden cover for the cellar. Since the cellar sat directly before an active hearth, the posts may have acted to keep the cover from direct contact with fire. Located in the northeast corner, the northwest corner and at a point halfway in-between, the posts may have also braced the northern wall of the root cellar, preventing its collapse.

Sealing the root cellar were a series of thin clay hearth floors. Backfilling the cellar allowed for the expansion of the cooking area, because the construction of a replacement cellar took place 12 inches farther to the south.

The most recent root cellar measured 11 by 5½ feet and was not quite 3 feet deep. At the bottom was a layer that formed while the cellar was still in operation. This thin (1-2 inch thick) dark yellowish brown sandy loam covered two-thirds of the cellar floor but contained only a few artifacts, none of which were datable.

Several features cut this layer, including a group of five postholes with molds. The last cellar cut into both of its predecessors, resulting in edges made of backfilled soil instead of dense subsoil clay on two sides. This suggests that both sides were more likely to experience collapse than sides that cut subsoil. In order to prevent collapse, Ludwell had a series of posts installed, four along the northern wall and a fifth on the eastern wall (Figure 61).

The four posts were placed in a line. The westernmost posthole, which measured 12 by 9 inches, had vertical sides and a flat bottom. The posthole contained a dark yellowish-brown sandy loam fill with charcoal flecking throughout. Its square postmold measured 5 inches across. Two feet to the east was the next posthole, which measured 10 by 9 inches and was V-shaped in profile. Filled with the same soil as was the 57 Figure 61. Detail of root cellar showing reinforcing postholes. westernmost hole, this posthole had a square mold that measured 4 inches across. Thirty-two inches to the east was the next posthole and mold. It measured 9 by 7 inches and had vertical sides and a flat bottom. It too contained very similar fill as its companion holes, and had a square mold measuring 6 inches across. The last posthole was located 17 inches to the west. It measured 8 by 10 inches, and had an angled, V-shaped bottom with a square mold of 4 inches. Along the eastern wall of the root cellar was an additional postmold that served the same function as the four posts located on the north wall. This 4-inch-square mold was located 32 inches south of the northern wall.

There were two notches cut into the southern wall of the root cellar approximately three feet apart (Figure 62). Both contained the root cellar's earliest fill layer, and they may represent where the cellar was subdivided perhaps using boards.

Four layers were used to fill the root cellar when it either failed or was not longer needed. The earliest was an irregular sandy clay that contained pockets of clay, sand, silt, and mortar. Found only in the southeast corner, this 10-inch-thick layer was sealed by a second fill layer that was also only found in this corner. This second layer was redeposited subsoil that contained charcoal, mortar and brick fragments, and a pocket of plaster. On top of was a third layer that covered the entire root cellar. This layer was thickest (16 inches) on the south side and tapered to almost nothing on the north side, consisted of dark yellowish brown sandy loam, and contained charcoal flecks and a number of straight pins. The final fill layer also covered the entire cellar and was a dark yellowish brown sandy loam with subsoil clay mottling. This layer contained the heaviest concentration of artifacts, including ceramics, pipestems, and straight pins. The root cellar's fill contains leaded table glass indicating abandonment and filling sometime after 1670s. One of the postholes (68AT-430) contained a window lead impressed with the date [1]686, suggesting the posts were not original, but used to 58 Figure 62. Detail of root cellar notches. reinforce existing walls. That these posts cut through a layer that formed while the feature was still in use confirms that the posts were added after the construction of the cellar. The absence of large quantities of architectural material indicates the filling of the cellar took place before the building was abandoned and torn down. Why the root cellar was no longer needed toward the very end of the building's life remains unknown.

The kitchen's fireplace was atypical in several ways (Figure 63). Normally, fireplace floors either don't survive or are just areas where heat has turned the subsoil pink. The dwelling, for example, has both missing and burned pink subsoil hearth floors. On the other hand, the kitchen's hearth floors are made up of a jumble of features and layers cutting and stacked one on top of another (Figure 64). The fireplace measured 10 by 3.5 feet, and contained over 20 contexts, including several thin clay layers that covered different parts of the fireplace floor. Ten of these layers/features postdate the construction of the cellar additions, indicating that they date to the Thomas or Philip Ludwell periods. The rest have no relationship with the builder's trench and are hard to assign to a time period.

Listed in order from most recent to earliest, the features/layers are as follows. The latest fireplace floor (68AT-591) was a sandy clay fill approximately 4 inches thick. Under it was a gray sandy clay (68AT-592) that ranged in thickness from 1 to 2 inches. Layer 3 (68AT-593) was a dark yellow brown sandy clay located near 68AT-592. Layer 4 (68AT-594) was a yellow brown clay that measured 4 inches in thickness and sealed four different contexts. Layer 5 (68AT-595) was located only on the eastern half of the fireplace. This small lens of plastic brown clay measured about the same thickness as layer 4. Layer 6 (68AT-596) was a dark yellow brown clay, irregular 59 Figure 63. Fireplace floor before excavation. Figure 64. Fireplace floor during excavation. 60 in shape and appeared related to layers 4 and 5. Layer 7 (68AT-597) contained charcoal, ranged in depth from 1 to 4 inches and was made up of a dark yellowish brown clay. Layer 8 (68AT-598) was a small lens located in the center of the fireplace that was made up of dark yellowish brown sandy clay. Layer 9 (68AT-599) was located in the back of the hearth, ranged in thickness from 1 to 3 inches, and was made up of an ashy gray clay. Layer 10 (68AT-600) was a very large feature located in the center of the fireplace. It was irregular in plan and profile and was primarily filled with a reddish yellow clay. This layer contained glazed floor tiles like those found in the cellars of the additions. Layer 11 (68AT-604) was a small lens of brownish yellow clay situated in the northeast corner of the fireplace.

Layer 12 was the builder's trench for the north addition's cellar. It contained fragments of the new cellar floor tiles and roofing tiles. Layer 13 (68AT-606) covered the western half of the fireplace. This yellowish-red clay contained several ash pockets. Layer 15 (68AT-609) was a square feature filled with reddish-yellow clay. Layer 16 (68AT-610) was a linear feature in the northwest quadrant of the fireplace. This gray clay contained charcoal and ash. Layer 17 (68AT-611) extended over much of the hearth. This dark gray clay contained charcoal and ash. Layer 18 (68AT-612) was a small lens of dark brown clay with black soot. Layer 19 (68AT-613) was also a rectangular feature with a dark brown sandy loam. Layer 20 formed the lowest layer for most of the western portion of the fireplace. Irregular in plan as well as profile, this feature was filled with a brown silty sand containing charcoal and brick bits.

In the eastern side of the fireplace a posthole was discovered underneath all the layers (Figure 65). Filled with dark reddish gray sandy loam this hole measured 26 by 28 inches and contained a square postmold which measured 14 by 8 inches. The posthole and mold cut 6 inches into the subsoil under the hearth. This post appears to have been used to hold up a cooking pot or utensils or perhaps supported a spit.

This plethora of layers and features suggests specialized cooking took place in the kitchen. Several features were actually pits dug into the floor for some particular cooking task. When the pit was no longer needed worker filled it in and covered it with a new clay floor. Most cooking activities took place in the center of the fireplace, with more specialized cooking projects located on the extremities of the hearth floor.

Several small postholes were also found in the central room, located mostly along the west wall and in the south half of the room. The postholes ranged in size from 16 by 16 inches to 16 by 24 inches. The molds were circular and ranged from 6 to 8 inches across. These holes date to the Thomas Ludwell period and are possibly part of a shelving system.

The Additions

Excavations of the brick-lined cellars associated with the additions took place over two summers. Fill in the cellars was divided into quadrants and removed in 25 percent portions.

Post Structures

Excavators identified five post structures that date to the Thomas Ludwell period. Most of the new post structures sat far from the master's dwelling and constituted a 67 Figure 71. Distribution of plaster. Figure 72. Distribution of curtain rings, candlesticks, and candlesnuffers. 68 distinct quarter area. Archaeological evidence indicates that at least three of these wooden buildings served as the homes of enslaved Africans. A contemporaneous grave of an adolescent African positioned between two of the structures strongly supports this contention.

Structure C was a post-in-ground building located north of the kitchen (Figure 73). Like Structures A and B, it was oriented on a north-south axis. Eight postholes delineate the 20-foot-wide by 36-foot-long structure (Figure 74). Two additional postholes, slightly smaller in size, indicate that there was also a shed attached to the south end that measured 12 by 20 feet. With the shed attachment, the building had an overall dimension of 20 by 48 feet. Excavation revealed no fireplace remains associated with the building, but traces of a fireplace might easily have been eradicated by plowing or by machine grading. The building did not necessarily employ a brick fireplace foundation; open hearths served by a wood and clay smoke hoods were common in the seventeenth century. This structure did not have glass windows or root cellars.

The postholes that made up Structure C were spaced 8 feet apart on a side, and generally measured 32 by 40 inches across. Posthole depths averaged 12 inches, but this reflects removal by grading of about 4 inches of subsoil. Posthole fill was silty clay that in most cases produced little more than nails. One exception was a posthole that contained fragments of table glass, window glass, and wine bottle glass, as well as a large quantity of architectural debris including tile, nail, and brick fragments. That this and one other posthole contained paving and roofing tile fragments suggesting that Structure C postdated the renovation of Structures A and B sometime after 1665.

All of the postholes had postmolds or post removal holes. Postmolds were square or rectangular in plan, measuring 10 to 12 inches across, and extending the full depth of the posthole. At least three postholes had post removal holes rather than postmolds. Removal holes were rectangular or slightly rounded in plan, were similar in size to postmolds, and also extended to the depth of the postholes. In contrast to the postmolds, the removal holes were characterized by sloping wall profiles and were filled with roofing and paving tile fragments. Those posts probably were rocked and pulled out Figure 73. Plan view of Structure C. 69 Figure 74. Overall of Structure C. of their holes with a minimum of digging. The broken tiles that fell into the removal holes suggest that his building was dismantled around the same time as Structures A and B, when debris from those two buildings was scattered across the site sometime near the end of the century.

The remains of two fences were associated with Structure C. These were shallow, linear features measuring 8 inches deep and 8 to 12 inches wide. The first trench extended from the west side of Structure C at a 90° angle and was about 18 feet long. Excavators retrieved four paving tile fragments from this feature. A second slot trench adjoined the first at a 90° angle and ran for at least 22 feet southward. Logging or brush removal operations that preceded grading had disturbed the area east of this point, and no further traces of the trench were found. The fenceline may have turned back towards the building at this point, or possible continued further before turning. These trenches represent a pale fence that enclosed a square or rectangular area on the west side of Structure C; three sides of that square were formed by the fence, with the wall of the building serving as the fourth side. The fence probably protected a vegetable garden.

Structure C was the plantation's largest slave quarter. It size, physical situation in the midst of the plantation complex, and the artifacts found in association with it all indicate a dwelling rather than an agricultural support building. Archaeological excavation of barns of the seventeenth-century Tidewater show that these structures typically were located away from domestic complexes, off in fields by themselves. Designed to store agricultural implements, fodder, or even crops, barns were situated close to the activities they supported, such as cultivation and animal husbandry. Few if any artifacts were associated with such support buildings. In contrast, Structure C contained large numbers of artifacts, both in the postholes and molds and in the overlying plowzone. Field testing of the plowzone during 1992 produced domestic debris including wine 70 bottle glass, tin-enameled earthenware, and coarsewares. Unfortunately roadway construction destroyed most of the plowzone data, before it could be recovered. Finally, the archaeological record shows that seventeenth-century dwellings often had garden enclosures on their protected side in the same manner as Structure C does. The presence of a burial located just south of the building further suggests that it was a quarter.

Structure D

This post-in-ground building was located directly north of Structure C (Figure 75). It was square in plan, measured 16 by 16 feet, and is represented by four corner postholes and two gable support postholes (Figure 76). The supports were in the center of the north and south walls, indicating that these sides were the gable ends of the building, and therefore, that the structure was oriented north-south along the ridge axis. The presence of gable posts indicates either interrupted sill construction or ground to plate construction; the latter method is more likely given the small dimensions of the gable supports, and it indicates that Structure D had an earthen floor. The building might have employed an open hearth, with either a wood and clay smoke hood or simply an opening in the roof providing ventilation. It might have also been unheated.

This structure lay along the north edge of the road cut, with its southeast posthole in the graded road area. Excavators removed and screened the topsoil overlying the remainder of the structure. Structure D contained four corner posts measuring roughly 27 by 31 inches with postmolds about 8½ inches square. Depths measured about 2 feet below grade. The gable posts were smaller, measuring about one foot square and extending only 2 inches below grade. Excavation of the holes unearthed only one fragment of coarseware suggests that minimum activity occurred in this area before construction of the building.

All other artifacts from this structure came from the postmolds. Among them was a roofing tile fragment, but it did not appear the posts were removed from their mooring Figure 75. Plan view of Structure D. 71 Figure 76. Overall of Structure D. as was the case with Structure C. Nevertheless, its proximity to, and alignment with Structure C and the rest of the plantation complex indicates that this building probably dates from the Thomas Ludwell period of ownership. The building may have served as a dwelling for slaves or as a service/storage building. It contained no glass windows, no known hearth, and no root cellars. Excavators found some domestic artifacts in the plowzone over the structure, but not enough to definitively determine its function.

Structures E and F

Excavators located two overlapping post-built structures in the area to the northwest of Structure B and south of Structure C (Figure 77). Two overlapping post buildings—one four-poster (Structure E) and one six-poster (Structure F)—centered on, and cut, the remains of a slot fence. Only the posts of the structures' northeast corners made contact with each other. The stratigraphic relationship between these postholes indicated that the four-poster predated the six-poster (Figure 78).

Structure E's postholes were rectangular in plan, varied in size from 20 by 24 inches to 32 by 22 inches, and were filled with redeposited subsoil. They had flat sides, flat bottoms, and intruded 12 inches into subsoil. The postmolds for this structure were round and measured 8 inches across.

This building measured 15 by 15 feet, lacked glass in its windows and was torn down sometime after 1665 in order to build its replacement, Structure F. No evidence of a hearth has survived. This building appears to have housed slaves.

A complex of shallow fences cut and overlapped the structure's southeastern posthole—68AT-364. Two of these trenches cut respectively the north and south sides of the posthole. A third trench cut both of the other slot trenches as well as posthole 68AT-364 by curving over these features.

Figure 77. Plan view of Structures E and F.

Figure 78. Overall of Structures E and F.

The postholes associated with the six-post structure were mostly rectangular in plan, measuring 26 inches across and between 26 to 34 inches in length. These features had flat sides and a flat bottom, were filled with a yellowish brown redeposited subsoil, and intruded into the subsoil 8 to 16 inches. This 18 by 20 foot structure was built after 1675 and torn down sometime before several fences were installed in this area. The building lacked glass windows or a hearth and appears to have housed slaves. The presence of metal cooking pots suggests that at least some food was cooked in this structure.

The stratigraphic relationships of the features in this area indicate that the site's Kemp/Lunsford period layout saw a fence line running through westward to an undetermined point. This fence was moved to the south when the time the four-post structure went up. Similarly, the six post structure replaced the four-poster and occupied the same space. Both structures are in line with the remains of Structures C and D, suggesting they coexisted for at least a portion of time. Eventually, Rich Neck's occupants tore down Structures E and F and the space they occupied was redefined by the three different fences which cut the remains of Structure E's southeastern posthole. The presence of a curved portion of one slot trench—68AT-366—suggests that the area the post buildings once covered was outside of the area the latest fences intended to enclose.

Structure H

Another post structure was uncovered north of the dwelling, partially on top of where the bounding ditch had previously been located (Figure 79). This structure differed from the site's other wooden buildings in several ways. Its location was unusual in that it was built in a filled ravine and was the only post structure on the eastern half of the site. It's dimensions were odd, measuring 10 by 20 feet. Its post placements were also atypical, with posts located every 5 feet, instead of the more traditional 8 or 10 foot spacing (Figure 80). Finally, its corner posts were replaced not once, but twice, before the structure was torn down. The surviving interior posts (the line of eastern interior posts were completely plowed away) never underwent replacement. Its location in a filled ravine caused the structure to experience water and post-rot problems. Surface runoff and excess water in oversaturated soils would have drained directly into this structure. An excavated trench that was filled with heavy clay likely represents one attempt to keep water out of the building's interior. This trench extended from the southwest corner post to an interior post to the north. This waterproofing may have prevented the interior posts from needing replacement. It also suggests that this structure had a dirt floor. A raised wooden floor would have eliminated the necessity of such a barrier to keep water out.

The original corner posts were roughly square measured about 34 inches across. The holes ranged in depth from 20 to 28 inches. Subsequent repairs completely destroyed the molds for these holes. Workers replaced all four corners at the same time using large rectangular holes that were started on the exterior and worked inward to the failed post. These holes averaged 55 by 22 inches and were the same depth as the original corner postholes. The molds for these holes were circular, measuring 6-8 inches across. Workmen performed the last repairs with greater precision. Small 74 Figure 79. Plan view of Structure H. Figure 80. Overall of Structure H. 75 rounded-corner square holes were excavated just around the post needing replacement. These holes measured 10 to 15 inches across and contained large circular molds 8 to 10 inches across. These replacement holes also extended to the depth of the original hole.

The interior holes were smaller and shallower than the original corners, measuring 32 inches across and ranging from 16 to 20 inches in depth. Their circular molds measured 10 to 12 inches across. The irregular plan shape of some of these holes is excavation-related and not associated with their original appearance.

Watering Hole

The former clay quarry pit located east of the dwelling continued its role as watering hole throughout the Ludwell period (Figure 81), though in order to construct the additions to the dwelling the west end of this feature was purposely filled with a layer of brick rubble which shifted the entire feature to the east.

The Human Burial

Excavation revealed a burial (68AT-453) between Structure C and Structures E and F (Figure 82). The grave shaft first appeared at the interface of the plowzone and subsoil. The department's best excavator, Lucie Vinciguerra, drew, photographed, and carefully excavated the burial. Grave fill was screened through 1 8-inch wire mesh and soil chemistry samples and pH readings (6.6) were taken from the upper fill. She made several additional drawings documenting organic stains that were almost all that remained of the human remains. Conservator Emily Williams consolidated all fragments of bones in situ with 10% solution of paraloid B72 in 1 to 1 acetone to ethanol. She pedestaled the long bones and removed them in plaster jackets. She removed the grave fill around the head, for later excavation in the conservation lab. This excavation revealed several deteriorated sections of skull and fourteen whole or partial teeth. Dr. Douglas Owsley and D. Hunt of the Smithsonian Institution examined the remains in situ and later again in the laboratory.

Oriented roughly east-west, the individual's head was at the west end (25° south of west). The grave shaft was rectangular in shape and measured 65 by 28 inches. The shaft had vertical sides and a flat bottom. A gray body stain appeared after excavating 10 inches of fill. Overall depth measured approximately 14 inches below plowzone.

Vinciguerra divided the grave fill into two layers. The upper layer was a mixture of yellowish brown clay loam with a light yellow brown sandy clay loam mottling, measured 10 inches deep, and completely sealed the lower fill. The lower fill was similar to the upper fill except for an increase in mottling and the presence of a gray body stain.

Artifacts found in the grave fill included a single nail located at the interface of the grave and subsoil. Excavation revealed no grave goods.

The bones were oriented roughly east-west with the head at the west end. Within the gray body stain some small fragments of spongy bone were found. The body appeared supine, extended, with its feet together, elbows at its sides, and with its hands on its lower abdomen. No evidence of a coffin or a shroud was present. The remains were of an individual with a small frame, approximately 56 inches tall and 18 inches wide from elbow to elbow.

Figure 81. Plan view of watering hole.

Figure 82. Human burial.

Dr. Owsley argued that this individual was approximately 10-12 years old, and possibly female. Several characteristics from the recovered teeth suggest that this individual had a probable African ancestry. The location of the grave and the lack of a coffin or shroud support this interpretation. The positioning of the grave suggests it was dug while the surrounding structures (Structures C, E, and F) were occupied, sometime between 1665 and ca. 1690. Documents show that during this time the plantation was home to a number of slaves.

Enclosures

Thomas Ludwell not only made changes to the brick structures, he transformed the landscape around them as well. Workers filled in the northern half of the bounding ditch and tore down the two fences that tied into it. The northernmost fence gave way to a new fence that tied the northeast corner of the expanded dwelling to the main east-west fence located just north of the brick structures.

Workers tore down the western half of the main east-west fence in order to make way for the new post buildings. They replace this portion of fence with a new fence located just to the south, which connected the northwest corner of the expanded kitchen structure with the southern portion of the bounding ditch. They also installed two new fences that subdivided the southern portion of the property for the first time. The easternmost of these connected the southwest corner of the dwelling to the southern portion of the ditch. Parallel to it was a fence that connected the new east-west fence to the southern portion of the ditch. This fence contained a gate at its northern end, allowing access from the kitchen into the westernmost part of the site.

The site's only post and rail fence ran northward from the northeast corner of Structure C. The northern end of this fence was not identified and its function remains unclear.

Trash Disposal

The Thomas Ludwell period also witnessed changes in the trash disposal patterns. Waste from the dwelling ended up in three distinct places. Ludwell's workers who exited the rear door used both the barrow pit directly east of the structure. Those who exited from the front door carried trash to the south side of the house or farther south to the bounding ditch. Trash produced in the kitchen exited the building through the door just west of the hearth and was distributed throughout this yard from the small enclosed area just west of the building all the way to the bounding ditch.

Grazing Area

Ludwell created a large L-shaped enclosure in the southern half of the site using two fences and the bounding ditch. The north-south fence that connected the dwelling to the southern boundary ditch made up the eastern boundary of this delineated space. The bounding ditch made up the southern boundary, while the north-south fence located just west of the kitchen made up the western limit, and ran from the ditch to the main east-west fence. Phytoliths present in this area were mostly panicoid/chloridoid, with some chloridoid/pooid and pooid (Figures 83 and 84). This suggests the area was made up of a mixture of wet and dry areas. Chloridiods are indicative of a hot, open, arid shortgrass pasture. This enclosed space may have served as a temporary animal penning area. Documentary evidence occasionally describes planters penning cows with calves close to the house for milking (Sullivan 1999).

Structure H

The dating of Structure H hinges on pipestems and artifacts associated with the renovation of the dwelling house. Roofing tile fragments were found in the earliest postholes of this structure, suggesting a post-1665 construction date. Pipestem dating confirms that this structure went up shortly after Ludwell arrived at Rich Neck, and indicates that the building went down sometime around 1681, or shortly after Ludwell's death.

Understanding Structure H's role in the new socially divided world created by Thomas Ludwell is difficult. It shared attributes with structures located inside the enclosure as well as those located on the outside. Complicating the task of determining the status of the occupants who lived in this structure is the presence of artifacts that predate its construction. Pipestem analysis shows that while some pipestems with 8 64th-inch bores clustered around the structure, the vast majority of pipestems found have 6 64th-inch and 7 64th-inch bores, suggesting they were thrown away while Structure H was standing (Figure 85). This data indicates that most of the artifacts found around the structure date to the period it was actively occupied.

Another indication that most of the finds unearthed in this area are not related to the brick dwelling is that artifacts found in and around the main house are missing from the area surrounding Structure H. Included in this group of missing artifacts are plaster, aiglets, curtain rings, locks, keys, and spurs (Figures 86 and 87). Clearly, if the artifacts found around Structure H originated from the main house, these categories of artifacts would have been present.

Structure H resembles the post structures located to the west in several respects. It is, for instance, made of the same material and in the same manner as Structures C, D, E and, F, including dirt floors and no sign of fireplaces. Four of these structures appear to have been built around the same time. Although shaped differently, Structure H's square footage is very similar to Structures D and E, and like the others, it was located just outside the enclosure.

However, Structure H also differs from its wooden contemporaries. Architectural artifacts found around it include window leads and flat glass, suggesting it had glass windows, a first for Rich Neck's wooden structures. It was also repaired twice instead of being replaced, suggesting that it continued to have value even though its 80 Figure 83. Paniciod distribution. Figure 84. Chloridoid distribution. 81 Figure 85. Distribution of 7/64-inch diameter pipestems. Figure 86. Distribution of plaster around the dwelling. 82 Figure 87a. Distribution of aiglets around the dwelling. Figure 87b. Distribution of curtain rings around the dwelling. Figure 87c. Distribution of locks around the dwelling. Figure 87d. Distribution of keys around the dwelling. 83 Figure 87e. Distribution of spurs around the dwelling. placement in a filled ravine contributed to its need for additional repairs (Figure 88). Lastly, the other wooden structures cluster around the back of the kitchen, while Structure H stood alone, near the dwelling.

An examination of the artifacts found around Structure H points to another difference between it and the other wooden structures. Not only are there more artifacts situated around Structure H, but artifacts not found in association with Structures C, D, E, and F are present, including some status-related items such as cutlery, porcelain, silver jewelry, and horse furniture. However, Structure H was lacking in artifacts usually associated exclusively with elite living such as aiglets, curtain rings, candlesticks, book clasps, and spurs.

Structure H's occupants seemed to have lived in something of a liminal space, removed from the slave quarter's physical community, yet not fully in the masters' domestic enclosure. The structure's post-in-ground architecture suggest that it was a slave dwelling, but its markedly larger and more valuable artifact assemblage stands in direct contrast with the sparseness of the other dwellings' artifacts. Whoever lived in Structure H—be they a group or an individual—appear to have been favored materially during Ludwell's tenure. While the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries' documentary and archaeological records abound with evidence of specially-favored slaves and close personal master-slave relationships, the evidence for the late seventeenth century (a time when Virginia slavery was both new and rare) is less telling. The Ludwell records contain no slave manumissions—a good indicator of a special master-slave relationship—and indeed say little of Ludwell and his slaves. Nevertheless, Structure H's plowzone evidence and its site placement do suggest that its 1670s residents enjoyed a more comfortable material life than did residents of the site's other contemporaries post-in-ground buildings.

Figure 88. Closeup of repairs to Structure H.

Courtyard Plan

During the Lunsford period, Rich Neck's homelot was organized in an I-shaped plan with all three buildings aligned in a single line (Figure 89). Almost all English and Middle Plantation sites from this period employing the linear I-plan placed the outbuildings lined up behind the dwelling. Rich Neck was different in that employed this design with the dwelling and kitchen facing each other and the smaller outbuilding located behind the kitchen.

Ludwell transformed Rich Neck into a true courtyard plan with parallel ranges of outbuildings extending off a shortened I-shaped plan made up of the dwelling and the kitchen. The southern extension included Structures E, F, C and D. Structure H made up the incomplete northern line of structures.

Figure 89. Overview of Ludwell's courtyard plan.

Dwelling House

The final addition to the dwelling was a room off the northeast corner (Figure 91). This 1½ course wide foundation measured 10 feet by 12 feet. Beneath the new room was a full cellar, featuring a brick floor and plastered walls (Figure 92). Stratigraphically this room postdates both the additions and the end chimneys, with its builder's trench having a TPQ of 1670. The only heat source for the room and its cellar was the chimney wall of the fireplace attached to the north end of the dwelling's front room. 88 Figure 90. Philip/Philip II's Rich Neck. Figure 91. Brick by brick of dwelling house. 89 Figure 92. Cellar of the last room added to the dwelling. The destruction fill in the cellar contained watertable bricks, indicating that it was executed entirely in brick.

The foundation walls and floor were both heavily robbed, leaving little evidence about how the cellar was accessed. The floor of the first story would have been raised at least two feet above current ground level, so that adults would have been able to walk upright in the cellar. The first floor was accessible only from the exterior and the room located just to the south, with entry from the main portion of the house being blocked by the chimney. The elevated floor would have made access from the neighboring room to the south difficult, suggesting that that access to the newest addition was limited to an exterior entryway.

The Rest of the Site

Two structures and several features came to an end during this period. Some were simply abandoned, while others were replaced. The last surviving portions of the bounding ditch were filled in. The Ludwells allowed the bottom of the ditch to silt in naturally, before being filled all at one time. They replaced the southern end of the ditch with a fence that connected the fence running south from the dwelling house to a new complex of north-south fences just east of the kitchen midden.

Philip I and II also witnessed the filling of the watering hole. Several layers were identified in the pit, including a brown sandy loam layer that contained large amounts of trash generated from the dwelling. The TPQ for this layer is 1675 and the Binford pipestem date is 1673 (Figure 93). Under the brown loam was a yellow clay fill, possibly originating from the construction of the cellar addition to the dwelling. Under the clay were several ash lenses, a layer containing large amounts of brick, and silt 90 Figure 93. Pipe tamp found in filled-in watering hole. layers that predate the Philip I/II years. The long-standing east-west fence was extended into the area once the watering hole was filled.

Structures F and H were abandoned and torn down during this period. The area around Structure H saw little activity after it was demolished. The area west of the kitchen, however, was completely reorganized. The area formerly occupied by Structure F became the site of the new main east-west fence (Figure 94). The old main east-west fence had connected the kitchen to the bounding ditch. The filling of this ditch required that a new east-west fence to take the place of the ditch. The destruction of Structure F allowed the fence which divided the slave quarter from the rest of Figure 94. Slot fences cutting Structure F posthole. 91 the site to shift northward. Connecting to this new fence were a series of north-south fences erected just east of the kitchen midden.