
|
At first, it
might seem surprising that the sites on Front Street would be of
interest to archaeologists. Both dated mainly to the first half
of the twentieth century. If we think about their information potential,
though, we can recognize their appeal. Both sites contained archaeological
features (manmade disturbances in the soil) such as
trash-filled privies, slop holes for human waste, and
structural trenches. Household trash and other artifacts within
these time capsules of soil can answer questions about
which written records are silent or confusing. Fragments of a fruit
juice bottle from West Virginia or the depth and placement of privies,
for example, reveal some of the countless details of daily living.
In turn, these details help us answer more general questions about
the lives of millworkers in Danville and other Southern textile
towns.
Even
though the sites held a treasure of information, our dig could not
attempt to answer every conceivable question about the people who
lived there. Instead, we carefully prepared a research
design long before digging began. A research design narrows
the goals to a list of managable topics best suited to the particular
site. It also outlines the best ways to organize the work in the
field (and later the laboratory) to answer those questions.
The excavations
focused on archaeological deposits from the turn of the twentieth
century through the Depressionthe period of most intensive
activity on the sites and a time of immense change in goods and
services and health reform in America. Our research would try to
find out how these transformations played out in the lives of millworkers
at the Danville sites and more generally in other Southern textile
towns. To address this general research goal, we would focus on
two aspects of the site: yard layout and material culture.
Yard
Layout. The presence and position of outhouses and trash
disposal areas, for example, could reveal much about the transition
to modern conveniences. In other mill towns of this period, scholars
also had noted the existence of urban farmsteads. Only
recently removed from their rural background, millworkers yards
often included gardens, animal pens, or work sheds to help supplement
their lifestyle. Archaeology not only reveals quite specific information
about individual features (often only vaguely discussed in documents
or oral accounts). Through dating the features, archaeology also
shows how the yards, and by extension the lifestyles of the millworker
tenants, evolved through time.
Material
Culture.
By this term, we mean the objects used by the people who occupied
the site. Besides the bits and pieces from archaeological sites
most commonly defined as artifactssuch as broken
tableware, bottles, or buttonswe also can include animal bone
and seeds that tell us about diet, or parasites indicative of disease.
Through careful
analysis of this collected material, we can begin to answer a host
of specific questions about the lives of millworkers. Does
the material culture at these sites reflect the mass production
and marketing that surged at the beginning of the twentieth century?
What was the state of health as reflected in foodways and sanitation
practices? Perhaps most intriguing, questions about material culture
could focus on the degree of independence millworkers exercised
at homeoff the clock but still in the shadow of
the mill. According to one scholar, mill owners tried to shape their
workers behavior, requiring them to avoid alcohol, attend
church, complete their basic schooling, and learn responsibility
from intelligent men. At the same time consumerism was encouraged
to increase workers dependence on their wages and loyalty
to the company (Zingraff 1991:202).
Archaeology can add substance to these sweeping notions (or challenge
them) by looking at material evidence of millworkers
lives. Even though these sites in Danville are not from a distant
past like the Egypt of the pharaohs, they hold answers to questions
that are still elusive without archaeology. (back
to top)
|