Speaking of archaeology in the news. There was an article in The Capital recently about an important discovery in Charles County. It seems that archaeologists from St. Mary's College of Maryland have discovered the original Charles County courthouse which dates to the 1620s.
The courthouse has taken almost 75 years to locate. The group of archaeologists led by St. Mary's professor Julia King were able to identify the courthouse due to an unusually large amount of artifacts found while digging test pits. Shovel test pits commonly known as STPs are a standard in the early stages of excavation and are a common way for archaeologists to assess where cultural remains may or may not be located on a given site. STPs are usually laid out in a grid over the project area. Archaeologists then dig small test holes typically only a foot to a foot and a half in diameter in order to determine artifact densities. Based on the results from the STPS, archaeologists determine if further excavation is necessary. STPs are most commonly used for Cultural Resourse Management(CRM) work.
Among the artifacts found at the courthouse were a large number of glass and ceramic shards from wine bottles, beer tankards and drinking vessels. Professor King explained that it was common practice for judges and councilmen to drink while at the courthouse. According to King there are no 17th century buildings which still exist in Maryland or Virginia so to find the foundation of an early government building like this is very significant.
For more information on the Courthouse find see the following Capital and Washington Post articles:
http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2008/09_16-11/REG
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/08/AR2008060802057.html
29 September 2008
26 September 2008
London Uncovered
Archaeology has been in the news quite a bit lately with many digs and their findings being presented to the public. The finds have been all over the map both literally and figuratively. 
From the discovery of a 1,900 year old Thracian chariot in Bulgaria to the uncovering of a 3,000 year old head of Ramses II from a large statue in Egypt to the uncovering of Shakespeare's first theater in London. The stories have been really interesting to watch. I never realized how frequently archaeology came up in the media until this exhibit opened and now I can't stop seeing archaeology articles. I suppose it goes to show how aware I have been.
The article on the London findings particularly caught my eye as the images from the digs on the Museum of London Archaeology Service website somewhat resemble the digs that took place this summer in downtown Annapolis. The picture on the left really reminded me of some of the backyards along Fleet and Cornhill Streets. The two digs also have similarities in that they were conducted metropolitain areas in preparation of construction projects. Annapolis was preparing for utility undergrounding while London was studying the site as the home of a new theater.
Annapolis
From the discovery of a 1,900 year old Thracian chariot in Bulgaria to the uncovering of a 3,000 year old head of Ramses II from a large statue in Egypt to the uncovering of Shakespeare's first theater in London. The stories have been really interesting to watch. I never realized how frequently archaeology came up in the media until this exhibit opened and now I can't stop seeing archaeology articles. I suppose it goes to show how aware I have been.The article on the London findings particularly caught my eye as the images from the digs on the Museum of London Archaeology Service website somewhat resemble the digs that took place this summer in downtown Annapolis. The picture on the left really reminded me of some of the backyards along Fleet and Cornhill Streets. The two digs also have similarities in that they were conducted metropolitain areas in preparation of construction projects. Annapolis was preparing for utility undergrounding while London was studying the site as the home of a new theater.
Annapolis
18 September 2008
Tree dedication
Yesterday was the dedication ceremony of the Honey Locust Memorial tree in the backyard of the Maynard-Burgess House. Everyone gathered around 2pm to hear opening remarks by the Mayor of Annapolis, Ellen Moyer. Janice Hayes Williams, a prominent African American Historian for the City of Annapolis also talked to the audience about the Maynard and Burgess families and generally what life was like for free African Americans in Annapolis. Dr. Mark Leone spoke on the archaeological finds that were recovered at the site during excavations in the 1990s. Lastly, Mamie Williams of Fowler's Methodist Church gave a blessing of the tree which included a prayer and song. Two decedents of Willis Burgess attended and officially uncovered the dedication plaque for all to see. Archaeology in Annapolis displayed artifacts from the excavations and the Mayor's Office produced signs interpreting the archaeology from the site.
As Mayor Moyer explained this dedication was the first step in transforming the backyard of the Maynard-Burgess House into a representation of a 19th century working yard. While performing archaeology at the house in the early 1990s archaeologists found the remains of a privy which was full of household refuse including bottles and ceramics. From census records we know that members of the Maynard and Burgess families worked as laundresses. Archaeologists found an unusually large amount of buttons in the yard to support this information. A privy and a clothes line will be included in the representation of the 19th century yard as well as a small garden. It was typical for middle class families in the 19th century to maintain small gardens as a means of supplementing their groceries. While Annapolis has many house museums this will be an especially important site because it will be the only representation of a free African-American household.
Work on the backyard will take place over the coming year with the site opening to the public sometime in 2009.
As Mayor Moyer explained this dedication was the first step in transforming the backyard of the Maynard-Burgess House into a representation of a 19th century working yard. While performing archaeology at the house in the early 1990s archaeologists found the remains of a privy which was full of household refuse including bottles and ceramics. From census records we know that members of the Maynard and Burgess families worked as laundresses. Archaeologists found an unusually large amount of buttons in the yard to support this information. A privy and a clothes line will be included in the representation of the 19th century yard as well as a small garden. It was typical for middle class families in the 19th century to maintain small gardens as a means of supplementing their groceries. While Annapolis has many house museums this will be an especially important site because it will be the only representation of a free African-American household.
Work on the backyard will take place over the coming year with the site opening to the public sometime in 2009.
12 September 2008
Charles Carroll House Cache
One of the most popular and intriguing portions of the Seeking Liberty exhibit is the Brice House material which includes a model of the East wing of the house that was excavated by Archaeology in Annapolis in 1998. In the basement of the east wing archaeologists discovered a series of caches or distinct, intentional deposits of material placed there by African Americans in order to control spirits which is a common practice in West African cultures. What many may not know is that Archaeology in Annapolis discovered a similar cache at the Charles Carroll House in 1991.
Dr. Robert Worden was a volunteer excavator at the site when he discovered a white ceramic bowl with a blue asterisk placed upside down approximately 18 inches beneath the modern dirt floor of the East wing of the Carroll House. When he removed the broken ceramic bowl he found that it had been placed over a whole array of other artifacts including 14 rock crystals, a half-dozen white bone discs, a smooth black pebble, two coins (one dated 1790 and the other 1810) and a number of straight pins.
The finds were published in an article in the Sunday Times on September 15, 1991. That Monday Dr. Frederick Lamp, Curator of African Art at the Baltimore Museum of Art telephoned to suggest that the materials were a spirit bundle associated with West African culture. Lamp further explained that within this tradition crystals were used to contain spirits and that the four holes on the buttons most likely represented a cosmogram. A cosmogram is a symbol of the vertical world axis and the horizon showing a divide between the worlds of the living and the dead. These items were most likely placed in the ground by spiritual practitioners to control spirits for various purposes, especially to protect inhabitants. No one in Annapolis had ever found anything tied so clearly to African culture.
Before these discoveries many thought that African cultural traditions did not survive the Middle Passage. The cache at the Carroll House provided compelling evidence that Africans did retain religious practices in the New World well into the 19th century. Thus, the history of Annapolis was no longer strictly European it also contains clear African influence as well.
The cache of materials from the Carroll House are currently on display at the History Quest Welcome Center in Annapolis located at 99 Main Street right near the city dock. For details see their website: http://www.annapolis.org/index.asp?pageid=44
For more on the Carroll House finds see Dr. Mark Leone's book "The Archaeology of Liberty in An American Capital: Excavations in Annapolis" (2005).
The finds were published in an article in the Sunday Times on September 15, 1991. That Monday Dr. Frederick Lamp, Curator of African Art at the Baltimore Museum of Art telephoned to suggest that the materials were a spirit bundle associated with West African culture. Lamp further explained that within this tradition crystals were used to contain spirits and that the four holes on the buttons most likely represented a cosmogram. A cosmogram is a symbol of the vertical world axis and the horizon showing a divide between the worlds of the living and the dead. These items were most likely placed in the ground by spiritual practitioners to control spirits for various purposes, especially to protect inhabitants. No one in Annapolis had ever found anything tied so clearly to African culture.
Before these discoveries many thought that African cultural traditions did not survive the Middle Passage. The cache at the Carroll House provided compelling evidence that Africans did retain religious practices in the New World well into the 19th century. Thus, the history of Annapolis was no longer strictly European it also contains clear African influence as well.
The cache of materials from the Carroll House are currently on display at the History Quest Welcome Center in Annapolis located at 99 Main Street right near the city dock. For details see their website: http://www.annapolis.org/index.asp?pageid=44
For more on the Carroll House finds see Dr. Mark Leone's book "The Archaeology of Liberty in An American Capital: Excavations in Annapolis" (2005).
09 September 2008
If a tree falls in the forest...
I was recently in a meeting discussing the use of technology by historic sites in Anne Arundel County when we began talking about the use of blogs as a very user-friendly means of talking about what historic sites are up to. One of the meeting attendees commented on the blog at Port Tobacco here in Maryland as one of the better examples. This blog provides information as to the status or projects, new ideas, and what staff members are up to in bite-sized amounts which gave you quite a bit of detail without being overwhelming and conveying the excitement and energy the writer is feeling towards a particular project. As I was reading the blog, I found myself thinking about how information is provided to visitors by museums and vice versa and how it it changing.
Using Seeking Liberty as an example, we have tried to provide information in four different ways, each one with differing approaches and results. The first method is through the exhibition itself. The exhibit has physical objects, labels, and text panels - all things expected in a museum exhibition. The exhibition has been extremely popular with visitors near and far, with many people coming specifically to see this exhibit. Within the exhibition is a survey asking visitors to take a few minutes to provide us their feedback. I am very interested in the fact that few visitors fill out the forms and when they do, they do not leave us much feedback. However, in our permanent exhibition on the second floor, we have a nearly identical survey which is filled out quite frequently. On this form we ask visitors to rate different experiences they had in the exhibit as well as tell us how they connected with the exhibition. On the permanent gallery forms, we receive quite a bit of feedback - sometimes quite extensive feedback. In Seeking Liberty, that is not the case. The forms, when they are filled out, generally only have numeric answers without any comments.
At first I found this to be rather disheartening. I found myself asking whether or not the visitors were truly engaging in the exhibit or were they simply walking into the exhibit and walking out, following the directions of the security guard to go into the first room they saw. I saw some truth to that when I worked the front desk and would provide a different overview of the museum and would not direct the visitors to immediately enter the exhibit they were standing next to. After doing so, I found that visitors would often actually choose to go to the permanent exhibition first. What did that mean for the attracting power of Seeking Liberty? Is this exhibit not as engaging as we once thought? Are people simply not engaging with the subject matter beyond what they read within the exhibit? Do they not take anything out of the museum from the exhibit?
I ended up getting my answer in a very unexpected place - this blog. One of the major concerns many museum folks have it that if you put exhibitions and exhibition content online, people will not want to actually come and see the physical exhibit. My argument has always been that putting information online is a way of attracting visitors to the exhibition and to allow people who will never be able to see the physical exhibit a means of accessing it. To put in another way, if someone does not have the means to go to Paris themselves, does that mean that looking at images, reading about the city, and owning Paris-themed objects will deter them from ever wanting to actually go?
When reviewing the statistics for this blog and the exhibition website I was very surprised to learn that while people are not necessarily filling out the evaluation forms, they are giving us feedback through their visitation to the blog. We are seeing that many visitors have come to the museum and then gone home to view the website and blog. This showed me that perhaps I was a bit hasty in my thinking that people are not getting anything out of the exhibit because they were not filling out paper forms. The return visits, to me, are far more gratfying because they show me that people are enjoying the exhibition so much that they are willing to give the museum a second visit - this time virtually.
If you visited the exhibit at the museum and this blog, which did you visit first? What made you come back for a second look at Seeking Liberty? If you have only seen this blog, or the exhibit's website for that matter, has it stopped you from wanting to come to the museum to see the physical exhibit?
Using Seeking Liberty as an example, we have tried to provide information in four different ways, each one with differing approaches and results. The first method is through the exhibition itself. The exhibit has physical objects, labels, and text panels - all things expected in a museum exhibition. The exhibition has been extremely popular with visitors near and far, with many people coming specifically to see this exhibit. Within the exhibition is a survey asking visitors to take a few minutes to provide us their feedback. I am very interested in the fact that few visitors fill out the forms and when they do, they do not leave us much feedback. However, in our permanent exhibition on the second floor, we have a nearly identical survey which is filled out quite frequently. On this form we ask visitors to rate different experiences they had in the exhibit as well as tell us how they connected with the exhibition. On the permanent gallery forms, we receive quite a bit of feedback - sometimes quite extensive feedback. In Seeking Liberty, that is not the case. The forms, when they are filled out, generally only have numeric answers without any comments.
At first I found this to be rather disheartening. I found myself asking whether or not the visitors were truly engaging in the exhibit or were they simply walking into the exhibit and walking out, following the directions of the security guard to go into the first room they saw. I saw some truth to that when I worked the front desk and would provide a different overview of the museum and would not direct the visitors to immediately enter the exhibit they were standing next to. After doing so, I found that visitors would often actually choose to go to the permanent exhibition first. What did that mean for the attracting power of Seeking Liberty? Is this exhibit not as engaging as we once thought? Are people simply not engaging with the subject matter beyond what they read within the exhibit? Do they not take anything out of the museum from the exhibit?
I ended up getting my answer in a very unexpected place - this blog. One of the major concerns many museum folks have it that if you put exhibitions and exhibition content online, people will not want to actually come and see the physical exhibit. My argument has always been that putting information online is a way of attracting visitors to the exhibition and to allow people who will never be able to see the physical exhibit a means of accessing it. To put in another way, if someone does not have the means to go to Paris themselves, does that mean that looking at images, reading about the city, and owning Paris-themed objects will deter them from ever wanting to actually go?
When reviewing the statistics for this blog and the exhibition website I was very surprised to learn that while people are not necessarily filling out the evaluation forms, they are giving us feedback through their visitation to the blog. We are seeing that many visitors have come to the museum and then gone home to view the website and blog. This showed me that perhaps I was a bit hasty in my thinking that people are not getting anything out of the exhibit because they were not filling out paper forms. The return visits, to me, are far more gratfying because they show me that people are enjoying the exhibition so much that they are willing to give the museum a second visit - this time virtually.
If you visited the exhibit at the museum and this blog, which did you visit first? What made you come back for a second look at Seeking Liberty? If you have only seen this blog, or the exhibit's website for that matter, has it stopped you from wanting to come to the museum to see the physical exhibit?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)