Citation
Independence and identity on the Victorian-era American frontier

Material Information

Title:
Independence and identity on the Victorian-era American frontier
Creator:
Parrish, Allison P. ( author )
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronid resource (411 pages). : ;

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Frontier and pioneer life -- Colorado -- Teller County ( lcsh )
Froniter and pioneer life -- Colorado -- Arapahoe County ( lcsh )
Women pioneers -- Colorado ( lcsh )
Women pioneers -- West (U.S.) ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
This project investigates how personal and domestic artifacts recovered from two rural Colorado homestead sites of single, middle class women reflect gender identity, and how these reflections subsequently relate to conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood in the context of the Victorian-era American West. This undertaking is accomplished through an analysis of artifact collections from the 1890-1906 Arapahoe County, Colorado homestead (5AH916) of Adelia Wells, and the 1878-1905 Teller County, Colorado homestead (5TL4) of Adeline Hornbek, as well as spatial analyses addressing gendered uses of space at each respective homestead, and an analysis of historical records associated with the life of Adeline Hornbek. Ultimately, this thesis incorporates the results of these analyses to serve as a comparative and interpretive examination of reflections of gender identity and associated conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood in the context of the Victorian-era American West, and Colorado in particular. It is acknowledged that the analyses of artifact assemblages, uses of space, and available historical records from two homesteads comprises a relatively limited sample size with regard to the number of single females who took advantage of homesteading opportunities in the American West. However, based on the general dearth of known and/or studied collections from homesteads of single, middle class women in the American West, this analysis contributes valuable information to a historically-marginalized and archaeologically-neglected demographic, and provides a basis for future research and analyses of the archaeology of single, economically independent women on the American Frontier.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of Colorado Denver. Anthropology
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographic references.
System Details:
System requirements: Adobe Reader.
General Note:
Department of Anthropology
Statement of Responsibility:
by Allison M. Parrish.

Record Information

Source Institution:
|University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
|Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
912923203 ( OCLC )
ocn912923203

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

INDEPENDENCE AND IDENTITY ON THE VICTORIAN ERA AMERICAN FRONTIER by ALLISON M. PARRISH B.A., University of Denver, 2007 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of Anthropology 2015

PAGE 2

2015 ALLISON M. PARRISH ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

ii This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Allison M. Parrish has been approved for the Department of Anthropology by Tammy Stone, Chair Julien Riel-Salvatore John Brett April 23, 2015

PAGE 4

iii Parrish, Allison M. (M.A., Anthropology) Independence and Identity on the Victorian-Era American Frontier Thesis directed by Professor Tammy Stone ABSTRACT This project investigates how personal and domestic artifacts recovered from two rural Colorado homestead sites of single, middle class women reflect gender identity, and how these reflections subsequently relate to conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood in the context of the Victorian-era American West. This undertaking is accomplished through an analysis of artifact collections from the 1890-1906 Arapahoe County, Colorado homestead (5AH916) of Adelia Wells, and the 1878-1905 Teller County, Colorado homestead (5TL4) of Adeline Hornbek, as well as spatial analyses addressing gendered uses of space at each respective homestead, and an analysis of historical records associated with the life of Adeline Hornbek. Ultimately, this thesis incorporates the results of these analyses to serve as a comparative and interpretive examination of reflections of gender identity and associated conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood in the context of the Victorian-era American West, and Colorado in particular. It is acknowledged that the analyses of artifact assemblages, uses of space, and available historical records from two homesteads comprises a relatively limited sample size with regard to the number of single females who took advantage of homesteading opportunities in the American West. However, based on the general dearth of known

PAGE 5

iv and/or studied collections from homesteads of single, middle class women in the American West, this analysis contributes valuable information to a historicallymarginalized and archaeologically-neglected demographic, and provides a basis for future research and analyses of the archaeology of single, economically independent women on the American Frontier. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Tammy Stone

PAGE 6

v For my mother, Josephine Anne Lundstrom, the strongest, bravest, and most inspiring lady I will ever have the great honor to know.

PAGE 7

vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to my advisor and thesis chair, Dr. Tammy Stone, as well as committee members Dr. Julien Riel-Salvatore and Dr. John Brett, for their guidance not only on my thesis, but on countless other projects and papers over the past three years which have contributed to and culminated in my thesis. I am also grateful to Dr. Stone for providing me with the inspiration and direction to study the archaeological record of unmarried female homesteaders in Colorado. Others to whom I am grateful for their aid and professional support in my thesis efforts since 2012 include Susan Smith, Director of Education at the Plains Conservation Center, and Conni OConnor, Museum Technician at Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, for providing me with access to the respective Wells and Hornbek sites, associated archaeological assemblages, and historical records and information. I would also like to thank the staff of Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, including Rick Wilson, Chief Ranger, and Laine Weber, Interpretive Ranger, for providing me with an impressive tour of the Hornbek homestead site, and for allowing me to take a look at the artifact collection originating from the property, including both curated and un-curated objects. To Kristy Griffin-Smith and her research assistants Jessica Ericson and Kat Shrawder of Colorado State University, with whom I spent one very long day at the Plains Conservation Center West Bijou Site analyzing hundreds of artifacts from the Wells homestead site, thank you for your help with the analysis, for sharing your professional knowledge, and for being willing to share photographs and basic paperwork to avoid process duplication I could not have made it through the Wells assemblage without this combined effort!

PAGE 8

vii To my colleagues at the Golden Office of Cardno (formerly TEC Inc.) and at the Region 6 Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, I am indebted to you all for your flexibility, patience, and unwavering support of my professional dreams. To my wonderful family, including my father Rick, my brother Collin, my in-laws Jan and Greg, and all of the Schultes, Lundstroms, Parrishs, Hasselblads, and Cobbs, thank you for your constant emotional support and for listening with interest to my grand academic exploits. To my dear friends, and especially Jennifer Bryant and Abigail Sanocki-Duran, thank you for pushing me through this degree and providing me with chocolate, beer, brunch, and, most of all, friendship. To my cohorts, for whom I have nothing but the utmost respect, thank you for your support and inspiration I feel honored to work alongside you in this field. Most of all, to my husband Tim, who has put up with three years of constant hard work, chaos, and extremely limited time on my part, I cannot give you enough credit your unwavering patience and encouragement I am eternally grateful for your sacrifice in support of my dreams. I truly could not have done this without you, and I am the luckiest girl on the planet to be able to call you my husband. Finally, I am indebted to the great state of Colorado, which provided the childhood foundations for my archaeological dreams. Without the motivation driven by the incredible history of the Centennial State, I cannot imagine how I would have found my path to archaeology. This breathtaking place has provided me for thirty years with endless beauty, adventure, and inspiration, and no matter where I end up in life, Colorado will always remain my hearts home.

PAGE 9

viii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION AND BROADER IMPACTS ........................................................ 1 Research Question ............................................................................................. 1 Background ........................................................................................................ 1 Broader Impacts ................................................................................................. 3 II. THEORY .................................................................................................................... 7 Feminist Theory ................................................................................................. 9 Political Economy and Marxist Theory ........................................................... 12 Structure ........................................................................................................... 13 Agency ............................................................................................................. 15 Structuration .................................................................................................... 17 Habitus ............................................................................................................. 19 Capital .............................................................................................................. 21 Identity ............................................................................................................. 22 Analysis ........................................................................................................... 25 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 38 III. HISTORIC CONTEXT ........................................................................................... 40 National Context .............................................................................................. 41 Post-Contact History of the American West ....................................... 41 Homesteading in the American West .................................................. 45 Womens Issues in the Victorian-Era United States ........................... 48 The Rise of Materialism and Consumerism in the Industrial Victorian Era ........................................................................................................ 52

PAGE 10

ix National-Level Analysis ...................................................................... 58 State Context .................................................................................................... 62 Post-Contact History of Colorado ....................................................... 62 Homesteading in Colorado .................................................................. 66 Womens Issues in Victorian-Era Colorado ........................................ 72 State -Level Analysis ............................................................................ 75 Previous Research ............................................................................................ 77 Literature Review ................................................................................ 77 File Search ........................................................................................... 81 IV. METHODOLOGY AND ANTICIPATED RESULTS .......................................... 83 Methodology .................................................................................................... 83 File Search and Literature Review ...................................................... 83 Analyses of Archaeological Collections and Gendered Space ............ 86 Masters Thesis .................................................................................... 97 Anticipated Results .......................................................................................... 97 V. WELLS HOMESTEAD (5AH916) ........................................................................ 102 Historic Background ...................................................................................... 102 Artifact Analysis ............................................................................................ 106 Tableware .......................................................................................... 107 Household Decoration and Furnishing .............................................. 125 Victorian Vices .................................................................................. 138 Health and Hygiene ........................................................................... 145 Personal Items .................................................................................... 171

PAGE 11

x Childrens Toys ................................................................................. 197 Use of Space Analysis ................................................................................... 199 VI. HORNBEK HOMESTEAD (5TL4) ..................................................................... 205 Historic Background ...................................................................................... 205 Artifact Analysis ............................................................................................ 210 Tableware .......................................................................................... 212 Household Decoration and Furnishing .............................................. 214 Personal Items .................................................................................... 223 Archival Materials Analysis .......................................................................... 232 Use of Space Analysis ................................................................................... 244 VII. COMPARATIVE CRITICAL ANALYSIS ......................................................... 268 Wells Homestead ........................................................................................... 270 Tableware .......................................................................................... 271 Household Decoration and Furnishing .............................................. 272 Victorian Vices .................................................................................. 273 Health and Hygiene ........................................................................... 274 Personal Items .................................................................................... 274 Childrens Toys ................................................................................. 275 Total Assemblage .............................................................................. 276 Hornbek Homestead ...................................................................................... 279 Tableware .......................................................................................... 280 Household Decoration and Furnishing .............................................. 280 Personal Items .................................................................................... 280

PAGE 12

xi Total Assemblage .............................................................................. 281 Comparison of Site Frequencies of Gendered Artifacts ................................ 283 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 285 VIII. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 291 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 292 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 305 A. PROJECT BUDGET .............................................................................................. 306 Direct/Capital Expenses ................................................................................ 306 Indirect Expenses ........................................................................................... 306 B. PROJECT SCHEDULE .......................................................................................... 308 C. ORIGINAL ARTIFACT ROUGH SORT WELLS HOMESTEAD (5AH916) .. 309 D. TOTAL ARTIFACT ANALYSIS SORT WELLS HOMESTEAD (5AH916) .. 351 E. TOTAL ARTIFACT ANALYSIS SORT HORNBEK HOMESTEAD (5TL4) .. 380!

PAGE 13

xii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. Major Events of Colorados Historical Period (Ubbelohde et al. 2006) ............... 63! 2. Colorado Homestead Sites Associated with Female Claimant Names Only ........ 82! 3. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware ............................... 122! 4. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing ............................................................................................................ 135! 5. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Victorian Vices ....................... 144! 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene ................ 164! 7. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items ......................... 193! 8. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Childrens Toys ...................... 199! 9. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware ........................... 214! 10. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing ............................................................................................................ 221! 11. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items .................... 229! 12. Proposed Budget .................................................................................................. 307! 13. Proposed Timeline (Original) ............................................................................. 308! 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead ............................................... 314! 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) ............................... 351! 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) ............................... 380!

PAGE 14

xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. Total number of deeded homestead claims in Colorado and surrounding states/territories (adapted from NPS 2013a). ......................................................... 47 2. Total acres in deeded homestead claims in Colorado and surrounding states/territories (adapted from NPS 2013b). ........................................................ 47 3. 5TL4, Hornbek homestead, Teller County, Colorado. .......................................... 72 4. The main house (ca. 1878) at the Hornbek homestead. ......................................... 79 5. The reconstructed root cellar (ca. 1880) of the Hornbek homestead. .................... 80 6. Location of 5AH916, Wells homestead site, Arapahoe County, Colorado. ........ 103 7. Map of 5AH916, Wells homestead site, Arapahoe County, Colorado (adapted from Stone 2000). ................................................................................................ 105 8. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 394 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................... 112 9. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 394 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................... 113 10. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1908 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................. 113 11. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2002 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................. 114 12. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 375 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................... 117 13. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 681 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................... 118 14. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1839 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................. 118 15. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2102 (see Table 3 for additional details). ................................. 119

PAGE 15

xiv 16. 5AH916, fabric with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1855 (see Table 4 for additional details). ..................................................... 126 17. 5AH916, terra cotta pot with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1416 18. (see Table 4 for additional details). ....................... 128 18. 5AH916, serving tray with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2055 (see Table 4 for additional details). ................................. 129 19. 5AH916, oil lampshade fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 521 (see Table 4 for additional details). ......................... 131 20. 5AH916, oil lampshade fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 533 (see Table 4 for additional details). ......................... 131 21. 5AH916, oil lampshade fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1811 (see Table 4 for additional details). ....................... 132 22. 5AH916, pressed glass oil lamp base with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1815 (see Table 4 for additional details). ....................... 132 23. 5AH916, pressed glass oil lamp base with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1864 (see Table 4 for additional details). ....................... 133 24. 5AH916, doorknob with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2039 (see Table 4 for additional details). ................................. 134 25. 5AH916, glass bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 608 (see Table 5 for additional details). ................................... 139 26. 5AH916, liquor bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 676 (see Table 5 for additional details). ................................... 140 27. 5AH916, glass bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1903 (see Table 5 for additional details). ................................. 140 28. 5AH916, glass bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 5 for additional details). ................................. 141 29. 5AH916, liquor bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 5 for additional details). ................................. 141 30. 5AH916, ceramic and rubber bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1915 (see Table 5 for additional details). ........ 142

PAGE 16

xv 31. 5AH916, pipe stem fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 316 (see Table 5 for additional details). ................................... 143 32. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 608 (see Table 6 for additional details). ......................... 148 33. 5AH916, medicinal bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 625 (see Table 6 for additional details). ................................... 149 34. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 654 (see Table 6 for additional details). ......................... 149 35. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 676 (see Table 6 for additional details). ......................... 150 36. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 676 (see Table 6 for additional details). ......................... 150 37. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1002 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 151 38. 5AH916, medicinal bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1035 (see Table 6 for additional details). ................................. 151 39. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1035 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 152 40. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1822 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 152 41. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1822 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 153 42. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1822 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 153 43. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 154 44. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 154 45. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 155

PAGE 17

xvi 46. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 155 47. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1913 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 156 48. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2032 (see Table 6 for additional details). ....................... 156 49. 5AH916, medicinal bottles with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2045 (see Table 6 for additional details). ................................. 157 50. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details). ............... 157 51. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details). ............... 158 52. 5AH916, medicinal bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details). ......................... 158 53. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details). ............... 159 54. 5AH916, cologne/perfume/fragrance bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 608 (see Table 6 for additional details). .............................................................................................................. 161 55. 5AH916, cologne/perfume/fragrance bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1903 (see Table 6 for additional details). .............................................................................................................. 162 56. 5AH916, cologne/perfume/fragrance bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). 162 57. 5AH916, comb fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1011/1041 (see Table 6 for additional details). ........................ 163 58. 5AH916, comb fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1860 (see Table 6 for additional details). ................................. 164 59. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 411 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 173

PAGE 18

xvii 60. 5AH916, button (at left) with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 507 (see Table 7 for additional details). ................................... 174 61. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 514 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 175 62. 5AH916, snap with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 604 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 175 63. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 655 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 176 64. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 712 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 176 65. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 716 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 177 66. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1009 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 177 67. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1010 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 178 68. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1016 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 178 69. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1038 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 179 70. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1108 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 179 71. 5AH916, button (at right) with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1214 (see Table 7 for additional details). ................................. 180 72. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1518 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 180 73. 5AH916, snap with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1708 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 181 74. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1779 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 181

PAGE 19

xviii 75. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1843 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 182 76. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1851 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 182 77. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1920 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 183 78. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2101 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 183 79. 5AH916, eyelets with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 630 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 184 80. 5AH916, suspender clip with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 919 (see Table 7 for additional details). ................................... 186 81. 5AH916, garter fastener with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 411 (see Table 7 for additional details). ................................... 187 82. 5AH916, hairpin with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1034 (see Table 7 for additional details). ..................................................... 188 83. 5AH916, bead with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 316 (see Table 7 for additional details). ....................................................... 190 84. 5AH916, bead with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS #507 (see Table 7 for additional details). ............................................................ 190 85. 5AH916, bead with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS #1214 (see Table 7 for additional details). .......................................................... 191 86. 5AH916, childs toy train with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 395 (see Table 8 for additional details). ................................... 199 87. Location of 5TL4, Hornbek homestead site, Teller County, Colorado. .............. 207 88. Map of 5TL4, Hornbek homestead site, Teller County, Colorado. ..................... 208 89. Adelines 1885 Homestead Proof Testimony of Claimant. .............................. 209 90. 5TL4, spoon with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 9 for additional details). ..................................................................... 213

PAGE 20

xix 91. 5TL4, hinge with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). ........................................................................... 215 92. 5TL4, heart cushion with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). ................................................. 217 93. 5TL4, detail of embroidered date on heart cushion dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). ................................................................... 217 94. 5TL4, letter knife with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). ................................................. 219 95. 5TL4, EAPG pitcher with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). ................................................. 220 96. 5TL4, EAPG pitcher handle with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). ................................................. 221 97. 5TL4, hat with embroidered initials with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). .................................. 223 98. 5TL4, detail of embroidered initials on hat dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). ........................................................................... 224 99. 5TL4, shoe fragment with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). ................................................. 226 100. 5TL4, shoe fragment with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). ................................................. 227 101. 5TL4, shoe with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). ........................................................................... 228 102. 5TL4, shoe with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). ........................................................................... 228 103. Adeline Hornbek (middle row, seated second from right), ca. 1882. .................. 241 104. Adeline Hornbek, ca. 1885. ................................................................................. 243 105. Adeline Hornbek (middle), ca. 1895. .................................................................. 244 106. Hornbek homestead, main house, looking northeast. .......................................... 253 107. Newspaper insulation in main house of the Hornbek homestead. ....................... 255

PAGE 21

xx 108. Wallpaper in main house of the Hornbek homestead. ......................................... 256 109. Wallpaper in main house of the Hornbek homestead. ......................................... 256 110. Upper level room of the Hornbek homestead main house. ................................. 258 111. Upper level room of the Hornbek homestead main house. ................................. 259 112. Upper level room of the Hornbek homestead main house. ................................. 259 113. Parlor on lower level of Hornbek homestead main house. .................................. 260 114. Bedroom on lower level of the Hornbek homestead main house. ....................... 261 115. Kitchen on lower level of Hornbek homestead main house; main entrance in background and staircase to right. ....................................................................... 262 116. Pantry on lower level of Hornbek homestead main house. ................................. 263 117. Overview of the Hornbek homestead main house with the road between Florissant and Cripple Creek at left, looking south. ............................................................. 264 118. Reconstructed Hornbek homestead root cellar, exterior view. ............................ 266 119. Reconstructed Hornbek homestead root cellar, interior view. ............................ 266 120. Categorical breakdown of gendered artifacts within the Wells assemblage. ...... 277 121. Breakdown of Wells artifacts with a potential to exhibit a gender association. .. 278 122. Categorical breakdown of gendered artifacts within the Hornbek assemblage. .. 282 123. Breakdown of Hornbek artifacts with a potential to exhibit a gender association. ... .................................................................................................................... 283!

PAGE 22

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND BROADER IMPACTS Research Question How do personal and domestic artifacts recovered from two rural Colorado homestead sites of single, middle class women reflect gender identity, and how do these reflections subsequently relate to conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood in the context of the Victorian-era American West? Background This study investigates how personal and domestic artifacts recovered from two rural Colorado homestead sites of single, middle class women reflect gender identity, and how these reflections subsequently relate to conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood in the context of the Victorian-era American West. In particular, this is accomplished through analyses of artifact assemblages from two nineteenth century Colorado homesteads of single, middle class women, including the 1890-1906 Arapahoe County homestead (5AH916) of Adelia Wells, and the 1878-1905 Teller County homestead (5TL4) of Adeline Hornbek. The focus on these two specific historic homestead sites is a result of their multitude of shared characteristics, including the fact that the homesteads are documented in the historical record as belonging to single women, both of whom were originally from back east, and both of whom achieved relative economic security, falling squarely into what might be defined as the middle class; these women were not exceedingly wealthy, but

PAGE 23

2 were not poverty-stricken either, and were able to live comfortably, as apparent from extant historical and archaeological records. Additionally, although the Wells homestead is located on the plains and the Hornbek homestead is located in the mountains, both locations fall within rural frontier contexts, dating from the late nineteenth century through the early twentieth century. The Wells homestead, located on the current property of the Plains Conservation Center in Aurora, Colorado, was surveyed and excavated by a University of Colorado Denver (UCD) field school in the late 1990s. The artifact assemblage has undergone basic analysis and interpretation, including an analysis of expressions of gender identity as reflected by the ceramic assemblage recovered from the site; the site was also the focus of an examination of Victorian-era gender roles and identity in relation to spatial aspects of the sites activity areas (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000, 2002). With regard to the Hornbek homestead, which is located on present-day National Park Service (NPS)-administered Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument near Florissant, Colorado, the main house and root cellar are the only existing structures on the site which date to the original occupation by Adeline Hornbek. The root cellar has been subject to restoration (NPS 2014a), and the Hornbek house has undergone multiple stabilizations over the course of the past forty years (NPS 2014b). These activities have resulted in the recovery of a small assemblage of artifacts from the Hornbek homestead property, and an extensive archival collection of primary historical documents associated with Adeline Hornbek, her family, and the homestead are also curated by the museum at Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument.

PAGE 24

3 The histories of both the Wells and Hornbek homesteads and their associations with single, middle class women are documented in the historical record, and these women are further identifiable in the archaeological record of the respective homesteads based on the presence of items commonly associated with feminine, domestic gender roles emphasized by Victorian ideals of true womanhood and the cult of domesticity. These items are in some cases concomitant with secondary identity characteristics (the primary identity characteristic for the purposes of this investigation being gender), including, for example, kinship and economic status. In such cases, secondary identity characteristics are likely directly associated with the personal and conscious decisions and choices of Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek as the matriarchs of their households in the sense of kinship relations, family social organization, and economic capabilities, and thus theoretically, the individuals not only making these types of familial identity decisions on a household level, but also as the primary bread-winners, and hence consumers, purchasing these items. Broader Impacts The National Science Foundation (NSF) defines broader impacts as important considerations in advancing the NSF Mission, which is To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes (NSF Act of 1950). In order to account for a range of broader societal impacts emanating from publicly funded research projects, the NSF has established five Broader Impacts Criterion which can serve as foundations for developing and identifying progressive contributions. With regard to this project, these include:

PAGE 25

4 1. How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? (NSF 2007) This project can contribute to the development of local and regional outreach programs aimed at girls or womens social groups (such as Girl Scout troops in Colorado or other western states, for example), historical societies, or other groups or organizations with interests in homesteading, the rural American West, and/or the spacial and temporal evolution of womens issues (such as land ownership) in the United States. Project interpretations resulting from analyses of artifact and archival collections could also be integrated into exhibitions of living museums and/or static exhibits on local or regional scales. 2. How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.) ? (NSF 2007) The project can broaden the participation of underrepresented groups by making accessible the research, analyses, and interpretations of the archaeological and historical records of a particular marginalized group (based on gender and geography) in which contemporary women and rural groups have vested historic, intellectual, and emotional interests. Specifically, this project can enhance the visibility of single, middle class women in the rural American West through the archaeological record, and as such may encourage future research and participation in studies of this history by women or other interested groups, including local, rural historical societies or property owners. This can be accomplished through establishment of contacts with local historical societies, historians, and/or other interested individuals, researchers, or organizations, and the

PAGE 26

5 dissemination of project results and interpretations to local and regional groups through lectures and/or presentations. Additionally, it may be possible to broaden participation through informative publicity on the part of local media, including stories in local newspapers, newsletters, or other publications, or announcements on local television stations. 3. To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? (NSF 2007) The project can enhance the infrastructure for research and education through the expansion of networks between researchers, and private and governmental organizations such as History Colorado, the NPS, the Plains Conservation Center, as well as local historical societies, via the establishment of a dialogue based on comparative analyses of archaeological and archival collections held by these various entities. 4. Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? (NSF 2007) The primary mode of dissemination of the results of the project is this Masters thesis. The potential also exists for publication of scholarly articles in local, regional, and national journals, and the distribution of project results and interpretations to interested parties (such as local historical societies) and professional conferences through lectures, presentations, papers, and posters. Portions of this thesis have been published in regional journals (Parrish 2014a), as well as associated information presented at regional archaeological conferences (Parrish 2013, 2014b). 5. What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society? (NSF 2007)

PAGE 27

6 Based on the general dearth of known and studied archaeological collections from homesteads of single, middle class women in the rural American West, the comparative analysis of the Wells and Hornbek assemblages can contribute valuable information to this historically-marginalized and archaeologically-neglected demographic, and can provide a basis for future research and analyses of the archaeology of unmarried, economically independent women on the American Frontier. It can also form a foundation for analyses of conformance, resistance, and agency within Victorian-era structures on the part of single, middle class women through integration of the archaeological and historical records. In this way, the project can serve to refute or substantiate the historical record through the quantifiable, material past, while simultaneously bringing greater nuance and resolution to the largely forgotten history of this group of pioneering women.

PAGE 28

7 CHAPTER II THEORY For modern archaeologists studying the past, whether prehistoric or historic, a profound realization is that All that remains of past events is circumstantial evidence, and moreover, that archaeology is in fact not the study of the past, but the study of the past in the context of the present (Binford 2001:46). The lived experiences of the past can never be recreated in the pure form of reality, for the simple fact that the past is comprised of moments in the contemporaneous life of an individual, now represented only by fragmentary remnants. Those moments of a life or an event can be interpreted in secondary contexts based on remnants, which can include the material record as well as historical documents (in some cases), but lived moments can never be relived, revived, or re-experienced, and as such, will never again comprise a reality of experience. All that truly remains of history is a palimpsest of partially reconstructed moments and experiences influenced by a growing knowledge based on material and documentary records, and informed by a variety of theoretical concepts, approaches, and frameworks which can be used as tools to concurrently focus on and draw information from those records based on key questions to which we seek answers. Unlike ethnography, which involves the radical specificity of living a life, evoking the indeterminacy and contingencies of life experienced in the flows, multiplicities, and provisionality of particular moments and events, (Lancaster 2011:48), archaeology as a practice can never ascertain actual embodied experience, but it can serve to produce snapshots of embodied experience through the application of theory and consequent interpretations.

PAGE 29

8 In piecing together fragments of evidence from past lives and bygone eras, archaeologists become storytellers, and it is imperative to recognize that storytelling is both reflexive and dialectical. Archaeologists interpret material and written records, and subsequently tell a story about the past, but each interpretation is in effect only a single story about a particular historical event or life experience from one distinct perspective, and it follows that every historical event or experience might be construed in a multiple and divergent ways by different interpreters. In this way, theory informs these stories by assigning a focus and direction. Furthermore, archaeologists, in choosing theoretical approaches and frameworks for interpreting the past, not only tell a story, but in doing so are reflected in their very interpretations. Although in practice archaeologists strive for objectivity, in reality the personal, professional, and academic backgrounds of archaeologists inform their motives, their questions, their theoretical focus, and consequently, their interpretations of history. Moreover, one interpretation of history is not necessarily more or less accurate than another; rather, different approaches answer different questions, or answer the same question from different perspectives, just as in history one event was experienced from multiple perspectives. As such, multivocality not only constitutes the archaeological record, but founds the basis of modern interpretations as well. Further, as the archaeologist is reflected in his or her interpretation of the past, the past in turn reflects back on the archaeologist and contributes to increasing the knowledge and experience of that individual; this in turn effectively expands the knowledge base, perspectives, and practices of the greater archaeological community as the findings of a particular study are disseminated. As a result, archaeology as a practice not only informs the present, but also influences the past and the future.

PAGE 30

9 Recognizing the incomplete, reflexive, and dialectical nature of archaeology in practice, this section investigates key theoretical approaches useful in an archaeological study that serves to examine, deconstruct, and interpret the subject of unmarried, middle class female homesteaders in the Victorian-era American West. Specifically, these theoretical approaches are analyzed in association with their ability to inform the greater research question, and this section examines how certain theories are relevant to the research question to create exploratory avenues for future research on the subject at large. Theoretical approaches generally considered applicable to Victorian-era political, economic, and social structures revolving around homesteading, gender, and consumerism fall under the grand narrative of political economy, and include theories related to gender, identity, and agency, with a focus on Marxist theory. Practice theory is particularly important to this analysis, including Giddens theory of structuration as well as Bourdieus concepts of habitus and capital. Additionally, a focus on feminist theory in archaeology is considered imperative due to the nature of the research question at hand, with its focus on unmarried female homesteaders. These theoretical concepts and approaches are useful in an analysis of the ways in which politics, economics, and social aspects of Victorian life informed and influenced not only the material framework and composition of households at large, but also individual negotiations of identity, the creation and maintenance of gender roles, and the simultaneous structuring and restructuring of social organization in the American West. Feminist Theory Feminist theory within archaeology provides a situated approach to deconstructing ideologies of gender within the structures of American history, and represents a

PAGE 31

10 sociopolitical commitment to emancipation as transforming the disciplines presentday practices and reconstructions of the past. Both aims hinge on diversification of the field (Geller 2009:73). In a way, feminist theory represents a subjective approach to archaeological interpretation, in that it focuses on the role and experiences of the female gender within the social structures and realities of a given culture and time. Feminist archaeology serves to correct bias introduced through androcentrism, or the placing of the interests of men in the center, rather than creating a balance between men and women (Nelson 2001:1). In terms of the research question at hand, feminist theory can inform an exploration of the experiences of unmarried female homesteaders within the male-dominated structures of the Victorian era, while simultaneously taking into account the more fluid and dynamic economic and gender structures of the American Frontier. With regard to feminist anthropological theory, it is argued that Relativism is a way of being nowhere while claiming to be everywhere equally. The equality of positioning is a denial of responsibility and critical inquiryBut it is precisely in the politics and epistemology of partial perspectives that the possibility of sustained, rational, objective inquiry rests. [Haraway 1988:584] As an interpretive approach to history, feminist theory emphasizes, The science questionis about objectivity as positioned rationality (590). While objectivity continues to be an imperative foundation of a scientific approach to any interpretation of evidence of the past, it is likewise important to recognize and represent the realities of history; a feminist approach to archaeology is about critical vision consequent upon a critical positioning in unhomogeneous gendered social space. Translation is always interpretive, critical, and partial. Here is a ground for conversation, rationality, and objectivity (589). With the historically biased and androcentric focuses of archaeologists and historians framing earlier studies of the past, feminist archaeology

PAGE 32

11 recognizes that an approach which objectively investigates subjective questions is essential for building a holistic knowledge of the reality of the past as experienced not only by white, Protestant, middle class males, but by marginalized groups including women as well. Along these lines, feminist archaeology provides a refined methodological approach in that it is capable of creating new methodologies and stretching theory, by questioning received wisdom, by requiring that assumptions be made explicit and that they be examined for inconsistencies. Any new perspective might be said to achieve some of these goals, but the gender perspective is both deeper and more central to the ends of anthropological archaeology. [Nelson 2001:1] Feminist theory also acknowledges the multiplicity and diversity of genders as opposed to historic western notions of man/masculine and woman/feminine, as well as the relationships between genders. Feminist theory informs a growing knowledge, awareness, and recognition of demographic groups who have been marginalized with regard to historical knowledge in terms of the traditional focus of historical, anthropological, and archaeological research on males as defined by the concept of man/masculine within western cultural norms. A focus on the experiences and actions of these marginalized groups is recognized as necessary to broaden and diversify information and research on social systems, in that it allows for a multivocality of experiences, in addition to the recognition that social systems and their attendant structures are products of the actions not only of white, middle class males, but a variety of individuals of different ages, sexes, races, ethnicities, and genders. Further, the relationships between individuals as informed by gender are recognized as valuable lines of research into gender identity, and its negotiation and manifestation historically, as well as how negotiation and manifestation of gender identity and gendered relationships

PAGE 33

12 influence the creation, maintenance, and transformation of sociocultural structures (Haraway 1988; Nelson 2001; Joyce 2007; Spencer-Wood 2013). Moreover, Feminist accountability requires a knowledge tuned to reasonance, not to dichotomy. Gender is a field of structured and structuring difference, in which the tones of extreme localization, of the intimately personal and individualized body, vibrate in the same field with global high-tension emissions. [Haraway 1988:588] In particular, there is no concrete, authentic, or pure masculine or feminine gender; rather, gender identity is representative of the agency of individual experience, relationships, and lived realities. Feminist theory recognizes that the expression of gender is fluid and dynamic, in response to the reality of experience and its incumbent necessities for the negotiation of social structures and physical survival. Political Economy and Marxist Theory The focus of political economy is on the structural relationships that defined th e means of controlling wealth and creating inequality in state-level societyspecifically in terms of the labor and exchange relationships found within bourgeois industrial society (Hirth 1996:204). From the standpoint of political economy the basis of culture lies within political and economic structures of society, and how individuals interact and are organized within those structures on the basis of their economic and political relationships. Political economy recognizes the influence of agency and its interface with structure to produce cultural change, as well as the potential for external influences such as environment on systems and associated structures (Trigger 2006 [1989]). For additional information on the process of structuration, please refer to Chapter II, page 17. Political economy emphasizes materialism and the foundations of society in relationships

PAGE 34

13 of production (economy), which are subsequently embedded in political structures defined by institutions that result from interactions of power, class, and agency: The social being determines social consciousness andthe forms and relations through which humans produce their livelihoods constitute fundamental, and determining, relations in societythat these forms and relations have a material existence[and are] consolidated over time in classes, powers, and institutions[and] these institutions [exercise] a determining influence over human action. [Roseberry 1997:43] Marxist theory further emphasizes a materialist approach to investigations of inequality and power disparities within societies, especially as manifested within capitalist cultural systems, with a focus on the primary significance of the relations of production to the dynamics of social change (Gilman 1989:63). Materialism factors into political economy and Marxist theory in the way that social inequality and disparities within political and economic structures tend to be both based on and symbolized through ownership or control of diverse and disparate aspects of material culture. In addition, political economy and Marxism have strong foundations in a contextual approach to exploring cultural change, particularly with regard to accounting for historical backgrounds and the role of historic processes and events on subsequent culture change (Trigger 2006 [1989]). Structure Structure, defined as structuring properties providing the binding of time and space in social systems (Giddens 2002:236), comprises the organizing principles of human physical, mental, and emotional existence in a given time and place. Structures can include political, economic, gender, kinship, and other categories that in sum comprise overarching cultural systems. Specifically, structure refers to the rules and concepts which give meaning to system (Shanks and Tilley 1987:51), and structural

PAGE 35

14 properties, consisting of rules and resources, recursively implicated in the reproduction of social systems, simultaneously influence and reinforce the creation and recreation of structure. As such, structure is characterized by duality, described as the mutual dependence of structure and agencythe structural properties of social systems are both the medium and the outcome of the practices that constitute those systems (Giddens 2002:238). Structure serves as a framework or foundation for larger-scale systems comprised of patterns existing in time as well as space, through continuities of social reproductiona structured totality (Giddens 2002:238). Within the structural basis of systems are institutions, fundamental units that serve to facilitate and substantiate the structures within systems. Systems are therefore framed by structures, which are in turn embodied by institutions, and are governed by patterned rules within a particular systemic, structural, and temporal context. Additionally, agency contributes to the formation of institutions, but only in the way that the relationship between agency and institution is reciprocal and mutually dependent, and In the sense of institutionthe collective is bound to the very phenomenon of action (242). As such, institutions are related to and influenced by the actions and agency of the collective social structure. Institutional knowledge can also be drawn upon to reproduce social structure through social interaction. Structure is applicable to archaeological research in that material culture both exists within and contrives structure, and as a result, material culture symbolizes, represents, and reflects the structures of society. Hence, material culture can provide archaeologists with information not only about the material objects themselves, but also about the

PAGE 36

15 organization of the society in which those material objects existed, as well as the position of the person owning or in control of those material objects. In such a way, structures organize human action and material culture, and are reproduced in the practices of everyday life. Practices lead to repetition and pattern in material culture, and thus meaning structures are relevant objects of inquiry for contemporary archaeology (Saitta 1992:888). Furthermore, the notion of power and how its situated and enacted in and across time and space is inherent in the construction of structure. Power tends to lend itself to the framework of structure, for the reason that those individuals with power have the capability via capital to manufacture the structures that ultimately define political, economic, and social life not only for the upper class, but for the middle and lower classes as well (Giddens 2002). For additional information on the concept of capital, please refer to Chapter II, page 21. Agency Agency is the concept that individual humans, or agents, have the capacity and ability to make decisions within the structures in which they exist. It is defined as the socioculturally mediated capacity to act, (Ahearn 2001:112-113) or a continuous flow of conductinvolving a stream of actual or contemplated causal interventions of corporeal being in the ongoing process of events-in-the-world (Giddens 2002:233). Agency is different from action in that action can be a means of acting without any influence of associated symbolic, inherent, or subconscious meaning action may be a method to accomplish a simple, unassuming goal. However, action and agency are not mutually exclusive as action can be used as a method of enacting agency, or conversely, may not contribute to agency at all; further, agency can inform action. The structural

PAGE 37

16 contexts in which action and agency occur define the relationship and interaction between these two processes (Ahearn 2001). Within systems and structures, action of individual agents is guided by existing patterned rules; patterned rules and actions are not mutually exclusive, but rather are entwined and contingent upon each other. Rules affect action, and action in turn affects rules, serving to either support or alter those rules. By their very nature, structures and associated rules can restrict individual agents, but can likewise enable the pursuit of actions and agency (Giddens 2002). Agency is a powerful tool for individual actors in that agency can be both active and passive, and while existing structures serve to corral agency, in reality agency cannot be wholly restricted because of its nature as a physical, mental, and emotional construct. Agency can be a means of achieving an end, especially with regard to the creation and subsequent alteration of existing structures, because human actors, and not reified systems, are the agents of cultural change. Human actors devised complex strategies to solve their problems and meet their goals, and these strategies are [not] random (Brumfiel 1992:559). In this way, individuals can use agency as a conscious process by which to undertake certain actions or achieve particular goals. Both action and agency are situated within the historical structures in the time and place in which they occur; thus, the recognition of this temporality and context is essential to any analysis of agency. Individuals existing within particular structures and systems maintain the capability to exercise agency within the structures that simultaneously empower and restrict them, and in turn can affect those structures. Every individual actors existence with a social structure is informed by subconscious and

PAGE 38

17 conscious, instinctive and learned knowledge, and that knowledge is in turn built upon historical knowledge and structures manufactured by other individual actors within that social system across time. The knowledge of individual actors is bound in such a way that actions are directed by the extent of knowledge based on the place of an actor within social structures and systems, but conversely, actions are not bound by knowledge as a result of the outcome of unintended consequences and unconscious conditions of action. Additionally, upper class or dominant individuals acting within structures tend to have greater constraints placed upon their actions and agency by those structures than would be the case for lower class or subordinate individuals, and that the latter individuals have a greater ability to influence structure through agency, simply because they are less restricted by their positions within existing social structures (Giddens 2002). Structuration Giddens (2002) theory of structuration is based on explanations of the interplay of structure and agency. Structuration consists of the ways in which that [social] system, via the application of generative rules and resources, and in the context of unintended outcomes, is produced and reproduced in interaction (237). Structure and agency are not mutually exclusive, but are interdependent and exist in an ongoing, dialectical relationship. Agency creates structure, structure simultaneously influences agency, and agency in turn alters structure. The relationship between structure and agency is codependent, ongoing, and circular, and frames, informs, and influences social interactions between individuals and groups within social systems, such that The context of interaction is in some degree shaped and organised as an integral part of that interaction as a communicative encounter (241-242). Rules and resources are the basis of social

PAGE 39

18 interaction, and are reproduced as a result of social interaction; structure serves as the framework within which that social interaction takes place. Individual agents interact within interpretive schemes based on shared knowledge of structures, and these interactions subsequently generate meaning. Further, The communication of meaning in interaction does not take place separately from the operation of relations of power, or outside the context of normative sanctions. All social practices involvethree elements, including meaning, power, and sanctions (Giddens 2002:241). Within structure, power is associated with the ability to enact or resist sanctioning processes, and that ability is reciprocally affected by the position of an individual with a system (Giddens 2002:241). The power held by individual agents within social structures and their relationships to other individuals are essential to the concept of structuration in that power directly influences an individuals ability to exercise action and agency as methods of reproducing or transforming the structures in which they exist. Power as a method of continuing or changing existing structures is a mechanism of both individuals and groups asa property of the collectivity. Resources embody the bases or vehicles of power, comprising structures of domination, drawn upon by parties to interaction and reproduced through the duality of structure (239). Power is specifically generated through the interface of rules and practices, and in the way that agency and structure exist in a dialectical relationship, so do power and practice; practices produce power, and power subsequently produces practices. Structuration also maintains accountability of individuals, as well as capabilities of practical consciousness and reflexivity. Accountability of individual agents comprises

PAGE 40

19 the accounts that actors are able to offer of their conduct, based on innate structural and systemic knowledge; this knowledge in turn informs agency (Giddens 2002:233234). Practical consciousness is an innate, instinctive, and subconscious knowledge within an individual that impacts the exercise of agency; however, practical consciousness cannot be learned or taught, and cannot be consciously drawn upon. Reflexivity consists of an individuals reflexive monitoring of behaviour that forms the basis for the conscious acknowledgement and evaluation of actions and agency, as well as the contextual setting in which actions or agency occur (234). Individuals can be influenced by conscious and subconscious motivation in association with action and agency, as motivation can affect actions and agency in conjunction with reflexivity. Subconscious motivation in particular is associated with unintended consequences of conscious action because even unintended consequences can manifest in such a way as to produce and reproduce structure, and consequently can factor into decisions of action and the exercise of agency. Habitus Bourdieus (2001) concept of habitus is founded on how an individual thinks, relates, and interacts within his or her world based on a culturally reflexive and instinctive knowledge of that world, or how an individual experiences the world through the structure in which he or she lives based on personal background and experience. Habitus has a historical basis in the life of an individual (Bourdieu 1977), and can be thought of as a way in which an individual experiences their world based on their own personal, specific, and unique historic context the culture history of that persons life from the day they were born. Bourdieus concept of habitus designates the system of durable and

PAGE 41

20 transposable dispositions through which we perceive, judge, and act in the world (Wacquant 2008:267), and comprises The structures constitutive of a particular type of environmentsystems of durable, transposable dispositions, structured structures predisposed to function as structuring structuresobjectively adapted to their goals without presupposing a conscious aiming at ends or an express mastery of the operations necessary to attain them andcollectively orchestrated without being the product of the orchestrating action of a conductor. [Bourdieu 1977:407] Habitus is subliminal it is the result of the interaction of structures and actions as experiences that define the human subconscious. In such a way, habitus contributes to structuration, but is additionally an end result of that process, as individuals act within their habitus to create but also to modify the structures that found the basis of the habitus (Bourdieu 1977). An individuals habitus cannot be purposefully planned or directly attained, but rather is defined by generative schemes that produce regular but nonbinding and goal-directed but not necessarily conscious, habitual practices and representations (Knapp and Van Dommelen 2008:22). Further, although an individual is capable of making decisions that can ultimately modify or adjust the trajectory of the habitus in the future, habitus as a historic mechanism always underlies the identity of an individual; there is no way to change, alter, or remake the past or historic course of the habitus of a persons life it will always exist and underlie later alterations to the habitus (Bourdieu 1977). In this way, the trajectory of the life of an individual is characterized by a historicity of layers or strata of action, experience, decisions, and change, which concurrently constitute that individuals habitus. The concept of habitus can be thought of as a dynamic interaction between the objective and subjective, internal and external, emic and etic, as

PAGE 42

21 Bourdieus notion of habitusoffers [a] link between the subjective, internal experience of individual peoples identity, and the objective, external social context of their livesHabitusembeds peoples activities in the fabric of their society by tying it into the communities, kinship networks and other collectivities in which they are involved. [Knapp and Van Dommelen 2008:23] Additionally, habitus is symbolic in that it consists of similar experiences between individuals whose existence is framed by comparable structures, thus resulting in similar habitus; as a result, people with similar habitus can recognize and relate to one another on a symbolic level (Bourdieu 1977). Capital Capital is defined as accumulated laborwhich, when appropriated on a private, i.e., exclusive basis by agents or groups of agents, enables them to appropriate social energy in the form of reified or living labor (Bourdieu 1986:1). Bourdieus concept of capital is consistent with the notion of habitus in that an individuals habitus can provide that person with certain assets (or capital) on which they can act within the structures that frame their existence. Capital can be social, economic, and cultural, although economic capital is argued to comprise the basis of all other forms of capital; in other words, its difficult to attain social or cultural capital without the economic means to do so. Further, although economic capital can be used to attain social and cultural capital, it is not a transaction that is easily achieved or automatically purchased, and only at the cost of a more or less great effort of transformation (Bourdieu 1986:7). Having economic means, for instance, can buy an individual the means to live an upper class lifestyle, but all the money in the world cannot buy the learned social graces and refined cultural knowledge

PAGE 43

22 that someone born into wealth retains as part of the habitus of their ascribed social structure. Social capital is described as the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition or in other words, to membership in a group which provides each of its members with the backing of the collectively-owned capital. [Bourdieu 1986:5] In other words, social capital is embodied by social ties and group membership which, in and of itself, provides an individual with the support and power of the group as a whole, as well as that of other individual members with their own respective varieties of capital. With regard to cultural capital, Bourdieu (1986) defines three different types: embodied capital, objectified capital, and institutionalized capital. Embodied capital consists of the form of long-lasting dispositions of the mind and body, while objectified capital is defined as the form of cultural goods. Embodied capital could be exemplified by good health or physical or mental aptitudes, while objectified capital consists of material objects. Institutionalized capital is a form of objectification which must be set apart becauseit confers entirely original properties on the cultural capital which it is presumed to guarantee (2). Examples of institutionalized capital could include college education or accumulated experience working for a particular company or within a certain discipline. Identity Notions of identity are fluid from culture-to-culture and individual-to-individual, but are broadly defined by this author in relation to the research question at hand as the categories in which an individual places himself or herself fundamentally; the self-

PAGE 44

23 ascribed, personality-defining characteristics to which an individual relates on the basis of personal background and experiences. For additional information on the related concept of habitus, please refer to Chapter II, page 19. Aspects of identity are both conscious and subconscious in terms of construction and expression by an individual. Moreover, identity is a dynamic and impermanent construct it can be adjusted, altered, modified, and transformed by an individual across time and space, or even within a single time and space to adhere to relevant but potentially dichotomous structural requirements or goals at hand. Identity does not consist of a solitary defining characteristic of a given individual. Rather, a single individuals identity is composed of multiple intertwined identities, based on the structures within which that individual exists and acts, an individuals habitus, and an individuals history and goals. The attributes that define or comprise the life of an individual all contribute to the formation of that persons multiple identities within their lived reality. For instance, one individual can be defined by multiple, concurrent identities, such as those related to political, economic, kinship, religious, ethnic, or other structures (Stone 2012). These identities are not necessarily separate or discrete, and they interweave to comprise the holistic identity of a person; for instance, an American womans role as a mother, or the identity of motherhood, can be intrinsically entwined with, interrelated to, and/or dependent upon gender and kinship identities, in that motherhood can be associated with concepts of female biology, womanhood, femininity, and relationships between mothers and daughters, sisters, and committed partnerships such as legal marriage, civil unions, or common law marriage (to name a few possibilities) in western culture.

PAGE 45

24 The archaeological record can reflect any or all of these identities through material culture, which often acts figuratively as a mirror, reflecting social conditions and agents dispositions (Bell 2002:260). It is recognized that material culture itself may be indicative of multiple forms of an individuals personal identity, including not only gender identity, but also economic, religious, kinship, ethnic, and other types of identity, and even a single object may represent multiple aspects of a persons identity some identities may be obvious based on knowledge of social structures and research on an individuals life history, while others may be apparent but not easily reconciled, and still others may have been embodied by an object during a persons life, but based solely on the remnants of the material record may never be recognized as such. Material culture in a symbolic sense is reflective of larger-scale structures that may have framed or defined the life of an individual, and In complex societies, the importance of material culture for the definition of group identities is heightened and so are the social pressures to amplify or suppress visual cues (Beekman and Christensen 2011:163). In this sense, the presence of certain material aspects of archaeology, such as types of artifacts, form, material, decoration, and method of construction, or the relationship of material objects to larger-scale structures, exemplified by associations with, for example, a particular political party or ideology, a certain economic cost or nature of availability, or adherence to gender ideals of a time and place, can be indicative not only of an individuals identity, but likewise the construction, negotiation, and manipulation of that identity with the structures of their culture. This can in turn lead to interpretations of individual agency, including conformance and resistance, as well as reflect on the processes affecting structural change.

PAGE 46

25 Analysis Archaeology is particularly well situated to explore Euroamerican constructions of gender in recent history, as gender in the United States tends to be constituted by and expressed through material culture, especially with the rise of industrialism and consumerism in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In particular, archaeology can provide unique demonstrations of the productive implications of critiques of the Western correspondence model of sex, gender, and sexuality, and its assumed basis in natural biological facts, by exploring how embodied subjectivity is shaped under diverse historical, cultural, and material conditions, [Joyce 2007:49] particularly in this case as applied to unmarried female homesteaders on the Victorian-era western frontier of the United States. Additionally, Gender performance involves public, repetitive acts of movement, gesture, posture, dress, labor, production, interaction with objects, and the manipulation of space. As a result, archaeologists are in a good position to document gender performance through exploration of such material media. [51] Gender identity in American culture is both influenced by and expressed as a manifestation of peripheral appearance through the incorporation of material culture into gender representations, and is characterized by A process unfolding over time in an exterior space, shaped through iteration of the bodies and representations circulating in the cultural milieu, gender performativity is ideally situated as an archaeological model (Joyce 2007:50). As a result of the position of material culture in individual aesthetic representations of gender, archaeology is an ideal approach for exploring both the construction and negotiation of gender through time in American culture. Further, gender as an external expression of identity is inherently intertwined with notions of agency, and archaeology is situated to understand the bodily incorporation of citational precedents itself as a pleasurable exercise of agency rather than simply as a disciplinary imposition

PAGE 47

26 of power on an unwilling subject (55). As gender identity has typically been expressed through material culture in the post-Industrial history of Euroamerican social structures, archaeology can methodologically explore material representations of gender, particularly with regard to negotiations of gender within situated structures of a particular time and place or across time and/or place. Under the Homestead Act of 1862, any U.S. citizen over the age of 21, or head of household, or non-citizen who officially declared intent to become a citizen, was permitted claim up to 160 acres of public land, so long as that individual had never taken up arms against or aided the enemies of the United States (BLM 1962, 2012; Harris 1993; Ubbelohde et al. 2006; Hensley 2008; Beaton 2012). This act effectively gave women, including unmarried women, the right to own land and the associated opportunity to pursue a level of economic independence that may have been considered more socially respectable than for instance, prostitution, and more realistically attainable from an economic standpoint than ownership and management of, for example, a boarding house or other business establishment. For unmarried female homesteaders in the American West, the functional and practical concept of homesteading could represent a method of expanding on adjacent claims owned by family members; a method of investment based on profits from subsequent sales of claims after proving up; or associated status and personal satisfaction inherent in ownership (Garceau 1995). As such, Land ownership in the Westembodied mythic qualities of renewal, the chance to redefine ones identity and ones place in society. This reinvention of self had significant resonance for womenas Victorian mores gave way to modernity (2).

PAGE 48

27 By applying feminist theory to an archaeological subject such as unmarried femal e homesteaders of the Victorian-era American West, it is possible to formulate interpretations of gender structures and established social ideologies of the era, such as the cult of domesticity and true womanhood. Feminist theory allows for explorations of conformance and resistance to those structures and ideologies (Christensen 2013:64), and it is recognized that historically, boundaries that at times have been seen as impenetrable were in fact crossed with great regularity. Female gender ideologies, such as the Cult of Domesticity, domestic reform, and equal rights feminism, while seemingly in opposition, were melded in the lives of women as they negotiated the meaning of domestic and public, private and political. [78] Whereas the idealized cult of domesticity and true womanhood representative of gender structures of the Victorian era called for women to embrace the roles of wife and mother through a devotion to sociocultural norms of gentility, domesticity, and family exemplified through the four cardinal virtues, of piety, purity, submission, and domesticity (Welter 1966), the reality of womanhood and femininity in the American West was likely very different. With the realities of the harsh environment compounded by less structured social norms, the notion of feminine identity was characterized by a relative level of fluidity, and was likely individually constructed by women on the frontier (Griswold 1988; Harris 1993; Garceau 1995; Beaton 2012). It is feasible that ideals of womanhood were likely just as centered on chores around the homestead as on chores involving the home and family, and mending a fence or helping to care for ranch animals or livestock did not lessen the concept of femininity out west rather, in contributing to activities traditionally considered masculine, women on the frontier not only proved their economic worth beyond the roles of wife and mother, but also

PAGE 49

28 redefined the ideals of femininity. On the frontier, an ideal woman may have been willing and able to contribute directly and equally to the establishment, daily activities, and subsequent long-term maintenance and success of a ranch or homestead (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006; Beaton 2012). By contributing to the economic success of towns and territories through local homestead ventures, it is possible that even single women were accorded an equality, respect, and admiration earned as a result of their contribution to successful frontier endeavors and proven ability to put themselves on equal economic foundations as men; this may be immediately apparent in the early success of suffrage movements out west, where women gained the right to vote in the Wyoming Territory in 1869, the state of Colorado in 1893, and Idaho and Utah in 1896. In fact, prior to the passage of the nineteenth Amendment on a Federal basis in 1920, women had already been granted full suffrage by the western states of Kansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Montana, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California, in addition to Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho, and Utah, whereas the only states east of the Mississippi River to grant women full suffrage prior to 1920 were Michigan and New York (Shuler 1920). Political economy and Marxist theory are also useful approaches to exploring the research question at hand for a number of reasons. With industrialization and the rise of consumerism in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, American culture gradually became defined by the nations political and economic structures, which were concurrently and increasingly demarcated by materialism. Material culture came to define class status in American life, with the upper class defining the ideologies and fashions of the day, and the middle and lower classes falling under the ideological

PAGE 50

29 cultural dominance of the elite as exemplified through the emulation of those fashions (Mintz 1985; Roberts 1998; Bell 2002). Material culture is often symbolic of broader cultural ideologies, and the investigation of conformance or resistance to dominant ideologies through the examination of material culture and how individuals within a culture use it is an innate feature of archaeology, in that Departures from symbolic resonance, or the degree of symbolic dissonancecould indicate the existence of multiple ideologies, the depth of resistance to a dominant politics and ideology, and perhaps the specific social arenas in which struggles over politics and ideology were situated. [Saitta 1992:893] The framework of Marxist theory is widely applicable to Victorian-era structures in an anthropological and archaeological sense on the basis of its major assumptions, which include its foundations in materialism as symbolic of social relationships which are in turn symbolic of organizing structures of society; the realism of the materialist aspect of society, in that materials with their associated symbolic constructs manifest in tangible ways within the structures of society and can be explained and deconstructed; that relationships between individuals are manifested within the structures of society, with a particular regard to class structure, power, and inequality; and that class and other structures directly impact and orient the actions of individuals within those structures (Roseberry 1997). Furthermore, Marxist approaches have traditionally informed feminist issues in archaeology, and are useful in framing the topic of unmarried female homesteaders in that Marxist starting points offered a way to get our own version of standpoint theories, insistent embodiment, a rich tradition of critiquing hegemony without disempowering positivisms and relativisms and a way to get to nuanced theories of mediation (Haraway 1988:578).

PAGE 51

30 Notably, the concept of class is a useful context within which specific structuring principles like gender can be better understood (Saitta 1992:890). This lends itself to an examination of the rise of the middle class in the post-Industrial era, and the role of women as consumers within that structure. Middle class women were targeted as major Victorian-era consumers based on their positions as the matriarchs of their families; with sociocultural norms placing socially acceptable roles for women solidly within the domestic realm, in line with the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, women were placed on a pillar when it came to domestic, household consumer decisions. Advertisers marketed to women, who were assumed to be the primary domestic and household decision-makers, whereas men were the primary decision-makers with regard to the greater business and financial realms of the family interest; men earned a familys money, while women were believed (and pushed by marketing), to be the ones spending it. Household purchases were considered to be fixed within the realm of womanhood; within sociocultural norms of the Victorian era, women ran the household and thus made associated purchasing decisions (Harris 1993; Blumin 1998; Roberts 1998; Woloch 2006). These decisions, especially with regard to the middle class, could consist of family meals, clothing, and household furniture and dcor. The domestic household was the realm of the family matriarch, and that realm could be filled with a great deal of material consumer objects; ultimately, material objects took on meaning, such that they were no longer simply utilitarian, but also symbolic (Mintz 1985; Roberts 1998; Bell 2002). Additionally, manifestations of consumerism in the archaeological record might serve as indications of agency related to the economic independence of single female homesteaders, and in particular, may be suggestive of how a marginalized demographic

PAGE 52

31 constructed identity, and gender identity in particular, while negotiating and actively participating in a male-dominated economic structure. Although strict gender structures and associated gender roles began to ease slightly as the Industrial era progressed, in the late nineteenth century eastern United States social and gender structures were still characterized by the position of women in the home and the role of men outside the home (Welter 1966; Griswold 1988; Harris 1993; Dublin 1994; Garceau 1995; Woloch 2006). The political and economic standing of American women in the east was defined by the status of the male(s) of the family in existing political and economic structures; women themselves had few political or economic rights or opportunities. From a Marxist perspective, this social structure could have been based on an ideology encompassing a means by which competing classes and interest groups present their views and justify them, so as to manipulate and control others (Gilman 1989:68), with men ultimately controlling the political and economic rights of women. Basic biological differences between men and women were perceived to symbolize physical, mental, and emotional weakness in that womens subordinate status was based on culturally specific reactions to universal female biological processes such as menstruation, pregnancy, and childbirth (Joyce 2007:44); this argument was used as a method to effectively relegate women to the domestic realms of household, matrimony, and childcare. Conversely, Americas western frontier was settled under structures with greater flexibility and opportunity for women. The west lacked the defined social, economic, and political Euroamerican structures of the east that had been in place and evolving in parallel for hundreds of years, and

PAGE 53

32 Western Anglo women inherited an ideology that arose in the east, but it was an ideology that was fluid, elastic, and complex: women explained their own action by its assumptions, sometimes wrestled to align behavior with diverse perceptions of its tenets, and modified it to meet challenging realities. [Griswold 1988:17] There were no established economies, political ideals or parties, or refined social etiquette such as associated with the structures of the developed eastern United States; even territorial boundaries were in a frequent state of flux. The frontier lacked basic Euroamerican infrastructure such as towns, roads, businesses, and housing; without the basic necessities that characterized consumer lifestyles back east, existence was difficult. This relative lack of structure, both physical and social, resulted in a new, increasingly fluid manifestation of feminine gender ideology (Garceau 1995:13). Homesteaders oftentimes started from scratch and had to survive on their own physical labor and cunning in a variety of difficult conditions there was not much recourse for severe weather, low population, and in some areas, lack of law enforcement. In remote locations and harsh conditions, the abilities of every person counted homesteaders and other settlers of the frontier couldnt afford, economically or for reasons of basic survival, to relegate women to the domestic realm as required by the established structures of the east. Rather, in situations where an extra set of hands or additional labor were essential, women provided those requirements, if only for the reason that there were few alternative options (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006; Beaton 2012). Western pioneer women were also able to provide extra income to homestead households in what could be tenuous conditions from year to year as a result of blizzards, famines, floods, infestations, tornadoes, and other challenges. Some women took jobs as teachers to provide their families with a more stable secondary income (Beaton 2012), and

PAGE 54

33 newfound public stature was not dependent on Victorian public identities like that of wife, mother, teacher, or social worker. Ratherpublic stature derived from nontraditional sources for women: independent property ownership, vocational competence out-side the domestic realm, and economic self-support. [Garceau 1995:15-16] As a result, economic structure (or lack of economic structure, for that matter) resulted in the manufacture of a gender structure and associated gender roles that allowed women greater opportunity and freedom than their counterparts back east, and it follows that domestic ideology in the West was less a rigid set of assumptions than a supple perspective about gender ideals, less a well-defined cult of true womanhood than a way common women made sense of everyday existence (Griswold 1988:15). This new gender ideology was ultimately reflected in western political structures with the extension of full suffrage to western women, state by state, prior to the passage of the nineteenth Amendment in 1920; in Colorado, women were granted the right to vote in 1893. However, it is recognized that although the American West afforded women a new level of independence not previously achieved in the east, most women who took advantage of the opportunities of the west were not wholly independent in the sense of being entirely solitary or self-dependent, and meanings and symbolism of independence on the frontier had very different meaningsfor unmarried women on family ranches, independencecould mean decision-making power within a group enterprisefor single women not engaged in a family agricultural venture, the independence associated with homesteading meant economic self-support (Garceau 1995:3). In fact, although women on the frontier may not have been exclusively dependent on the assistance of other individuals for their success and achievements,

PAGE 55

34 Recent research suggests the primacy of group effort rather than individual independence in accounting for the successes of single women homesteaders (4). The concept of structuration is significant with regard to how unmarried, middle class women on the frontier may have exercised agency in such a way as to negotiate, manipulate, and potentially resist existing eastern gender structures with which they may have been expected to conform (at least to some degree), especially in light of what may have been more flexible political, economic, and social structures, as well as gender roles, of frontier society. The use of agency is notable in the very fact that unmarried women may have shunned the concept of submission as related to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, conversely asserted their independence through staking homestead claims, and subsequently managed these ventures in such a way that they achieved and maintained middle class economic and social status. As a result, single, middle class female homesteaders of the Victorian period could have contributed to a process that would have served to initially develop and subsequently refine or restructure political, economic, social, and gender structures within the context of the rural American West, and ultimately contribute to and reinforce change within these structures over time, especially as western women increasingly gained economic, social, and cultural capital as a demographic. In an archaeological frontier context, the ideological cultural dominance of the elite is likely reflected in middle and lower class emulation of upper class material trends of the Victorian era, although potentially to a lesser degree than might be the case in established eastern social and economic structures. Emulation of eastern trends reflecting the ideological cultural dominance of the upper class as observed through material culture in

PAGE 56

35 western contexts would be particularly interesting, in that it might not reflect the influence of rigid political, economic, or social structures transferred from an eastern to a western context, but could be more indicative of individuals attempting to recreate a habitus previously influenced by eastern, upper class ideologies, and to create some version of stability in a context characterized by inherent instability, in terms of newly established and dynamic political, economic, and social structures. On the other hand, especially as time passed and the influx of pioneers westward increased, this pattern could be indicative of increasing ideological dominance of the east over the west, especially with regard to economic and social structures. As a western upper cl ass became established as a result of the exploitation of the rich raw resources held by the western states and territories, a degree of ideological dominance could also have been established over middle and lower class westerners by their upper class counterparts, although this influence would likely not have been as powerful as that of the east due to the lack of rigid, established structures, lower population, and the wide dispersal of the population over a large geographic area. Rather than the establishment of a regional, western, upper class ideological cultural dominance, the west would likely have been characterized primarily by established eastern norms and ideologies, and secondarily by localized cultural ideologies and trends in areas of geographically concentrated populations. Further, dominant ideological concepts of what was defined by the upper class as culturally normal, with regard to social and gender structures of the Victorian era may not have been questioned, and thus may have resulted in two levels of agency on the part of unmarried female homesteaders, manifested in conscious agency or decision-making

PAGE 57

36 based on deeper subconscious actions associated with dominant ideological concepts of what was right or normal as defined by the social and gender structures of the era. In this way, it is possible that unmarried female homesteaders were able to reinforce their positions within class and gender structures through an emphasis on respectability, gentility, and domesticity in conformance with Victorian-era gender ideals, based at least partially on their economic abilities to make independent consumer choices that could that reinforce the conventional sociocultural and gender values that defined the Victorianera middle class. In this case, the ideological cultural dominance of established eastern social and gender structures would be relevant to unmarried female homesteaders, who could somewhat ironically use agency to reject Victorian gender ideals by independently establishing homesteads, and in turn use agency associated with economic independence to conform (perhaps on the basis of habitus) to other domestic gender ideals as informed by domesticity and the household within Victorian gender or social structures. This would characterize the epitome of negotiation of gender identity within a western frontier context. Habitus was likely diverse for individual women homesteaders of the west, at least in terms of their previous histories and backgrounds. However, for those women who came to the frontier from the east, habitus was likely defined to some degree by the rigid and male-dominated political, economic, and social structures of Victorian-era culture. This would have included defined notions of economic class, womanhood, and specifically what it meant to be a woman of a certain economic class in terms of what was required on the part of action and agency, as characterized by the cult of domesticity and true womanhood (Griswold 1988). As women became established homesteaders in western

PAGE 58

37 stat es and territories, however, habitus was likely impacted by the more flexible and dynamic nature of political, economic, and social structures of the frontier, where men, women, and all economic classes (other than the wealthiest individuals perhaps) struggled alike to simply survive, let alone fulfill the traditional social, economic, and gender ideals of the east. In this context, habitus, like the developing structures of culture out west, was probably highly dynamic and tailored to individuals in terms of not only background, but personal ongoing struggles related to new positions and experiences in the west, including the formation and potential influence of western politics, economic activities, relationships to other pioneers in geographic area, and localized social structures. Furthermore, habitus could have been impacted not only by the experiences and realities of individuals, but likewise by the needs of communities, as individuals embraced certain roles to fulfill those needs, be they economic or social. Finally, independent female homesteaders on the late nineteenth century American Frontier succeeded at least partially as a result of existing capital retained by individuals; in particular, it is likely that many women started their homestead claims with some previously held economic capital, or supplemented existing economic capital with secondary jobs like teaching (Garceau 1995; Beaton 2012). Additionally, with the economic capital resulting from successful homestead ventures, women were able to use that economic capital to further their social and cultural capital as a demographic, ultimately leading to early suffrage across the western states. Individually-held social capital was likely a significant contributing factor to the success of homestead ventures by single women, in that social capital could be relied on to obtain assistance when needed from family, friends, and neighbors. Cultural capital associated with shifting

PAGE 59

38 gender roles and social structures of the late Victorian era also played into the reality of unmarried females being able to take advantage of the opportunity to homestead and gain economic independence using socially-acceptable methods within changing social structures of the time. Unmarried female homesteaders used the social and cultural capital that women as a demographic had gained to that point in American culture to pursue their own economic independence through homesteading; in doing so, they in turn gained social and cultural capital in that they succeeded economically via a method that may have been more socially acceptable than other forms of employment or income for unmarried women on the frontier. This capital is similarly reflected in the transformation of social structures and gender norms associated with women gaining the right to vote in western states decades prior to suffrage on the national level. Conclusion The theoretical concepts and approaches considered all have applicability to Victorian-era political, economic, and social structures, particularly as those structures interrelate to produce actions and agency associated with homesteading, consumerism, the middle class, and gender identity. An exploration of gender, identity, and agency as associated with independent, middle class female homesteaders and studied through the lens of political economy and Marxist theory serves to bring a focus to questions not only of cultural change in the American West at the end of the Industrial and Victorian eras, but sheds new light on a group marginalized not only under historic social structures, but also with regard to a deficiency of modern knowledge resulting from historic biases and consequent neglect or indifference of the social science disciplines, including archaeology, to this area of research. Although this dilemma has improved over the past

PAGE 60

39 few decades, especially with the advent of feminist approaches to archaeology, there are still gaps in knowledge that can be enriched through the application of political economy and Marxist theory, including practice theory, along with evolving applications of feminist theory to questions of individual negotiation of identities, the creation and maintenance of gender roles, and the simultaneous structuring and restructuring of Euroamerican culture on the American Frontier.

PAGE 61

40 CHAPTER III HISTORIC CONTEXT The opportunity for unmarried women to homestead in the Victorian-era American West, in a time in which they had relatively few rights and limited control over their personal independence and identities, was ultimately the result of a convergence of events and processes associated with the changing political and economic character of a nation. Political economy, with a focus on the Marxist capitalism of the Industrial era, is a vital theoretical foundation in analyzing the political and economic structures underlying national and regional patterns, as well as concepts of class and gender. In particular, this context serves to develop an explanation of how historical, cultural, political, and economic events and processes of th e nineteenth century merged in such a way that resulted in the establishment of the opportunity for single women to homestead independently in places like Colorado. This is accomplished through an exploration of the history of dominant womens issues of the time, including the concept of the cult of domesticity and true womanhood (Welter 1966), as well as the history of the American West and that of Colorado specifically; the analysis also focus es on homesteading and related land laws. An examination of the rise of materialism and consumerism within the capitalist economic structure of the industrialized Victorian-era United States is also incorporated. Ultimately national and state-level critical analyses investigate how these aspects of politics, economics, culture, and history in the context of the Victorian-era United States converged in such a way that single women had the opportunity to homestead independently on the American Frontier, with a level of autonomy that few of

PAGE 62

41 their peers back east, or even throughout much of the western world, could dream of attaining for years to come. National Context Post-Contact History of the American West Literature consulted with regard to the history of the American West includes historical analyses of the Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark Expedition (Appleman 1975; Fleming 2003), the primary historical account of OSullivan (1839) in reference to the concept of Manifest Destiny, and examinations of the Mexican-American War of the mid-nineteenth century (Castillo 1998; Ubbelohde et al. 2006). The Euroamerican history of the American West officially began, more or less, with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803; President Thomas Jefferson authorized the purchase of more than 820,000 square miles of land west of the Mississippi River from France for $15 million dollars. Jeffersons interest in purchasing the French-owned territory to the west was driven by a number of motivations, not least of which included American security and economic interests associated with control of the waters of the Mississippi River and port at New Orleans, as well as hopes for the discovery and control of a Northwest Passage which could give the American commerce easy access to the Pacific Ocean and the markets of the Asian continent (Appleman 1975). However, the purchase was not without controversy, as some Americans questioned the constitutionality of the action on the basis that the President of the United States did not have constitutional power to authorize the purchase of land, and believed that such an action would increase the power of the federal executive branch to the detriment of states rights (Fleming 2003).

PAGE 63

42 Conversely, ongoing conflict between the British and French on the continent and globally left the United States in a vulnerable position geographically, especially in consideration of Napoleons empire-building activities in the New World; however, following the 1802 French loss of Santo Domingo following a successful slave rebellion, Napoleon abandoned his plans for a New World empire, and agreed to sell the entirety of the French Louisiana Territory to the United States. The Louisiana Purchase Treaty was signed in Paris on April 30, 1803; signatories for the United States included Robert Livingston and James Monroe. The United States Senate ratified the treaty on October 20, 1803. The territory was formally transferred from France to the United States on December 20, 1803, and the United States took official possession on December 30, 1803. The purchase of the Louisiana Territory granted the United States all or portions of the present-day states of Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado (Fleming 2003). Later, the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 between Spain and the United States established the southern and western boundaries of the Louisiana Purchase through the transfer to the United States of lands to the north and east of the Red River to the 100th meridian to the Arkansas River to the 42nd parallel to the Pacific Ocean (including portions of the present-day state of Colorado), while the portions of the Louisiana Purchase to the south and west of these boundaries were turned over to Spain (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). By chance, the Lewis and Clark expedition to explore the western half of the North American continent was already in planning stages when the United States purchased the Louisiana Territory in 1803 (Appleman 1975; Fleming 2003); the expedition set out from

PAGE 64

43 St. Charles, Missouri in 1804 and followed the Missouri River, the Clearwater River, the Snake River, and the Columbia River, reaching the Pacific Ocean in November 1805 (Appleman 1975). President Thomas Jefferson also approved the Pike expedition of 1806-1807; the expedition was charged with exploring the southwestern region of the North American continent, and particularly with identifying the source of the Red River and Arkansas River. The Pike expedition made it as far as the Conejos River near present-day Alamosa, Colorado in February 1807, where Spanish forces captured the group; the Spanish ultimately returned Pike and his men to the United States in July 1807 (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). These expeditions, regardless of the differential success of their outcomes, served to officially open the Louisiana Purchase for business to American citizens, and ultimately established the pillars upon which American pioneers moved westward. The Louisiana Purchase and subsequent expeditions also served to lay the foundations for Manifest Destiny, a term coined by journalist John OSullivan in 1839 to describe the concept that Yes, we are the nation of progress, of individual freedom, of universal enfranchisement. Equality of rights is the cynosure of our union of States, the grand exemplar of the correlative equality of individuals; and while truth sheds its effulgence, we cannot retrograde, without dissolving the one and subverting the other. We must onward to the fulfillment of our mission -to the entire development of the principle of our organization -freedom of conscience, freedom of person, freedom of trade and business pursuits, universality of freedom and equality. This is our high destiny, and in nature's eternal, inevitable decree of cause and effect we must accomplish it. All this will be our future history, to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man -the immutable truth and beneficence of God. For this blessed mission to the nations of the world, which are shut out from the life-giving light of truth, has America been chosen; and her high example shall smite unto death the tyranny of kings, hierarchs, and oligarchs, and carry the glad tidings of peace and good will where myriads now endure an existence scarcely more enviable than that of beasts of the field. Who, then, can doubt that our country is destined to be the great nation of futurity? [OSullivan 1839]

PAGE 65

44 In other words, Manifest Destiny embodied the ideal that it was the duty of the United States to expand westward and to instill the ideals of democracy in parts of the continent that were not yet established under democratic law. The underlying drivers of Manifest Destiny were many and complex, but generally included a growing American population due to rising birth rates associated with economic needs for workers, increasing immigration, economic depressions in 1818 and 1839, the cheap cost of land on the frontier, economic development of untapped resources, the concept of land ownership and related aspects of wealthtied to self-sufficiency, political power and independent self-rule, and the potential for the development of ports on the West Coast which could lead to economic expansion and facilitate trade with the Asian continent (PBS 2006). However, on a more basic level, the ideal of Manifest Destiny was something of an insidious justification to appropriate land not yet under the jurisdiction of the United States government; in particular, this applied to lands west of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase held by Mexico following its independence from Spain in 1821. The new nation of Mexico was plagued by instability, which led to the secession of Texas in 1836. The United States took advantage of this state of affairs, ultimately convincing Texas to join the Union and officially annexing the republic in 1845. This turn of events brought the United States into direct conflict with Mexico, instigating the Mexican-American War in 1846. American forces captured Mexico City in September 1847. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed in February 1848 and officially ended the conflict; under the conditions of the treaty, Mexico ceded its lands north of the Rio Grande River (i.e.,

PAGE 66

45 Texas) to the United States, along with the Mexican Cession (Castillo 1998; Ubbelohde et al. 2006), which included portions of the present-day state of Colorado. Following the end of the Mexican-American War in 1848, Manifest Destiny was geographically fulfilled, with the new territories of the United States effectively establishing control of the country over the mid-sectio n of the North American continent, from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. American settlers began to stream west in earnest at this point, hoping to establish themselves on the frontier and strike it rich, through the construction of coast-to-coast railroads, mining, logging, or homesteading (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). Homesteading in the American West Research into nineteenth and twentieth century homesteading in the American West yielded a number of documents from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). These include a historical analysis of the 1862 Homestead Act and associated evaluation of actual numbers of homestead claims and acreage per state (refer to Figures 1 and 2 below) (BLM 1962; NPS 2013a, 2013b), in addition to a timeline presenting a chronological history of the development of the 1862 Homestead Act and subsequent variations and events to arise from the Federal perspective (BLM 2012). Layton 2005 explores the relationship between the Civil War and particular clauses of the 1862 Homestead Act. Further, Harris (1993), Ubbelohde et al. (2006), Woloch (2006), and Hensley (2008) present a variety of factual information as well as interpretations of the 1862 Homestead Act and its historical outcomes as related to the nation, states/territories, and individuals.

PAGE 67

46 Homesteading was pursued east of the Mississippi River following the American Revolution, when members of the Continental Army were awarded tracts of land for their service. The General Land Office (GLO) was created in 1812 to administer homestead claims on public lands. In 1820, the Sale Act became the first federal legislation enacted to extend the opportunity to own public land to individual citizens; interested parties could purchase tracts of land at $1.25 per acre (Bureau of Land Management [BLM] 2012). The 1841 Preemption Act allowed for the division of federal lands into small farms of no more than 160 acres for a minimum cost of $1.25 per acre. The 1850 Donation Land Act comprised the earliest version of the subsequent 1862 Homestead Act, but applied only to settlers of the Oregon Territory (Harris 1993; BLM 2012). This act was extended to settlers of the Washington and New Mexico territories in 1854, but attempts to pass national homestead legislation failed in 1852, 1853, and 1860 (BLM 2012). The first successful national homestead legislation, the 1862 Homestead Act, was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln that same year (BLM 1962, 2012; Beaton 2012). The 1862 Homestead Act allowed any United States citizen over the age of 21, or head of household, or non-citizen who officially declared intent to become a citizen, to claim up to 160 acres of public land (BLM 1962; Harris 1993; Hensley 2008; Ubbelohde et al. 2006; Beaton 2012), so long as they had never taken up arms against or aided the enemies of the United States (this portion of the Act applied to those individuals who sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War) (Layton 2005). The claimant then had to prove up on the claim, which typically required residing on the land, building a house, making other improvements, and cultivating the acreage for five years; after five years, if the homesteader could prove that he or she had fulfilled these requirements and

PAGE 68

47 pay a small fee, the homesteader would receive patent on the land and take legal possession (BLM 1962; Harris 1993; Hensley 2008; Beaton 2012). Figure 1. Total number of deeded homestead claims in Colorado and surrounding states/territories (adapted from NPS 2013a). Figure 2. Total acres in deeded homestead claims in Colorado and surrounding states/territories (adapted from NPS 2013b). "! #""""! $""""! %""""! &""""! '"""""! '#""""! !"#$%&'()'*%%+%+',(#%-.%/+' 01/2#-' ()*+,-!./!0,,1,1! 2.*,34,51!6758*3! "! 9""""""! '"""""""! '9""""""! #"""""""! #9""""""! 3(./1'45&%-'26'*%%+%+',(#%-.%/+' 01/2#-' :.457!;<-,3!8=!0,,1,1! 2.*,34,51!6758*3!

PAGE 69

48 Later homestead acts tended to expand on the 1862 Homestead Act, including the 1873 Timber Culture Act and the 1877 Desert Land Act (Harris 1993; Ubbelohde et al. 2006; BLM 2012). The 1887 Dawes Act opened Native American reservations to homesteading by settlers; reservation lands were divided and allotted to individual Native Americans, with additional remaining acreage opened to homesteading or other use by non-tribal members, effectively removing the land from Native American control (Woloch 2006; Hensley 2008; BLM 2012). In 1889, changes to Homestead Act were enacted, including allowing homesteaders who originally claimed less than 160 acres to claim additional acreage up to a total of 160 acres, and the 1909 Enlarged Homestead Act increased the maximum potential acreage of homesteads in many western states from 160 to 320 acres (Harris 1993; Ubbelohde et al. 2006; Hensley 2008; BLM 2012). The greatest number of homestead claims filed in single year in the United States occurred in 1913 (BLM 1962, 2012). The 1916 Stock Raising Homestead Act extended the definition of homesteading to including cattle ranching, rather than strictly comprising cultivation (Harris 1993; Ubbelohde et al. 2006; BLM 2012). The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 created public grazing allotments on federal land, effectively removing public land from further homestead claims (Ubbelohde et al. 2006; BLM 2012). In 1946, the GLO and Grazing Office merged into the Bureau of Land Management. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 repealed homestead laws in the contiguous United States, officially ending the era of homesteading in the continental United States (BLM 2012). Womens Issues in the Victorian-Era United States Works consulted with regard to the history of dominant Victorian-era womens issues, including the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, include Welter (1966) and

PAGE 70

49 Woloch (2006). In particular, the concept of the cult of domesticity and true womanhood emerged from Welters (1966) exploration of socioculturally-accepted concepts of the mid-to-late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in which women were expected to conform with and devote themselves to Victorian ideals of gentility, domesticity, and family through four cardinal virtues, including piety, purity, submission, and domesticity. Woloch (2006) examines American history from the eighteenth through twentieth centuries with a focus on events and themes related to womens history and issues affecting women in the United States across time and space. For women, the Victorian era was defined by the ideals of what it meant to be a proper lady, and what actions to pursue or avoid in adhering to those ideals. In particular, the proper lady was married, immersed herself in her home and children, and supported her husband in any way possible. The times were characterized by publications like Godeys Ladys Book, which upheld the values of the Victorian era. These values, defined by the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, encompassed socio-culturally accepted concepts of the midto late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in which women were expected to conform with, and devote themselves to, Victorian ideals of gentility, domesticity, and family through four cardinal virtues, including piety, purity, submission, and domesticity (Welter 1966). Certainly, female pioneers took with them more than the material items necessary for survival. They also took a set of values, assumptions, and ideals that enabled them to make sense of their lives (Griswold 1988:15) in the journey west. By the mid-nineteenth century, as Americans began to move west in significant numbers with the goal of permanent settlement (Ubbelohde et al. 2006), cultural and

PAGE 71

50 social norms and values were beginning to undergo a transformation. Concepts of what it meant to be a proper lady were part of this transformation, and with the advancement of industrialization and expansion westward, the central place of women in the home began to be challenged, especially as women increasingly joined the formal and traditional American workforce (Harris 1993; Dublin 1994; Garceau 1995; Woloch 2006; Beaton 2012). In particular, on Americas western frontier, gender roles were challenged by the reality of survival in demanding and sometimes dangerous conditions; especially in regard to homesteading, it often took equal efforts on the part of both men and women for homesteads to succeed (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006), and many women took jobs outside the home to enhance household revenue in lean times (Beaton 2012). Despite changing gender roles and ideals, and the newfound economic and social freedoms afforded by life in the West, women still lacked political representation and power on a very basic level, as it was illegal for them to vote. In 1869, women gained the vote in the Wyoming Territory, but it wasnt until 25 years later that this right was extended to women in Colorado, and not until over 50 years later that it was extended to women on a national basis. The national womens suffrage movement began, more or less, with the Seneca Falls Convention of 1848, organized by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott. In the 1850s and 1860s, the womens suffrage movement focused largely on bringing attention to the lack of basic economic rights and freedoms of American women, and tried in vain to convince Congress to include women under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments to the Constitution, which granted citizenship and the right to vote to freedmen. Although women in Wyoming gained the right to vote in 1869, by 1871 the national womens

PAGE 72

51 suffrage movement had achieved relatively little, and frustrations ultimately led to the fragmentation of the movement into two distinct groups. By the 1880s, interest in womens suffrage was waning, and the various suffrage groups struggled to maintain awareness of the issues. The early 1890s saw a resurgence of the movement with an increase in womens interest groups nationwide, and the two major womens suffrage groups, the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) and the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA), merged into the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). The group focused on forming networks with womens interest groups across the country, and worked to gain support for womens suffrage on the state level. The movement achieved victories in the 1890s, with women in Colorado granted the right to vote in 1894, followed by successful suffrage movements in Utah and Idaho in 1896. However, following these accomplishments, no further advances in womens suffrage came until the period of 1910 to 1914, in which NAWSA stepped up its efforts and Washington, California, Arizona, Kansas, Oregon, Nevada, and Montana granted women the right to vote (Woloch 2006). In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson encouraged Congress to extend the right to vote to women, and Jeannette Rankin of Montana became the first woman to hold a seat in the national legislature. In April 1917, the United States entered World War I; supporters of womens suffrage argued that this event made the extension of the right to vote to women increasingly important and urgent, due to the need for an increased domestic effort on the part of women to support the troops fighting overseas. The House of Representatives passed a voting rights amendment in January 1918, but the Senate failed to act. The war ended in November 1918, but this didnt end the womens suffrage movement in the

PAGE 73

52 summer of 1919, the Senate passed the voting rights amendment, which was ratified in August 1920 (Woloch 2006). After fighting for the vote for over 70 years, women gained the legal right to vote in the United States. The Rise of Materialism and Consumerism in the Industrial Victorian Era Literature associated with the rise of the capitalist economic structure of the industrialized Victorian-era United States, with its accompanying material, consumer, labor, gender, and class issues, includes Kornbliths (1998) presentation of an introduction to the history of the Industrial Era and summarization of the major features of the Industrial Revolution which set it apart from earlier periods. Smith (1990) explores the advance of the Industrial Era with its subsequent cultural evolution, including the role of the railroads in bringing the Industrial Revolution to the American West, and Mintz (1985) examines of the rise of the international capitalist economic system and associated cultural changes inherent with the advent of the Industrial Revolution, with specific focuses on labor, consumerism, materialism, and class relations. Additionally, Montgomery (1976) examines the background of labor and class in the context of the Industrial Era. Blumin (1998) analyzes cultural changes associated with increasing rates of urbanization, and the development and expansion of the middle class during the Industrial Era, and Bell (2002) analyzes the culture of the middle class in the eighteenth and nineteenth century United States as manifested through emulation of the upper classes. Roberts (1998) investigates the relationship between gender and consumerism through history. Woloch (2006) analyzes the role of industrialization in the nineteenth century evolution of the Euroamerican domestic unit and the female role in the household and greater familial economic realm, including the new focus on housewives in the

PAGE 74

53 realms consumerism and conspicuous consumption. Dublin (1994) explores the evolution of the domestic and economic roles of women during the course of the Industrial Era, including the shift of female labor from the private sphere of the home to increasingly public economic spheres characterizing the era, including manufacturing and professional occupations. The process of industrialization within the capitalist economy of the Victorian era was generally characterized by increases in the division of labor and specialization, leading to greater efficiency, mass production, and cheaper prices, but at the expense of the working class (the proletariat). They were removed from the modes of production and forced to sell their labor, as they did not control sufficient financial capital to own the modes of production. This ultimately resulted in a hierarchical class society in which a few upper class individuals (the bourgeoisie) controlled large quantities of financial capital and subsequently owned the modes of production, driving industrialization forward at the expense of the working class. The Industrial era in the United States was ultimately defined by a major shift away from farming toward manufacturing, which by 1890 employed one-fifth of the nations total work force and accounted for over half of its total economic output. Manufacturing establishments routinely used water and steampowered machinery, and in major cities the typical worker labored for wages in a factory with over 100 employees. (Kornblith 1998:xv) Industrialization in the United States began in earnest in the late eighteenth century, precipitated by European innovation and immigration, which led to a diffusion of early mechanized processes and equipment, such as the cotton spinning mill, to the United States. The railroad industry powered American industrialization, not only dominating the consumption of resources like steel, iron, and coal, but also transporting raw

PAGE 75

54 resources and machinery across the country (Smith 1990). By 1860, the United States was one of the leading industrial nations in the world, producing iron, textiles, paper, and farm equipment for domestic and international markets; mechanized processes led to inexpensive, mass-produced consumer goods (Montgomery 1976). Moreover, the era entailed a huge growth in nonindustrial wage laborThe appearance of urban centers contributed to the skyrocketing growth of domestic service and unskilled laboring jobs in commercial cities. In farming areas the growth of outwork occupations and commercial agriculture transformed the rural labor marketthese economic developments coincided with dramatic changes in family life, particularly declining family size and increasing life expectancy. (Dublin 1994:1) With increasing mechanization, the general standard of living for American citizens began to rise, and a prominent working class emerged. During the mid-to-late 1800s, wages for workers were generally steady and food prices were low, resulting in disposable income and fueling demand for mass-produced products. However, two depressions impacted American workers in the late 1800s, the first from 1873 to 1878, and the second from 1893 to 1897; these depressions led to a shortage of workdays for many workers, along with subsequent impacts on wages. During these depressions, the upper class tended to fault the working class for their predicament. The desperateness of the economic circumstances in which the lower classes found themselves and negative attitudes of the upper class towards the working class only served to stress the already fragile relationship between the groups. This in turn led to conflict and eventually, unionization of workers under organizations like the American Federation of Labor (AFL), which was established in 1886 (Montgomery 1976). Additionally, The burden of social condescension, deprivation, and toil fell most severely on the working-class woman, (116-117) a demographic which tended to fill mechanized, wage-labor roles at higher rates than men, although With the growth of urban female

PAGE 76

55 employmentwomens wage labor in the middle of the nineteenth century offered young single Yankee women a degree of economic independence unknown to rural women of earlier generations (Dublin 1994:27). The Victorian-era social structure of the United States began to transform in congruence with the countrys economy, and traditional social norms and gender roles that began to give way to the more progressive ideals of the incoming Edwardian era. In particular, gender roles in the public and private spheres began to change, and women were decreasingly relegated to the private space exemplified by the home and associated ideals of womanhood engendered by the cult of domesticity and true womanhood (Welter 1966). Transformations affecting family needs and obligations increasingly determined the nature of womens wage work (Dublin 1994:257); in particular, women were increasingly employed outside the home to augment household income, especially as modes of production were increasingly subsumed by large corporations and wage labor became the dominant form of income. Subsequently, industrializationtransformed womens work in the home and their roles within the family by turning much of womens work into wage labor (8). To a greater extent, the New Woman was the product of industrialization, which removed productive labor from middle-class homes and made her long for something to do. She was the product of urbanization, which brought her into contact with other women and also within range of the other half or submerged tenth. (Woloch 2006:270) However, this transformation in the economic sphere was not immediately accompanied by equivalent changes in the political and social spheres, as women were still legally and socially subservient to their male counterparts. The Industrial era also led to consumerism and materialism. The Commercial Revolution in general was associated with the recognition of the potential markets and

PAGE 77

56 related profits to be made from certain products, along with a circular pattern of demand, supply, and falling prices. Consumption within the transformation of the global economy from mercantilism to capitalism was a manifestation of covert domination of the lower classes by the upper classes that controlled production, especially as certain products became increasingly intertwined with new meanings associated with social events, soci al status, and social differentiation. With industrialization, decreasing rural populations and the influx of landless workers into urban areas in conjunction with new proletarian work schedules led to increased demand for and dependence on market products. Political and economic control over production by suppliers, investors, producers, creditors, government officials, and other parties with stakes in, and control over, the production and availability of products also contributed to an increasing demand for those commodities through the assignment of new meanings to products (Mintz 1985). Advertising also fueled fervent consumerism, in that advertisers relied on the commercial appeal of plenitude and the magical transformation of the self. By the twentieth centurythe meaning and purpose of commoditiesbecame subordinate to the quest for social status (Roberts 1998:829). Additionally, mass-produced commodities with roots in upper class contexts became increasingly embedded within lower class ceremony, ritual, and associated social events, serving to symbolically transform concepts of social status through newfound economic capabilities as material indicators of success. At the same time, this process provided the lower class with a sense of control over decisions in their lives (although this was something of a deception, as they were making choices from an array of greater choices that were in effect made for them by the parties who controlled industry). As such, power in the era of industrialization was based

PAGE 78

57 on control of production and availability of product in conjunction with widespread consumer access to the product. In other words, mass consumption precipitated power and the associated need for control; in this way, consumerism was also exemplary of the class struggle for power between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie (Mintz 1985). Consumerism within the context of the Victorian-era United States also tended to be driven by gender roles and ideals (Woloch 2006). In particular, increases in disposable income led to a growing demand for consumer products, which were inclined to fall within the confines of emulation of the upper classes (Bell 2002); in many cases, this was driven by marketing products to women, who even within the era of changing gender ideals came under pressure to maintain respectable familial lifestyles as matriarchs, represented through household and domestic goods (Harris 1993; Blumin 1998) such as upholstered sofas, elaborate furniture, carpets, and draperies (Woloch 2006:118). Through conspicuous consumption, lower and middle class American families could pursue higher social status and prove their success in obtaining the American Dream as represented by the material lifestyle of the upper class (Bell 2002). It has also been proposed that gendered power roles existed within consumer contexts of the Industrial era, in that If we were to adopt Michel Foucault's notion of power relations, we could say as well that commodities constitute a set of forms of cultural domination through which power is exercised and social organization constituted, as men tended to earn more money than women, and women, as domestic matriarchs of their families, in turn spent that money (Roberts 1998:841). The role within Victorian society of men as primary breadwinners and women as primary spenders in the domestic realm is exemplary of a dichotomous, gendered power dynamic, in which women used

PAGE 79

58 money and consumption as a tool for gaining power within an unequal power dynamic defined by gender ideals of the Victorian era. Additionally, Unable to participate in national politics because of the cultural perception that they were frivolous consumers, women nevertheless gained civic (if not) political legitimacy qua consumers giving concrete substance and value to the nation (826). Women were also able to use commodities in ways that served to manipulate traditionally assigned gender roles and social identities of the time, in that a culture of display and appearance undermined belief in identity as essentially fixed in class, family, and social position. Thus it had the capability to destabilize gender identities, such as domestic motherhood, that had been naturalized or essentialized throughout the nineteenth century. [843] Unmarried female homesteaders took this concept a step further through acting not only as consumers, but also in achieving economic success as producers (a role traditionally symbolized by male-oriented economic activities). By taking comprehensive control of their economic potential as both producers and consumers, unmarried female homesteaders were able to garner a new level of power within the capitalist system and consequently, make a prominent contribution to the evolution of increasingly flexible gender roles, initially in the American West and ultimately across the nation. National-Level Analysis The opportunity for single women to homestead within the structure of the Victorianera American West was the result of a multitude of events, processes, and changing values in the United States, which can largely be related back to political and economic interests associated with the protection and expansion of the capitalist, industrializing economy of the United States.

PAGE 80

59 On a very basic level, women were needed on Americas western frontier; men far outnumbered women early on due to rugged conditions and disproportionate opportunities for male-oriented employment in mining and railroads (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006; Beaton 2012). Extending the opportunity to homestead to women, with the subsequent prospect for a respectable type of economic freedom and social independence more difficult to come by in the traditional Victorian-era structures of the East, afforded the government a method to appeal to women to settle out West. This approach also boosted the potential for families to put enduring roots down on the frontier, and the long-term exploitation of the resources of the West by as many individuals as possible was in the economic interests of the United States. The protection of the frontier and its associated rich raw resources, including timber, land, and most importantly, precious metals, during the Civil War also served as a probable driving factor in the opportunity for single women, minorities, and intended citizens to homestead with the passage of the 1862 Homestead Act. The United States had only achieved Manifest Destiny approximately 15 years prior, and by that time the country was deeply involved in the conflict with the Confederacy. Confederate attempts to capture the western frontier were an imminent danger during the Civil War, and with a significant percentage of young, able-bodied American men fighting the war back east, the availability of that demographic to move west, invest in the land, and establish themselves in such a way that would challenge Confederate advances, was not a realistic possibility. The government of the United States was certainly aware of the strategic and financial value that the resources afforded by the frontier would have held for the Confederacy; as such, the protection of those resources was a priority for the United

PAGE 81

60 States at the time. The Confederacy had, in fact, appropriated portions of the New Mexico Territory by 1862, and during the Battle of Glorieta Pass in March 1862 attempted to move on the Colorado Territory, although they were ultimately defeated by Union forces (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). As such, a strategic contingency plan on the part of the United States government, based on the political atmosphere and economic value of the newly acquired lands out west, consisted of effectively making ownership and associated stewardship of those lands accessible to any and every American or intended American who had an interest in settling the frontier. The greatest number of Americans the government could encourage to move west in the least amount of time would in turn have the most significant effect on representing the frontier as established territory of the United States, consequently dissuading the Confederacy from attempts at capturing western lands, and resulting in the capability to physically defend the lands in which settlers were invested if that turn of events ensued. The opportunity for women to homestead on Americas western frontier also tied into the economic maximization of resources in the nations expanding capitalist industrial market. In particular, the more individuals the United States government could encourage to move west and exploit available resources, the greater the benefit to the economy of the United States, in terms of both domestic and foreign markets and trade. Additionally, for those individuals with the least economic opportunity within the structures of the East namely women and minorities the more appealing the opportunities afforded by the West, and perhaps the greater the effort those individuals would invest in that opportunity, when any economic benefit would be materially their own in terms of land ownership and monetary profit.

PAGE 82

61 Encouraging women to move west and homestead under the 1862 Homestead A ct would also have served to establish consumer markets on the economically undeveloped western frontier. The advance of industrialization and the associated expansion of consumerism and material ideals, in conjunction with conspicuous consumption, would have made women and families targets of manufacturers and producers; marketing strategies of the time would have focused on women as matriarchs and the dominant domestic consumers in the household (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006). This concept of women as the principal consumers of material culture, in conjunction with conspicuous consumption characteristic of the Victorian-era domestic realm, contributed to an effort to establish those markets on the frontier, subsequently increasing demand for products within those new markets, and leading in turn to an increase in supply and associated profits. Additionally, the establishment of homesteaders on the American Frontier would have resulted in the production of goods for local and regional markets under the cultivation requirements of the 1862 Homestead Act; the required improvements to claims would also effectively have raised the value of land. The overall result of this sequence of events would have been to establish new markets of producers and consumers, facilitate the further expansion of industrialization, and increase the growth of the nations economy. The passage of the Homestead Act of 1862 was one of the major influencing factors on politics, economy, and culture as related to gender roles in the history of the United States; in a sense, it paved the way for the expansion of womens rights in the political and economic structures of American society. Certainly, for single female homesteaders, the opportunity presented by the American West exemplified not only a degree of

PAGE 83

62 economic and social freedom from the more rigid structures of the East, but the physical frontier served as a metaphorical frontier, where women achieved autonomy and competence, valued qualities in the brave new world of modern gender roles (Garceau 1995:13). The passage of the Homestead Act of 1862, its extension of economic opportunity to single women, and associated transformations of gender roles in the late Victorian-era American West were both motivated and influenced by geographic and population expansions of the United States westward, harsh realities of life on the frontier, regional suffrage movements, the logistical realities of the Civil War, and the emergence of industrialization and Americas growing capitalist economy. Through the realization of these processes and events, along with the use of agency to define and redefine the economic, political, and social structures of the frontier, the single female homesteaders of the American West were among the first American women to achieve socioculturally respectable, middle class economic and political independence. State Context Post-Contact History of Colorado Major historical events in the Euroamerican exploration and settlement periods of the Colorado Territory and the state of Colorado are summarized in Table 1 below. This information is largely drawn from A Colorado History (Ubbelohde et al. 2006), which presents a comprehensive history of Colorado, with a general focus on the post-sixteenth century Euroamerican history of the land area that came to comprise the territory and later state. A chronology developed by the Colorado State Archives (State of Colorado 2013) also imparts historical information related to the establishment and evolution of the

PAGE 84

63 territory and state from the sixteenth through twentieth centuries. The reader is referred to these sources for additional information. Table 1. Major Events of Colorados Historical Period (Ubbelohde et al. 2006) Year (A.D.) Event 1541 Coronado explores portions of present day Colorado. 1682 L a Salle explores portions of presentday Colorado. 1765 Juan Maria Rivera explores portions of presentday Colorado. 1776 Escalante and Dominguez explore portions of present day Colorado. 1806 Pike expedition tr avels through present day Colorado. 1820 Major Steven H. Long leads an expedition up the South Platte River on the orders of President Monroe 1820s Fur trade stretches into present day Colorado. 1833 Bents Fort is established. 1848 Treaty of Guadalup e Hidalgo signed. 18421853 Lieutenant John C. Fremont leads five expeditions in the Rocky Mountains, with his final expedition in 1853 encompassing the San Luis Valley and the Gunnison River, with the goal of finding a suitable railroad route across the Rocky Mountains. 1850 The present day state of Colorado was divided between the Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Utah Territories. 1851 T he first permanent settlement with in the presentday boundaries of Colorado is established at Conejos in the San Lui s Valley and irrigation farming is pursued. 1852 Fort Massachusetts is established in 1852 to protect settlers from Native American raids. 1853 Captain John W. Gunnison leads an expedition through present day southern and western Colorado. 1858 The reg ions first gold strike occurs near the confluence of the South Platte River and Cherry Creek, prompting a fervent gold rush, and the towns of Montana City, St. Charles, Auraria, and Denver City are founded in the vicinity of present day Denver. Arapahoe County is established in November. 1859 A second gold strike takes place on Chicago Creek near present day Idaho Springs; by this point, the gold rush is in full swing, and the towns of Black Hawk, Central City, Nevadaville, Boulder, Colorado City, Fairpla y, Hamilton, and Tarryall are founded. The Jefferson Territory is established to administer the gold towns springing up across the region. William N. Byers starts the regions first newspaper, the Rocky Mountain News. 1861 In 1861 the Colorado Territory i s officially established with its present day boundaries, boasting a population of 25,371. The first territorial governor appointed by President Lincoln is William Gilpin, and Colorado City is selected as the territorial capital (although by 1862, the terr itorial capital is moved to Golden) (State of Colorado 2013). 18611865 The United States fights the Confederate States of America in the Civil War.

PAGE 85

64 Table 1. Major Events of Colorados Historical Period (Ubbelohde et al. 2006) Year (A.D.) Event 1862 The Civil War nearly spills into the Colorado Territory with the Battle of Glorieta Pass, in which C onfederate forces from Texas advanced on the Colorado Territory from the New Mexico Territory; the Confederate forces were intercepted and ultimately defeated at Glorieta Pass by Union forces from the Colora do Territory on March 28. 1863 Denver receives a branch telegraph line. 1864 The 1st and 3rd Colorado Regiments, under the command of Colonel John Chivington, massacre an encampment of Arapaho and Cheyenne at Sand Creek, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Native Americans, mainly women, children, and elderly members of the tribes; this event initiates a chain of violent encounters between Native Americans and settlers across the Colorado Territory for the next two years (Ubbelohde et al. 2006) This also ultimately results the establishment of Fort Sedgwick and Camp Collins (present day Fort Collins) in 1864 and Fort Morgan in 1865 (State of Colorado 2013). 1867 The territorial capital is permanently established at Denver (State of Colorado 2013). 1869 The final violent conflict between Native Amer icans and settlers in the eastern portion of the Colorado Territory takes place at Summit Springs. 1870 The population of the Colorado Territory stands at 39,864 (State of Colorado 2013). Construction of the Denver and Pacific Railroad and the Kansas Paci fic Railroad within the Colorado Territory commences. 1871 Construction of the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad begins, and Colorado Springs is established by General William J. Palmer (who also built the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad). 1872 Railroads be tween Black Hawk and Central City and Denver are completed (State of Colorado 2013). The Denver and Rio Grande Railroad reaches Pueblo. By the early 1870s, homesteaders in the South Platte Valley begin to pursue agriculture in earnest. 1876 The Colorado T erritory becomes the 38th state admitted to the Union. 1878 Silver is struck at Leadville and the town is officially founded. Denvers first telephone service is established (State of Colorado 2013). 1879 Violent conflicts erupt between the Ute tribe and the Indian agency at Meeker; Nathan C. Meeker, several employees of the agency, as well as a number of military troops are killed in the conflict, and the Ute are ultimately defeated. 1880 Grand Junction is established (State of Colorado 2013). The population of Colorado rises to nearly 200,000 people Ute Chief Ouray passes away. The Denver and Rio Grande Railroad reach Leadville. 1881 The Ute are removed to reservations. 1882 The narrow gauge line of the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad reaches Grand Junction from Gunnison. 1883 Denver gains the capacity for electric lighting. 1886 The Denver Union Stockyards are founded (State of Colorado 2013). 1888 The last violence between the Ute and settlers in Colorado takes place (State of Colorado 2013). 1 890 Colorados population stands at 413,249 (State of Colorado 2013). The Sherman Silver Purchase Act makes silver a hot commodity, to Colorados benefit. The Pikes Peak cog railroad is established.

PAGE 86

65 Table 1. Major Events of Colorados Historical Period (Ubbelohde et al. 2006) Year (A.D.) Event 1892 The Denver Post is founded. The Brown Palace Hotel in Denver opens. 1893 The Sherman Act is repealed, dealing a blow to Colorados silver industry and economy. 1894 Women in Colorado are granted the right to vote. The state capitol is completed in Denver for $2,500,000. 1899 The first sugar beet refine ry in the state is constructed in Grand Junction. 1900 The population of Colorado approaches 540,000 people. Cripple Creek holds title as one of the worlds richest gold camps, producing more than $18,000,000 in gold annually. 1902 Construction of the Moffat Railroad over the Continental Divide begins ; the railroad reaches Steamboat Springs in 1908 and Craig in 1913 (State of Colorado 2013). The first federal reclamation project the Uncompahgre irrigation project is approved. 1903 Workers at mines, m ills, and smelters strike, demanding higher wages and better working conditions, to no avail and following violence resulting in the loss of life and property. 1904 Construction of the Gunnison water tunnel by the Bureau of Reclamation begins. 1906 The D enver Mint produces its first coins, and the National Western Stock Show starts (State of Colorado 2013). Congress creates Mesa Verde National Park. 1908 Denver hosts the Democratic National Convention, where William Jennings Bryan is selected as the Demo cratic nominee for President. 1909 Colorado features the most irrigation area of any state in the Union, with 2,790,000 irrigated acres. The Gunnison water tunnel is completed (State of Colorado 2013). 1910 The first airplane flight and long distance pho ne call from Denver take place (State of Colorado 2013). The state population stands at 799,024. 1911 Colorado National Monument is created. 1913 The State Tax Commission is created, and assessed the value of Colorado property at $1,306,536,692 (State of Colorado 2013). 1914 The Ludlow Strike takes place in southern Colorados coalfields. World War I begins. 1915 The State Industrial Commission is created and workers compensation measures are adopted. The Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs is built (S tate of Colorado 2013). Rocky Mountain National Park is created. 1916 Colorado adopts prohibition. 1917 The United States enters World War I; Colorado produces its maximum of minerals, valued at $80,000,000 (State of Colorado 2013). 1918 Agriculture in the state increases exponentially to meet wartime demands; coal production also picks up, and molybdenum mining at Climax begins. In November, Germany surrenders and World War I ends. 1919 Colorados economy is booming due to postwar inflation. 1920 Col orados population stands at 939,629 (State of Colorado 2013).

PAGE 87

66 Homesteading in Colorado Ubbelohde et al. (2006) is the major source referenced for a general history of homesteading and its economic context in the state of Colorado. Research into nineteenth and twentieth century homesteading in Colorado also yielded a primary historical General Land Office (GLO) document held by the BLM in reference to the claim made by Adeline Hornbek on her homestead property in Florissant (BLM, GLO 1878). Homesteading was an arduous and risky venture, but as Euroamerican settlers flooded into the Jefferson Territory, and later, Colorado Territory, following the initial gold strike of 1858, claimants of 160-acre tracts pursued both ranching and farming, and along with mining and expansion of the railroads, both ranching and farming developed into economic mainstays of the region. While nearly any economic activity in the new territory could be financially and physically risky, cooperative colonies and associated pursuits of ranching and farming may have seemed less risky than activities like mining, especially to settlers who originated from eastern or Midwestern agricultural communities (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). Ranching, and cattle ranching in particular, became a relatively common economic pursuit in the Colorado Territory in association with the increasing introduction of cattle in the region following the initial gold strike at the confluence of the South Platte River and Cherry Creek in 1858. At first, many Euroamerican settlers were surprised at the winter survival and success rate of cattle turned loose on the prairie. The cattle thrived on the native prairie vegetation, which apparently was not widely anticipated by many settlers despite the obvious long-term success of bison in the same environment. Subsequently, in the years immediately succeeding the 1858 gold strike, many

PAGE 88

67 prospectors and suppliers came to the realization that cattle ranching could potentially be more lucrative than the aforementioned trades. Additionally, in the mid-1860s at the conclusion of the Civil War, ranchers in Texas found themselves with surplus cattle and a lack of method of transportation for those cattle to southern markets. The ranchers avoided the appearance of disloyalty to the south and found effective transportation to northeastern markets by driving their herds north to the railroads of the Colorado Territory and other western territories to subsequently ship product to Union states. Texan ranchers also benefited from this arrangement as the prices for cattle in Union states were under the stress of wartime inflation. As a result, from the mid-1860s through the 1870s, cattle trails developed between Texas and western territories, and open range became common across the West; the cattle economy boomed in Colorado with the increasing number of railroad routes east. Cattle drives of 2,000 to 3,000 head of cattle were common, and the early years of the ranching economy in the territory comprised a relatively free and open economic opportunity to anyone (Ubbelohde et al. 2006:169), due not insignificantly to low overhead costs in many cases, the only major overhead required of a cattle enterprise was the purchase of the cattle themselves, as the animals lived on the abundant natural resources of the region, and other supplies and labor were inexpensive. The decades of the 1870s and 1880s saw the rise of the cattle kings (Ubbelohde et al. 2006:169) who owned huge herds of cattle and expansive tracts of land; however, even these large and increasingly corporate enterprises continued to be somewhat bounded in influence by the collective nature of ranching activities, as for instance in the case of herding, in which cattle owned by multiple interests were separated after

PAGE 89

68 intermingling on the open range. Large-scale cattle ranching was further driven by increasing foreign investment in the cattle economy of the western frontier, resulting in the formation of huge and influential corporate cattle enterprises, which ultimately led to conflicts over land use and land rights between farmers, sheep ranchers, and cattle ranchers, as fences constructed by farmers constricted the movement of cattle on the range, and sheep competed with cattle for grazing acreage, which due to increased overstocking of cattle began to diminish returns. As a result of overstocking, in conjunction with the expansion of irrigation features and quarantine laws (which restricted the movement of cattle across state lines), open range cattle ranching activities declined through the 1880s. By the early twentieth century, the open range approach to cattle ranching gave way to leased government lands and reserved grazing areas (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). The Homestead Act of 1862 was also conducive to farming, although before long, and like ranching, it became apparent that profitable cultivation out west required more than 160 acres of land. Additionally, the western landscape harbored a much different climate than that of the eastern and midwestern United States especially the arid, high altitudes of the Colorado Territory. Only a few years after the passage of the Homestead Act, the limited supply of water and its usage on the frontier was acknowledged through the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, which established water rights in Americas arid west. Additionally, early on, Euroamerican pioneers developed innovative techniques to ensure the agricultural success of homestead plots in regional and local contexts, including in many cases the large-scale modification of the landscape to provide for irrigation of crops. Landscape modification in Colorado often took the form of ditch and

PAGE 90

69 canal waterways, including the San Luis Peoples Ditch, which was constructed in the San Luis Valley in 1852 and operates to this day as the oldest irrigation canal in continuous use in the state of Colorado (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). In the 1870s, numerous colony settlements with agricultural foundations were established across Colorado, including communities along the plains paralleling the Front Range in Greeley, Evans, and Fort Collins, and in the Wet Mountain Valley in southcentral Colorado. These cooperative or semi-cooperative communities could be attractive to settlers moving west as, especially in cooperative colonies, these groups provided a virtual physical and financial support system for individuals and families looking to try their hand at agricultural in Colorados arid environment (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). By the 1880s, like the cattle industry, foreign investors began to recognize the potential of a market for irrigation in Colorado. As investment increased, irrigation in the state developed into a corporate activity. Large irrigation systems were constructed, including canals in Bessemer, Fort Lyon, Bob Creek, and Otero; however, the increasingly successful use of irrigation systems for agricultural water supply also strained the already limited water supply of Colorados high desert environment. With the recognition of this issue, in the 1880s and 1890s large reservoirs were constructed across the state to provide a more stable water supply in the long-term (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). Homesteaders pursuing agriculture also found success in Colorados arid climate through experimentation with new crops like potatoes, sugar beets, and alfalfa, as well as the development of innovative planting processes, including the use of plowing. The success of plowing in agriculture in combination with higher levels of precipitation in

PAGE 91

70 Colorado in the 1880s led to an influx of sodbusters (Ubbelohde et al. 2006:192-193) settling in the state, and especially along railroads for ease of shipping of produce to eastern and midwestern markets (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). With increasing agrarian success resulting from new methods of cultivation and advantageous weather patterns, land values in Colorado rose for a time; unimproved land was valued at $3.10 per acre, whereas slightly cultivated land could range as high as $8.20 per acre. The tables began to turn in 1889 and 1890, with a marked and general decrease in precipitation across the state. The years 1891 and 1892 saw good rainfall; however, by 1894 Colorado was hit with a severe drought, and many agricultural ventures failed. Many discouraged homesteaders turned their focus to ranching or left the state altogether (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). By the early 1900s, the situation improved with new agricultural methods and experimentation, including dry farming (Ubbelohde et al. 2006:251), undertaken by the United States Department of Agriculture and local agencies. By this time it was also becoming clear that 160-acre homestead plots were not sufficient for successful commercial agricultural ventures in the arid American West, leading to extensions of the Homestead Act which increased acreages and enabled ranching on larger tracts. In 1901, the District Irrigation Law passed, enabling private landowners to organize irrigation districts with the ability to construct or purchase irrigation systems. Water availability and rights continued to present challenges to farmers. The issue of water rights and appropriation also caused continuing problems and conflicts between Colorado and other western states. In 1902, the Newlands Act established the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to administer Federal irrigation projects in an attempt to relieve some

PAGE 92

71 of the tensions building over the general availability (or lack of availability) of water in the arid American West. An early BOR undertaking in Colorado comprised a water diversion project from the Gunnison River to the Uncompahgre Valley; construction took place from 1904 to 1910 (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). By the early 1900s, sugar beet farming was on the rise on the Plains along the Front Range. The sugar beet industry quickly became an agricultural mainstay of the states economy due to the prime growing conditions of the region, including the high altitude, temperate climate, and controlled irrigation systems which had developed over past decades. The first sugar beet factory in the state was constructed in Greeley in 1899, and was followed shortly thereafter by factories in Loveland in 1901, and Greeley, Eaton, Fort Collins, Longmont, and Windsor from 1902 to 1903. Immigrants, especially those of German-Russian heritage, found their way to the Centennial State to work in the sugar beet fields and factories. In 1905, the South Platte Valley factories consolidated into the Great Western Sugar Company, which was capitalized at $20,000,00. By the early 1910s, Colorado was leading producer of sugar beets in the nation, with over 79,000 acres planted (Ubbelohde et al. 2006). Only approximately 40 percent of homesteaders who filed claims in western territories and states like Utah and Wyoming proved up (Hensley 2008), while this number approached 50 percent in northeastern Colorado (Harris 1993). While homesteading in some western states and territories never really caught on, homesteading in Colorado was a popular economic activity, with a total of 107,618 successful homestead claims encompassing 22,146,400 acres filed in the state between 1862 and 1961 (BLM 1962; Ubbelohde et al. 2006). Further, in parts of Colorado, it is estimated

PAGE 93

72 that up to 18 percent of all homesteaders were single women (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006). Figure 3 depicts the Hornbek Homestead in Teller County, Colorado, which was established by single mother Adeline Hornbek in 1878 (Hornbek 1885; Bureau of Land Management, General Land Office [BLM, GLO] 1878). Allison Parrish Figure 3. 5TL4, Hornbek homestead, Teller County, Colorado. Womens Issues in Victorian-Era Colorado Works consulted with regard to the relationship of Colorados post-eighteenth century Euroamerican history to issues of gender and class, include Beatons (2012) comprehensive study of womens history in Colorado as interwoven with the Euroamerican history of the territory and state as exemplified through historical examples, as well as a detailed analysis by Leonard (2004) of the history of the nineteenth century womens suffrage movement in the territory and later, state, of Colorado.

PAGE 94

73 In 1894, women gained the right to vote in Colorado, following a nearly 25-year campaign. The extension of the right to vote to women in Colorado was first proposed by Territorial Governor Edward McCook in 1870, but denied by the territorial government. In 1871, national suffragists Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton journeyed to the Colorado Territory where they campaigned for womens suffrage. In 1876, womens suffrage leaders pressed to have equal rights included in the new state constitution, but were denied again, gaining only the right to vote in school-district elections. The issue was further pressed in an 1877 election; Susan B. Anthony and Lucy Stone traveled to Colorado to publicize the measure, which once more met failure. In 1881, a referendum proposing womens suffrage in municipal elections also met with defeat. In the meantime, a number of groups promoting womens power and suffrage sprang up, which resulted in the founding of strong social networks amongst Colorados women, and would ultimately serve useful in the rekindled push for suffrage in the 1890s (Leonard 2004; Beaton 2012). In 1890, the Colorado Equal Suffrage Association was formed and boasted some of Colorados most respected women as members (Leonard 2004). The Colorado Equal Suffrage Association began to plan for another womens suffrage measure for the 1893 ballot, receiving support from the Populist political party, and conversely receiving relatively limited support from the national womens suffrage movement, whose leaders were pessimistic following Colorados past failed attempts at suffrage. However, on November 7, 1893, Colorados male voters approved the right of Colorados women to vote, by a count of 35,698 to 29,461, becoming the second state in the nation (after Wyoming) to extend the vote to women (Leonard 2004; Beaton 2012). Following

PAGE 95

74 womens suffrage in Colorado, the state elected its first female state representatives, Clara Cressingham, Frances Klock, and Carrie Clyde Holly in 1894 (Beaton 2012). The first female state senator, Helen Ring Robinson, was elected in 1913, and upon being sworn into office told a journalist, I believe a woman who has qualified as a capable mother and housewife can qualify as a capable legislator. I hold my new responsibilities to the people of the state as sacred as I hold my responsibilities to my husband and my daughter. [59] Ultimately, the extension of the right for women to vote in Colorado was a result of the convergence of a number of events and processes that played out in the years immediately preceding and up to the 1893 vote. In particular, female journalists held respected positions at many of Colorados most authoritative newspapers, and these women were able to convince the newspapers to support womens suffrage (Leonard 2004; Beaton 2012). This influence showed in a survey of Colorados newspapers in 1893, in which Thirty-three newspapersapproved suffrage; only eleven opposed (Leonard 2004:230). Colorados suffragettes also managed to gain the public support of a number of Colorados prominent and respected male citizens, including Governor David Waite, ex-Governor John Routt, and Denver attorney Jared Warner Mills. Additionally, male voters in Colorado outnumbered potential female voters in the state, as reflected by the 1890 Census, which may have made Colorados men more inclined to support womens suffrage; even if women gained the vote, male voters could be assured that women could likely not vote in such a way that would greatly disrupt or interfere with the male-dominated political status quo. Natural-born male voters who feared being politically outnumbered by naturalized citizens might also have voted in support of womens suffrage as a method of watering-down the vote of foreign-born constituents

PAGE 96

75 whom they considered political adversaries (Leonard 2004). Other contributing factors to the success of the 1893 measure potentially included a relatively light vote forecast, as well as a misstep by suffrage opposition in publishing an anti-suffrage pamphlet in the late fall of 1893, which included a brewery advertisement, thus shedding rather embarrassing light on the interests behind the opposition (Leonard 2004; Beaton 2012). The Populist political party also threw its support behind the womens suffrage movement in Colorado, expecting to be repaid with support when women received the vote, although this didnt occur in actuality. Finally, the 1893 depression resulting from the repeal of the Sherman Act could have served as something of a catalyst for what male voters saw as necessary change in the political and economic realms, and granting women the right to vote would have served as one method of fulfilling this need for change (Leonard 2004). State-Level Analysis The Homestead Act of 1862 indirectly led to the extension of the right for women to vote in Colorado in 1894, and it has been noted that the enlarged role of women on the frontier was one of the reasons for granting women suffrage in U.S. western states and territoriesbefore the national franchise was extended (Myres 1988:272). That many women were economic equals of their male counterparts on the American Frontier through the extension of the opportunity provided by the homesteading structure, and through their own hard work to achieve status and success, set the stage for womens suffrage in Colorado, Wyoming, and other western states and territories. Additionally, Colorados women, who were accustomed to working hard to advance economically and take advantage of the opportunities that existed in the West, were able to employ agency

PAGE 97

76 to manipulate the male-dominated political structure to their advantage. Female journalists gained professional respect over time, and ultimately convinced newspapers to support womens suffrage, womens organizations banded together in expansive networks for the common good to publicize the suffrage cause, and some of the states most socially respected women were able to convince men in positions of political and social power to support the suffrage movement. Women also made it a point to vote in school district elections to prove to their male counterparts that they were legitimately interested in gaining the vote, and would act accordingly once that goal was realized (Leonard 2004; Beaton 2012). Furthermore, Colorados women convinced the Populist Party to support the suffrage movement, likely under the assumption that women as a voting bloc would support the party once the vote was gained, although ultimately this was not the case (Leonard 2004). Colorados women were able to make use of agency within the existing political structure in Colorado due to the relatively fluid nature of that structure, and conversely, were able to both reaffirm that structure and simultaneously transform it through their actions. Colorados women held economic and social capital, stemming from the level of independence afforded within the political, economic, and social structures of the American West. The Homestead Act of 1862 played a distinct role in this process, effectively leveling the playing field between men and women on the frontier relatively early in the process of western expansion, industrialization, and womens suffrage. In this sense, there was hardly a time in the Euroamerican history of the West when gender roles werent fluid and dynamic, and although men and women still occupied relatively defined hierarchical levels of social structure, the structure in the West was much less

PAGE 98

77 pronounced than that of the East. Certainly there was some differentiation, especially in terms of political power, but on a basic level, the focus on survival and advancement towards the economic prosperity of the region and nation resulted in less rigid social and economic structures, to the detriment of established, traditional Victorian-era social constructs. In a manner of speaking, the homesteaders of the West, men and women alike, were in the venture together, as equal actors in the economic game of developing the American Frontier. Thus, by the 1890s, women in Colorado held a degree of power, and by the turn of the century, they had learned how to use it in their favor, employing agency to recreate the structures in which they existed, and ultimately convince Colorados men to give them political power through the vote, more than 25 years before the expansion of political gender equality on a national level. Previous Research Literature Review Based on a literature review incorporating the results of JSTOR, Academic Search Premier, Google Scholar, and general Internet searches, few comprehensive archaeological studies or investigations have been undertaken on the subject of unmarried, middle class female homesteaders of the Victorian era American West, especially in Colorado, although a limited number of historical studies have been conducted on the subject. These historical studies include Harris (1993) investigation of women on Colorado homesteads, Hensleys (2008) analysis of female homesteaders on the western frontier of the United States, and Garceaus (1995) examination of the relationship between unmarried women in the west, homesteading, and Victorian-era notions of independence. Additionally, Griswold (1988) explores the realities,

PAGE 99

78 manifestations, and negotiations of domesticity among historical cases of Euroamerican women in the era of late nineteenth through early twentieth century homesteading. Myres (1988) examines the relationship between female domestic and economic independence in western contexts and the conceptual association with early suffrage for women in many territories and states of the Victorian-era American West. The 1890-1906 Arapahoe County, Colorado homestead (5AH916) of Adelia Wells, and the 1878-1905 Teller County, Colorado homestead (5TL4) of Adeline Hornbek are the focus of this study. The histories of both the Wells and Hornbek homesteads and their associations with single, middle class women are documented in the historical record, including in an extensive collection of primary historical documents in the case of the Hornbek homestead, as well as through previous historical and archaeological investigations which exist with regard to these properties and their respective owners. Based on a review of existing literature through UCD and the History Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP), the Wells homestead was the subject of a UCD field school in the 1990s; the project took place from 1996 through 2000, with survey and excavation fieldwork occurring in 1997 and 1998. The artifact collection recovered during fieldwork at this site has undergone basic analysis and interpretation, including an examination of expressions of gender identity inferred from the ceramic assemblage as well as spatial aspects of the sites activity areas (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000, 2002). Based on a review of existing literature and personal communications with staff at the NPS, including Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument and the History Colorado OAHP, the main house and root cellar of the Hornbek homestead are the only existing

PAGE 100

79 structures on the site which date to the original occupation by Adeline Hornbek; the main house (Figure 4) was built in 1878 and stabilized by the NPS in 1976, 1990, and 2007 (NPS 2014b), and the root cellar structure (Figure 5) was built in 1880 and reconstructed by the NPS in 1976 (NPS 2014a). Further, various artifacts have been recovered from the grounds of the property by NPS personnel over the years (personal communication, Rick Wilson, Chief Ranger, August 9, 2013). A small assemblage of artifacts (approximately 59 items) has subsequently been amassed from the Hornbek homestead property. Some of these artifacts, particularly those associated with respective reconstructions, restorations, and stabilizations of the root cellar and house, have undergone minimal analysis for the purpose of curation (personal communication, Conni OConnor, Museum Technician, 21 November 2012). Allison Parris h Figure 4. The main house (ca. 1878) at the Hornbek homestead.

PAGE 101

80 Allison Parrish Figure 5. The reconstructed root cellar (ca. 1880) of the Hornbek homestead. Research at Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument yielded an in-house NPS interpretive history of the Hornbek family and homestead property (Given and Stark 2000) based on an extensive archival collection of primary historical sources directly associated with Adeline Hornbek and curated by the museum at Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, including letters between members of Adelines family the original homestead claim paperwork completed by Adeline, and a number of historical sources such as family photographs, interviews, genealogical research, and census and county records (personal communication, Conni OConnor, Museum Technician, 21 November 2012). Additionally, architectural and historic structure studies of the Hornbek homestead root cellar (NPS 2014a) and main homestead house (NPS 2014b) have been undertaken in conjunction with the NPS-administered List of Classified Structures for Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. The Hornbek homestead site is listed on the National Register.

PAGE 102

81 File Search File searches of History Colorados Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) COMPASS database were conducted on 3 September 2012 and 24 November 2012. A search for all known sites in the state of Colorado with the word homestead in the site name yielded 1,158 results. These results were further sorted for sites with a combination of the word homestead in conjunction with female claimant names (without associated male claimant names or hyphenated claimant names); for example, Adelia Wells Homestead or Adeline Hornbek Homestead. Using this procedure, 21 sites defined by singular female claimant names without associated or hyphenated male claimant names were identified in Colorado, including the Adelia Wells (5AH916) and Adeline Hornbek (5TL4) homesteads (refer to Table 2 below) (OAHP 2012a, 2012b). Previous investigations completed with regard to the Wells homestead include four reports (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000) and one journal article (Stone 2002) associated with the aforementioned 1990s UCD field school. Previous work included on the COMPASS database in association with the Hornbek homestead includes a historic resource study (Culpin 1977), a heritage tourism project proposal (Pikes Peak 2006), and a historic resources survey (Mehls et al. 2000) and community partnership plan summary (Colorado Scenic 1998) associated with the Gold Belt Scenic Byway through Teller and Fremont counties (OAHP 2012c).

PAGE 103

82 Table 2. Colorado Homestead Sites Associated with Female Claimant Names Only Site Number Site Name County Date Condition 5AH916 Adelia Wells Homestead Arapahoe Late date 1939 Good/Light Disturbance; Excavated 5DL2115 Martha J ackson Homestead Cabin Dolores Early date 1931 Late date 1931 Good/Light Disturbance 5GF939 Minnie Hurlburt Clark Homestead Garfield Not provided Poor/Heavy Disturbance 5HF1325 Lillie Baher Homestead & Lumber Mill Huerfano Early date 1920 Late date 1920 Fair/Moderate Disturbance 5LA3120 Laura Michael Homestead Archival Site #40 Las Animas Early date 1910 Late date 1930 Good/Light Disturbance 5LA5832 Mary Doyle Homestead Las Animas Early date 1880 Late date 1984 Fair/Moderate Disturbance 5LP6637 Page Wr ight Homestead La Plata Early date 1930 Late date 1960 Deteriorating; Grazing; Vandalized 5LP7511 Opal Rabbit Homestead La Plata Not provided Poor/Heavy Disturbance; Ruins 5LR492 Sarah Ann Smith Homestead Larimer Early date 1870 Late date 1879 Good/Light Disturbance 5MF1990 Minnie Chapman Homestead Moffat Early date 1932 Late date 1932 Ruins 5OT1129 Louisa Goodpastor Homestead Otero Early date 1899 Not provided 5OT1318 Lenora Rucker Homestead Otero Not provided Grazing 5OT1321 Delilah Jackson Homestea d Otero Not provided Destroyed/Total Disturbance 5PL12 Mary Trego Homestead/Local Landmark Phillips Early date 1888 Late date 2010 Not provided 5PL290 Rachel Osborn Homestead Phillips Early date 1906 Late date 2010 Not provided 5PT880 Jennie McKenzie Ho mestead Pitkin Early date 1917 Late date 1917 Not provided 5TL4 Adeline Hornbek Homestead Teller Early date 1878 Good/Light Disturbance; Listed National Register 5WL1776 Grandma Osgood Homestead/Koenig Farm Weld Early date 1900 Late date 1900 Fair/Modera te Disturbance 5WL1930 Rose Durbin Homestead Weld Early date 1917 Late date 1941 Fair/Moderate Disturbance 5WL4806 Elisha Lines Homestead Weld Early date 1860 Late date 1900 Deteriorating 5WL5470 Gale Church Homestead Weld Early date 1920 Fair/Moderate Disturbance; Grazing

PAGE 104

83 CHAPTER IV METHODOLOGY AND ANTICIPATED RESULTS Methodology The intent of the methodological approach of this study is to implement Wylies (1989) concept of cable and tacking, in which the cable is represented through using multiple lines of evidence to build cables of inference; any given evidentiary thread may be weak or even fragmentary, but woven together, as a cable, they are strong (Ames 2008:139). In terms of tacking, archaeologists tack horizontally between lines of evidence, which combine multiple threads of theory and evidence; one also tacks vertically within cables between theory and evidence, and among phenomenological scales in such a way that archaeological and historical data[are] independent and mutually constraining lines of evidence. With regard to this project, lines of evidence that serve to build cables of inference with which to develop interpretive and comparative analyses on intraand inter-site levels using the tacking (139) approach include the archaeological record, use of space analyses, and historical records. The methodology of the project includes three main steps: 1) a file and literature review, 2) analyses of the archaeological assemblages, gendered uses of space, and historical records associated with the Wells and Hornbek homesteads, and 3) the completion of this Masters thesis to integrate and interpret these results. File Search and Literature Review An in-depth literature review of secondary sources has been undertaken, with a focus on historical studies of single, middle class women homesteading on the Victorian-era American Frontier; the history of dominant Victorian-era womens issues, including the

PAGE 105

84 cult of domesticity and true womanhood; the history of the American West and Colorado in particular, with a focus on homesteading and related land laws; and the rise of materialism and consumerism within the capitalist economic structure of the industrialized Victorian-era United States. Additionally, a file search includes a review of previous archaeological and historical studies related to the Wells and Hornbek homesteads. The literature review also includes research on primary historical documents, notably the archival collection associated with Adeline Hornbek, her family, and her homestead, to serve as a supplementary line of evidence to contribute to cables of inference (Wylie 1989; Ames 2008:139), and to substantiate the archaeological record. It is recognized that the small size of the archaeological assemblage (approximately 59 items) recovered from the Hornbek homestead property is a potential weakness with regard to developing representative interpretations of gender identity, and conformance to the cult of domesticity and Victorian ideals of true womanhood. As such, the extensive archival collection of primary historical sources directly associated with Adeline Hornbek, her family, and her homestead, including a homestead claim document written by Adeline, serve as a supplementary line of evidence, and serve to substantiate the results of the analyses of the archaeological record and use of space concerning interpretations of gender identity and conformance or resistance to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood. A digital camera was used to complete high-quality photographic documentation during research of the Hornbek archival collection. This line of study focuses on primary archival records personally documented by Adeline Hornbek, or by her closest family members who lived the experience of

PAGE 106

85 homesteading in close familial association. Adelines children in particular were likely greatly influenced in their formative years by their mother and could thus be expected to be recipients of, or at the very least, have the ability to acknowledge or recognize aspects of Adelines identity as experienced by her family. As such, firsthand accounts of and by Adeline and her immediate family members, with an emphasis on personal letters, photographs, and other primary accounts, are the focus of this analysis, as Reality is often found in the immediate accounts of womens letters, diaries, and journals reflective writings if you will (Norwood 1988:157). Research into primary archival documents focuses on expressions or descriptions of gendered identity associations and secondary but related identity characteristics such as kinship and economic identity within the historical records themselves, taking into account the hearsay-type nature of many of these documents and recognizing the potential for bias from indirect and impersonal accounts, written for example, by spouses or other family members. In many cases, information associated with gender identity is inferred from documents that describe an individuals roles as a wife or mother, or her relationship to her children. Similarly, photographic documentation has been observed and analyzed for visual evidence that these individuals were or were not adhering to gender roles or ideals of the era on the basis of dress or activity depicted in the images. The outcome of this portion of the file and literature search is detailed and discussed in the individual results section of this thesis. Review of other pertinent documentation available on the subject of the homestead sites and the individual women from local historical societies, museums, and libraries (such as the Western History and Genealogy Collection of the Denver Public Library)

PAGE 107

86 and agencies such as the NPS, History Colorado, and the Arapahoe County and Teller County Clerk and Recorder has also been pursued. Ultimately, the results of the file search and literature review serve to underlie the development of the historic and sitespecific contexts for this thesis, which are subsequently used as a basis for interpretations of the archaeological and historical records, as well as gendered space analyses, of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads. Analyses of Archaeological Collections and Gendered Space A detailed descriptive analysis of a sample of archaeological materials recovered during UCD fieldwork at the Wells homestead and from the NPS restoration of the root cellar of the Hornbek homestead is the primary focus of this study. The analysis focuses on personal and domestic historic artifacts with gendered associations which can be temporally assigned with reasonable certainty to the period of significance associated with this study, which dates from the mid-nineteenth through the early twentieth century, and as frequently as possible to the years preceding and extending through the time periods during which the Wells and Hornbek homesteads were inhabited by their single female owners (as established through historical documentary records). In the case of the Wells homestead, this includes artifacts pre-dating 1906, when the portion of the property containing the homestead was sold (Stone 2002). In the case of the Hornbek homestead, this includes artifacts pre-dating Adeline Hornbeks death in 1905 (Given and Stark 2000). Adeline married Frederick Sticksel in 1899 (Given and Stark 2000), and although archaeological artifacts dating from the period of 1899-1905 would not have been associated with Adelines identity as a single woman, they could have been associated with her identity as a married woman; the potential existence of this sort of dichotomy

PAGE 108

87 within the material record could serve as a sort of gauge with regard to the recognition of modifications or transitions in manifestations of gender identity and conformance or resistance to traditional and conventional middle class Victorian gender ideals, including the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, associated with changes in marital status. For the purposes of this study, artifacts with gendered connotations and identity associations, especially in the sense of the feminine gender and its associations with the domestic and consumer realms, are the focus of the analysis as potential embodiments of identity. Artifacts indicative of feminine gender identity can include a variety of domestic items related to womens work, such as canning jars, knitting or crochet needles, or embroidery materials; decorative or ornamental domestic items such as ceramic sets, glassware, or ornate furniture; health-related items such as jars or bottles which would have held proprietary medicines for female ailments, makeup, or perfumes; or personal items such as buttons, jewelry, and hairpins, as well as artifacts of dress related to womens clothing styles of the era (such as corsets or bustles). Additionally, it is recognized that artifacts in and of themselves may reflect multiple types of personal identity that might include not only gender identity, but also economic, religious, kinship, ethnic, and other types of identity, in that Gender remains a core structuring principle but it is not always the central principle to constitute an individuals identity in a given social or historical context. Consideration of age, sexuality, ethnicity, race, class, etc.not added but relational to gendercaptures the complexity, contradiction, and plurality of lived experiences. [Geller 2009:70] Secondary aspects of identity can be reflected in these objects as well: for instance, economic identity might be reflected in artifacts indicative of consumer choice and representing certain products and goods of the period, including certain brands or types of

PAGE 109

88 ceramic sets, quality jewelry, or other objects suggestive of disposable income. Religious identity can be reflected within the archaeological record through the presence of rosaries, medals, or other objects directly associated with particular religions. Ethnic identity can potentially be represented through certain types of jewelry (for example, Irish Claddagh rings), and ceramic vessel types or place of manufacture. Kinship identity can be reflected within the archaeological record through the presence of wedding rings or items of clothing (for example, Scottish clan tartans). Furthermore, it is possible that some artifacts may not be particularly revealing of identity. The analysis of gendered personal and domestic artifacts incorporates a variety of material types and artifact classes, including glass (such as jars, bottles, and glassware), ceramics (such as dining sets and decorative objects), metal (such as combs, garter clips, and hairpins), and any other relevant miscellaneous materials and/or items exemplary of Victorian-era gender roles or associations extant within the archaeological assemblages of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads. Artifact analyses are based on formal characteristics and include measurements of length, width, height, thickness, and/or diameter using calipers with United States customary units of measure, as well as estimations of minimum number of vessels (where applicable). Glass artifacts are analyzed on the basis of type, segment/portion, color, shape, contents/function, finish, seams, decoration, and/or makers mark or other distinguishing features. Ceramic artifacts are analyzed on the basis of type/ware, segment, function/form, glaze/color, decoration, and/or makers mark or other distinguishing features. Metal artifacts are analyzed on the basis of material, type, segment/portion, function, seams, closure, method of opening, and/or other distinguishing features. Miscellaneous items are

PAGE 110

89 analyzed on the basis of material, size, function, and/or makers marks or other distinguishing features. Where possible, diagnostic artifacts have been researched to determine manufacturer, location and date of manufacture, cost, and any other available and pertinent historic information that can be obtained. Interpretations of artifacts as expressions and reflections of identity on the part of Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek are ultimately tied back to the context produced through research into secondary sources, as well as the inclusion of any relevant information from primary or secondary sources alluding or referring to popular and/or socioculturally accepted material culture of the period. Formal analyses of material culture contributing to the discussion presented in latter chapters of this thesis are based on and interpreted from Victorian-era catalogues which depict and describe the material culture of the relevant period in context, including Montgomery Ward & Co. (1895), and Sears Roebuck & Co. (1897). Toulouse 2001 is referenced for purposes of identification of bottle makers marks, Lindseys (2014) Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA) Bottle Dating internet resource is consulted for general dating guidance for historic bottles and glass, as is Rexfords (2000) publication on the history and identification of eighteenth through twentieth century female footwear in the United States. Gernsheim 1981 and Blum 1974 are consulted for purposes of identification and dating of artifacts related to apparel, accessories, and fashions of the Victorian era. For insights into gender roles and relations as symbolized through the evolution of Victorian-era fashions, Nickolais (2013) work on nineteenth century fashion and dress reform is referenced. Sources researched in relation to Victorian-era

PAGE 111

90 use of space associated with domesticity and gender include Clark 1986, Foy and Schlereth 1992, and Tange 2010. The artifact analysis focuses on personal and domestic historic artifacts that can be temporally assigned with reasonable certainty to the period of significance associated with this study, which dates from the mid-nineteenth through the early twentieth century. Within Victorian-era middle and upper class structures, personal and domestic artifact classes tended to have gendered connotations and identity associations, especially in the sense of the feminine gender and its associations with the domestic and consumer realms (Harris 1993; Blumin 1998; Roberts 1998; Woloch 2006). Artifact assemblages from the Wells and Hornbek homesteads are subsequently subdivided and classified under four categories for purposes of comparative analysis: 1. Domestic and personal items that fall within the realm of Victorian-era feminine gender roles or associations; 2. Domestic and personal objects that fall within the realm of Victorian-era masculine gender roles or associations; 3. Domestic and personal items for which it is difficult to assign a particular gender role or association based on the current condition of the object, but which based on observed physical characteristics likely fell within the realm of masculine or feminine gender roles or associations at the time of use (such as, for example, buttons, snaps, eyelets, hooks, shoes, etc.); and 4. Gender-neutral artifacts that may not connote gender identity at all, especially with in a western homesteading context in which functional, utilitarian artifacts associated with basic survival may have taken precedence over conformance or

PAGE 112

91 resistance to mainstream gender roles of the Victorian era. This category might include items associated with utilitarian or functional usages, such as, for example, agricultural tools and equipment, guns, bullets, pots and pans, and cooking utensils. These artifacts are noted within the overall study in order to provide a comprehensive context for the analysis of gendered artifacts within the greater site assemblages, but are not analyzed within the confines of the study of gendered artifacts in particular, as it is assumed that basic functional items would have been utilized by any individual living as a homesteader in the west, and as a result would not afford a great deal of interpretive utility with regard to the research question at hand. However, in the case that an otherwise gender-neutral artifact features characteristics that could indicate an expression of gender identity (such as unique attributes or markings, or other distinctive identifying characteristics), it is included in the analysis as a gendered artifact, along with subsequent interpretations of gender identity reflected by the archaeological record. A digital camera with a macro lens and tabletop photo studio has been used to capture high quality photographic imagery of artifacts analyzed within these categories from the respective Wells and Hornbek assemblages. For the purposes of this study, the totality of artifacts (n=59) recovered from the house, root cellar, and grounds of the Hornbek homestead and held by Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument are examined for potential gendered associations. Some of these artifacts are formally curated, with basic analyses and associated paperwork completed and held by the National Monument; conversely, other artifacts are informally

PAGE 113

92 retained by the National Monument and subsequently have not been subject to any level of official documentation, analysis, or curation. This latter portion of the assemblage is the result of the unsystematic collection of artifacts from the grounds of the Hornbek homestead property by NPS personnel, as objects are randomly encountered in surface contexts. Due to the spontaneity of collection, and owing to an apparent lack of connection with an official preservation project (such as restoration or reconstruction) or provenience in direct association with extant site features or structures (rather, these items have been recovered from the general grounds of the site), these artifacts have not undergone formal analysis prior to the effort at hand. However, despite the unsystematic nature of collection and the aforementioned lack of formal analysis or curation, the research potential of these items is recognized by NPS personnel, and consequently a significant effort is made to preserve and maintain the artifacts recovered from the general grounds of the Hornbek homestead site. Accordingly, the Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument Chief Ranger accumulates and retains unsystematically collected artifacts from the grounds of the site in a container in his office (personal communication, Rick Wilson, Chief Ranger, August 9, 2013). Based on the number and diversity of artifacts represented in this unofficial collection, and as reflected by a variety of artifact classes, diagnostic historical periods, and functional types present, it is evident that the Chief Rangers efforts to retain all artifacts potentially associated with the site have met with a considerable degree of success, especially taking into account the present lack of systematic survey or excavation of the site. From the total formal and informal collection of Hornbek homestead artifacts, those which are determined to post-date the period of significance for the investigation of this

PAGE 114

93 site (1878-1905) and those artifacts which are neither diagnostic nor can be reasonably dated to the general period of significance (such as, for example, from an excavation level with associated diagnostic artifacts which date to the applicable period) are eliminated from further examination and analysis. Those artifacts that pre-date or date to the period of significance for this study on the basis of diagnostic or other characteristics which allow the inference of a date or period with reasonable certainty are further sorted for personal and domestic artifacts, which are subsequently subdivided and classified into the categories established above, i.e., 1) objects with Victorian-era feminine gender roles or associations; 2) objects with Victorian-era masculine gender roles or associations; and 3) objects which likely fell within the realm of masculine or feminine gender roles or associations at the time of use, but for which are difficult to ascertain a particular gender association in the context of the present. Gender neutral artifacts, such as strictly functional, utilitarian artifacts described under Category 4 above, were set aside and not subject to further analysis. All artifacts falling within the gendered artifact categori es established for the purposes of this study and held (formally and informally) by Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument were photographed and subject to analysis; these items are included in Table 9 through Table 11 (Chapter VI, page 205). Refer to Appendix E for a full sort of total artifacts associated with the homestead site and held by Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. With regard to the Wells homestead site, the totality of artifacts (n=25,986) recovered from archaeological investigations (including multi-year surveys and excavations) at the Wells homestead by the University of Colorado Denver (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000, 2002) and held by the Plains Conservation Center (at this organizations West

PAGE 115

94 Bijou location) are examined for potential gendered associations. All of these artifacts are formally curated by the Plains Conservation Center, and the majority of these items have undergone analysis associated with the original fieldwork and reporting completed by the University of Colorado Denver. The Plains Conservation Center and the University of Colorado Denver hold associated paperwork. From the total collection of Wells homestead artifacts, those which are determined to post-date the period of significance for the investigation of this site ( 1890-1906) and those artifacts which are neither diagnostic nor can be reasonably dated to the general period of significance (such as, for example, from an excavation level with associated diagnostic artifacts which date to the applicable period) are eliminated from further examination and analysis. Those artifacts that pre-date or date to the period of significance for this study on the basis of diagnostic or other characteristics which allow the inference of a date or period with reasonable certainty are further sorted for personal and domestic artifacts, which are subsequently subdivided and classified into the categories established above, i.e., 1) objects with Victorian-era feminine gender roles or associations; 2) objects with Victorian-era masculine gender roles or associations; and 3) objects which likely fell within the realm of masculine or feminine gender roles or associations at the time of use, but for which are difficult to ascertain a particular gender association in the context of the present. Gender neutral artifacts, such as strictly functional, utilitarian artifacts described under Category 4 above, were set aside and not subject to further analysis. While all of the Wells homestead artifacts held by the Plains Conservation Center were visually examined (by a total of two historical archaeologists, including the author

PAGE 116

95 of this study and a graduate-level researcher associated with Colorado State University, along with two research assistants associated with Colorado State University), only those observed to embody characteristics falling within the gendered artifact categories established for the purposes of this study were photographed and subject to further analysis; these items are included in Table 3 through Table 8 (Chapter V, page 102). Additionally, gendered artifacts which were identified and in some cases analyzed in post-fieldwork reports by the University of Colorado but which could not be relocated during current research activities were included on the basis of existing information in the current analysis, using previously documented data and photographs where available ; these items are also included in Table 3 through Table 8 (Chapter V, page 102). Refer to Appendix C for a full sort of total artifacts recovered during archaeological investigations at the Wells homestead by the University of Colorado Denver (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000, 2002); refer to Appendix D for a full sort of total artifacts considered for analysis in association with the goals of the current study. The totality of gendered artifacts identified in association with the Wells and Hornbek homestead site s are further subject to frequency analyses, which are presented in the Comparative Critical Analysis section of this thesis (refer to Chapter VII, page 268). In particular, frequency analyses for each individual site examine the categories of gendered artifacts established above (i.e., 1) feminine artifacts; 2) masculine artifacts; and 3) gendered but masculine or feminine-indistinct artifacts), with a focus on significant differences between these three categories of artifacts in relation to each other, as well as to the total number of artifacts with potential to exhibit gender associations recovered from each site. The results of frequency analyses on artifacts recovered from each

PAGE 117

96 homestead site are also contrasted as a method of facilitating a quantitatively meaningful comparative analysis and subsequent discussion of the realities of gender identity reflected through a palimpsest of the material culture associated with the respective homestead sites of these two unmarried female pioneers on both an individual basis and with regard to a more holistic representation of feminine gender norms, ideals, and roles in Victorian-era Colorado. Uses of space, including floor plans of individual structures and activity areas across sites and landscapes, have been tied to Victorian-era concepts of gender identity and the cult of domesticity and true womanhood (Clark 1986; Foy and Schlereth 1992; Tange 2010). Subsequently, a reexamination of Stones (1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000, 2002) original analyses of gendered activity areas based on the results of survey and excavations at the Wells homestead is undertaken (see Chapter V, page 199). With regard to the Hornbek homestead, an analysis of gendered space incorporates concepts of gendered uses of space as evidenced by the floor plan and architecture of the main house (see Chapter VI, page 244). A visit to the Hornbek homestead was completed, and high quality photographs were taken of the interior and exterior of the main house, as well as the overall site. A previously completed architectural study of the main homestead house (NPS 2014b) under the NPS-administered List of Classified Structures for Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument is used in conjunction with the photographs and observations resulting from the Hornbek homestead site visit as a method of analyzing the floor plan and architectural detail of the original portions of the main house, with a focus on concepts of Victorian-era gendered space and consequent conformance or nonconformance. These analyses of gendered uses of space at the Wells and Hornbek

PAGE 118

97 homesteads ultimately serve as supplementary lines of evidence to integrate into the cable of inference (Wylie 1989; Ames 2008:139) related to potential expressions of gender identity, and specifically to whether Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek were conforming to Victorian notions of gendered space associated with the cult of domesticity with in the confines of Victorian-era Colorado. Masters Thesis The final step in this study is the completion of this comparative and interpretive Masters thesis incorporating, via the cables and tacking (Wylie 1989; Ames 2008:139) approach, the results of the file search and literature review, including primary historical sources, the analyses of the archaeological records of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads, and the analyses of gendered space at the Wells and Hornbek homesteads. The context developed from the literature review serves as the basis for interpretations within the greater theoretical frameworks of political economy, Marxist theory, practice theory, and feminist theory, with a focus on the political, economic, social, and gender structures of the Victorian-era American West, especially as pertain to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood. The result is a cohesive analysis of issues of gender identity and conformance to Victorian ideals of true womanhood and the cult of domesticity on the part Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek as unmarried, middle class female homesteaders within the context of the rural Victorian-era American West. Anticipated Results The histories of both the Wells and Hornbek homesteads and their associations with single, middle class women of the Victorian era are documented in the historical record, and it is expected that Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek are further identifiable in the

PAGE 119

98 archaeological record based on the presence of items commonly linked with feminine domestic gender roles and identity as emphasized by Victorian ideals of true womanhood and the cult of domesticity. It is also expected that economic, religious, kinship, ethnic, and other types of identity might be apparent within the archaeological record, and in such cases, are likely be associated with Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek as the heads of their households and thus theoretically, the individuals not only making these types of conscious identity decisions on a household level, but also as the primary bread-winners and hence consumers purchasing these items. It is, however, recognized that three grown sons lived with Adelia Wells (Stone 2002), which could potentially result in ambiguous data, especially in terms of certain categories of artifacts which arent necessarily indicative foremost of gender identity, such as, for example, the presence of glass liquor bottles ; necessary caution is exercised with regard to recognition of this complication pertaining to interpretations of data in these types of scenarios. The archaeological assemblages, historical records, and uses of space associated with the Wells and Hornbek homesteads are anticipated to exemplify levels of both conformance and resistance to dominant and socioculturally-accepted structures of the Vict orian era, and economic and gender structures in particular. That Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek were resisting the dominant, male-oriented capitalist structure at the most basic level by adopting independent, self-reliant economic identities as land owners and homesteaders, and succeeding financially without reliance on husbands, stands as an example of perhaps the utmost level of resistance on the part of single, middle class women in the Victorian era. That said, three potential outcomes are anticipated with

PAGE 120

99 regard to analyses of the archaeological assemblages of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads: 1. Strict conformance to socioculturally-established notions of feminine gender identity as defined by the cult of domesticity and Victorian ideals of true womanhood, and signified by high overall proportions of material culture distinctly related to feminine gender identity as defined by Victorian, middle class cultural values and norms. 2. Notable resistance to socioculturally-established notions of feminine gender identity in terms of the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, suggested by the conspicuous absence of material culture related strictly to feminine gender identity, or a disproportionate quantity of material culture aligned more closely with masculine gender identity, and distinguished overall by a general lack of items which might be attributed to significant expressions of gender identity at all. 3. Evidence of both conformance and resistance to dominant and socioculturallyaccepted structures of the Victorian era, including gender structures as defined by the cult of domesticity and true womanhood. Specifically, Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek were independent women who made their own decisions, and as a result, the archaeological record is expected to mirror individual agency and unique manifestations of identity through a variety of artifacts expressive of the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, in addition to evidence of resistance to these ideals based on independently-established or manufactured characteristics of individual identity; for example, non-conformance to popular clothing or accessory styles of the period, exemplified by the presence of artifacts indicative

PAGE 121

100 of older, out-of-date styles, or the presence of liquor bottles, which might be indicative of alcohol consumption, and hence, non-conformity to Victorian ideals of femininity and domesticity. It is also expected that gendered personal and domestic artifacts within the archaeological record could reflect economic status, especially with regard to consumer choices, in the way that the material record might reveal purchases of more expensive items and non-necessity or luxury items, some of which might also be suggestive of gender identity and influences of the cult of domesticity and true womanhood. Additionally, the archaeological record is expected to include items representative of emulation, or the attempt, with varying levels of consciousness, to replicate the behaviors and to adopt the material culture ofthose with perceived higher socioeconomic status (Bell 2002:253), of the upper classes as pursued through social and economic practices of the Victorian middle class, thus fueling the consumer revolution, and indicating conspicuous consumption and the role of material culture in concepts of social structure and movement within that structure (256). Specifically, it is expected that despite their economic independence, single middle class women, especially those raised in the United States with its established pillars of Vict orian sociocultural values and norms, would have conformed to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, especially in terms of consumerism and the more socially visible aspects of personal and domestic material culture, such as ceramics with their role in middle class social dining practices, and clothing styles incorporating corsets and other feminine middle class dress codes of the time. Additionally, like gender and economic identity (and potentially associated with gender and economic identity), it is

PAGE 122

101 likely that concomitant identity characteristics such as kinship, religious, ethnic, or other forms of identity could be apparent within the archaeological assemblages of the homesteads of Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek; some of these identity characteristics may have secondary associations with gender identity and influences of the cult of domesticity and true womanhood. Finally, it is anticipated that this study could result in the development of conceptual directions for future research, which might feasibly be anticipated to include questions such as (but certainly not limited to) : In cases of strict conformance to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood inferred through the personal and domestic aspects of the material record, is this symbolic of an active, conscious use of agency in attempting to emphasize feminine gender identity in the face of economic independence, which would have fallen outside Victorian-era socioculturally accepted gender norms? Might strict conformance to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood through material culture be an attempt to balance the less socioculturally-accepted economic independence embraced by single female homesteaders? How did the presence of children influence conformance or resistance to Victorian-era norms of gender identity within homestead households? Were middle class, single mothers on the American Frontier attempting to emphasize and uphold traditional gender ideals in order to facilitate the transmission of accepted norms of the time, despite what may have been less rigid gender structures of frontier life?

PAGE 123

102 CHAPTER V WELLS HOMESTEAD (5AH916) Historic Background Little information on the early life and history of Adelia Wells was recovered during either current research or research by the University of Colorado Denver (UCD) in association with excavations and analysis of collections in the 1990s and early 2000s. The history of Adelia Wells and the Wells homestead provided below were largely developed from Stones (2000) synthesis report on UCDs field investigations of the Wells site (5AH916) between 1996 and 1998. The reader is referred to this report for additional details. Adelia Wells was born in New York in 1838. Her path west to Colorado is characterized by a dearth of information; however, following unsuccessful attempts by two earlier claimants to homestead the acreage, the Wells homestead was established by Adelia Wells in Arapahoe County, Colorado in 1890, in Township 4 South, Range 66 West, within the southeast quarter of Section 26. The homestead is situated on the high plains to the east of the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains (Figure 6). The homestead house was constructed on the south half of the claim, located on a small knoll between East and West Tollgate Creeks, between June and September 1890. Adelia and her three adult sons occupied the house. Patent #4602 for the 160-acre claim was issued on June 7, 1898 after an eight-year prove-up period. While there are discrepancies between the Wells affidavit and witness affidavits, all documents generally indicate the cultivation of between 16 and 25 acres, with the remainder of the property grazed by livestock. Structures on the property included a four-room stone house built in 1890 and measuring

PAGE 124

103 either 32 x 28 feet or 16 x 28 feet (excavations support the latter, smaller measurement), a root cellar, two wells, corrals, pig pens, chicken coops, and a barn, as well as a fence line spanning between two and three total miles (Stone 2000). The number of buildings and structures, the size of the house, and the construction materials used to build the house (stone and wood as opposed to the common use of sod), indicate that Adelia had financial resources at her disposal and was likely fairly well-off (Stone 1998a:33). None of the buildings or structures are extant, and the site exists only as a series of archaeological deposits. Figure 6. Location of 5AH916, Wells homestead site, Arapahoe County, Colorado. Surface deposits of the archaeological site cover 6,156 square meters. Excavations by UCD in 1997 and 1998 revealed the house foundation, the root cellar, one well, two trash pits, and a possible courtyard to the north of the house (Figure 7). A total of approximately 25,986 artifacts were recovered over the course of two field seasons of

PAGE 125

104 excavations (Stone 2000). The majority of the materials recovered pre-date 1900, suggesting that the majority of the artifacts are likely associated with the Wells occupation. A number of the artifacts recovered (and particularly glass and ceramic items) pre-date 1890, suggesting that Adelia brought a significant amount of material culture with her to the site. Further, other diagnostic artifacts indicate purchase between 1890 and 1903; this, in addition to the sheer quantity of materials recovered from the site (in opposition to a more common deficiency of material culture at contemporaneous homestead sites), indicate that Adelia may have had access to fairly significant financial resources in terms of disposable income (Stone 1998b:188). Most importantly, analysis of artifacts recovered during excavations indicate that Occupation at the site, may in fact, be limited to the period in which Adelia Wells owned the property, though at least some maintenance activities to the buildings occurred later as indicated by the presence of wire nails and clear (post-1915) window glass. [186] Although details on the last years of the Wells occupation are scarce, it is clear that by 1903, the north half of the homestead claim had been sold to a new owner, with the south half of the property meeting a similar fate by 1906; however, it is apparent from the archaeological record that the occupation of the Wells homestead as a residence is restricted to 1890-1900/1903 and Ms. Wells is apparently the only one who ever lived there (Stone 2000:91).

PAGE 126

105 Figure 7. Map of 5AH916, Wells homestead site, Arapahoe County, Colorado (adapted from Stone 2000). The 1900 census does not list Adelia as a resident of Colorado, although she may have been listed under a sons name. Whatever the case, if Adelia still owned the

PAGE 127

106 homestead between 1898 and 1906, she may not have been in residence on the property; ownership of the property at during this frame of time is unclear with regard to historical records (or the lack thereof) (Stone 2000; Tucker 1997). Based on chain-of-deed information, the results of excavation of the site, and analysis of the associated artifact assemblage, Stone (2000) determined a probable site occupation date of 1890-1903 (19). Distinct owners separately owned the north and south halves of the claim until the two halves of the original claim were reconsolidated in a 1919 sale to a new owner (Tucker 1997; Stone 2000). Artifact Analysis The analysis of artifacts originating from the Wells homestead includes both diagnostic and non-diagnostic objects. In the case of diagnostic objects, the association of the artifacts with Adelia Wells and the activities at the homestead concurrent with her habitation of the property are based on the diagnostic features of those items, i.e., the ability to date those items based on generally known and acknowledged temporal characteristics of style, design, manufacture, materials, etc. to the timeframe during which Adelia would have inhabited the property. In the case of non-diagnostic artifacts, these items are included in the analysis on the basis of the location from which they were recovered, with regard to spatial locale, subsurface level (i.e., lower subsurface levels typically retaining physical integrity with regard to original deposit), and/or spatial association with diagnostic objects which date to the timeframe of interest, with the assumption that short of evidence of subsurface disturbance, the diagnostic and nondiagnostic artifacts were deposited during approximately the same timeframe. Additionally, a small number of objects with strong gender associations that have

PAGE 128

107 previously been analyzed in conjunction with past excavation reports or publications on the Wells site and directly attributed to the Wells occupation on the basis of provenience evidence that has since been lost are also included in this analysis. Artifacts from the Wells assemblage that can be argued to exhibit gender associations are analyzed and discussed below within the context of the functional categories of Tableware, Household Decoration and Furnishing, Victorian Vices, Health and Hygiene, Personal Items, and Childrens Toys; individual artifact attributes are detailed in Table 3 through Table 8. Tableware Ceramic tableware in the Victorian era served as a direct symbol of a familys economic station, as well as their observance of appropriate Victorian social culture with its associated gender roles. In particular, a middle class Victorian wife was expected to maintain two complete sets of tableware, each matching, including one set for private family use (which could be expected to consist of a relatively plain set of whiteware to symbolize modesty) and a second, more elaborate set for use in the course of public social gatherings (which might consist of an ornately decorated or porcelain set). Further, tableware was a reflection of the individualism so imperative to the social norms of the era, and hence ceramic sets were expected to focus on individual place settings in a practice known as segmented dining, with corresponding numbers of plates, soup bowls, and other vessels; the family-style serving of food from communal platters or bowls was not conducive to prescribed social processes focused on the individual (Fitts 2002). In some cases, broken tableware may have been replaced with a nearly identical vessel from a different set, with a similar theme close enough to the aesthetics of the original that the difference between the two may not have been immediately recognizable; in such a case,

PAGE 129

108 although individual vessels may not have represented exact matches, the similar nature of theme may reflect a middle class desire to perpetuate a generally matching ceramic set (Gray 2009). Similarly, the financial success of middle class families was symbolized through teaware maintained by the Victorian wife, who was expected to maintain a matching plain set for private familial use during morning tea and a more elaborate matching set for public use during afternoon tea (Wall 1999). Whiteware In historic archaeology, the terms whiteware and ironstone are commonly used interchangeably, and generally both reference a ceramic with an aesthetically lightcolored, white to off-white paste with a clear glaze; refined earthenware whiteware, in addition to being softer and more porous than ironstone, can also be distinguished by a white-to-gray-to-buff color paste, whereas ironstone is characterized by a blue-to-bluish gray paste. True ironstone is fired at a very high temperature, resulting in a highly refined, vitrified product, extremely hard and non-porous, whereas refined earthenware is fired at lower temperatures, resulting in a refined, semi-vitreous product with (slightly) greater porosity. Further, although a number of ceramic makers marks dating from the nineteenth century incorporate the term ironstone, the use of this term generally indicates a trade name rather than a true ironstone product, as the use of the term ironstone was not regulated for accuracy with regard to composition or firing properties of the manufactured product; as a result, although a ceramic may be labeled as ironstone, the mere manufacturer identification of the product as such is not necessarily reflective of a true ironstone material. Additionally, although ironstone is harder and denser than refined earthenware, it is still technically classified as a category of earthenware (Rotman

PAGE 130

109 et al. 2013). As such, for the purposes of this analysis, all whiteware ceramics are denoted and classified by the generic term whiteware, and it is noted that, although a number of ceramic makers marks present in the assemblage denote ironstone, the majority of the ceramic fragments analyzed in actuality appear to consist of a refined earthenware whiteware, on the basis of observations of semi-vitreous porosity in conjunction with a buff-colored paste. To facilitate analysis and interpretation of the Wells ceramic assemblage in terms of time and resource constraints, the analysis of individual artifacts focused specifically on whiteware ceramic fragments with makers marks or other potentially diagnostic markings (such as rim patterns or gold leaf embellishment), including two reconstructed bowls, a reconstructed plate, and ten additional fragments, a few of which could be assigned functions such as cups, a lid, and a pitcher (a number of these artifacts are depicted in Figures 8-11 below); however, a total of 683 whiteware fragments are present in the overall Wells ceramic assemblage, accounting for a total of 66.7 percent by count of the total ceramic assemblage (Stone 2000). Although the majority of whiteware artifacts were too fragmentary to assign functional designations, the presence of plates, bowls, cups, and a pitcher were noted in the original analysis (Motsinger and Stone 1998); also noted was the presence of an apparent whiteware platter with an oblong shape. Identified makers marks indicate that Adelia likely owned whiteware manufactured by two companies prior to establishing the homestead, which she subsequently transported with her to the homestead; additional makers marks post-dating the establishment of the homestead indicate that Adelia continued to purchase whiteware

PAGE 131

110 to supplement her original assemblage, indicating a degree of disposable income (Stone 2000). The presence of an extensive number of whiteware artifacts in the Wells assemblage, representing a variety of functional vessel types, indicates that in accordance with middle class Victorian social norms, Adelia maintained a relatively simple, minimally decorated set of matching whiteware, which likely would have been used for day-to-day family functions. Further, based on the number of ceramic makers marks present, it seems possible that Adelia may have made an effort to replace broken elements or supplement her original set with closely matched settings purchased separately at later dates. In terms of the social requirements for segmented dining, it is difficult to reach a meaningful conclusion based on the partial and fragmentary nature of the ceramic assemblage, which represents individually discarded elements rather than the remnants of a comprehensive set of tableware; however, it is apparent that vessels of multiple types are represented in the whiteware assemblage, including plates, bowls, and cups, which could reflect the general existence of individual place settings, each with corresponding vessel types. Conversely, the presence of an apparent platter is antithetical to the notion of segmented dining, as it is a vessel representative of a community function in which individual diners would have served themselves family-style from a common vessel, in effect removing the Victorian focus on the individual diner. Additionally, although the presence of a whiteware tea set for family use cant be completely discounted based on the occurrence of cups in the assemblage, the potential existence of a whiteware tea set per Victorian standards is not obvious due to a lack of whiteware saucers; if Adelia did in fact not own a whiteware tea set, this could be a result of personal preference associated with a

PAGE 132

111 divergence from social standards for family tea time, or could indicate the use of a decorated tea set for family functions. Overall, the whiteware assemblage indicates that Adelia generally subscribed to middle class Victorian social norms requiring a matching whiteware set with individual elements for each functional vessel type for the purpose of private, family dining; however, she may also have negotiated these standards to fit the specific needs of her household, with its own familial definitions of meaning or tradition, as reflected by the presence of a platter and its symbolic implications of family-style dining. Additionally, although Adelia made an apparent effort to maintain a closely matched set of whiteware with minor differences apparent in settings purchased after the move to the homestead, the lack of a particular common makers mark over others in the assemblage could indicate that Adelia never replaced an entire older set of whiteware with a newer set which would have contained identical individual settings. This could indicate that although Adelia subscribed to the social requirement to maintain a whiteware set that generally matched, she may have been comfortable negotiating the specifics of that social norm for the sake of personal preference, material economy, financial frugality she simply may not have had the disposable income required to purchase an entirely new set of matching whiteware. Additionally, as whiteware was likely to be used on a daily basis within the household, the breakage of individual settings was probably a relatively frequent occurrence, and thus it would not be reasonable to purchase a complete, new matching set in association with damage to a single setting rather, it would be rational to purchase one or a few settings at a time to replace broken items. This strategy would have allowed Adelia to fulfill middle class feminine gender expectations related to

PAGE 133

112 domestic material culture and conspicuous consumption, while simultaneously negotiating an income that likely fluctuated from year-to-year in association with the windfalls and hardships of homesteading. Whiteware sets were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between $3.65 and $13.00 (depending on the size of the set) (531), and individual pieces were also sold at various costs between 9 cents and $1.50 per piece (536-537). Undecorated J.G. Meakin whiteware sold by individual piece or vessel dozen for various costs between 7 cents and $1.60 in the 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue (614). Allison Parrish Figure 8. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 394 (see Table 3 for additional details).

PAGE 134

113 Allison Parrish Figure 9. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 394 (see Table 3 for additional details). Allis on Parrish Figure 10. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1908 (see Table 3 for additional details).

PAGE 135

114 Allison Parrish Figure 11. 5AH916, whiteware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2002 (see Table 3 for additional details). Transferware To facilitate analysis and interpretation of the Wells ceramic assemblage in terms of time and resource constraints, the analysis of individual artifacts focused specifically on transferware ceramic fragments with makers marks and representative samples of different transfer patterns, attempting to capture at least one fragment of each design documented by previous investigations of the site (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000). It was possible to assign functions to the majority of transferware ceramic artifacts, which included fragments of a teapot, a cup, bowls, plates, saucers, and three additional fragments for which it was not possible to assign functions (a number of these artifacts are depicted in Figures 12-15 below); however, a total of 133 transferware fragments comprising 11 different transfer patterns are present in the overall Wells ceramic assemblage, accounting for a total of 13.0 percent by count of the total ceramic

PAGE 136

115 assemblage. Functional designations for the overall transferware assemblage include a teapot, cups, bowls, plates, and saucers. Identified makers marks indicate that Adelia likely owned transferware manufactured by two companies prior to establishing the homestead, which she subsequently transported with her to the homestead; additional makers marks post-dating the establishment of the homestead indicate that Adelia continued to purchase transferware to supplement her original assemblage, indicating a degree of disposable income (Stone 2000). The number of transferware artifacts present in the Wells assemblage, representing a variety of functional vessel types, indicates that in accordance with middle class Vic torian social norms, Adelia maintained an ornate, decorated set of matching transferware, which likely would have been used for public social gatherings, such a dinner held for friends or neighbors. Further, based on the number of ceramic makers marks and transfer patterns present, it seems likely that Adelia may have made an effort to replace broken elements or supplement her original set with closely matched settings purchased separately at later dates; although a diversity of transfer patterns and color s is apparent, the fact that transferware is the distinct type of decorated ceramic present in the overall assemblage indicates that while individual vessels may not have represented exact matches, the similar nature of theme may reflect Adelias middle class desire to perpetuate a generally matching ceramic set. In terms of the social requirements for segmented dining, it is difficult to reach a meaningful conclusion based on the partial and fragmentary nature of the ceramic assemblage, which represents individually discarded elements rather than the remnants of a comprehensive set of tableware; however, it is apparent that vessels of multiple types are represented in the transferware assemblage,

PAGE 137

116 including cups, bowls, plates, and saucers, which could reflect the general existence of individual place settings, each with corresponding vessel types. Additionally, the presence of saucers, cups, and a teapot in transferware patterns indicates that Adelia may have maintained an ornate set of teaware for family and/or public social functions. As with the whiteware assemblage, the transferware assemblage indicates that Adelia generally adhered to middle class Victorian social norms associated with femininity, domesticity, and conspicuous consumption; this is symbolized most obviously by the fact that Adelia maintained a decorated transferware ceramic set for public display in addition to a simple whiteware set for household use. Further, although the transferware assemblage features individual matching settings, it also includes individual settings that are not exact matches to the overall set, but follow the same general transfer pattern theme, reflecting an adherence to a middle class desire and expectation to perpetuate a generally matching ceramic set. Additionally, the number and diversity of functional vessel types may represent corresponding individual setting elements and an associated commitment to segmented dining, especially with regard to public displays of dining as would be associated with the use of the transferware set. Although Adelia made an apparent effort over time to maintain a relatively matched set of transferware, with color and pattern differences observed within the common transfer pattern theme, it would appear based on the occurrence of makers marks in the assemblage that over the longterm, she replaced or supplemented elements of two early sets of brown transferware she brought with her to the homestead, but may never have deliberately disposed of a complete older set of transferware for the purpose of replacing it with a new set with identical individual settings. This could indicate that although Adelia subscribed to the

PAGE 138

117 social requirement to maintain a transferware set that generally matched, she may have been comfortable negotiating the specifics of that social norm for the sake of personal preference, material economy, financial frugality she simply may not have had the disposable income required to purchase an entirely new set of matching transferware. As with her whiteware set, a strategy of replacement-in-kind would have allowed Adelia to fulfill middle class feminine gender expectations related to domestic material culture and conspicuous consumption, while simultaneously negotiating an income that likely fluctuated from year-to-year in association with the windfalls and hardships of homesteading. Allison Parrish Figure 12. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 375 (see Table 3 for additional details).

PAGE 139

118 Allison Parrish Figure 13. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 681 (see Table 3 for additional details). Allison Parris h Figure 14. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1839 (see Table 3 for additional details).

PAGE 140

119 Allison Parrish Figure 15. 5AH916, transferware with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2102 (see Table 3 for additional details). Enamelware The presence of two enamelware artifacts in the Wells assemblage, including a teapot and a plate, respectively recovered from the south trash midden and the kitchen area, do not conform with middle class Victorian social norms revolving around domesticity and matching sets of ceramic tableware, in conjunction with associated concepts of conspicuous consumption. Based on the small number of enamelware artifacts recovered, it is possible that these items are isolated individual settings, and are not necessarily reflective of consistent use or ownership of a larger set on Adelias part; further, it is surmised that these objects may not be associated directly with household material culture, but rather, may represent utensils used in the course of ranch activities such as roundups. Conversely, these enamelware objects may have used by Adelia in the course of her journey west (as opposed to fragile, expensive, and treasured ceramic tableware

PAGE 141

120 sets), consequently ending up in the homestead assemblage, though likely not used regularly once the homestead was established. Adelia may have kept the enamelware items for food storage purposes, ranch activities, or just for the sake of miscellaneous or future use. In such a scenario, the ownership and use of these items doesnt necessarily signal divergence from Victorian social norms rather, on the basis that the enamelware artifacts may essentially represent utilitarian items rather than commonly used household tableware, these items would instead reflect a functional necessity or relic from the past, and thus would not be expected to sustain a great deal of social, economic, or gendered domestic symbolism with regard to their existence within the greater homestead assemblage. Enamelware teapots were available in the 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue for between 32 cents and $1.23, while enamelware plates sold for $1.30 per dozen (144-145). Flatware As with tableware, flatware began to take on a new social symbolism for the middle classes of Europe and the United States in association with the conspicuous consumption of the Victorian Era. Particularly, manufacturing of flatware sets became standardized and cheaper with the influx of silver into the market from the Comstock Silver Mine in the mid-nineteenth century, and the great silver services of the Victorian era and Gilded Age were an inevitable outcomeduring the 18th and 19th centuries, owning the most up-to-date pattern was of the utmost importance, and having sets remodeled was not uncommon (Gair N.d.:4). As flatware became increasingly imbued with social and cultural meaning, and in association with industrialization became economically available to a wider demographic, designs became increasingly elaborate and decorative, and

PAGE 142

121 Patterns emergedinspiration was taken from interior design and architecture. Knives, most of which had a pistol-grip handle since the 17th century, soon acquired a straight handle, and were decorated to match the forks and spoons (3). Flatware artifacts present in the Wells assemblage include a silver-plated flatware handle fragment recovered from the house foundations, along with a knife with a composite wood and metal handle, a silver-plated spoon handle, and five spoons from a matching set recovered from the south trash midden. It is surmised that the knife (the only flatware object recovered in this particular style/material), like the enamelware tableware discussed above, may represent a utilitarian item used in the course of ranch activities or a remnant from Adelias initial journey west rather than commonly used household flatware; in such a case, this item would be reflective of a functional necessity or relic from the past, and thus would not be expected to sustain a great deal of social, economic, or gendered domestic symbolism with regard to its existence within the greater homestead assemblage. However, with the exception of than the knife, the remainder of the flatware assemblage indicates that Adelia made an effort to maintain high quality, matching flatware sets in conjunction with middle class Victorian social norms and associated domestic displays of conspicuous consumption. This is apparent based on the presence of two silver-plated flatware handles, as well as the recovery of five spoons from an identical set. Further, the recovery of five matching spoons, which all appear to be intact and in relatively good condition, from a trash midden could be indicative of the replacement of an entire set, which would suggest sufficient disposable income to complete such a purchase and fulfill associated social standards requiring the domestic display of household wealth through material culture. Rogers Bros. 1847 flatware sets

PAGE 143

122 were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between $2.48 and $7.36 per dozen for general flatware (i.e., fork, spoon, etc.), while pieces with specialized functions (i.e., mustard spoons, pie knives, etc.) sold for between 22 cents and $2.51 each (189). Rogers Bros. 1847 flatware was also available in the 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue for between $2.48 and $8.40 per dozen for general flatware (i.e., fork, spoon, etc.), while pieces with specialized functions (i.e., mustard spoons, pie knives, etc.) sold for between 22 cents and $2.50 each (449-450). Table 3. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC W HITEWARE (Dates from Kovel and Kovel 1986) 61 1001 South Trash L1 No Photo 2 x 1 x KN N=1 undecorated whiteware cup. 18901900 F 394 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L7 8 4 (D) 4 (D) ROYAL IRONSTONE CHINA WARRANTED N=2 reconstructed small wh iteware bowls with scalloped rims. Post 1890 F 394 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L7 9 9 (D) LAUGHLIN N=1 reconstructed whiteware plate with scalloped rim. Ca. 1900 F 816 1407 S122/W84 House Foundatio ns S122/W86 House Foundatio ns L0 L2 No P hoto 2 x 2 LAUGHLIN N=2 undecorated whiteware fragments. Ca. 1900 F 1001 1006 South Trash Surface/L1 No Photo 2 # (W at base) 4 (W at mouth) 1 (Depth) ROYAL N=1 undecorated whiteware fragment, unidentified vessel. Post 1890 F

PAGE 144

123 Table 3. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1001 1006 1029 1032 Sout h Trash L4/L5 No Photo 9 # (H) X 7 (D) J. & G. MEAKIN C and IRONSIDE CHINA N=1 undecorated whiteware pitcher. Ca. 1890 F 1015 S118/W94 House Foundatio ns L2 No Photo AU N=1 undecorated whiteware cup. Ca. 1900 F 1017 South Trash L3 No Photo No ne C.T. N=1 undecorated whiteware fragment, unidentified vessel. 18901900 F 1908 S118/W95 South Trash L2, F4 10 4 (D) x 1 (H) Handle 1 # x None N=1 partial whiteware lid with handle and gold leaf embellishment in flower design, scalloped rim. Undet er mined F 2002 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L7 11 2 # x 2 1/8 ROYAL IRONSTONE CHINA WARRANTED N=1 fragment whiteware base of unidentified vessel. Post 1890 F 2002 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L7 No Photo None WHEELING POTTERY COMPANY N= 1 undecorated whiteware fragment, unidentified vessel. 18801886 F TRANSFERWARE (Dates from Kovel and Kovel 1986) 375 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L7 12 2 3/8 x 2 3/16 None N=1 fragment brown transferware cup. Undeter mined F 530 S84/W100 North T rash L5 No Photo 5 (D) x 1 (Depth) PHILEAU and TUNSTALL N=1 brown transferware bowl. Pre 1890 F 681 S120/W84 House Foundatio ns L7 13 2 5/8 x 1 # None N=1 fragment brown transferware plate rim. Undeter mined F

PAGE 145

124 Table 3. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 805 814 817 822 S122/W84 House Foundatio ns L2/L3 No Photo 6 (D) x (Depth) W.H. GRINDLEY & CO.: TUNSTALL 1/Rd F 16 SPRING and 14 N=1 blue floral transferware saucer. 18911904 F 1001 1006 South Trash Surface/L1 No Photo 2 x 1 M & CO. and MENTONE N=1 brown floral transferware saucer. Pre 1890 F 1835 S120/W96 South Trash L5 No Photo None None N=1 brown transferware teapot. Undeter mined F 1839 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 14 9 (D) G.W. TURNER & SONS PHILEAU and TUNSTALL N=3 fragments brown transferware plate rim and base. Pre 1890 F 2102 S120/W94 South Trash L10, F4 15 6 1/8 x 4 # GRIND EV & [] and 105 N=1 fragment brown transferware bowl rim and base. 18911914 F Unkno wn S120/W88 House Foundatio ns L2 No Photo None None N=3 black floral transferware fragments. Unde ter mined F ENAMELWARE 1869 S120/W94 South Trash Unknown No Photo None None N=1 metal enamelware teapot. Non diagnos tic M Unkno wn S92/W102 S94/W102 Kitchen Area Unknown No Photo 9 (D) None N=1 enamelware plate. Non diagnos tic M FLATWARE 1022 S118/W94 House Foundatio ns L3 No Photo None None N=1 silver plated flatware handle fragment. Undeter mined F 1022 S118/W94 South Trash L3 No Photo None None N=1 knife with composite wood and metal handle. Non diagnos tic M 1845 S120/W96 South Trash L6 No Photo None 847 ROGERS BROS. A N=1 silver plated spoon handle. Post 1847 F

PAGE 146

125 Table 3. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1831 S120/W96 South Trash L5 No Photo None None N=5 spoons from a matching set. Undeter mined F Household Decoration and Furnishing In line with Victorian norms emanating from the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity, the domestic space of the home was the primary realm of women, and associated patterns of consumption and responsibilities for the management and decoration of the domestic space thus fell to the matriarch of the family and household (Clark 1986:32). Material culture was perceived as a direct indicator of a familys economic success through the exercise of conspicuous consumption, as well as adherence to and attainment of socioculturally-accepted norms associated with the Cult of Domesticity through the display of elegant household furnishings and decoration (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Fabric The only fabric fragment recovered from the Wells homestead site is a small piece of a black, felt-like material with a scalloped edge (Figure 16). Although the function of this artifact is unknown, based on the scalloping it is inferred that the item may have held some type of household decorative value, and thus may be indicative of a feminine gender association, manifested in accordance with Victorian feminine gender norms through the responsibility for the decoration of the domestic space by Adelia as the household matriarch of the Wells homestead.

PAGE 147

126 Allison Parrish Figure 16. 5AH916, fabric with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1855 (see Table 4 for additional details). Dog Figurine As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). The presence of a ceramic dog figurine in the archaeological record of the Wells homestead is surmised to fall within the confines of domesticity symbolized through household decoration; although initially it seemed possible that the dog figurine could be a childs toy, considering its ceramic material type and subsequent fragility, in conjunction with the composition of Adelias family herself and three sons it seems unlikely that this item is a toy, as Victorian standards for male children

PAGE 148

127 dictated outdoor games and sturdy toys designed for active play (Moore 2009). Therefore, it is likely that a fragile item such as this ceramic figurine would thus be more directly associated with a female presence in the household, and might be representative of an object of household dcor. Further, the presence of an ornamental household object in the archaeological assemblage could comprise a material representation of Adelias social and financial commitment to decorate the domestic space, in conformance with the requirements of Victorian Era female responsibilities under the Cult of Domesticity. Terra Cotta Pot As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Although the function of the terra cotta pot in the Well s assemblage is unknown, it is not difficult to imagine that it may have been used to house an ornamental plant; however, regardless of its ultimate function, the intricate molded design on the exterior (Figure 17) indicates that the pot was associated in some way with public display, and as such, may represent an object of household dcor. As such, the presence of the ornamental terra cotta pot in the archaeological assemblage would fall within the confines of domesticity symbolized through household decoration, and would comprise a material representation of Adelias social and financial commitment to decorate the domestic space, in conformance with the requirements of Victorian Era female responsibilities under the Cult of Domesticity.

PAGE 149

128 Allison Parrish Figure 17. 5AH916, terra cotta pot with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1416 (see Table 4 for additional details). Serving Tray As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). The presence of an ornate serving tray (Figure 18) made from a white metal such as zinc or aluminum (possibly intended to emulate silver) amongst the assemblage of the Wells homestead site is indicative of a feminine gender association in that the tray would have served a conspicuous decorative function, with its elaborate design and simulation of silver. As such, its use during social events would have been associated with a domestic display of material wealth on Adelias part, especially in

PAGE 150

129 recognition of its imitation of expensive silver, though ironically, at a much more economical cost to the household. As such, this object symbolizes a negotiation of Victorian gender and social norms associated with decoration of the household and domestic displays of wealth related to conspicuous consumption, in that Adelia apparently adhered to expectations to decorate her house with ornamental, expensivelooking objects as a method of denoting the familys economic success and financial stability; however, she was also willing to negotiate this standard through the purchase of a more economical, but inauthentic imitation item which would aesthetically connote the same implication of material wealth to outsiders. Allison Parrish Figure 18. 5AH916, serving tray with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2055 (see Table 4 for additional details). Oil Lamp Parts As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of

PAGE 151

130 the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). At least two types of distinctive glass oil lampshades (Figures 19-21) and two styles of pressed glass oil lamp bases (Figures 22-23) are apparent in in the Wells assemblage. The shades are decorative, with one featuring an ornate scalloped rim, and the other characterized by thin, delicate glass and a frosted, intricate heart-design motif. The pressed glass oil lamp bases feature ornate, faceted designs reminiscent of crystal patterns. The elaborate decorative features of these oil lamp parts are likely associated with a feminine presence in the household, and particularly, with the Victorian era feminine role and responsibility in furnishing and decorating the household. Further, in accordance with Victorian gender roles, the presence of these ornamental oil lamp parts indicates that a female in the household, namely, Adelia, was making consumer decisions with regard to domestic purchases, which is not surprising considering she may have controlled the primary household income; further, the purchase of practical household products with added decorative (and likely, cost) components beyond simple functionality suggests that the family had disposable income to spend on such small luxuries, and in acting on their economic success through the purchase of ornamental material culture, may have participated on some level in customs associated with middle class social conspicuous consumption. Oil lamps with pressed glass bases were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 30 cents and 45 cents, while oil lamps with scalloped glass shades sold for between 16 cents and 35 cents (551).

PAGE 152

131 Allison Parrish Figure 19. 5AH916, oil lampshade fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 521 (see Table 4 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 20. 5AH916, oil lampshade fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 533 (see Table 4 for additional details).

PAGE 153

132 Allison Parrish Figure 21. 5AH916, oil lampshade fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1811 (see Table 4 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 22. 5AH916, pressed glass oil lamp base with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1815 (see Table 4 for additional details).

PAGE 154

133 Allison Parr ish Figure 23. 5AH916, pressed glass oil lamp base with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1864 (see Table 4 for additional details). Doorknob As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). The presence of a pressed glass doorknob (Figure 24) in the Wells assemblage is indicative of a feminine gender association on the basis of its ornate, decorative character, which subsequently suggests Adelias choices with regard to household ornamentation may have corresponded with Victorian feminine gender ideals associated with responsibility for decoration of the domestic space. Further, the doorknobs pressed glass material would have simulated expensive crystal, therefore symbolizing the households material wealth to visitors, but at a substantially lower price

PAGE 155

134 than that of true crystal. As such, this object symbolizes a negotiation of Victorian gender and social norms associated with decoration of the household and domestic displays of wealth related to conspicuous consumption, in that Adelia apparently adhered to expectations to decorate her house with ornate, expensive-looking objects as a method of denoting the familys economic success and financial stability; however, she was also willing to negotiate this standard through the purchase of a more economical, but inauthentic imitation item which would aesthetically connote the same implication of material wealth to outsiders. Allison Parrish Figure 24. 5AH916, doorknob with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2039 (see Table 4 for additional details). Hinges As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way

PAGE 156

135 as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). As such, the presence of an ornamental, brass door hinge in the Wells assemblage indicates that Adelia likely prescribed to Victorian feminine gender ideals associated with responsibility for decoration of the domestic space as well as expression of economic success through demonstrative displays of material culture. Similar ornamental bronze hinges were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 25 cents and $1.19 per pair (380). Table 4. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC FABRIC 1855 S120/W9 6 South Trash L7 16 1 7/16 x 1 None N=1 fragment of black fabric with scalloped edge; unknown function. Non diagnos tic F DOG FIGURINE 663 S120/W94 South Trash L5 No Photo None None N=1 ceramic dog figurine (nearly complete), white and black painted with red and blue detail. Undeter mined F TERRA COTTA POT 1416 S122/W86 House Foundatio ns L3 17 7 # (D) x 2 (H) None N=1 reconstructed terra cotta pot or bowl with a brown and black salt glazed interior. Non diagnos tic F SERVING TRAY

PAGE 157

136 Table 4. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 2055 S92/W104 Dugout K itchen/R oot Cellar Unknown 18 11 # x 11 # None N=1 unidentified zinc or aluminum hexagonal artifact with raised crosshatched edging and molded floral accents; possible serving or gallery tray. Undeter mined F OIL LAMP PARTS 521 S84/W100 North Trash L4 19 1 7/8 x 1 5/8 x 1 1/16 None N=2 solarized amethyst glass fragments with scalloped edges. Possible oil lampshade fragments. Pre 1915 F 521 S84/W100 North Trash L4 19 7/8 x 7/8 None N=1 solarized clear glass fragment with scalloped edges. Possible oil l ampshade fragments. Pre 1915 F 533 S84/W100 North Trash L6 20 1 1/16 x None N=1 solarized amethyst glass fragment with scalloped edge; possible oil lampshade fragment. Pre 1915 F

PAGE 158

137 Table 4. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1811 S120/W96 South Trash L3 21 Frosted Fragments: 1 7/16 x 1 1 1/16 x 13/16 1 3/16 x 5/8 1 1/16 x 7/8 1 3/16 x None frosted heart design N=12 solarized amethyst frosted glass vessel fragments with a heart design motif (only fragments with frosted design motif apparent were measured N=5), indented patterned line observed on two fragments; possible oil lampshade fragments. 1860s 1915 F 1815 S120/W96 South Trash L4 22 6 5/8 (H) x 5 (D at base) 2 (D at top) None N=1 amber pressed glass fragment, roughly conical in shape, diamond pattern; possibly a pedestal type colum n/stem and base of an oil lamp. Undeter mined F 1822 S120/W96 South Trash Unknown No Photo Same as 1811 (no measuremen ts taken) None frosted heart design N=12 solarized amethyst frosted glass vessel fragments with a heart design motif; possible oil lampshade fragments. 1860s 1915 F 1864 Unknown Unknown 23 4 7/8 (H) x 4 7/8 (D) 1 # 1 (D at top) None N=1 amethyst pressed glass fragment, roughly conical in shape, vertical ridged pattern; possibly a pedestal type column/stem and base of an oil lamp. Pre 1915 F

PAGE 159

138 Table 4. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC DOORKNOB 2039 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L8 24 2 (D) x 2 (L); 13/16 (interior D); (thickness) None N=1 amethyst pressed glass doorknob with a cracked off, ground rim, octagonal pattern with depressions on facets. Pre 1915 F HINGES 8 06 S122/W84 House Foundatio ns L2 No Photo None None N=1 ornamental brass hinge. Undeter mined F Victorian Vices Liquor Bottles The presence of liquor bottles in the Wells assemblage is interesting due to the associated representation of both adherence to and divergence from Victorian gender and social norms. In particular, the consumption of liquor by middle class women of the Victorian era was in direct opposition to the standards of the Cult of Domesticity, which emphasized the sacredness of the home and family; liquor, due to its associations with saloons, drunkenness, and spousal abuse, was therefore a threat to the purity of the home and family (Krasnick Warsh 1993). This concept contributed directly to the temperance movements associated with womens rights efforts of the mid-to-late nineteenth century. However, in reality, although the public consumption of liquor by respectable upper and middle class women in the Victorian Era was discouraged by gender and social norms, liquor was consumed nonetheless in the privacy of the home, and often, in conjunction

PAGE 160

139 with medicinal justifications (Skelly 2008). As such, the presence of liquor-related artifacts (Figures 25-30) in the Wells assemblage signifies divergence from Victorian gender norms, in that the lady of the house may have participated in the consumption of alcohol, but also adherence to social expectations on another level, in that the consumption of alcohol would have been concealed within the private sphere of the home. Another facet of potential liquor consumption is the presence of a large number of medicinal bottles in the assemblage; it is possible that medicinals were purchased and consumed in the privacy of the home for their alcohol content. Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 25. 5AH916, glass bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 608 (see Table 5 for additional details).

PAGE 161

140 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 26. 5AH916, liquor bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 676 (see Table 5 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 27. 5AH916, glass bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1903 (see Table 5 for additional details).

PAGE 162

141 Allison Parrish Figure 28. 5AH916, glass bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 5 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 29. 5AH916, liquor bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 5 for additional details).

PAGE 163

142 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 30. 5AH916, ceramic and rubber bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1915 (see Table 5 for additional details). Smoking Paraphernalia In the Victorian Era United States, as with the consumption of liquor, the use of tobacco by women was considered un-ladylike and indicative of immorality, particularly with regard to smoking (as opposed to the use of snuff, which was a more commonly encountered social norm); of course, this did not stop women from taking up the habit, although among respectable middle class women, the activity of smoking would have been pursued only within the privacy of the home. Further, through the mid-nineteenth century, female smokers commonly made use of pipes, and although early on cigarettes had gained a particularly unwholesome reputation due to associations with women of socially disreputable character, such as actresses and prostitutes, cigarettes began to gain in popularity with women as early as the late 1870s, and by the turn of the century were the vehicle of choice as far as the feminine use of tobacco (Segrave 2005).

PAGE 164

143 Allison Parrish Figure 31. 5AH916, pipe stem fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 316 (see Table 5 for additional details). For these reasons, the most obvious interpretation of the single ceramic pipe stem fragment (Figure 31) recovered from the Wells homestead is that it represents a masculine gender association; it is possible that this object may be related to the residence of one or more of Adelias adult sons on the homestead property during at least a portion of the time that Adelia lived there. However, it is certainly possible that Adelia may have used the pipe to smoke; as with the presence of liquor bottles in the Wells assemblage, this could indicate simultaneous defiance of and conformance to Victorian gender norms regarding the activity of smoking. In particular, if Adelia were a pipesmoker, this would indicate resistance to established Victorian gender norms which deemed the practice socially unacceptable with regard to women; however, in light of the fact that Victorian women smoked nevertheless, Adelia may have at least conformed to standards which required middle class women to smoke in the privacy of their own homes, thus culminating in the occurrence of the pipe fragment in the archaeological

PAGE 165

144 record of the homestead, and particularly in the root cellar, a feminine space by definition. Additionally, if Adelia did make use of the pipe, this could reflect something of an ironic adherence to gender norms associated with smoking, in that, up until the turn of the century, it was considered more socially acceptable for women to smoke pipes than cigarettes, which until the late decades of the nineteenth century were considered particularly scandalous due to their association with women of perceived loose moral standards. Table 5. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Victorian Vices FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC LIQUOR BOTTLES (Dates from Lindsey 2014) 608* S120/W94 South Trash L1 25 None None N=1 large clear glass bottle stopper, neck and finial fragment, finial spherical in shape; possibly from liquor or cologne/perfume bottle. Non diagnos tic M 676* S120/W94 South Trash L7 26 None 8846 N=2 aqua glass union oval bottle body and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold; possible liquor or medicinal bottle. 1850s 1910s M 1903* S118/W95 South Trash L1 27 1 (L) x 3/8 1 (W) x (D) x # (thickness) None N=1 yellow glass bottle stopper, finial circul ar in shape with circular indentation or depression on both faces, ground shank; possibly from a liquor or cologne/perfume bottle. 19001920 M

PAGE 166

145 Table 5. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Victorian Vices FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1911* S118/W95 South Trash L2 28 2 (L) x 1 (W at top) x (W at bottom and neck) x (W at top of lower stopper) None N=1 yellow glass bottle stopper, crystal shaped with incised squiggle design on all faces of the finial, ground shank; possibly from liquor or cologne/perfume bottle. 19001920 M 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 29 None None N=1 aqua glass bottle finish, neck, and shoulder fragment, mouth blown, applied oil finish; possible liquor bottle. 18301890s M 1915 S118/W95 South Trash L2, F4 30 None PATD K. HUTTER FEB. 7, 1893 and CITY BOTTLING CO. DENVER, COLO. 1537 PLATTE ST. N=1 refined whiteware, iron, and rubber lightning type bottle stopper; possibly from a carbonated beverage bottle (possibly beer). 18931920s M SMOKING PARAPHERNALIA 316 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/R oot Cellar L3 31 3/8 (D) x (L) None N=1 pipe stem fragment (possibly ceramic). N ondiagnos tic M Italicized*: Multiple listings of single artifact or lot due to ambiguous function. Health and Hygiene Medicinal Bottles Professionally trained, competent doctors were relatively scarce on the American Frontier during the Victorian Era, and when a community did have a doctor, that individual would have been kept very busy tending to patients across a huge geographic

PAGE 167

146 area; for patients, the realities of rural life meant that even when a doctor was available, timely access to that individual may not have been feasible due to demographic and geographic constraints. Additionally, Even when chronically ill, women did not completely trust their doctors. The professionalization of medicine did not ensure its competenceWell-trained doctors were unlikely to be effective, and few were well trainedNot surprisingly, middle-class women sought alternatives (Woloch 2006:124125). Limited household financial resources may have also discouraged families from seeking medical help from a doctor until deemed an absolute necessity a matter of life and death. Pioneers who traveled west to the Frontier were also accustomed to hard work and self-sufficiency in order to successfully eke out an existence through homesteading, mining, ranching, or any other venture pursued in areas populated by very few Euroamericans, and which featured only skeletal infrastructure; it is surmised that this theme of autonomy and individualism may have carried over to basic health care, including efforts to heal minor illness or injury. Ayers Cherry Pectoral could be purchased from the 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue for 68 cents per bottle (29). At the level of the individual household in the Victorian Era American West, the aforementioned cultural facets, including rural scarcity of doctors, general lack of trust in the medical profession, limited household finances, and notions of individualism, contributed to the usage of proprietary medicine to various degrees; however, the household purchase and consumption of proprietary medicines could also be influenced by a component of Victorian gender roles and responsibilities. In particular, gender roles associated with the Cult of Domesticity, in alignment with expectations related to Progressive Era health reform, required women to maintain strict adherence to measures

PAGE 168

147 promoting the general health, hygiene, and cleanliness of the family and home. This social responsibility, which also stemmed from notions of morality, patriotism, and American exceptionalism, fell to the matriarchs of the household based on the presumed responsibilities of the wife and mother for the care of her family, and the social mores of the era emphasized the domestic foundation of these practices (Woloch 2006; Horn 2009). None of the medicinal bottles originating from the Wells homestead (Figures 3253) are exclusively indicative of gender-specific conditions or ailments. However, the fact that a significant number of medicinal bottles were recovered from the site could represent a feminine gender association, in the sense that the inferred purchase and consumption of these products on the part of the household may have been motivated and supervised by Adelia, the female head-of-household, in association with her responsibilities for the health and hygiene of the family members living under her roof. In short, as a female and mother in the late nineteenth century, it would have been a social expectation and standard for Adelia to maintain her familys health and physical well being, and the presence of medicine bottles among the homestead assemblage could signify that she was actively fulfilling this responsibility, in accordance with established feminine gender norms. Additionally, proprietary medicines of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries often contained significant quantities of alcohol and/or narcotics; while the chemical properties of these products may have temporarily relieved pain or other ills through some level of inebriation, certain proprietary medicines, such as bitters, may have been consumed primarily for their alcohol content, especially as temperance movements gained traction (Horn 2009). While there is no way to ascertain the exact

PAGE 169

148 circumstances leading to the purchase and use of proprietary medicines by the occupants of the homestead, one possibility is that these products were purchased and consumed for their alcohol content; this would fall in line with concurrent divergence and adherence to Victorian gender and social norms as described in the context of liquor consumption in general, in that alcohol may have been consumed by the lady of the house against cultural mores of the era, but in a circuitous way within the hidden privacy of the home, which would adhere to established (although concealed) cultural realities. Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 32. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 608 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 170

149 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 33. 5AH916, medicinal bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 625 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 34. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 654 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 171

150 Courtesy o f K. Griffin Smith Figure 35. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 676 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 36. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 676 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 172

151 Allison Parrish Figure 37. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1002 (see Table 6 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 38. 5AH916, medicinal bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1035 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 173

152 Allison Parrish Figure 39. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1035 (see Table 6 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 40. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1822 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 174

153 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 41. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1822 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 42. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1822 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 175

154 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 43. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 44. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 176

155 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 45. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 46. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 177

156 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 47. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1913 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 48. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragments with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2032 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 178

157 Allison Parrish Figure 49. 5AH916, medicinal bottles with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2045 (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Grif fin Smith Figure 50. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 179

158 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 51. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 52. 5AH916, medicinal bottle with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 180

159 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 53. 5AH916, medicinal bottle fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# Unknown (see Table 6 for additional details). Cologne/Perfume/Fragrance Bottles The use perfumed scents and eau-de-colognes by men and women extends through several thousand years of history and spans continents; the use of fragrances has traditionally been linked with health and hygiene, with fragrance used externally as a method of disguising body odor, and historically, in the case of fragranced spirits such as Florida water, used both externally as well as consumed for its assumed therapeutic health benefits (although the distilled alcohol contained therein likely played a role in its common consumption as well) (Sullivan 1994). In the years leading up to the Victorian Era, eau-de-colognes, perfumes, and fragranced spirits were formulated from combinations of organic herbal and animal fragrances, oils, and distilled alcohols were developed and marketed on a limited basis for local markets, or created by individuals for their own use. By the late Victorian Era, organic chemists began to isolate certain chemical components of fragrance in order to produce synthetic ingredients which could in turn be used in the mass production and marketing of perfumes and colognes as we

PAGE 181

160 know them today; it was at this point that the widespread use of commercial fragrances by the middle classes of Europe and the United States became prevalent (Pybus and Sell 1999). Elegant, decorative glass perfume bottles and decanters became popular and economically attainable by the middle classes in Europe and United States during the nineteenth century; prior to the mass production of commercial fragrances sold in associated bottles, perfume bottles and decanters were purchased individually and replenished with handmade or locally-obtained fragrances as-needed by the user (Powerhouse 2015). Atomizers came into use in association with fragrance bottles in the late nineteenth century; however, glass stoppers for fragrance bottles and decanters continued to be manufactured through the twentieth century. Until fragrances began to be mass -produced on a commercial scale with associated marketing campaigns, scents, and more than likely, the bottles and decanters that held them, were non-gender specific, and chosen for use on an individual basis (Pybus and Sell 1999). Thus, prior to the commercial distribution of fragrances in product-specific bottles marketed on a genderspecific basis to men or women, the designation of particular gender associations to generic fragrance bottles and decanters with any degree of accuracy is generally not feasible. A variety of glass perfume bottles with stoppers were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 20 cents and 25 cents each (259). In the case of the Wells assemblage, the ambiguous nature of non-commercial Victorian fragrance bottles and decanters with regard to gender association is further complicated by the presence of three decorative glass bottle stoppers (Figures 54-56)

PAGE 182

161 lacking their attendant bottles; it is possible that these stoppers originate from either fragrance or liquor bottles. In the case that these stoppers represent the remnants of fragrance bottles or decanters and the related use of fragrances by occupants of the homestead, it isnt possible to denote a particular gender association on the basis of the presence or design of the glass stoppers themselves; however, an argument can be made that the use of fragrances by members of the Wells family signifies an acknowledgement of and commitment to health and hygiene, a sphere of middle class Victorian culture closely related to the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity, and as such, a familial responsibility which would ultimately have fallen within the domain and domestic oversight of Adelia as matriarch of the family. Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 54. 5AH916, cologne/perfume/fragrance bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 608 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 183

162 Allison Parrish Figure 55. 5AH916, cologne/perfume/fragrance bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1903 (see Table 6 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 56. 5AH916, cologne/perfume/fragrance bottle stopper with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1911 (see Table 6 for additional details). Combs In and of themselves, comb fragments (Figures 57 and 58) in the Wells assemblage are gender neutral; the artifacts dont feature any specific gender-identifying features, and

PAGE 184

163 could have been used by either a man or a woman in the course of detangling or straightening hair. Although the comb artifacts are not particularly indicative of gender association, the fact that someone at the homestead owned and likely used combs does reflect an investment in health and hygiene. Similar to the occurrence of medicinal and fragrance bottles in the assemblage, the occurrence of comb fragments in the archaeological record of the Wells homestead signifies an acknowledgement of and commitment to health and hygiene, a sphere of middle class Victorian culture closely related to the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity, and as such, a familial responsibility which would ultimately have fallen within the domain and domestic oversight of Adelia as the female head-of-household. In such a way, the presence of comb fragments in the Wells assemblage could infer a feminine gender association in terms of an adherence to Victorian gender norms involving the role and investment of Adelia, as the family matriarch, in the overall health of her family. The 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue sold basic celluloid combs for 15 cents each (338). Allison Parrish Figure 57. 5AH916, comb fragment with a potential gender association dating to We lls occupation, FS# 1011/1041 (see Table 6 for additional details).

PAGE 185

164 Courtesy of K. Griffin Smith Figure 58. 5AH916, comb fragment with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1860 (see Table 6 for additional details). Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC MEDICINAL BOTTLES (Dates from Lindsey 2014) 376 S92/W1 04 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 No Photo s 2/5 (D) None N=3 clear glass bottle finish/neck/body fragments, patent finish; likely homeopathy bottles. 1870s 1930s F 608 S120/W94 South Trash L1 32 1 5/8 (D) None N=1 clear glass bottle finish and neck fragmen t, mouth blown, tooled flare finish (also called a rounded prescription finish); possible medicinal bottle. 1900s 1910s F

PAGE 186

165 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 625 S120/W94 South Trash L3 33 None None N=1 complete clear glass oval bottle with a plate mark panel and rounded shoulder, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s F 654 S120/W94 South Trash L5 34 1 (D) CHE and V N=3 clear glass early Vaseline bottle finish/body/base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled patent finish. 18721910s F 676* S120/W94 South Trash L7 35 None 8846 N=2 aqua glass union oval bottle body and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold; possible liquor or medicinal bottle. 1850s 1910s F 676 S120/W94 South Trash L7 36 None CHERRY N=1 aq ua glass bottle body fragment; likely side panel from an Ayers Cherry Pectoral bottle (Lowell, Massachusetts, 18411948); patent/proprietar y medicine bottle. Pre 1920 F 948 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L9 No Photo s None L 8 N=6 clear glass bottl e finish and base fragments, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1920s F

PAGE 187

166 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1002 S118/W94 South Trash L0 37 2 7/8 x 2 1/16 [with M sideways and attached at top] xvi N=1 amethyst glass bottle body and shoulder fragment, square, rectangul ar, or oval druggist bottle with a plate mark panel and rounded shoulder and edges; embossed post 1900 druggist capacity mark, likely mouth blown. 19001915 F 1002 S118/W94 South Trash L0 37 3 x 2 # IV N=1 aqua glass base fragment, post bottom mold, mouth blown or early machine made; possible medicinal bottle. 1840s 1900 F 1035 S118/W94 South Trash L5 38 3 7/16 (H) x 1 (W) x 7/8 (D of outer rim) x 1 (Depth); 1 (finish H); 3/8 (inner D) None N=1 complete yellow glass square bottle, mouth blown, cup -b ottom mold, tooled prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 19001910s F 1035 S118/W94 South Trash L5 39 3 13/16 (H) x 2 (W) AYERS N=2 solarized aqua glass bottle body and shoulder fragments (MNI=1), likely from a square mouth blown bottle with a plate mark panel with embossing below rounded shoulder; patent/proprietar y medicine bottle. 1850s 1910s F

PAGE 188

167 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1511 S124/W86 House Foundation s L2 No Photo None SYRUP OF FIGS and CALIFORNIA FIG SYRUP CO. SAN FRANCISCO, CAL N=10 clear glass bottle body and base fragments, cup bottom mold; patent/proprietar y medicinal bottle. Post 1878 F 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 40 4 4/5 (H) None N=2 clear glass oval medicine bottle finish/neck/shoul der/body/base and base fragments (nearly complete) with a defined crescent shaped shoulder, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s F 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 41 2 # (W) x 1 5/8 (Depth) WT & CO. S&W and STEINHAUER & WALBRANCH PHARMACIST S DENVER, COLO N=3 clear glass oval bottle (complete) fragments with a plate mark panel and rounded shoulder, mouth blown, cupbottom mold, tooled prescription finish; druggist/prescrip tion bottle (manufactured by Whitall Tatum & Company for local pharmacy). 1870s 1890 (Lockh art et al. 2006:34) F

PAGE 189

168 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 No Photo s None CHESEBROU GH N=5 clear glass Vaseline bottle finish, body, and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, patent finish. 18721910s F 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 42 2 (W) x 2 (D) None N=1 clear glass beveled square bottle neck/shoulder/bo dy/base fragment, mouth blown, possible cup bottom mold; possibly a medicinal bottle. 1850s 1910s F 1836 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 No Photo 1 3/16 (D) None N=1 yellow glass bottle finish fragment, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1920s F 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 43 None CH N=5 clear glass bottle body and base fragments; possible Vaseline bottle. Post 1872 F 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 4446 2 9/10 x 1 CH MFG N =13 yellow glass bottle body, shoulder, base, and finish fragments (MNI=1), mouth blown, cup bottom mold, applied patent finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1890s 1910s F 1913 S118/W95 South Trash L2, F4 47 None EBROU and ASE N=1 clear glass Vaseline b ottle body fragment. Post 1872 F

PAGE 190

169 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 2021 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L8 No Photo s 2/5 (D) None N=4 clear glass bottle finish and base fragments (MNI=3), cup bottom mold, patent finish; likely homeopathy bottles. 1870s 1930s F 2032 Unknown Unknown 48 5/8 (D) x 2 (L) 5/8 (D) x 3/4 (L) 5/8 (D) x 7/8 (L) 5/8 (D) x 1 3/16 (L) Opening 9/16 outer x 3/8 interior None MNI=4 clear glass homeopathy bottles with tooled prescription finishes, mouth blown. 1870s 1930s F 2045 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L9 49 5/8 (D) x 2 (L) Opening 9/16 outer x 3/8 interior None N=4 clear glass homeopathy bottles with tooled prescription finishes, mouth blown. 1870s 1930s F Unkno wn S82/W100 North Trash L3 50 None None N=2 aqua glass bottle finish/neck/shoul der and body fr agments, mouth blown, tooled patent finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s F Unkno wn S118/W94 South Trash L4 51 None CTORAL N=1 aqua glass bottle body fragment with an embossed plate mark panel; likely side panel from an Ayers Cherry Pectoral b ottle (Lowell, Massachusetts, 18411948); patent/proprietar y medicine bottle. Pre 1920 F

PAGE 191

170 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC Unkno wn S118/W94 South Trash L5 52 3 # (H) x 1 1/16 (W) x 7/8 (D) None N=1 complete clear glass square bottle with arched shoulders, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, too led prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s F Unkno wn S120/W94 South Trash L4 No Photo None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1920s F Unkno wn S120/W94 South Trash L5 53 None PE N=1 aqua glass bottle body fragment; likely side panel from an Ayers Cherry Pectoral bottle (Lowell, Massachusetts, 18411948); patent/proprietar y medicine bottle. Pre 1920 F COLOGNE/PERFUME/FRAGRANCE BOTTLES (Dates from Lindsey 2014) 608* S120/W94 South Trash L1 54 None None N=1 large clear glass bottle stopper, neck and finial fragment, finial spherical in shape; possibly from liquor or cologne/perfume bottle. Non diagnos tic F

PAGE 192

171 Table 6. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Health and Hygiene FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1903* S118/W95 South Trash L1 55 1 (L) x 3/8 1 (W) x (D) x # (thickness) None N=1 yellow glass bottle stopper, finial circular in shape with circular indentation or depression on both faces, ground shank; possibly from a liquor or cologne/perfume bottle. 19001920 F 1911* S118/W95 South Trash L2 56 2 (L) x 1 (W at top) x (W at bottom and neck) x (W at top of lower stopper) None N=1 yellow glass bottle stopper, crystal shaped with incised squiggle design on all faces of the finial, ground shank; possibly from liquor or cologne/perfume bottle. 19001920 F C OMBS 1011 1041 S118/W94 South Trash L2 57 # x 1 1/8 None N=1 black and brown celluloid comb fragment. Non diagnos tic F 1860 S120/W96 South Trash L8 58 1 1/10 (H) x 1/5 (W) None N=1 black celluloid comb fragment, tooth. Non diagnos tic F Italicized*: Multiple listings of single artifact or lot due to ambiguous function. Personal Items Buttons and Snaps Based on provenience information, most of the buttons and snaps (Figures 59-78) in the Wells assemblage, which include materials such as shell/mother-of-pearl, iron or steel, pewter, brass, and celluloid, were likely associated with discarded but more-or-less complete articles of clothing, such as undergarments, shirts, skirts, dresses, pants, or

PAGE 193

172 coats. The majority of the buttons feature two or four-hole attachments, although a few shank attachments are apparent (Figures 63 and 77), along with riveted snap-style attachments (Figures 59 and 72), and a few of the metal buttons are embossed with lettering (Figure 72), or feature embossed decorative characteristics such as stippling (Figures 61, 62, 67, 73). Despite efforts to identify metal buttons and snaps with potentially diagnostic markings, none of the buttons could be designated with regard to date, manufacturer, or the associated but non-extant article of clothing. Smaller ceramic (Figure 78) and shell/mother-of-pearl buttons (Figures 65, 68, 69, 71, 72, 75, 76) could feasibly have been associated with male or female undergarments or shirtwaists, while larger metal (Figures 59-62, 64, 66-70, 73, 77), celluloid (Figures 66, 68), or wood (Figure 63) buttons may have been associated with male or female outerwear such as pants, skirts and dresses, jackets, and coats; however, lacking the associated fabric article of clothing, there is no way to definitively assign gender associations to miscellaneous individual buttons. As such, although in their original state the buttons in the Wells assemblage would have been associated with specific, gendered articles of dress, lacking this context due to the deterioration of fabric in the archaeological record, these items are not particularly identifiable with regard to their earlier gender associations. In general, the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide carried pearl shirt buttons for between 9 cents and 12 cents per dozen, gray shell (smoked pearl) buttons for between 5 cents and 15 cents per dozen (85). The exceptions to this rule are the riveted brass buttons in the assemblage, which are slightly more identifiable with regard to diagnostic information and gender associations. In particular, Levi Strauss and Jacob Davis invented the riveted blue jean in 1873; the

PAGE 194

173 rivets served to strengthen points on denim trousers that were typically subject to stress in the course of mens industrial or agricultural work activities, thereby increasing the durability and lifespan of the trousers. However, Levi Strauss & Co. did not manufacture jeans for women until 1934; prior to this, women likely wore and/or adapted mens blue jeans for their own purposes (Panek 2014). It is likely that the riveted brass buttons (Figures 59 and 72) in the Wells assemblage originated from this product; the association of riveted blue jeans with agricultural work further supports this possibility, as the primary economic income for the Wells family appears to have been generated from ranching and agricultural activities. Allison Parrish Figure 59. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 411 (see Table 7 for additional details). In the late nineteenth century, riveted blue jeans were manufactured only for men; thus, the occurrence of the riveted brass buttons in the Wells assemblage could be directly indicative of a male presence and subsequent masculine gender association. However, as noted above, Victorian women who participated in agricultural work (as

PAGE 195

174 would not have been uncommon on a Frontier homestead owned by a woman) adopted the riveted blue jean for their own use; thus, it is surmised that the riveted brass buttons might also be indirectly indicative of divergence from the established Victorian female dress code on Adelias part, if in fact she donned riveted blue jeans to contribute to agricultural or ranching activities around the homestead. Finally, it should be noted that if Adelia wore riveted mens blue jeans in association with agricultural activities on the homestead, although this practice would have diverged from established, traditional Victorian female standards for dress, the dress codes of the American Frontier were likely more flexible for women; in fact, as noted above, Levi Strauss & Co. eventually recognized that women were making use of mens riveted blue jeans in significant enough numbers to convince the manufacturer to develop a female product line. As such, if Adelia in fact donned mens riveted blue jeans to contribute to agricultural work around the homestead, this would likely not have been entirely out of the norm for a female for the context of the time and place, with specific reference to the late nineteenth century American West, where gender roles and responsibilities by necessity were more fluid and readily negotiable than those of the East. Allison Parrish Figure 60. 5AH916, button (at left) with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 507 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 196

175 Allison Parrish Figure 61. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 514 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 62. 5AH916, snap with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 604 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 197

176 Allison Parrish Figure 63. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 655 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 64. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 712 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 198

177 Allison Parrish Figure 65. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 716 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 66. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1009 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 199

178 Allison Parrish Figure 67. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1010 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 68. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1016 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 200

179 Allison Parrish Figure 69. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1038 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 70. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1108 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 201

180 Allison Parrish Figure 71. 5AH916, button (at right) with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1214 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 72. 5AH916, buttons with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1518 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 202

181 Allison Parrish Figure 73. 5AH916, snap with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1708 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 74. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1779 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 203

182 Allison Parrish Figure 75. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1843 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parris h Figure 76. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1851 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 204

183 Allison Parrish Figure 77. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1920 (see Table 7 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 78. 5AH916, button with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 2101 (see Table 7 for additional details). Eyelets Eyelets were commonly included on both masculine and feminine articles of dress in the Victorian Era, with the preponderance of these items associated with male and female shoes, and female corsets. As such, although eyelets can be directly reflective of

PAGE 205

184 masculine or feminine gendered attire, much like the button artifacts discussed above, the lack of the associated context provided by the original, intact accessory makes it difficult to designate a particular gender association for the extant fragmentary remnants of the complete item. In the case of the eyelets (Figure 79) present in the Wells assemblage, which include both simple open and hooked eyelets, the eyelets all originate from one unit of the south trash midden, and as such may represent a single accessory, such as a high-ankle boot; the boot upper across the top of the foot would have laced through open eyelets to the ankle, with hooked eyelets cross-laced from the ankle up the lower leg following the insertion of the foot into the shoe. Unfortunately, with a lack of additional contextual material such as an upper or a sole, precise determination of functional accessory type or associated gender designation is impossible, especially in recognition of the fact that high-ankle boots were designed for and popular with both men and women during the Victorian Era (Stamper and Condra 2011). The 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide sold boxes containing approximately 1,000 shoe eyelets for 10 cents (526), while corset clasps were available for 23 cents per pair (89); corsets sold for between 35 cents and $3.00 each (308-311). Allison Parrish Figure 79. 5AH916, eyelets with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 630 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 206

185 Suspender Clips Suspenders, a common accessory worn by men during the Victorian Era, held up trousers, much as belts worn through belt loops do today; a suspender clip would have comprised the piece of the suspender design used to adjust and maintain a comfortable suspender length for the wearer. Braces, or suspenders, were re-designed late in the century, crossing at the back, adjustable at the front, and so on, but the belt was slowly replacing themin th e United States, men were dispensing with suspenders altogether toward the end of the 1800s, [Stamper and Condra 2011:335] indicating that these artifacts (Figure 80) in the site assemblage may reflect the early years of the homestead occupation by the Wells family. Although Adelia herself could have worn suspenders in association with a skirt or trousers or possibly riveted denim jeans, as discussed above especially for work around the homestead, Victorian social norms of feminine dress commonly dictated the attire of full-length dresses; even for women who contributed to homestead labor in the American West, a simple, unadorned full-length dress called a Mother Hubbard dress was typically worn for household or homestead labor. As such, the occurrence of suspender clips in the Wells assemblage is likely indicative of a masculine gender association in conjunction with the presence of Adelias sons at the homestead. Suspenders with similar clips were available in the 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue fo r 25 cents per pair (238).

PAGE 207

186 Allison Parrish Figure 80. 5AH916, suspender clip with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 919 (see Table 7 for additional details). Garter Fasteners Garters were typically worn by Victorian women in association with stocking support, although sock garters were sometimes worn below the knee by men with the purpose of holding up socks (Stamper and Condra 2011). Although garter fasteners can be directly reflective of masculine or feminine gendered attire, much like the button artifacts, hooks, and eyelets discussed above, the lack of the associated context provided by the original, intact accessory makes it difficult to designate a particular gender association for the extant fragmentary remnants of the complete item. It does, however, seem likely that this garter fastener would more reasonably have originated from a female garter, as the use of such an accessory to support stockings was a necessity of dress, while conversely, male sock garters were used only occasionally in association with particular types or materials of socks that might otherwise sag. As a result, by the very nature of their consistent occurrence in Victorian standards of female attire, the presence of garter fasteners (Figure 81) in the Wells assemblage is inferred to reflect the potential

PAGE 208

187 ownership and use of a stocking garter by Adelia, and therefore, representative of a feminine gender association. Womens garters were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 10 cents and 25 cents per pair, while mens sock garters sold for between 10 cents and 35 cents per pair (88). Allison Parrish Figure 81. 5AH916, garter fastener with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 411 (see Table 7 for additional details). Hairpins Popular Victorian hairstyles for women in the mid-to-late nineteenth century called for ornate and elegant up-dos, culminating by the end of the century in the pompadour (Blum 1974); the common factor in socially-acceptable hairstyles for middle class women in the Victorian Era was long hair, such that, in order to achieve fashionable coiffures, maintaining hair of sufficient length w as a material requirement. Hairpins were subsequently worn by Victorian women as a method of holding hair up and out of the face, as well as to accomplish the tasteful and sophisticated styles of the day. The occurrence of a hairpin (Figure 82) in the site assemblage then is almost certainly indicative of a feminine gender association related to Adelias adherence to Victorian

PAGE 209

188 gender norms requiring women to maintain long hair. The 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide sold boxes containing 40 to 100 hairpins for between 2 cents and 6 cents each (87). Courtesy of K. Griffin Smit h Figure 82. 5AH916, hairpin with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 1034 (see Table 7 for additional details). Beads Queen Victoria popularized elaborate black jewelry and beading on womens clothing during her extensive mourning period following the death of Prince Albert in 1861 until her own death in 1901 (Lang Antiques 2015), and increasing levels of mass production of similar beads with relatively inexpensive materials allowed middle class European and American women to take advantage of this popular trend. Further, elaborate beading and trim on articles of womens clothing factored into styles in the decade from the early 1880s through the early 1890s (Blum 1974). Consequently, the presence of an opaque glass bead (Figure 83), a clear glass bead (Figure 84), and a black faceted glass bead (Figure 85) in the Wells assemblage may be indicative of Adelias feminine presence at the homestead. Although no additional matching beads were found, and these objects

PAGE 210

189 may subsequently represent isolated occurrences such as ornamental beads which individually detached from their respective articles of clothing or jewelry (as opposed to the disposal of a complete article of clothing or jewelry), the existence of these beads in the assemblage reflects a material manifestation of popular womens fashions of the late Victorian Era, with the emphasis on decorative bead embellishments. Accordingly, the bead artifacts are suggestive of Adelias potential adherence to popular Victorian Era womens fashions and trends along with an associated degree of effort to integrate these into her own wardrobe, in conformance with social norms dictating standards for feminine apparel. Further, the occurrence of the black faceted glass bead in the material record of the Wells homestead is interesting in that it represents a direct manifestation of a widespread trend originating with the personal style of Queen Victoria, who on an international scale defined respectable cultural standards and preferred fashions for this phase of Euroamerican history, and who subsequently lent her name to this Victorian Era. By following the fashionable clothing trends of the era through bead ornamentation, Adelia would have aesthetically and materially symbolized her social respectability, as well as her financial ability to keep up with the latest styles. Black Italian cut bead sets were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for $1.69, and faceted jet buttons sold for between 4 cents and 6 cents per dozen (84).

PAGE 211

190 Allison Parrish Figure 83. 5AH916, bead with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 316 (see Table 7 for additional details). A llison Parrish Figure 84. 5AH916, bead with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS #507 (see Table 7 for additional details).

PAGE 212

191 Allison Parrish Figure 85. 5AH916, bead with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS #1214 (see Table 7 for additional details). Metal Star With regard to the archaeological record of the Wells homestead, a small metal star artifact (3/4 inch in height) with the placement of a hole in its center is consistent with an interpretation as a bead-type accessory, possibly originating from a piece of jewelry or an article of clothing. From the 1860s through the mid-1880s, growing availability of and access to gold and silver resulted in the popular use of these materials in jewelry, which commonly included bangle bracelets, lockets, and brooches featuring a variety of engravings and designs, with Acorns, anchors, monograms, hearts, bees, bells, birds, swans, stars, sphinxes and daisiesall in vogue (Lang Antiques 2015). Although the specific metal material type of this item is unknown, its star design, along with its size, would correspond with popular Victorian styles of womens jewelry accessories, which could infer that Adelia, as the potential owner of this item, observed womens fashion trends of the era. For instance, a necklace with a gold star pendant sold in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for $2.75 (162).

PAGE 213

192 Umbrella/Parasol Upper and middle class Victorian women were expected to maintain fair skin as a status symbol, in concurrence with the notion that Tanned skin meant that the lady had to work outdoors and meant she was not wealthy enough to avoid the harsh sun on her skin. Parasols helped to keep the skin pale, and so were very popular items for women to carry, rain or shine. [Stamper and Condra 2011:290] It is however surmised that the social expectation for fair feminine skin was likely much more flexible in the American West, where both men and women of respectable, middle class economic standing may have contributed to work outdoors on the basis of the ultimate survival of the family in a frontier context which lacked many of the basic necessities and comforts that defined life and society back East. In recognition of the potential Western negotiation of established Victorian gender norms, the occurrence of an umbrella or parasol frame in the Wells assemblage is notable; although it is recognized that this frame may represent an umbrella used for the simple function of protection from the rain or snow, it is also possible that it could have been used as a shield from the sun, or may represent an actual parasol, which would have been used primarily for protection from the suns rays. In such a case, this could reflect Adelias adherence to established Victorian standards of feminine beauty related to economic social status, embodied through the maintenance of a fair complexion. This would be especially significant in light of the fact that Adelia owned and operated a homestead, which would in theory require a substantial amount of labor outside of the home; it is possible that if Adelia were taking such efforts to maintain a middle class, Victorian feminine aesthetic, she may have adhered more closely to the socially accepted role of the woman as domestic matriarch in association with the standards of the Cult of

PAGE 214

193 Domesticity, while her sons fulfilled the traditionally masculine tasks associated with agricultural and other outdoor activities. Parasols and umbrellas were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 50 cents and $5.00 (297-298). Table 7. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC BUTTONS AND SNAPS 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 59 3/8 (D) x (W) None N=1 riveted brass snap/button; possibly from jeans or denim clothin g. Post 1873 M 507 S84/W100 North Trash L1 60 11/16 (D) None N=1 iron or steel button (unidentified # holes, but likely 4hole). Non diagnos tic M/F 514 S84/W100 North Trash L2 61 9/16 (D) None N=1 pewter 4 hole button with stippled inner rim design moti f. Undeter mined M/F 604 S120/W94 South Trash L1 62 9/16 (D) x 1/8 (H) None N=1 brass snap with stamped bubble or dot design. Undeter mined M/F 655 S120/W94 South Trash L5 63 11/16 (D) x # (W) None N=1 wood 4 hole button with iron or steel shank. Non diagnos tic M/F 712 S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 64 5/8 (D) None N=1 iron or steel 2hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 712 S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 64 9/16 (D) None N=1 iron or steel 4hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 716 S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 65 # (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 4hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F

PAGE 215

194 Table 7. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1009 Unknown L1 66 # (D) None N=1 beige celluloid button or snap with unidentified attachment. Non diagnos tic M/F 1010 S118/W94 South Trash L1 67 # (D) None N=1 pewter 4 hole button with sti ppled inner rim design motif. Undeter mined M/F 1016 S118/W94 South Trash L2 68 5/8 (D) None N=1 iron 4 hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1016 S118/W94 South Trash L2 68 7/16 (D) None N=1 white celluloid 4 hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1016 S118/W94 Sout h Trash L2 68 5/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 69 7/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 2hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 69 7/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 4hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 69 # (D) None N=1 brass and iron or steel button (unidentified # holes, but likely 4hole). Non diagnos tic M/F 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 69 5/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 4hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1108 S120/W9 2 House Foundation s L2 70 5/8 (D) None N=1 iron 4 hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1214 S82/W98 Well L3 71 7/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 2hole partial button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 72 11/16 (D) None N=1 iron 2 hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 72 11/16 (D) None N=1 iron 4 hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F

PAGE 216

195 Table 7. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 72 9/16 (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 2hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 72 5/8 (D) LATEST NOVELTY N=1 riveted brass and iron or steel button stamped with Latest Novelty and stars with stippled rim. Undeter mined M 1708 S80/W98 Well L2 73 # (D) x 3/16 (W) None N=1 brass snap with sunrise design motif. Undeter mined M/F 1 779 S80/W98 Well L14, F3 74 # (D) None N=1 shell 4 hole button with white paint. Non diagnos tic M/F 1843 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 75 7/16 (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 2hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1851 S120/W96 South Trash L6 76 # (D) None N=1 mot her of pearl 4hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F 1920 S118/W95 South Trash L3, F4 77 9/16 (D) None N=1 copper or brass button with copper shank and iron or steel face (corroded). Non diagnos tic M/F 2101 S120/W94 South Trash L10, F4 78 7/16 (D) None N=1 gra y ceramic 2 hole button. Non diagnos tic M/F EYELETS 604 S120/W94 South Trash L1 No Photo s x 3/16 None N=4 brass eyelets; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnos tic M/F 620 S120/W94 South Trash L2 No Photo s x 3/16 None N=8 bra ss eyelets; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnos tic M/F 627 S120/W94 South Trash L3 No Photo s (D) x 1/16 (H) None N=3 brass eyelets; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnos tic M/F

PAGE 217

196 Table 7. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 630 S120/W94 South Tr ash L4 79 x 3/16 None N=9 brass eyelets, including 3 hooked; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnos tic M/F 640 S120/W94 South Trash L5 No Photo s x 3/16 None N=1 brass hooked eyelet; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or c orsets. Non diagnos tic M/F SUSPENDER CLIPS 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 No Photo None None N=1 brass suspender clip. Non diagnos tic M 919 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L4 80 1 3/16 x PARIS CC SOLIDE B 6x5 N=1 brass suspender clip or waistcoat buckle. Late 19th/Ear ly 20th Century (Meredi th 2008) M 1008 S118/W94 South Trash L1 No Photo None None N=1 brass suspender clip. Non diagnos tic M 1024 S118/W94 South Trash L4 No Photo None None N=1 brass suspender clip. Non diagnos tic M GARTER FASTENE RS 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 81 1 x 5/8 None N=1 brass eyelet/buckle/fas tener (possible garter fastener). Non diagnos tic F 620 S120/W94 South Trash L2 No Photo None None N=1 brass eyelet/buckle/fas tener (possible garter fastener). Non diagnos tic F HAI RPINS 1034 S118/W94 South Trash L5 82 4 (H) x 9/16 (W) None N=1 unidentified iron artifact; possible hairpin. Non diagnos tic F 1810 S120/W96 South Trash L3 No Photo None None N=1 metal hairpin. Non diagnos tic F BEADS

PAGE 218

197 Table 7. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 316 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L3 83 3/8 (D) x 3/8 (L) None N=1 opaque glass bead. Non diagnos tic F 507 S84/W100 North Trash L1 84 3/16 (D) x 1/8 (L) None N=1 clear glass bead. Non diagnos tic F 1214 S82/W98 Well L3 85 x 5/16 None N=1 black glass 2hole bead (sideways D shap ed). Non diagnos tic F METAL STAR 1034 S118/W94 House Foundation s L5 No Photo (H) None N=1 ornamental metal star with a hole in the center; unknown function. Undeter mined F UMBRELLA/PARASOL 399 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar Unknown No Photo None None N=1 steel umbrella or parasol frame. Non diagnos tic F Childrens Toys Train During the Victorian Era, with an increasing separation of the work environment from the homethe children of relatively affluent families were released from pressure to contribute to the family economy and instead were encouraged to [experience]childhood, a time of learning and leisure (Moore 2009:294). With public, professional spaces and social roles assigned to men and private, home spaces and associated social roles assigned to women, Victorian children were encouraged to engage in activities and with toys that supported and promoted these traditional masculine and feminine gender roles in conjunction with the established social standards of the period; in short, toys can be viewed as part of the material reality of the cult of domesticity,

PAGE 219

198 intended to mold children into adults fully capable of exhibiting proper behavior according to their particular class and gender (296). As such, boys were encouraged to play raucous games outdoors, while girls were kept closer to home under the watchful eye of their mothers. Gendered characteristics of childhood play extended to toys as well, in that boys were gifted toys associated with traditionally masculine gender roles, and which were sturdy and not easily broken in the course of boisterous play. Conversely, girls were gifted toys which served to support and emphasize their feminine roles and responsibilities as future wives and mothers; subsequently, popular Victorian toys for girls included objects like dolls and tea sets which were frequently manufactured from fragile ceramic materials. The occurrence of a cast iron toy train (Figure 86) in the Wells assemblage is almost certainly indicative of a male gender association, and in particular, is conjectured to represent a remnant object from the childhood of Adelias adult sons. However, the toy train also reflects a certain feminine gender association, in that its presence in the material record of the homestead suggests that Adelia, as a mother and domestic matriarch, would have approved of the toy for her sons, as symbolized through the purchase and extended tenure of the item in the homesteads material culture. Further, under the assumption that Adelia herself approved and completed the financial purchase, this act would reflect her conformance with traditional gender roles as embodied through childrens toys. In other words, the toy train indicates that Adelia reinforced traditional gender roles through the purchase of toys with a masculine gender association for use by her sons. In turn, the reinforcement of traditional gender roles with regard to childrens play infers a more innate adherence to gender roles and responsibilities as defined by the

PAGE 220

199 Cult of Domesticity, thus indicating that on some level as a mother, Adelia likely subscribed to and maintained traditional, established Victorian gender norms. Iron toy trains were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 25 cents and $1.00 (225). Allison Parrish Figure 86. 5AH916, childs toy train with a potential gender association dating to Wells occupation, FS# 395 (see Table 8 for additional details). Table 8. Wells Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Childrens Toys FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC TRAIN 395 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 86 5 1/8 x 3 7/16 x 2 7/16 None N=1 partial cast iron toy train. Undeter mined M Use of Space Analysis The gendered use of space analysis for the Wells site discussed below is summarized from Stones (2000) synthesis report on UCDs field investigations of the Wells site (5AH916) between 1996 and 1998; the reader is referred to this report for additional details.

PAGE 221

200 Gendered divisions of space in the Victorian Era are thought to correspond with activity areas outside of the formal house structure and within a rural, agricultural landscape, especially in relation to farming and ranching ventures. As such, this can be indicative of the potential for gendered use of space on homesteads in the American West. In particular, homestead buildings, structures, and activity areas can be linked with gendered uses of space in conjunction with activities generally considered to be aligned with masculine and feminine spheres of influence or responsibility related to the Victorian-era Cult of Domesticity. For instance, Victorian rural spaces situated within a masculine sphere of influence are thought to have included the barn, granaries, and outlying fields; these are the spaces typically associated with the commerce side of homestead activities, a sphere assigned to male responsibility within the bounds of Victorian gender norms and associations; in particular, men were assumed to have responsibility for the overall operation of a farm or ranch, oversight of crops and livestock, and related interactions within the public sphere of business and economics. Spaces with the confines of the feminine sphere of influence are generally considered to include the main house and related domestic outbuildings such as the root cellar or summer kitchens. This is related to the socioculturally-assigned responsibilities of women over the household, and as primary actors within the domestic domain, including activities such as the overall operation of the household, the furnishing and decoration of the home, household maintenance, cooking, cleaning, child-rearing, clothing manufacture and maintenance, and the oversight of family gardens within the immediate vicinity of the main house (Stine 1992; Rotman and Nassaney 1997; Stone 2000).

PAGE 222

201 Stone (2000) notes that materials excavated from a primary context can infer gendered use of space. Additionally, archaeological studies of historic farming contexts have shown that these types of sites generally dont exhibit strict separation of gendered spaces across agricultural homesteads and properties due to the sheer scope of labor necessary to ensure the successful operation of agricultural ventures. Instead, similar to working class contexts, use of space within agricultural sites tends to be fluid and negotiable with regard to gender (Stine 1992; Rotman and Nassaney 1997; Stone 2000). Excavations of the Wells site by UCD did not include the barn but did include other activity areas of the homestead property that can be analyzed and discussed in terms of gendered uses of space, particularly with regard to the root cellar and the southern kitchen trash midden. In her analysis of artifacts recovered from a primary context in the root cellar of the Wells site, Stone (2000) notes that the assemblage included artifacts more closely related to masculine activities than to feminine activities associated with the domestic use of space inherent in the root cellar as a site of storage for food and items of material culture traditionally associated in Victorian times with cooking as a feminine activity. Excavated from a primary context in the Wells root cellar were items associated with feminine activities, including pots and pans, stove parts, fruit jars, and crockery; however, the excavations also recovered artifacts concomitant with masculine activities in association with the expected objects associated with gendered female activities and spaces. Particularly, Stone notes that amongst the food storage and cooking items were machine parts, tools, wire, and other objects directly related to the masculine sphere of influence associated with the male-associated activities related to the operations of a ranching venture. Of particular interest is the observation by Stone that these objects

PAGE 223

202 associated with masculine-gendered activities were being stored in a space traditionally associated with feminine activities, despite the fact that a barn was extant on the property during the Wells occupation; in other words, if gendered uses of space were being strictly defined and adhered to, one would expect objects associated with masculine activities related to ranching operations to be stored in the barn, as associated with similar masculine uses of space, rather than in a space traditionally defined by and designed for objects associated with feminine activities and uses of space. Based on this, Stone determines that, as in the case of many rural farming and ranching homesteads, gendered uses of space at the Wells homestead may not have been strictly enforced, but rather may have been fluid and negotiable. Conversely, the assemblage excavated from the southern trash area at the Wells site, thought to be associated with the household kitchen due to the types of artifacts recovered, is more supportive of the separation of gendered spaces than that encountered in association with the root cellar. In particular, high densities of artifacts associated with roles traditionally considered feminine during the era were recorded, including items related to the maintenance of the house (drain pipe fragments and fasteners), furnishing and decoration (decorative furniture fragments), cooking (cans and bottle tops), and the serving and storage of food (ceramic vessel fragments of different types and forms). As such, this sub-assemblage originating from the apparent kitchen midden appears to support the possibility of gendered division of space with regard to the Wells site, specifically in light of the major roles and responsibilities of women of the Victorian era in relation to the kitchen, with its concurrent themes of cooking, serving, child-rearing,

PAGE 224

203 and general domesticity, in conjunction with the number and types of feminine gendered artifacts recovered from the midden associated with this space (Stone 2002). Based on these two opposing uses of space within the confines of the Wells site, with one space appearing to be negotiable with regard to gender association, and the other appearing to exhibit adherence to more traditional and strict norms of gendered space divisions, it is considered likely that gendered uses of spaces across the site were generally fluid and negotiable, with certain gendered spaces being more strictly enforced than others. It is interesting to note that the space that exhibits the most significant degree of apparent gendered use based on the artifact assemblage is the kitchen midden, which would have been associated with use of a particular room of the house. In terms of the kitchen as a feminine space, it can be inferred that this was a traditional role and sphere of female influence which was followed with regard to the norms of the Victorian era; this is interesting in that the main house generally, and the kitchen in particular, were primary functional and symbolically central spaces to notions of womanhood and domesticity, whereas the root cellar, as a more peripheral outlying space, exhibits a greater degree of cross-gendered usage within the context of the Wells site. As such, it can be inferred that gendered uses of space at the Wells homestead may have been enforced most strictly with regard to spaces considered central or especially significant to symbolically maintaining Victorian gender roles, such as the kitchen of the main house, whereas peripheral spaces, both geographically and symbolically, may have seen a greater degree of negotiation with regard to gender divisions at the Wells homestead. In particular, in terms of the notion of public/private spaces and the implication of these concepts with regard to the cult of domesticity, the kitchen may have been a more public

PAGE 225

204 space than that of the root cellar, and thus, it may have been considered important to adhere more closely to Victorian gender norms and uses of space in this public context in opposition to the more private (and generally less visible) space of the root cellar.

PAGE 226

205 CHAPTER VI HORNBEK HOMESTEAD (5TL4) Historic Background The following background on the life of Adeline Hornbek and the Hornbek homestead is largely developed from Given and Starks (2000) reference/research history on the Hornbek homestead (5TL4) and other historic landholdings in the area of present day Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument for the interpretive purposes of the National Park Service. This document also contains a detailed historic context of the local Florissant area and the greater region, and the reader is referred to this document for additional details on the life of Adeline Hornbek, the history of the homestead property, and the history of the region. Adeline Warfield was born in Massachusetts in July 1833. In the mid-1850s, Adeline traveled west to visit her brother Alexander, who owned a trading post in the Creek Nation portion of Indian Territory (present day Oklahoma). It was there that Adeline met Simon A. Harker, an English ex-patriot who worked in Alexanders store; Adeline and Simon married were married in Indian Territory in 1857 or 1858. In 1859, Adeline gave birth to a son, Frank, followed in 1860 by a daughter, Annie (Given and Stark 2000). By 1861 the political situation in the Indian Territory began to unravel with the unrest of the Civil War. Alexander and Simon were Union sympathizers, and may even have gone as far as to take actions to aid the Union forces in the area; as a result, the Warfield and Harker families may have been particularly affected by increasing levels of local political upheaval. This may have been a contributing factor to Simon and Adelines decision to move west to the Colorado Territory in 1861; however, in letters to family,

PAGE 227

206 Simon also noted that he had been unwell, and this may also have motivated the family to move to the more arid environment of the high plains region. Whatever the case, the Harkers relocated to a homestead on the South Platte River of the high plains six miles northeast of Denver City, with the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains looming to the west (Given and Stark 2000). The family settled in to their new surroundings, and in 1863, a second son, George, was born to Adeline and Simon. The same year, Simon filed a Declaration to Pre-Empt a total of 160 acres of land surrounding the homestead; however this declaration was contested. Subsequently, the Harkers ended up with an 80-acre claim under the Homestead Act of 1862. A significant flood affected the South Platte River in 1864, and this impacted the familys holdings. Difficult times were compounded by Simons death later that year. Further, local and regional conflicts between settlers and the Arapaho, Cheyenne, and Ute around the same time led to an atmosphere of unease for many of the Euroamerican families settled in the area. Adeline prevailed through these difficult times, however, and in 1866 was able to pay off the homestead claim and obtain title to the land, rather than waiting the allotted five years to prove up (Given and Stark 2000). In September 1866, she married Elliott Hornbek, and by 1868 had given birth to her fourth child, a son christened Elliott Jr. In March 1870, Adeline and Elliott Sr. sold the homestead near Denver. Little information on the family between the years of 1870 and 1875 is known; however, what is certain is that Elliott Sr. had abandoned Adeline and the children by 1875. During this time Adeline and the children resided in Colorado Springs (Given and Stark 2000).

PAGE 228

207 By the spring of 1878, Adeline and family reappear in Florissant, having established the homestead just outside town, in Township 13 South, Range 71 West, within the south half of the southwest quarter of Section 12 and the north half of the northwest quarter of Section 13. The homestead was originally established in El Paso County; in 1899, the portion of El Paso County containing the homestead became a part of the newly founded Teller County (Figure 87). The homestead claim consisted of 160 acres situated in a meadow surrounded by Ponderosa forest near a tributary of the South Platte River (Figure 88). Ranching comprised the primary economic activity of the homestead. Adeline obtained title to her claim in 1887, following an appeal for delay due to her belief, potentially instigated by her neighbors, that she could not obtain title without a divorce decree from her husband (Given and Stark 2000). Figure 87. Location of 5TL4, Hornbek homestead site, Teller County, Colorado.

PAGE 229

208 Figure 88. Map of 5TL4, Hornbek homestead site, Teller County, Colorado. Adelines 1885 Homestead Proof Testimony of Claimant (Figure 89) is written in the first person, likely in her own hand; in this document, Adeline states that the house was built Early in the Spring of 1878, and that the family established residence at the same time. Further, Adeline describes the homestead, including the house: Log House 1 # story, 3 rooms upstairs 3 rooms downstairs. Main Part is 30 x 19 ft. Ell is 14 x 16 ft. Shingle roof. Eleven windows. Eleven doors. A good Milk House, Chicken House. A large corral has a shed on two sides. Stables for 9 horses, has wagon shed attached. Whole interest in mile Ditch and one half interest in # mile Ditch [Hornbek 1885] Adeline places the value of her homestead at $1200. She describes her family as consisting of Myself and one child. I am the head of a family. My husband Elliott A. Hornbek abandoned me over ten (10) years ago, since which time I have supported myself and family. My said husband did not pay for these improvements nor any portion thereof [Hornbek 1885]

PAGE 230

209 Adeline also describes three acres of land cultivated each season on the homestead property, including the annual production of twenty tons of hay, as well as potatoes and other garden produce (Hornbek 1885). Florissants location along a rail line, as well as its proximity to Cripple Creek, a booming gold town established in 1890 only 18 miles to the south, likely provided Adeline with ease of access not only to transportation and markets for the homesteads goods, but consequently with access to every modern convenience of the era, related to the convenience of the railroad for supplying consumer purchases from product catalogs of the day (such as Sears Roebuck & Co. and Montgomery Ward & Co.). Courtesy of NPS/FLFO Figure 89. Adelines 1885 Homestead Proof Testimony of Claimant. During Adelines years in Florissant, she not only ran the homestead, but also served as Secretary to the Florissant School Board, and even boarded the local schoolteacher.

PAGE 231

210 Further, she worked for a time a local trading post in town. By 1880, Adelines eldest child, Frank, left home and moved to Ouray County, Colorado; in 1883, her daughter Annie married Leon Marcott at the homestead house and subsequently moved in with her husbands family. By 1885, Adelines youngest child, Elliott Jr., left home to forge his way in the world, and in 1888, her son George married and moved to a homestead eight miles to the south. In 1899, Adeline married for a third time to Frederick Sticksel, a younger German immigrant who may have worked on the homestead ranching venture. In 1900, Adeline pursued the title to an adjacent 120 acres of land that had been abandoned by a neighbor; it seems that the owner was delinquent on his taxes, and gave Adeline the quit-claim deed. After some complication, Adeline received undisputed title to the neighboring tract in June 1904. In the summer of 1905, Adeline may have been afflicted with a stroke, and she subsequently passed away on June 27, 1905, at the age of 71. She was buried at Four-Mile Cemetery in Florissant (Given and Stark 2000). The homestead was jointly inherited by Adelines husband and her three surviving children (her daughter Annie had passed away some years before), and the group sold the homestead property in 1907. The Federal government purchased the land in 1973 as part of the Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument (Given and Stark 2000). The Hornbek house and root cellar are extant, with the house having undergone stabilization in 1976, 1990, and 2007, and the root cellar having undergone reconstruction in 1976 (NPS 2014a, 2014b). No formal archaeological investigations of the site have been undertaken. Artifact Analysis Due to the lack of provenience control with regard to the vast majority of artifacts recovered from the structures and grounds of the Hornbek homestead, and in recognition

PAGE 232

211 of subsequent occupations of the homestead following Adelines death in 1905, the analysis of artifacts originating from the Hornbek homestead includes mainly diagnostic objects, as well as a very limited number of non-diagnostic artifacts. In the case of diagnostic items, the association of the artifacts with Adeline Hornbek and the activities at the homestead concurrent with her habitation of the property are based on the diagnostic features of those items, i.e., the ability to date those items based on generally known and acknowledged temporal characteristics of style, design, manufacture, materials, etc. to the timeframe during which Adeline would have inhabited the property. In the case of non-diagnostic artifacts, items analyzed in association with the Hornbek occupation of the homestead site include those which can be reasonably dated to the era of the Hornbek occupation on the basis of material, design, or other unique markers which comprise representative period-defining characteristics of the late Victorian Era, rather than precise diagnostic markers which can be assigned a particular date based on the basis of research; specifically, these artifacts include a hat which is inferred to have belonged to Adelines son George based on the presence of embroidered initials, and a mother-of-pearl letter knife featuring Victorian material and stylistic characteristics. Artifacts from the Hornbek assemblage that can be argued to exhibit gender associations are analyzed and discussed below within the context of the functional categories of Tableware, Household Decoration and Furnishing, and Personal Items; individual artifact attributes are detailed in Table 9 through Table 11.

PAGE 233

212 Tableware Flatware As discussed above in association with the analysis of the Wells assemblage, during the Victorian Era flatware acquired a new social symbolism in conjunction with mass production and middle class consumption; in particular, like ceramic tableware sets, middle class households were expected to maintain matching flatware sets in popular patterns as a material symbol of the familys economic success and financial stability (Gair N.d.). A single nickel silver spoon (Figure 90) dating to the era of the Hornbek occupation of the homestead site was recovered from the root cellar; Wm. A. Rogers, a popular manufacturer of silver-plated flatware during the Victorian Era, produced the spoon. Although it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding Adelines potential adherence to or divergence from middle class Victorian social norms influencing household maintenance of matching flatware sets as domestic a display of material wealth on the basis of a single spoon, what is apparent is that Adeline may have purchased flatware from a popular manufacturer; however, research into the pattern of the spoon does not indicate that the Brighton 1900 pattern was a particularly popular design. Additionally, the spoons nickel silver composition is notable in that nickel silver resembles silver, but does not actually contain the precious metal; as such, this spoon would not have been of particularly high quality. In the case of this spoon, all that can be known for certain is that it likely would not have met the standards for quality or pattern required by middle class Victorian social norms governing domestic displays of conspicuous consumption, particularly in light of Adelines relative wealth as displayed materially by the house itself, in addition to other

PAGE 234

213 artifacts recovered from the homestead. It seems possible based on the spoons location in the root cellar that it might have served a purely functional purpose with regard to portioning foods stored in the root cellar and subsequently transferred to the main house for cooking and consumption, and as such would not serve as an accurate indicator of Adelines potential subscription to social norms requiring high quality, matching flatware sets. Consequently, it is possible that this spoon was utilitarian and not meant for public display associated with social events; conversely, it is possible that the spoon was used in association with dining, which would suggest a negotiation of Victorian norms governing conspicuous consumption and domestic displays of material wealth by Adeline, who almost certainly maintained the disposable income necessary to purchase a high quality set of flatware for dining purposes. Allison Parrish Figure 90. 5TL4, spoon with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 9 for additional details).

PAGE 235

214 Table 9. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Tableware FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC SPOON N/A Root Cellar N/A 90 6 x 1 1/5 WM. A. ROGERS NICKEL SILVER N=1 complete nickel silver spoo n, Brighton 1900 pattern. Post 1890s F Household Decoration and Furnishing Hinges As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration o f the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). As such, the decorative, vine-patterned cast iron door hinges (Figure 91) present in the Hornbek assemblage, also observed to be extant on several doors in the main house, indicate that Adeline likely prescribed to Victorian feminine gender ideals associated with responsibility for decoration of the domestic space as well as expression of economic success through demonstrative displays of material culture. Similar decorative hinges were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for 60 cents per dozen pair (380).

PAGE 236

215 Allison Parrish Figure 91. 5TL4, hinge with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). Heart Cushion Although expectations for the primary priorities of a ladys time and energy continued to be dictated in response to the needs of her family and home, by the late Victorian Era, women were expected to develop and maintain multi-faceted cultural skills, including the exercise their creative and artistic talents. Middle-class women were taught from an early age to draw and play the piano, crochet and design elaborate female elegancies that could be displayed around the house (Clark 1986:106). Further, during the s and 1880s, women were encouraged to embellish their homes with their own handiworkthis apparent move towards creative expression and personalizing interiors was in essence a continuation of the effort to link home and its decoration to proper moral growth and the perpetuation of gentility. [Foy and Schlereth 1992:33]

PAGE 237

216 The presence of the hand sewn, embroidered heart-shaped patchwork cushion (Figures 92 and 93) in the Hornbek assemblage is perhaps a direct reflection of this social gender norm, and is further supported by the incorporation of a hanger-type feature, made of thick string, which would have allowed the cushion to be hung decoratively on a wall. Creating and displaying this ornament would have allowed Adeline to show off her needlework and embroidery skills, and to decorate her home with a beautiful object made by her own hand according to the norms associated with femininity and domesticity in the late Victorian Era. The heart-shaped cushion features at least two distinct types of decorative stitching in yellow thread, a variety fabric types and patterns, the remnants of a sheer, purple ribbon border, and the date embroidered on the back. This artifact seems especially meaningful due to the likelihood that Adeline, who would have been 70 years old at the time, personally chose the design, fabrics, and threadwork, and subsequently made this object from scratch based on the depth of her own imagination; it is also possible that the inclusion of a date may have had a commemorative purpose, although its meaning has now been lost to history. Ultimately, this artifact appears to represent a direct manifestation of Victorian Era feminine gender ideals associated with the Cult of Domesticity, reflecting dual purposes of the display of Adelines creative talents, as well as her proficiency at beautifying her home in a manner originally prescribed by cultural gender ideals around the time Adeline first established the homestead.

PAGE 238

217 Allison Parrish Figure 92. 5TL4, heart cushion with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 93. 5TL4, detail of embroidered date on heart cushion dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details).

PAGE 239

218 Letter Knife As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Although both men and women certainly used letter knives to open correspondence in the Victorian Era, the letter knife handle (Figure 94) present in the Hornbek assemblage features a distinctly feminine gender connotation with regard to its decorative design; in particular, it was produced with a luminescent mother-of-pearl material, and features an ornate, geometric floral incised pattern. An elegant, feminine mother-of-pearl letter opener would have been both functional and decorative in terms of Victorian material culture and its role in household activities; further, it would have represented the familys economic success with regard to financial ability to purchase an item which certainly would have been more expensive than its plainer counterparts with an identical function. The ornamental excess of this item, in conjunction with its very basic function in terms of its role in household activities, is a strong signifier of middle class conspicuous consumption on the part of Adeline, who as the head-of-household likely would have been the individual responsible for the purchase of this item. Pearl letter knives were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 60 cents and 80 cents each (187).

PAGE 240

219 Allison Parrish Figure 94. 5TL4, letter knife with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). Pitcher As previously noted, the ideology of the Cult of Domesticity and associated Victorian gender norms assigned responsibility for the management, furnishing, and decoration of the domestic space to the matriarch of the household, manifested materially in such a way as to symbolize the financial success and middle class economic standing of the family (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). The Early American Pressed Glass (EAPG) pitcher (Figures 95 and 96) found on the grounds of the Hornbek homestead, although serving a practical function in terms of its capacity to contain and serve liquid beverages, would also have served a conspicuous decorative function, with its ornate pattern and simulation of fine crystal. As such, its use during social events would have been associated with a domestic display of material wealth on Adelines part, especially in recognition of EAPGs purpose to serve as an imitation of expensive crystal, though ironically, at a much more economical cost to the household. As such, this object symbolizes a negotiation of Victorian gender and social norms associated with decoration of the household and

PAGE 241

220 domestic displays of wealth related to conspicuous consumption, in that Adeline apparently adhered to expectations to decorate her house with ornate, expensive-looking objects as a method of denoting the familys economic success and financial stability; however, she was also willing to negotiate this standard through the purchase of a more economical, but inauthentic imitation item which would aesthetically connote the same implication of material wealth to outsiders. A pressed glass pitcher was available in the 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue for 28 cents (622). Allison Parrish Figure 95. 5TL4, EAPG pitcher with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details).

PAGE 242

221 Allison Parrish Figure 96. 5TL4, EAPG pitcher handle with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 10 for additional details). Table 10. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC HINGES N/A House N/A 91 Hinges: 3 # x 3 # Pin: 5 # (L) None N=2 steeple top door hinges, cast iron with vine pattern (Eastlake) and white paint; six screw holes in each hinge; one hinge has a pin (manufactured by P. & F. Corbin, New Britain, CT). 18681902 (Univers ity of Connecti cut 2003) F HEART CUSHION N/A House (upper level) N/A 9293 Approx. 7 (L) x 6 (W) x 1 (H) None N=1 complete quilted heart shaped cushion with embroidering, including 903 on back. Ca. 1903 F LETTER KNIFE

PAGE 243

222 Table 10. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Household Decoration and Furnishing FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Yard N/A 94 3 x 1 7/50 None N=1 fragment of a mother of pearl handle, incised floral motif, possible letter opener or other small accessory, such as a nail file, pen knife, or button hook. Undeter mined F PITCHER N/A Grounds General N/A 95 3 (H) x 3 # (W at top) x 2 9/10 (W at base) None N=1 amethyst pressed glass vessel base and body fragment, pedestal foot, crosshatched circle and crescent moon pattern (resembles pineapples), likely Early American Pressed Glass (EAPG); possible pitcher. 1860s 1910 F N/A Grounds G eneral N/A 96 4 x 2 x 2 1/5 None N=1 amethyst glass handle, crosshatched circle and crescent moon pattern (resembles pineapples), likely Early American Pressed Glass (EAPG); possible pitcher handle. 1860s 1910 F

PAGE 244

223 Personal Items Hat The presence of a mans wide-brimmed, felt field hat (Figures 97 and 98) in the Hornbek assemblage, in conjunction with the embroidered initials G*H on the rim, almost certainly refers to Adelines son George Harker, who lived at the homestead until 1888. This hat features obvious masculine gender connotations, and may have been worn by George in the course of contributing to ranching or agricultural activities at the homestead. The embroidered initials are also an interesting feature of the hat in terms of the questions they raise with regard to who completed the embroidery. In particular, for middle class women of the Victorian Era, needlework, including both fancy decorative embroidery skills along with more utilitarian sewing skills, was considered a staple of a ladys education and overall feminine, domestic skill set. Embroidery and sewing occupied leisure time and also contributed to household chores, such as mending clothing (Ledbetter 2012). Allison Parrish Figure 97. 5TL4, hat with embroidered initials with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details).

PAGE 245

224 In terms of the field hat with the embroidered initials G*H on the rim, it is easy to speculate that Adeline or her daughter Annie might have completed the needlework for George, which would support adherence to domestic, feminine gender roles in accordance with Victorian gender ideals and the Cult of Domesticity with regard to the mastery of needlework as a skill set, as well as fulfilling the feminine role of support and care of dependent family members. Conversely, documented cases of men in the American West straying from established Victorian norms and undertaking chores traditionally associated with feminine activities, including sewing (Johnson 2001), leave room for speculation. It seems at least a possibility that George may have sewn his initials onto his own hat; in a time and place when men outnumbered women on the American Frontier, perhaps Adeline, recognizing the potential for George to leave home and survive on his own without a wife, taught George the basics of sewing for his own benefit, should he ultimately find himself without a wife to complete basic mending and sewing tasks. Although speculative, this could certainly signify a resistance to established Victorian gender norms, if for the sake of necessity in recognition of the unique circumstances of life on the American Frontier. Allison Parrish Figure 98. 5TL4, detail of embroidered initials on hat dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details).

PAGE 246

225 Shoes Shoe fragments are notoriously difficult to date and establish gender associations, due in no small part to their typically fragmentary nature in the archaeological record; however, general characteristics of partial shoe fragments, including overall size, shape, material and heel shape and height, in conjunction with diagnostic characteristics such as left/right differentiation and method of manufacture can be compared with evolving styles and trends through time to construct a broad idea of gender association and era of manufacture. The four shoe fragments (Figures 99-102) recovered from the grounds of the Hornbek homestead can all arguably be dated to the timeframe within which Adeline and her family inhabited the property. Two shoe fragments appear to originate from ladies shoes (Figures 99 and 100), while one fragment appears to be associated with mans style (Figure 101); the gender association of the fourth shoe fragment remains ambiguous (Figure 102). The two potential ladies shoe fragments may represent a slipper, and a work boot or walking shoe, respectively, while the mans shoe fragment might represent a slipper or house shoe. The fourth shoe fragment, with an unknown gender association, retains characteristics of a gym shoe. The utilization of shoes by Adeline and her family likely adhered to gender appropriate lines, as a vast variety of shoe types were manufactured for men and women during the late Victorian Era. For this reason, it is likely that women in the household would have worn slippers, walking shoes, or work boots manufactured for females, while men would have had similar functional options in shoe types. As such, the shoe fragments present in the Hornbek assemblage more than likely represent the presence of both males and females at the homestead, which makes sense since Adeline had a

PAGE 247

226 daughter and three sons, as well as the probable adherence of family members to shoes with manufactured gender associations as far as Victorian functional styles and associated gender norms; in this case, there is no functional reason to suspect that shoes manufactured for one gender were worn by individuals of the opposing gender. Allison Parri sh Figure 99. 5TL4, shoe fragment with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). The overall number of distinct shoe remnants in the Hornbek assemblage is interesting with regard to the generally low density of the total collection. It is possible that the inequitable number of shoe fragments in comparison to the sample of artifacts recovered on a random basis from the property reflects the substantial disposable income and upper middle class economic status of the household; although a shoe sole with a potential repair is present in the assemblage, it seems likely that once an old pair of shoes had worn out, members of the Hornbek family would have had the financial resources to dispose of the old shoes and purchase new shoes as needed, rather than continually

PAGE 248

227 making repairs to older shoes over the long-term for the sake of frugality. Ladies heavy pegged boots similar to those in the Hornbek assemblage were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between $1.10 and $1.65 a pair (511), while gym/athletic shoes similar to those in the Hornbek assemblage sold for between $1.25 and $1.75 a pair (519). Allison Parrish Figure 100. 5TL4, shoe fragment with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details).

PAGE 249

228 Allison Parrish Figure 101. 5TL4, shoe with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details). Allison Parrish Figure 102. 5TL4, shoe with a potential gender association dating to Hornbek occupation (see Table 11 for additional details).

PAGE 250

229 Table 11. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC HAT N/A House (upper level) N/A 9798 Approx. 11 (D) x 7 (H) None N=1 complete brown felt hat with G*H embroidered on rim. Non diagnosti c M SHOES (Dates from Rexford 2000) N/A Grounds General N/A 99 6 4/5 x 2 9/10 x 2/5 None N=1 shoe fragment with rubber outsole and fabric insole, small few iron or steel staples attaching insole to outsole, flat/no heel, minor left/right differentiation, turned manufacture process; possibly a ladys slipper (evening or boudoir). 18301870 F N/A Grounds General N/A 100 Shoe: 4 3/10 x 2 7/10 x 3/10 Nails: (D) None N=1 shoe fragment with rubber outsole fragment, narrow oval toe, round iron or steel hobnails protruding from bottom cleat like, one small stainless steel nail in center of base from possible repair, unknown method of manufacture; possible a ladys work boo t or walking shoe. 18801930s F

PAGE 251

230 Table 11. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A 101 9 3/5 x 4 x 1 9/10 None N=1 leather shoe, fragmentary, leather vamp/upper, fabric insole and lining, rubber outsole and heel with some stippled tread apparent, minor left/right differentiation oval shaped toe, spring heel, turned manufacture process; possibly a mans slipper or house shoe. Pre 1930s M

PAGE 252

231 Table 11. Hornbek Homestead Sort of Gendered Artifacts: Personal Items FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A 102 Shoe: 7 x 3 x 2 3/5 Nails: 3/10 (D) Grommet: 3/10 (D), 1/10 (D) None N=1 leather shoe, front laced, closed tab, round toe, gypsy seam, leather vamp, leather upper with brass shoe lace grommets (six pairs of lace holes), unidentified insole and lining material (inaccessible), rubber outsole and stacked leather and rubber heel with small, round stainless steel nail s apparent, in addition to one larger iron or steel tack near the insole arch of the foot and hobnails on the ball of the outsole, minor left/right differentiation. Thin organic twine, possibly cotton, observed unraveling from exterior of stacked heel. Nai led/pegged manufacture process. Not gender specific, possible gym/athletic or walking shoe. 1860s 1930s M/F

PAGE 253

232 Archival Materials Analysis Historical documents associated with Adeline Hornbeks life and retained by Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument were exhaustively reviewed for symbolic or representative characterizations of gender identity as defined by socially accepted Victorian-Era gender norms. A number of representative documents came to light, including two letters written by Simon Harker, Adelines first husband, to his family in England in which he makes mention of Adeline and their children; a 1905 biographic profile of Adelines son Frank; three photographs of Adeline taken between 1882 and 1895; as well as Given and Starks (2000) reference/research history on the Hornbek homestead, which details widely acknowledged facts of Adelines life history based on extensive research into primary records from institutions across the country. The average age at first marriage for women in the United States in 1860 was 22.8 years, down from 23.1 years in 1850 (Hacker et al. 2010). Adelines first marriage to Simon Harker occurred in 1857 or 1858 (Given and Stark 2000), when she would have been 24 or 25 slightly older than the national average for age at first marriage, although only by two to three years. The fact that she did marry, and relatively close to the average age at first marriage for American women at the time, is perhaps indicative of an adherence to feminine gender ideals in accordance with cultural expectations of marriage at a certain age in association with the Cult of Domesticity, and the concomitant obligation of the Victorian-Era middle class female to the principles and standards of piety, purity, submission, and domesticity (Welter 1966). Further, Adelines multiple marriages, especially in light of her financial independence and economic success as a homesteader, indicate that she likely prescribed to nineteenth century ideals of the

PAGE 254

233 companionate marriage, based on notions of romantic love and marital accord, and denoted by the concept that marriage should be based on sympathy, affection, esteem, friendship, and mutual obligation, as opposed to the hierarchical mode of traditional marriage (Woloch 2006:85). In other words, following her first marriage and initial success at homesteading, Adeline likely had no pressing financial or economic need to remarry, and given the relatively broad cultural rights of single women in the American West, was not dependent on a husband politically or socially within the context of her Frontier existence. As such, it is not difficult to imagine that Adelines purpose in remarrying twice over the course of her life was primarily aligned with a desire for companionship, in line with the ideals of the companionate marriage. Divorce grew increasingly common as American women gradually became decreasingly dependent on their husbands for financial stability, political representation, and overall happiness as the ideals of the Cult of Domesticity began to wane. This is reflected in the fact that In 1880 there was one divorce for every twenty-one marriages; in 1900, one for every twelve marriages; and by 1916, one for every nine marriages; further, it is noted women rarely rebelled against marriage but rather against mates who failed to meet traditional ideals (Woloch 2006:273). Despite these statistics, divorce in general remained frowned upon in public ideology. Adeline was abandoned by her second husband between 1870 and 1875; however, no divorce records for Adeline and Elliott Hornbek have been discovered in the course of research into public records in Colorado (Given and Stark 2000). Although Adelines marriage to Elliott failed, which would have fallen outside the accepted Victorian ideals of the Cult of Domesticity, it is interesting that no divorce was apparently ever obtained. There is, short of the discovery

PAGE 255

234 records, no way to know definitively if Adeline ever attempted to file for divorce, but it seems a possibility in light of the continued social discouragement of divorce in public ideology that she may have avoided divorce and the social stigma it may have carried, in spite of its increasing prevalence in American families. If this were the case, it could symbolize Adelines adherence to overall Victorian gender and social norms. However, if Adeline and Elliott were never legally divorced, had he still been alive when she was remarried to Frederick Sticksel in 1899, the marriage would not have been legal; granted, the status of her relationship with Elliott Hornbek, or even the fact of his existence or demise, may not have been known by the Florissant community. Further, with the realities of life in rural Colorado, Elliotts abandonment of the family may have been enough to render a symbolic third marriage socially acceptable in the eyes of the community, regardless of the legal status of the relationship. This possibility could also be indicative of a socially accepted negotiation of traditional Victorian ideals on the part of the local community, given the hardships of life in rural Colorado compared to the relatively trivial matter of legal marriage, especially in the context of previous abandonment by a spouse. For middle class white women native to the United States, birth rates fell consistently over the course of the nineteenth century, in conjunction with a rise in age at marriage as women began to exercise increasing control over their marital options and fertility, congruent with increasing economic, political, and social independence as the century progressed. The average fertility rate for a woman born in the 1830s in the United States, such as Adeline, was 6.55 children (Woloch 2006). Adeline, however, had only four children (Frank in 1859, Annie in 1860, and George in 1863, all by her first husband,

PAGE 256

235 Simon Harker), and the youngest (Elliott Jr. in 1868, by her second husband, Elliott Hornbek) significantly later than her first three (Given and Stark 2000). This could be indicative of Adelines divergence from and thus, negotiation of, Victorian gender ideals, in that she may have exercised some control over her fertility, especially given the threeyear inter-birth spacing between Annie and George, as well as the possibility that, following the birth of her youngest child in 1868, she may have been married to her second husband, Elliott Hornbek, for as long as seven years without the birth of additional children. Conversely, the birth of only four children may be a simple result of Adelines marital status over the years, as her first husband passed away in 1864, with Adeline remarrying in 1866, and at some point between 1870 and 1875, her second husband abandoning the family. Had Adelines second husband abandoned the family as early 1870, Adeline simply may not have had much of a chance to give birth to a fifth child with regard to the realities of inter-birth spacing; by this point she was approaching her forties as well, and may no longer have been physically able to bear children. Additionally, Adelines ability to bear children could feasibly have been impacted nutritional hardships associated with the upstart of homesteads and general survival on the Frontier, although by all accounts, Adeline and her first husband quickly established a successful ranch outside Denver; her economic status is less certain during the years she was married to Elliott Hornbek, although she continued to run the ranch until she and Elliott sold it in 1870. Simon Harker, Adelines first husband, makes mention of his new wife, Adeline, in an 1859 letter to his family in England; at this time he and Adeline were living in the Indian Territory. Simon notes that he will send a photograph of Adeline at the first

PAGE 257

236 opportunity, and also references the expected arrival of their first child. As far as Adeline, he states She is well at this time and desires her kind love to you all, Mother in particular. She says she would very much like to see you all and is anxiously waiting for the likeness [photograph] (Harker 1859). This letter obviously addresses the Harkers marriage and expectation of future children, both of which would seem to correspond with and represent adherence to the ideals of the Victorian Cult of Domesticity, under which Adeline, as a middle class woman, would have been expected to fulfill a role as a wife and mother. A second letter from Simon to his family, written in 1861 from the Colorado Territory, verifies the birth of firstborn son Frank, along with a second child, daughter Annie. Simon also references the general health and condition of the children, writing, I wish mother and you all could see them, they will bear inspection (Harker 1861). These statements denote that, within three to four years of marriage, Adeline had given birth to two children, which as previously mentioned would have, within the confines of Victorian principles, satisfied her cultural role as female through the act of becoming a mother the ultimate feminine profession in the mid-nineteenth century. Further, Simons mention of the general good state of health of the children, both of whom were babies at the time, could be translated as something of an acknowledgement of Adelines maternal skills as the primary nurturer within the domestic space, as required by Victorian gender ideals and the associated Cult of Domesticity. It is estimated that in the 1890s, 40.5% of unmarried women participated in the labor force; overall during the same decade, women as a demographic were estimated to comprise 17.0% of the total labor force (Woloch 2006). With regard to Adelines role in the labor force, as the owner of a homestead with associated farming and ranching

PAGE 258

237 activities, she was certainly represented within these demographics. As far as Adelines role in the labor force as an unmarried woman with regard to the aforementioned numbers, it was not uncommon for single women to participate in labor roles within the expanding capitalist market; however, it was less common for females as a total demographic to participate in the labor force outside the domestic home. This is also reflected in the numbers of unmarried female homesteaders on the Western Frontier, which, even while fairly significant, are still estimated at only up to 18 percent of all homesteaders (Harris 1993; Woloch 2006); if one considers the number of single mothers who pursued homesteading, the number is probably drastically reduced. And, while Adeline undoubtedly had to make a living for herself and her children as a single mother through some channel, her economic feat and apparent success as a homesteader and rancher are, in recognition of the numbers, rather remarkable for the era, even at a time when gender roles with regard to the labor force and overall economy were evolving. Although Adeline defied Victorian gender ideals in terms of her pursuit of and success at homesteading, it is interesting to note that the 1905 A.W. Bowen & Company publication Progressive Men of Western Colorado, which features a biographical profile of Frank Harker, Adelines firstborn son, states that Frank managed the ranch business for the family, and after leaving school took charge of the home ranch which he managed until 1882 (790). Allowing her adolescent son to manage the ranch could be indicative of an effort on Adelines part to conform more closely to prescribed Victorian gender norms, perhaps through teaching her son the ropes of the ranching business, or through returning a greater extent of her own time to activities around the house and yard. Whatever the case, Adeline likely ran the ranch prior to Franks coming of age, and she

PAGE 259

238 probably returned to managing the ranch following Franks departure in 1880; by 1888, the last of her children had left home, and she would have been the sole owner and main occupant of the homestead until her remarriage in 1899. Although Adeline almost certainly had help around the homestead during the course of her residence, be it in the form of her children, neighbors, or ranch hands, it is likely that she retained an extensive stake in overall management and principal decision-making over the years, and the material record reinforces the perception that she certainly served as the family matriarch and head-of-household not only in domestic matters, but in terms of the use of the homesteads finances as well. By the late nineteenth century, the middle class womanCapitalizing on her domestic expertise, inspired by a sense of shared feminine interests, and supported by a wide range of womens organizationswas ready to take an active role in public life (Woloch 2006:296). In line with this evolving gender ideal of progressive womanhood, Adeline served as Secretary to the Florissant School Board, and worked for a time a local trading post in town. Adelines conformance and resistance to prescribed gender ideals of the Victorian Era are also apparent in her fashion choices. From the mid-1870s through the early 1880s, fashion was characterized by a commitment to increasingly slender skirts which defined the natural shape of the wearers lower body, although Separates, which had been in wide use in the early 1860s, continued to be worn until the early 1870s. There were blouses and neckwear as delicate as infants clothes (Blum 1974:3). The new fashions were complemented by an attention to asymmetrical design and an emphasis on verticality, resulting in the popularity of full-length dresses emphasized by gaudy trim

PAGE 260

239 and drapery, such as trains. Low necks and collars were popular. Darker colors on heavier fabrics were considered fashionable. Hairstyles became increasingly extravagant and integrated combs, clips, ornaments, and false hairpieces. Corsets were worn as a rule rather than an exception, although the Aesthetic movement lauded the natural form and flowing lines, while eschewing confining corsets. Fashionable ladies shoes featured square toes, high heels, and ornate trim such as buttons, buckles, bows, and decorative stitching, although slippers were flat with no heels (Blum 1974; Gernsheim 1981). The fashion period from the early 1880s through the early 1890s was defined by a broadening of skirts, resulting in less restriction of the legs and the disappearance of trains; however, mobility was still restricted by the weight of dresses, which were made from heavy upholstery-like (Blum 1974:149) fabric, featuring layers and substantial quantities of accessorized beads and trimmings. The bustle, which achieved the height of its popularity during the post-Civil War era, also made a reappearance, although by the late 1880s it began fade from fashion once more. Conversely, bodices increasingly featured less decoration, were sometimes tailored, and generally had slightly higher neck and collars than previous styles, ending below the chin. Hairstyles and hats were characterized by more verticality compared to styles of prior fashion fads, and hats and hair accessories became ever more ornate, often featuring flower, ribbons, feathers, and sometimes even real birds; tortoiseshell combs and hairpins were also popular. Another major fashion feature of this period was the evolution of the sleeve, which evolved from relatively form-fitting to bulky and puffed. Corsets continued to be widely used. Fashionable shoes featured pointed toes, high heels, the same ornate trim as the previous

PAGE 261

240 period, although walking and traveling shoes featured low or flat heels and less decoration (Blum 1974; Gernsheim 1981). The fashions of the 1890s were defined by a commitment to the hourglass figure, which was achieved through a combination of corset, epaulette and ballooning (Blum 1974:227) style sleeves, and broad skirts. Ladies tailored suits became popular, as did the combination of separate skirts and shirtwaists, which had been fashionable in the 1860s and 1870s. Trousers began to make their way into womens styles for activity and sports, such as swimming, bicycling, and ice-skating. Corsets were the basis of the hourglass figure, but began to be joined by newer styles of undergarments such as combinations and bloomers. Sleeves continued to grow in size and general puffiness. By the mid-1890s, bodices began to accentuate a front-heavy appearance, and featured high collars, ending at or just below the chin, with boning to improve posture. At this point, skirts also became slimmer and with longer backs. Shoes of this period featured pointed toes and low to flat heels, with smaller and less ornate trim than previous periods; travelling and walking shoes generally featured flat heels and relatively plain decoration (Blum 1974; Gernsheim 1981). During the 1890s, jewelry became generally daintier than the more gaudy fashions of previous periods, and Heavy Victorian brooches were replaced by smaller pins scattered on the bodice of a dress (Lang Antiques 2015). A circa 1882 photograph (Figure 103) depicts Adeline, who would have been in her late forties, seated in a large group (middle row, second from right) in a seated position; she is wearing a light-colored shirtwaist with a fairly high collar, a prominent jabot, and ruffled cuffs, along with a dark-colored jacket and skirt. Her hair appears to be pulled back into a low bun or chignon. As far as current fashions at the time this photograph was

PAGE 262

241 taken, Adelines style more closely aligns that of the 1860s and 1870s, with the combination of the shirtwaist and the separate jacket and skirt, in conjunction with her simple hairstyle; her use of dark colors, however, especially with heavier fabrics, would have been fashionable in the early 1880s. Although this photograph was originally estimated to have been taken in 1882, it seems possible, on the basis of the general fashions of the ladies in the group, that this photograph was more likely taken in the early to mid-1890s, when Adeline would have been in her late fifties or early sixties. I base this argument on the observations of the general styles of dress across the group, which are observed to commonly include separate shirtwaists and skirts, puffed sleeves, high collars, and pompadour hairstyles. If this photograph were in fact taken in the early to mid-1890s, Adeline, along with the other ladies in the group, would have been adhering very closely to the popular fashions of the day, which included the aforementioned aesthetics. Further, Adelines jacket and skirt, if a tailored suit set, would have been all the rage during this period. Courtesy of NPS/FLFO Figure 103. Adeline Hornbek (middle row, seated second from right), ca. 1882.

PAGE 263

242 A circa 1885 photograph (Figure 104) depicts Adeline, who would have been in her early fifties, in a formal portrait, with her face and upper body pictured. She is wearing a black shirtwaist embellished with a delicate brooch at the collar, which ends just beneath her chin. A dark-colored jacket is worn over her shirtwaist and features large black buttons on the lapels. Adelines hair appears to be pulled back into simple, low bun, and is accentuated by a hair comb, possibly of tortoiseshell. The styles worn by Adeline for this portrait generally appear to accord with the popular fashions of the mid-1880s. In particular, her dark-colored clothing appears to be made from a relatively heavy fabric, features a fairly high collar, and is embellished with beading and a brooch. Adelines hair, although worn in a relatively simple, low style, is accentuated with an ornate comb, possibly of tortoiseshell, which would have been a very popular accessory of the era (similar hair combs were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for 90 cents to $1.60, while imitation tortoiseshell hair combs sold for between 19 cents and 45 cents (183)). Interestingly, Adeline also appears to partake in something of a classic Victorian fashion, in the form of the large black beads which embellish her jacket; specifically, Queen Victoria popularized elaborate black jewelry and beading on womens clothing during her extensive mourning period following the death of Prince Albert in 1861 until her own death in 1901 (Lang Antiques 2015), and increasingly large-scale manufacture of similar beads with relatively inexpensive materials allowed the middle classes of Europe and the United States to take advantage of this popular trend (for instance, jet buttons were available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue & Buyers Guide for between 4 cents and 6 cents per dozen (84)).

PAGE 264

243 Courtesy of NPS/FLFO Figure 104. Adeline Hornbek, ca. 1885. A circa 1895 photograph (Figure 105) depicts Adeline (middle), who would have been in her early sixties, wearing a high-collared, patterned shirtwaist or chemisette under a pinstripe jacket or dress with a v-cut neckline, although it is not possible to tell whether the outer layer is a separate or a full-length dress. No jewelry or other accessories are apparent, and Adelines hair appears to be pulled back into its usual style a simple, low bun. Adelines style accords with some features of the evolving styles of the 1890s, but overall adheres less closely to contemporary fashions as in previous photographs. She appears to observe some trends, in that her clothing is not as dark in color as previous years and features patterns with lighter shades, and her collar ends just beneath her chin in conformance with the high-necked fashions of the1890s. It is difficult to decipher if Adelines outer shell is a separate jacket or a full-length dress, at a time when separates were increasingly popular. Contrary to the fashions of the 1890s, Adelines style does not

PAGE 265

244 include popular features such as puffed sleeves or epaulettes, and her hairstyle endures relatively unchanged from previous years. Courtesy of NPS/FLFO Figure 105. Adeline Hornbek (middle), ca. 1895. Overall, through the years, Adeline appears (at least in posed photographs) to make an attempt to conform to popular and ever-evolving feminine styles, but with a degree of caution, possibly in recognition of her age for instance, none of the photographs depict Adeline in her advancing age sporting particularly elaborate hairstyles, such as the pompadour, or fashions such as puffed sleeves. Adelines appearance and clothing are modest but dignified, and regardless of how closely she may or may not have adhered to contemporary popular fashions, her style is obviously that of a respectable, Victorian middle class woman. Use of Space Analysis The following discussion of Victorian-gendered use of space divisions is largely developed from the specialized studies of Clark 1986 and Tange 2010, and the reader is referred to these sources for additional, detailed information on the subject.

PAGE 266

245 Victorian-era, middle class uses of household space with regard to floor plans can generally be perceived as an extension of the ideals of the Cult of Domesticity. In particular, homes were defined by the Victorian subscription to notions of public versus private space, symbolized through the segmentation of fl oor plans into public/private, masculine/feminine, and hierarchical family space; houses were self-contained entities which reinforced the cohesiveness of the whole family while also providing for the needs of each individual membereach room in the house, like each member of the family, should have a clearly defined role and function (Clark 1986:40). The Victorian home in particular was considered to comprise a private space, evolving from earlier concepts of the household as public space, associated with the role of the home and family as a productive unit within the greater economy local and/or regional economies. With the removal of significant activities of production away from and outside of the household scale, the home space itself became associated with ideals of the private, moral bonds of the nuclear family unit. This included standards related to domesticity and usage of increasing amounts of leisure time (Clark 1986:32), however, The central tenet of the new canon of domesticitywas the assertion that the household should be a refuge from the outside world, a fortress designed to protect, nurture, and strengthen the individuals within it (29). However, the recognition of certain areas of the home as public space for entertaining outsiders was also inherent to the exercise of middle class conspicuous consumption and adherence to accepted sociocultural domestic norms, as far as material representations of economic success and stability, as well as symbolic demonstrations of Victorian domesticity and the abilities of the lady of the

PAGE 267

246 house to effectively run her household and care for her family in accordance with the Cult of Domesticity (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). In particular, As the emphasis on taste might suggest, home was the central site wherein families could continually reaffirm their middle-class status through a process of careful display. For in addition to offering a place of repose and rejuvenation, the home served as the venue for social occasions and a microcosm of class relations through the interactions of family, servants, and tradespeople. In short, the Victorian middle classes relied upon the home to be both public and private. [Tange 2010:19] As Victorian-era masculine spaces tended to be associated with the public realms of professional work and economic status as household bread-winner, the home as a private space was disposed to association with the feminine gender and associated roles, with the common understanding that the Victorian ideal of home relied on the notion of separate spheres, which defined the private, feminine, domestic realm against the public, masculine world of work and commerce (Tange 2010:11). In other words, the home was the primary space and realm of the wife and mother, in her profession of domesticity as interpreted by the cultural norms of the era. Further, If the male sphere of expertise was the commercial world, the female was expected to dominate at home (Clark 1986:32), and the home, with its Victorian associations of domesticity and protection, became the realm of women in conjunction with the ideals of the Cult of Domesticity, especially with regard to patterns of consumption regarding the furnishing and decoration of the domestic space. For mid-nineteenth century women the home was considered the center of power in societyit made mothers respected authority figures and arbitrators of power within the middle-class family (34). The wife and mother of the household was considered the authoritative domestic figure within the confines of the household, particularly in regard to the activities and operation of the household, including the children and greater family unit as a whole. Additionally, in terms of the home as both

PAGE 268

247 space and concept falling within the realm and responsibilities of the wife and mother, along with the well-being of individual family members, it was expected that this lady keep an omniscient eye on the activities and goings-on of her family members under the umbrella of household uses of space and requirements of the Cult of Domesticity; however, Victorian norms also called for some allowance of a degree of individual independence on the part of individual family members (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). These concepts are reflected within the Victorian household use of space, such that even the architecture of privacy complemented the goal of establishing a social hierarchy by subdividing spaces to make it more feasible for a woman to provide adequately for the various needs of the members of her household while carefully maintaining the hierarchies among them. Furthermore, as a place where guests were able to see and judge the households character through both taste and actions home was a highly public place for display. [Tange 2010:20] The lower floor of the house was generally split between public and private spaces, with public spaces characterized by parlors and dining rooms, and private spaces defined by kitchens and lower-level bedrooms. Public spaces were preferably situated within the accessible front side of the house, and private spaces at the back of the home, where they would be shielded from prying eyes (Clark 1986:45). Further, all rooms would typically be segmented and separated by individual doors, and sometimes multiple doors at opposite sides of the room, which could be used to limit or facilitate access to defined areas of the house dependent upon on changing activities, space needs, and the relationships of outside individuals to the family, and The large number of doorsserved the changing composition of the Victorian family well by allowing for the expansion or contraction of usable space (62). Additionally, spaces within the home could further be divided by gendered association and hierarchy within the family, with

PAGE 269

248 feminine spaces occupying one floor or wing, and spaces considered to be used primarily by and for the benefit of males occupying a separate area, such that gender boundaries were also constructed into the distribution of spaces and bodies within[the] home. Physical home design carefully demarcated the identities of household occupantsby assigning genderand class-based characteristics to individual locations with the home and regulating access to those places by distributing individuals in space according to a plan. In this way, the spatial boundaries within the home became an effective means of reiterating peoples proper ideological places and confirming their authority without doing so explicitly in relative terms. [Tange 2010:55] Childrens spaces (such as bedrooms and nurseries) might lie within a different area of the house entirely in order to separate the associated noise and toys from quieter adult spaces of the home, thus further breaking down the private areas of the house by gender and/or overall familial hierarchy, with children occupying the lowest level of that hierarchy (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). The ideal use of space within a middle class Victorian household emphasized separate spheres, broken down by public versus private space and further, by gender and authority within the family unit. In particular, public spaces were considered essential to hosting friends, neighbors, and other individuals falling outside the sphere of the nuclear family; parlors, dining rooms, and entrance halls to homes were designed to function as spaces in which the family unit could receive, socialize with, and entertain outsiders. Parlors in particular helped fill the need for a more controlled social environment in which the rules governing social interaction could be formalized (Clark 1986:42-43). These spaces also served to exhibit material objects indicative of the familys economic success through the exercise of conspicuous consumption, as well as adherence to and attainment of socioculturally-accepted norms associated with the Cult of Domesticity through the display of elegant household furnishings and decoration and the showcase of the creative

PAGE 270

249 crafts of the ladies of the house (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). The Victorian preoccupation with public and private space was ideally anchored by a central entrance hall to the home. This entrance hall served as a negotiation between the publicly accessible and private familial areas of the house, and also served to make a first impression on outsiders entering the home, such that through the provision of a separate entry into each room, [the front entrance hall] preserved the privacy and specialized functions of the other spacesThe hall thus served as a vehicle for managing social relations. It had to be large enough to accommodate several visitors and give them a sense of the quality of the house. [Clark 1986:45] As such, the entrance hall tended to occupy a place as divider of public and private spaces; further, this public entrance hall typically featured a centrally located staircase which was understood to be a feature for use only by the family to access the private upper level of the home (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Other spaces in the home were defined as private familial spaces, including the kitchen, library, and bedrooms. These private spaces were further broken down by gender and authority or hierarchy within the family unit; kitchens, with their associated activities of cooking, cleaning, and child-rearing, were typically associated with the realm of the feminine gender, with the library representing masculine space. The upper level of a home, private by virtue of access from a staircase separating it from the lower level public spaces of a house, typically featured family bedrooms (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Victorian culture, while emphasizing the importance of and need for a close familial bond of the nuclear family, also recognized the associated need for some level of privacy (much as a microcosm of the house as a public and private space) among individual family members in accordance with the ideals of American Republicanism, in the sense that even with the home circle, members of the family deserved a place to be

PAGE 271

250 alone...The family home thus needed to have enough bedrooms to provide each member of the family with a degree of privacy and solitude (Clark 1986:35). Thus, separate bedrooms were encouraged for each member of the family, including children. In cases where this need could not be met due to a lack of space, children of the same gender shared bedroom space (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Victorian kitchens served as the central activity area and household family base, and were thus considered private with regard to the public/private use of space in the home, shielded from the eyes of outsiders by placement behind doors or at the back of the house. Ideally, Victorian kitchens were also large spaces that could easily facilitate the activities and needs of all family members, along with the range of activities that might take place in the space, from cooking, to laundering, to childrens activities. Furthermore, in association with cooking, and especially regarding the lack of modern refrigeration technologies, Victorian kitchens and household spaces were further subdivided into separate spaces for the storage of food, such as pantries, cellars, and/or root cellars (Clark 1986; Tange 2010). Finally, Victorian sociocultural norms placed emphasis on tradition, but also accorded worth to efficiency consistent with fast-paced technological changes and modernization representative of the Industrial Era (Volz 1992). This was determined to comprise a culturally acceptable negotiation the basis that design efficiency waspart of the plainest requisitions of Christianity. Since the Creator was a Being of perfect system and order, it was the responsibility of the Christian wife to manage her house with as much efficiency as possible. Thereforethe desire to blend the traditional housing arrangements with the latest technological innovations was symptomatic of an American Victorian outlook that saw no contradiction in fusing the best of the past with the insights of the present. [Clark 1986:33]

PAGE 272

251 Thus, it wasnt unusual for Victorian homes to exhibit contradictory characteristics with regard to overall adherence to what were considered to be traditional uses of space as far as familial and gender associations and roles alongside new-fangled technology that improved household efficiency. Similarly, household uses of space could exhibit some degree of negotiation and flux in cases where it was determined to improve overall household efficiency, and The architectural goals of Victorian-era homes placed a strong emphasis on the functionality of the dwelling. In arranging the apartments, wrote[a] designer, special attention should be given to the saving of needless labor (Clark 1986:23). This negotiation of traditional and novel may be indicative of a reality in which, While technological advances were welcomed because of the improved standard of living, better health, and increase in leisure time they provided, there was a need for Americans to cloak the rapid changes in traditional guise to ease the transition (Foy and Schlereth 1992:46). As such, these dualities werent considered inconsistent or contrary where the overall use of space was improved or related activities rendered more efficient. These gendered use of space divisions can facilitate an analysis of use of space with regard to feminine gender associations and related concepts of the Cult of Domesticity in the case of the Hornbek homestead, particularly with reference to the extant homestead house. Further, the outlying Hornbek root cellar can be included in an analysis of gendered activity areas in terms of the greater property-at-large, especially in the rural, middle class homesteading context, which is directly associated with farming and ranching economic uses. Specifically, although the root cellar has not been subject to systematic archaeological excavations, and was reconstructed by the NPS in 1976, it

PAGE 273

252 yielded a small number of artifacts related to gendered activities, and can thus be tied back to concepts of gendered use of space. Locations of particular structures and features associated with the Hornbek homestead have not been established due to a lack of formal archaeological investigations and associated mapping of the site; as the only extant structures at the Hornbek site directly associated with the original Hornbek homestead are the main house and the root cellar, use of space analyses are possible with regard to architectural use of space in terms of the main house in particular. However, more general analyses of uses of space across the landscape are not possible due to the lack of archaeological studies at the site. As such, the focus of this analysis will be on gendered uses of space regarding the architecture of the main house, although minimal analyses of the root cellar and landscape layout in the immediate vicinity of the main house will also be included. The main house of the Hornbek homestead (Figure 106), built in 1878, is a one and one-half story, T-plan log cabin (NPS 2014b). The logs that comprise the walls of the structure are squared timber logs exhibiting a dovetail or eastern saddle-notch method of construction; no nails or pins were used in the construction of the house, and in fact, werent necessary to the structural integrity of the building based on the method of notching used (NPS 2014b; FLFO N.d.). The walls of the cabin contain a mortar-type chinking, which appears to be modern and is likely the result of modern restoration. The roof is a steeply pitched side gable roof with cedar shingles and a central brick chimney. The gable ends are board and batten. The foundation of the house is stone and concrete.

PAGE 274

253 Allison Parrish Figure 106. Hornbek homestead, main house, looking northeast. The earliest and original portion of the house appears to be the west wing bedroom, with the parlor and kitchen wing added shortly thereafter (these two portions of the house exhibit a degree of similarity in construction which suggests they were built by the same individual) (NPS 2014b). The east faade of the main house contains the main entrance with a single hung, four-over-four sliding sash window on either side of the door, which is wood with four panels. The north faade of the main house features one single hung, four-over-four sliding sash window on the first floor, and one upper level fixed four-light sash window. The west faade of the main house contains one single hung, four-overfour sliding sash window on the first floor, and the east faade of the main house features two single hung, four-over-four sliding sash windows on the first floor and one single hung, four-over-four sliding sash window on the upper level. The original bedroom wing of the main house features an entrance on the north faade, with a four panel wood door. The west faade of this wing contains one single hung, four-over-four sliding sash window on the upper level, and the east faade features two single hung, four-over-four

PAGE 275

254 sliding sash windows on the first floor. The west wing of the house features vernacular Greek Revival window trim. The well room off of the north faade of the house was added circa 1910 ( NPS 2014b); it should be noted that this room will not be discussed in the remainder of the analysis of the Hornbek house, and only the pre-1910 portions of the house, as coincide with Adeline Hornbeks occupation, will be considered from this point forward. The interior of the Hornbek house features three rooms on each floor. The first/main floor includes the kitchen (with a sizable partitioned pantry), the parlor, and a bedroom. The kitchen contains a central cooking stove aligned with the main entrance to the house, as well as a heating stove on the other side of the wall in the parlor (however, it is not known if this heating stove is an original feature to the house or a later addition). The west wall of the first floor bedroom features the boarded and patched remnants of a fireplace that is no longer extant within the wall. An inconspicuous central staircase facing towards the rear of the house and opening into the kitchen leads to a loft-style central hallway on the second/upper story of the house. Three additional bedrooms are located off of this central hallway. It should also be noted that it seems possible that the staircase may have been modified at some point, although the timeframe for this potential alteration is not clear; an original staircase may have faced the current main entrance doorway and ascended in a direction opposite to that of the current staircase; architectural drawings and apparent alterations to ceiling and floor boards in the kitchen indicate that this original staircase may have been entirely enclosed and separated from the greater room by a door, and that the area underneath the original staircase may have been a second small pantry or storage area, also closed off by a door. However, despite the state

PAGE 276

255 of the current staircase and the unknown timeline of the potential alteration with regard the Hornbek occupation, for the purposes of this study, the potential alteration is essentially a minor aesthetic modification and doesnt result in a conflicting interpretation of Victorian-Era use of space divisions with regard to the floor plan and overall layout of the Hornbek house. Allison Parrish Figure 107. Newspaper insulation in main house of the Hornbek homestead. The interior walls of the house exhibit newspaper insulation (Figure 107), which also served as an adhesive base for at least two distinct types of wallpaper (Figures 108 and 109) observed in the parlor and kitchen of the house. Painted wood baseboards and trim

PAGE 277

256 run along the base of the floor in each room, and around the doors and windows on the lower level and two of the upstairs bedrooms (although it is noted that this trim no longer appears extant within an upper story bedroom). All rooms in the house are segmented and separated from one another via partitioning doors, including on all upstairs bedrooms, and on the lower level between the kitchen and parlor and kitchen and bedroom. Allison Parrish Figure 108. Wallpaper in main house of the Hornbek homestead. Allison Parrish Figure 109. Wallpaper in main house of the Hornbek homestead.

PAGE 278

257 Features of the main house both conform to and deviate from standard Victorian uses of space, implying a negotiation of space and its associated relationship to gender norms in order to fit the needs of the inhabitants on the basis of their everyday realities and lived experiences as a family with a female head-of-household in rural Colorado. Specifically, the house is generally divided into public and private spaces, with the bedrooms representing private family spaces; even the bedroom on the first floor adjacent to public space such as the parlor is separated by way of doors between individual rooms. Interestingly, the house seems to reflect the Victorian standard of independent space for individual family members, with four bedrooms for five family members. It has been speculated that the three Hornbek boys maintained individual bedrooms (Figures 110112) in the upper level of the house (FLFO N.d.); this would have provided the boys with independence, but under the watchful eye of their mother, who in theory would still be aware of their coming and goings, as they would have had to come downstairs via a staircase relatively concealed from the sight of visitors but immediately adjacent to Adelines lower level bedroom, and from there traverse their mothers bedroom or the kitchen, likely a space where their mother spent much of her time, to exit the home. Additionally, if the three boys inhabited the upper level bedrooms, this would have effectively created a masculine space on the upper level of the house, as the daily activities of Adeline and her daughter would not generally have been associated with the use of those three bedrooms; this is also interesting in that within the main house itself, there are no rooms present which represent a masculine space within the confines of Victorian norms, such as, for instance, a library. This is perhaps not surprising, as Adeline was the head-of-household; as the female owner of the home and head of the

PAGE 279

258 family, she would have had no use for a room with singularly masculine connotations. This is further supported by the fact that, although she had three sons, she likely expected them to leave home and establish their own households and families once they were grown; thus, there would have been no long term need for a defined masculine space in the house. Allison Parrish Figure 110. Upper level room of the Hornbek homestead main house.

PAGE 280

259 Allison Parrish Figure 111. Upper level room of the Hornbek homestead main house. Allison Parrish Figure 112. Upper level room of the Hornbek homestead main house.

PAGE 281

260 With the upper level of the home committed to bedrooms for the boys, thus creating a masculine but adaptable space, the lower level of the home effectively represented the feminine space of the home, containing the parlor, the kitchen, and Adelines bedroom, which she may have shared with her daughter. The parlor (Figure 113), in alignment with Victorian standards, is located at the front of the house and represents a formal public space in which Adeline entertained friends and community members; it is even possible that the parlor featured an organ, which Adeline played at Saturday night gatherings in her home (FLFO N.d.). Such a practice would have served to display not only the familys material wealth (not many pioneer families had organs in their parlors), but also would have supported Adelines achievements in line with her status as a respectable lady in conformance with the established gender norms of the East. The lower level bedroom (Figure 114) is located at the back of the house, and separated from public space by portioning doors, in conjunction with Victorian standards of spatial divisions within the home. As previously stated, its position with regard to the other rooms in the home would have allowed Adeline, as head-of-household and omniscient mother, to keep an eye on her offspring while still allowing them a degree of independence. Allison Parrish Figure 113. Parlor on lower level of Hornbek homestead main house.

PAGE 282

261 Allison Parrish Figure 114. Bedroom on lower level of the Hornbek homestead main house. The kitchen (Figure 115) is one of the few rooms in the house that does not appear to conform to Victorian standards of division of public/private space. Specifically, the kitchen is located at the front of the house, and the main entrance into the house opens straight into the kitchen, which would typically be set towards the back of the house and away from the eyes of visitors as a private familial space. No central entryway or foyer exists, and visitors would have crossed the exterior threshold straight into the kitchen; a doorway immediately inside the main entrance to the house separates the parlor from the kitchen. Per Victorian standards the kitchen itself is large, and includes a separate, partitioned pantry (Figure 116) for food storage. The house features no dining room; it seems likely that with limited household space, the social necessity for a parlor may have taken precedence, and family meals would have been consumed at a table in the large kitchen. If Adeline entertained visitors for dinner, which seems likely based on her extensive array of decorated transferware ceramic sets, it is speculated that the parlor could have been transformed into a substitute dining room for these special occasions,

PAGE 283

262 although it also seems possible that public meals could have been served in the kitchen as well, since Adeline apparently did not have serious qualms about maintaining that room as a highly visible and publicly-accessible space. Further, it is likely that the Hornbek family did not have either the need or the physical space to employ servants or cooks for the household, and Adeline and her daughter in particular would have been the primary cooks in the house, which may have contributed to negating the need to maintain the kitchen as a private space at the back of the house. As previously mentioned, space restrictions within the house also may have limited the options for placement of the kitchen, and the lower bedroom may have taken precedence as a private space for which to limit access above and beyond the kitchen. Finally, it is interesting to note that the location of the main entrance with regard to its relationship to the kitchen appears to be deliberate; the kitchen and parlor rooms were added to the house at approximately the same time, and there is no obvious reason why the entrance was aligned with the kitchen rather than the parlor, reflecting the likelihood that this architectural feature was a conscious decision on Adelines part. All ison Parrish Figure 115. Kitchen on lower level of Hornbek homestead main house; main entrance in background and staircase to right.

PAGE 284

263 Allison Parrish Figure 116. Pantry on lower level of Hornbek homestead main house. Whatever causative factors may have led to the existence of the kitchen as a public, accessible space within the Hornbek home, it seems likely that there was a deliberate preference for and subsequent divergence from socially-accepted Victorian divisions of space, especially in light of the relative adherence of the remainder of homes floor plan to these ideals. As such, it seems likely that this decision was informed in some way by Adelines personal experiences and lived realities with regard to life on a rural homestead in Florissant, Colorado, perhaps related in some way to increasing efficiency and functionality of the household, or to forming and reinforcing community relationships in a place where survival could depend on forging close relationships with neighbors.

PAGE 285

264 The house is set back significantly from the main road to Florissant (Figure 117); a long walkway is present and would have been needed in the past, as it is currently, to reach the house from the road. This, combined with the acreage immediately surrounding the house and the generally rural character of the area, may be significant in light of the fact that By the 1860s and 1870s, a large front lawn had become an important symbol of status for the well-to-do, middle-class family, a means of extending the formal public spaces of a house beyond the front rooms. With itslong walkway, the front lawn was clearly designed as a public area that would provide a sense of spacious formality. [Clark 1986:43] Setting the house back from the road, especially as visualized within the greater dramatic landscape of the valley and surrounding hills, may represent a symbolic reflection of the Hornbek familys middle class standing in the greater community, effectively illustrating not only the size and quality of the main house, but set within the extent of their landholdings and associated infrastructure, such outbuildings and corrals. Allison Parrish Figure 117. Overview of the Hornbek homestead main house with the road between Florissant and Cripple Creek at left, looking south.

PAGE 286

265 The homesteads root cellar (Figures 118 and 119) is a large, subterranean dugout feature excavated into a small hillside to the northeast of the main house. Built in 1880, the root cellar had collapsed entirely by the mid-twentieth century and was subsequently reconstructed by NPS in 1976. During the course of reconstruction, three individual artifacts were recovered from the root cellar deposits, including a nickel silver spoon post-dating the 1890s, as well as a pewter fork with a riveted wood handle and a steel awl with a black-painted wood handle (both non-diagnostic and thus not formally analyzed for Victorian gender associations under the objectives of this study). Although the fork and the steel awl are not formally analyzed in association with this study, both artifacts, along with the spoon dating to the era of the Hornbek occupation, are not outside the universe of items which could be expected to be stored within a root cellar in terms of that features affiliation as a domestic, and thus feminine, space during the Victorian Era. In particular, because of the root cellars association with the domestic use of space as a site of storage for food and items of material culture traditionally associated in Victorian times with cooking as a feminine activity, the presence of a fork and a spoon in this location accord with a female, domestic use of this space. Further, although an awl is generally considered a tool, thus potentially harboring a masculine gender affiliation, because of its direct association with the root cellar in this case it was likely utilized as a pick for ice, which would have been stored in the root cellar and associated with food storage and preparation; hence, the presence of the awl is also considered to align with a domestic, female use of the root cellar. As such, on the basis of the recovery of artifacts associated dominantly with food preparation and storage, the use of space of the Hornbek

PAGE 287

266 root cellar appears to reflect a domestic, female gender affiliation in accordance with Victorian gendered use of space divisions. Allison Parrish Figure 118. Reconstructed Hornbek homestead root cellar, exterior view. All ison Parrish Figure 119. Reconstructed Hornbek homestead root cellar, interior view.

PAGE 288

267 Finally, it is interesting to note that within the confines of the Cult of Domesticity, changing familial norms under the evolving capitalist political economy, and progressive notions of health and quality of life issues in relation to urban realities associated with Industrialization, American families were encouraged to take advantage of access to and habitation of rural areas and expanding frontiers; in particular, Whereas cities for middle-class Americans served as symbols of greed, corruption, and temptation, the bucolic countryside, where the excesses of the frontier and wilderness hadbeen tamed, was emblematic of the restorative powers of nature (Clark 1986:30). Although Adeline Hornbek initially moved west with her first husband and homesteaded on the outskirts of the growing population center of Denver, by 1875, widowed with four children, she was recorded as living in the city of Colorado Springs. By 1878, she had established the homestead outside Florissant. Her move to a rural area from a more urban context leads one to wonder if the Victorian focus on rural contexts for health and restoration played any part in her motivation to move her four children to a homestead in Florissant. Additionally, based on Florissants role as a supply town to bustling Cripple Creek 18 miles to the south, it is surmised that for Adeline Florissant may have presented a beneficial negotiation between the conveniences of urban life, set in the realities of a rural setting. In particular, the homestead occupied a full 160-acres of meadow and forested-land, but also was located immediately off the main road between Cripple Creek and Florissant. Further, a train stop in nearby Florissant ensured that Adeline could obtain nearly any convenience or good of modern life, while still situated in a relatively peaceful mountain setting for the health of herself and her children.

PAGE 289

268 CHAPTER VII COMPARATIVE CRITICAL ANALYSIS Elements of the feminine and masculine are represented in the material record of both the Wells and Hornbek homestead sites, however, it is important to note that the goal of this study is not so much to define a feminine or masculine artifact assemblage as it is to explore gender variations and negotiations symbolized through the material record, within which it is possible to ascertain and gauge the presence feminine and masculine genders according to the social standards of the Victorian Era. In particular, while embodiments of the feminine gender are readily apparent and compelling, other artifacts suggest that Victorian gender norms were not all or always adhered to and this speaks to both the socially prescribed standards of femininity as wel l as to the accepted gender norms of masculinity. Instances of crossover and negotiation of gender norms are supported in previously discussed analyses of use of space at both the Wells and Hornbek homesteads, in addition to the Hornbek archival records. For example, masculine and feminine spaces at both homesteads appear to have been in a general state of flux in response to the immediate needs of the household. Further, the Hornbek records indicate Adelines simultaneous adherence and resistance to expectations of Victorian women, such that she married three times and had children, but overall gave birth to significantly fewer children than her average counterpart, while also serving as the primary manager of the Florissant homestead for a substantial period of time after her children grew up and left home. Much as is the case now, Adelia and Adeline appear to have negotiated and manufactured their own personal meanings of womanhood, with particular attention to the realities and context of life on rural, frontier homesteads.

PAGE 290

269 Similarly, the archaeological records of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads reflect elements of both the feminine and masculine, as discerned by the social standards and gendered traditions of the late nineteenth century. The respective artifact assemblages subject to analysis in the course of this study are the result of applications of two distinct field collection methodologies; specifically, the Wells assemblage was collected through the quantitatively and stratigraphically controlled excavation of 1x1 meter test units placed in pre-determined locations on the basis of mapped surface concentrations of artifacts and features. Conversely, the Hornbek assemblage is a judgmental/diagnostic collection resulting from the spatially and tempora lly spontaneous collection of surface artifacts from random locations around the Hornbek homestead property; however, it is important to keep in mind that the quantitatively limited nature of the Hornbek assemblage is inherently complemented and reinforced by the strength of the associated Hornbek archival historical record. Keeping these differential strategies in mind, depicted below are frequencies of gender-associated objects of material culture represented within and between the artifact assemblages of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads; these representations are based on artifact densities at each site in terms of total numbers of artifacts, as opposed to minimum number of individuals (MNI). In the face of time and collections limitations, this method ensures a comprehensive approach that effectively and efficiently addresses a broad number and type of artifacts. Subsequently, these depictions are not necessarily as precise or as statistically significant as might be the case through the use of a more contextually definitive MNI methodology as a basis for comparison; however, they are nevertheless illuminating as far as gauging and interpreting relative frequencies of occurrence of feminine and masculine-gendered

PAGE 291

270 artifacts within each site assemblage. Frequencies are also useful for exploring similarities and differences between assemblages, along with pursuing related analyses of potential negotiations of gender identity and norms embodied through material culture. Wells Homestead Approximately 25,986 total artifacts were recovered as result of excavations of the Wells homestead in 1997 and 1998; however, a large number of these artifacts were ultimately unable to be unidentified or interpreted in any meaningful way due to their poor condition and fragmentary nature. Subsequently, the total number of identifiable artifacts from the Wells homestead with the potential for analysis and interpretation was reduced to 11,497 objects (Stone 2000). Additionally, in order to estimate frequencies of the number of gendered artifacts recovered compared to the overall potential for the occurrence of gendered artifacts, objects which are not considered to have a high potential for gender associations, such as, for example, strictly architectural-type artifacts, are subsequently subtracted from the total number of artifacts in the assemblage to ensure the most accurate proportional frequency of gendered artifacts occurring on the site, and to ensure that artifacts with a low potential to reflect gender associations do not skew the overall representations. Taking this into account, the total number of artifacts occurring on the Wells site with a potential to exhibit a gender association is estimated at n=2,217. This number was reached by adding the total number of artifacts with a potential to exhibit a gender association from the original analysis categories as defined by Stone, including Furniture (n=479), the Bottles/Jars subcategory of Food Storage and Preparation (n=632), and Clothing and Personal Items (n=240) (2000:93-95); additionally, the

PAGE 292

271 counts of ceramic tableware artifacts (n=855), enamelware artifacts (n=2), and flatware artifacts (n=9) were totaled (n=866) from the site reports for the 1997 and 1998 excavations (Stone 1998a, 1998b, 1999) to reach the estimated number of artifacts considered to exhibit a potential gender association (n=2,217) within the overall number of identifiable artifacts recovered from the Wells site (n=11,497). Artifact categories containing chiefly utilitarian objects considered to have a low potential to reflect gender associations and thus discounted from this analysis include Stones original artifact categories of Architectural Aspects, Farm Equipment and Machine Parts, and Food Storage and Preparation (with the exception of the Bottles/Jars subcategory) (2000:9394). The estimated number of artifacts occurring on the Wells site with a potential to exhibit a gender association (n=2,217) will be used as a basis for the estimation of relative frequencies of occurrence of feminine and masculine gendered artifacts originating from the Wells homestead site. Tableware Within the tableware category, although the analysis of individual artifacts in the course of this study focused specifically on whiteware ceramic fragments with makers marks or other potentially diagnostic markings, a total of 683 whiteware fragments are present in the overall Wells ceramic assemblage; similarly, with regard to transferware, the analysis of individual artifacts by this study focused specifically on ceramic fragments with makers marks and representative samples of different transfer patterns, however, a total of 133 transferware fragments are present in the overall Wells ceramic assemblage. As such, for the purpose of estimation of the relative frequencies of occurrence of gendered artifacts from the Wells site, the total numbers of whiteware

PAGE 293

272 (n=683) and transferware (n=133) ceramic fragments are considered for the purpose of accuracy of interpretation with regard to the overall site assemblage. Tableware artifacts reflecting a feminine gender association within the context of the Victorian Era include whiteware and transferware ceramic fragments (n=816), as well as silver-plated flatware and flatware from a matching set (n=8); these items represent 95.4 percent of the total tableware assemblage. Conversely, artifacts considered to reflect a masculine gender association within the context of the Victorian Era include enamelware items (n=2) and one flatware item with a composite wood and metal handle; these items represent 0.35 percent of the total tableware assemblage (n=866). The overall tableware assemblage is thus considered to reflect a strong feminine gender association within the context of Victorian Era gender norms (see Figure 120 below), as well as participation in practices of conspicuous consumption. Household Decoration and Furnishing Objects associated with household decoration and furnishing, and thus, a feminine gender association within the context of the Victorian Era include a decorative fragment of fabric with a scalloped edge, a ceramic dog figurine, a terra cotta pot, an ornate serving tray, scalloped and etched glass oil lampshade fragments, decorative glass oil lamp parts, and ornamental doorknobs and door hinges. These items (n=36) represent 7.5 percent of the total assemblage associated with household decoration and furnishing with a potential to exhibit a gender association (n=479), thus accounting for a rather minor feminine gender association within the context of Victorian Era gender norms; however, no artifacts were identified in the course of this analysis which featured apparent masculine or indeterminate gender association, and the remaining 92.5 percent of the assemblage

PAGE 294

273 related to household decoration and furnishing is considered to be gender neutral. As a result, the 7.5 percent frequency of feminine artifacts within the household decoration and furnishing assemblage appears to be somewhat consequential, due to the relative dearth of additional artifacts with gender-specific overtones, and further suggests household participation in practices of conspicuous consumption. Victorian Vices Artifacts representative of so-called Victorian vices, which in the context of the period were socially aligned more commonly with use by men than women include potential liquor bottles and a smoking pipe fragment. These objects (n=8) account for 1.2 percent of the total objects comprising the assemblage (n=633) that may potentially exhibit a gender association in conjunction with Victorian activities considered immoral within the context of the era. All of the identified artifacts associated with Victorian immoral behaviors retain a primarily masculine gender association. No other artifacts within this category were identified as characterizing a particular feminine gender association or indeterminate gender association, although it is recognized that female use of these items was not implausible within the realities of the social contexts of the late nineteenth century American Frontier. Thus, while these artifacts are assigned a masculine gender association, it is concurrently recognized that these items, if in fact used by the lady of the house, could reflect resistance to traditional standards of femininity related to the established gender ideals more assiduously defined and upheld by the cultural values of the Eastern United States.

PAGE 295

274 Health and Hygiene Items associated with the feminine responsibility for the health and hygiene of household family members include medicinal bottles, possible fragrance bottles, and comb fragments. These objects (n=86) account for 1.4 percent of the total objects comprising the assemblage (n=634) that may potentially exhibit a gender association in conjunction with Victorian activities related to health and hygiene. All of the identified artifacts associated with Victorian health and hygiene can be argued to reflect a feminine gender association in conjunction with the domestic responsibilities of the Victorian woman for the oversight of her familys health and hygiene practices. No other artifacts within this category were identified as characterizing a particular masculine gender association or indeterminate gender association, and the remaining 98.6 percent of the assemblage potentially falling within this category is considered for the purposes of this analysis to consist of gender-neutral objects. Thus, although a female presence within the homestead is suggested by the presence of the artifacts with a feminine gender association in relation to Victorian health and hygiene, and thus generally indicates a level of adherence to gender ideals associated with the Cult of Domesticity, this category of material culture cannot be directly assigned a predominantly feminine association. Personal Items Personal items (n=238) in the Wells assemblage include artifacts with both feminine and masculine gender associations, as well as objects, which, short of evidence of their original context, cannot be definitively assigned to a particular gender association. The latter artifacts consist of numerous buttons and eyelets (n=195), and comprise 82.0 percent of this category of material culture. Artifacts with a feminine gender association

PAGE 296

275 (n=9) include garter fasteners, hairpins, beads, and possible jewelry and parasol parts, and comprise 3.8 percent of the Personal Items category; objects with a masculine gender association (n=6) include suspender clips and riveted blue jean buttons, and account for 2.5 percent of Personal Items within the Wells assemblage. Interestingly, the artifacts with specific feminine and masculine gender associations within this category account for similar frequencies, but neither gender association accounts for a significant percentage of the overall Personal Items assemblage, although this is likely not an accurate reflection of the original composition of the assemblage, due to the large number of artifacts which have lost specific gender association with the deterioration of material context. Regardless, although the Personal Items category cannot be aligned with a primary gender association in particular, the likely presence of both women and men at the homestead is apparent from the archaeological record, which generally suggests adherence to Victorian gender norms regarding nineteenth century clothing and personal aesthetics. Childrens Toys The single childs toy in the Wells artifact assemblage consists of a cast iron train with masculine gender connotations; subsequently, this category is directly reflective of a masculine gender association, and it likely represents a remnant toy from the childhood of Adelias sons. No additional childrens toys are apparent within the overall Wells assemblage, and this artifact subsequently accounts for 100.0 percent of this functional category.

PAGE 297

276 Total Assemblage Figure 120 summarizes the frequency of occurrence of gender-associated artifacts within the Wells assemblage, classifed by functional category of analysis. Overall, with regard to artifact categories, the only categorical assemblage with a strong feminine gender association is Tableware; the only categorical assemblage with a strong masculine gender association is Childrens Toys, although this is misleading in that only a single artifact falls within this category. Additionally, the Household Decoration and Furnishing and Health and Hygiene categories are interesting in that they reflect only feminine or no gender associations; similarly, the Victorian Vices category only masculine and no gender association. It is surmised that these patterns may be indicative of strong conformance to Victorian gender norms if corresponding with behaviors of an individual of the consistent gender according to established Victorian social standards; conversely, these patterns could be reflective of resistance to Victorian gender norms if in reality they were associated with behaviors of an individual of the opposing gender by traditional Victorian social standards. Interestingly, the only categorical assemblage which features a relatively equivalent frequency of feminine and masculine gender-associated artifacts is the Personal Items category, although it is possible that the accuracy of this representation is skewed by the extensive loss of context with regard to objects which were initially associated with more substantial items, such as shoes or articles of dress.

PAGE 298

277 Figure 120. Categorical breakdown of gendered artifacts within the Wells assemblage. In terms of artifacts within the total Wells assemblage with a potential to exhibit a gender association (n=2,217), objects with a feminine gender association (n=957) account for 43.2 percent of the homesteads gendered material culture, while objects with a masculine gender association (n=18) account for 0.81 percent of the gendered assemblage; artifacts with an undetermined gender association (n=195) comprise 8.8 percent of the assemblage, and artifacts with no gender association (n=1047) make up the remaining 47.2 percent of the homesteads potentially-gendered material record (see Figure 121). As such, based on the overall composition of the Wells assemblage, it can be argued that the material record in general reflects a distinctly feminine character with regard to the material manifestation of gender ideals of the Victorian Era. As noted by Sto ne (2000), densities of artifacts with a feminine gender association in the Wells assemblage suggest that Adelia controlled discretionary income (as opposed to her sons), and that her income may have been relatively substantial based on higher artifact ">! '">! #">! ?">! $">! 9">! %">! @">! &">! A">! '"">! (.!B,=1,-!;33.<8548.=! C=1,4,-*8=,1! D53<)78=,! E,*8=8=,!

PAGE 299

278 densities than typically encountered within assemblages of western homesteading sites (Stone 1998b), which further supports the hypothesis that Adelia made an effort to use that discretionary income to exercise purchasing power in such a way as to adhere to Victorian practices of conspicuous consumption. It is apparent, however, that despite the distinct feminine-gendered overtones of the material record, that Adelia also likely negotiated her own feminine gender identity within the context of and in response to her own habitus and the realities of life as a homesteader on the American Frontier. In particular, this is evidenced by a potential resistance to traditional notions of Victorian femininity in relation to consumption of alcohol and tobacco, as well as gendered standards of dress, which may have been negotiated through apparel such as mens blue jeans, in direct reaction to the realities of life and labor requirements on a rural frontier homestead. Figure 121. Breakdown of Wells artifacts with a potential to exhibit a gender association. 7%11-'4&.2)/5.-'72.8'4'9(.%6.2/1'3(' :;82$2.'4'<%6+%&'4--(52/.2(6' E,*8=8=,! D53<)78=,! C=1,4,-*8=,1! (.!B,=1,-!;33.<8548.=!

PAGE 300

279 Hornbek Homestead A total of 59 artifacts have been unsystematically recovered on a random basis from the house and grounds of the Hornbek homestead site. From the overall assemblage, the total number of artifacts occurring on the Hornbek homestead site which date to the period of the Hornbek occupation and which are considered to have a potential to exhibit a gender association is n=17. Due to the temporal history of the homestead site, which includes multiple occupations through the mid-twentieth century, in conjunction with the unsystematic nature of recovery of the artifacts in the site assemblage, all diagnostic artifacts dating to the Hornbek occupation and artifacts otherwise included in the analysis in accordance with the standards outlined in Chapter VI, page 210 are included in this total. As a result of the relatively strict diagnostic standards for inclusion in analysis of the Hornbek-period assemblage, along with the small size of the overall assemblage, all of the artifacts which occur in the subsequent Hornbek-period assemblage are considered to have a potential for gender associations; no artifacts included in the analysis are considered to have a low potential to reflect gender associations on the basis of class or type, with the subsequent potential to skew the overall estimation of relative frequencies of occurrence of feminine and masculine gendered artifacts. This is largely related to the fact that the majority of utilitarian artifacts recovered from the Hornbek site which would otherwise be considered to have a low potential to reflect gender associations (such as, for example, strictly architectural-type artifacts) are not diagnostic, and thus were excluded from the analysis at the outset. As such, the number of artifacts occurring on the Hornbek homestead site which date to the period of the Hornbek occupation and which

PAGE 301

280 are considered to have a potential to exhibit a gender association is n=17, and this number will subsequently be used as a basis for the estimation of relative frequencies of occurrence of feminine and masculine gendered artifacts originating from the Hornbek occupation of the homestead site. Tableware The single tableware artifact in the Hornbek assemblage consists of a nickel silver spoon with a feminine gender connotation; subsequently, this category is directly reflective of a feminine gender association. No additional tableware artifacts are present within the Hornbek assemblage, and this artifact subsequently accounts for 100.0 percent of this functional category. Household Decoration and Furnishing Objects associated with household decoration and furnishing, and thus, a feminine gender association within the context of the Victorian Era include ornamental hinges, a decorative embroidered heart-shaped cushion, a mother-of-pearl letter knife handle, and fragments of a pressed glass pitcher. These items (n=6) represent 100.0 percent of the total assemblage associated with household decoration and furnishing with a potential to exhibit a gender association, thus indicating a strong feminine gender association within the context of Victorian Era gender norms, as well as household participation in practices of conspicuous consumption. Personal Items Personal items (n=5) in the Hornbek assemblage include artifacts with both feminine and masculine gender associations, as well as objects that cannot be definitively assigned to a particular gender association. The latter consists of a single gender-neutral leather

PAGE 302

281 shoe, possibly a gym/athletic Oxford or walking shoe, which comprises 20.0 percent of this category of material culture. Artifacts with a feminine gender association (n=2) include possible womens shoe fragments, and comprise 40.0 percent of the Personal Items category; objects with a masculine gender association (n=2) include a fragment of a mans shoe and a mans felt hat, and account for 40.0 percent of Personal Items within the Wells assemblage. Interestingly, the artifacts with specific feminine and masculine gender associations within this category account for identical frequencies, and subsequently, although the Personal Items category cannot be aligned with a primary gender association in particular, the likely presence of both women and men at the homestead is apparent from the archaeological record, which generally suggests adherence to Victorian norms regarding nineteenth century gender-specific clothing and accessories. Total Assemblage Figure 122 summarizes the frequency of occurrence of gender-asso ciated artifacts within the Hornbek assemblage, classifed by functional category of analysis. Overall, with regard to artifact categories, both the Tableware and Household Decoration and Furnishing categorical assemblages indicate strong feminine gender associations; however, it should be noted that the feminine gender association of the Tableware categorical assemblage is misleading in that only a single artifact falls within this category. Interestingly, the Personal Items categorical assemblage features an equivalent frequency of feminine and masculine gender-associated artifacts, which indicates the likely presence of both women and men at the homestead, as well as probable adherence to Victorian norms regarding nineteenth century gender-specific clothing and accessories.

PAGE 303

282 Figure 122. Categorical breakdown of gendered artifacts within the Hornbek assemblage. In terms of artifacts within the Hornbek assemblage with a potential to exhibit a gender association (n=17), objects with a feminine gender association (n=9) account for 53.0 percent of the homesteads gendered material culture, while objects with a masculine gender association (n=2) account for 11.8 percent of the gendered assemblage; artifacts with an undetermined gender association (n=1) comprise 5.9 percent of the assemblage, and artifacts with no gender association (n=5 glass bottle fragments related to food storage or with unidentifiable functions) make up the remaining 29.4 percent of the homesteads potentially-gendered material record (see Figure 123). As such, based on the overall composition of the Hornbek assemblage, it can be argued that the material record in general reflects a decidedly feminine disposition (70.6 percent) with regard to the material manifestation of gender ideals of the Victorian Era. The high densities of artifacts with a feminine gender association in the Hornbek assemblage suggest that Adeline controlled discretionary income, and may have made an effort to use that ">! '">! #">! ?">! $">! 9">! %">! @">! &">! A">! '"">! :5+7,F5-,! 2.)3,G.71! 0H<.-IE)-=83G! J,-3.=57!K4,*3! (.!B,=1,-!;33.<8548.=! C=1,4,-*8=,1! D53<)78=,! E,*8=8=,!

PAGE 304

283 discretionary income to exercise purchasing power in such a way as to adhere to Victorian practices of conspicuous consumption. Figure 123. Breakdown of Hornbek artifacts with a potential to exhibit a gender association. Comparison of Site Frequencies of Gendered Artifacts As far as comparisons of the artifact assemblages of the Wells and Hornbek sites, a few patterns emerge. In particular, the Tableware categories both reflect strong feminine gender associations in the context of Victorian Era social norms, and the Personal Items categories artifacts with feminine and masculine gender associations at equivalent or nearly equivalent frequencies. Similarities exist between the Household Decoration and Furnishing categories, with the Hornbek assemblage featuring a very strong feminine gender association, and the counterpart Wells assemblage exhibiting a feminine gender association that appears minor at first glance, but is rendered more significant by the concurrent lack of artifacts with other gender-specific overtones. Further, on the basis of artifacts present in the Tableware and Household Decoration and Furnishing categories ,(&6$%='4&.2)/5.-'72.8'4'9(.%6.2/1'.(' :;82$2.'4'<%6+%&'4--(52/.2(6' E,*8=8=,! D53<)78=,! C=1,4,-*8=,1! (.!B,=1,-!;33.<8548.=!

PAGE 305

284 from the both the Wells and Hornbek sites, it is inferred that Adelia and Adeline likely participated in practices of conspicuous consumption, in accordance with middle class Victorian social standards encouraging the symbolic public display of household economic success. It is interesting to note that in terms of the overall material record the Wells and Hornbek assemblages exhibit relatively similar frequencies of artifacts with feminine gender associations (43.2 percent and 53.0 percent, respectively), despite the disparity between assemblage sizes, with the Hornbek assemblage containing comparatively few artifacts; these frequencies strongly associate both sites with a dominant feminine presence in terms of the symbolic expression of gender identity and Victorian standards associated with the Cult of Domesticity. The frequency of artifacts with undetermined gender associations within the respective assemblages (8.8 percent/Wells versus 5.9 percent/Hornbek) is also comparable. Frequencies between the site assemblages however diverge with gender neutral artifacts (47.2 percent/Wells versus 29.4 percent/Hornbek), and significantly, the Wells assemblage contains a drastically reduced frequency of masculine gender-associated artifacts compared with the Hornbek assemblage (0.81 percent versus 11.8 percent, respectively). While these discrepancies could be a function of the disparity of assemb lage sizes, it is also possible that these disparate frequencies reflect use of space or activity area data gaps, particularly as related to the ages of males at the respective sites. Specifically, the Hornbek sons were children and young adults during their occupation of the homestead; once they reached mid-to-late adolescence, they left home and pursued their interests elsewhere. As such, it might be expected that artifacts related to the

PAGE 306

285 Hornbek boys would commonly have been used, and subsquently, would be found, in spaces of the homestead that would typically fall under the confines of feminine space, as they would have spent a significant amount of time under the watchful eye of their mother, like in and around the main house, which is where many of the Hornbek artifacts have been recovered. Conversely, the Wells sons were apparently adults during their occupation of the homestead; subsequently, it is possible that artifacts related to the Wells sons would have been commonly used, and consequently, would be found, in spaces of the homestead that would typically fall under the confines of masculine space. A primarily masculine space with regard to Victorian homesteads, for example, was the barn, which as of yet has not been re-located at the Wells site; as a result, this non-extant structure, associated with a predominantly masculine use of space, could represent a data gap with regard to the gendered archaeological record of the Wells site. Discussion As previously noted, the purpose of this study is not to define or authenticate the elements or boundaries of a feminine versus masculine artifact assemblage on the basis of some imagined baseline for what the assemblage of an unmarried female homesteader should look like. Rather, materials reflecting both feminine and masculine elements of socially-accepted Victorian Era gender norms are present in the Wells and Hornbek assemblages, and it is subsequently recognized that, ultimately, this analysis is a study in the negotiation and manipulation of Victorian gender identity in the face of and in response to the experiences and lived realities of life on the American Frontier. In particular, gender norms of the era were likely not as rigid as traditionally believed, and further, gender norms and elements of gender identity, especially in the context of the

PAGE 307

286 American Frontier, were in actuality rather fluid and negotiable. While a strong female presence can certainly be ascertained within both the Wells and Hornbek assemblages, artifacts are also present which retain cultural and temporal affiliations with masculine gender associations. This is likely a representation of two realities: first, males (the sons of Adelia and Adeline) occupied both households, although they apparently didnt control primary discretionary income; subsequently, it is a possibility that the presence of masculine artifacts reflects the presence of the sons at each homestead. Second, although masculine artifacts could be a direct reflection of the presence of males, these items may also represent negotiations of Victorian feminine gender identity on the part of Adelia and Adeline, the respective family matriarchs and likely financial heads-ofhousehold. Although Adelia and Adeline conformed to certain aspects of conventional Victorian feminine gender identity and norms, the material culture of their respective homesteads also indicates that this conformance was not absolute. Their negotiation of gendered material culture characterizes the epitome of the tractability of gender identity within a frontier context, and indicates that in rural Colorado, habitus, like the developing structures of western culture, was probably highly dynamic and tailored to individuals in response to not only background, but also new realities, personal experiences, and ongoing struggles, including the potential influence of western politics, economic activities, relationships to community members, and local social structures. For instance, habitus was likely impacted not only by the personal contexts and experiences of Adelia and Adeline as individuals, but in turn by the economic or social needs of their communities, as reflected in these respective ladies apparent efforts to entertain publicly

PAGE 308

287 in the sense of hosting social events for non-family friends, neighbors, or community members, in addition to Adelines service on the Florissant school board and employment at the local trading post. Further, the manipulation of gender norms by Adelia, through a material representation of her agency and evolving habitus as an Eastern-turned-Western frontierswoman, is reflected in the presence of a significant percentage of items traditionally associated with the feminine in the archaeological record, such as, for example, her extensive collection of ceramic dinnerware, numerous household decorative items, a large assemblage of health and hygiene-related objects, including medicinal bottles, and female personal items, including hairpins, garter fasteners, and beads. It is apparent, however, that in spite of the distinct feminine-gendered overtones of the material record, that Adelia also likely negotiated her own feminine gender identity within the context of and in response to her own habitus and the realities of life as a homesteader on the American Frontier. In particular, this is evidenced through a possible resistance to traditional notions of Victorian femininity in relation to consumption of alcohol and tobacco, as well as gendered standards of dress, which may have been negotiated through apparel such as mens blue jeans, in direct reaction to the realities of life and labor requirements on a rural frontier homestead. Similarly, the fluidity of feminine and masculine gender identity, along with associated adherence and resistance to established gender norms embodied by the Cult of Domesticity is reflected in the material culture of the Hornbek homestead. This is exemplified in the archaeological record through the occurrence of elegant ornamental objects that would have served to decorate the house, and in the case of a handmade,

PAGE 309

288 embroidered heart cushion, to display Adelines domestic, feminine skillset as a middle class woman in the context of the Victorian Era. Conversely, the presence of a mans field hat in the assemblage is especially interesting in reference to the embroidered initials on its rim, which correspond with those of Adelines son, George Harker. Specifically, while it is impossible to know who actively stitched the initials onto the rim of the hat, it is at least possible that George may have sewn this label himself, having in theory been taught the basics of the skill by his mother; on the western frontier, where men generally outnumbered women and wives were accordingly in high demand, it would be essential for a young, single man to master the basics of such a skill to serve his own use and benefit, until and if he did marry. This artifact is thus another potential indicator of the fluidity of gender norms on the American Frontier, and goes to show that both women and men negotiated traditional Victorian standards of gender identity in response to the realities of life in the West. Ultimately, Adelia and Adelines use of agency is notable in the very fact that these women apparently shunned the concept of submission as related to the cult of domesticity and true womanhood, conversely asserted their independence through staking homestead claims, and subsequently managed these ventures in such a way that they achieved and maintained middle class economic and social status. In doing so, these ladies contributed directly to a process that served to develop and subsequently refine or restructure political, economic, social, and gender structures within the context of the rural American West, and ultimately contribute to and reinforce change within these structures over time, especially as western women increasingly gained economic, social, and cultural capital as a demographic. Conversely and in direct relation to the fluidity of gender identity and

PAGE 310

289 norms on the American Frontier, Adelia and Adeline as unmarried female homesteaders were able to reinforce their social status and femininity within class and gender structures through an emphasis on respectability, gentility, and domesticity in conformance with the material symbolism of Victorian Era gender ideals. This was based at least partially on their economic abilities to exact independent consumer choices that could that reinforce the conventional sociocultural and gender values that defined the Victorian Era middle class and is clearly reflected in the significant presence of items of traditional, feminine material culture within the assemblage of each homestead, exemplified by elaborate collections of ceramic dinnerware and flatware; pressed glass serving vessels; ornate objects of household dcor such as elegant doorknobs, hinges, and domestic accessories like the mother-of-pearl letter opener; embroidery; beads and hairpins; as well as gendered clothing in the form of womens shoes and garter fasteners. Further, the ideological cultural dominance of established eastern social and gender structures is both relevant to and represented in the artifact assemblages of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads; it is apparent that Adelia and Adeline somewhat ironically made use of agency to reject Victorian gender ideals by independently establishing homesteads, while concurrently employing agency associated with economic independence to conform (perhaps on the basis of habitus) to other domestic gender ideals as informed by domesticity, the household, and personal appearance within established Victorian social and gender structures. Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek, as single women in the Victorian Era United States, embraced potential opportunities, along with great risk, inherent in pursuing homesteading on the American Frontier in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. By

PAGE 311

290 eschewing established social and gender norms of the period through pursuing personal autonomy and economic independence as homesteaders, the actions of these ladies perhaps speak to a fundamental resistance to overarching expectations of Victorian women, as defined by the social and gender norms of the Cult of Domesticity. In other words, by rejecting traditional middle class Victorian notions of femininity with the intrinsic emphases on piety, purity, and domesticity, along with the socially and economically constraining responsibilities of women to the private space of the home, and through the application of personal agency and active choice to establish and operate homesteads, potentially at great physical and economic cost to themselves and their families, Adelia and Adeline sanctioned the ultimate rejection of Victorian ideals of womanhood. In doing so, these ladies essentially set out to define femininity on their own terms, using the American Frontier and its flexible social standards as a catalyst to build their own identities as women through structuration, simultaneously reinforcing and affecting change in the cultural system. In conjunction with recognition of the underlying context of resistance at the heart of the action of the independent establishment of homesteads, the analyses of the Wells and Hornbek artifact assemblages and uses of space within the homestead sites, along with an analysis of historic al documents associated with the life of Adeline Hornbek, are thoroughly representative of this type of structuration, illustrating both adherence and resistance, reinforcement and evolution, with regard to Victorian notions of respectable, middle class womanhood.

PAGE 312

291 CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION Single, middle class female homesteaders of the Victorian era, including Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek, were operating within fairly rigid political, economic, social, and gender structures which were male oriented and male dominated, yet these women were able to fluidly and successfully negotiate and perhaps manipulate those structures, and associated socioculturally-accepted norms and values of identity, such that they were able to actively produce and reproduce their own identities, and concurrently, the Victorian-era frontier structures in which they existed. They were doubtless strong women who had the will and determination, and certainly the distinct ability and power, to exercise agency and to pave their own paths with in the structures that defined the Victorian era; homesteading in particular offered an opportunity to achieve this goal with in structures traditionally defined by rigid gender roles. Adelia Wells and Adeline Hornbek prospered economically, as evident from the relative success of their respective homestead ventures, and it is seems likely that although they did not lose sight of their Victorian-era feminine gender identities, they likely also forged new identities as successful, middle class, independent single women. In this way, negotiations of structure, agency, habitus, and identity played definitive roles in each of their lives. Certainly, it could be argued that with in early Euroamerican, middle class society on the frontier of the United States, unmarried female homesteaders were the original women to have it all, and through establishing lofty goals and seizing unique opportunities, they were ultimately able to achieve the American Dream on their own terms.

PAGE 313

292 REFERENCES Appleman, Roy E. 1975 Lewis and Clark: Historic Places Associated With Their Transcontinental Exploration (1804-06). U.S. National Park Service. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. Ahearn, Laura M. 2001 Language and Agency. Annual Review of Anthropology 30:109-137. Ames, Kenneth M. 2008 Slavery, Household Production, and Demography on the Southern Northwest Coast: Cables, Tacking, and Ropewalks. In Invisible Citizens: Captives and Their Consequences edited by Catherine M. Cameron, pp. 138 158. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. A.W. Bowen & Company 1905 Progressive Men of Western Colorado. A.W. Bowen & Company, Chicago. Beaton, Gail M. 2012 Colorado Women: A History. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Beekman, Christopher S. and Alexander F. Christensen 2011 Power, Agency, and Identity: Migration and Aftermath in the Mezquital Area of North-Central Mexico. In Rethinking Anthropological Perspectives on Migration, edited by Graciela S. Cabana and Jeffery J. Clark, pp. 147-171. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Bell, Alison 2002 Emulation and Empowerment: Material, Social, and Economic Dynamics in Eighteenthand Nineteenth-Century Virginia. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 6(4):253-298. Binford, Lewis R. 2001 Constructing Frames of Reference: An Analytical Method for Archaeological Theory Building Using Hunter-Gatherer and Environmental Data Sets. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. Blum, Stella 1974 Victorian Fashions and Costumes from Harpers Bazar, 1867-1898. First Edition. Dover Publications, Mineola, New York. Blumin, Stuart M. 1998 Urban Lifestyles and Middle-Class Formation. In Problems in American Civilization: The Industrial Revolution in America edited by Gary J. Kornblith, pp. xv-xxiii. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston and New York.

PAGE 314

293 Bourdieu, P. 1977 Chapter 37: Structures and the Habitus. In Outline of a Theory of Practice. Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1986 The Forms of Capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J. Richardson. Greenwood, New York. Electronic document, http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu-formscapital.htm, accessed online April 14, 2013. 2001 Structures, Habitus, Practices. In Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory, edited by Paul A. Erickson and Liam D. Murphy, pp. 533-542. Broadview Press. Brumfiel, Elizabeth M. 1992 Breaking and Entering the Ecosystem Gender, Class, and Faction Steal the Show. American Anthropologist 94(3):551-567. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 1962 Homesteads. U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 2012 Explore the Homesteading Timeline. Electronic document, http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/Law_Enforcement/nlcs/educatio n__interpretation/homestead_graphics0.Par.57736.File.dat/Expanded%20Homest ead%20Timeline%20final.pdf accessed February 17, 2014. Bureau of Land Management, General Land Office [BLM, GLO] 1878 Patent Homestead Certificate No. 121, Application 109. BLM Serial Nr. COCOAA 061163. Electronic document, http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/details/cdi/default.aspx?doc_id=459954&sid=v1z b3vbw.r0t#cdiDetailsTabIndex=1, accessed April 9, 2014. Castillo, Richard Griswold del 1998 Manifest Destiny: The Mexican-American War and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Southwestern Journal of Law and Trade in the Americas 5:31. Christensen, Kim 2013 Chapter 4, Troubling the Domestic Sphere: Women Reformers and the Changing Place of the Home in the United States, 1854-1939. In Historical and Archaeological Perspectives in Gender Transformations: From Private to Public, edited by S.M. Spencer-Wood, pp.63-83. Springer Science+Business Media, New York. DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-4863-1_4.

PAGE 315

294 Clark, Clifford Edward Jr. 1986 The American Family Home. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill and London. Colorado Scenic and Historic Byway Commission 1998 Gold Belt Tour Scenic Byway, Community Partnership: A Vision for the Future (Gold Belt Tour Scenic Byway Partnership Plan Summary), Fremont and Teller Counties (SHF 1996-BG-001). On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. Culpin, Mary 1977 Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, Historic Resource and Historic Furnishing Study. National Park Service. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. Dublin, Thomas 1994 Transforming Womens Work: New England Lives in the Industrial Revolution. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London. Fitts, Robert K. 2002 Becoming American: The Archaeology of an Italian Immigrant. Historical Archaeology 36(2):1-17. Fleming, Thomas J. 2003 The Louisiana Purchase. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument (FLFO) N.d. Guide to the Hornbek Homestead. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. On file at NPS Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, Florissant, Colorado. Foy, Jessica H. and Thomas J. Schlereth 1992 American Home Life, 1880-1930: A Social History of Spaces and Services. First Edition. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Gair, Daniele N.d. The Dish Ran Away With The Spoon: A History of Flatware. M.S. Rau Antiques, LLC. Electronic document, http://www.rauantiques.com/images/pdf/FlatwareArticle.pdf accessed March 18, 2015. Garceau, Dee 1995 Single Women Homesteaders and the Meanings of Independence: Places on the Map, Places in the Mind. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 15(3):1-26.

PAGE 316

295 Geller, Pamela L. 2009 Identity and Difference: Complicating Gender in Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 38:65-81. Gernsheim, Alison 1981 Victorian and Edwardian Fashion: A Photographic Survey. Dover Publications, Mineola, New York. Giddens, Anthony 2002 Chapter 17: Agency, Structure. In Contemporary Sociological Theory, edited by Craig Calhoun, Joseph Gerteis, James Moody, Steven Pfaff, and Indermohan Virk, pp. 232-243. Blackwell Publishing, Massachusetts. Gilman, Antonio 1989 Marxism in American Archaeology. In Archaeological Thought in America, edited by C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 63-73. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Given, Charlie and Walt Stark 2000 Land History of the Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. On file at NPS Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, Florissant, Colorado. Gray, Amie 2009 Materia l Cultural of the Margi nalized. In The Archaeology of Class War: The Colorado Coalfield Strike of 1913-1914, edited by Karin Larkin and Randall H. McGuire, pp. 219-249. University of Colorado Press, Boulder. Griswold, Robert L. 1988 Anglo Women and Domestic Ideology in the American West in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. In Western Women: Their Land, Their Lives edited by Lillian Schlissel, Vicki L. Ruiz, and Janice Monk, pp. 15-33. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Hacker, J. David, Libra Hilde, and James Holland Jones 2010 The Effect of the Civil War on Southern Marriage Patterns. Journal of Southern History 76(1):39-70. Haraway D. 1988 Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspectives. Feminist Studies 14(3):575-599. Harker, Simon 1859 Letter from Simon A. Harker to John Harker, Richmond, Yorkshier, England, from the Creek Agency, West Arkansas. September 28. On file at NPS Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, Florissant, Colorado, and Arkansas History Commission, Little Rock, Arkansas.

PAGE 317

296 1861 Letter from Simon Harker to brother from the Creek Agency Creek Nation, West of Arkansas. February. On file at NPS Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, Florissant, Colorado, and Arkansas History Commission, Little Rock, Arkansas. Harris, Katherine 1993 Long Vistas: Women and Families on Colorado Homesteads University Press of Colorado, Niwot. Hensley, Marcia Meredith 2008 Staking Her Claim: Women Homesteading the West. High Plains Press. Hirth, Kenneth G. 1996 Political Economy and Archaeology: Perspectives on Exchange and Production. Journal of Archaeological Research 4(3):203-239. Horn, Claire H. 2009 Though Shalt Not Dose Thyself, Proprietary Medicine Use at the Ludlow Tent Colony. In The Archaeology of Class War: The Colorado Coalfield Strike of 1913-1914, edited by Karin Larkin and Randall H. McGuire, pp. 251-284. University of Colorado Press, Boulder. Hornbek, Adeline 1885 Homestead Proof Testimony of Claimant, Homestead Entry No. 109. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service [NPS]. Electronic document, http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/twhp/wwwlps/lessons/67hornbek/67images/67doc1.pdf accessed April 9, 2014. Howe, Daniel W. 1976 Victorian Culture in America. In Victorian America, edited by Daniel W. Howe, pp. 3-28. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Johnson, Susan Lee 2001 Roaring Camp: The Social World of the California Gold Rush. W.W. Norton, New York. Joyce, R. 2007 Feminist Theories of Embodiment and Anthropological Imagination: Making Bodies Matter. In Feminist Anthropology: Past, Present and Future, edited by P. Geller and M. Stockett, pp. 43-53. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Knapp, A.B. and P. van Dommelen 2008 Past Practices: Rethinking Individuals and Agents in Archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18:15-24.

PAGE 318

297 Kornblith, Gary J. 1998 Introduction. In Problems in American Civilization: The Industrial Revolution in America, edited by Gary J. Kornblith, pp. xv-xxiii. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston and New York. Kovel, Ralph and Terry Kovel 1986 Kovels New Dictionary of Marks, Pottery and Porcelain 1850 to the Present. Crown Publishers, New York. Krasnick Warsh, Cheryl 1993 John Barleycorn Must Die: An Introduction to the Social History of Alcohol. In Drink in Canada: Historical Essays, edited by Cheryl Krasnick Warsh, pp. 3-26. McGill-Queens University Press, Montreal and Kingston. Lancaster R. 2011 Autoethnography: When I Was A Girl (Notes On Contrivance). In A Companion to the Anthropology of the Body and Embodiment, edited by F. Mascia -Lees, pp. 46-71. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex. Lang Antiques 2015 Decorative Periods: Victorian Jewelry 1835 to 1890. Lang Antique & Estate Jewelry. Electronic document, http://www.langantiques.com/pages/decorative-periods/victorian-period, accessed March 18, 2015. Layton, Stanford J. 2005 Homestead Act. In Americans at War, Volume 2: 1816-1900, edited by John P. Resch, pp. 79-80. Macmillan Reference USA, Detroit, Michigan. Ledbetter, Kathryn 2012 Victorian Needlework. Praeger, Santa Barbara, California. Leonard, Stephen J. 2004 Bristling for Their Rights: Colorados Women and the Mandate of 1893. In Western Voices: 125 Years of Colorado Writing, edited by Steve Grinstead and Ben Fogelberg, pp. 226-233. Fulcrum Publishing, Golden. Lindsey, Bill 2014 Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA)/U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Electronic document, http://www.sha.org/bottle/, accessed May 6, 2014.

PAGE 319

298 Mehls, Steven F., Carol D. Mehls, Donald L. Hardesty and Daniel Grenard 2000 A Sample Historic Resources Survey of the Gold Belt Scenic Byway, Fremont and Teller Counties, Colorado Volume I Report, Fremont and Teller Counties (SHF 1996-BG-001). Western Historical Studies, Inc. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. Mintz, Sidney W. 1985 Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History. Penguin Books, New York. Montgomery, David 1976 Chapter 3: Labor in the Industrial Era. In The U.S. Department of Labor Bicentennial History of the American Worker edited by Richard B. Morris, pp. 104-128. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Montgomery Ward & Co. 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. Catalogue and Buyers Guide 1895. Facsimile Edition (2008). Skyhorse Publishing, New York. Moore, Summer 2009 Working Parents and the Material Culture of Victorianism, Childrens Toys at the Ludlow Tent Colony. In The Archaeology of Class War: The Colorado Coalfield Strike of 1913-1914, edited by Karin Larkin and Randall H. McGuire, pp. 285-309. University of Colorado Press, Boulder. Motsinger, Ricky and Tammy Stone 1998 Chapter 4: Ceramic Artifacts. In Excavations at the Adelia Wells Homestead (5AH916), Arapahoe County, Colorado, edited by T. Stone, pp. 80-112. Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado at Denver. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. Myres, Sandra L. 1988 Victorias Daughters: English Speaking Women on Nineteenth-Century Frontiers. In Western Women: Their Land, Their Lives, edited by Lillian Schlissel, Vicki L. Ruiz, and Janice Monk, pp. 261-281. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. National Park Service (NPS) 2013a Total Number of Successful Homestead Claims. U.S. Department of the Interior. Electronic document, http://www.nps.gov/home/historyculture/upload/Claims%20graph.pdf accessed online May 7, 2013.

PAGE 320

299 2013b Total Amount of Acres Successfully Homesteaded in State U.S. Department of the Interior. Electronic document, http://www.nps.gov/home/historyculture/upload/Acres%20graph.pdf, accessed online May 7, 2013. 2014a Hornbek Root Cellar. List of Classified Structures. Electronic document, http://www.hscl.cr.nps.gov/insidenps/report.asp?STATE=CO&PARK=FLFO&S TRUCTURE=&SORT=&RECORDNO=8, accessed May 2, 2014. 2014b Hornbek House. List of Classified Structures. Electronic document, http://www.hscl.cr.nps.gov/insidenps/report.asp?STATE=CO&PARK=FLFO&S TRUCTURE=&SORT=&RECORDNO=2, accessed May 2, 2014. National Science Foundation (NSF) 2007 Merit Review Broader Impacts Criterion: Representative Activities Electronic document, http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf, accessed online October 30, 2012. Nelson, Sarah Milledge 2001 How a Feminist Stance Improves Archaeology. University of Denver. Electronic document, http://www2.nau.edu/~gender-p/Papers/Nelson.pdf, accessed online April 25, 2013. Nickolai, Carol A. 2013 Decently Dressed: Womens Fashion and Dress Reform in the Nineteenth Century United States. In Historical and Archaeological Perspectives in Gender Transformations: From Private to Public, edited by S.M. Spencer-Wood, pp. 215-229. Springer Science+Business Media, New York. DOI 10.1007/978-14614-4863-1_4. Norwood, Vera 1988 Womens Place: Continuity and Change in Response to Western Landscapes. In Western Women: Their Land, Their Lives, edited by Lillian Schlissel, Vicki L. Ruiz, and Janice Monk, pp. 155-181. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) 2012a COMPASS File Search Results for Homestead. Electronic document, http://www.historycolorado.org/oahp/compass, accessed September 3, 2012. 2012b COMPASS File Search Results for Homestead. Electronic document, http://www.historycolorado.org/oahp/compass, accessed November 24, 2012. 2012c COMPASS File Search Results for Hornbek Homestead. Electronic document, http://www.historycolorado.org/oahp/compass, accessed September 3, 2012.

PAGE 321

300 OSullivan, John L. 1839 The Great Nation of Futurity. In The United States Democratic Review 6(23):426-430. Electronic document, https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/osulliva.htm accessed online May 6, 2013. Panek, Tracey 2014 Throwback Thursday: Celebrating 80 Years of Womens Jeans. Unzipped: A deeper look inside Levi Strauss & Co. September 4. Electronic document, http://www.levistrauss.com/unzipped-blog/2014/09/celebrating-80-years-ofwomens-jeans/, accessed March 18, 2015. Parrish, Allison 2013 Homesteading and the Single Woman: A Context and Critical Analysis of the Realization of an American Dream Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Plains Anthropological Society, Student Paper Competition, Loveland, Colorado. 2014a Homesteading and the Single Woman: A Context and Critical Analysis of the Realization of an American Dream. Southwestern Lore 80(1):21-37. 2014b Independent Women: A Story of Gender and Agency in the Colorado Rockies Poster presented at the 36th Annual Meeting of the Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Student Poster Competition, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Pikes Peak Historical Society and City of Cripple Creek 2006 The Pikes Peak Regional Heritage Guide, Heritage Tourism Pilot Project Proposal, Teller County (SHF 2005-T1-006). On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. Powerhouse Museum 2015 Collection database: Two crystal and silver perfume bottles in case, 18951905. Objects from the collection of the Powerhouse Museum, Sydney, Australia. Electronic document, http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/collection/database/?irn=348490 accessed March 18, 2015. Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) 2006 Prelude to War: Manifest Destiny. Electronic document, http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_introduction.html accessed May 6, 2013.

PAGE 322

301 Pybus, David H. and C.S. Sell 1999 The Chemistry of Fragrances. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Rexford, Nancy E. 2000 Womens Shoes in America, 1795-1930. Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio. Roberts, Mary Louise 1998 Gender, Consumption, and Commodity Culture. The American Historical Review 103(3):817-844. Roseberry, William 1997 Marx and Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology 26:25-46. Rotman, Deb, Ann Kroll Lerner, Heather Van Wormer, Emily Flores, Catherine Ahern, Adam Lake, and Ariel Terpstra 2013 Irish Immigrant Experiences at the Dan and Catherine Boyle Farm Site (20CX204), Beaver Island, Charlevoix County, Michigan: Results of the 2012 Excavations. Preliminary Draft. University of Notre Dame Accession #2012.01. Prepared for the Michigan Office of the State Archaeologist. Department of Anthropology, University of Notre Dame. Electronic document, http://blogs.nd.edu/irishstories/files/2013/12/2012-Technical-Report-partIIIa1.pdf, accessed March 18, 2015. Rotman, Deborah and Michael S. Nassaney 1997 Class, Gender, and the Built Environment: Deriving Social Relations from Cultural Landscapes in Southwestern Michigan. Historical Archaeology 31(2):4262. Saitta, Dean 1992 Radical Archaeology and Middle-Range Methodology. Antiquity 66:886-897. Sears Roebuck & Co. 1897 1897 Sears Roebuck & Co. Catalogue. Facsimile Edition (2007). Skyhorse Publishing, New York. Segrave, Kerry 2005 Women and Smoking in America, 1880-1950. McFarland & Company, Jefferson, North Carolina. Shanks, Michael and Christopher Tilley 1987 Chapter 2, Social Archaeology. In Social Theory and Archaeology pp. 29-78. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

PAGE 323

302 Shuler, Marjorie 1920 Out of Subjection Into Freedom. The Woman Citizen 4 September 4:360. Skelly, Julia 2008 When Seeing is Believing: Women, Alcohol and Photography in Victorian Britain. Shift: Graduate Journal of Visual and Material Culture 1:1-17. Smith, Page 1990 The Rise of Industrial America: A Peoples History of the Post-Reconstruction Era Vol. 6. Reprinted. Penguin Books, New York. Originally published 1984, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. Spencer-Wood, Suzanne 2013 Commentary: How Feminist Theories Increase Our Understanding of Processes of Gender Transformation. In Historical and Archaeological Perspectives in Gender Transformations: From Private to Public, edited by S.M. Spencer-Wood, pp. 391-423. Springer Science+Business Media, New York. DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-4863-1_4. Stamper, Anita A. and Jill Condra 2011 Clothing Through American History: The Civil Ware Through the Gilded Age, 1861-1899. Greenwood, Santa Barbara, California. State of Colorado 2013 Colorado History Chronology. Colorado State Archives, Department of Personnel and Administration. Electronic document, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/Chronology%20of%20Colora do%20History.pdf, accessed online May 6, 2013. Stine, Linda 1992 Social Differentiation of the Farmstead. In Exploring Gender Through Archaeology, edited by C. Claasen, pp. 103-110. Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin. Stone, Tammy 1998a Western Central High Plains Archaeological Project 1997 Excavations at the Adelia Wells Homestead (5AH916), Arapahoe County, Colorado. Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado at Denver. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. 1998b Excavations at the Adelia Wells Homestead (5AH916), Arapahoe County, Colorado. Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado at Denver. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado.

PAGE 324

303 1999 1998 Excavations at the Adelia Wells (5AH916) and Harry Jackson (5AH648) Homesteads, Arapahoe County, Colorado. Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado at Denver. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. 2000 The Adelia Wells Homestead: A Synthesis of Research, Arapahoe County, Colorado. Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado at Denver. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. 2002 Gender and Class Roles in the Western United States During the Victorian Era. Southwestern Lore 68(2):1-17. 2012 Migration and Ethnic Interaction in Middle Range Societies Presented in ANTH 5810 Integrating Anthropology, October 29. Sullivan, Catherine 1994 Searching for Nineteenth-Century Florida Water Bottles. Historical Archaeology 28(1):78-98. Tange, Andrea Kaston 2010 Architectural Identities: Domesticity, Literature and the Victorian Middle Classes. University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Toulouse, Julian Harrison 2001 Bottle Makers and Their Marks. The Blackburn Press, Caldwell, New Jersey. Trigger, Bruce G. 2006 [1989] A History of Archaeological Thought, Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, New York. Tucker, Gordon C. Jr. 1997 The Historic Era. In Western Central High Plains Archaeological Research Project Survey edited by Tammy Stone, pp. 118-154. On file at Colorado OAHP, Denver, Colorado. Ubbelohde, Carl, Maxine Benson, and Duane A. Smith 2006 A Colorado History. 9th ed. WestWinds Press, Portland, Oregon. Volz, Candice M. 1992 The Modern Look of the Early-Twentieth-Century House: A Mirror of Changing Lifestyles. In American Home Life, 1880-1930: A Social History of Spaces and Services, edited by Jessica Foy and Thomas J. Schlereth, pp. 25-48. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

PAGE 325

304 Wacquant, Loic 2008 Chapter 16, Pierre Bourdieu. In Key Sociological Thinkers, Second Edition, edited by Rob Stones, pp. 261-277. Palgrave Macmillan, London and New York. Wall, Diana 1999 Examining Gender, Class, and Ethnicity in Nineteenth-Century New York City. Historical Archaeology 33(1):102-117. Welter, Barbara 1966 The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860. American Quarterly 18(2):151 174. Woloch, Nancy 2006 Women and the American Experience. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. Wylie, Alison 1989 Archaeological Cables and Tacking: The Implications of Practice for Bernsteins Options beyond objectivism and relativism. Philosophy of Science 19(1):1-18.

PAGE 326

305 APPENDICES

PAGE 327

306 APPENDIX A PROJECT BUDGET Direct /Capital Expenses A Nikon D5200 Digital SLR camera will be used for photographic documentation during the analyses of the artifacts from the archaeological collections of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads at the Plains Conservation Center and Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, respectively. The camera is also planned for use in photographic documentation and research of the Hornbek archival collection at Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. An AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm 1:2.8 G ED Macro Lens, tripod, and tabletop photo studio will be supplementary materials used for photographic documentation during the analyses of the artifacts from the archaeological collections of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads at the Plains Conservation Center and Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, respectively. Calipers will be used for completing artifact measurements during the analyses of the artifacts from the archaeological collections of the Wells and Hornbek homesteads at the Plains Conservation Center and Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, respectively. Indirect Expenses The cost of fuel is estimated for a single, round-trip visit to Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument in association with the analysis of the Hornbek archaeological and archival collections; the monument is located approximately 200 miles southwest o f Denver, Colorado.

PAGE 328

307 It is estimated that the analysis of the archaeological and archival collections at Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument will take two days, with a single overnight stay in Cripple Creek, Colorado to facilitate this schedule. There is no admission fee to the Plains Conservation Center, which holds the archaeological collection of the Wells homestead. The admission fee for Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument will be used to gain entrance to the curation facility in order to conduct the analysis of the archaeological collection of the Hornbek homestead, as well as research the archival collection. The estimated cost for document production will cover printer paper and ink for production of the Masters thesis, as well as reproduction/copies of materials during the literature review and/or basic paper prints of photographic documentation of the archival materials associated with the Hornbek homestead, if necessary. Table 12. Proposed Budget DIRECT/CAPITAL EXP ENSES Item Cost Nikon D5200 Digital SLR Camera $650.00 AF S Micro NIKKOR 60mm 1:2.8 G ED Macro Lens $500.00 Tripod $25.00 Tabletop Photo Studio $50.00 Calipers $70.00 SUBTOTAL $1,295.00 INDIRECT EXPENSES Item Cost Fuel (200 miles round trip to Florissant, Colorado) $30.00 Hotel (1 night), Cripple Creek, Colorado $77.00 Florissant Fossil Beds Admission Fee $3.00 Plains Conservation Center Admission Fee $0.00 (No Fee) Document Production $70.00 SUBTOTAL $180.00 TOTAL $1,475.00

PAGE 329

308 APPENDIX B PROJECT SCHEDULE Table 13. Proposed Timeline (Original) May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 File Search and Literature Review Wells Homestead Artifact Analysis Hornbek Homestead Artifact Analysis Hornbek Homestead Archival Collection Research Production of Draft Masters Thesis Review of Draft Masters Thesis by Adviso r and/or Committee Address Advisor and/or Committee Comments and Incorporate Revisions Submit Revised Masters Thesis to Committee Masters Thesis Defense Address Committee Comments and Incorporate Revisions Submit Final Masters Thesis to the University of Colorado Denver

PAGE 330

309 APPENDIX C ORIGINAL ARTIFACT ROUGH SORT WELLS HOMESTEAD (5AH916) (Courtesy of Dr. Tammy Stone, University of Colorado Denver) ROUGH SORT CODE SHEET UPDATED 3/4/99 ADELIA WELLS (5AH916) AND HARRY JACKSON (5AH648) HOMESTEADS Unit: Southing and Westing of the unit of recovery Level: Arbitrary level of the unit of recovery Functional ID: Identification of the function of the item (add as you need) 1 = bottle 2 = window pain 3 = mason jar lid 4 = decorated glass 5 = glass telephone insulator 9 = unidentified glass 10 = plate 11 = bowl 12 = cup 13 = pitcher 14 = storage crock 15 = saucer 19 = unidentified domestic pottery 20 = drain pipe 21 = ceramic lid 22 = ceramic electrical conduit 23 = void 24 = flower pot 25 = effigy bowl 26 = jug handle and mouth 27 = chamber pot 50 = button 51 = bead 52 = cork 53 = silverware 54 = pipe steam 55 = figurine 56 = insulation

PAGE 331

310 57 = figurine 58 = comb 59 = unid 60 = faunal bone 61 = faunal tooth 62 = eggshell 63 = building material 64 = prehistoric 65 = shoe 66 = shell 67 = leather 128 = heat flashing for stove pipe 129 = furniture caster 130 = square nails 131 = wire nails 132 = smooth wire 133 = barbed wire 134 = other wire 135 = pail/bucket 136 = u nails 137 = bolt 138 = washer 139 = nut 140 = pot/pan 141 = can 142 = plate 143 = cup 144 = baking dish 145 = cartridge casing 146 = eyelet 147 = slag/melted metal 148 = metal 149 = unidentified domestic metal 150 = void 151 = stove 152 = lamp part 153 = screen 154 = bomb fragment 155 = hair pin 156 = can sized pail 157 = rod

PAGE 332

311 158 = furniture piece 159 = barrel hoop 160 = other metal fastener 161 = unidentified metal tool/building supplies 162 = screw 163 = metal tubing 164 = bracket 165 = rivet 166 = clock part 167 = bottle cap 168 = eyelet screw 169 = bullet 170 = lock, lock parts, key 171 = trunk part 172 = strap 173 = hinge 174 = grommet 175 = tack 180 = snap 181 = suspender adjuster 182 = pawl 183 = machine screw 184 = star 185 = blasting cap 186 = cable 187 = flatware 188 = stovepipe 189 = heel plate 190 = stocking garter clip 191 = gear, flywheel 192 = spring 193 = flue dampener 194 = hook 195 = clothing eyelet 196 = ball joint 197 = glazier corner 198 = handle 199 = fireplace grate 200 = umbrella parts 201 = curry comb 202 = sardine can

PAGE 333

312 203 = lid 204 = toy 205 = teapot Material 4 = bone 5 = flora 6 = plastic 7 = shell 8 = wood 9 = unidentified 11 = mica 12 = cork 13 = composite 14 = plaster 15 = leather 16 = foam 17 = graphite 18 = stone 19 = tooth 20 = egg shell 21 = marine and freshwater shell 30 = unidentified metal 31 = iron/steel 32 = copper 33 = brass 34 = silver 35 = galvanized/zinc 36 = lead 37 = cast iron 38 = tin 39 = silver plate 40 = enamel 41 = aluminum 100 = unid glass 101 = clear glass (post-1915) 102 = light green glass 103 = dark green glass

PAGE 334

313 104 = purple glass (pre-1915) 105 = black glass 106 = light blue glass 107 = brown glass 108 = amber/orange glass 109 = cobalt blue glass 110 = dark purple glass 111 = opaque white glass 112 = pink glass 200 = UNID ceramic 201 = white glaze over white paste 202 = brown transfer pattern #1 203 = blue transfer pattern 204 = dark brown glaze over orange/red/terra cotta c lay 205 = blue glaze over white clay 206 = brown glaze over tan clay 207 = dark brown glaze over tan clay 208 = red brown glaze over tan clay 209 = dark brown clay 210 = red clay 211 = dark gray glaze over gray clay 212 = gray clay 213 = red brown glaze over white clay 214 = white clay 215 = red brown glaze over orange clay 216 = dark brown glaze over white clay 217 = gray glaze over white clay 218 = gray glaze over gray clay 219 = dark green transfer print 220 = pink gray clay 221 = red brown clay 222 = dark green glaze over brown clay 223 = red glaze over a red clay 224 = tan clay 225 = dark green glaze over gray clay 226 = dark green glaze over white clay 227 = void 228 = dark brown glaze over dark brown clay 229 = white clay 230 = white glaze over tan/gray clay 231 = dark gray glaze over gray clay 232 = void 233 = red brown glaze over orange clay

PAGE 335

314 234 = pink gray clay 235 = black glaze on tan clay 236 = brown transfer ware pattern #2 237 = brown transfer ware pattern #3 238 = brown transfer ware pattern #4 239 = pale pink glaze over pink clay 240 = multicolored transfer ware pattern 241 = light gray glaze over tan clay Comment: list if diagnostic, if deserving of further research, if from a feature, etc. List the FS# here too. Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 84 100 2 50 3 1 1.0 514 NORTHTRASH 120 94 1 50 7 1 0.1 606 FRAGMENT SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 50 8 1 0.3 606 FRAGMENT SOUTHTRASH 84 100 1 50 3 1 1.3 507 N ORTHTRASH 84 100 1 51 1 1 0.1 507 NORTHTRASH 92 104 5 59 6 1 6.4 336 FRAGMENTE D KITCHEN 118 94 2 50 3 1 0.8 1016 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 50 7 1 0.1 1016 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 50 6 1 0.3 1016 SOUTHTRASH 120 88 2 50 7 1 0.1 716 FRAGMENT FOUNDATION 84 100 5 50 7 1 0.1 532 NORTHTRASH 118 94 4 50 7 1 0.2 1028 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 59 11 1 2.5 1028 1 SHEET OF MICA SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 52 12 2 0.1 1028 FRAGMENTS SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 50 13 1 0.8 1022 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 50 7 2 1.5 1022 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 50 6 1 0.8 1022 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 3 54 2 1 2.1 316 FRAGMENT KITCHEN 92 104 3 51 1 1 0.1 316 KITCHEN 120 94 4 59 6 1 0.3 632 FRAGMENT SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 50 7 1 0.5 623 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 59 11 3 0.1 1038 FRAGMENTS SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 59 6 1 0.1 1038 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 59 14 1 0.7 1038 FRAGMENT SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 50 3 1 0.6 1038 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 50 7 3 0.8 1038 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 336

315 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 100 2 56 6 1 0.9 412 FRAGMENT NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 59 15 1 3.9 536 STRAP NORTHTRASH 92 104 2 59 16 4 0.1 310 F RAGMENTS KITCHEN 120 94 5 52 12 1 5.2 641 "FORD'S INKS" SOUTHTRASH 122 84 2 59 15 1 0.6 813 FRAG & PAINT FOUNDATION 82 98 3 51 6 1 4.2 1214 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 50 7 1 0.1 1214 NORTHTRASH 118 94 1 59 17 1 2.4 1010 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 50 3 1 0.1 1010 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 57 2 1 14.0 663 DOG SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 50 7 1 1.2 663 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 59 17 1 0.7 663 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 59 17 2 1.5 644 SOUTHTRASH 82 100 0 59 18 6 5.3 403 PUMICE NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 59 9 1 38.4 438 BURNED PLASTER? NOR THTRASH 82 100 5 60 4 1 0.7 438 MEDAPODIA L NORTHTRASH 120 94 5 59 17 2 1.5 644 SOUTHTRASH 82 100 3 59 9 2 26.2 423 BURNED PLASTER? NORTHTRASH 118 94 2 58 6 1 1.0 1041 BURNED FRAGMENT SOUTHTRASH 120 92 3 60 4 14 128.2 1114 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 60 4 16 6.8 706 FOUNDATION 82 100 2 60 4 41 60.2 417 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 61 19 4 5.6 417 NORTHTRASH 90 104 1 60 4 1 0.6 904 KITCHEN 120 94 5 60 4 24 63.0 657 SOUTHTRASH 84 100 3 60 4 52 52.8 517 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 61 19 1 0.1 517 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 60 4 2 10.5 513 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 60 4 10 12.9 522 NORTHTRASH 118 94 0 60 4 1 46.9 1003 SOUTHTRASH 82 100 3 60 4 76 87.5 421 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 61 19 1 4.5 421 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 60 4 1 37.6 1221 NORTHTRASH 118 94 4 60 4 14 13.9 1027 SOU THTRASH

PAGE 337

316 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 94 1 60 4 3 4.1 611 SOUTHTRASH 82 100 4 60 4 29 28.7 427 NORTHTRASH 120 92 2 60 4 25 53.1 1110 FOUNDATION 120 94 2 60 4 7 4.3 622 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 3 60 4 12 28.4 1212 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 60 4 7 3.6 506 NORTHTRASH 82 98 9 61 19 1 6. 8 1257 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 120 92 1 60 4 11 20.0 1107 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 60 4 2 0.8 1406 FOUNDATION 82 100 1 60 4 16 10.9 408 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 61 19 2 6.6 408 NORTHTRASH 118 94 1 60 4 9 79.5 1004 SOUTHTRASH 120 88 1 60 4 1 7.6 708 FOUNDATION 82 100 5 60 4 106 96.2 436 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 61 19 2 8.0 436 NORTHTRASH 90 104 2 60 4 1 0.2 909 KITCHEN 120 94 1 60 4 20 6.4 609 SOUTHTRASH 84 100 6 60 4 6 4.5 535 NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 61 19 1 1.7 535 NORTHTRASH 124 86 1 60 4 2 1.0 1508 FOUN DATION 102 84 1 60 4 1 6.7 7 COURTYARD 120 88 2 60 4 20 13.0 713 FOUNDATION 90 104 3 60 4 6 2.0 913 KITCHEN 82 98 6 60 4 13 5.9 1236 NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 60 4 29 288.4 1239 NORTHTRASH 122 84 2 60 4 15 30.1 809 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 61 19 1 14.4 809 FOUNDATION 82 100 6 60 4 37 54.6 443 NORTHTRASH 122 86 1 60 4 1 7.0 1403 FOUNDATION 82 98 9 62 20 7 0.8 1253 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 122 84 3 60 4 1 0.2 824 FOUNDATION 82 98 4 60 4 8 3.7 1216 NORTHTRASH 120 88 2 61 19 1 0.1 715 FOUNDATION 82 98 9 60 4 2 2.3 1255 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 120 94 5 60 4 3 1.4 645 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 60 4 18 15.6 340 KITCHEN 122 86 2 60 4 4 16.8 1408 FOUNDATION

PAGE 338

317 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 84 100 7 60 4 8 1.9 538 NORTHTRASH 90 104 4 60 4 7 0.6 921 KITCHEN 92 104 3 60 4 10 22.4 315 KITCHEN 82 98 8 60 4 9 9.7 1249 NORTHTRASH 82 100 7 60 4 1 0.2 449 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 60 4 6 3.8 1231 NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 60 4 1 13.3 1241 FEATURE 1 NORTHTRASH 120 94 5 60 4 16 27.0 643 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 7 60 4 5 1.5 1241 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 102 84 2 60 4 3 11.7 11 COURTYARD 122 84 3 60 4 3 4.0 821 FOUNDATION 120 94 4 60 4 5 6.5 637 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 60 4 19 33.6 626 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 4 60 4 14 31.9 1219 NORTHTRASH 118 94 3 60 4 27 26.3 1019 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 61 19 1 1.7 1019 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 60 4 24 23.1 1036 SOUTHTRASH 84 100 5 60 4 27 16.4 531 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 61 19 1 0.1 531 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 60 4 16 25.9 1225 NORTHTRASH 118 94 2 60 4 22 39.0 1014 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 5 2 104 1 32.4 1232 IN SITU NORTHTRASH 82 98 9 9 104 1 3.2 1 256 NORTHTRASH 82 98 9 1 104 1 3.0 1256 NORTHTRASH 82 98 9 1 104 6 37.4 1256 SQUARE BOTTLE* NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 3 111 1 2.1 1250 MASON JAR LID* NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 4 104 4 13.2 1250 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 8 9 104 9 6.8 1250 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 6 4 104 1 1.0 1240 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 6 1 102 1 2.7 1240 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 6 9 104 7 7.7 1240 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 6 1 104 2 5.0 1240 SQUARE BOTTLE* NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 9 104 4 18.6 1237 NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 1 103 2 7.9 1237 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 9 104 23 33.0 1210 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 9 102 10 7.4 1228 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 339

318 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 98 4 9 104 2 3.3 1226 NORTHTRASH 82 98 7 1 103 1 4.1 1242 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 7 9 104 7 25.8 1242 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 0 1 103 1 60.5 1201 BOTTLE BOTTOM* NORTHTRASH 82 98 0 2 104 3 6.3 1201 NORTHTRASH 82 98 0 9 104 4 2.4 1201 NORTHTRASH 82 98 0 4 104 1 0.2 1201 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 1 103 3 6.8 1206 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 4 104 6 7.3 1206 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 9 104 17 21.7 1206 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 1 104 12 17.1 1206 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 9 110 1 1.6 1206 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 4 104 3 12.4 1202 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 9 104 24 52.5 1202 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 4 101 1 2.5 1202 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 1 103 3 6.7 1202 NORTHTRASH 82 100 0 1 103 47 227.7 401 BOTTLE* NORTHTRASH 82 100 0 1 103 6 58.3 402 BOTTLE* NORTHTRASH 82 100 0 1 101 4 37.8 402 NORTHTRASH 82 100 0 4 104 3 0.5 402 NORTHTRASH 82 100 0 9 101 2 1.6 402 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 1 103 14 313.3 404 SAME AS 401* NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 1 101 1 10.7 404 EMBOSSED* NORTHT RASH 82 100 1 1 101 6 10.5 404 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 9 110 4 9.8 404 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 4 104 4 1.5 404 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 9 104 35 46.3 404 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 1 103 1 28.6 413 SAME AS 401* NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 1 104 1 10.4 413 EMBOSSED* NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 9 104 1 5.8 413 EMBOSSED* NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 3 101 3 3.5 413 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 9 104 45 92.7 413 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 1 103 1 5.0 420 SAME AS 401* NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 1 104 1 27.6 420 BOTTLE BOTTOM* NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 1 104 3 9.5 420 EMBOSSED* NORTHTRASH

PAGE 340

319 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 100 3 1 104 2 7.1 420 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 9 104 38 32.8 420 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 4 104 33 11.4 415 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 1 101 1 15.3 424 JAR MOUTH* NORTHTRASH 82 100 4 9 104 14 17.5 429 NORTHTRASH 82 100 4 1 101 1 1.0 429 E MBOSSED* NORTHTRASH 82 100 4 4 104 5 1.6 429 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 2 104 5 20.1 435 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 1 101 5 32.6 435 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 1 103 4 14.4 435 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 9 104 46 51.7 435 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 4 104 38 22.3 435 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 9 104 3 11.1 445 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 4 104 14 8.7 445 NORTHTRASH 82 100 7 9 104 13 22.0 448 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 1 101 2 7.2 420 BOTTLE NECK* NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 9 104 7 5.0 420 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 1 103 2 135.2 409 BOTTLE NECK* NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 2 104 2 52.0 434 WINDOW PANE NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 1 104 1 19.9 425 JAR FRAG NORTHTRASH 84 100 0 1 103 3 21.5 501 NORTHTRASH 84 100 0 2 106 2 1.9 501 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 1 110 3 12.8 504 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 9 104 2 4.5 504 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 9 105 1 2.6 504 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 2 104 9 13.5 504 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 4 104 1 0.4 504 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 9 104 11 13.7 540 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 4 104 1 0.1 540 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 9 104 21 15.6 510 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 4 104 6 1.5 510 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 4 104 22 24.5 521 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 1 104 6 10.3 521 EMBOSED* NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 1 104 3 11.0 524 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 9 104 14 13.8 524 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 341

320 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 84 100 5 4 104 17 6.4 524 CIRCULAR FRAG* NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 9 110 5 2.6 524 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 1 107 1 5.3 524 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 4 104 67 31.3 518 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 2 104 2 4.2 518 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 9 101 17 13.9 518 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 1 104 2 5.2 518 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 9 110 2 5.0 518 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 9 105 1 0.7 518 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 1 104 1 2.8 518 BOTTLE NECK* NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 1 111 1 30.5 518 VASELINE* NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 4 110 1 3.1 533 NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 9 102 1 0.5 533 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 2 104 1 55.6 537 WINDOW PANE NORTHTRASH 90 104 2 9 104 8 5.3 906 KITCHEN 90 104 3 2 104 13 10.2 912 KITCHEN 90 104 3 9 108 2 0.6 912 KITCHEN 90 104 3 3 111 5 1.6 912 KITCHEN 90 104 1 9 104 8 7.3 901 KITCHEN 90 104 1 1 102 1 7.7 901 KITCHEN 90 104 4 1 102 3 4.0 916 KITCHEN 90 104 4 9 104 7 3.1 916 KITCHEN 90 104 4 3 111 2 0.6 916 KITCHEN 92 104 3 9 102 8 2.7 320 KITCHEN 92 104 3 2 104 2 6.3 320 KITCHEN 92 104 2 1 107 1 5.6 309 KITCHEN 92 104 2 9 110 1 0.4 309 KITCHEN 92 104 4 2 104 9 5.7 323 KITCHEN 92 104 5 9 102 8 4.6 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 1 107 1 2.5 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 3 111 1 0.4 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 1 103 1 4.7 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 4 104 2 3.4 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 2 104 2 7.3 342 BOTTLE TOP* KITCHEN 92 104 1 9 101 1 0.2 303 KITCHEN

PAGE 342

321 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 92 104 5 1 104 20 134.6 3 41 BOTTLE FRAG* KITCHEN 92 104 5 1 107 1 0.0 341 KITCHEN 92 104 5 5 13 1 209.8 355 BOTTLE TOP* KITCHEN 102 84 0 9 104 4 9.8 1 COURTYARD 102 84 1 1 101 84 320.1 2 BOTTLE FRAGS* COURTYARD 102 84 1 9 104 11 7.2 2 COURTYARD 102 84 1 1 110 1 6.5 2 COURTYARD 102 84 2 1 101 1 3.2 8 COURTYARD 102 84 2 9 104 12 10.1 8 COURTYARD 102 84 3 9 104 2 0.9 12 COURTYARD 102 88 1 9 101 6 6.0 102 COURTYARD 102 88 1 1 107 2 3.8 102 COURTYARD 102 88 1 2 101 69 33.5 102 COURTYARD 102 88 2 9 104 5 2.2 105 C OURTYARD 118 94 4 2 104 2 8.3 1025 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 9 104 1 14.6 1025 EMBOSSED* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 1 102 8 49.3 1025 BOTTLE FRAG* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 1 101 3 8.4 1025 EMBOSSED* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 9 104 29 15.8 1025 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 1 102 4 62.3 1002 PLATE FRAG* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 1 101 10 93.4 1002 VASE FRAG* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 2 104 10 33.5 1002 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 9 104 6 5.5 1002 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 1 101 1 6.1 1002 BOTTLE NECK* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 4 104 6 5.1 1020 SOUTHTRASH 1 18 94 3 1 107 7 10.5 1020 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 1 101 6 31.2 1020 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 2 104 4 8.4 1020 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 1 106 1 13.0 1020 BOTTLE BOTTOM* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 5 104 4 6.7 1020 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 9 104 79 42.7 1020 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 2 104 2 15.8 1005 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 1 106 14 31.4 1005 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 1 101 5 17.9 1005 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 343

322 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 1 1 107 1 1.9 1005 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 5 104 1 3.6 1005 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 9 104 84 62.2 1005 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 1 107 7 5.8 1013 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 1 102 2 9.8 1013 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 4 104 4 8.1 1013 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 1 101 3 17.7 1013 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 1 110 4 8.9 1013 EMBOSSED* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 9 104 85 59.4 1013 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 9 104 14 13.1 1035 S OUTHTRASH 118 94 5 1 107 3 3.6 1035 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 4 104 4 2.5 1035 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 2 104 4 2.5 1035 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 1 102 22 40.0 1035 EMBOSSED* SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 1 104 1 38.9 1035 BOTTLE* SOUTHTRASH 120 88 1 2 101 57 23.9 704 FOU NDATION 120 88 1 1 101 13 11.9 704 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 1 101 1 2.9 704 EMBOSSED* FOUNDATION 120 88 1 1 107 1 6.1 704 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 9 104 30 54.5 704 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 1 103 24 36.1 711 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 1 104 3 4.5 711 EMBOSSED* FOUNDATION 120 88 2 9 104 47 36.3 711 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 1 104 17 97.3 711 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 2 101 161 84.7 711 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 9 104 204 205.0 711 FOUNDATION 120 88 3 1 103 3 16.6 719 FOUNDATION 120 88 3 9 104 11 13.7 719 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 2 101 175 124.7 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 1 107 4 9.6 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 9 110 5 26.5 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 9 104 22 33.7 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 4 104 4 0.8 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 1 104 1 4.6 1103 BOTTLE MOUTH* FOUNDATION 120 92 3 9 104 2 0.6 1115 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 2 101 41 9.1 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 9 104 9 9.3 1109 FOUNDATION

PAGE 344

323 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 92 0 1 106 1 15.9 1101 FOUNDATION 120 92 0 2 101 13 6.1 1101 FOUNDATION 120 94 0 1 107 1 75.7 613 BOTTLE NECK* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 1 107 1 4 29.0 658 BOTTLE BODY* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 4 104 1 507.1 646 LANTERN BASE* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 13 1 531.9 653 BOTTLE W/ CORK* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 1 104 4 97.4 636 BOTTLE* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 1 107 3 10.7 617 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 1 103 1 4.9 617 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 4 104 10 9.7 617 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 1 102 6 4.8 617 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 2 104 6 14.9 617 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 9 104 65 51.6 617 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 107 4 72.2 654 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 102 5 21.2 654 JAR MOUTH* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 13 1 7.5 654 JAR MOUTH* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 104 4 40.1 654 JAR FRAGMENTS SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 4 104 2 7.6 654 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 9 104 11 26.5 654 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 2 104 1 2.5 654 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 4 104 24 21.3 629 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 2 104 1 40.7 629 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 9 104 25 27.4 629 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 9 104 64 49.9 624 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 0 2 104 4 10.1 602 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 0 1 104 2 5.3 602 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 3 111 1 29.4 615 MASON JAR LID* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 1 104 1 56.7 608 BOTTLE NECK* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 1 101 1 47.2 608 GLASS STOPPER* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 4 104 1 2.9 608 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 2 104 1 6.4 608 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 9 104 12 10.3 608 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 345

324 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 94 1 9 104 1 4.9 608 MOLTEN GLASS SOUTHTRAS H 120 94 2 1 110 1 78.0 616 VASOLINE JAR* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 1 104 1 73.2 635 VASOLINE JAR* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 2 104 2 5.9 613 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 9 104 4 4.3 613 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 1 101 1 69.5 628 BOTTLE* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 2 104 7 16.8 639 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 4 104 17 16.5 639 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 9 104 11 24.7 639 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 104 1 3.7 639 EMBOSSED* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 4 104 15 52.5 634 LAMP* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 1 109 1 37.6 656 BOTTLE TOP* SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 3 13 2 102.9 664 MASSON JAR LID* SOUTHTRASH 122 84 0 9 104 3 4.3 801 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 1 107 1 1.5 803 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 1 102 3 8.1 803 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 1 106 3 8.1 803 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 2 104 13 13.2 803 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 9 104 57 25.7 803 FOUN DATION 122 84 2 9 104 208 71.3 807 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 1 103 4 2.4 807 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 1 106 8 7.7 807 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 1 110 14 14.4 807 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 2 104 21 22.1 807 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 9 104 20 13.8 819 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 2 104 5 4.0 1402 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 1 110 3 3.1 1402 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 9 104 23 8.9 1402 FOUNDATION 122 86 2 1 103 3 69.6 1409 BOTTLE FRAGS* FOUNDATION 122 86 2 2 104 13 5.1 1409 FOUNDATION 124 84 0 2 101 3 2.3 1602 FOUNDATION 124 84 1 9 101 1 6.3 1626 CORRUGATE D FOUNDATION 124 84 1 9 101 2 0.5 1626 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 2 101 54 38.5 1509 FOUNDATION

PAGE 346

325 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 124 86 1 9 101 5 1.8 1509 FOUNDATION 90 104 4 63 9 7 8.9 917 LINOLEUM? KITCHEN 82 98 8 63 13 1 11.5 1251 PAINTED WOOD NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 63 13 1 1.1 1213 PAINTED WOOD NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 63 13 1 0.1 1234 PAINTED WOOD NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 63 13 2 0.1 1218 PAINTED WOOD NORTHTRASH 120 92 1 63 8 1 60.0 1106 LAMINATED WOOD FOUNDATION 82 100 2 63 8 1 0.8 416 BURNED NORTHTRASH 92 104 5 63 8 1 11.1 339 POST? KITCHEN 122 84 2 63 8 1 0.1 815 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 60 4 1 0.2 815 EPIPHESIAL CUP FOUNDATION 82 98 8 63 8 1 36.6 1247 POST? NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 63 13 1 0.4 1259 PAINTED WOOD NORTHTRASH 90 104 4 63 8 1 0.3 920 KITCHEN 118 94 3 60 4 2 1.0 1042 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 59 15 2 3.2 1042 STRAP? SOUTHTRASH 82 98 4 59 15 4 0.1 1260 NORTHTRASH 92 104 2 63 9 3 1.1 311 LINOLEUM? KITCHEN 92 104 5 60 4 2 0.6 350 KITCHEN 92 104 2 60 4 4 0.5 313 KITCHEN 82 100 1 60 4 1 3.6 452 NORTHTRASH 122 84 2 60 4 1 1.0 826 FOUNDATION 124 84 0 64 18 1 1.9 1603 3R FLAKE,P WOOD FOUNDATION 124 84 1 64 18 1 4.6 1625 3RD FLAKE,QRTZ T FOUNDATION 120 88 1 64 18 1 1.0 709 3RD FLAKE,QRTZ T FOUNDATION 124 86 1 64 18 2 6.6 1506 3FLK,QRT&P WOOD FOUNDATION 102 84 1 64 18 1 2.5 6 SHATTER,P WOOD COURTYARD 92 104 2 64 18 1 24.7 312 MAR RETCH,PWO OD KITCHEN 118 94 5 1 104 1 52.8 1035 SQUARE SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 347

326 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA FRAGS* 120 92 0 2 104 2 1.7 1101 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 2 104 36 28.3 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 9 101 1 0.8 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 9 107 1 0.6 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 2 104 142 123.4 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 9 101 9 4.2 1103 FOUNDATION 90 104 1 9 101 2 1.8 901 KITCHEN 92 104 5 9 102 1 0.1 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 1 101 1 0.6 342 KITCHEN 92 104 5 2 104 8 6.6 342 KI TCHEN 102 88 1 9 104 3 0.9 102 COURTYARD 102 88 1 9 110 6 2.4 102 COURTYARD 102 88 2 9 110 1 0.2 105 COURTYARD 124 84 1 9 110 1 0.4 1626 FOUNDATION 124 84 1 9 104 2 1.5 1626 FOUNDATION 124 84 1 2 104 29 14.4 1626 FOUNDATION 124 84 1 2 101 55 7 .4 1626 FOUNDATION 120 88 3 9 101 4 1.8 719 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 9 106 2 0.7 704 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 2 104 45 34.2 704 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 9 101 13 9.2 711 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 2 104 18 16.7 1509 FOUNDATION 120 92 0 2 104 2 1.7 1101 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 2 104 36 28.3 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 9 101 1 0.8 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 9 107 1 0.6 1109 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 2 104 142 123.4 1103 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 9 101 9 4.2 1103 FOUNDATION 120 94 4 9 101 8 8.3 629 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 9 108 1 0.8 624 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 9 107 1 1.3 639 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 0 9 101 2 1.8 1201 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 9 101 2 1.1 1226 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 9 101 5 4.9 1202 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 2 104 3 2.7 1202 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 2 104 1 35.1 537 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 348

327 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 84 100 6 9 104 12 10.7 533 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 4 104 3 2.9 413 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 2 106 10 16.1 413 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 9 101 4 2.9 415 NORTHTRASH 92 104 1 20 204 1 145.9 306 KITCHEN 92 104 2 20 204 1 2.2 308 KITCHEN 92 104 2 14 225 2 1.3 308 KITCH EN 92 104 3 20 204 4 610.0 314 TO HEAVY TO WGH KITCHEN 92 104 3 19 206 1 9.2 319 KITCHEN 92 104 3 19 202 1 3.0 321 KITCHEN 92 104 4 19 201 1 7.7 324 TAPERED EDGE KITCHEN 92 104 4 19 202 1 0.5 324 KITCHEN 92 104 5 14 225 2 2.4 337 KITCHEN 92 104 5 19 202 3 2.5 337 KITCHEN 122 86 1 19 202 3 9.4 1405 MEND TO 1504 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 19 201 6 11.1 1405 FOUNDATION 122 86 2 19 201 4 4.9 1407 FOUNDATION 122 86 2 19 201 1 3.2 1407 MKRSMRK 816MEND FOUNDATION 124 86 0 19 201 2 9.5 1502 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 19 202 1 3.3 1504 MEND TO 1405 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 19 205 1 0.6 1504 MEND TO 1405 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 19 202 2 9.4 805 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 19 201 2 3.0 805 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 19 205 1 0.6 805 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 15 203 1 4.5 805 MEND 817 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 10 201 5 137.0 808 PLATE? FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 201 8 9.9 808 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 202 1 0.2 808 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 205 1 0.6 808 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 216 2 25.7 808 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 204 3 3.1 808 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 228 1 6.1 808 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 12 201 1 15.4 811 CUP HANDLE FOUNDATION 122 84 2 15 203 6 81.1 814 MENDS 817 FOUNDATION

PAGE 349

328 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 122 84 2 15 203 2 9.5 817 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 19 223 1 35.8 818 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 15 203 1 28.4 822 MENDS 817 FO UNDATION 122 84 3 19 204 1 0.4 822 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 19 224 1 0.6 822 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 19 225 1 2.1 822 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 19 201 2 3.4 822 FOUNDATION 122 84 0 19 201 1 3.7 816 MKRMRK,M END1407 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 19 205 1 8.1 1104 FOUNDATI ON 120 92 1 19 201 11 21.5 1104 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 19 201 1 1.7 1104 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 16 228 1 36.3 1105 GEAR SHIFT KNOB FOUNDATION 120 92 2 19 201 8 13.4 1111 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 19 225 1 3.8 1111 FOUNDATION 120 92 3 19 201 1 0.1 1112 FOUND ATION 84 100 0 14 225 2 109.3 502 MENDS 1211 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 14 207 1 11.2 505 MENDS 441 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 14 204 3 7.8 505 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 14 207 3 32.1 505 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 19 201 4 6.4 505 HANDLE EDGE NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 14 225 1 243.2 509 MEND 422 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 14 207 4 48.6 511 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 19 202 2 15.1 511 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 14 207 4 11.3 516 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 14 207 7 60.5 516 MENDS TO 441 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 14 204 1 6.8 516 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 14 207 1 1.2 542 MENDS TO 441 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 19 201 2 13.8 523 ROUNDED EDGE NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 14 207 1 0.9 523 EDGE, MEND 441 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 14 207 3 18.6 529 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 11 202 1 116.5 530 SMALL BOWL NORTHTRASH 118 94 0 19 201 3 2.8 1001 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 19 201 4 70.7 1001 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 350

329 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 0 19 202 5 14.3 1001 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 19 201 2 2.0 1001 MAKERS MARK SOUTHTRASH 118 94 0 11 201 1 69.2 1001 MAKERS MARK SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 201 50 82.3 1006 MKRSMRK10 01MEND SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 201 5 182.6 1006 MEND TO 1001 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 202 6 8.5 1006 MEND TO 1001 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 201 1 1.3 1006 MAKERS MARK SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 201 1 0.8 1006 MKRSMARK 610MEND SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 205 2 2.4 1006 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 19 201 1 0.7 1006 MAKERS MARK SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 20 206 7 610.0 1007 TOO HEAVY SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 20 206 2 227.3 1012 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 19 201 43 83.9 1015 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 19 202 2 25.6 1015 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 19 201 1 0.3 1015 MAKER S MARK SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 19 205 2 2.2 1015 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 20 206 3 610.0 1017 TOO HEAVY SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 19 201 53 119.6 1017 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 19 202 4 35.0 1017 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 19 201 1 1.8 1017 MAKERS MARK SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 19 205 3 2.5 1017 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 19 203 1 4.8 1017 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 14 207 1 3.0 1017 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 19 201 10 46.8 1026 HANDLE SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 13 201 2 175.7 1029 MENDS 1032 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 13 201 4 155.4 1032 PITCHER, M/M SOUTH TRASH 118 94 5 19 203 2 284.2 1033 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 19 201 8 19.1 1037 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 19 203 1 93.4 1037 MENDS WITH 1033 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 19 202 1 5.6 1037 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 19 203 4 6.9 1037 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 351

330 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 5 19 205 2 0.9 1037 SO UTHTRASH 120 88 1 10 201 2 79.6 705 PLATE FOUNDATION 120 88 1 19 201 9 9.0 705 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 19 205 1 2.2 705 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 19 201 55 88.0 710 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 19 231 7 7.4 710 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 19 205 5 5.3 710 FOUNDATION 120 88 3 19 201 2 0.7 718 FOUNDATION 90 104 1 19 201 3 0.9 903 KITCHEN 90 104 1 14 207 1 4.4 922 KITCHEN 90 104 2 19 201 2 0.9 910 KITCHEN 90 104 3 19 226 1 8.5 914 CROCKERY KITCHEN 90 104 4 19 201 3 1.4 918 KITCHEN 82 98 1 14 207 1 2.3 1204 NORTHT RASH 82 98 1 14 207 1 1.8 1204 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 19 202 1 4.0 1204 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 14 225 1 39.6 1208 MEND 502 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 14 207 1 8.5 1208 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 14 218 1 10.0 1208 JUG MOUTH NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 14 225 1 54.0 1211 MEND TO 5 02 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 14 207 1 11.7 1211 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 19 201 1 7.1 1211 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 12 201 1 22.9 1220 CUP? NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 19 202 1 1.3 1220 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 14 207 1 25.7 1230 MEND 414 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 19 201 1 4.4 1230 NORTHTRASH 82 98 7 19 230 1 0.5 1243 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 14 207 1 7.5 405 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 19 201 1 4.1 407 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 14 229 1 7.3 452 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 14 207 2 205.8 414 CROCK,MEN D 441 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 19 201 5 25.8 414 NORTHTRAS H 82 100 2 14 207 1 1.8 414 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 19 204 4 56.7 414 CROCKERY NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 14 225 1 122.8 422 MEND 509 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 10 201 3 6.7 422 MEND 530 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 352

331 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 100 4 19 202 1 4.5 431 NORTHTRASH 82 100 4 19 2 1 4.5 431 BRN FLO RAL NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 14 207 2 86.2 437 MEND 441 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 14 204 1 4.2 437 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 19 201 2 30.9 437 EDGE NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 19 201 1 0.7 446 EDGE NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 14 207 1 575.5 441 CROCKERY NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 14 207 1 2.6 446 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 11 202 2 84.6 446 MENDS 530 NORTHTRASH 124 84 0 19 201 5 107.4 1604 FOUNDATION 124 84 1 19 201 14 40.1 1627 FOUNDATION 124 84 1 19 202 2 5.8 1627 FOUNDATION 102 84 1 19 201 1 0.8 4 COURTYARD 102 84 1 19 207 1 3.4 4 COURTYARD 102 88 1 14 229 2 24.7 103 RIM COURTYARD 102 88 1 14 208 13 100.3 103 COURTYARD 102 88 1 19 201 2 1.5 103 COURTYARD 120 94 0 12 201 1 52.5 601 CUP? SOUTHTRASH 120 94 0 19 201 3 4.0 601 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 0 19 202 3 3.3 601 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 0 19 219 4 5.0 601 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 12 201 1 19.5 607 CUP?, MEND 601 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 19 201 9 11.0 607 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 19 202 3 4.2 607 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 12 201 1 7.5 610 MKRMRK,M END1006 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 19 201 2 1.2 610 SOUTH TRASH 120 94 4 12 201 1 21.1 631 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 19 201 18 63.5 618 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 19 201 1 2.8 618 MAKERS MARK SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 19 205 1 0.9 618 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 19 202 1 1.4 618 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 19 218 1 5.6 618 SOUTHTRASH 1 20 94 3 19 205 3 1.9 625 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 19 201 26 34.5 625 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 12 203 1 14.4 631 RIM OF CUP/BOWL SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 353

332 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 94 4 19 202 1 1.2 631 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 19 201 2 0.5 667 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 13 201 2 610.0 622 MEND 1029,1032 S OUTHTRASH 124 86 1 19 201 19 52.0 1504 MEND TO 1502 FOUNDATION 118 94 2 50 30 1 1.2 1011 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 4 50 37 1 1.5 1224 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 50 37 1 0.3 515 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 50 37 1 0.5 426 NORTHTRASH 120 88 2 50 37 2 2.7 712 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 50 37 1 1.4 1108 FOUNDATION 120 92 3 147 30 3 5.2 1113 FOUNDATION 120 92 3 161 37 8 8.4 1113 FOUNDATION 120 92 3 130 37 1 2.3 1113 FOUNDATION 82 100 6 130 37 16 22.5 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 131 37 12 7.5 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 161 30 99 146.8 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 132 37 3 2.1 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 161 37 1 8.1 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 166 30 1 0.7 444 STUDY NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 180 30 1 0.9 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 146 30 3 1.2 444 2 TYPESSTUDY NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 165 33 1 3.3 444 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 145 33 1 0.7 444 .22 SHORT,"U" NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 161 30 1 0.9 444 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 131 37 1 14.1 1222 NORTHTRASH 92 104 4 161 37 1 119.5 325 STUDY KITCHEN 92 104 4 132 37 6 13.8 325 KITCHEN 92 104 4 130 37 3 10.1 325 KITCHEN 92 104 4 161 37 116 132.7 325 KITCHEN 118 94 3 149 33 1 27.9 1023 STUDY SOUTHTRASH 82 98 4 132 37 2 46.2 1226 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 135 30 30 310.1 1226 NORTHTRASH 118 94 2 145 33 5 13.3 1011 5070 RIFLE, 22 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 132 37 17 30.5 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 164 30 1 1.2 1011 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 354

333 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 2 147 30 2 7.9 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 160 37 2 36.2 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 136 37 2 3.0 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 161 37 1 44.4 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 161 37 1 24.2 1011 S OUTHTRASH 118 94 2 161 37 1 59.5 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 161 37 13 20.3 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 130 37 54 128.1 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 146 30 9 3.1 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 168 37 1 4.5 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 167 30 1 0.7 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 131 37 28 103.5 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 162 37 3 10.2 1011 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 149 37 1 1.9 1011 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 135 30 3 370.9 328 KITCHEN 90 104 3 170 37 2 25.1 911 HASP, KEYHOLE KITCHEN 90 104 3 130 37 5 7.6 911 KITCHEN 90 104 3 169 36 1 1.8 911 .22 KITCHEN 90 104 3 165 30 1 0.4 911 KITCHEN 90 104 3 161 37 2 1.3 911 KITCHEN 90 104 3 146 30 1 0.5 911 KITCHEN 90 104 3 131 37 9 45.5 911 KITCHEN 90 104 3 132 37 1 1.0 911 KITCHEN 118 94 3 171 37 1 38.5 1021 IN SITU,W80,N3 7 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 145 33 4 11.2 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 132 37 35 101.1 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 132 30 1 29.5 1018 INSULATED SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 132 37 1 4.5 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 130 37 76 139.2 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 136 37 4 8.3 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 131 37 64 133.8 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 162 37 9 15.1 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 161 30 1 0.6 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 160 37 1 0.7 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 146 33 10 2.6 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 141 37 78 72.5 1018 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 355

334 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 3 175 37 7 2.5 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 169 36 1 3.0 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 172 37 1 4.8 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 172 37 1 19.2 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 161 37 1 2.6 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 161 37 1 36.6 1018 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 161 30 1 14.4 1018 STUDY SOUTHTRASH 118 94 3 161 37 1 2.1 1018 SOUTHTRASH 122 84 2 175 30 1 0.4 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 162 37 5 10.1 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 131 37 24 65.5 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 136 37 1 6.4 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 130 37 42 7 9.8 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 160 37 1 3.1 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 141 37 28 17.2 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 148 37 1 3.8 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 173 30 1 1.1 806 STUDY FOUNDATION 122 84 2 161 37 2 61.2 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 161 37 1 2.7 806 STUDY FOUNDATION 122 84 2 174 33 1 8.7 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 172 37 1 33.3 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 172 37 1 1.2 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 132 37 12 32.2 806 FOUNDATION 122 84 2 145 33 5 5.7 806 FOUNDATION 82 98 4 130 37 1 1.0 1224 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 161 37 18 31.5 1224 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 132 37 5 11.8 1224 NORTHTRASH 124 84 0 132 37 1 40.1 1601 FOUNDATION 124 84 0 149 37 7 31.6 1601 FOUNDATION 120 94 4 145 33 1 0.1 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 146 32 9 3.0 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 167 37 1 1.6 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 136 37 1 5.0 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 162 37 5 6.6 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 132 37 6 5.9 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 131 37 21 47.1 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 130 37 45 99.8 630 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 356

335 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 94 4 141 37 1 5.6 630 SOUTHTRASH 1 20 94 4 130 35 1 3.0 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 147 30 23 27.1 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 149 30 1 8.3 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 130 37 1 11.5 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 173 37 1 22.4 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 161 37 1 14.6 630 STUDY SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 172 37 1 2.4 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 161 37 286 226.3 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 4 170 37 1 3.4 630 SOUTHTRASH 120 88 0 188 37 1 306.1 702 FOUNDATION 92 104 0 132 37 1 50.9 301 KITCHEN 82 100 5 161 37 6 112.9 433 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 132 37 447 80.2 1223 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 163 30 4 59.4 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 133 37 1 13.7 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 130 37 4 13.0 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 161 37 7 5.0 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 145 33 1 0.3 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 132 30 19 55.1 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 132 37 849 343.2 1248 NORTHTRASH 82 98 8 131 37 1 0.5 1248 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 145 33 1 0.5 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 160 37 1 10.8 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 130 37 6 9.3 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 161 37 30 55.8 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 161 37 1 1 5.5 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 161 37 1 8.8 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 131 37 1 0.4 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 164 30 1 1.3 539 NORTHTRASH 84 100 7 132 30 2 2.5 539 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 132 37 182 37.0 1233 NORTHTRASH 120 94 5 140 37 13 86.3 650 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 141 37 1 14.4 650 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 141 37 20 156.4 660 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 132 37 6 51.1 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 131 37 4 9.1 661 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 357

336 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 94 6 130 37 5 9.3 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 168 37 1 7.8 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 141 37 2 30.5 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 149 37 1 8.1 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 149 37 1 6.5 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 176 37 1 0.7 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 173 37 1 16.9 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 149 37 49 232.3 661 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 138 33 1 0.4 661 SOU THTRASH 84 100 3 136 37 1 2.7 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 130 37 35 103.0 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 145 33 1 0.2 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 138 37 2 2.9 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 132 37 13 51.9 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 146 33 7 1.1 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 149 37 24 38.5 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 162 37 1 3.0 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 131 37 15 37.0 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 149 30 1 0.8 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 132 37 1 2.3 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 164 37 1 5.6 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 149 37 1 28.4 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 149 37 1 2.5 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 172 37 1 3.1 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 149 33 2 3.7 515 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 164 37 1 9.2 515 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 131 37 6 13.3 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 149 37 61 124.3 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 149 37 1 12.1 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 165 33 2 5.1 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 141 30 3 10.1 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 149 37 1 2.4 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 132 37 17 35.3 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 177 33 1 9.0 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 147 30 1 4.0 1 209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 136 37 2 5.1 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 175 37 1 0.5 1209 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 358

337 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 98 3 130 37 24 40.9 1209 NORTHTRASH 82 98 3 146 33 1 0.2 1209 NORTHTRASH 122 84 1 131 37 5 25.6 804 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 130 37 4 13.0 804 FOUNDATION 1 22 84 1 149 37 21 14.2 804 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 132 37 4 31.7 804 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 162 37 1 2.2 804 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 172 37 2 6.1 804 FOUNDATION 122 84 1 149 37 1 9.7 804 FOUNDATION 120 94 3 130 37 41 86.6 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 131 37 11 31.3 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 132 37 1 5.5 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 133 37 1 1.1 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 134 30 13 25.6 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 136 37 2 8.5 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 137 37 1 11.1 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 160 37 1 13.8 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 141 37 37 28.4 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 145 33 6 5.0 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 146 37 3 0.2 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 180 37 1 0.6 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 147 30 6 12.6 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 161 37 5 16.7 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 138 37 1 2.2 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 3 162 37 2 2.3 627 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 131 37 14 48.3 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 130 37 37 112.6 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 149 37 1 2.4 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 149 30 1 2.1 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 178 30 1 0.4 640 SOU THTRASH 120 94 5 173 37 1 18.1 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 147 30 8 14.2 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 175 37 1 0.3 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 133 37 1 1.8 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 146 33 1 0.4 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 162 37 1 4.1 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 141 37 1 3.6 640 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 359

338 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 94 5 149 37 42 142.3 640 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 132 37 5 33.8 640 SOUTHTRASH 84 100 6 149 37 7 9.9 534 NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 162 37 1 6.8 534 NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 132 37 7 10.8 534 NORTHTRASH 84 100 6 131 37 1 4.5 534 N ORTHTRASH 84 100 6 130 37 4 9.5 534 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 160 37 1 10.1 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 180 37 1 7.2 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 149 37 134 187.0 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 136 37 1 3.2 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 165 33 1 1.8 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 147 30 1 0.4 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 146 33 11 2.8 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 162 37 1 4.0 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 138 33 1 0.3 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 132 37 28 31.4 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 130 37 29 49.9 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 131 37 21 65.6 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 179 37 1 2.8 419 NORTHTRASH 82 100 3 175 37 6 4.3 419 NORTHTRASH 118 94 1 130 37 79 223.8 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 131 37 31 108.6 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 132 37 20 98.9 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 133 37 1 1.2 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 145 33 1 0.3 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 146 33 2 0.4 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 171 37 2 62.1 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 148 37 1 9.3 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 136 37 1 4.0 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 137 37 2 15.6 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 147 30 6 16.7 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 172 37 1 103.8 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 182 37 1 20.7 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 149 37 3 4.1 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 149 37 5 28.2 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 162 33 2 7.9 1008 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 360

339 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 1 162 37 3 13.6 1008 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 181 30 1 4.4 1008 SOUTHTRASH 84 100 5 164 37 1 16.0 526 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 164 33 1 9.2 526 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 147 36 1 2.8 526 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 146 33 4 0.6 526 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 145 33 2 3.6 526 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 148 37 1 37.6 526 NORTHTRASH 82 98 9 149 37 1 0.6 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 9 130 37 1 1.4 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 9 136 37 1 0.8 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 9 145 33 1 5.1 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 9 162 37 1 3.0 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 9 131 37 2 1.1 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 9 132 37 23 22.1 1254 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 7 130 37 4 3.2 1245 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 7 162 37 1 2.8 1245 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 7 132 37 57 32.0 1245 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 102 84 1 131 37 2 1.2 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 130 37 10 38.1 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 132 37 3 20.9 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 162 37 2 2.4 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 169 36 1 1.2 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 172 37 2 47.2 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 183 37 1 1.6 3 COURTYARD 102 84 1 149 37 13 5.5 3 COURTYARD 92 104 2 130 37 2 11.7 307 KITCHEN 92 104 2 149 37 34 70.3 307 KITCHEN 92 104 2 131 37 3 9.9 307 KITCHEN 92 104 2 146 33 1 0.2 307 KITCHEN 92 104 2 132 37 8 81.8 307 KITCHEN 92 104 2 133 37 1 16.3 307 KITCHEN 92 104 2 149 37 1 6.6 307 KITCHEN 118 94 5 130 37 38 96.9 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 131 37 22 70.1 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 184 37 1 0.4 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 172 37 4 11.3 1034 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 361

340 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 118 94 5 160 33 1 0.8 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 133 37 1 2.8 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 146 37 2 1.2 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 146 33 11 3.0 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 132 37 16 41.0 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 162 37 1 4.0 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 165 33 4 12.8 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 149 37 49 87.3 1034 SOUTHTRAS H 118 94 5 149 37 6 101.7 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 149 37 1 45.5 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 141 37 2 13.2 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 147 30 1 1.1 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 140 37 1 5.0 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 167 37 5 6.0 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 165 37 1 1.0 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 141 37 17 56.9 1034 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 5 172 33 1 0.8 1034 SOUTHTRASH 82 100 5 149 37 289 646.2 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 149 33 1 12.6 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 149 30 4 5.7 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 160 37 2 21. 8 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 149 37 1 15.6 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 146 33 10 2.9 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 132 37 19 49.4 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 131 37 16 39.6 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 130 37 58 152.9 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 140 37 2 29.9 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 136 37 1 0.5 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 135 37 1 4.4 432 NORTHTRASH 82 100 5 147 30 2 3.7 432 NORTHTRASH 124 86 0 132 37 2 10.6 1503 FOUNDATION 82 100 4 185 33 1 1.9 428 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 138 33 1 0.7 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 162 37 1 4.6 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 160 37 1 9.1 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 186 37 2 1.6 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 178 37 3 2.6 1203 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 362

341 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 98 1 146 33 1 0.6 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 172 37 1 2.1 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 131 37 10 27.0 1203 NORTHT RASH 82 98 1 165 33 3 9.0 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 145 33 1 1.5 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 132 37 6 9.8 1203 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 149 37 55 85.4 1203 NORTHTRASH 118 94 4 141 37 1 57.0 1031 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 135 37 1 198.4 345 KITCHEN 120 94 1 149 37 1 9.0 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 162 37 2 4.2 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 149 37 17 29.7 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 130 37 20 82.3 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 131 37 3 10.2 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 180 33 1 0.9 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 135 37 2 9.9 604 SOU THTRASH 120 94 1 146 33 4 0.8 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 132 37 3 23.7 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 136 37 3 10.1 604 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 145 33 2 1.6 604 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 141 37 2 282.4 354 KITCHEN 84 100 5 141 37 53 115.3 525 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 130 37 4 1.6 525 NORTHTRASH 100 118 1 132 37 3 61.8 201 COURTYARD 82 98 2 187 39 2 36.3 1207 NORTHTRASH 84 100 0 149 37 2 0.4 503 NORTHTRASH 122 84 0 149 37 3 0.8 802 FOUNDATION 122 84 0 131 37 2 12.9 802 FOUNDATION 92 104 5 161 37 1 223.8 333 KITCHEN 120 94 1 149 37 2 6.7 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 136 37 1 1.1 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 148 37 1 0.7 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 149 36 1 25.4 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 162 37 2 6.4 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 131 37 4 11.8 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 1 30 37 12 50.3 612 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 1 132 37 4 49.8 612 SOUTHTRASH

PAGE 363

342 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 92 104 5 188 37 114 1453.4 334 KITCHEN 92 104 5 132 37 8 32.8 334 KITCHEN 92 104 5 149 37 2 2.8 334 KITCHEN 92 104 5 193 37 4 62.5 334 KITCHEN 92 104 5 130 37 2 2.7 334 KITCHEN 92 104 5 140 37 13 305.1 330 KITCHEN 84 100 3 132 37 14 28.3 519 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 149 37 1 27.0 519 NORTHTRASH 84 100 3 130 37 1 3.7 519 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 132 37 6 3.4 1217 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 149 37 9 2.0 1217 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 135 37 1 1.0 1217 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 131 37 1 8.9 1217 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 149 37 1 55.9 1217 NORTHTRASH 92 104 5 132 37 4 108.4 332 KITCHEN 120 94 2 130 37 61 144.5 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 131 37 19 49.6 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 191 33 1 4.3 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 190 33 1 2.2 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 167 37 1 1.1 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 147 30 2 6.5 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 160 37 1 3.9 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 189 30 1 3.2 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 149 37 41 54.2 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 145 33 1 0.2 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 146 33 8 1.5 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 165 33 1 2.7 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 149 37 4 10.1 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 180 33 1 1.2 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 191 37 1 3.9 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 149 37 1 26.3 620 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 2 162 37 4 16.5 620 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 149 37 196 323.7 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 132 37 30 91.6 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 192 37 17 183.4 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 149 37 4 4.3 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 169 36 1 2.0 343 KITCHEN

PAGE 364

343 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 92 104 5 189 30 1 2.3 3 43 KITCHEN 92 104 5 175 37 1 0.9 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 149 37 2 1.9 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 134 37 1 14.2 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 172 37 1 2.2 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 131 37 4 12.6 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 130 37 13 58.6 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 193 37 2 68.1 343 KITCHEN 92 104 5 160 37 1 4.0 343 KITCHEN 82 100 2 149 33 1 3.8 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 149 37 2 13.5 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 160 37 1 8.1 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 136 37 2 7.1 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 132 37 35 67.3 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 175 37 2 1.0 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 130 37 71 187.7 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 131 37 31 106.7 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 149 37 119 136.1 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 194 37 1 21.5 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 146 33 18 5.4 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 180 33 1 1.1 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 172 37 1 66.2 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 172 37 2 102.9 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 195 30 1 1.0 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 181 33 1 2.2 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 191 33 1 14.2 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 135 37 1 1.1 411 NORTHTRAS H 82 100 2 162 37 2 5.2 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 189 37 1 8.7 411 NORTHTRASH 82 100 2 170 33 1 8.0 411 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 132 37 22 152.8 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 149 30 1 42.1 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 136 37 1 3.8 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 131 37 3 15.4 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 130 37 25 58.8 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 162 37 1 1.6 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 148 37 1 0.8 1205 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 365

344 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 98 2 146 33 2 0.2 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 165 33 5 18.9 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 160 37 1 56.9 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 149 37 25 39.3 1205 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 149 37 89 138.6 426 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 132 37 14 30.8 426 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 165 33 1 2.5 426 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 131 37 6 5.9 426 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 130 37 16 44.6 426 NORTHTRASH 82 100 6 149 33 1 24.1 426 NORTHTRASH 92 104 3 149 37 45 147.8 318 KITCHEN 92 104 3 131 37 3 21.6 318 KITCHEN 92 104 3 132 37 4 4.6 318 KITCHEN 92 104 4 132 37 1 7.7 326 KITCHEN 82 100 1 147 30 1 12.3 410 NORTHTRASH 82 100 7 149 37 2 14.7 447 NORTHT RASH 82 98 5 149 37 53 91.3 1229 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 130 37 7 16.2 1229 NORTHTRASH 82 98 5 132 37 8 1.5 1229 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 149 37 45 103.9 1215 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 146 33 1 0.2 1215 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 132 37 3 1.0 1215 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 145 33 1 0.5 1215 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 131 37 2 9.0 1215 NORTHTRASH 82 98 4 130 37 14 28.8 1215 NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 149 37 17 32.3 1235 NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 132 37 5 0.8 1235 NORTHTRASH 82 98 6 130 37 1 1.9 1235 NORTHTRASH 120 92 1 149 37 49 60.9 1102 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 149 37 3 15.8 1102 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 135 37 1 0.2 1102 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 145 33 2 1.0 1102 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 130 37 7 17.2 1102 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 162 37 1 2.1 1102 FOUNDATION 120 92 1 131 37 11 43.7 1102 FOUNDATION 84 100 4 149 37 16 45.5 520 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 132 37 9 9.8 520 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 366

345 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 84 100 4 149 37 1 4.8 520 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 146 33 1 0.4 520 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 135 37 1 1.4 520 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 162 37 1 7.3 520 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 131 37 3 5.8 520 NORTHTRASH 84 100 4 130 37 20 53.6 520 NORTHTRASH 92 104 3 149 37 65 128.9 317 KITCHEN 92 104 3 132 37 18 77.1 317 KITCHEN 92 104 3 130 37 8 36.9 317 KITCHEN 92 104 3 149 37 1 0.4 317 KITCHEN 92 104 3 186 37 1 3.2 317 KITCHEN 92 104 3 131 37 4 7.9 317 KITCHEN 120 88 2 164 37 1 117.2 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 162 37 1 2.7 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 130 37 23 48.4 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 131 37 22 69.9 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 145 33 2 0.6 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 132 37 6 7.7 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 165 33 1 2.3 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 149 30 5 27.5 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 175 37 4 0.8 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 197 30 2 0.2 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 136 37 2 8.5 712 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 196 37 1 30.2 712 FOUNDATION 84 100 5 130 37 29 89.0 528 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 131 37 11 25.3 528 NORTHTRASH 84 100 5 132 37 3 6.5 528 NORTHTRASH 92 104 5 141 37 1 134.3 329 KITCHEN 92 104 5 141 37 1 137.6 351 KITCHEN 92 104 5 144 37 1 251.7 346 KITCHEN 92 104 5 140 37 1 554.9 331 KITCHEN 92 104 5 149 37 1 278.4 358 KITCHEN 92 104 5 142 37 1 188.6 356 KITCHEN 82 98 9 140 37 1 357.3 1252 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 122 84 3 172 37 1 48.9 820 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 131 37 7 25.2 820 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 130 37 7 15.0 820 FOUNDATION

PAGE 367

346 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 122 84 3 132 37 1 0.2 820 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 179 37 1 11.8 820 FOUNDATION 122 84 3 162 37 1 3.7 820 FOUNDATION 92 104 5 135 37 37 395.9 347 KITCHEN 92 104 5 132 37 23 78.6 347 KITCHEN 92 104 5 149 30 1 5.9 347 KITCHEN 92 104 5 172 37 1 1.4 347 KI TCHEN 118 94 4 149 37 97 140.6 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 198 37 1 127.1 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 149 37 1 61.6 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 132 37 27 110.0 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 146 33 9 1.2 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 160 37 1 3.7 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 180 33 1 1.1 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 181 33 2 10.8 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 145 33 1 0.5 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 147 30 2 6.7 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 162 37 1 2.0 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 165 33 2 5.8 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 136 37 1 2.9 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 131 37 15 30.0 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 130 37 40 106.5 1024 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 4 172 37 2 5.4 1024 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 141 37 1 64.4 651 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 149 37 1 120.2 665 SOUTHTRASH 124 84 0 172 37 1 367.3 1 605 FOUNDATION 120 94 6 132 37 2 138.0 666 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 132 37 2 51.4 666 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 6 141 37 1 90.4 659 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 3 145 33 1 6.9 322 KITCHEN 124 86 1 193 37 2 88.0 1505 FOUNDATION 124 84 2 130 37 2 4.0 1628 FOUNDATION 1 24 84 2 132 37 1 3.9 1628 FOUNDATION 124 84 2 149 37 63 82.3 1628 FOUNDATION 124 84 2 175 37 1 0.3 1628 FOUNDATION 124 84 2 162 37 1 0.2 1628 FOUNDATION 120 88 2 149 37 1 106.7 714 FOUNDATION

PAGE 368

347 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 82 100 4 146 33 3 0.9 430 NORTHTRASH 120 94 5 161 37 1 26.5 652 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 141 37 1 100.1 348 KITCHEN 92 104 5 132 37 2 1.5 348 KITCHEN 82 100 1 130 37 41 112.6 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 162 37 2 6.0 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 175 37 1 1.1 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 189 37 1 1.9 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 164 33 1 1.0 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 164 37 1 45.6 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 136 37 1 2.2 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 145 33 1 0.4 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 190 33 1 0.9 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 146 33 1 0.2 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 165 33 3 8 .4 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 131 37 8 26.7 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 132 37 8 17.4 406 NORTHTRASH 82 100 1 149 37 26 12.4 406 NORTHTRASH 120 94 5 149 37 10 17.7 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 162 33 1 2.7 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 149 37 1 2.1 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 162 37 4 14.2 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 132 37 11 36.6 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 131 37 9 35.2 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 130 37 11 33.0 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 178 33 1 0.1 655 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 141 37 1 45.3 648 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 6 188 37 17 355.0 1238 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 82 98 6 132 37 41 31.0 1238 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 102 84 2 164 37 1 17.6 9 COURTYARD 102 84 2 149 33 1 1.0 9 CRIMP COURTYARD 102 84 2 132 37 1 1.1 9 COURTYARD 102 84 2 131 37 3 6.2 9 COURTYARD 102 84 2 130 37 7 11.7 9 COURTYARD 102 84 2 165 33 1 1.6 9 COURTYARD 92 104 5 141 37 1 51.4 349 2" DIAx3 1/4 H KITCHEN 102 88 1 130 37 8 37.1 104 COURTYARD

PAGE 369

348 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 102 88 1 131 37 8 53.8 104 COURTYARD 102 88 1 133 37 1 31.9 104 COURTYARD 102 88 1 132 37 5 10.4 104 COURTYARD 102 88 1 169 36 1 5.3 104 COURTYARD 102 88 1 168 37 1 0.6 104 VERY SMALL3/4" COURTYARD 102 88 1 149 37 11 5.7 104 COURTYARD 102 88 1 138 37 1 2.0 104 COURTYARD 102 88 1 137 37 1 6.8 104 COURTYARD 84 100 2 132 37 1 171.4 512 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 149 37 57 46.6 512 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 149 30 1 0.8 512 ALUMINUM? NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 138 33 1 0.2 512 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 165 33 1 3.2 512 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 146 33 3 0.7 512 1 HOOK,2 HOLES NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 183 37 1 18.6 512 COURSE THREAD NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 131 37 8 15.6 512 NORTHTRASH 84 100 2 130 37 18 50.8 512 NORTHTRASH 118 94 4 199 37 1 740.0 1030 SOUTHTRASH 102 88 0 133 37 1 44.0 101 COURTYARD 84 100 1 132 37 4 24.5 508 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 145 37 1 8.2 508 WRA CO40 60RIFL NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 172 37 2 25.0 508 TEETH MISSING NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 138 37 1 3.1 508 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 131 37 2 80.4 508 1 LARGE SPIKE NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 149 37 1 13.0 508 ORNATE CYL,FRAG NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 130 37 10 28.0 508 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 149 37 34 34.1 508 NORTHTRASH 84 100 1 147 30 2 2.3 508 NORTHTRASH 122 84 2 129 37 2 114.1 810 2 TYPES FOUNDATION 120 94 5 132 37 22 13.7 649 SOUTHTRASH 120 94 5 176 37 3 0.2 649 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 128 38 1 590.2 357 FLASHING/S TOVE KITCHEN 90 104 4 162 33 1 0.1 919 KITCHEN

PAGE 370

349 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 90 104 4 131 33 1 0.2 919 KITCHEN 90 104 4 148 33 1 2.5 919 "SOLID" "PARIS" KITCHEN 82 100 5 132 37 1 33.1 440 NORTHTRASH 90 104 2 130 37 2 7.3 908 KITCHEN 90 104 2 131 37 3 19.1 908 KITCHEN 90 104 2 136 37 1 1.9 908 KITCHEN 90 104 2 146 33 1 0.1 908 1 HOLE KITCHEN 90 104 2 162 37 1 4.7 908 FLAT KITCHEN 90 104 2 169 36 1 2.3 908 .22 FIRED KITCHEN 120 88 1 141 37 18 14.0 703 2 FILL HOLES FOUNDATION 120 88 1 145 33 2 0.8 703 .22 LONG &SHORT FOUNDATION 120 88 1 132 37 4 13.9 703 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 162 37 1 2.4 703 FLAT FOUNDATION 120 88 1 130 37 10 25.1 703 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 146 33 1 0.2 703 1 HOOK FOUNDATION 120 88 1 131 37 7 27.2 703 FOUNDATION 120 88 1 160 37 1 16.1 703 4" LONG FOUNDATION 120 88 1 164 37 1 5.7 703 COUNTERSU NK HOL FOUNDATION 118 94 1 146 33 2 0.4 1039 2 HOLES SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 138 33 1 1.0 1039 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 165 33 3 8.5 1039 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 1 145 33 1 0.9 1039 .22 LONG "U" SOUTHTRASH 122 86 0 193 37 1 123.2 1401 SEPT 14 188" FOUNDATION 122 86 1 149 37 7 12.5 1404 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 131 37 1 5.7 1404 FOUNDATION 122 86 1 132 37 1 2.3 1404 FOUNDATION 90 104 4 131 37 4 19.4 915 KITCHEN 90 104 4 130 37 1 4.3 915 KITCHEN 90 104 4 132 37 2 1.6 915 KITCHEN 90 104 4 191 33 1 1.7 915 V FIRE TEETH KITCHEN 120 92 2 132 37 1 18.7 1108 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 149 37 23 19.3 1108 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 131 37 5 7.1 1108 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 149 33 1 3.5 1108 FOUNDATION

PAGE 371

350 Table 14. Original Artifact Rough Sort Wells Homestead S W LEV FN ID MAT # WGT FS# COMMENT ACT AREA 120 92 2 130 37 5 6.2 1108 FOUNDATION 120 92 2 145 33 1 0.4 1108 .22 SHORT "U" FOUNDATION 82 100 5 170 30 1 10.8 439 SKELETON KEY NORTHTRASH 120 94 0 149 37 2 4.5 603 SOUTHTRASH 118 94 2 138 37 1 1.7 1040 SOUTHTRASH 92 104 5 164 33 1 8.1 353 2 RIVETS KITCHEN 102 88 2 130 37 1 3.2 106 COURTYARD 84 100 5 132 37 6 20.0 527 NORTHTRASH 90 104 1 130 37 2 2.8 902 KITCHEN 90 104 1 138 37 1 0.8 902 KITCHEN 90 104 1 169 36 1 1.7 902 .22 FIRED KITCHEN 120 94 5 180 30 1 0.5 642 1/2 OF SNAP SOUTHTRASH 92 104 1 149 37 8 31.0 302 KITCHEN 92 104 1 133 37 1 13.8 305 KITCHEN 124 86 1 149 37 13 18.0 1507 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 136 37 1 0.1 1507 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 130 37 3 9.7 1507 FOUNDATION 124 86 1 131 37 2 10.7 1507 FOUNDATION 122 86 2 149 37 6 3.8 1410 FOUNDATION 120 88 3 131 37 2 3.0 717 FOUNDATION 82 100 2 149 30 7 7.3 418 NORTHTRASH 90 104 2 149 37 52 32.4 907 KITCHEN 92 104 5 161 37 1 84.1 338 RAKE LIKE KITCHEN 124 86 0 141 37 1 70.9 1501 CAN END FOUNDATION 82 98 1 130 37 22 75.7 1203 NORTHTRASH 118 94 3 187 13 1 31.0 1022 K NIFE HANDLE SOUTHTRASH 82 98 8 188 37 1 2440.0 1246 FEATURE 3 CISTERN 120 88 0 188 37 1 1300.0 701 FOUNDATION 92 104 5 151 37 1 2980.0 359 KITCHEN 120 98 5 130 37 2 5.3 647 SOUTHTRASH 82 98 2 60 4 10 22.1 1267 NORTHTRASH 82 98 1 60 4 2 4.3 1261 NORTHTRASH 82 100 4 60 4 1 4.7 453 NORTHTRASH 118 94 1 60 4 2 1.7 1045 NORTHTRASH 118 94 2 60 4 1 3.3 1046 NORTHTRASH 82 98 2 60 4 4 4.6 1268 NORTHTRASH

PAGE 372

351 APPENDIX D TOTAL ARTIFACT ANALYSIS SORT WELLS HOMESTEAD (5AH916) Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 61 1001 South Trash L1 No Photo 2 x 1 x KN N=1 undecorated whiteware cup. 18901900 X 82 S102/W84 Courtyard L1 #904 1 (D) None N=1 clear glass bottle finish/neck fragment, machine made, flare finish; unknown function. Post 1910s N/A 82 S102/W84 Courtyard L1 #905 None None N=1 amethyst glass bottle finish fragment, machine made, patent finish; unknown function. 1 910s 1915 N/A 316 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L3 #245250 3/8 (D) x (L) None N=1 pipe stem fragment (possibly ceramic). Non diagnostic X 316 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L3 #245250 3/8 (D) x 3/8 (L) None N=1 opaque glass bead. Non diagnostic X 343 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L5 No Photo None None N=1 metal heel plate. Non diagnostic N/A 357 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L5 No Photo None DANDY N=1 two burner, table top cast iron stove. Ca. 1897 N/A

PAGE 373

352 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 367 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #943944 None H & BRO N=2 cobalt glass square bottle body and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold; possible patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle (John Wyeth & Bro, potassium bicarbonate?). 1910s 1920s N/A 375 S92/W104 Dugou t Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #2830 2 3/8 x 2 3/16 None N=1 fragment brown transferware cup. Undeterm ined X 376 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 No Photo s None OIA N=1 clear glass bottle base fragment, cup bottom mold; unknown function. 1850s 1910s N /A 376 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 No Photo s 2/5 (D) None N=3 clear glass bottle finish/neck/bod y fragments, patent finish; likely homeopathy bottles. 1870s 1930s X 388 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #878879 None IRON STONE CHINA P IONEER POTTERY WORKS N=1 refined whiteware chamber pot (nearly complete) with handle, vitreous. 18841890 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) N/A 394 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #3541 4 (D) 4 (D) ROYAL IRONSTONE CHINA WARRANTED N=2 reconstructed smal l whiteware bowls with scalloped rims. Post 1890 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) X 394 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #4251 9 (D) LAUGHLIN N=1 reconstructed whiteware plate with scalloped rim. Ca. 1900 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) X

PAGE 374

353 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 395 S92/W104 Dugout Kit chen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #292298 5 1/8 x 3 7/16 x 2 7/16 None N=1 partial cast iron toy train. Undeterm ined X 399 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar Unknown No Photo None None N=1 steel umbrella or parasol frame. Non diagnostic X 406 S82/W100 North Trash L1 No Photo None None N=1 metal heel plate. Non diagnostic N/A 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 No Photo None None N=1 metal heel plate. Non diagnostic N/A 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 No Photo None None N=1 brass suspender clip. Non diagnostic X 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 #98102 1 x 5/8 None N=1 brass eyelet/buckle/fa stener (possible garter fastener). Non diagnostic X 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 #7983 2 # x YALE N=1 nickel and brass lock fragment. Undeterm ined N/A 411 S82/W100 North Trash L2 #208211 3/8 (D) x (W) None N=1 riveted brass snap/button; possibly from jeans or denim clothing. Post 1873 X 413 S82/W100 North Trash L2 #917 None OV3/88 N=1 aqua glass bottle body fragment; unknown function. Pre 1920 N/A 439 S82/W100 North Trash L5 #212215 3 # x 7/8 None N=1 iron skeleton key. Non diagnostic N/A 507 S84/W100 North Trash L1 #261265 11/16 (D) None N=1 iron or steel button (unidentified # holes, but likely 4hole). Non diagnostic X 507 S84/W100 North Trash L1 #261265 3/16 (D) x 1/8 (L) No ne N=1 clear glass bead. Non diagnostic X

PAGE 375

354 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 514 S84/W100 North Trash L2 #274279 9/16 (D) None N=1 pewter 4 hole button with stippled inner rim design motif. Undeterm ined X 521 S84/W100 North Trash L4 #131138 1 7/8 x 1 5/8 x 1 1/16 None N=2 solarized a methyst glass fragments with scalloped edges. Possible oil lampshade fragments. Pre 1915 X 521 S84/W100 North Trash L4 #131138 7/8 x 7/8 None N=1 solarized clear glass fragment with scalloped edges. Possible oil lampshade fragments. Pre 1915 X 530 S84/W 100 North Trash L5 No Photo 5 (D) x 1 (Depth) PHILEAU and TUNSTALL N=1 brown transferware bowl. Pre 1890 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) X 532 S84/W100 North Trash L5 #266273 5/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 4hole button. Non diagnostic N/A 533 S84/W100 North Trash L6 #139144 1 1/16 x None N=1 solarized amethyst glass fragment with scalloped edge; possible oil lampshade fragment. Pre 1915 X 604 S120/W94 South Trash L1 No Photo s x 3/16 None N=4 brass eyelets; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or co rsets. Non diagnostic X 604 S120/W94 South Trash L1 #112118 9/16 (D) x 1/8 (H) None N=1 brass snap with stamped bubble or dot design. Undeterm ined X

PAGE 376

355 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 608 S120/W94 South Trash L1 #931 1 5/8 (D) None N=1 clear glass bottle finish and neck fragment, mouth -b lown, tooled flare finish (also called a rounded prescription finish); possible medicinal bottle. 1900s 1910s X 608 S120/W94 South Trash L1 #932 None None N=1 large clear glass bottle stopper, neck and finial fragment, finial spherical in shape; possibly from liquor or cologne/perfum e bottle. Non diagnostic X 620 S120/W94 South Trash L2 No Photo None None N=1 metal heel plate. Non diagnostic N/A 620 S120/W94 South Trash L2 No Photo s x 3/16 None N=8 brass eyelets; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnostic X 620 S120/W94 South Trash L2 No Photo None None N=1 brass eyelet/buckle/fa stener (possible garter fastener). Non diagnostic X 625 S120/W94 South Trash L3 #929 None None N=1 complete clear glass oval bottle with a plate mark p anel and rounded shoulder, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s X

PAGE 377

356 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 627 S120/W94 South Trash L3 No Photo s (D) x 1/16 (H) None N=3 brass eyelets; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnostic X 630 S120/W94 South Trash L4 #103111 x 3/16 None N=9 brass eyelets, including 3 hooked; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnostic X 640 S120/W94 South Trash L5 No Photo s x 3/16 None N=1 brass hooked eyelet; possibly related to the lacing of shoes or corsets. Non diagnostic X 640 S120/W94 South Trash L5 #125130 1 1/8 x None N=1 steel safety pin. Post 1849 N/A 654 S120/W94 South Trash L5 #922 1 (D) CHE and V N=3 clear glass early Vaseline bottle fin ish/body/bas e fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled patent finish. 18721910s X 655 S120/W94 South Trash L5 No Photo s 7/8 (L) x 1/4 1/2 (W) None N=1 steel safety pin fragment distal portion (hinged). Post 1849 N/A 655 S120/W94 South Trash L5 #235238 11/16 (D) x # (W) None N=1 wood 4 hole button with iron or steel shank. Non diagnostic X 663 S120/W94 South Trash L5 No Photo None None N=1 ceramic dog figurine (nearly complete), white and black painted with red and blue detail. Undeterm ined X

PAGE 378

357 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 676 S120/W94 South Trash L7 #945 None None N=1 solarized clear glass bottle body fragment, horizontal ribbing; possible condiment bottle. Post 1870s N/A 676 S120/W94 South Trash L7 #945 None None N=1 solarized clear glass bottle finish fragment, patent finish; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A 676 S120/W94 South Trash L7 #945 None None N=1 yellow glass bottle finish fragment, mouth blown, tooled patent finish; unknown function. 1870s 1890s N/A 676 S120/W94 South Trash L7 #946948 None 8846 N=2 aqua glass union oval bottle body and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold; possible liquor or medicinal bottle. 1850s 1910s X 676 S120/W94 South Trash L7 #949 None CHERRY N=1 aqua glass bottle body fragment; likely side panel from an Ayers Cherry P ectoral bottle (Lowell, Massachusetts, 18411948); patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle. Pre 1920 X 681 S120/W84 House Foundation s L7 #3134 2 5/8 x 1 # None N=1 fragment brown transferware plate rim. Undeterm ined X

PAGE 379

358 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 693 S120/W94 South Trash L9 No Photo 4 1/3 (D) WFM and MASONS PATENT NOV 30TH 1858 N=5 green glass Mason jar/bottle (complete) fragments, mouth blown, post bottom mold. 1870s 1910s N/A 712 S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 #256260 5/8 (D) None N=1 iron or steel 2hole button. Non diagnostic X 712 S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 #256260 9/16 (D) None N=1 iron or steel 4hole button. Non diagnostic X 716 S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 #280283 # (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 4hole button. Non diagnostic X 805 814 817 822 S122/W84 House Foundatio n s L2/L3 No Photo 6 (D) x (Depth) W.H. GRINDLEY & CO.: TUNSTALL 1/Rd F 16 SPRING and 14 N=1 blue floral transferware saucer. 18911904 X 806 S122/W84 House Foundation s L2 No Photo None None N=1 ornamental brass hinge. Undeterm ined X 816 1407 S122/W84 House Foundation s S122/W86 House Foundation s L0 L2 No Photo 2 x 2 LAUGHLIN N=2 undecorated whiteware fragments. Ca. 1900 X 919 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L4 #8490 1 3/16 x PARIS CC SOLIDE B 6x5 N=1 brass suspender clip or wai stcoat buckle. Late 19th/Early 20th Century (Meredith 2008) X

PAGE 380

359 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 936 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #981 None None N=2 yellow glass bottle body and neck/finish fragments, machine made, continuous external thread finish, incised geometric and incised/frosted floral design on shoulder and neck; possible sauce/condimen t bottle. 19121950s N/A 938 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #985987 1 1/5 x 2 2/5 x 3 2/5 (D) None N=1 clear glass oval bottle, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, embossed diamond patt ern on base; unknown function. 1850s 1910s N/A 941 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L1 No Photo s None None N=11 aqua glass horizontally ribbed condiment bottle finish, neck, and body fragments, machine made, double ring finish. 1910s 1920 N/A 941 S90/ W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 No Photo s None B N=15 yellow glass bottle body and finish fragments, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 19121920s N/A

PAGE 381

360 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 948 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L9 #982 None None N=1 aqua glass bottle body and base fragment, cup bottom mold; unknown function. 1850s 1920 N/A 948 S90/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L9 No Photo s None L 8 N=6 clear glass bottle finish and base fragments, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1920s X 1001 1006 South Trash Surface/L 1 No Photo 2 x 1 M & CO. and MENTONE N=1 brown floral transferware saucer. Pre 1890 X 1001 1006 South Trash Surface/L 1 No Photo 2 # (W at base) 4 (W at mouth) 1 (Depth) ROYAL N=1 undecorated whiteware fragment, unidentified vessel. Post 1891 X 1001 1006 1029 1032 South Trash L4/L5 No Photo 9 # (H) X 7 (D) J. & G. MEAKIN C and IRONSIDE CHINA N=1 undecorated whiteware pitcher. Ca. 1890 X 1002 S118/W94 South Trash L0 #197200 2 7/8 x 2 1/16 [with M sideways and at tached at top] xvi N=1 amethyst glass bottle body and shoulder fragment, square, rectangular, or oval druggist bottle with a plate mark panel and rounded shoulder and edges; embossed post 1900 druggist capacity mark, likely mouth blown. 19001915 X

PAGE 382

361 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1002 S118/W94 South Trash L0 #197200 3 x 2 # IV N=1 aqua glass base fragment, post bottom mold, mouth blown or early machine made; possible medicinal bottle. 1840s 1900 X 1008 S118/W94 South Trash L1 #9197 1 1/8 x 1 None N=1 iron buckle. Non diagnostic N/A 1008 S118/W94 South Trash L1 No Photo None None N=1 brass suspender clip. Non diagnostic X 1009 Unknown L1 #288291 # (D) None N=1 beige celluloid button or snap with unidentified attachment. Non diagnostic X 1010 S118/W94 South Trash L1 #284287 # (D) None N=1 pewter 4 hole button with stippled inner rim design motif. Undeterm ined X 1011 1041 S118/W94 South Trash L2 #225228 # x 1 1/8 None N=1 black and brown celluloid comb fragment. Non diagnostic X 1015 S118/W94 House Foundation s L2 No Photo AU N=1 undecorated whiteware cup. Ca. 1900 X 1016 S118/W94 South Trash L2 #229234 5/8 (D) None N=1 iron 4 hole button. Non diagnostic X 1016 S118/W94 South Trash L2 #229234 7/16 (D) None N=1 white celluloid 4 hole button. Non diagnostic X 1016 S118 /W94 South Trash L2 #229234 5/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell button. Non diagnostic X 1017 South Trash L3 No Photo None C.T. N=1 undecorated whiteware fragment, unidentified vessel. 18901900 X 1021 S118/W94 South Trash L3 #159173 2 x 2 x 1 (W) Non e N=1 iron strap; possible trunk part. Non diagnostic N/A

PAGE 383

362 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1022 S118/W94 House Foundation s L3 No Photo None None N=1 silver plated flatware handle fragment. Undeterm ined X 1022 S118/W94 South Trash L3 No Photo None None N=1 knife with composite wood and m etal handle. Non diagnostic X 1024 S118/W94 South Trash L4 No Photo None None N=1 brass suspender clip. Non diagnostic X 1033 1037 S118/W94 South Trash L5 No Photo 7 (H) x 6 (D) See Description N=1 stoneware vessel with transfer printing: VANITY FAIR. HIGHEST AWARD, VIENNA, 1873. DOES NOT BITE THE TONGUE. ROCHESTER N.Y. Wm. S. KIMBALL & CO. and N.Y. 1864 & 1874. VIENNA, 1873. PHILADA, 1876. PARIS, 1878. SIDNEY, 1879. MELBOURN, 1880. ADELAIDE, 1881. CINCINNATI, 1882. NEW ZEALAND, 1882. AMSTERDAM 1883. 17 FIRST PRIZE MEDALS. Post 1883 N/A

PAGE 384

363 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1034 S118/W94 House Foundation s L5 No Photo (H) None N=1 ornamental metal star with a hole in the center; unknown function. Undeterm ined X 1034 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #885886 4 (H) x 9/16 (W) None N=1 unidenti fied iron artifact; possible hairpin. Non diagnostic X 1035 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #174189 3 7/16 (H) x 1 (W) x 7/8 (D of outer rim) x 1 (Depth); 1 (finish H); 3/8 (inner D) None N=1 complete yellow glass square bottle, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, too led prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 19001910s X 1035 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #190196 3 13/16 (H) x 2 (W) AYERS N=2 solarized aqua glass bottle body and shoulder fragments (MNI=1), likely from a square mouth blown bottle with a plate mark panel with embossing below rounded shoulder; patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle. 1850s 1910s X 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #251255 7/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 2hole button. Non diagnostic X 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #251255 7/16 (D) None N= 1 gray shell 4hole button. Non diagnostic X

PAGE 385

364 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #251255 # (D) None N=1 brass and iron or steel button (unidentified # holes, but likely 4hole). Non diagnostic X 1038 S118/W94 South Trash L5 #251255 5/16 (D) None N=1 gray shel l 4hole button. Non diagnostic X 1108 S120/W92 House Foundation s L2 #239244 5/8 (D) None N=1 iron 4 hole button. Non diagnostic X 1205 S82/W98 Well L2 #145152 5/8 x 5/8 None N=1 iron buckle. Non diagnostic N/A 1214 S82/W98 Well L3 #201207 x 5/16 N one N=1 black glass 2hole bead (sideways D shaped). Non diagnostic X 1214 S82/W98 Well L3 #201207 7/16 (D) None N=1 gray shell 2hole partial button. Non diagnostic X 1242 S82/W98 Well L7, F3 No Photo s None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, wide patent finish; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A 1250 S82/W98 Well L8 #910 None NSOL N=1 milk glass fragment, likely a partial liner from a tin mason jar screw cap; embossing suggests manufacture by the Consolidated Fruit Jar Company. 18711908 N/A 1250 S82/W98 Well L8 #909 None None N=1 aqua glass bottle finish/neck fragment, machine made, bead finish; unknown function. 1910s 1920 N/A

PAGE 386

365 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1416 S122/W86 House Foundation s L3 #119124 7 # (D) x 2 (H) None N=1 reconstructed terra cotta pot or bowl with a brown and black salt glazed interior. Non diagnostic X 1511 S124/W86 House Foundation s L2 No Photo None SYRUP OF FIGS and CALIFORNIA FIG SYRUP CO. SAN FRANCISCO, CAL N=10 clear glass bottle body and base fragments, cup bottom mold; patent/proprieta ry medicinal bottle. Post 1878 X 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 #299303 11/16 (D) None N=1 iron 2 hole button. Non diagnostic X 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 #299303 11/16 (D) None N=1 iron 4 hole button. Non diagnostic X 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 #299303 9/16 (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 2hole button. Non diagnostic X 1518 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 #299303 5/8 (D) LATEST NOVELTY N=1 riveted brass and iron or steel button stamped with Latest Novelty and stars with stipple d rim. Undeterm ined X 1523 S124/W86 House Foundation s L3 No Photo 1 1/16 (D) None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, patent finish; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A 1708 S80/W98 Well L2 #319325 # (D) x 3/16 (W) None N=1 brass snap with sunrise design motif. Undeterm ined X 1712 S80/W98 Well L3, F3 No Photo s None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, wide patent; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A

PAGE 387

366 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1722 S80/W98 Well L5, F3 No Photo s None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, wide patent; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A 1737 S80/W98 Well L7 #950 None C257 N=1 aqua glass bottle base fragment, possible valve/ejection mark indicates may be machine made; unknown function. 1910s 1920 N/A 1779 S80/W98 Well L14, F3 #310313 # (D) None N=1 shell 4hole button with white paint. Non diagnostic X 1810 S120/W96 South Trash L3 No Photo None None N=1 metal hairpin. Non diagnostic X 1811 S120/W96 South Trash L3 #381385 Frosted Fragments: 1 7/16 x 1 1 1/16 x 13/16 1 3/16 x 5/8 1 1/16 x 7/8 1 3/16 x None frosted heart design N=12 solarized amethyst frosted glass vessel fragments with a heart design motif (only fragments with frosted design motif apparent were measured N=5), indented patterned line observed on two fragments; possible oil lampshade fragments. 1860s 1915 X

PAGE 388

367 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1815 S120/W96 South Trash L4 #397413 6 5/8 (H) x 5 (D at base) 2 (D at top) None N=1 amber pressed glass fragment, roughly conical in shape, diamond pattern; possibly a pedestal type column/stem and base of an oil lamp. Undet erm ined X 1822 S120/W96 South Trash Unknown No Photo s Same as 1811 (no measuremen ts taken) None frosted heart design N=12 solarized amethyst frosted glass vessel fragments with a heart design motif; possible oil lampshade fragments. 1860s 1915 X 1822 S 120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 #100 61007 4 4/5 (H) None N=2 clear glass oval medicine bottle finish/neck/sho ulder/body/base and base fragments (nearly complete) with a defined crescent shaped shoulder, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s X

PAGE 389

368 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 #100 5 2 # (W) x 1 5/8 (Depth) WT & CO. S&W and STEINHAUER & WALBRANCH PHARMACIST S DENVER, COLO N=3 clear glass oval bottle (complete) fragments with a plate mark panel and r ounded shoulder, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled prescription finish; druggist/prescri ption bottle (manufactured by Whitall Tatum & Company for local pharmacy). 1870s 1890 (Lockhart et al. 2006:34) X 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 No Photo 1 5/8 ( D finish) 2 (D base) None N=8 aqua glass bottle finish/body/bas e fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, applied wide mouth patent finish; possible pickled/preserv ed food bottle. Ca. 1890s N/A 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 No Photo (D) None N=1 ye llow glass bottle finish fragment, machine made, continuous external thread finish; unknown function. Post 1912 N/A 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 No Photo 2 (D) None N=1 clear glass oval bottle base fragment, cup bottom mold; unknown function. Post -1 850 N/A

PAGE 390

369 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 #983984 1 1/5 (D) WICHERTS N=4 yellow glass bottle fragments (complete bottle), mouth blown, post bottom mold, tooled patent finish, embossed shield; likely condiment (mustard) bottle. 1880s 1900s N/A 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 #989992 4/5 (D finish) 2 (D base) ENOSBURGH FALLS VT, I, and SPAVIN CURE KENDALL N=8 amber glass polygon bottle fragments (complete bottle), mouth blown, post bottom mold, applied patent finish; embossing on base and upper rim of sho ulder; equine and human patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle. 1870s 1880s N/A 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 #993995 6 7/10 x 2 x 1 3/5 (D) Oval with a horizontal line N=3 yellow glass rectangular bottle fragments (complete bottle), mouth blown, cupbottom mold, tooled patent finish; possible pickled/preserv ed food bottle. 19001915 N/A

PAGE 391

370 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 #100 11002 3 # (D) X and TO BE WASHED AND RETURNED N=3 clear glass bottle body and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold; likely a mi lk bottle. 1880s 1910s N/A 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 No Photo s None CHESEBROU GH N=5 clear glass Vaseline bottle finish, body, and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, patent finish. 18721910s X 1822 S120/W96 South Trash L5 #100 91010 2 (W) x 2 (D) None N=1 clear glass beveled square bottle neck/shoulder/b ody/base fragment, mouth blown, possible cup bottom mold; possibly a medicinal bottle. 1850s 1910s X 1831 S120/W96 South Trash L5 No Photo None None N=5 spoons from a matching set. Undeter m ined X 1835 S120/W96 South Trash L5 No Photo None None N=1 brown transferware teapot. Undeterm ined X 1836 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 #386390 2 5/16 x 2 5/16 x 1 1/8 2 # x 1 13/16 x 1 1/8 2 x 1 # x 1 3/8 1 7/16 x 13/16 1 x None N=6 amethyst glass fragments of an oval shaped bottle base and body (MNI=1), vertical ridged pattern on body, cupbottom mold; possible condiment bottle. 1850s 1915 N/A

PAGE 392

371 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1836 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 No Photo None None N=1 yellow glass bottle finish fragment, patent fini sh; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A 1836 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 No Photo 1 3/16 (D) None N=1 yellow glass bottle finish fragment, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1920s X 1839 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 #1927 9 (D) G.W. TURNE R & SONS PHILEAU and TUNSTALL N=3 fragments brown transferware plate rim and base. Pre 1890 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) X 1843 S120/W96 South Trash L5, F4 #304309 7/16 (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 2hole button. Non diagnostic X 1845 S120/W96 South Tras h L6 No Photo None 847 ROGERS BROS. A N=1 silver plated spoon handle. Post 1847 X 1851 S120/W96 South Trash L6 #326329 # (D) None N=1 mother of pearl 4hole button. Non diagnostic X 1854 S120/W96 South Trash L7, F4 No Photo None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, patent finish; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A 1855 S120/W96 South Trash L7 #153158 1 7/16 x 1 None N=1 fragment of black fabric with scalloped edge; unknown function. Non diagnostic X 1860 S120/W96 South Trash L8 #920921 1 1/10 (H) x 1/5 (W) None N=1 black celluloid comb fragment, tooth. Non diagnostic X

PAGE 393

372 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1864 Unknown Unknown #391396 4 7/8 (H) x 4 7/8 (D) 1 # 1 (D at top) None N=1 amethyst pressed glass fragment, roughly conical in shape, vertical ridged pattern; possibly a pedestal type column/stem and base of an oil lamp. Pre 1915 X 1869 S120/W94 South Trash Unknown No Photo None None N=1 metal enamelware teapot. Non diagnostic X 1903 S118/W95 South Trash L1 #414419 1 (L) x 3/8 1 (W) x # (D) x (thickness) None N= 1 yellow glass bottle stopper, finial circular in shape with circular indentation or depression on both faces, ground shank; possibly from a liquor or cologne/perfum e bottle. 19001920 X 1903 S118/W95 South Trash L1 #996, 9981000 1 4/5 x 1 1/5 NCS N=3 clear glass bottle body and finish fragments, mouth blown, applied patent finish; unknown function. 18501890s N/A

PAGE 394

373 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1903 S118/W95 South Trash L1 #100 31004 1 3/10 (D) W.T.&CO N=2 clear glass bottle finish, shoulder, body, and base fragments, sprinkler to p finish; unusual shape round, tapered, with a distinctive shoulder and horizontal ridge on the body near the base, likely machine made; possible tonic or fragrance bottle. 1920s 1935 (Toulouse 1971) N/A 1908 S118/W95 South Trash L2, F4 #6978 4 (D) x 1 (H) Handle 1 # x None N=1 partial whiteware lid with handle and gold leaf embellishment in flower design, scalloped rim. Undeterm ined X 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 #355363 2 (L) x 1 (W at top) x # (W at bottom and neck) x (W at top of lower sto pper) None N=1 yellow glass bottle stopper, crystal shaped with incised squiggle design on all faces of the finial, ground shank; possibly from liquor or cologne/perfum e bottle. 19001920 X 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 #968969 None CH N=5 clear glass bottle body and base fragments; possible Vaseline bottle. Post 1872 X

PAGE 395

374 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 #960966 2 9/10 x 1 CH MFG N=13 yellow glass bottle body, shoulder, base, and finish fragments (MNI=1), mouth blown, cup bottom mold, applied patent fini sh; possible medicinal bottle. 1890s 1910s X 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 #970 None None N=1 aqua glass bottle finish, neck, and shoulder fragment, mouth blown, applied oil finish; possible liquor bottle. 18301890s X 1911 S118/W95 South Trash L2 #971 N one None N=2 aqua glass horizontally ribbed condiment bottle finish, neck, and body fragments, machine made, double ring finish. 1910s 1920 N/A 1913 S118/W95 South Trash L2, F4 #974 None EBROU and ASE N=1 clear glass Vaseline bottle body fragment. Pos t1872 X 1915 S118/W95 South Trash L2, F4 #925928 None PATD K. HUTTER FEB. 7, 1893 and CITY BOTTLING CO. DENVER, COLO. 1537 PLATTE ST. N=1 refined whiteware, iron, and rubber lightning type bottle stopper; possibly from a carbonated beverage bottle (possibly beer). 18931920s X 1920 S118/W95 South Trash L3, F4 #330333 9/16 (D) None N=1 copper or brass button with copper shank and iron or steel face (corroded). Non diagnostic X

PAGE 396

375 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 2000 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #216224 1 x 1 None N= 1 iron buckle. Non diagnostic N/A 2002 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 #6068 2 # x 2 1/8 ROYAL IRONSTONE CHINA WARRANTED N=1 fragment whiteware base of unidentified vessel. Post 1890 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) X 2002 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Ce llar L7 No Photo None WHEELING POTTERY COMPANY N=1 undecorated whiteware fragment, unidentified vessel. 18801886 X 2021 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L8 No Photo s 2/5 (D) None N=4 clear glass bottle finish and base fragments (MNI=3), cup bottom mold, patent finish; likely homeopathy bottles. 1870s 1930s X 2032 Unknown Unknown #344354 #955956 5/8 (D) x 2 (L) 5/8 (D) x 3/4 (L) 5/8 (D) x 7/8 (L) 5/8 (D) x 1 3/16 (L) Opening 9/16 outer x 3/8 interior None MNI=4 clear glass homeopathy bottles with t ooled prescription finishes, mouth blown. 1870s 1930s X 2032 Unknown L8 No Photo s None PATD JUNE 9 1891 J HEINZ N=2 clear glass polygon condiment bottle body and base fragments, mouth blown, cup bottom mold; possible condiment bottle. 18911910s N/A

PAGE 397

376 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC 2039 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L8 #364373 2 (D) x 2 (L); 13/16 (interior D); (thickness) None N=1 amethyst pressed glass doorknob with a cracked off, ground rim, octagonal pattern with depressions on facets. Pre 1915 X 2045 S92/W104 Dugout Ki tchen/Ro ot Cellar L9 #374380 5/8 (D) x 2 (L) Opening 9/16 outer x 3/8 interior None N=4 clear glass homeopathy bottles with tooled prescription finishes, mouth blown. 1870s 1930s X 2055 S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar Unknown #334343 11 # x 11 # Non e N=1 unidentified zinc or aluminum hexagonal artifact with raised crosshatched edging and molded floral accents; possible serving or gallery tray. Undeterm ined X 2101 S120/W94 South Trash L10, F4 #314318 7/16 (D) None N=1 gray ceramic 2 hole button. No ndiagnostic X 2102 S120/W94 South Trash L10, F4 #5259 6 1/8 x 4 # GRIND EV & [] and 105 N=1 fragment brown transferware bowl rim and base. 18911914 (Kovel and Kovel 1986) X Unkno wn S82/W100 North Trash L1 #919 None PUR/ANE N=1 clear glass bott le body fragment; possible syrup/condimen t bottle (PURE CANE as in pure cane sugar syrup?). Undeterm ined N/A

PAGE 398

377 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC Unkno wn S82/W100 North Trash L2 #916 None OIL N=1 aqua glass square or rectangular bottle body fragment; possibly a sauce/condimen t bottle (salad dressing or vegetable oil?). Pre 1920 N/A Unkno wn S82/W100 North Trash L3 #918 None None N=2 aqua glass bottle finish/neck/sho ulder and body fragments, mouth blown, tooled patent finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s X Unkno wn S82/W100 North Trash L5 No Photo None C N=1 patinated clear glass ink bottle base fragment, oval or rectangular. Undeterm ined N/A Unkno wn S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L6 #977978 1 (D) T TAKEN EX:T DOSE N=1 cobalt glass bottle finish/neck/sho ulder fragment, machine made, oil finish; gap with a rubber ring and a glass collar below finish; possible patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle (John Wyeth & Bro, potassium bicarbonate?). 1910s 1920s N/A Unkno wn S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L7 No Photo s 1 4/5 (D) None N=1 frosted aqua glass bottle patent finish fragment; unknown function. 18501920 N/A

PAGE 399

378 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC Unkno wn S92/W104 Dugout Kitchen/Ro ot Cellar L8 No Photo s None None N=1 clear glass bottle patent finish fragment; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A Unkno wn S92/W102 S94/W102 Kitchen Area Unknown No Photo 9 (D) None N=1 enamelware plate. Non diagnostic X Unkno wn S118/W94 South Trash L4 #936 None CTORAL N=1 aqua glass bottle body fragment with a n embossed plate mark panel; likely side panel from an Ayers Cherry Pectoral bottle (Lowell, Massachusetts, 18411948); patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle. Pre 1920 X Unkno wn S118/W94 South Trash L4 #937 11/16 (D) None N=4 aqua glass bottle base fragments, cupbottom mold; unknown function. 1850s 1920 N/A Unkno wn S118/W94 South Trash L5 #935 3 # (H) x 1 1/16 (W) x 7/8 (D) None N=1 complete clear glass square bottle with arched shoulders, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, tooled prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1910s X Unkno wn S120/W88 House Foundation s L2 No Photo None None N=3 black floral transferware fragments. Undeterm ined X

PAGE 400

379 Table 15. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Wells Homestead (5AH916) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC Unkno wn S120/W92 House Foundation s L1 No Photo s None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, patent fini sh; unknown function. Post 1850 N/A Unkno wn S120/W94 South Trash L4 No Photo None None N=1 clear glass bottle finish fragment, prescription finish; possible medicinal bottle. 1870s 1920s X Unkno wn S120/W94 South Trash L5 #923 15/16 (D) None N=1 aqua glas s bottle finish fragment, machine made, patent finish; unknown function. 1910s 1920s N/A Unkno wn S120/W94 South Trash L5 #924 None PE N=1 aqua glass bottle body fragment; likely side panel from an Ayers Cherry Pectoral bottle (Lowell, Massachusetts, 18411948); patent/proprieta ry medicine bottle. Pre 1920 X

PAGE 401

380 APPENDIX E TOTAL ARTIFACT ANALYSIS SORT HORNBEK HOMESTEAD (5TL4) Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A House N/A #258, 260269, 272278 Hinges: 3 # x 3 # Pin: 5 # (L) None N=2 steeple top door hinges, cast iron with vine pattern (Eastlake) and white paint; six screw holes in each hinge; one hinge has a pin (manufact ured by P. & F. Corbin, New Britain, CT). 18681902 (Universit y of Connectic ut 2003) X N/A House N/A #237257 2 (D) x (H) Compressee Poudre Truvy N=1 complete sterling silver, hinged powder compact with traces of red paint on lid, engraved lettering a nd floral motif on lid. Ca. 1920s N/A N/A House N/A #259260, 270271 Latch: 3/5 (L) Straps: 1 2/5 (L) x 7/10 (W) None N=1 brass sliding latch with two straps. Non diagnostic N/A N/A House (upper level) N/A #144157, 174179 Approx. 7 (L) x 6 (W) x 1 ( H) None N=1 complete quilted heart shaped cushion with embroidering, including 903 on back. Ca. 1903 X N/A House (upper level) N/A #130143 Approx. 11 (D) x 7 (H) None N=1 complete brown felt hat with G*H embroidered on rim. Non diagnostic X

PAGE 402

381 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Hou se (underneat h kitchen floor) N/A #113129 3 1/5 (L) x 3 1/5 (W) x 10 4/5 (H) None N=1 complete aqua glass square pickle bottle, mouth blown, post bottom mold, applied wide bead finish. 18801895 N/A N/A House (addition) N/A #180199 7 x 2 3/10 None N= 1 iron wagon hook with associated shackle, including one round head pin and one squarehead pin. Non diagnostic N/A N/A House (addition) N/A #200206 12 3/10 x 2/5 None N=1 complete iron square spike. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Root Cellar N/A #215224 6 x 1 1/5 WM. A. ROGERS NICKEL SILVER N=1 complete nickel silver spoon, Brighton 1900 pattern. Post 1890s X N/A Root Cellar N/A #225236 3 3/5 (L) x 3/5 (W) x 2/5 (H) None N=1 complete fourtine pewter fork with riveted wood handle. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Root Cellar N/A #207214 5 1/10 x 1 3/5 None N=1 complete steel awl with a black painted wood handle. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Yard N/A #160173 3 x 1 7/50 None N=1 fragment of a mother of pearl handle, incised floral motif, possible letter opener or other small accessory, such as a nail file, pen knife, or button hook. Undeterm ined X

PAGE 403

382 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #821824 6 4/5 x 2 9/10 x 2/5 None N=1 shoe fragment with rubber outsole and fabric insole, small few iron or steel staples attaching insole to outsole, flat/no heel, minor left/right differentiation, turned manufacture process; possibly a ladys slipper (evening or boudoir). 18301870 X N/A Grounds General N/A #765770 2 9/10 x 2 3/5 x 2/5 3 N=1 blue glass bottle base fragment, mouth blown, possibly a three piece mold, with a blowpipe pontil scar; unknown function. 1830s 1908 N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #810816 4 1/5 x 2 x 4/5 None N=1 blue glass bottle base fragment, mouth blown, cup bottom mold, possible glass tipped pontil scar; unknown function. 1850s 1910s N/A

PAGE 404

383 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #797804 3 (H) x 3 # (W at top) x 2 9/10 (W at base) None N=1 amethyst pressed glass vessel base and body fragment, pedestal foot, crosshatched circle and crescent moon pattern (resembles pineapple s), likely Early American Pressed Glass (EAPG); possible pitcher. 1860s 1910 X N/A Grounds General N/A #805809 4 x 2 x 2 1/5 None N=1 amethyst glass handle, crosshatched circle and crescent moon pattern (resembles pineapples), likely Early Americ an Pressed Glass (EAPG); possible pitcher handle. 1860s 1910 X

PAGE 405

384 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #833840 Shoe: 7 x 3 x 2 3/5 Nails: 3/10 (D) Grommet: 3/10 (D), 1/10 (D) None N=1 leather shoe, front laced, closed tab, round toe, gypsy seam, leather vamp, leather upper with brass shoe lace grommets (six pairs of lace holes), unidentified insole and lining material (inaccessible), rubber outsole and stacked leather and rubber heel with small, round stainless steel nails apparent, in addition to one larger iron o r steel tack near the insole arch of the foot and hobnails on the ball of the outsole, minor left/right differentiation. Thin organic twine, possibly cotton, observed unraveling from exterior of stacked heel. Nailed/pegged manufacture process. Not gender specific, possible gym/athletic or walking shoe. 1860s 1930s X

PAGE 406

385 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #721722 1 1/2 x 1 x 1/5 None N=1 milk glass fragment; likely a liner fragment from a tin mason jar screw cap. Post 1869 N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #712717, 785 1 7/10 x 1 1/10 x 1/4 None N=1 amethyst glass bottle finish and neck fragment with tooled patent finish; unknown function. 1870s 1915 N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #825826 Shoe: 4 3/10 x 2 7/10 x 3/10 Nails: (D) None N=1 shoe fragment with rubber outso le fragment, narrow oval toe, round iron or steel hobnails protruding from bottom cleat like, one small stainless steel nail in center of base from possible repair, unknown method of manufacture; possible a ladys work boot or walking shoe. 18801930s X N/A Grounds General N/A #718720, 727 1 9/10 x 1 1/10 x 1/5 None N=1 amethyst glass bottle finish and neck fragment with tooled crown finish; likely soda bottle. 18921915 N/A

PAGE 407

386 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #707711 3 3/4 x 2 9/10 x 2 1.4 Lid: 2 4/5 (D) G ENUINE BOYD CAP FOR MASON JARS embossed on milk glass cap liner N=1 aqua glass bead seal mason jar fragment, machine made with a wide mouth continuous external thread finish; closure/lid is a zinc screw cap with a milk glass liner and a rubber gasket seal Post 1910 N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #780784 Body: 2 9/10 x 1 4/5 x 1 1/5 Neck: 1 (D) None N=1 clear glass oval bottle, machine made, small mouth continuous external thread finish, parison mold lines on base; possible condiment bottle. Post 1910s N/ A N/A Grounds General N/A #771779 Body: 3 1/5 (H) x 2 2/5 (D) Neck: 1 9/10 (D) TRADE MARK VASELINE CHESEBROUG H NEW YORK N=1 yellow glass Vaseline bottle, machine made, wide mouth continuous external thread finish, suction scar characteristic of early Owens Automatic Bottle Machines. Post 1912 N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #728730 1 x 9/10 x 1/10 JOHNSOEN G N=1 semi vitreous whiteware ceramic fragment; unidentified vessel. Post 1913 (Godden 1988) N/A

PAGE 408

387 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #787796 Body: 2 ( H) x 1 2/5 (D) Neck: 2/5 (D) N=1 clear glass conical bottle, machine made, sprinkler top finish, embossing and parison mold lines on base; possible tonic or fragrance bottle. Post 1920s N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #827832 9 3/5 x 4 x 1 9/10 None N= 1 leather shoe, fragmentary, leather vamp/upper, fabric insole and lining, rubber outsole and heel with some stippled tread apparent, minor left/right differentiation, oval shaped toe, spring heel, turned manufacture process; possibly a slipper or house sh oe. Pre 1930s X N/A Grounds General N/A #723726 2 3/5 x 1 7/10 x 1/4 None N=1 purple opaque milk glass plate fragment, embossed floral pattern and scalloped rim; manufactured by the Jeannette Glass Company, Cherry Blossom pattern in blue delphite color 19301939 N/A

PAGE 409

388 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #739751 1 9/10 (H) x 3 3/5 x 1 4/5 ONE PINT R72 S/A5 Keystone shaped makers mark with a K N=1 clear glass oval bottle body and base fragment, machine made with a parison mold seam, embossed with measurement at base of body and keystoneshaped makers mark and other lettering on base; possible liquor or medicinal bottle manufactured by Knox Glass Bottle Company. 19321968 (Lockhart 2008) N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #731738 1 1/2 x 4/5 x 1 9/10 None N= 1 green glass bottle body and base fragment, machine made with cross hatched stippling on the base; likely soda bottle. Post 1940 N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #758760 9/10 x 1/5 HOWARD N=1 button or snap face, possibly nickel silver or pewter with sti ppling. Undeterm ined N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #858864 1 4/5 (L) x 9/10 to 1 (W) x 1/25 (T) None N=1 small, hollow brass cylindrical knob with decorative banded embossing and extant wood core fragment. Undeterm ined N/A

PAGE 410

389 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A N /A Not Measured None N=2 green glass bottle body fragments; unknown function. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A N/A Not Measured None N=1 clear glass jar body fragment. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A N/A Not Measured None N=1 whi teware ceramic fragment. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A N/A Not Measured None N=1 clear glass fragment. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A N/A Not Measured None N=3 light tan brown stoneware crockery fragments. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A N/A Not Measured None N=2 light tan yellow stoneware crockery fragments. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A N/A Not Measured None N=7 light brown stoneware crockery fragments. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #752757 5 1/2 x 2 4/5 x 2 7/10 Handle: 1 x 7/10 Cork: 1 1/10 x 1 4/5 None N=1 crockery jar neck and handle with cork plug. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #761762 3/4 x 1/5 None N=1 white ceramic fourhole button. Non diagnostic N/A N/ A Grounds General N/A #763764 9/10 x 1/5 None N=1 two hole mother of pearl button. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #817820 8 7/10 x None N=1 tin plate. Non diagnostic N/A

PAGE 411

390 Table 16. Total Artifact Analysis Sort Hornbek Homestead (5TL4) FS# LOC EXC LEV FIG# MEAS/ INCHES MM/EMB DESCRIP DATE/ CA VICT GEND ASSOC N/A Grounds General N/A #841842 4 # x 2 1/10 to 7/10 x 3/10 N one N=1 miscellaneous leather fragment, double fold with stitching up length and across width; possible saddle part or fragment of a knife sheath. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #843850 Body: 7 3/5 x 3 to 1 # x 1 Hole: # (D) None N=1 misc ellaneous lead and iron object with spike and rounded end with a hole in the center; possible stake or anchor. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #851857 2 (L) x 9/10 to 1 (W) x 1/10 (T) None N=1 miscellaneous hollow cylindrical brass object wi th one closed end, and a lap side seam and small circular hole on one side; possible fitting. Non diagnostic N/A N/A Grounds General N/A #865871 1 # to 1 9/10 (L) x 7/10 to 4/5 (W) x 1/5 (T) None N=1 spherical brass knob, partially crushed. Non diagnos tic N/A