Course Hero - We put you ahead of the curve!

You have requested the below document.

Coursehero >> Texas >> Texas >> BRANDONJC 99738

By Copyright Jamie Chad Brandon 2004 The Dissertation Committee for Jamie Chad Brandon certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation Van Winkle's Mill: Mountain Modernity, Cultural Memory and Historical Archaeology in the Arkansas Ozarks Committee: ___________________________ Maria Franklin, Supervisor ___________________________ Samuel M. Wilson ___________________________ John Hartigan, Jr. ___________________________ Richard R. Flores ___________________________ George Sabo, III Van Winkle's Mill: Mountain Modernity, Cultural Memory and Historical Archaeology in the Arkansas Ozarks by Jamie Chad Brandon, B.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December, 2004 UMI Number: 3150548 Copyright 2004 by Brandon, Jamie Chad All rights reserved. UMI Microform 3150548 Copyright 2005 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 For T. J. Acknowledgements As with any research such as this there a number of people to thank. I would, of course, like to thank my committee--Drs. Maria Franklin, Samuel Wilson, John Hartigan, Richard Flores and George Sabo--for their support and tolerance. They have, in varying ways and in varying aspects, helped and encouraged me to complete this work. Maria Franklin and Sam Wilson, in particular, have supported me and my work throughout my career at the University of Texas. I could not have asked for better mentors. Thanks are also due to George Sabo for allowing his research station's resources to be used during the project, encouraging students from his historical archeology class to participate in the excavations, sponsoring the 2001 Van Winkle archaeological field school, and his never-failing support of my work and my professional development. I would like to the institutions and agencies that funded and supported the fieldwork. A portion of these investigations and this dissertation were made possible by a cost-share agreement between the Arkansas Archeological Survey, the Little Rock District of the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism. A great debt is owed certain individuals who negotiated this agreement and navigated the many pitfalls that occur any time multiple state and federal agencies engage in a joint endeavor. Christopher Davies, Dr. Thomas J. Green, Steve Chryrchel, Mark Clippinger, Dr. George Sabo, Dr. Robert C. Mainfort, Sean Harper and many others were all instrumental to the process. v Thanks to the Arkansas Archeological Survey (AAS) for the years that they have encouraged and supported me in my research. Dr. Robert Mainfort, Randall Guendling, Mary Kwas, Kathy Cande and many others have offered sage advice and support. I would like to acknowledge Jami Lockhart for conducting extensive geophysical explorations at Van Winkle's Mill on multiple occasions and Jared Pebworth and Mike Evans for their efforts at mapping and assisting with the archeo-geophysical investigations. Thanks also go to Dr. Patrick Martin of Michigan Technological University for participating in the Van Winkle's Mill cost-share project and offering his insightful advice on industrial archaeology. A large debt is owed to Jerry Hilliard, the station assistant at the UAF Station of the AAS, who elsewhere I have called "the guiding spirit" behind the Van Winkle's Mill project. Jerry not only introduced me and James Davidson to the Van Winkle's Mill archaeological project in 1997, he has always supported and actively aided the archaeological investigations. He has also keep James and I busy on a number of other "side projects" during our stints at the University of Arkansas and the University of Texas. He has also, incidentally, always been a true friend. Thanks to all those students, AAS employees and other volunteers who helped out during the various excavations 1997-2003: Ben Adams, Jenny Bales, Lorna Beard, Brynn Berry, Michelle Berg Vogel, Carrie Berryman, Robin Bowers, David Bowman, Mary Brennan, Queszarrah Bunch, Minnie Burford, William Chesser, Pritam Chowdhury, Edma Delgado, Robert Depper, Jason DeWitt, Clark Donat, Lela Donat, Carl Drexler, Donna Edgemon, Gregory Edgemon, Randall Guendling, Stacey Gustafson, vi David Humphrey, Cara Huwieler, Marilyn Johnson, Molly Kerr, Roula Khawam, Marian Kunetka, Melody Kinnard, Don Lee, Sam Littrell, Christy Longlois, Doyle Loughren, Shannon McElmurry, Robin McMullen, Amanda Melton, Kevin Miller, Pathe Miller, Michael "Buffalo" Morgan, Kim Newman, Michael O'Connell, Lydia Rees, Amy Reynolds, Jennifer Richardson, Allyssa Riley, Suika Rivett, Barbara Scott, George Stair, Heide Stair, Mark Still, Melissa Stroud, Will Taggert, Katherine Taylor, Maria Tavaszi, Edward Tennant, Chris Torantali, Alicia Underdown, Greg Vogel, Leslie Walker, Susan Wheatley and Deborah Weddle. My apologies to those who I have forgotten to include here. Thanks to my colleagues at the University of Texas at Austin: Kerri Barile, Whitney Battle, Peggy Brunache, Paula Sanders, Sean Maroney, John Schafer, Rissa Trachman, Mary Jo Galindo, Mindy Boninie, Chet Walker, Clay Schultz, Nesta Anderson, Nusrat Chowdhury, Jemima Pierre, Leighton Peterson, Keisha-Khan Perry, Scott Webel, Carmen "Apen" Ruiz, Dan Sharp, Galeet Dardashti, Ronda Brulotte, Brandt Peterson and many, many more who helped me, challenged me, encouraged me, critiqued me, and had more than a few beers with me. Thanks also to my colleagues (and some of my students) at the University of Arkansas: Greg Vogel, Michelle Berg Vogel, Edward Tennant, Mary Brennan, Leslie Walker, Brynn Berry, Robin Bowers, Bryan Renfro, Maria Tavaszi, Alicia Valentino, Carl Drexler, and many others. A debt is also owed to the authors of the two works which inspired my approach: Remembering the Alamo (Richard Flores) and Memories of Revolt (Ted Swedenburg). Their works have been both informative and inspiring. Additionally, I would like to vii thank the Hicks family (especially Marilyn Larner Hicks) and other Van Winkle descendants who have been also incredibly helpful and provided a wealth of information about the history of their families. I cannot begin to stress the debt I owe my family--Jerry and Jeanette Brandon, Arch and Mae Brandon, Dorris and Billie Deason, A.J. Brandon, and now Mike Hilton and Davis Brandon See--for their support and tolerance throughout my life. I would have never thought I could accomplish a project such as this if you hadn't been there, and I apologize for the long absences caused by my work on this project. I would definitely be remiss if I did not thank James M. Davidson who has literally been working with me on the Van Winkle's Mill project since "day one." It is really as much his project as it is mine. Aside from being one of the best research partners an archaeologist could ask for, he has been one of my best and closest friends. From our meeting in 1996, he has spurred me on to do more and better work. We have worked together on Van Winkle's Mill, Juliette Street in Dallas, Eagle Mountain Lake, the Peel House, Cross Hollows and countless other small research projects. I can only hope that our partnership will continue in some form well into the future. Finally, and most importantly, thanks to T. J. Vestal. There are not words for the support, love and understanding that she has given me throughout graduate school. For all of that, and much more, this dissertation is dedicated to her. viii Van Winkle's Mill: Mountain Modernity, Cultural Memory and Historical Archaeology in the Arkansas Ozarks Publication NO.______________ Jamie Chad Brandon, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2004 Supervisor: Maria Franklin The Arkansas Ozarks hold a particular place in our collective cultural memory. A place that is decidedly rural, anti-modern and white. This dissertation explores how these notions came to dominate our historical consciousness and uses the archaeological excavations carried out at Van Winkle's Mill (3BE413) between 1997 and 2003 as a platform to challenge and complicate our notions of the history of the Ozarks. Van Winkle's Mill was a thriving Northwest Arkansas sawmill community from the 1850s through the first decades of the twentieth century. The mill's founder, Peter Van Winkle, was a regionally important industrialist who identified with both the modern Victorian ideologies and those of the Confederate South. Enslaved labor made up a portion of the mill's labor force before the war, and several freedmen families continued to work at Van Winkle's Mill following emancipation. Topics covered by this dissertation include an analysis of the role of popular culture in the formation of cultural memory, a landscape analysis of the mill community, an examination of symbolic consumption by the mill's African-American workers and a critique of efforts to interpret the mill's history to popular audiences. ix Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Chapter 1: Introduction Introduction The Van Winkle Educational Program Synopsis Chapter 2 "A Frontier More South than West": A Historical Overview of the Arkansas Ozarks and Van Winkle's Mill Introduction Arkansas, the Ozarks, and Northwest Arkansas: An Explanation of Geography and Scale "Who Are These Ozark People?" Ethnicity and Immigration in the Trans-Upland South "Incongruous, Implausible and Unworthy of Examination": Slavery in Northwest Arkansas The Civil War in the Arkansas Ozarks: Ambivalent Rebellion and the Collapse of Ozark Society "Ozarks as Destination": The Postbellum Ozarks "We All `Jes Scattered, Somehow": African-American Life in Postbellum Northwest Arkansas Peter Van Winkle and Van Winkle's Mill Life Histories of the Mills and Laborers in Van Hollow Van Winkle's Mill into the Twentieth Century Chapter 3 "The Most Backward and Deliberately Unprogressive Region in the United States": Cultural Memory and the Arkansas Ozarks Introduction Cultural Memory Cultural Memory and the Ozarks Narrative Tropes and Ozarks: The Frontier, The Civil War and The Hillbilly Memory, Modernity and the Hillbilly The Shepherd of the Hills: Ozark Arcadian Master Narrative Construction of the Hillbilly Trope J. Vance Randolph, Ozark Folklore and Cultural Memory xiii xiv 1 6 9 12 13 17 20 31 37 42 52 61 72 78 79 84 86 92 96 109 121 x "There is No Melting Pot in These Mountains": The Ozark Hillbilly and Race Chapter 4 Archaeology, Cultural Memory and Van Winkle's Mill Introduction Archaeology and the Prehistoric Hillbilly Historical Archaeology and the Arkansas Ozarks The Archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill Excavations at the Home of Peter Van Winkle and Family 3BE652, The Mill's African-American Cemetery Feature 9: Mill Worker's Quarters Features 27 and 28: Trash Dumping Areas Feature 29: Vernon T. West's Portable Mill Location Features 31 & 30: The Blacksmith Shop Feature 32: Livestock Enclosure/Barn Feature 33: Possible Slave Quarters Excavations in the Van Winkle Mill Complex Other Features of Note Chapter 5 "Pines in Place of Magnolias": The Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill Introduction Archaeologies of Landscape Peter Van Winkle's Landscape Van Winkle's Mill and Settlement Patterns in the Regional Landscape The Plantation Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill Mapping Cultural Change in Van Hollow African-American Perceptions of the Van Winkle Landscape Cultural Memory and the Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill Chapter 6 "Independent But Not Isolated?": Consumerism, Racism and African-American Identity Introduction Modernity, Race, Consumption and Desire Archaeologies of Consumption Antebellum Artifact Assemblage: Feature 33 Postbellum Artifact Assemblage: Feature 9 Isolated and Independent: African-American Subjectivity, Consumerism and Identity at Van Winkle's Mill Feature 33: Antebellum Enslavement Feature 9: The Postbellum Marketplace Brick-a-Brac 129 138 139 141 146 153 155 158 163 166 167 177 180 183 190 195 198 199 202 203 208 216 218 225 227 231 232 224 235 237 242 242 xi Harmonica Fragments Toys Chapter 7 Engaging Cultural Memory and Presenting the Past to the Public at Van Winkle's Mill Introduction The Rogers Historical Museum and The Van Winkle Educational Program Student and Teacher Response to the Van Winkle Program A Better, Kinder Slavery? Student Responses to Industrial Slavery in the Ozarks Evaluation of the Van Winkle Program From the Wythe House to the Van Winkle House: Critical History and Cultural Memory Cultural Memory, Archaeology and Race in the Ozarks: Recommendations for the Van Winkle Program & State Park Interpreters Chapter 9 "When With Sighs We Seek to Find Thee": Conclusions and Summary Introduction Appendix A: Van Winkle Program Student Evaluations on Slavery Bibliography Vita 245 247 251 253 256 260 266 268 271 284 289 296 325 xii List of Tables Chapter2 2.1 African-American population in the Arkansas Ozarks, 1840-1970 (After Morgan 1973:62). 2.2 Enslaved persons listed in the 1860 US Census slave schedule for Peter Van Winkle. Mill related persons and families listed in the 1860 US Census. Mill related persons and families listed in the 1870 US Census. Mill related persons and families listed in the 1880 US Census. 44 62 65 66 67 2.3 2.4 2.5 Chapter 4 4.1 Historical archaeology projects conducted in the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks. 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 Cultural features identified in Van Hollow, 1999-2003. Artifacts recovered from Feature 27. Artifacts recovered from Feature 28. Artifacts recovered from Feature 31, general surface collection. Artifacts recovered from testing at Feature 31 (without nails). 142 149 164 165 168 169 xiii List of Figures Chapter1 1.1 Remaining stairway to the formal raised garden in Van Winkle's Mill, 2002. 1.2 Foundations for the flywheel at the site of the Van Winkle Mill complex, 1997. Students portraying historical figures at Van Winkle's Mill for the Rogers Historical Museum's open house, 2003. Standing left to right: Aaron Anderson Van Winkle, Peter Van Winkle, Temperance Van Winkle, Mary Van Winkle. Kneeling left to right: a confederate soldier and J. A. C. Blackburn. Student art project portraying Van Winkle's Mill. 3 3 1.3 7 7 1.4 Chapter 2 2.1 The Ozarks as geographic region (after Rafferty 2001:xiv). 2.2 2.3 2.4 Van Winkle project area showing surrounding towns. Van Winkle's Mill and Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area. Peter Van Winkle and family circa 1870. Clockwise from top: Norman, Temperance, Peter, Jr. (being held), Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Wallace (being held) and Peter Van Winkle (after Hicks 1990:14). The Van Winkle home, circa 1870 (after Hicks 1990:28). Raised gardens across from main house, circa 1970 (after Hicks 1990:28). The Van Winkle Hotel (also called the Van Winkle House) circa 1890 (after Hicks 1990:35). Van Winkle's Mill ca. 1870 (after Hicks 1990:26). Van Winkle family gathered on the front porch of the Steele home in Rogers, 1901. Temperance Van Winkle is sitting center (after Hicks 1990:104). 14 16 16 53 57 2.5 2.6 57 2.7 58 58 2.8 2.9 70 xiv 2.10 Detail of 1901 Van Winkle photograph showing Aaron Anderson Van Winkle standing in the shadows behind Temperance. This is the only known photograph of Aaron. "The Old South," a nostalgic composite photo of five freedmen who had been enslaved in northwest Arkansas. Sam Van Winkle is second from left. 70 2.11 71 Chapter 3 3.1 A Young Harold Bell Wright (after Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theater 2004). 3.2 Title card from the 1912 silent film version of The Shepherd of the Hills (after Chudleigh 2003). 1870 Currier and Ives print based on The Arkansas Traveller. "Barney Google and Snuffy Smith" Sunday page May 3, 1936 (after Inge 1994:101). "Old Ways are Best," the frontice piece from the first edition of J. Vance Randolph's The Ozarks: An Survival of Primitive Society (1931). Front view of the church and high school on Community Hill, the Presbyterian mission established in Kingston, Arkansas (after Burnett 2000:82). 97 97 111 3.3 3.4 111 3.5 128 3.6 128 Chapter 4 4.1 Map showing the features identified by the original 1997-1999 mapping and testing project at Van Winkle's Mill (after Brandon et al. 2000:16). 4.2 Survey area and features identified by the June 2000 systematic survey of the northern portion of Van Hollow (after Brandon and Davidson 2003:25). Plan map of main house excavation area (after Brandon et al. 2000:25). 150 152 154 4.3 xv 4.4 North profile of backhoe trench N487-488/W488 showing buried midden associated with the first Van Winkle house (Feature 24). Field stones marking probable slave cemetery 3BE652. 154 157 4.5 4.6 Extent of 1999 excavations at Feature 9 uncovering one chimney box and part of the foundation. Extent of 2000 excavations at Feature 9 uncovering the back foundation wall. Plan view of the entire excavated footprint of Feature 9, a postbellum mill worker's quarters. Artifacts recovered from Feature 27. a) alkaline-glazed stone ware; b) molded ironstone; c) ironstone base with maker's mark; d) hand-[painted whiteware; e) patent medicine bottle with hand-tooled lip; f) ceramic doll leg; g) mule shoe; h) hand-forged hook. Artifacts recovered from Feature 29. a) Albany-slipped stoneware; b) alkaline-glazed stoneware; c) automatic machine-made bottle neck; d) bottle base with Owens scar and maker's mark; e) railroad spike. Artifacts recovered from Feature 31. a-b) wagon axle "box"; c) "L" bracket; d) wagon bolster plate; e) wagon strap bolt. Topographic map and geophysical grid area for Feature 31 (blacksmith shop). Magnetometer (left) and resistance data (right) from geophysical survey of Feature 31 (blacksmith shop). Planview of test excavations at forge box, Feature 31 (blacksmith shop). Test excavations at Feature 31 showing blacksmith's forge box, view from the east. Profile of forge box excavations at Feature 31. Photographic view of excavations along the back wall of the blacksmith shop. 159 4.7 160 4.8 161 4.9 164 4.10 165 4.11 168 4.12 172 4.13 173 174 4.14 4.15 174 175 4.16 4.17 175 xvi 4.18 Plan view map showing the distribution of shovel test at Feature 32 (possible mule paddock). Artifacts recovered from Feature 32. a-b) mule shoes; c) L-bracket; d-h), large penny cut nails from various shovel tests. Results of geophysical survey at Feature 33 (possible slave quarters). Extent of 2001 test excavations at Feature 33 (possible slave quarters). View of the boiler platform (left) and the flywheel support (right) during the 2003 spring break excavations in the mill complex. Topographic map of the mill complex area delineating the geophysical grids and excavation areas. Results of geophysical investigations in the mill complex area: magnetmoetry (left) and electrical resistance (right) from RSG3; in the inset, electromagnetic conductivity (left) with possible data trends (right) from RSG1. Artifacts from the mill complex testing. A-d) large rivets; e) large square-headed bolt; f) belt staple; g) file. Extent of 2001 excavations on the boiler platform in the mill complex. Feature 2, the Van Winkle Spring house, 1997. View of the Van winkle house showing the semi-detached kitchen and kitchen addition. 178 4. 19 178 181 181 4.20 4.21 4.22 184 4.23 185 4.24 186 4.25 189 189 192 4.26 4.27 4.28 192 Chapter 5 5.1 Map of the late nineteenth century of the cultural landscape of Van Winkle's Mill 5.2 Map of the late nineteenth century of the cultural landscape of Van Winkle's Mill showing industrial and residential zones and activity flow. A partially reconstructable shallow refined earthenware bowl with an impressed makers mark found under the foundation wall at Feature 9. 196 197 5.3 213 xvii 5.4 Drawing by Darby Hicks included in the Van Winkle family history (Hicks 1990:15) demonstrates the importance of the frontier trope to the Hicks family. 213 Chapter 6 6.1 Door hinge and ceramic doorknob recovered from Feature 9 excavations. 6.2 Clothing buttons recovered from Features 9 and 33. Specimens a-d, f-h, j, k, m-v and x recovered from Feature 9. Specimens e, i, l, and w recovered from Feature 33 A sample of some of the children's toys recovered from Feature 9 Excavations: a-c) transfer print alphabet plate Fragments; d-h) porcelain doll fragments; i) cast iron cap pistol Fragment; j) a porcelain marble; k-l) bakelite children's rings. Harmonica reed plate fragments recovered from Feature 9. Small objects recovered from Feature 9 excavations: a) a copper "shield" nickel; b) a "Granger Twist" tobacco tag excavated from Feature 9; c) a pristine "Granger Twist" tobacco tag for comparative purposes (from the collection of the author). A variety of decorated ceramics recovered from Feature 9 and Feature 33 excavations. A fragment of a rooster ceramic figurine recovered from Feature 9. 236 237 6.3 238 239 6.4 6.5 239 6.6 241 241 6.7 Chapter 7 7.1 Teacher evaluation forms from the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle education program. 7.2 Student evaluation forms from the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle education program. 263 264 xviii Chapter 1 Introduction Archaeology is often about what is no longer there--at least what is no longer visible on the surface of things. I was reminded of this one day while standing in the narrow Ozark hollow known as Van Hollow. It was a pretty, temperate day in the late spring of 2003. The sunlight was filtering through the green leaves of the abundant sycamore trees near the ruins of a large saw and gristmill once known as Van Winkle's Mill. Now the area was being developed, and interpreted as an historical site, as a part of the Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area. When archaeological investigations of the Van Winkle's Mill site began in 1997, Van Hollow (an abbreviated form of Van Winkle Hollow) was an overgrown jungle, with few discernible features. The mill had been destroyed around the time of First World War in order to salvage its metal for scrap. The White River was dammed in 1966 in order to create Beaver Lake, which flooded the northern portion of the hollow. The Van Winkle house, home of the mill's owner Peter Van Winkle, was torn down in 1969. Although the lake rarely floods as high as the location of the house site, time and the destructive forces of nature have slowly caused the site to deteriorate. Due to the site's accessibility, looting has also occurred; including the scavenging of bricks from the house site and the removal of large limestone blocks from the raised formal garden. Today, the site offers visitors only glimpses of what it once was. The only discernible surface features include the steps leading up to the elevated garden (Figure 1.1), a 1 limestone spring house, the old Huntsville or Van Winkle Road, which ran in front of the house, and the foundation of the steam engine and boilers (Figure 1.2). In its day, however, this mill was described as "the most extensive lumber business in the southwest" (Fayetteville Sentinel February 15, 1882). Additionally, the mill served as the anchor for a small community whose lives were connected with the mill in many different waysthe owner and his family, lathe operators, bookkeepers, sawyers, teamsters, store operators, blacksmiths, unskilled white wage laborers, enslaved AfricanAmerican laborers before the war and free black laborers after emancipation all lived and worked in the narrow Ozark hollow between the 1850s and the early-twentieth century. By 1997, all that was left of this mill was the large limestone foundations for the platform that, in the nineteenth century, housed the three cast iron boilers and the steampowered engine that ran the mills. Around this platform were several other features related to the mill. To the west was a deep but narrow trench approximately three meters deep with a wall built of massive pieces of cut limestone extending from the trench's west face. This trench was where the mill's legendary flywheel was mounted. This flywheel, long demolished for scrap metal, gave me my first encounter with how my work as a historical archaeologist at Van Winkle's Mill was entangled with the larger cultural memory of the Arkansas Ozarks. Historical accounts refuse to agree on the most basic facts about the mill's equipment. There was no doubt that the flywheel was large and impressive. Beyond that fact, it was reported as being anywhere between 18 and 24 feet in diameter and weighing between 10,000 to 20,000 pounds (Bowers 2003:33; Elliott 1959:6, Rothrock 1972:93, D. Miller 1966:22, Scott 1962:171, Hicks 2 Figure 1.1. Remaining stairway to the formal raised garden in Van Winkle's Mill, 2002. Figure 1.2. Foundations for the flywheel at the site of the Van Winkle Mill complex, 1997. 3 1990:25, Goodspeed 1889:108). Moreover, none of the measurements given in the historical documentation correspond with the projected size of the wheel as ascertained through industrial archaeology (Bowers 2003:33-34). My colleague, Robin Bowers, has pointed out that what is behind these contradictions is the place of the mill and its steam-powered machinery in the local imagination. There is no doubt that the mill was a source of wonder for the inhabitants of Northwest Arkansas. Steam power was very much a new technology when the first steam engine was installed at the mill in the early 1860s. All other mills in the area, including flour mills, were water driven. The spinning of the flywheel, the noise from the engine and saws, and the smoke pouring from the smoke stack must have been impressive for local people visiting the millpeople who had likely never seen a locomotive. For rural residents who, even in the 1860s, were considered "backward hillbillies," there must have been a tremendous pride in this symbol of modernity that graced their woods. (Bowers 2003:20) Thus the flywheel cannot be discerned through solely historical or archaeological methodologies. To really understand the flywheel, how it becomes "legendary" in local history and how its real size gets obscured, one must take into account the cultural frameworks at work in the construction of our historical narratives. These frameworks have been referred to as our cultural memory. The above quotation also offers a glimpse at a powerful theme in both local and national cultural memory that I will be examining in much detail laterthe trope of the hillbilly. Bowers overtly evoked this trope when she pointed out that the nineteenthcentury rural Ozark residents may have been considered "backward hillbillies." Although the term itself would not become widely used until the twentieth century, Bowers' point is well taken. There is an interesting disjuncture between these people 4 who may have been conceived of as "backward" or "isolated" and the "symbol of modernity" that is Van Winkle's Mill. Bowers, however, was also playing into the trope when she stated that many of these inhabitants "had likely never seen a locomotive." Each time I have given tours, lectures or interviews about the work being conducted in Van Hollow, I have encountered this disjuncture. I have found the listeners filtering what I was saying through various tropes of cultural memory. After listening to me explain the history and archaeology of Van Winkle's Millcomplete with the New York born, Illinois raised owner and his family, the large industrial saw mill complex that dominated the regional markets, and the enslaved African-American labor which made it possiblemany people would go out of their way to tell me of their surprise at (or sometimes disbelief of) my narrative. Sometimes they were surprised by the presence of such a powerful industrial capitalist in the Ozarks, sometimes it was surprise that the institution of slavery was prevalent in the upland South or industrial settings, sometimes it was a surprise that any racial or ethnic diversity ever existed in the Ozarks at all. The further I delved into this disjuncture, and the more interactions I had with public interpretations of Ozark history, I began to suspect that the origins of some of the tropes at work in our cultural memories were entangled with the forces at work at Van Winkle's Mill in the mid-to-late-nineteenth century. The onset of modernity, industrialization, the creation of tropes such as the hillbilly, changing conceptualizations of race and even the formation of modern whiteness itself all left a mark on either the physical landscape or the cultural memory of Van Winkle's Mill. 5 The Van Winkle Educational Program By that afternoon in 2003, the area where the three-story mill complex once stood was now a clearing with grass and the occasional tree; it was beginning to look like a state park. I was struck by the contrast of the scene before me and the one I remembered from the first time I saw the mill's ruins in 1997. Then there was a dense tangle of underbrushsaw briers, poison ivy, and all variety of small bushes and trees. These plants tugged at every piece of equipment and clothing we had as we tromped around the hollow in the attempt to figure out where the archaeological features associated with this mill were and map them. I was there on that afternoon to attend an open house in the hollow hosted by Hobbs State Park and the Rogers Historical Museum. The Rogers Historical Museum, in collaboration with Hobbs State Park, the Arkansas Humanities Council, the Arkansas Archeological Survey and the Bentonville and Rogers School Districts had launched an ambitious project as a part of their educational programs for schools. Using historical documents, archaeological information, family history and other sources, they proposed to expose some 1,300 fifth-grade children in Benton County schools to critical history through the story of Van Winkle's Mill. The curriculum was multidisciplinary and sought to introduce students to aspects of the natural environment that made the lumber mill possible, the social, political and economic history of Northwest Arkansas, the concept of industrial slavery, the impact of the Civil War on the region, and how different types of sources (including historical archaeology) come together to reconstruct the history of a site. The program included a 6 Figure 1.3. Students portraying historical figures at Van Winkle's Mill for the Rogers Historical Museum's open house, 2003. Standing left to right: Aaron Anderson Van Winkle, Peter Van Winkle, Temperance Van Winkle, Mary Van Winkle. Kneeling left to right: a confederate soldier and J. A. C. Blackburn. Figure 1.4. Student art project portraying Van Winkle's Mill. 7 class visit to provide background information for (and primary documentation of) Van Winkle's Mill and a field trip to Van Hollow where students rotated through several key interpretive locations. On the day of the open house the park employees, teachers, students and even Van Winkle descendants (who traveled from Texas and California to attend) all gathered in the grassy clearing near the mill's foundations. For this special occasion several extra events were taking place. A group of seventh grade students in historical garb "reenacted" first person monologs at various locales throughout the hollow for the teachers and descendants (Figure 1.3) and student art projects depicting aspects of life at Van Winkle's Mill were on display (Figure 1.4). It was that afternoon of being on a historical site full of interpretation, with actually very little to materially indicate that anything historic had happened, that lead me to think about archaeology and absence. Everyone in the hollow that day, or any day for that matter, read into the remains of Van Winkle's Mill its totality. They all looked at the few above-ground features and imagined what they thought the whole of the community must have been like. Dydia DeLyser (2001) has elsewhere examined this phenomenon in western ghost towns where returning visitors actually remember things that never existed and comment on the perceived changes. This was the most active experience of cultural memory I had encountered, and where I have chosen to begin and end this dissertation. My questions seemed relatively straightforward and centered around the disjuncture between the history and archaeology I worked with and what people expected from the Ozark past. What work does cultural memory perform on and in the Arkansas Ozarks 8 and Van Winkle's Mill in particular? How did the tropes of cultural memory come to be and situationally change? What was differentially silenced and remembered in Ozark history? Synopsis Both Van Winkle's Mill and the questions to which it points lend themselves to interrogation using a combination of excavated archaeological materials, historical archival records and an examination of cultural memory. Using these methods and resources in combination will hopefully allow for a more nuanced understanding of each question in context and provide a clearer, interlocking picture of Van Winkle's Mill and its place in the local and regional cultural memory. This dissertation will make an attempt to do this by moving heuristically between archaeological methodologies and other approaches. First, in Chapter 2, I will provide the historical context(s) of the Arkansas Ozarks and Van Winkle's Mill. This chapter will contain a brief historical overview, but it will also contain a number of small vignettes that will go into detail about a few people and events. This technique has been adopted in an attempt to avoid broad generalizing statements about the Ozarks. Concentration on the particulars of these people and events will hopefully demonstrate the diversity of the region's historical experiences. Following this overview, I will turn to the history of Van Winkle's Mill itself. I trace the community and its inhabitants as we can best discern them through historical 9 documents and oral histories from the mill's founding in the 1850s to the site's incorporation into the Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area. In Chapter 3, I will examine cultural memory; what constitutes cultural memory, how it is produced and what role it plays in the creation of Ozark historical narratives. After a brief explanation of the theoretical orientation I deploy when evoking cultural memory, I turn again to the particulars of the Arkansas Ozarks. Here I follow the construction and use of various "tropes" in cultural memory that help us make sense of Ozark history. I then concentrate on one of the more powerful tropesthe aforementioned hillbillyin order to assess how that trope came to be and what it emphasizes and silences in the Ozark past(s). Chapter 4 will outline both archaeology's engagement with the hillbilly trope and the archaeological investigations that have taken place in Van Hollow from 1997 to 2003. I will not provide all of the technical details of these excavations as I have done so elsewhere (Brandon et al. 2000; Brandon and Davidson 2003; Brandon 2005), but I will endeavor to provide the information that is pertinent to understanding the analyses that will take place in the following chapters. Following these three overviews and interpretive contexts, I provide chapters that examine two distinct interpretive cases at Van Winkle's Mill. First, I will examine the cultural landscape of the site (Chapter 5). Here I will use the archaeological recoveries in dialog with the historical materials and cultural memory in an attempt to understand the landscape as seen through nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first century eyes. What were the messages structured within the landscape of the working nineteenth-century 10 milling community and how have those messages been interpreted by later observers through varying lenses of cultural memory. I will then turn to examine the artifacts recovered from the site (Chapter 6), especially those recovered from the workers quarters, in order to examine material consumption and what these artifacts might suggest about the daily lives and identities of the occupants of Van Winkle's Mill. Following these two cases, I then return to the framework of cultural memory. Chapter 7 will outline the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle Program and its intent to expose students in the Benton County school system to critical interpretations of Van Winkle's Mill, race, slavery, the Civil War and, less directly, cultural memory. I will also analyze the student and teacher evaluations of the program in order to ascertain the results of such an ambitious project. Finally, Chapter 8 will attempt to draw on the preceding chapters to form some conclusion regarding the dense, entangled thicket of history, cultural memory, modernity and archaeology. A thicket much more entangled than the vegetation that we encountered when we first saw Van Winkle's Mill in 1997. 11 Chapter 2 "A Frontier More South than West": A Historical Overview of the Arkansas Ozarks and Van Winkle's Mill In the early nineteenth century, Arkansas was "a reincarnation of the American frontier" and thought of in cultural memory in the same fashion as places like Kentucky had been in the popular imagination of the late 1700s (Rohrbough 1990:219). It was seen as a "wild borderland in the process of being tamed and brought within the sphere of civilization through pioneer settlement" (Sabo 1990:139). Even at that point in history, however, the "forces of movement" and modernization which had overtaken the myriad of previous frontiers had been put into motion in Arkansas and the Arkansas Ozarks (Blevins 2002:9; Rohrbough 1990:219). The decades following the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, which included the land that was to become the Arkansas Ozarks, saw the arrival of what some have called "ambitious pioneers"--merchants, politicians, lawyers, farmers, aspiring planters and their families--until "the Arkansas Ozarks were home to over a quarter of a million American settlers" by the end of the nineteenth century, perhaps more than the land could support (Blevins 2002:9). The story of Van Winkle's Mill takes place in this period of exponential growth, a time that regional historian Brooks Blevins calls "an era of starts and stops, false hopes, important transformations and stubborn continuities" (Blevins 2002:69). Of course, this period was a time of rapid change in a region which is usually portrayed as "timeless" 12 and "unchanging." This is just the oppositional dichotomy that this work seeks to explore through the device of Van Winkle's Mill. Below, I will briefly outline some of the historical context(s) of the Arkansas Ozarks and Northwest Arkansas in particular. I do not intend this to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject. Instead, I intend to give the reader a feeling for the historical and cultural setting of the region. In doing so, I also set the stage for an examination of how we view this region's history--both locally and on a national level. Arkansas, the Ozarks, and Northwest Arkansas: An Explanation of Geography and Scale For those unfamiliar with the geography of the region, a bewildering number of terms are used in this work. First, it should be said that shifts in terminology in the discussions that follow are largely representative of shifts in analytical scale. That is, I typically will begin the discussion of a topic with the state of Arkansas as my analytical unit and then I will shift my discussion to either the Ozarks or, more restrictively, the Arkansas Ozarks (Figure 2.1). The Ozarks, unfortunately, are a region whose boundaries "are vague to most people and subject to interpretation and disagreement by experts" (Rafferty 2001:1). For the purposes of this work, the Ozarks are the interior highlands as delimited by cultural geographers and include parts of four states--Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Kansas. The "unifying criteria" of the Ozarks as a region would be the "greater relief and steeper slopes" than the surrounding geographic provinces (Rafferty 2001:1)--bounded to the south by the Arkansas River valley, the Missouri River to the north, the Mississippi 13 Figure 2.1. The Ozarks as geographic region (after Rafferty 2001:xiv). 14 lowlands to the east and the Osage Plains to the west. More importantly, I believe, is the "sense of place" surrounding the Ozarks (McNeil 1995:3). Although experts in geography, history and folklore may not agree on the physical boundaries, the region-- both internally and on a national level--is held to be more than "simply another rural region quite like any other in most regards" (Blevins 2002:6). The "region's past and present are riddled with paradox" and seen through a "thicket of myth, nostalgia and stereotype" formed and remembered through lived experience, popular culture and the tourism/recreation industries with which the region has long been associated (Blevins 2002:6-7; see also Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999). It is this aspect of Ozark historical and cultural memory that this work attempts to examine. In the pages that follow, my discussions will focus on Northwest Arkansas--the finest of my analytical scales (Figure 2.2). Like its larger counterpart, the Ozarks, there is little agreement about what counties actually make up Northwest Arkansas. For my purposes, I have attempted to take a cultural approach by roughly equating Northwest Arkansas with what Blevins (2002) refers to as "the western counties" which includes parts of the Boston Mountains, the Springfield Plateau and small portions of the White River Hills. The core counties of Northwest Arkansas are Washington, Benton, Carroll and Madison Counties, but I have also included northern portions of Crawford County, in the steep Boston Mountains, in my discussions. Finally, the site of Van Winkle's Mill is located in the physiographic subdivision of the White River Hills of the Ozark Mountains in the southeastern portion of Benton County--along Little Clifty Creek and between War Eagle Creek to the south and Beaver 15 Figure 2.2: Van Winkle project area showing surrounding towns. Figure 2.3. Van Winkle's Mill and Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area. 16 Lake to the north (Figure 2.3; Rafferty 2001:12). This region of the Ozarks is known for its rugged relief and karst topography (Rafferty 2001:15-16). Historically, it was described as "so broken and uneven that it [was] mostly unfit for cultivation, except in the valleys of the streams" (Goodspeed 1889:2). "Who Are These Ozark People?" Ethnicity and Immigration in the Trans-Upland South Prior to the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, the Spanish and French explored and settled Arkansas and the Ozarks. Spanish settlement in the Ozarks was largely negligible and French settlement in the eighteenth century centered upon the lead-rich district near St. Genevieve in what is now Missouri (McNeil 1995:9-10; Rafferty 2001:42-44; Sabo 1990:138). In some popular histories, the Ozarks owe their name to an Anglicized version of either the French phrase bois aux arcs, which refers to the wood used to make Native American bows, or a French abbreviation for the Osage tribe (McNeil 1995:2; Steele and Cottrell 1993:11). This evocation of the Osage serves to remind us that the Ozarks have been, in fact, populated by Native Americans for some 12,000 years before the coming of the Spanish or French (Sabo 2002:1; Sabo and Early 1990:36-40) and, despite some opinion to the contrary, have not yet disappeared. In fact the Osage, Quapaw, and other Native American immigrant tribes (such as the Cherokee) are intertwined with the history of Northwest Arkansas--especially in its role as a frontier abutting the infamous Indian Territory. Moreover, it is the 1828 establishment of the western territorial boundary 17 between Indian Territory and Arkansas which opened up Northwest Arkansas for fullscale settlement. Although a vanguard of European Americans were living in the region illegally since the first decades of the nineteenth century, the 1817 Cherokee Treaty reserved much of western Arkansas as Cherokee land--in 1828 the tribe exchanged this land for seven million acres north of the Arkansas River in Indian Territory (McNeil 1995:8). The immediate impact of the establishment of the 1828 boundary was to officially open Northwest Arkansas for white settlement (Hilliard 1983; Rafferty 2001:52). Although Cane Hill was an established community prior to 1828, it was the newly established town of Fayetteville which would become the county seat of Washington County and territorial center of Northwest Arkansas (Hilliard 1983). Benton County, where Van Winkle's Mill is situated, was largely settled during the 1830s and became the first county established after Arkansas became a state in 1836 (Black 1975:7; Goodspeed 1889:24-25). Numerous histories have characterized these early Ozark settlers as white immigrants from other places in the upland South (i.e., eastern Tennessee, southern Kentucky, western North Carolina and southwestern Virginia) who were descended from British or "Scotch-Irish" stock (e.g., Blevins 2002:19; :Flanders 1979:176-178; Rafferty 2001:2, etc.). Although it is true that other groups represent a minority of the region's population, they nonetheless "constitute an important element in the population of the Ozarks" (Gerlach 1976:8). Waves of Germans (1830-1850), Mennonites (1850-1890), Swiss (1860s), Poles and Bohemians (late 1800s), Moravians and Italians (1900s) all came to the Ozarks in search of the same things that had brought those who came from 18 elsewhere in the Southern United States (Gerlach 1976; McNeil 1995:9-15; Rafferty 2001:62-73). In Northwest Arkansas in the 1830s, a small German settlement founded Dutch Mills (Hermannsburg) in Washington County, Arkansas, and a group of Germanspeaking Swiss settled near Altus on the edge of the Boston Mountains in the 1880s (Rafferty 2001:66). More locally acknowledged is a group of forty Italian families fleeing Sunnyside Plantation--a failed attempt to use European immigrants as plantation labor in lowland Chicot County--who settled in the Ozark Mountains on the border with Indian Territory where they founded Tontitown, Arkansas in 1898 (Whayne 1993:21). A decade later this group had grown to seventy families living on 1,400 acres (Blevins 2002:44). Tontitown, west of Springdale and north of Fayetteville, still strongly selfidentifies itself as Italian and catholic. This surprising number of minority communities are small when compared to the much larger number of settlers from Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia and Virginia--not to mention a later and larger wave of settlers from Missouri, Kansas, Illinois and other Midwestern states (Blevins 2002:38-39)--but they existed nonetheless. Thus the history of the Ozarks included the entanglement and interaction of these southern white immigrants (the so-called "Scotch-Irish"), Midwestern immigrants, Germans, Poles, Italians, indigenous Native groups (such as the Osage), recently immigrated Native Americans (such as the Cherokee), free blacks and the enslaved African Americans brought in bondage by their masters to the mountains of the Ozarks. 19 It is to the last group that I wish to turn next. As mentioned in the introductory chapter of this work, part of the labor at Van Winkle's Mill was provided by slaves. Like the other groups mentioned here, African Americans (and slavery) are not a common part of the traditional cultural memory of the Arkansas Ozarks. For this reason, I will provide a brief background of slavery in the region. "Incongruous, Implausible and Unworthy of Examination": Slavery in Northwest Arkansas In the 1980s, John Solomon Otto, a member of the earliest generation of archaeologists to tackle the subjects of slavery and the African Diaspora, conducted a small historical research project in Yell County, Arkansas. Although his work was brief, he made some important, timely observations: Historians of American slavery have traditionally studied the institution on a regional basis, searching for generalization that might hold true for the entire South. Despite their attempts at regional generalization, however, they have used sources that come largely from the plantation belt--the lowland and piedmont areas of the Old South...by using these sources from the plantation belt, historians have made sweeping judgments about slavery that may not be applicable to the entire South, since roughly half of the slave territory of the United States lay outside the plantation regime. (Otto 1980:35) Since the time of his writing there have been exceptions to this rule (e.g., C. Dew 1994; Hahn 1982; Inscoe 1989; Schlotterbeck 1982, etc.), although slavery in the upland South and slavery in non-agricultural settings, in particular, remain grossly understudied. As late as 1995, Ted Smith would write in his study of slavery in Washington County, Arkansas that "[t]o historians and non-historians alike, the idea of slavery in the 20 mountains has seemed incongruous, implausible or even unworthy of examination" (Smith 1995:2; see also Bolton 1999). The reasons why this has become the case will be examined in later chapters, but for now it is important to note that in 1840, the first United States census for the state of Arkansas recorded over 20,000 inhabitants in the eight counties that made up the Arkansas Ozarksincluding almost 2,000 enslaved African Americans (Blevins 2002:18). In the decades that followed the opening of Northwest Arkansas to legal white settlement (1828), immigrants filled the Ozark counties. Throughout the 1820s and 1830s, it was the northwestern Arkansas counties, with their "healthful upland valleys" that were the "principle attraction" for farmers--and slave holders--coming to Arkansas (Taylor 2000:27, 50). These migrants brought the labor which would become the foundation for "a workforce that would out-produce the rest of the state in manufacturing and whose farmers would grow more corn, wheat, oats and Irish potatoes" than any other region in the state--a workforce that, of course, included not only white labor, but their African-American (mostly enslaved, but a few free) counterparts as well (Smith 1995:5, 16-17). In fact, by 1830, approximately 68% of the state's total population and 61% of the slave population was located in the northwestern part of the state (Catalfamo-Serio 1979:105; Mintz and Hilliard 1992; Taylor 2000:27). In 1831, the Arkansas Gazette declared that Washington County (which then included what would become Benton County in 1836) was "now the most populous county in the Territory" (Arkansas Gazette, May 25, 1831). 21 Between 1820 and 1850, the slave population in Arkansas grew at a proportionately faster rate than did their white counterparts--tripling between 1820 and 1830, almost quadrupling between 1830 and 1840, and doubling again between 1840 to 1850 (Morgan 1973:24; Table 2.1). The Arkansas Ozarks continued to lead the state in overall population until the postbellum period, while the leading slaveholding region shifted to the southeastern sections of the state which contained 70% of the state's enslaved population by 1850 (DeBlack 2002a:142; Smith 1995:15; Taylor 2000:51). Nevertheless, the aggregate number of enslaved African Americans in Northwest Arkansas "actually continued to rise throughout the antebellum period" (Smith 1995:15). In 1850, the black population of the entire Arkansas Ozark region totaled more than 2,254 slaves and 162 free blacks (Morgan 1973:29, 36). Washington County, the second most populous county in the state, boasted 13,133 white inhabitants and almost 1500 slaves (12% of the population, or one out of every eight individuals; Catalfamo-Serio 1979:107). Meanwhile, the relatively young Benton County to the north reported approximately 8,000 whites with almost 400 enslaved individuals (5% of the total population) (Black 1975:13; Smith 1995:15, Taylor 2000:52-53). Moreover, both of these counties were reporting a substantial increase in the number of slaves from the 1840 census when they reported 1,199 and 201 slaves respectively (Taylor 2000:52, 53). By the 1860, the average number of slaves per owner in Washington County in 1860 was 4.9 and in Benton County 3.5 (Table 2.1; Catalfamo-Serio 1979:115). There were more than 300 owners and 1,486 slaves in Washington County alone (Doolin 1980:5). 22 Although the southern and eastern counties of the state dramatically eclipsed the northwest in terms of growth in the numbers of slaves after 1850, slavery remained an important institution in the Ozark region. These enslaved African Americans and their owners "played an important role in [the region's] development and economy which far outpaced their numbers" (Smith 1995:16). Several researchers working in Northwest Arkansas have established a firm connection between slaveholding and political and/or economic power (e.g., Blevins 2002:23; DeBlack 2002a:149; Hilliard 1983; Mintz and Hilliard 1992; Smith 1995:90-91, etc.). Moreover, the links between early settlers, the best and largest land holdings, and slave holding extends to the establishment of key industrial enterprises: mills, blacksmith shops, tanneries and stores. Smith (1995:57) has pointed out that in Washington County this synergy led to a profoundly unequal distribution of wealth. For example, by 1850, "at least thirteen of the twenty-seven manufacturing establishments listed in the census records" for Washington County were owned by slaveholders, making up 75.1% of the county's total production value (Smith 1995:51, 90). Thus, slave holding was not only a status symbol as some upland South researchers have claimed. Rather, the holding of "chattel provided an invaluable form of labor [and capital] in the early years of settlement, and their owners became quite wealthy, on the whole" (Smith 1995:17). Historians have made much of the differences between upland and lowland slavery in the American South. In the Ozarks, researchers such as Gordon Morgan, in his study Black Hillbillies in the Arkansas Ozarks, have speculated that the low numbers of slaves 23 and the degree of personal interaction between slaves and masters may have created a close social relationship between enslaver and the enslaved. More probably, there might have been a kind of mutual benefit relationship between some masters and their slaves, each contributing to the protection of the other in their struggle to survive in the frontier environment. Also, there is the possibility that given more of a balance between numbers of slave owners and the slaves that there was less master-servant social desistance and more of a partner relationship between them. (Morgan 1973:28) According to Morgan's argument, shared living quarters, working conditions and the frontier character of the Ozarks helped create situations where neither master nor slave preferred to break the bonds of the relationship. This is "inferred from the fact that Northern Arkansas counties were not well policed and slaves could easily run away from their masters" along with the fact that the incidence of runway slaves was dramatically lower than in the lowland counties of the state (Morgan 1973:26). This argument is not unique and has been used by many researchers to depict a "kinder" version of slavery that existed throughout the Upper South; even Otto (1980:52) falls into this line of reasoning. There are, however, other reasons for the low incidence of runways slaves in Northwest Arkansas. As Smith points out, the slave community was "comparatively small...so its members did not have the opportunity to hide from their white owners" (Smith 1995:91). Moreover, many enslaved individuals did choose to rebel or resist the bonds that held them. Period newspaper accounts list numerous slaves running to nearby Indian Territory or Kansas--including a few dramatic stories such as the international incident caused by the escape of Nelson Hacket and the furor surrounding the murder of James J. Anderson. 24 Nelson Hacket was the "handsome, well-dressed" slave of Alfred Wallace, one of the earliest settlers of Washington County, Arkansas, and a prominent regional merchant (Smith 1995:60; Zorn 1957:140). In the summer of 1841, Nelson Hacket ran away, stealing his master's beaver overcoat, a gold watch, a race horse and a saddle as he left Fayetteville. Six weeks later Nelson made it to Sandwich in Canada where he joined a refugee settlement across the border from Detroit (Smith 1995:60; Zorn 1957:142). Hacket was caught by his master, however. He was then beaten, placed in a Canadian jail, and finally extradited as a criminal following the intervention of Arkansas Governor Archibald Yell. The result was a panic amongst abolitionists who thought that a dangerous precedent had been set--a precedent that could endanger the entire free black population of Canada (Smith 1995:61). Following the incident, British abolitionists launched a political campaign which ultimately led to restricting the extradition powers set out in the Webster-Ashburton Treaty between the United States and Canada (Zorn 1957:149). In another dramatic incident, James J. Anderson, son of early Benton County settler Hugh Anderson, was apparently murdered in August of 1849. The story, discovered by Jerry Hilliard during research related to the archaeological investigation of the Anderson slave cemetery (Hilliard 1998:10-12), plays out in an edition of the Arkansas Intelligencer (a nineteenth-century Van Buren newspaper). The event is so remarkable that the article is included here in its entirety. Horrible Murder. A Horrid murder was perpetuated on Vache Grasse, in this county, about noon of the 4th instant. The facts, as far as we have been able to learn, are as follows: From some impropriety in the conduct of his negro, Mr. Anderson, a highly respectable citizen of Benton County, left 25 home some time last week, for the purpose of selling him. In the company with the negro, he came through this city and crossed over to Fort Smith. On Sunday, about three o'clock, P.M., the negro arrived at Fayetteville, with his master's horse, and dressed in his master's clothes, and remarked to another negro that he had killed his master. The fact that his master had not returned with him was of itself sufficient reason to suspect something wrong, and upon search being made for the negro, it was found that he had made his escape. With praiseworthy alacrity a goodly number of citizens of Fayetteville started in pursuit of the negro, while at the same time, Col. Alfred Wilson, Mr. Dinsmore, a brother-in-law of Mr. Anderson, the rev. Mr. Stout and Mr. Keats, came this way in search of Mr. Anderson. They passed through our city on Tues. morning. On the other side of Fort Smith; on Vache Grasse, the search proved successful--Mr. Anderson was found about 150 yards from the road, weltering in his gore, his skull fractured in a shocking manner, and his throat cut from ear to ear. Col. Wilson, and the gentlemen who accompanied him, passed through our city on Wednesday, on their return to Fayetteville. Should the negro be arrested, he will be brought to this city for trial, as the crime was committed within the limits of Crawford County. P.S.--Since penning the above lines, the mail has reached us from Fayetteville. There is now no doubt of the negro's guilt. Some of the party in pursuit of the negro, after having come up with and shot him, about 25 miles from Fayetteville near where his wife lives, returned to the house and found the negro washing his wound. His escape was then so precipitate, that he left his pantaloons behind, one pocket of which contained Anderson's purse, with about $14. The pantaloons show a ball wound, which indicates that the ball must have lodged in the hip; and from the appearance of clotted blood on the suspenders, he is no doubt wounded in the shoulder. It is supposed that he is mortally wounded. It is now positively known that the murder of his master was premeditated by the negro, that he had disclosed his intensions to some free negroes of the neighborhood. We understand that Mr. Anderson was Mr. Mecklin's brother-in-law, Principle of the Ozark Institute (Arkansas Intelligencer 1849:3 quoted in Hilliard 1998:11). I will return to discuss the case of James Anderson's murder in later chapters, but I will touch upon a few points here. Although the story was told in a sensational style, it does point toward some valuable insights into the nature of slavery in the antebellum Ozarks. Hilliard (1998:11-12) has pointed out that because of some unknown transgression it appeared that Mr. Anderson was attempting the Ozark version of selling 26 his slave "down the river" by choosing to travel 60 or so miles south to Ft. Smith to sell his slave, although there were certainly closer markets in Fayetteville. He was being sold away from his family, despite the fact that numerous texts claim that this practice did not happen in the Upland South. Also notice that the unnamed escaped slave had such ties to the region that he returned to Fayetteville (where his wife was), although Mr. Anderson, and presumably his slave, resided in Bentonville. Interestingly, the members of the free black community also had some part in his being caught and shot. Anderson's unnamed slave was not the only such case in Northwest Arkansas; in 1856, Dr. James Boone was bludgeoned to death by two of his slaves and one of his brother-in-law's slaves three miles outside of Fayetteville. Two of the murderers were later lynched in a fit of mob violence leaving the third to be executed following the next meeting of the circuit court (Catalfamo-Serio 1979:122). Of course, these stories cannot be considered representative of the AfricanAmerican experience in the Ozarks--they are clearly exceptional on many levels. They are also, however, indicative of the fact that slavery in the Ozark uplands was far from harmonious and that the enslaved did actively resist. A few were even driven to that most feared and ultimate form of rebellion--the murder of one's enslaver. It seems clear that for these enslaved individuals "the institution which held them was no less cruel" than that which held the slaves in lowland plantations (Bolton 1999:11; Smith 1995:90). On a more mundane level there is plenty of evidence that slaves could not be entirely "happy" with their lot, such as the runaway advertisements and slave sale notices in the Arkansian and other antebellum newspapers (Smith 1995:67; Taylor 2000:225- 27 232). The few ex-slave narratives for Washington and Benton County reported varied treatment of slaves--some relating stories that resonate with the regional stereotype of benevolent highland masters, while others told of mixed experiences or even beatings being administered (Smith 1995:80). Taylor reports that "the most extreme case" of brutal whippings he found during his exhaustive study on slavery in Arkansas was from Northwest Arkansas which involved a man named Spencer and a newly-purchased slave woman in Washington County. In this case Spencer stripped the slave, staked her down on the ground face down, and whipped her at intervals with a "plaited buckskin lash about fifteen inches long." After the beatings he "took salt and a cob and salted her back" (Taylor 2000:205). Most of the existing slave narratives from Northwest Arkansas seem cautiously worded, no doubt the result of being interrogated by white interviewers. In fact many scholars have expressed doubts as to the reliability of the WPA ex-slave narrative interviews on various grounds (Cantrell 2004). They cited the state-based project's lack of established oral history methodology; the biases of interviewers; the personal agendas of those interviewed; the age of the interviewees, the time elapsed since their slave experiences, and the possible inaccuracy of memories; and potential errors introduced by interviewers, typists, and state and federal supervisors in the editing and transcription process (Cantrell 2004:48). Yet careful examination of the subtle, defensive postures taken by the interviewees can be enlightening. For instance, most affirmations of slavery as "good times" or whites as "good masters" in the Northwest Arkansas narratives were followed by references subtextually pointing toward their economic situations following the war. Thus Jenny 28 Flowers, enslaved in Cincinnati, Arkansas in extreme western Washington County, declared: "Dem was good times `fo' de War. Yes'm good times--plenty to eat" (Flowers in Federal Writers' Project 2001 V2, P2:317). Similarly, Adeline Blakely, enslaved in the county seat of Fayetteville, stated: "My master's folks always treated me well. I had good clothes" (Adeline in Federal Writers' Project 2001 V2, P1: 12) and "I can remember the days of slavery as happy ones. We always had an abundance of food" (Adeline in Federal Writers' Project 2001 V2, P1: 14). This juxtaposition of "good times" and food and/or clothing thus seems less about nostalgia for the "Old South" and their status as slaves, than it seems to be about the extreme storages of food during the Civil War, the economic problems pandemic in Arkansas during Reconstruction and, perhaps, the depressions of the 1890s and 1930s. Following the outbreak of the Civil War, the already fragile Arkansas economy collapsed. With no way to collect debts, merchants refused to extend credit, and there was a drastic storage of currency, food and supplies in local communities as early as January of 1861 (Moneyhon 1994:103-104). It is certainly true that although the life of an Ozark slave was filled with work, it was a more diversified form of labor than that of his/her lowland plantation counterpart. The enslaved population of Northwest Arkansas worked in the fields cultivating wheat, corn, cotton, sorghum and potatoes, raised livestock, sheared sheep, made yarn, cooked meals, made shoes, worked in hotels, mills, stores, and were even used to build public roads and bridges (Smith 1995:69-74; Taylor 2000:113). This variety of experiences and skills, no doubt led to more individual opportunities and a degree of freedom for some of 29 the Ozark enslaved, but it did not obscure the fact that they were not free and were considered property under the law. Free Blacks did exist in the Arkansas Ozarks, although their numbers were few and their presence discouraged. Twenty-nine free African Americans are reported living in the core counties of Northwest Arkansas in 1840--ten in Benton County and 19 in Washington County (1840 US Census). By 1850, the greater upland counties of the Arkansas Ozarks reported a total of 162 free blacks, with the vast majority (N=129) in Marion County (Gordon 1973:29). "Free blacks had been a problem in Arkansas from its beginning," writes Gordon Morgan (1973:30), and this is evident in the series of draconian laws regulating "free negroes and mulattos" in the state of Arkansas. In 1838 the legislature passed a law that no free negro or mulatto could immigrate into the state of Arkansas after March 1, 1843 and people harboring free blacks were subject to a $500 fine (Cathey 1944:72; Morgan 1973:30). All free people of African decent were required to produce evidence that they were free in the county court of their residence where a register of all free blacks was kept (Cathey 1944:72). If the indignity of having to prove one's status and be registered with the court was not enough, the fact that all "free negroes and mulattos were further required to enter a [$500] bond for good behavior" added a sizeable economic deterrent to free African Americans who wished to live in the state of Arkansas (Cathey 1944:72; Taylor 2000:251). It was clear that "free blacks were unwelcome in the state, even if they had been present since its founding" (Morgan 1973:30). 30 Finally, on the eve of the Civil War, the 1859 Arkansas legislature passed a law forbidding free blacks and mulattoes to remain in the state after January 1, 1860. Those failing to comply were to be arrested and hired out to the highest bidder for a year of service (Cathey 1944:73; Taylor 2000:257). Free blacks failing to leave following this period of bondage were then sold into slavery to the highest bidder. Free African Americans who wished to remain in the state could only do so by enslaving themselves to someone who was required to make bond as a guarantee that the slaves would not be permitted to act as free persons (Taylor 2000:257). These are powerful deterrents designed to erase the category of "free blacks" from existence in the state of Arkansas, but it is difficult to ascertain to what extent these laws were enforced. Orville Taylor reports that no "instance of free Negroes being sold involuntarily into slavery or voluntarily enslaving themselves were found" (Taylor 2000:257). Moreover, the 1860 census (taken several moths following the January deadline) shows 144 free African Americans in the state with 47 free blacks in Washington County alone (Gordon 1973:31; Taylor 2000:257). Tellingly, none of these 47 free African Americans lived within the city of Fayetteville--all were rural farmers and all were "quite poor" (Smith 1995:85). The Civil War in the Arkansas Ozarks Ambivalent Rebellion and the Collapse of Ozark Society More than five years before Fort Sumter was fired upon, conflicts between slaveholders in Missouri and northern Arkansas and abolitionists in Kansas sounded the 31 initial rumblings of what became the Civil War and set the tone for the ambushes, midnight raids and guerrilla actions that characterized the war in the Arkansas Ozarks (Sabo 1990:157; Steele and Cottrell 1994:12; Sutherland 2000:131). Despite this early involvement in conflict, however, Arkansas itself, and the upland counties in particular, were slow to respond to the call of succession and the Confederacy (Moneyhon 1994: 94-95). This was due less to pro-Union or abolitionist tendencies than it was to cautious, overall conservatism--although a "defense of slavery was seldom forthcoming from your typical dirt farmer of Northwest Arkansas, most classes of people...were opposed to Northern abolitionism" (Catalfamo-Serio 1979:113). Following the secession of Arkansas from the Union in 1861, however, the populace of Northwest Arkansas found themselves, like the nation, divided; with "somewhat more than half acknowledging loyalty to the Confederacy" (Sabo 1990:156). The upland counties of the Arkansas Ozarks, and Northwest Arkansas in particular, have historically been singled out as a bastion for Unionist and Union sympathizers during the war. Recent research has pointed toward "a massive wave of yeoman immigrants in the decade before the Civil War" which "diluted the power and influence of the small class of slaveholders" in Northwest Arkansas (Blevins 2002:29; Smith 1995:50), but its is also clear that even members of the planter class, who owned relatively large numbers of slaves, would situationally side with the Unionist on economic grounds. An odd, ambivalent mixture of abolitionists, those with an anti-war sentiment, "ex-Whigs, railroad men concerned about the loss of government support for their projects" and those "fearful of the problems succession might create on the Indian 32 frontier" all, at varying times supported the Unionist cause (Moneyhon 1994:95). The Fayetteville Arkansaian demonstrated the overt caution and ambivalence with which Northwest Arkansas approached the war when it advised its readers to "wait until after his [Linclon's] inaugural and see what course he will pursue" (quoted in DeBlack 2002a:161). David Walker is one example from which we can see many of the historical trends discussed so far. Walker was born on February 19, 1806, in Todd County, Kentucky, moved to Arkansas in 1830, commenced the practice of law in Fayetteville, served at the state's constitutional convention in 1836 and on the Arkansas Supreme Court between 1848 and 1855 (Smith 1999:61-63, 74). As an early settler and landholder in Washington County, Walker received many of the benefits discussed above--first choice of fertile bottomland and the slaveholders status which allowed for maximum production of that land which, in turn, gave support to various economic ventures and political influence (Battershell 1999; Hilliard 1983; Smith 1995:17). He was the largest slaveholder in Washington County in 1860 holding 25 slaves (11 males, 14 females, 21 of which were classified as "mulattos"; Mintz and Hilliard 1992). He kept a house and practice in Fayetteville and another house on his upland plantation (Mintz and Hilliard 1992; Smith 1999:73). He self identified as a planter and could easily be considered one by most historians' standards (e.g., Genovese 1974; Moneyhon 1994:15; Smith 1995; Stampp 1956:30-38). In March of 1861, Walker was narrowly elected President of the Arkansas Secession Convention and as a former Whig with strong ties to the railroad interests, he 33 did not support secession from the Union at first (Moneyhon 1994:96; Smith 1999:76). Under his leadership, the small Unionist majority, which never exceeded five votes, held the day (DeBlack 2002a:163). However, following the events at Ft. Sumter in South Carolina and Lincoln's stern response, when it became clear that they could not rely on the Union to protect their "property rights," Walker defected. After reassembling the convention in April and making an appeal for unity to all other Unionist supporters, all but one--Isaac Murphy from Madison County in Northwest Arkansas--changed their votes to support an ordinance of secession (DeBlack 2002a:164-165; Moneyhon 1994:97). Following official secession, Walker returned to his Washington County farm "wishing to have no part in the war, even though four of his sons joined the Confederate army" (Smith 1999:76). His apparently neutral stance soon fell away, however, after his property was seized by the invading Union Army. Walker joined the Confederate cavalry, was commissioned as a colonel and served as a military judge (Smith 1999:76). Aside from the ambivalence demonstrated by many of Northwest Arkansas' residents, the war was met with outright resistance by some. The most overt example came early in the war (1861) when some citizens in the Ozark counties of Searcy, Izard, Carroll, Fulton, Marion and Van Buren formed a large, clandestine antiwar organization known as the Arkansas Peace Society (DeBlack 2002b:167; Moneyhon 1994:102-103; Worley 1958). This organization, the first formal resistance group in the Confederacy, pledged to resist the war effort, but was quickly suppressed by the government. Seventyeight members were arrested, chained together in pairs, force marched to Little Rock and 34 given the choice of either enlisting in the Confederate army or being tried for treason (DeBlack 2002b:167; Worley 1958). Historian Carl Moneyhon (1994:102-103) points out that "their resistance raises questions about the common interests of whites--interests that supposedly held the antebellum community together." Despite the slowness of Arkansas to secede from the Union and the divided nature of Northwest Arkansas, the war came to the Ozarks nonetheless. During the war, less than 13 % of the 771 military actions that took place in Arkansas were in the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks (Hughes 2000:31). This handful of conflicts in the region includes Wilson's Creek in nearby Missouri, and the Battles of Pea Ridge, Prairie Grove, Cane Hill and Fayetteville (DeBlack 2002b:166-181). This figure, however, is misleading as to the price Northwest Arkansas paid in life and property. Causalities at the Battle of Pea Ridge in March of 1862, known as the "Gettysburg of the west" because of its importance to the war in the trans-Mississippi theatre, totaled nearly the same on both sides. The Union army suffered almost 1,400 killed, wounded or missing in action, and the Confederates reported their losses as 1,000 killed and wounded and 300 captured, but in the days following the battle hundreds of starving Confederates deserted the army (DeBlack 2002b:174; Steele and Cottrell 1993:48). Likewise the battle of Prairie Grove, in December of 1862, resulted in over 1,250 casualties on each side (DeBlack 2002b:180; Steele and Cottrell 1993:62). These two battles, and a number of smaller skirmishes, established a Federal foothold in the Ozarks which eventually led to the undermining of the Confederate government's hold on Northwest Arkansas (DeBlack 2002b:180). 35 The response to the devastating military events of 1862 was for the Confederate government to authorize the use of "irregular units" in Arkansas through the Partisan Ranger Act of 1862. Meanwhile, the Federals declared all guerrillas outlaws and required that they be executed upon capture (Steel and Cottrell 1993:50; Sutherland 2000:135). "If ever necessity bore a child," wrote historian Daniel Sutherland, "it fought as a guerrilla for the Confederacy's Trans-Mississippi armies" (Sutherland 2000:135). Thus began two years of ambushes and midnight raids "often with civilians treated as combatants and neighbors turned predators. Not a war within a war, as some historians have suggested, not even a second war, but the war" in the Arkansas Ozarks (Sutherland 2000:131, emphasis in the original). Figures that would become legends in our popular imaginations--such as Cole Younger, "Bloody Bill" Anderson, Bill Dark of Searcy County, Frank and Jessie James, and the Confederate "irregular" Captain William Clarke Quantrill--participated in guerrilla warfare in the Arkansas Ozark and have been seen by historians as either maniacal murders who craved violence or skilled military troops devoted to either the southern or, after the authorization of "counter guerrilla" units by the Federal Army in 1863, the Union cause (M. Davis 1999; Steele and Cottrell 1993:56; Sutherland 2000:146-147). Thus the war years were characterized in the Arkansas Ozarks by economic collapse, lack of the rule of law and guerilla warfare used at times for vendetta and personal gain. It has been said that "[n]one of the various names attached to the American Civil War adequately convey the scale of disruption unleashed by the conflict" (Brundage 2000:81). The event momentarily destroyed the illusion of American unity even as it 36 forged a greater sense of national identity. In many ways, this period took on an apocalyptic cast for both white and black southerners. Most importantly, I think it can be seen as the beginning of the South's (the Ozarks included) full articulation with modernity (following Flores 2002:32 ; Harvey 1990:10 38; Jameson 1991:53 66; Soja 1989:10 42), as the war "propagated an economic and social agenda that functioned to catapult the United States into an emerging capitalist economy" (Flores 2002:32). "Ozarks as Destination": The Postbellum Ozarks Archaeologist Kathleen Cande (1992, 1995) has used the theme of the Ozarks as a destination to examine the history and archaeology of various sites in Northwest Arkansas. For Cande, the first wave of Ozark immigrants were the antebellum settlers which we have discussed above, but, more important for our purposes here, her second two categories of Ozark immigration and visitation occur following the war. They mark a major change in the region's economy, population and place in the American cultural memory. The second category consisted of participants in the multiple "back to the land" movements that have brought various homesteaders--some permanent, but most temporary--to the Ozarks in the 1900s, 1930s and 1970s (Blevins 2002:128; Cande 1992; Webb 1983). Finally, the rapidly growing tourist economy (Cande's third category) made the Ozarks a destination for millions who wished to spend their leisure time away from urban life (Cande 1992; Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999). Between 1870 and 1920 the population of America shifted from predominately rural to urban (Hale 1998:123; Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:20). America also 37 became more industrialized during the first four Postbellum decades (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:20). Ozark historian Brooks Blevins (2002:31) states that the Civil War "interrupted the development of the Ozark region, and the destruction wrought by four years of skirmishing, battling and marauding altered the subsistence and semisubstence patterns of Ozark agriculture," but rising from the ashes of the Civil War and this new articulation with modernity was a new Ozarks. The "self-sufficient subsistence farmer was a dying breed by 1900 and already comprised only a minority of the Arkansas Ozarks' farm population" (Blevins 2002:46). By 1880, Washington and Benton Counties contained more farms than any other county in Arkansas, but these small yeoman farmers were engaged in cash crop agriculture and were involved in a more diverse economy than their neighbors in the lowcountry or the eastern Ozarks (Blevins 2002:39). While Northwest Arkansas became the United States' leading apple-producing areas, cotton, that important cash crop in the lowland South, gained favor in the eastern Ozarks (Blevins 2002:32). The apple boom was spurred on by the connection of the St. Louis, Arkansas & Texas Railway which extended its line from Springfield, Missouri to Ft. Smith, Arkansas--essentially bisecting Benton and Washington Counties. (Blevins 2002:42). Although plans for railroads were underway prior to the Civil War, it wasn't until the postbellum period that these plans came to fruition. These railroads "acted as a catalyst, altering frontier lifeways more rapidly than before (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:6). The coming of the railroad meant more homesteaders (encouraged by the railroad companies) and a new economic "connectedness" with the greater United States. This 38 increasing trade was part and parcel of "the metamorphosis of perpetuated frontier conditions--a process that writers often term modernization" (Morrow and MyersPhinney 1999:3-4). As the twentieth century dawned, the Arkansas Ozarks shared many similarities with other rural regions across the nation...Ozarkers lived their lives on the farm but transacted business and found social and political diversions in the hamlets and villages. Like those of other rural Americans, the lives of Ozarkers were not confined to the land; the monotony of seasonal labor was broken by school sessions, church services, social club meetings and political events. With road improvements and increasing population density, these activities came to be centered in settlements that ranged in size from a few families to 500 or more people. These hamlets and villages offered the services of doctors, blacksmiths, and merchants; the larger villages contained newspapers, secondary academies, and even specialty business. The Census Bureau's declaration of Ozark rurality obscured the nuances and diversity of settlements in the region and undermined the significant contrast between the isolated farmstead and the crossroads hamlet (Blevins 2002:66). Closely related to both the coming of the railroad and modernity was the beginning of the Ozark tourist and recreation economies. The railroad brought "vacationers and urban entrepreneurs who recognized the potential for profits and prosperity" and "fostered a more diverse economy, one which circulated money and modernization to the Ozarks as it disseminated information about the area, bringing ever more visitors and investors" (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:6). I will explore the connections and entanglements between tourism, modernity and Ozark cultural memory in the next chapter, but it is interesting to note that tourism began in the Ozarks in the late nineteenth century with the phenomenon of hunting and fishing float trips along the major rivers of the Ozark region (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:15-17). From these humble beginnings it expanded throughout the early twentieth century including natural 39 attractions such as Marvel Cave, game hunting clubs and parks as well as entire resort communities designed for the increasingly wealthy upper and middle classes who felt that time spent in a healthful rural setting somehow relieved the anxieties of urban life (Blevins 2002: 119, 125; Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:22, 37, 61). There are many examples of early tourist destinations and resort communities in the Arkansas Ozarks. Eureka Springs in Carroll County, incorporated in 1880, with its healing spring waters was a draw for those from St. Louis, Chicago and other midwestern cities (Blevins 2002:123). Winslow, in Washington County, developed into a thriving and popular resort town following its connection with the St. Louis and San Francisco railroad in 1882 and Bella Vista, in northern Benton County, was founded in 1909 and became the most successful Arkansas resort of the 1920s. It is still a popular retirement community today (Blevins 2002:124-126). One example of note in Northwest Arkansas is the resort community of Monte Ne which opened to guest in April of 1901 (Snelling 1973:13). Monte Ne was founded by William Hope "Coin" Harvey, an economist and politician long associated with his fervent support of the silver standard (as opposed to the gold standard) for the American monetary system. He was the publisher of the weekly magazine "COIN" in the 1890s and wrote his most famous work, Coin's Financial School, in 1894 (Snelling 1973:7-8). He was an advisor to William Jennings Bryan's bid for the presidency in 1896 and, following the economic collapse of 1929, he was nominated by his own Liberty Party as a candidate for the presidency in 1931 (Blevins 2002:125; Snelling 1973:8-9, 37-39). 40 Monte Ne was conceived of on a grand scale. It included the expansive three-story Hotel Monte Ne, its own private railroad spur, a two-story bank, a newspaper, golf course and an enclosed swimming pool all built on the shores of a lagoon which featured a gondola service (Blevins 2002:125; Snelling 1973:13-18). Visitors to Monte Ne were borne from their arriving train to the hotels on the opposite side of the lagoon "being poled over by a singing gondolier" (Snelling 1973:18). Two long hotel buildings known as "Oklahoma Row" and "Missouri Row" where also erected--combining the "rustic" theme of the Ozarks with the elegance of a European resort. Each of the buildings was over 300 feet long with walls of thick oaken logs and red-tiled roofs that glistened in the sunlight. The central part had an upper story, and in front a pillared portico reached across the entire length of the building. There was a basement section where the servants had rooms. A fireplace was built in each of the 42 rooms...In the north end of Oklahoma Row was a grand dining-room where Monte Ne's most elaborate gatherings were held. One side was an orchestra loft where fine musical groups Harvey often imported were quartered. The table settings were resplendent, the sterling silver flatware bearing the Monte Ne engraving (Snelling 1973:13). In 1920 Harvey, even more convinced of the emanate collapse of Western Civilization, announced his intentions to build a 140 foot tall pyramid at Monte Ne "that would stand against time and destructive forces" so that the "message it contained might be preserved for future civilizations" (Snelling 1973:33). In an air-tight room "void of moisture, so that nothing would rust or decay" he would house the important writings, inventions, and other significant accomplishments of the age. "By reading of the evils that killed the present civilization those of the future might learn how to evade them and survive" (Snelling 1973:33). Although the pyramid's base, a sort of amphitheater complete with throne-like chairs, was completed in the 1920s, shortage of funds and 41 illness kept Harvey from completing the project. Harvey died in the midst of the depression in 1936 and most of Monte Ne now lies beneath Beaver Lake (Snelling 1973:45). By the time that Monte Ne had closed following Harvey's death, the reputation of the Ozarks as a vacationing Arcadia had been firmly established for several decades. In 1919, as the image of the Ozarks as a vacationer's playground was just gaining momentum, 13 counties in southwestern Missouri and Northwest Arkansas organized the Ozark Playground Association (OPA)--an organization whose goals were to publicize the Ozarks and encourage tourism (Myers 1990:8). Resort communities such as Eureka Springs, Bella Vista, Winslow and Monte Ne, and the early Ozark tourist industry supported by the OPA in general, would lay the foundations for such mid-twentiethcentury attractions as Silver Dollar City, Dogpatch USA, Bass Pro Shops, the seven-story "Christ of the Ozarks" and the many entertainment venues just north of the Missouri border in Branson. "We All `Jes Scattered, Somehow": African-American Life in Postbellum Northwest Arkansas Seabe Tuttle, who was enslaved east of Fayetteville before the war, went to work on a farm for thirteen dollars a month following emancipation before he went to Van Buren where he was employed as a porter in a hotel. He returned to Fayetteville after getting married and became a carpenter working for A. M. Byrnes where he helped build many of the upper middle class houses built in late-nineteenth-century Fayetteville and even 42 helped put a roof on the Old Main Building at the University of Arkansas (Tuttle in Federal Writers' Project 2001 V2, P6:369-371). Although he and many of the others represented in the slave narratives chose to stay in Northwest Arkansas, Tuttle is clearly impressed by the secondary diasporas of freedmen following the war stating: "When Peace was made the slaves all scattered. We non was givin' nothin' for as I know." Later in the interview he restates the case almost with a sense of confusion and longing: "After Peace was made though, we all jus' scattered, somehow" (Tuttle in Federal Writers' Project 2001 V2, P6:370-371). Although there does not appear to have been a dramatic decrease in the black populations of the Ozarks from 1860-1870 (Table 2.1 contra Gordon 1973:31), this is somewhat misleading. All Ozark counties which existed in 1860 experienced a dramatic decline in African-American population during the war, with the exception of Independence County, a county partially in the Ozarks uplands and partially in the lowland delta. Independence County received a five fold increase in its black population between 1860 and 1870, possibly due to available farm land, thus giving the appearance of an overall increase in black Ozark population. The combination of the anti-free black legislation, slave desertion, and the fleeing of whites and their slaves during the war all, not doubt, contributed to the decline in the remainder upland counties (e.g., Benton, Carroll, Marion, Searcy and Washington). One must remember, however, that the numbers during this period are notoriously unreliable due to the infrastructural collapse and movements of people during the Civil War. 43 County Baxter Benton Boone Carroll Cleburne Izard Independence* Fulton Madison Marion Newton Searcy Sharp Stone Van Buren Washington Totals 1840 -176 -142 -135 222 -83 102 -11 --61 901 1833 1850 -202 -223 -196 840 51 164 255 54 29 --29 1213 3256 1860 -385 -330 -382 1137 88 296 269 24 93 --200 1540 4744 1870 -182 74 37 -246 5158 85 150 19 9 30 144 -119 674 6927 1880 45 128 88 60 -467 3614 36 124 43 5 16 176 99 118 944 5963 1890 18 92 91 82 49 833 4543 85 58 32 6 28 177 113 162 1010 7379 Census Year 1900 1910 5 7 112 110 142 7 166 64 11 7 285 242 1483 1264 79 44 44 55 38 0 7 10 99 104 74 83 94 94 167 220 543 614 3349 2925 1920 4 102 2 82 1 217 1075 26 40 0 10 24 15 15 211 508 2332 1930 1 88 3 25 3 175 894 0 16 1 0 1 19 15 121 571 1933 1940 0 46 0 8 0 140 801 0 15 1 0 1 8 12 137 411 1580 1950 0 20 0 13 2 95 642 4 3 0 1 1 12 4 106 422 1325 1960 0 23 3 6 1 54 527 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 95 566 1280 1970 144 290 49 22 18 57 628 21 21 63 27 18 22 28 103 1072 2583 Table 2.1. African-American population in the Arkansas Ozarks, 1840-1970 (after Morgan 1973:62). 44 Following the war, however, the picture is even more complicated. The AfricanAmerican population in the Ozarks peaked in 1890 when 7,379 blacks were enumerated by the U.S. Census in the counties of the Arkansas Ozarks--with every upland Ozark county having a black population of some size (Table 2.1; Gordon 1973:62). The population had grown from 5,963 the previous decade, but would fall to 3,349 in 1900. Moreover, between 1880 and 1890 the black population in some counties rose, while others fell. Benton, Baxter, Madison, Newton and Marion counties all declined in African-American population, while counties such as Boone, Carroll, Fulton, Izard, Stone and Washington recorded increases (Gordon 1973:32, 62). This trend of migration out of the Ozarks and nucleation within the Ozarks continued until the 1960 census recorded only 1,280 African Americans remaining in the Arkansas Ozarks--including five allwhite counties. This dramatic decrease in black population can be explained in a variety of ways. First, as it has already been noted the late-nineteenth century marks a turning point for the Ozarks as a whole--increasing modernization, the onset of a tourist economy and the movement of populations towards the two most urban areas in the Arkansas Ozarks (Fayetteville and Batesville). Moreover, this decline runs parallel to, but more exaggerated than, an overall peak in the larger Ozark population (Rafferty 2001:63). As the overall population of the Ozarks remained stagnate between 1900 and 1930, however, the region's African-American population plummeted. This "whitening" of the Arkansas Ozarks is no doubt due to both economic and racial pressures. 45 Attempts at industrialization in the South, southern urbanization (see Cobb 1984; Moneyhon 1996), and a general reorganization of social relations in the South following the physical and psychological destruction that accompanied the war required a new set of social codes in order to stabilize the changing constructions of race and class. Along racial lines these codes were overtly provided by the1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision, the systematic disfranchisement of black voters throughout the South between 1895 and 1909 (DuBois 1940:55) and the enactment of "Jim Crow" laws wherein "whites tried to order the world to prevent African Americans from rising" (Gilmore 1996:15). It seems more than a coincidence that the depopulation of the African-American communities of the Ozarks occurs at the same time. In the Arkansas Ozarks, following the end of reconstruction and the institution of Jim Crow, segregated black communities began to coalesce. Gray Rock, Mt. Pisgah, Bethlehem, Ruddell Hill, Dry Jordan Creek, Menifee, and many others are examples of black communities that were scattered throughout the Ozarks (Gordon 1973:95-151). In Northwest Arkansas many of these communities were located in Washington County-- Tin Cup (in Fayetteville), the Harris Community (southeast of Fayetteville along the Middle Fork of the White River) and in western Washington County around Cane Hill and Lincoln. The fact that these towns and communities became, in certain situations, the target of racial pressures--and sometimes violence--played a role in the exodus of the black Ozarkians. One dramatic example can be seen at the turn of the century in Harrison, Arkansas. 46 For much of the twentieth-century Harrison, Arkansas, in Madison County was all white (Froelich and Zimmermann 1999:131). This, however, was not always the case. In 1905 and 1909, two separate acts of racial mob violence caused, through death and fear of further violence, the complete depopulation of Dry Jordan Creek--Harrison's AfricanAmerican community which had numbered at least 115 in 1900 (Froelich and Zimmermann 1999:132). When Gordon Morgan was compiling his Black Hillbillies report he was not able to find out much about Harrison's African-American community due to a county courthouse fire in 1908 (Morgan 1973:133). Ralph Rea in Boone County and its People notes only that there were "several hundred blacks in the county up until just after the turn of the century" (Rea quoted in Morgan 1973:133). Morgan interviewed a 98-year-old resident who remembered "vague things about several hundred Negroes", but he could not remember why they left (Morgan 1973:134). Even more suspicious were gaps in the files of Harrison's newspaper coinciding with the events of 1905 and 1909 (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:131). Jacqueline Froelich and David Zimmerman, who finally brought the riots to light in 1999, have put together the story of the Harrison race riots by bringing together the scattered small references to the events. In 1901 Harrison was an expectant community. Track was being laid for the Missouri and North Arkansas Railroad which, they hoped, would bring economic prosperity to the town. Local histories indicate that the white and black communities of Harrison were getting along--even coming together to raise money for a black school house (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:133; Rea 1955:122). 47 But in the summer of 1905 the railroad defaulted on its bond and declared bankruptcy ; leaving the town that had heavily invested in its arrival shocked and financially crippled. Moreover, a steady stream of unemployed railroad workers--mostly young, single African-American men--were arriving in Harrison following the railroad's collapse (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:136). "Their mere presence, homeless and unemployed, was no doubt perceived as threatening" in a way that the local black population had never been--a situation which "often bred racial violence in the New South" (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:137). Saturday night, September 30, 1905, two black men--one known as Dan, the other called Rabbit--are arrested and jailed for breaking into the residence of Dr. John J. Johnson. The following Monday, a white mob stormed the building, removed the prisoners, whipped them and ordered to leave town (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:141). The rioters then turned on the residents of Dry Jordan Creek. ...some eight to ten [blacks were] tied to trees [and] whipped with five foot bull whips [while] several men and women [were] tied together and thrown into a three to four foot deep hole in Crooked Creek. Twenty or thirty wellarmed men with guns, clubs, etc. burned three or four of the Negroes' homes, shot out the windows and doors of all of the other Negroes' homes...and warned all Negroes to leave town that night. (Watkins quote in Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:141). Much of Harrison's African-American community made their way on foot that night to Eureka Springs, Springfield or Fayetteville (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:142; Rea 1955:141-142). It is unknown how many people were killed during the violence, but federal records suggest that the victims included at least a fourteen-year-old girl, her twelve-year-old brother, and a sixty-five-year-old woman (Froelich and Zimmerman 48 1999:143-144). For those few who stayed, random violent acts and murder against African Americans continued in Harrison for some time afterwards. It was not until 1909, however, that a second explosion of racial riots would erase Harrison's black community completely. Charles Stinnett, unemployed son of well-respected black resident Tom Stinnett, was arrested on January 18, 1909. Emma Lovett, an elderly white woman accused him of robbery, assault and rape. Stinnett admitted to being at Lovett's house but denied committing any crime (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:150-151). Two tense days passed as the jury was selected, arguments made and the jury deliberated. The jury returned a verdict of guilty on all charges and at sentencing the following day it was clear that the punishment "specified by statute for the offense of which Stinnett was convicted was death by hanging" (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:152). The tension grew as news spread that Lovett, the alleged victim, was gravely ill and a mob moved through the town headed toward the Harrison jail, but authorities had evaded the lynching of Stinnett by moving him to the jail in nearby Marshall (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:152). The threatening presence of the mob, however, proved the last straw for the 1905 survivors. Fearing for their lives, the remainder of the black community fled the town on the night of January 28th, 1909, leaving Harrison a "grey town" throughout most of the remainder of the twentieth century (Froelich and Zimmerman 1999:153). Although racism and violence in small communities partially explains the outward migration and nucleation of the African-American communities of the Ozarks, there are 49 economic pulls to the same towns to which the residents of Harrison fled--Eureka Springs, Fayetteville, Springfield. In these urbanizing towns there were many more opportunities for jobs, marriage and upward mobility (Froelich 1997:161). George Ballard, the "Poet Lauriat of Tin Cup," was a barber and auto-mechanic born in Cincinnati, Arkansas in western Washington County in 1882 (Read 1928:14). His parents, Ike and Lee Ballard were born into slavery, but owned a small farm in Cincinnati and also worked as day laborers by the late nineteenth century (Neal 1977). Ballard did not come to Fayetteville and Tin Cup until adulthood, but it was reported that he had been "studying English and writing verse for several years" (Read 1928:14). He married Rosetta Dart in 1902 and lived in a three room, tarpaper covered house on East Mountain behind the Fayetteville jail (Neal 1977). As a poet he received a fair amount of attention in Fayetteville, he was published regularly in Daily Democrat (the paper that would become the Northwest Arkansas Times), he had written commissioned poems for groups like the Ozark Playground Association, been the subject of two Arkansas Traveler feature articles and published a small book of poetry entitled Ozark "Ballards" (Ballard 1928). Both the articles and the preface to the book (written by Daily Democrat editor Lessie Stringfellow Read who also "edited" the volume of poetry) reveal the odd tightrope act that was commonly performed by those African Americans attempting to traverse "beyond the veil" in the early twentieth-century Ozark towns. The full title of the book, Ozark "Ballards" of a Negro Singer Being a Collection of Verse by George Ballard, Lay-poet of the Ozarks, Written as Comment on the Common 50 Current Events and Passing Seasons by One a Little Less Inarticulate than the Majority of His Race and Who Finds His Greatest Pleasures in and Best Self-expression Through Rhyme and Meter, is just the first of the many indications of the combination of slight and praise that Ballard received from his white peers and editors. Ballard is described as "Fayetteville's jazz singer" who "singings only of common and human things" and "knows nothing of the technique of writing" (Read 1928:16). Although his poetry had "brought the Negro singer something more than local fame" it is clear that "there is claimed for his work no serious literary merit" (Read 1928:12). Ballard's poetry was also a strange mix. His works in Ozark "Ballards," the only source we have for his poetry, include topics which would "sell" to the larger white audiences--The Fayetteville centennial, an invitation to vacation in the Ozarks (commissioned by the OPA), the death of Woodrow Wilson, a wedding poem for the mayor of Fayetteville, a condemnation of evolution, a Civil War memorial poem, and a variety of poems written in "black dialect." But hidden amidst these uncontroversial topics were poems which both praise and condemn prohibition (especially Bootlegger which depicts a family broken up by the jailing of an old man charged with selling whiskey; Ballard 1928:37) and a striking class consciousness (demonstrated most overtly in A Toiler Speaks where Ballard proclaimed that "I have no use for the white-collared man/Who does nothing but sit in the shade"; Ballard 1928:28). No doubt that Ballard's poetry deserves a much deeper and concerted analysis. As he is not the subject of this work, however, I will leave that analysis for other venues. 51 So far, the purpose of this chapter has been not only to provide a basic overview of the history of the Arkansas Ozarks and Northwest Arkansas in particular, but also to introduce the reader, through brief vignettes, to some of the diverse figures and events in Ozark history. Having completed this regional overview, I will now examine the microhistory of Van Winkle's Mill from its founding in the 1850s until its current status as a part of the Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area. Peter Van Winkle and Van Winkle's Mill The historical occupation of Van Winkle's Mill began sometime in the early years of the 1850s when Peter Marselis Van Winkle (Figure 2.4) borrowed money from a local venture capitalist and purchased the land, equipment and enslaved labor for his Ozark mill (Easley and McAnelly 1996:156). By 1851 he was paying taxes in Benton County on the land now known as Van Hollow (Brandon et al. 2000:5). Peter was born in 1814 in New York City, the fourth child of a large Manhattan family (Hicks 1990:15). As their Dutch name implies, the family were not newcomers to the continent. They were settlers of the New Amsterdam colony, New York's predecessor, and were ensconced there since 1625 (Hicks 1990:vii, 3-8). Any prosperity the family's early arrival accorded them had worn thin by the early nineteenth century and Peter's family moved westward in search of the opportunities commonly associated with newly opened portions of the west: landholdings and, no doubt, a way back up the social ladder (Hicks 1990:17-19; U.S. Census 1820). 52 Figure 2.4. Peter Van Winkle and family circa 1870. Clockwise from top: Norman, Temperance, Peter, Jr. (being held), Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Wallace (being held) and Peter Van Winkle (after Hicks 1990:14). 53 Peter's father had moved the family to Illinois prior to 1820 and Peter grew up in Franklin and Fulton Counties in Illinois (Easley and McAnelly 1996:156; Hicks 1990:1718). There is disagreement in the few historical documents that exist about Peter's educational and financial background. The earliest reference to Peter's education claims that he "received but meager educational advantages in his early days" (Goodspeed 1889:1032), but other sources mention a college education (Scott 1962:170). Most popular histories and newspaper accounts follow the former. Therefore Peter is remembered as a man who "had few advantages while a youth" (Black 1976; The Rogers Daily News July 1, 1950) or "having few advantages during his boyhood, he was a natural mechanic." (Rose 1953). Peter himself first appeared in Northwest Arkansas in the mid-1830s at the age of twenty-one years old (Hicks 1990:15-16; Rothrock 1973:63; Washington County Landowners Plat 1835). Although we have no direct evidence as to why Peter came to Arkansas, his arrival coincided with that of a Baptist "flock" under the leadership of Elder Stephen Strickland (Hicks 1990:17). The speculation that this was more than a coincidence is somewhat reinforced by the fact that he soon married Temperance "Tempy" Miller, a member of that flock (Rothrock 1973:63; Washington County Marriage Book B). After a brief return to Illinois, Peter and Temperance appeared in Northwest Arkansas records on a property map in 1845. Through the 1850s, he made a living farming, contracting to "break" prairie land, blacksmithing, and making wagons in 54 Washington County (Blevins 2002:71; Easley and McAnelly 1996:156; Hicks 1990:17; U.S. Census 1850). By 1860, Peter built what has been described as a "plantation style" (or a "southerntype") home in Van Hollow (Hicks 1990:21) where he lived with his wife, eight children, a tutor from Tennessee, and a young apprentice lathe operator named John Bell Steele. As early as 1861 he began to acquire a good deal of material wealth and the symbols of his newly acquired station: 1370 acres of land, one saw mill, 34 mules, one gold watch, one pleasure carriage, and 12 slaves over five years of age (1860 U.S. Census, Brandon et al. 2000:7). While the first evidence we have of Peter "owning" slaves was ten years earlier, coincident with his moving to Van Hollow, by the beginning of the Civil War he enslaved at least eighteen human beings--not an insubstantial number for Northwest Arkansas (Brandon et al. 2000:10; Hicks 1990:21, 51; Smith 1995:65). Moreover, his sympathies during the war were not hidden in the slightest. Not only did Peter contract with the Confederate government to build barracks and stables for troops stationed in the area (Hicks 1990:21, 346-348), he named two of his children after prominent Confederate figures: Jefferson Davis Van Winkle (born 1861) and Robert E. Lee Van Winkle (born 1863; Hicks 1990:175-262). Thus, when the tide turned against the Confederate forces in Northwest Arkansas, Peter found no quarter. He fled with his family and slaves in 1862, to Bowie County, Texas. His home and mill in Van Hollow were burned to the ground sometime between 1862 and 1866, possibly near the time War Eagle Mill was burned by 55 the Sixth Texas Cavalry Regiment on March 2, 1862 (Hicks 1990:23; Hughes 2000:35; Rothrock 1973:64). Peter and company returned to Van Hollow in 1866 and rebuilt the community, including a two-story house, a raised garden (Figures 2.5 and 2.6) and "the most modern and powerful mill in the west" (Easley and McAnelly 1996:157; Hicks 1990:25). The house and mill were finished by at least 1870. Van Winkle's Mill dominated the regional market in the 1870s and provided the lumber for the postbellum rebuilding of Fayetteville as well as many of the public buildings built following the war. This included the 1871 building of the Arkansas Industrial University (now known as the `Old Main' building of the University of Arkansas) and the 1872 Bentonville Courthouse (Campbell 1928:60; Hicks 1990:32, 47; Rothrock 1973:62). Nevertheless, by the end of the decade, Peter was moving on. In 1880--after a year of construction--he opened one of the first three-story hotels in Northwest Arkansas located on Center Street in downtown Fayetteville (Figure 2.7). This is where he began his second prestigious career (Fayetteville Democrat, February 14, 1880). Rather than being comfortable in his enclosed, rural hollow, Peter and family were at the center of social life in the growing town of Fayetteville. The Van Winkle's ballroom hosted a continuous stream of galas and celebrations (for example, see Fayetteville Democrat, June 19, 1880). Additionally, he continued his campaign for modernization, as he was instrumental in bringing the railroad to Fayetteville and apparently provided much of the funds to build its depot (Easley and McAnelly 1996:157). He was seen as "a man of 56 Figure 2.5. The Van Winkle home, circa 1870 (after Hicks 1990:28). Figure 2.6. Raised gardens across from main house, circa 1970 (after Hicks 1990:28). 57 Figure 2.7. The Van Winkle Hotel (also called the Van Winkle House) circa 1890 (after Hicks 1990:35). Figure 2.8. Van Winkle's Mill ca. 1870 (after Hicks 1990:26). 58 progress" and "was the first man in War Eagle to have a telephone, a line having been installed in 1880 from Fayetteville to his mill" (Scott 1962:171). In the winter of 1882, while walking on a street in downtown Rogers in the company of his wife, Temperance, Peter fell dead of a stroke (Fayetteville Democrat, February 16, 1882; Fayetteville Sentinel, February 15, 1882). One of Peter's sons summoned a special funeral engine and coach overnight from St. Louis (over 300 miles away), and Peter's body was borne in style a distance of approximately eleven miles south to the railroad depot he helped establish in Fayetteville (Easley and McAnelly 1996:156; Hicks 1999:38-40, 389; Rothrock 1973:61-62, 68-69). Gathered at the Frisco Depot on Dickson St. in Fayetteville, Arkansas on the morning of February 11, 1882, were the city's leading businessmen, officials, Freemasons and a large crowd of townspeople. They were there to perform a sad duty. The day before, on Friday, February 10th an old and honored citizen of Fayetteville-- Peter Van Winkle-- had died in the neighboring town of Rogers. Now, on the morning of the 11th, a special train dispatched overnight from St. Louis to Rogers was bringing Van Winkle's body and his family home. The funeral train pulled in at 9:30 A.M., Van Winkle's coffin was placed in a waiting horsedrawn hearse, his family entered waiting carriages and a procession formed behind. It moved east up Dickson Street, turned south onto College Ave. for three blocks, then west onto Center Street, stopping a half-block down Center in front of a three-story frame edifice known far and wide as Van Winkle's House, Van Winkle's Hall or Van Winkle's Hotel. The building was draped in the trappings of mournful black. Van Winkle lay in state there until 2 p.m. Sunday when, with Masonic honors, he was conveyed a few blocks west on Center Street to Evergreen Cemetery and buried (Rothrock 1973:61-62). A six-hundred dollar monument was ordered from Long and Wheete of Carthage, Missouri (Hicks 1990:400; Probate Box 16, Benton County Courthouse). It too displays the trappings of a successful member of the community: a three-tiered base upon which a 59 obelisk-like plinth was placed. Atop that plinth sat a marble urn. The Masonic badge is prominently displayed on the plinth. In this cemetery, founded by the local Masonic Lodge, he was laid to rest near other prominent Fayetteville residents. The large obeliskstyle grave marker, complete with Masonic insignia, indicated that his grave belonged to a well-regarded individual of his place and time (Brandon et al. 2000:9). His obituaries proclaimed him the "Lumber King of Northwest Arkansas" (Easley and McAnelly 1996:156-7) and later newspaper articles would frequently refer to him as "the greatest genius and captain of industry that the hills of northwest Arkansas ever nurtured" (Elliot 1959; Funk 1962:7). The inscription on the back side of Peter's stone is now almost illegible, but luckily a hand-scrawled note on the back of the monument invoice sits in the probate box at the Bentonville Courthouse (Probate Box 16, Benton County Courthouse). The note's author is Temperance Van Winkle, and aside from attempting to insure the proper spelling of "Van Winkle," it gives us the text to the poem once inscribed on that now weathered monument: What to us is life without thee-- Darkness and despair alone. When with sighs we seek to find thee This tomb proclaims that thou art gone. For myself as a researcher, this inscription struck a chord--I did seek to find Peter. Not only the Peter found in these documents, but the "every day" Peter Van Winkle. Moreover, we were not only looking for Peter, but all of those who lived and worked at Van Winkle's Mill. What were their lives like? What was the quality of life at the mill? 60 Life Histories of the Mills and Laborers in Van Hollow Peter Van Winkle chose wisely when he located his sawmill amidst the pinecovered hills of eastern Benton County. He was deep within the "timber belt of Carroll, Madison, and the eastern part of Benton County" whose "greatest length stretches from Boone County line on the east to the Benton County section of the White River on west" (Arkansas Gazette, March 2, 1882). From his position on the White River he would have access to both the pine stands he needed and the transportation necessary to build a successful lumber venture. Unfortunately, little is known about Peter's mill prior to the Civil War. Several obituaries and other sources indicate that the first mill (established in the 1850s) was a portable model that was powered by either horse or oxen (Easley and McAnelly 1996:156; Fayetteville Sentinel, 15 February, 1882; Hicks 1990:19). Soon after (according to some sources as late as 1858), Peter built a steam-powered mill with the financial help of James Sutton, a prominent local merchant and venture capitalist (Easley and McAnelly 1996:156). By 1860, "P. Van Winkle & Co." engaged 30 hands at the mill and was turning out pine lumber to feed the growing towns of Northwest Arkansas (1860 US Census, Schedule 5). It is not certain when the gristmill was added to the complex, but confederate Major Van Dorn utilized the Van Winkle grist during its period of abandonment during the war (Hughes 2000). Unfortunately, no record books related to Van Winkle's Mill have surfaced in the archival data, making a clear understanding of exactly who the mill laborers were difficult to determine. At this juncture, it is not clear if the "average number of hands 61 Age 31 29 28 25 25 22 19 16 13 9 8 7 6 Sex Female Female Male Male Male Male Male Female Male Male Female Male Male Black/Mulatto Black Black Black Mulatto Black Mulatto Black Black Black Mulatto Black Mulatto Black Table 2.2. Enslaved persons listed in the 1860 US Census slave schedule for Peter Van Winkle. 62 employed" at the mill in 1860 includes enslaved individuals or not. Slave Schedules from the same year reveal that Peter claimed to own thirteen human beings (although the number is up to eighteen by the time of their flight in 1862; Hicks 1990:350). Of these, six were "working age" menall possible hands at the mill (Table 2.2). Other workers at Van Winkle's Mill are just as difficult to get at through the documentary record. The 1860 Census lists few people who claim any occupation other than "farmer" in War Eagle Township (Table 2.3), and only two of them are clearly related to the mill's operation--J. B. Steele, the `turner' living with Peter, and Littleberg Macon, a sawyer from Tennessee. Additionally, William Vines (a day-laborer from Georgia) may also have worked at the mill, as might at least one of the two blacksmiths (Daniel Sharp and Thomas Clifton). It is less clear, however, what connection the three clergymen or the "trader" might have had with the Van Winkle establishment, if any. Thus, if we accept all the aforementioned parties as possible members of Peter's 30 hands, there are still twenty laborers unaccounted for in the archival data. These men were likely employed on a seasonal basis and drawn from the surrounding farmsteads. They therefore would have listed "farmer" as their occupation for the census taker, rendering themselves "invisible" in the documentary record. A surviving invoice tells us that by 1861, Peter contracted with the newly formed Confederate Government. For the handsome sum of $20,920.00, P. Van Winkle & Co. were to mill the lumber for, and construct a CSA barracks and stables in nearby Cross Hollows, Arkansas to aid the war effort (Hicks 1990:346-348). Peter, however, would never collect the money owed him since, as mentioned earlier, he and his family took 63 their slaves and fled to Texas in 1862. Nonetheless, when Peter returned from his exile (1866) he quickly recovered with renewed vigor. The new mill at Van Hollow was completed around 1870 (Figure 2.8). The machinery was purchased from a St. Louis firm, shipped via barge down the Mississippi River and up the Arkansas River to Van Buren, Arkansas. From there it was shipped overland through the rugged Boston Mountains and up to Van Hollow. "Roads had to be chopped, bridges improvised, camps maintained, food provided for men and oxen. The story of that trip should be worthy of a saga" (Rothrock 1973:65). More specifically and dramatically, it has been widely described as "an epic probably unsurpassed to that time except by the Egyptians in propelling on rollers the heavy blocks of stone cut from the quarries to the distant spots for erecting their pyramids" (Rose 1953). The new mill's equipment included a 150 horsepower engine (with a 22" x 30" cylinder) powered by three steam boilers driving the large, legendary flywheel with a smoke stack 60 feet high and five feet in diameter that towered over the whole affair (1880 U.S. Census, Industrial Schedule; Funk 1962; Hicks 1990:26; Rothrock 1973:65). Several auxiliary-manufacturing facilities were also added and the workshops at Peter's mill could produce cabinetry, doors, and windows (Hicks 1990:26). With this mill, Peter "developed the most extensive lumber business in the southwest" (Fayetteville Sentinel February 15, 1882) and became the "wealthiest man in this section of the country." He added many improvements, established other mills and purchased thousands of acres of pine lands until he owned nearly all the pineries in Benton, Madison and Carroll Counties" (Easley and McAnelley 1996:157). 64 Name Peter Van Winkle Temperance Mary Calvin Ellen Emily Norman Lucy M----s (?) J.B. Steele Isaac (?) Brodham Littleburg Macon Nancy Sarah Mary Brad Thomas Macon William Blackburn Amanda Almida Daniel Sharp Katherine Thomas Mary Cynthia William Viens Phebia Ranies Thomas Clifton Elizabeth James Lance Elizabeth Thomas Louisa Mary Thomas Branson & Family William Maharer & Family G. W. Blackburn & Family Richard Sharpe & Family John S. Reynolds Margaret Harriet Age 45 35 16 15 13 11 9 4 22 22 31 35 28 8 6 3 39 23 18 3 months 29 28 8 6 1 29 22 3 40 42 16 14 12 7 5 3 48 62 51 53 52 50 7 Sex M F F M F F M F M M M M F F F M M M F F M F M F F M F M M F M M F M F F M M M M M F F Occupation Mechanic Student Turner Sawing Sawyer Com. S. Teacher Teamster Blacksmith Day Laborer Blacksmith State of Birth NY IL AR AR AR AR AR AR TN TN TN TN TN AR AR AR NC AR IL AR TN TN TN TN AR GA AR AR SC SC SC SC SC SC SC GA TN NY NC TN NY TN AR Regular Baptists Clergyman Regular Baptists Clergyman Freewill Baptist Clergyman Freewill Baptist Clergyman Trader Table 2.3. Mill related persons and families listed in the 1860 US Census. 65 Name Peter Van Winkle Temperance Norman Jefferson Lee Wallace Peter John Steele Mary Guy Davis (?) Bailey Steele John Worrell Joel Leming Lucinda Charles Dackel Martha Francis Florence Aaron Van Winkle Vincent Ellis Amanda David Vincent Perry Van Winkle Agnes Mayfield Jobe George Henry Spence Elizabeth Jinsney Jessie Nathan Age 56 45 17 9 7 4 2 31 28 1 12 32 27 24 20 28 20 2 7 months 40 6 3 2 5 months 79 34 40 10 13 10 11 7 5 3 1 month 12 Race w w w w w w w w w w b w w w w w w w w b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b Sex M F M M M M M M F M M M M M F M F F F M M M F M M M F M M M M F F M M M Occupation Manufacturer Keeping House At Home Turner Keeping House Domestic(?) Servant Supt. Sash & --- Factory Farmer Working Mill Keeping House Turner in Mill Keeping House Working Mill Teamster Keeping House At Home State of Birth NY IL AR AR AR AR AR TN AR AR AR TN NC TN AR IL AR AR AR AL TX AR AR AR VA AR MO MO MO MO AR AR AR AR AR AR Table 2.4. Mill related persons and families listed in the 1870 US Census. 66 Name Peter Van Winkle Temperance Jeff D. Robert E. Lee William Wallace Peter Simm Stevens Susan Martha Homer Norman Van Winkle Maggie Matilda Calvin Cora B. Alonza K. Martha L---(?) Aron Van Winkle Jane Henry Vint. Ellis Marda Dave Sophia Josephine Gus Addie Alice Aron Age 66 56 19 16 14 12 28 26 3 6 months 27 28 6 4 11 months 27 50 55 20 16 14 18 12 10 9 8 7 80 Race w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w b b b b b b b b b b b b Sex M F M M M M M F F M M F M F M F M F M M F M F F M F F M Occupation Keeping House At College At College At Home Clerk at Lumber Mill Keeping House Sawyer Keeping House House Help Turner at Saw Mill Keeping House Work on Farm Work at Mill At Home " " " " " " Widowed State of Birth NY IL AR AR AR AR MO NC AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AL AR TX AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR VA Table 2.5. Mill related persons and families listed in the 1880 US Census. 67 Although it has been reported that "most of his freed slaves chose to return with him" (Elliot 1959, emphasis added) and that "when they were freed, Van Winkle had about thirty who were willing to stay on and help with the work" (Scott 1962:171). These are clearly exaggerations (Van Winkle never owned thirty slaves). At least two African-American families, however, did stay on at Van Winkle's Mill after emancipation. The 1870 Census lists the families of Aaron Van Winkle (whose occupation is reported as "working in the mill") as well as the family of Perry Van Winkle, a teamster (Table 2.4). Additionally, many more whites are listed as claiming mill-related occupations than in the previous Census--for example, Joel Lemming ("working mill"), Charles Dackle ("turner in mill"), and John Steele ("turner"). This is the same "J. B. Steele" who lived with Peter according to the 1860 Census. Now John Steele was commonly referred to as "Capt. Jack Steele" following his service in the first regiment of the Arkansas Calvary during the war (Hicks 1990:106, 344-345). During the war Jack somehow found the time to court Mary Van Winkle, the second daughter of Peter and Temperance. Information indicates that Jack and Mary were married by 1868, but stayed in Van Hollow only a short time. By 1871 they built a house and store in the nearby town of Springdale (Hicks 1990:105; Robert Lafferty, personal communication; Shiloh Museum 1997). The 1870 Census lists Jack and Mary as living under their own roof in the hollow as man and wife, along with one child (Guy) and three other dependents (Table 2.4). Steele moved with Peter to Fayetteville in 1880 to operate the newly built Van Winkle Hotel, but following Peter's death he returned to Benton County where he operated several industrial facilities (canning and milling operations) 68 and served as mayor of the town of Rogers, Arkansas for three terms (Goodspeed 1889:218-219; Hicks 1990:106). By 1880, Peter's mill was producing 1,300,000 board feet of lumber annually valued at approximately $134,250. His steam engine with three boilers powering a circular saw, two rip saws, two molding saws, one gang lathe, one shingle machine, two planers and a variety of other machines, easily out-paced the other water-powered sawmills in War Eagle Township. Oddly, the mill apparently employed only 15 individuals (including 4 "children and youth") working six months out of the year, between 8 and 10 hours a day, and making between 75 cents to $2.00 a day (1880 US Census, Industrial Schedule; Goodspeed 1889:108, 132). One of those fifteen individuals was a 28-year-old Missouri man named Simm Stevens employed as a "clerk at [the] lumber mill"--the first time a non-labor job is listed for Van Winkle's Mill. The teamster Perry Van Winkle is no longer listed as working at the mill by 1880. Aaron Van Winkle is, however, and his household had grown to include his wife, 9 children and his 80-year-old father who was born into slavery in the "Old Dominion" of Virginia (Table 2.5). By this time, Aaron Anderson Van Winkle (also known as "Old Rock" or "Uncle Rock") had cemented himself as a fixture in Van Hollow (Figure 2.9, 2.10). When he was about six years of age, he was brought to Arkansas in bondage from Alabama by Col. Hugh Anderson, the father of the murdered James J. Anderson (Benton County Democrat, May 12, 1904; also see Hilliard 1998 for a discussion of that family and slavery). It is unclear when Aaron was sold to Peter, but by the end of the war he was 69 Figure 2.9. Van Winkle family gathered on the front porch of the Steele home in Rogers, 1901. Temperance Van Winkle is sitting center (after Hicks 1990:104). Figure 2.10. Detail of 1901 Van Winkle photograph showing Aaron Anderson Van Winkle standing in the shadows behind Temperance. This is the only known photograph of Aaron. 70 Figure 2.11. "The Old South," a nostalgic composite photo of five freedmen who had been enslaved in northwest Arkansas. Sam Van Winkle is second from left. 71 working at the mill as an "engineer" (1870 U.S. Census; Benton County Democrat, May 12, 1904). Family oral history claims, however, that Aaron had a more domestic role in the hollow: "Rock was Peter's `manservant' and always by his side" (Hicks 1990:52). In truth, there does seem to have been `something' that attached Peter and Aaron for in 1880, when Peter left the hollow for his Fayetteville hotel, Aaron also left the hollow and bought a sizable farm west of Bentonville. Whatever Aaron's role at the mill, he managed to garner a great deal of respect from both the black and white communities and when he passed away in 1904, his death was mourned by both. His obituary spoke eloquently of the life of this freedman, stating: "Aaron, thy days of toil have ended and the time of rest is at hand. The tired body is sleeping in the grave but the good old man's spirit has returned to Him who gave it" (Benton County Democrat, May 12, 1904). Van Winkle's Mill into the Twentieth Century It is unclear who was running the mill between Peter's departure in 1880 and his death in 1882. It is quite possible that either Jack Steele or Peter himself (or perhaps both) managed to keep abreast of mill operations from Fayetteville. Following Peter Van Winkle's death in 1882, however, Van Winkle's Mill slowly faded into the distance as the twentieth century marched on. Temperance attempted to claim the Van Winkle home as a homestead in probate court (Probate Box 16, Benton County Court House), while John Steele returned to Van Hollow to manage the mill operations for a year (Goodspeed 1889:219). Her claim was 72 denied, however, and the estate sold the Van Hollow property (including the mill) to neighbor and son-in-law J. A. C. Blackburn (Arkansas Gazette, March 9, 1882; Goodspeed 1889:107-108). It seems clear that Blackburn saw himself as the heir to the Van Winkle and War Eagle legacieslocal histories give him the "Lumber King" title once used to describe Peter (Goodspeed 1889:132). Still, the Blackburn operation was brief, as he and his second wife moved from the Van Winkle home to the town of Rogers in 1890 when he combined operations with that of his own War Eagle Mill (Hicks 1990:47). In 1902, Tom Blackburn bought the machinery and equipment of the combined mills and shipped them to Danville, Arkansas (Funk 1962:8). After 1890, Blackburn attempted to sell the mill and all property associated with it. Blackburn had difficulty finding a buyer--possibly due to a national depression that began in 1893--until 1903, when Edgar Conable bought all of Blackburn's land, said to have equaled 8,000 acres (Bowers 2003:17; Conable 1903; Phillips 1979:37). No information to confirm this purchase was discovered in the Benton County deed books (possibly due to the fact that one deed book is missing for this time period). What can be confirmed, however, is that Edgar Conable opened a post office in Section 22 of Township 19 North, Range 28 West in 1903 (Bowers 2003:17; Phillips 1979: 37). Interestingly, Conable was the leader of a religious utopian group called the Pathfinders who believed in the power of mind over matter (Easley and McAnelly 1995:108, Phillips 1979:37). Conable's stay at Van Hollow was short-lived, as the post office closed only 73 six months later in 1904. Apparently, Conable lost ownership of the hollow upon default of payment (Conable 1903; Rogers Democrat, May 5, 1910). By all accounts the mill was no longer functioning during WWI when, spurred on by the high price of scrap metal, a group of workers dynamited the giant flywheel of the mill apart "so it could be carted away as scrap iron" (Arkansas Democrat, August 2, 1959; Mitchell 1969:17). Erwin Funk relates the most detailed and colorful account of the event: A few years ago during World War I a group of workmen went into the woods about twelve miles southeast of Rogers on War Eagle River and with charges of dynamite blew a 24-foot flywheel into fragments. They were carted away and sold for junk during the period when old iron was worth real money. These charges destroyed the last monument to the greatest genius and captain of industry the hills of Northwest Arkansas ever knew, the late Peter Van Winkle (Funk 1962:7) Between 1916 and 1929, Roscoe Hobbs purchased the Van Winkle land. Hobbs was the owner of the Ozark Tie Company (later the Hobbs Western Tie and Timber Company), which manufactured railroad ties and provided timber "for a variety of wood products manufactured in the cities of Rogers, Siloam Springs and Fayetteville" (Miller and Eastin 1984:32). Hobbs owned the old Van Winkle land until his death in 1965 (Bowers 2003:17-18; D. Miller 1966). Despite the early date of the purchase, however, the hollow appears to have been silent between the two World Wars, and the next indication of occupation began in 1944 when Vernon T. West and his wife reoccupied the house and set up a less substantial saw mill for the Hobbs Western Tie and Timber Company (D. Miller 1966; Mitchell 1969). This saw mill ran until 1960 when the Wests 74 moved their operation to a nearby hilltop property to take advantage of the new highway transportation networks (D. Miller 1966). Construction of the 228 foot high dam that would impound Beaver Lake began in 1960 and was completed in 1966. The damn was built "for flood control, to generate electric power, to supply water and to provide recreational opportunities" at a total cost of $46,200,000.00 to be off-set by future hydropower sales (Miller and Eastin 1984:51). The impoundment of Beaver Lake resulted in the flooding of a substantial amount of the northern portion of Van Hollow and uncertainties about the final water level was most likely partially behind the relocation of the West family. The house again stood derelict another decade, until after the death of Roscoe Hobbs. In 1969, as the Van Winkle home was no longer structurally sound, the large, spacious home was finally demolished before the Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism took over the property (Brandon and Davidson 2003:14; Hicks 1990:47-48; Funk 1962; contra Brandon et al. 2000:14). Harvey and Bernice Jones purchased the Van Winkle house in 1969, had it systematically dismantled, and used its materials to build a centerpiece at Har-Ber Village, their public resort in eastern Oklahoma (Rohrbbach 2004:42). In his will, Hobbs stipulated that the land should not be sold until 1977, and at that time, the State of Arkansas should be given the first opportunity to purchase it. In 1978, the 11,644 acres of the Roscoe C. Hobbs Estate attracted the attention of Arkansas State Parks, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission and the Department of Arkansas Natural and Cultural Heritage who thought that with "proper resource management" it 75 could "provide wildlife habitat, recreation and natural areas for the benefit of all Arkansans" (Miller and Eastin 1984:4). In January of 1979, the Nature Conservancy purchased the property to hold until the State of Arkansas could appropriate funding. One month later, Governor William J. Clinton signed Act 128 which authorized the state expenditure of $3,250,000 to purchase the land now known as the Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area (Miller and Eastin 1984:4-5). From the beginning, the Hobbs estate was looked at primarily as a natural resource--with each managing agency dividing the estate into areas where it held primary responsibility. Van Winkle's Mill fell within what was originally designated Beaver Lake State Park, the State Park management Zone of what was originally called the Hobbs State Management Area (HSMA) (Miller and Eastin 1984:25-26; 71). The "Van Hollow Finger of Beaver Lake" consisting of 2,400 acres or 20.61 % of the HSMA (Miller and Eastin 1984:27) and about 13 of the lake's 487 miles of natural shoreline were located along HSMA (Miller and Eastin 1984:51). Importantly for park planning, it was noted that a large number of tourist attractions were located within a fifty-mile radius of the HSMA--including Pea Ridge National Military Park, Eureka Springs, Silver Dollar City and other attractions in Branson, the Buffalo National River and the Ozark National Forest (Miller and Eastin 1984:41). Looking back to the disjuncture I discussed in the introduction, this historical overview is not satisfying. Examining this review, drawn from both academic and 76 popular histories of the region, there doesn't appear to be a disjuncture. Slavery, industrial booms, and modernity are all are here. The disjuncture between what people expected from Ozark history and what we encountered at Van Winkle's Mill cannot be explained through historical facts. So where does the disjuncture come from? Social theorist Walter Benjamin has stated that to "articulate the past historically does not mean to recognize it `the way it really was'...It means to seize hold of a memory as it flashes up at a moment of danger" (Benjamin 1968:255). So we will now turn to an examination of the lens of cultural memory in order to historically articulate the disjuncture between "the way it was" and the narratives we use to understand the past. 77 Chapter 3 "The Most Backward and Deliberately Unprogressive Region in the United States": Cultural Memory and the Arkansas Ozarks Why is there such a disjuncture between what people expect from Ozark history and the archaeology we have uncovered at Van Winkle's Mill? How did this disjuncture come to be and, perhaps most importantly, what does is this disjuncture reveal about what is remembered and forgotten in Ozark history (and, for that matter, our greater national historical narrative)? These seem like simple, manageable questions, but in actuality they are surprisingly vast, interconnected and complex. Thus, before we take a look at what archaeology has to tell us about Van Winkle's Mill and Northwest Arkansas, we must take a detour to examine collective cultural memory and how it works in--and on--the Arkansas Ozarks. Below, I will briefly examine the concept of cultural memory--how we come to collectively remember particular parts of history. Following this examination, I will turn more concretely to the subject of cultural memory in the Arkansas Ozarks. Here, I will follow the historical development of particular tropes in our cultural memories in order to begin to understand one half of our disjuncture. 78 Cultural Memory Current interest in what is varyingly referred to as "collective memory," "cultural memory," "social memory" or "historical memory" inevitably traces its roots to French historian Pierre Nora and the many volumes of his Les Lieux de M moire (Nora 1992) and, further back, to Maurice Halbwachs' posthumously published The Collective Memory ([1926] 1992). From these works, constructionist conceptualizations of collective memory then migrated rapidly to other disciplines and areas including American studies, cultural studies, communications, and anthropology (Tai 2001). It has, for example, recently been used to examine particular "memory sites" such as the Vietnam War Memorial (Sturken 1997), the American South (papers in Brundage 2000) and the Alamo in Texas (Flores 2002), events such as the Holocaust (e.g., Zelizer 1998), the American Civil War (e.g., Blight 2001; Grant and Parish 2003; Mills and Simpson 2003) and the 1936-1939 Palestinian rebellion (Swedenburg 2003), and even the way that memory itself (and its relationship to history) has changed with the onset of modernity (Matsuda 1996). Because of its entanglements with other operational constructs, the definition of cultural memory is remarkably hard to parse. It is "not the retrieval of stored information, but the putting together of a claim about past states of affairs by means of a framework of shared cultural understanding" (Radley 1990:46). Cultural memory can be seen as a piecemeal integration of various different personal pasts into a single common past(s) that members of a larger community come to identify with and remember collectively (Misztal 2003:11). It is a "collective project that is crucial to the 79 consolidation or construction of group, community or national identities," but its also "a site of hegemonic struggle, as a fluid ideological terrain" (Swedenburg 2003:xxix). This connection between social group identity and social frameworks for memory is a part of Halbwachs' contribution to cultural memory and his "assertion that every group develops a memory of its own past that highlights its unique identity" remains the starting point for most research in the field (Misztal 2003:51; see also Halbwachs 1992:46-53). Thus, cultural memory is, in its own amorphous way, a narrative. It strings together material objects, events, documents and descriptions into a narration of past and present. This narration conveys to its audience how the present derives from the past. Moreover, it explains the present even as it shapes the present reality by providing the audience with a symbolic framework that enables them (us) to make sense of the world. Cultural memory can be the interpretive frame through which we see history--providing the racialized context for the current historical interpretation of the Alamo, for instance (Flores 2002). Alternatively, in its role as "site of hegemonic struggle," cultural memories can provide an important counternarrative for those whose history has been silenced by powerful dominate narratives--as they might for Palestinian nationalism (Swedenburg 2003). For researchers like Marita Sturken (1997) or Richard Flores (2002), cultural memory "refers to those aspects of memory that exist outside official historical discourse" (Flores 2002:xv). This assertion, however, is more problematic than it sounds as "there is so much traffic across the borders of cultural memory and history that in many cases it may be futile to maintain a distinction between them (Struken 1997:5). 80 The result of this "traffic" is that cultural memory and history cannot be seen as oppositional but as entangled; with memory playing a critical role in the formation of histories (Flores 2002:17), or, as Walter Benjamin writes in his fragmentary project on the Paris arcades "history is not simply a science but also, and not least, a form of remembrance. What science has `determined,' remembrance can modify" (Benjamin 1999:471; see also Trouillot 1995:14-17). Thus, there is a complex relationship between personal memory, collective cultural memory and history itself--they do not exist within neatly definable boundaries (Sturken 1997:5). When viewed collectively, memory takes on characteristics that distinguish it from individual remembering. It opens up the terrain that is remembered and turns it into a multiple-sided jigsaw puzzle that links events, issues, or personalities differently for different groups. Unlike personal memory, whose authority fades with time, the authority of collective memory increases as time passes, taking on new complications, nuances and interests. Collective memories allow for the fabrication, rearrangement, elaboration and omission of details about the past, often pushing aside accuracy and authenticity so as to accommodate broader issues of identity formation, power and authority..." (Zelizer 1998:3) It is the instability involved in this fabrication, rearrangement and omission at play in cultural memory that "allows for renewal and redemption without letting the tension of the past and the present fade away." (Sturken 1997:17). Here is where the narrative metaphor for cultural memory breaks down. The situational and individual differences in the articulations of cultural memory create an overall framework, but this framework is disjointed, episodic and sometimes contradictory or incoherent. These aspects have lead some researchers to connect cultural memory with Gramsci's notion of "common 81 sense"--the uncritical traditional way of perceiving and understanding the world that is distinct for each epoch (Gramsci 1971:197, 322-323; see Swedenburg [2003:76] for an example of such a connection). As with any historical totality, the construction of cultural memory necessarily involves the isolation and privileging of one or more of the elements within that totality (Jameson 1981:28). It is this aspect that makes cultural memory a contested terrain. Remembering, of course, is not always a process of summoning representations of what happened and all memories are created in tandem with forgetting (Sturken 1997:7; Trouillot 1995:14). This forgetting makes cultural memory, like history, "a particular bundle of silences" whose presences can, when deconstructed, reveal not only important counternarratives, but much about the specific construction of memories as well (Trouillot 1995:27). The preceding paragraphs about forgetting, memory as a contested terrain, and memory as site of hegemonic struggle underscore the political nature of cultural memory. The ability "to create and control cultural memory," therefore, "is an act invested with power" (Flores 2002:17) with all historical knowledge represented "in the image of balanced scales, one tray of which is weighted with what has been and the other with knowledge of what is present" (Benjamin 1999:468). If history reveals itself only through the production of specific narratives, then in order to understand political power and intent what "matters most are the process and conditions of production of such narratives" (Trouillot 1995:25). 82 But given this complex interconnectedness of memory, identity, history and place, we must ask the question posed by Flores (2002:17): how do we evaluate narratives of the past when these narratives are entangled from the start? If we are to understand the Ozarks and their place in the formation of cultural memory, and the work cultural memory does in Ozark historical narratives, we must "cast a glance in two directions at once: toward the past and the narrative entwinement of memory and history and toward the present" (Flores 2002:18). Cultural memory is yet another, more subtle, layer of meaning(s) entangled with the past. This layer can only be "excavated" in a doubly historical way--examining not only historical phenomena, but by unfreezing the very frames with which historical phenomena have been understood (Jameson 1971:336). In short, I will attempt to focus simultaneously on the content of Ozark history and its representation in cultural memory. It is hoped that this approach will provide a critical interpretive framework that will help us understand the disjuncture and interplay of cultural memory and archaeology at Van Winkle's Mill. Trouillot (1995:27) has pointed out that each historical narrative is a particular bundle of silences, resulting from unique process and cultural frames. Thus the methodologies required to deconstruct these silences will vary accordingly. Here, I will outline a series of distinct but overlapping cultural frames that I believe are commonly deployed in the construction of historical narratives in the Arkansas Ozarks. Following researchers related to the so-called "linguistic turn" I term these frameworks "tropes." I will examine the historical development of these tropes and how and when they are/were 83 deployed, I will compare and contrast these tropes with the historical overview provided in the previous chapter and the, in the subsequent chapters I will examine the archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill for what it tells us about the deployment of these tropes and the silences which result from their narratives. Cultural Memory and the Ozarks The Ozarks, like their cousins the Appalachian Mountains, hold a particular place in modern cultural memory and imagination. That "place" is uniquely "American", decidedly rural, anti-modern and white. The Ozarks and Appalachian Mountains seem wholly subsumed under, and conflated with, what it means to be "rural" in Americaperhaps more so than any other regions in the country. Certainly, "the portrayal of southern mountain people as premodern and ignorant `hillbillies' is one of the most lasting and pervasive images in American popular iconography" (Harkins 2004:3). The historical narratives and cultural memories of the Ozarks stress their "otherness" and rely on a series of tropes that enhance their place as a foil to an increasingly urban Americaan othering process that slowly began to take form in the middle of the nineteenth century only to fully emerge after the turn of the twentieth (Harkins 2004:13-69; Horning 2002). This othering was so powerful and accepted by the 1930s that most readers did not bat an eye at pioneer folklorist J. Vance Randolph's claim that the Ozarks were "the most backward and deliberately unprogressive region of the United States" populated with people differing "so widely from the average urban 84 American that when the latter visits the hill country he feels himself among an alien people" (Randolph 1931a:4-5). As any historical archaeologist (or historian) working in the Arkansas Ozarks can attest, however, that the historical subjects one encounters while working on historical sites undermines this narrow conceptualization of Ozark history and points toward the very processes that etched images of the "homespun, rustic quaintness or wretched backwardness" of the Ozark hillbilly into the American consciousness "while they obscured the history, diversity and complexity of the Ozark region" (Blevins 2002:1; see also Brandon and Davidson 2003, 2005; Brandon et al. 2000:8-10; Stewart-Abernathy 1992). Figures we met in Chapter 2, such as David Walker; the prominent Northwest Arkansas judge who enslaved a sizeable labor force to work his upland plantation prior to the Civil War; Coin Harvey, the financial guru and advisor to Democratic presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan who founded the lavish Monte Ne resort community; George Ballard, an African-American barber turned poet; of course, Peter Van Winkle, the New York-born wagon maker who became the first "Lumber King" of the Ozarks using both enslaved and free labor in his substantial industrial endeavors; and countless others testify to the economic, social and racial diversity of the region (Brandon et al. 2000; Blevins 2002; Hilliard 1983). Here again, is the disjuncture. Randolph himself, in his introduction to his 1931 book, The Ozarks: An American Survival of Primitive Society, warned the reader that his subjects were not "the 85 progressive element in the Ozark towns, nor. . . the prosperous valley farmers" but the "diverting and picturesque" residents of the backwoods, the "hillbilly" and the "ridge runner" (Belvins 2002:1; Randolph 1931a:v). Yet this caveat is lost in an avalanche of popular culture that stresses the hillbilly trope, among others, as one of the main sources for our understanding of the Ozarksthe archetypical impoverished rural Other at once idyllic and violent, ignorant and noble, and ambivalently white. Narrative Tropes and the Ozarks: The Frontier, The Civil War and The Hillbilly Several distinct but overlapping narrative tropes are at play in the narrow hollows of the Arkansas Ozarksthe Ozark hillbilly, the Ozarks as frontier, and the Ozarks as stalwart member of the Confederacy (and, by extension, the South) all have strong implications for the way cultural memory and history play out in relation to the Ozarks as "place." We have already glimpsed two of these tropes at work in the previous chapter. The trope of the Arkansas Ozarks as frontier has been at play since the beginning of the nineteenth century. If the "wild borderland" of the Ozark frontier was "in the process of being tamed," then most of nineteenth-century America could not, or would not acknowledge it (Sabo 1990:139). The Arkansas Intelligencer would report that in the first half of the nineteenth century most of America saw the typical Arkansan as "a person in a semi-barbaric state, half alligator, half horse" who was "armed to the teeth, bristling with knives and pistols, a rollicking daredevil type of personage, made up of 86 coarseness, ignorance and bombast" (Arkansas Intelligencer, November 3, 1849 quoted in Williams 1980:99). By the fourth decade of the nineteenth century, Arkansas had come to be looked upon in some circles as an out-of-the-way place, with almost nonexistent roads, whose rivers were unpredictable at best, and whose credit rating was less than gilt-edged. Perhaps more important to her image, however, was the fact that the vast majority of Americans knew nothing about Arkansas. Few had been there nor did they know of anybody who had. Most Americans based their perceptions of Arkansas on travel accounts and feature stories in popular magazines. (Williams 1980:102, emphasis added) These travel accounts and popular magazines were indeed very important to the development of the frontier trope. Starting with early naturalists, ethnologists, geologists and adventurers such as Thomas Nuttall (1821), Henry Rowe Schoolcraft (1819), George Featherstonhaugh (1835), visitors to the Ozarks characterized the region as a "sinkhole of crime and infamy" (Featherstonhaugh 1844:87-88, 99; Harkins 2004:25; Willams 1980:103) where the residents' "manners, morals, customs, dress, contempt of labor and hospitality" were "not essentially different from that which exists amongst savages" (Schoolcraft 1955:86-87). Arkansas was a state "too favorable to the spread of ignorance and barbarism" due to its sparse population and geographic isolation (Nutall 1921:113). What population did exist was composed ...of the unruly and the vicious from all quarters, insulated by a pathless wilderness, without the pale of civil law, or the restraints upon manners and actions imposed by refined society, this population are an extraordinary instance of the retrogression of society (Schoolcraft 1819:174). In the 1840s, German adventurer Frederick Gerstaecker and Batesville native Charles Fenton Noland both brought bear hunting in Arkansas to the fore of the frontier 87 trope in their hunting stories published in popular magazines that catered to a newly expansive urban middle-class readership (Harkins 2004:25, 29; Williams 1980). These authors not only followed Schoocraft and Featherstonhaugh's lead in depicting the region as "a wilderness filled with adventure and peopled by rugged, hard drinking, somewhat lazy and often violent backwoodsmen," but, through their popular writings, they were instrumental in shaping a new image of Arkansas (Williams 1980:103-104). By the 1840s, the nation's literary tradition had become fascinated with the frontier and Arkansas' new "Bear State" image was "a larger than life symbol for frontier societyof which Arkansas was the best example" (Williams 1980:104). Arkansans wore the "Bear State" label uneasily, and "the title was never officially adopted as the state's nickname. Instead, public officials began a major effort to attract settlers in the 1840s and downplayed the rustic image" (Williams 1980:105). The Civil War brought about the beginning of the end of the actual Arkansas frontier and replaced it in popular imagination with the frontier of the West. The reign of the "hanging judge" Isaac Parker in the Western District of Arkansas and all of Indian Territory, which the gap between Reconstruction and the institution of "Jim Crow" (1875-1896), and the transformation of Indian Territory into the state of Oklahoma (1907) are the last gasps of Arkansas as frontier. Regardless of the transformation, historians continue to evoke the frontier as a trope in describing Arkansas history--often merging it with the "Wild West" in cultural memory. For example, one local historian described Harrison, Arkansas--the scene of the two race riots described in the previous chapter--using the frontier trope. In the 1890s, he explained, Harrison was 88 like a chapter from a story of the wild and woolly West...Saturday night brawls and gun plays were common, and so many fights, which resulted in fatalities, took place a the southeast corner of the square during this period and the succeeding twenty years, that this particular part of the square was dubbed "dead man's corner" (Rea 1955:119, 121). The Civil War, of course, also provided Ozark cultural memory with its next trope. The trope of Confederacy in the Arkansas Ozarks is not unique. Like other manifestations of the Confederacy in our national cultural memory, local cultural memory places the Arkansas Ozarks squarely in the South and with the noble lost cause despite its divided nature during the war. Through memory the South, including the Arkansas Ozarks, have "explained, condoned, and transmuted defeat into victory, defects into virtues and ignorance into divine revelation (Joyner 2003:21). In 1862 Gen. Curtis declared that the "rocky cliffs of the Ozark Mountains" may "remain monuments to the memory of those who fought and fell for their country at the battle of Pea Ridge," but Arkansans craved more conventional monuments (Curtis 1862). James Loewen's Lies Across America (1999) takes a detailed look at historic sites and markers in the United States and the way they rearticulate events like the Civil War into expressions of contemporary political sentiments. In his sections dealing with Arkansas he concentrates on sites and public art in south central Arkansas and the Arkansas Historical Commission Portrait Gallery in Little Rock (Loewen 1999:197-205), but he could have easily examined Northwest Arkansas in the same light. In the years in following Reconstruction through the early decades of the twentieth century, the memory of the Civil War was transformed across America and in the Ozarks via public art, historical preservation and popular culture. The themes of these genres were chosen self- 89 consciously to symbolize the existing public order and to" inculcate in its viewers the appropriate attitudes toward that order" (Levinson 1998:38-39). For instance, the Bentonville Confederate Monument in Public Square Park was erected in 1908 and the Fayetteville Confederate Cemetery was created rather early (1872) by the Southern Memorial Association of Washington County by moving the confederate dead from a variety of resting places to the newly established cemetery next to the Walker family Cemetery on East Mountain in Fayetteville. The enshrinement of the southern "Lost Cause" has been elsewhere linked to changing race relations brought about by Emancipation and the dawning of American modernity (Brundage 2000; Savage 1999) Even though it has been stated that slavery "was rarely, if ever, what struck visitors about the antebellum Arkansas" and recent scholars have de-emphasized that institutionespecially when talking about the upland South--somehow it is the Confederacy that the region more closely identifies with in local cultural memory (Bolton 1999:1). This odd turn of local cultural memory results in a memory of the Confederacy without slavery. One regional folklorist would articulate this clearly when he stated that At the beginning of the Civil War period the hillmen were predominately Southern in their sympathies and traditions...the slavery question was of less importance, for the pioneers had neither slaves nor prejudices against them. Even today there are many grown men and women in the Ozarks who have never seen a Negro" (Randolph 1931a:18). This historical transformation in the Ozarks may be more strained that in other regions of the South due to its partisan history and because "the Confederacy chose to wage war in Arkansas tarred the reputations of many of the men who executed the guerrilla strategy" (M. Davis 1999:429). The war in Northwest Arkansas was neither 90 noble nor honorable, it was "dirty, ugly and controversial, exploiting the land and punishing the people." (M. Davis 1999:429). Thus, violent figures such as Bill Dark, a Confederate guerilla in Searcy County, is remembered as a deserter and jayhawker, names usually used to describe Union irregulars rather than being enshrined like more conventional historical figures such as Major General Earl Van Dorn, Albert Pike, Ben McCulloch or even David Walker (M. Davis 1999). Finally, the hillbilly trope is a vastly interesting and complex one. It is also the most powerful of these tropes on the larger stage of national cultural memory. While popular histories, reenactment groups and local museums are just as likely to draw on discourses related to the frontier and southern tropes in their interpretations of Ozark history, in the national consciousness the hillbilly trope is dominant. The moonshining, feuding, backward mountaineer has be seen as savior of an American tradition, a simpleton amusement which shores up middle-class legitimacy (i.e., the Beverly Hillbillies and Ma and Pa Kettle) and, at times, an actual threat to civilization (i.e., Deliverance). 91 Memory, Modernity and the Hillbilly Cultural memory is a means through which definitions of the nation and "Americaness" are simultaneously established, questioned, and refigured" (Sturken 1997:13). "The impression of the old-fashioned can arise only where, in a certain way, reference is made to the most topical" (Benjamin 1999:69). "At the very moment the nation was discovering the Ozarks, the image that would come to represent the region no longer applied in reality"--if it ever did (Blevins 2002:118). Interestingly, the codification of the hillbilly trope runs parallel to the Ozarks' own development into a region fully articulated with modernity. Although certainly more physically isolated than the vast majority of Americans, the Ozarks witnessed the "coming of the steamboat, the introduction of cash crops, the construction of railroads, [and] the harvesting of hundreds of thousands of acres of virgin timber" all between the war of 1812 and the American Civil War (Blevins 2002:5). As reported in the previous chapter, by the late-nineteenth century, the Ozarks were home to nearly a quarter of a million settlers with the majority of farmers participating in cash-crop economies (as opposed to the subsistence farmers stressed in the hillbilly image), shipping crops via steamboats down the White River or on railroadsall connecting Ozark communities with each other and the outside world through regional hubs such as Memphis and St. Louis. Period local histories and newspapers make it clear that many Ozark inhabitants saw the region as a "land of opportunity" (a state advertising motto until the 1980s when it was changed to "the natural state") and actively worked to bring the "progressive" 92 trappings of modernity and full-blown capitalist economies into the region. In an 1872 promotional pamphlet Arkansas was even described as being on the verge of becoming "the empire state of the southwest" by its boosters (Williams 1980:108). Towns like Eureka Springs were quite cosmopolitanattracting visitors from all over the United States to bathe in its healing waters by the 1880s. In a similar vein, Coin Harvey's Monte Ne, with its own railway spur, Venetian gondolas, palatial hotel, golf course, swimming pool, auditorium and a dance pavilion, was a hybrid of faux tourist Ozark rusticness (Oklahoma Row was made of logs) and continental decadence. So why did the hillbilly icon arise at this moment of increasing modernity in the Ozarks? There is no single, monocausal answer, but in part it was directly related to the angst associated with the rapidly changing cultural milieu of modernity itself. The urbanization and industrialization of America, including towns in the Arkansas Ozarks, spurred a cultural competition between the increasingly urban "city" and the rural "country." Period discourses construct the city and country as polarized opposites where "urbanites rejoiced in their accumulations of things, money, travel, experiences, and institutional life" and rural backcountry dwellers "still prized face-to-face neighborliness, the land, life in familiar circumstances, and spontaneous social events" (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:9). The growth of industrial capitalism, urbanization and immigration at the end of the nineteenth century brought, in some instances, prosperity and new opportunities. Many, however, "were ambivalent about the rapid change and looked back longingly to an imagined past" (Becker 1998:3). 93 As America became more industrialized and more and more urban the feelings of America regarding the country, which became synonymous with nature, underwent change. Urban intellectuals exhibited a form of culture shock which was evident in their perceptions of city versus country: the cities loomed ever larger the rural landscape began to shrink. And as the country (and nature) seemed to disappear before the onslaught of urbanization and industrialization, both became more desirable. (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:20) Places such as Appalachia and the Ozarks, partially through their own engagement in the rustic tourist industries, were increasingly seen as a pristine Arcadia. The upland South was a place that could be "restorative, uniting body and spirit, nourishing the soul, encouraging self-reliance, and upholding the family" (Becker 1998:5). Thus, in the first decade of the twentieth century a flood of "lawyers, bankers, artists and other energetic homesteaders invaded the hills and hollows" of the Arkansas Ozarks in search of solace from the evils of the city (Blevins 2002:128-129). For those who came to visit and to homestead, the Ozarks "offered critical alternatives to America's industrial-capitalist society and its culture of consumption" (Becker 1998:3). Here, they imagined, they could live "in tightly knit societies, close to the soil, where life more closely resembled a preindustrial precapitalist ideal" (Becker 1998:3) These nostalgic yet condescending desires of urban America were powerful and staying--and the first step toward the hillbilly trope (Blevins 2002:118). The Ozarks, like Appalachia, would continue to "provide both a mystic source of collective identity, a mirror in which to view oneself, and a means to understand and come to grips with the contemporary world" well into the twentieth century (Becker 1998:5). 94 One historian working with the newspaper archives in Winslow would state in the 1950s that ...their life is simple and their wants are few. They do not suffer the relentless pressures which weigh heavily upon the shoulders of citydwelling money-grubbers. They are not burdened with ambition and progress. One generation is very much like another. (Bolster 1951:311) Of course, a generation before, Winslow, Arkansas had been a bustling resort town that was known as "the Top of the Ozarks" and a destination and node in the very capitalist economy that Bolster foils it against in the 1950s (Blevins 2002:124-126). For Bolster was admirable about this "backward, even primitive society" was its high moral values. In fact, Bolster concludes that "maybe a strong injection of the mountain character is just what American intellectual development needs most. There is wisdom in the mountaineer today" (Bolster 1951:308, 317, 326). Even more interesting is the fact that Bolster continued to see the people of Winslow as simple, yet somehow more noble than "city-dwelling money grubbers" even though his own newspaper research seemed to describe the early twentieth-century Winslow as quite modern. Bank robberies, train robberies, stabbings and lynchings all occurred in Winslow during the early decades of the twentieth century as did activities of local organizations such as the Civic League, Suffrage Club, Epworth League, the Junior Audubon Society, the Christian Endeavor Society, the Masonic Lodge, the Ladies Aid, the Home Mission Society, and the Independent Order of Odd Fellows (Bolster 1951:315-316). I now turn to examine the deployment of and interconnection between the idea of the Arcadian Ozarks, the high moral character of mountain people and explosion of 95 Ozark tourism using an example that is of great import to the region--The Shepherd of the Hills. The Shepherd of the Hills: Ozark Arcadian Master Narrative "...it all happened in the Ozark Mountains, many miles from what we of the city call civilization." Harold Bell Wright (1907:1) One of the most celebrated writers to articulate the Arcadian myth of the Ozarks was Harold Bell Wright (Figure 3.1). The 1907 publication of his The Shepherd of the Hills was a turning point for the Ozarks--popularizing the actual White River Hills as a destination and spawning a tourism industry that is still profitable today (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999; Myers 1990). The Shepherd of the Hills told what, even by 1907, was a standard, formulaic story of contrast between the modern urban centers of America and the idyllic, remote countryside which represented a simpler life more in touch with morality and God. The story was, at least, partially autobiographical. In 1905, Wright was told by physicians that his deteriorating health would no longer allow him to continue his ministerial work in Kansas City (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:26). Wright, following conventional wisdom, retreated to the mountains to take advantage of the healing air, springs and lifestyle that might return him to his vigor. His locational choice was the White River hills in Taney County, Missouri--only 80 miles northeast of Van Winkle's Mill. It is there, during a brief summer spent camping on what would be called "Inspiration Point," that he drafted his second novel The Shepherd of the Hills (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:28). 96 Figure 3.1. A young Harold Bell Wright (after Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theater 2004). Figure 3.2. Title card from the 1912 silent film version of The Shepherd of the Hills (after Chudleigh 2003). 97 Daniel Howitt is the title character of Shepherd (referred to mostly as "the stranger" and, later, "the Shepherd" and "Ol' Dad") was a weary pastor from an unnamed city to the north. Haunted by his relationship with his recently deceased son, he retreats to the Ozarks in order to regain his peace of mind. Once in Mutton Hollow along the trail that was "nobody knows how old" (Wright 1907:3), he becomes an itinerant shepherd and an observer of (and participant in) a romantic melodrama involving Sammy Lane, Young Matt, Ollie Stewart and a cast of other characters. Like the poetry of George Ballard, this story deserves a much larger analysis than can be given here. Below is a brief synopsis along with some observations about how the book helped create the Arcadian version of the hillbilly trope. Shepherd is a story told in three related layers. The first, and one might say main, layer involves Sammy Lane and Young Matt who are young and have fallen in love during the absence of Sammy Lane's boyfriend Ollie Stewart (who has returned from the city to take Sammy back as his wife). The second layer involves the older generation of Mutton Hollow. Sammy's father, Jim Lane, had ridden with the Bald Knobbers, a postbellum vigilante group related to the jayhawkers and bushwhackers of the Civil War. Mr. Lane has put that behind him and is raising Sammy alone after her mother's death. One of his old partners in crime, Wash Gibbs, still rides around with the "gang" sometimes drunk and, it seems, always with malicious intent. Gibbs is a "gigantic man" with "coarse heavy features" who strikes fear into almost everybody who crosses his path (Wright 1907:50), but he somehow convinces Lane into one last ride--a bank robbery (Wright 1907:200). When following the robbery, Jim attempts to leave the Bald 98 Knobbers and law officers arrive at the cabin, chaos ensues and Jim is killed by Gibbs who escapes badly injured. Later, in a gruesome scene, Gibbs is found dead and being eaten by buzzards--"thus does justice live even in these hills," Wright explains (Wright 1907:209). The third layer of the story involves a daughter of Old Matt (Young Matt's older sister) who, fifteen years prior to the Shepard's arrival, had fallen in love with "one of those here artist fellows" who had "come into the hills to paint" (Wright 1907:36). When he left, sending a letter explaining ...how he could never see her again; and told about what a grand old family his was, and how his father was so proud and expected such great things from him, that he didn't dare tell, them bein' the last of this here old family, and her bein' a backwoods girl, without any schoolin' or nothin'. (Wright 1907:38) She shortly died of a broken heart, but not before she gave birth to Pete--now a young boy who lives in the woods by himself, talks to the wind and speaks of himself in the third person. By the end of the story we discover that the "artist fellow" was the Shepherd's own boy who the father thought had recently committed suicide (Wright 1907:241). The Shepherd finds out that his son is not dead, but living in a cave in the nearby woods with his son, Pete. Unfortunately, Howitt's son was wounded the night that Jim Lane was killed and the Shepherd only discovers him on his deathbed (Wright 1907:243). Upon this revelation, the two fathers--Old Matt and the Shepherd-- reconcile with their grief and each other. The three layers are much more interconnected than I have laid out here. The Shepherd's son appears throughout the book as a ghostly figure who acts at several key 99 points in the story--including the death of Wash Gibbs--and it is Young Matt's role in all that goes on that wins Sammy Lane's heart at the expense of Ollie Stewart. Also, embedded deep within the structure of the story is religious feeling, a strong sense of the simple goodness and morality of the hill folk of the Ozarks, and, perhaps, an eerie implication that Pete, the young child born out of wedlock, is a modern-day Christ-like figure (Chudleigh 2003). More than the story, the language used to describe the places and characters in Shepherd feed into the Arcadian mythos of the Ozarks. The stark contrasts of the city and mountains are found throughout the book. For instance, while looking out at the view from the Mathews' family cabin with Old Matt the evening of their first encounter, Howitt states: We who live in the cities see but a little farther than across the street. We spend our days looking at the work of our own and our neighbors' hands. Small wonder our lives have so little of God in them, when we come in touch with so little that God has made. (Wright 1907:17) When Sammy Lane talks about going to the city with Ollie she reveals her thoughts on the fundamental differences between "city folks" and herself: I ain't never seen a sure `nough fine lady. I reckon them city folks are a heap different from us, but I reckon they're just as human. It would be nice to have lots of money and pretties, but somehow I feel there's a heap more than that to think about. (Wright 1907:22) In Wright's conception, these two aspects--closeness to God/basic morality and attitudes toward material things--are the main differences between the urbanite and rural inhabitants of the Ozarks. Education and refinement also frequently come up in Wright's comparisons, but are more ambivalently coded. Aunt Mollie told the Shepherd 100 apologetically that the Matthews family had "clean forgot the ways of civilized folks," while Sammy Lane remarks to Ollie: "It'll sure be fine for you to live in the city and get your schoolin' and all that. Us folks here in the woods don't know nothin'. We ain't got no chance to learn" (Wright 1907:24, 69). Mr. Matthews goes to Howitt for advice because he had an education (Wright 1907:33) and Sammy Lane seeks him out to teach her to be a lady because of his extensive knowledge and wisdom (Wright 1907:82). Yet, Howitt is at first reluctant to teach Sammy as he thinks that education and refinement makes "pale, sickly, colorless hothouse posies" out of urban women when compared to the "mountain follower" of Sammy Lane (Wright 1907:82). This of course, begs the question of transformation; an Ozark mountaineer's ability and willingness to adjust to city ways. Wright gives some conflicting answers to this. Sammy Lane learns to be a "sure enough lady" without succumbing to urban weaknesses, but it is, in part, this education that leads her to decide to stay in the mountains and not go to the city with Ollie (Wright 1907:137). Moreover, Ollie Stewart himself is radically changed by living in the city. He is almost unrecognizable in the description of him upon his return from the city: A strange gentleman stood at the gate. The strangest gentleman that Sammy had ever seen. Surely this could not be Ollie Stewart; this slender, palefaced man, with faultless linen, well-gloved hands and shining patent leathers. The girl drew back in embarrassment" (Wright 1907:140). Later, following episodes with a panther attack and a run in with Wash Gibbs, Sammy evaluates Ollie's changes poorly. It isn't that he is a bad man like Wash Gibbs. He couldn't be a bad man like that; he isn't big enough. And that's just it. He is too little--body soul and spirit--he is too little. He will do well in the world; perhaps he will even do 101 big things...So he is going back to the city, and I am going to stay in the hills (Wright 1907:177). If Sammy becomes too spiritual for the soulless city and Ollie's smallness destines him for big things in the city, then Young Matt represents the unrepentant rural mountaineer who sees the city with a mixture of bewilderment, hate and superiority. During a talk with Sammy and Ollie, Matt reveals Wright's essentialist stance on urbanites and rural folk when he states that "some folks are made to live in the city, and some ain't. I reckon I was built to live in these hills. I don't feel like I could get along without them; and besides, I'd always be knockin' against somethin' there" (Wright 1907:71). Later, in an moment anger at Ollie and Sammy's impending marriage, Matt lets us know which of the two essentialized stereotypes is the best when he shouts at Howitt: You've been a-tellin' me that I could be a gentleman, even if I always lived in the backwoods. But you're wrong, Dad, plumb wrong. I ain't no gentlemen. I can't never be one. I am just a man. I'm a--a savage, a damned beast, and glad of it...Dad, you say there's some things bigger'n learnin', and such, an I reckon this is one of them. I don't care if that little whelp goes to all the schools there is, and gets to be king; I don't care if he's got all the money there is between haven and hell; put him out here in the woods, face to face with life where them things don't count, and what is he? What is he, Dad? He's nothin'! Pumb nothin'! (Wright 1907:148, emphasis added). Wright's diametrically opposed poles of "city" and "rural" echoed the nostalgia and angst which existed at the dawn of modern America even as he gave America a frame through which to see that nostalgic yet condescending view of the Ozarks. Wrights other thirteen novels explore similar themes in both the western frontier and the upland south. 102 The values Harold Bell Wright championed were just what millions of people, especially rural and western people, wanted someone to champion. In Wright's books the values of the country and mountains and deserts were always strongest and best, even if transferred to the city. What were those values? Hard work, honesty responsibility, perseverance, integrity, respect, physical health, and living a life that is true to the work that God has assigned to you--whatever that might be (Chudleigh 2003). Although Harold Bell Wright's The Shepherd of the Hills basically depicts the backwoods life as mainly a positive critique of modernity, there are a few hints at the darkness and violence that would later characterize the fully developed hillbilly trope. Wash Gibbs and the rest of his Bald Knobbers are the most obvious example. The Bald Knobbers were an actual historical vigilantly gang operating in Taney County (18851892) who were responsible for a number of hangings and other violent deeds in the name of ridding the county of lawbreakers and evildoers. Wright uses this device to add a dark side to his Arcadia. After a very minor confrontation with the Shepherd, Gibbs tells him that "some strangers are all right, an' again some ain't" and returns next evening with his drunken gang to lynch Howitt (Wright 1907:89, 108-117). Wright depicts the Shepherd as unable to actually understand the savagery of the situation. The scholar's mind, trained to consider the problems of civilization, and to recognize the dangers of the city, refused to entertain seriously the thought that there, in the peaceful woods, in the dead of night, a company of ruffians was seeking to do him harm (Wright 1907:110-111). Time and again he wants to reason with the gang, but Young Matt stops him explaining "They ain't got no reason. They're drunk" (Wright 1907:109). After subduing Young Matt and Howitt, they actually get the two ropes thrown over the tree 103 limbs before the spectral presence appears and sends the gang fleeing in every direction (Wright 1907:117). A second encounter between Young Matt and Wash Gibbs happens at the mill that the Matthews family runs. Wash finds Ollie Stewart and Sammy riding up to the mill to meet with Young Matt. Wash immediately begins to ridicule the urbane Ollie calling him a "dolly" that Jim Lane must have given Sammy to play with (Wright 1907:164). Gibbs addressed his victim, "Now, dolly, you an' me's goin' t' play a little. Come on, let's see you dance." The other struggled feebly a moment and attempted to draw a pistol, whereupon Wash promptly captured the weapon, remarking in a sad tone as he did so, "You hadn't ought t' tote such a gun as that, sonny; hit might go off. It's a right pretty little thing, ain't hit?" He continued, holding his victim with one hand, and examining the pearlhandled, nickel plated weapon with great interest. "Hit sure is. But say, dolly, if you was ever t' shoot me with that there, an' I found out, I'd sure be powerful mad. (Wright 1907:165-166). Wash then publicly embarrassed Ollie, making him bow to Wash and declaring "This here pretty little feller from th' city's goin' t' show us hillbillies how t' spark a gal" (Wright 1970:166). The episode ends with Young Matt's intervention and the fight between Wash and Young Matt which has become the iconic image of The Shepherd in all its later versions. Besides the evils of Wash Gibbs, who serves more as a plot device than as a representative of the region, Wright's Ozarks are indeed an Arcadia and, for burdened people like Dan Howitt, a panacea. "The hills have done it," the Shepherd declares, "See how calm and strong they are; how they lift their heads above the gloom. They are my friends and companions...they have given me their calmness and strength" (Wright 104 1907:219). Wright gives us the "prescription," lifted from Henry Wadsworth Longfellow's Sunrise on the Hills, for healing the ills contracted from city life: If thou art worn and hard beset With sorrows, that thou wouldst forget, If thou wouldst read a lesson, that will keep Thy heart from fainting and thy soul from sleep, Go to the woods and hills! No tears Dim the sweet look that Nature wears (Wright 1907:223-224). Researchers have pointed out that by critical standards The Shepherd of the Hills "could hardly be judged good literature (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:31). It was, however, wildly successful. By early 1918 Shepherd had sold two million copies. It now claims to be the fourth most widely read book in publishing history, has been translated into seven different languages, and has produced four Hollywood films--including John Wayne's in his first Technicolor film. (Chudleigh 2003; Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theater 2004). Shepherd was more than a bestseller; it was an interesting example of the synergy between popular culture, cultural memory and regional identity. The book's theme quickly became the master narrative for the Arcadian version of the Ozarks. In turn, that narrative was the blueprint the region used to transform itself into a commercial imitation of the image the book presented (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:31)--complete with the replacement of real inhabitants with the fictional characters that were based on them. Within three years of its publication, tourists started coming to the White River Hills to explore the book's setting and to identify the actual people on which the characters were said to be modeled (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:31-32). Tourism 105 slowly became a major force in Taney County with the impoundment of Lake Taneycomo in 1913 and the arrival of "tourist friendly" amenities such as the Sammy Lane Boat Line and The Shepherd of the Hills Taxi Company. In 1910, Mr. and Mrs. J. K. Ross, the supposed models for Old Matt and Aunt Molly, sold their cabin on Inspiration Point and a restaurant promptly opened. By 1926 it was called Twin Falls Inn and was complete with a restaurant, gift shop and filling station (Morrow and MyersPhinney 1999:34). Lizzy McDaniel, the "feisty lady" from a Springfield banking family who owned and operated the Twin Falls Inn, also began occasional dramatic reenactments of The Shepherd at the cabin (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:34; Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theatre 2004). In the 1950s, what was by then known as "Old Matt's Cabin" (as opposed to Ross' Cabin) was purchased by Dr. and Mrs. Bruce Trimble and they began a nightly play based on the novel. Now known as The Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theatre, it has become a popular Branson attraction where the nightly drama is performed just down the hill from the original cabin (Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theatre 2004). The "Inspiration Tower" was built in 1989 (on the 100th anniversary of Harold Bell Wright's first visit to the area) and in 1996, the play was performed for the 5,000th time, making it the longest-running outdoor drama in recorded history (Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theatre 2004). Now Wright's Arcadia, if it ever existed, has been "completely engulfed by the glitz of Silver Dollar City and the garish music palaces" of Branson's strip (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:36). The entire region of the White River Hills in 106 Stone and Taney County, Missouri, is now officially known geographically as Shepherd of the Hills Country (Rafferty 2001:3-4). Although the 1912 silent film version of The Shepherd (Figure 3.2) is faithful to the book (Wright wrote and co-directed it), the 1941 Paramount Picture The Shepherd of the Hills tells a completely different story. It was filmed in Cedar Lake, California, stared John Wayne, Betty Field and Harry Carey, was written by Grover Jones (The Virginian, The Trail of the Lonesome Pine, The Dark Command) and Stuart Anthony (Along the Rio Grande, Saga of Death Valley, Girl of the Ozarks) and was directed by Henry Hathaway (How the West Was Won, The Sons of Katie Elder, Rawhide, and True Grit). Although the film begins with a picture of Wright's book, little besides the names of the characters has stayed the same; even the familial relationships between the characters have changed. The love story between Sammy Lane and Young Matt has been pushed to the side as the central story is now one of an Ozark moonshiner's revenge against the father he has never known. Young Matt and the entire Mathews clan are now suspicious, violent moonshiners running from revenuers in the opening scene. Wash Gibbs is now in business with the Matthews and is relegated to a minor role with Young Matt taking up his dark, violent character. In the film, Dan Howitt is now Young Matt's father who has been gone these many years and is now under the protection of the Lane family (not the Matthews as in the book). In fact, the major villain of the 1941 film is Aunt Mollie. Although she had been kind woman and a mother-figure to Sammy Lane in Wright's narrative, she was transformed in the 1941 film into a cursed, paranoid, iron-fisted matriarch of the 107 moonshing Matthews clan--a darker version of Granny Clampitt from the Beverly Hillbillies or Mammy Yoakum from Lil' Abner. More importantly, the relationship between the modernized city and the backwoods had changed. The Ozark Mountains were degenerate and they had strayed from their original course. This is overtly revealed in an exchange between Sammy, Jim Lane and Dan Howitt. They discuss the current conditions of "our mountains." Jim: Can't hardly believe it myself, but it wasn't always that way. Sammy: No it wasn't! Folk's happy--they sung songs and worked...but now all they do is sit around n' try to outsmart the government." Jim: Seems like people nowadays is stagnatin n' filmin' over like a pond dryin' up." Howitt sees a way of "getting ahead by getting back to where" the Ozarks were before and slowly, by example, they convince the people of the community to stop drinking moonshine. This, of course, puts him on a collision course with his estranged son who has taken a "blood oath" to kill his unknown father. Rather than preaching the evils of "money-grubbing city dwellers," the film has Howitt throwing around cash to solve the problems of the mountain community--he cashes a $100 check at the store to the locals' amazement, he pays $1000 for "Moanin' Meadow" the old home place of his late wife and Young Matt's mother, he pays for an eye operation to help an old blind woman see for the first time, and he hires Pete (who, in this version, is Aunt Mollie's son and Young Matt's cousin) to help him herd sheep at twice as much as any two of the Matthews make in a month. 108 The climax of the 1941 film happens when Young Matt comes to Moanin' Meadow to kill Howitt after learning that he is his father. Howitt shoots him first and confesses that he has been missing for these years because he was serving a murder sentence in prison and couldn't bear to see his son do the same. Upon Young Matt's recovery, father and son are reconciled. What are we to make of this transformation of The Shepherd of the Hills? Clearly, a couple forces are pulling at the film's screenplay. First the writers have infused the story with the missing elements of the hillbilly trope which had not fully developed by the writing of Wright's 1907 novel. Wright's book is not a hillbilly book, it is a positive depiction of mountaineers in the upland South who, by their actions and nature, critique American modernity. The 1941 film, on the other hand, is a hillbilly film with some western touches attested to by the credits of the writers, actors and directors as well as the films costumes--including western-style hats and Winchester repeating rifles in the place of the hillbilly-associated long rifles and broad-brimmed hats (Fig 3.8). Construction of the Hillbilly Trope The construction of the Arcadian Ozarks is only one step toward the full creation of the hillbilly trope. Wright's novel and the Arcadian myth in general, stressed the positive aspects of the "primitive life," although lurking beneath the surface in characters like Wash Gibbs (or the Young Matt of the 1941 film) was the more violent savage that would become manifested in books and films such as The Mountaineer's Honor (1909) and Deliverance (1972). I would like to take a moment to examine some of the other 109 genres of popular culture which have contributed to the making of the humorous and sometimes more violent hillbilly trope. In the mid-to-late nineteenth century, as regional and "local color" writers were beginning to explore Appalachia, scientists, outdoorsmen and humorists were "also discovering the other primary locus from which the hillbilly would grow"--the Ozarks (Harkins 2004:25). Building on the frontier-oriented travel logs of Featherstonhaugh and Schoolcraft and the articles of Gerstaecker and Noland, more wide-spread popular culture entered into the fray as early as 1847 with the introduction of the Arkansas Traveller (Figure 3.3). This fiddle tune, complete with dialogue, sometimes has been called "the most direct link between southwestern popular culture and the coming of the hillbilly" (Harkins 2004:25-26). The hillbilly image developed in the Arkansas Traveller revolved around a stranger lost in the backwoods of upland Arkansas who happens across a mountaineer's cabin. His efforts to coax food, lodging or directions from the suspicious squatter ended in failure until the stranger supplied the missing ending to the song the Arkansan had been repeating over and over again (Williams 1980:105). This piece of pop culture gets continuously rearticulated with a myriad of versions and variations of one line "Hey, Farmer" jokes in which the cleaver but backward rural Ozark farmer/trickster gets the better of an urbane traveler. Here we can see a profound difference in between the local, regional and national registers of cultural memory. Although in its original (regional) form, as written by early Arkansas politician Colonel Sanford Faulkner, it was intended as a juxtaposition between 110 Figure 3.3. 1870 Currier and Ives print based on The Arkansas Traveller. Figure 3.4. "Barney Google and Snuffy Smith" Sunday page May 3, 1936 (after Inge 1994:101). 111 urbane Little Rock politicians and rural mountaineers, it was quickly rearticulated nationally as "an eastern man's experience among the inhabitants of Arkansas" (Harkins 2004:26). The Civil War itself also played an often overlooked role in the formation of opinion regarding the state of man's backwardness in the Ozarks (Shea 2000). Beginning with the Pea Ridge campaign in 1862, solders and correspondents from Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio and other points north wrote letters to home and reports which would be published during the war and throughout the postwar years. For the Arkansas Ozarks, the "news from the front tended to be lass than complementary" (Shea 2000:85). The combination of previous national exposure and the desolation of the war-time hardships lead these visitors to see the Ozarks as a "gloomy and forbidding region of chert hills and pine forest" with the "awfulest roads man ever traveled" (Shea 2000:88). The region was ...very thinly settled by a wild semi-civilized race of backwoodsmen, half hunter and half farmer, with seeming little industry at anything, living in rude cabins located in the narrow valleys along the creeks, cultivating a few acres of ground to corn, potatoes and pumpkins. (Shea 2000:88) These "indolent go-easy squatters" whose "only heritage was wretched poverty" looked "as if they were banished from civilized society for their evil deeds" (Shea 2000:89-90). The role that popular culture played in the structuring of these opinions is made clear by comments such as one made by one Kansas solider who stated: "If I had time I would tell you some things that would beat the `Arkansas Traveler'" (Shea 2000:89). 112 Anthony Harkins has tracked the development and use of the terminology surrounding the hillbilly trope in his Hillbilly: A Cultural History of an American Icon (2004). The first deployment of the term "hillbilly" that Harkins could locate dates to 1899 and the first definition comes in 1900, but there seems to even by then be a "general familiarity with the term across the southern mountains and even parts of the Midwest" (Harkins 2004:49). The term, from its inception, has duel implications--on one hand "derogatory and accentuating poverty and improper behavior," on the other hand suggesting "freedom, self-identity and independence" (Harkins 2004:49). Charles Hibler's Down in Arkansas (1902) contains one of the early references to the word that Harkins could locate (Harkins 2004:50). It is also the first appearance of the word in association with Arkansas. On the heels of the turn of the century came a series of joke books that played off the earlier Arkansas Traveller and Civil War narratives. The first volleys were Down in Arkansas and Thomas Jackson's On a Slow Train through Arkansaw (1903). Down in Arkansas follows "a party of gentlemen representative of culture, capital and avoirdupoisan educated Bostonian, a Philadelphia lawyer, and an obese speculator from Kansas City" who explore the Ouachita Mountains (not the Ozarks) in order to engage in land speculation and to obtain lumber and mineral rights (L. Dew 1980:129; Harkins 2004:51). Like many genres of hillbilly humor that follow, the pamphlet attempts to critique both the hillbilly and his modern urbane foil; readers find that the upland natives "might be not-too-bright and be overly addicted to telling tall tells and drinking moonshine, but the out-of-state characters come across as being avaricious and 113 unprincipled" (L. Dew 1980:129). The group's native guide, sounding not unlike Harold Bell Wright, explains: Though as yet unheralded, the Hill Billy has a traditional history, reaching onto the dim and distant past...The Hill Billy is a character in many respects unlike any other on the globe, and to do him justice would require the facile pen of Dickens...The Hillbilly, ever true to his principle of exclusiveness, never looks beyond his own beloved hills for his bride. As a result, the species has remained pure and undefiled...the Hill Billy is proud in his poverty, contented with his environment, happy in his seclusion. (Hibler quoted in Harkins 2004:51). But it was Jackson's On a Slow Train Through Arkansaw, which had sold seven million copies by 1950, that had a more wide-spread circulation. On a Slow Train Through Arkansaw, privately printed and published in 1903, was "sent post paid to any address on receipt of 25 cents" (L. Dew 1980:127). Perhaps more importantly, Jackson also used his connections to the railroad industry to get his book sold railroad station newsstands during the 1904 World's Fair in St. Louis resulting in the volume's wide distribution and popularity (Harkins 2004:51). Unlike Down in Arkansas, On a Slow Train Through Arkansaw is an eclectic volume; its cover boasts that it contains "funny railroad storiessaying of the southern darkiesall the best minstrel jokes of the day." (L. Dew 1980:127; Harkins 2004:52). But most of the book related humor associated with the slowness of trains in Arkansas, a theme that weary travelers to the 1904 World's Fair could probably relate. A lady complained to the conductor because the train moved so slowly. "Conductor, can't this train make any better time than this? He said, "If you ain't satisfied with this train, you can get off and walk." She said she would, only her folks didn't expect her `til the train got there. (Jackson quoted in L. Dew 1980:127) 114 They stopped so often one of the passengers tried to commit suicide. He ran ahead for half a mile, laid down on the track, but he starved to death before the train got there. (Jackson quoted in L. Dew 1980:127) Hibler and Jackson's success pawned a host of imitators--Andrew Guy Chilton (1908) Through Arkansas on a Hog, George Beason's (1908) I Blew in From Arkansas, Milton Hughes (1904) Three Years in Arkansas. It also earned the genre strong rebuke with Bernice Babcock's The Man Who Lied on Arkansas and What it Got Him (1909). As the twentieth century marched forward, other forms of popular media engaged the hillbilly trope on a national stage. Motion pictures such as Billie--The Hill Billy (1915), The Moonshiners (1904), A Kentucky Feud (1905), A Night of Terror (1908), The Mountaineer's Honor (1909, directed by D. W. Griffith of Birth of a Nation fame), The Revenue Man and His Girl (1911), Love in the Hills (1911), The Last of their Race (1916) and no less than 76 films between 1920 and 1929 depicted the "spectacular violence" and concentrated on the deadly, darker and serious aspects of the trope (Harkins 2004:57-62; Williamson 1995). Beginning with the legendary 1927 recording sessions in Bristol, Tennessee, "hillbilly music" ("an amalgam of African-American and Euro-American traditions and the product of modern industrial capitalism and cuttingedge technology") would become wildly popular until the "singing cowboy" image trumped the hillbilly in popularity and the genre was re-titled "country and western" in the 1950s (Harkins 2004:71, 97; Malone 1985:137-175). By 1934 the full-blow comic aspect of the hillbilly trope had arrived when three major, popular comics debuted--The Mountain Boys, Snuffy Smith (a spin off of Bill DeBeck's wildly popular Barney Google; Figure 3.4) and Al Capp's Li'l Abner (Harkins 2004:103; Inge 1994:101). The Mountain 115 Boys, a one panel strip which ironically appeared in Esquire magazine, stopped production in the late 1940s. In contrast, both Snuffy Smith and Lil' Abner's popularity continued throughout the twentieth century--with Lil' Abner being discontinued in 1977 and Snuffy Smith is still being carried by over 900 papers today. The Mountain Boys were never situated geographically, but both Snuffy Smith and Lil' Abner's connection to the Ozarks illustrates the way in which Appalachia and the Ozarks are conflated in national cultural memory. Although Snuffy Smith originally appears in the North Carolina Mountains, the strip is full of references to the nearby city of "Little Rock" and "Crystal Springs, Arkansas" (Harkins 2004:123). Likewise, Lil'Abner's Dogpatch was originally in Kentucky (e.g., Capp 1936:116), but Capp relocated the community to the Ozarks, "a move never explained in the strip or commented on in the press" (Harkins 2004:127). In Al Capp's own words "Dogpatch was an average stone-age community nestled in a bleak valley, between two cheap and uninteresting hills, somewhere" (Capp Enterprises 2004). That "somewhere" was tied forever to the Arkansas Ozarks by the opening of the Dogpatch USA amusement park between Harrison and Jasper, Arkansas, in 1968 (Russ 2004). Clearly, by World War II the Arkansas Ozarks were "becoming instantly recognizable shorthand for the half-comic, half-savage backwoods man. A popular culture icon growing as familiar to Americans as the noble Indian chief in full headdress or the lazy plantation slave" (Harkins 2004:28-29). Although, ironically, the region's own African-American and Native-American populations were becoming erased for our collective cultural memories in the process. 116 Of course, cultural memory is a contested terrain and a site of hegemonic struggle. In that vein, the trope of the hillbilly has not solely been seen as a negative stereotype that has been thrust upon the inhabitants of the upland South (although those inhabitants were writing against the hillbilly image as early as the 1890s). It is a much more nuanced, complicated and conflicted issue of representation. It seems a truly ambivalent figure functioning in an attractive and repellant way to both those who selfidentify as inhabitants of the upland South and those who wish to mark those who do (Bhabha 1994:66-67; 129-38; Lim n 1998:110). This enables us to make sense of the way that "hillbilly otherness" has gotten deployed as an "oppositional culture against a hegemonic middle-class culture and the relative gain in status of African Americans and other minority social groups" (Harkins 2004:5-6). In the Ozarks it has been used as a regional identity to win regional political battles with Little Rock and warn away other "outside" influences. It is deployed within the region along racial and class lines on a daily basis. This ambivalence is why the state's academic flagship (the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville) could actively embrace "hillbilliness" by adopting the name Arkansas Traveller for its daily newspaper in 1927. One recent example of this political deployment of the hillbilly trope deals directly with historical archaeology. Jerry Hilliard, then Registrar for the Arkansas Archaeological Survey, conducted a continuing survey of archaeological resources in the Middle Fork of the White River in Washington County from the late 1980s through the first half of the 1990s. Hilliard's work focused on what was referred to as the pioneer 117 period (1828-1860s) and recorded over 75 sites; a "series of farms, mills, and at least one store connected by a dendritic road network parallel to the stream" (Ewen 1991:31; Robinson 1996). Hilliard's work also stimulated community awareness about the importance of the well-preserved historical landscape of the Middle Fork of the White River and a grass-roots movement formed in order to designate 75 square miles of the rural valley as a historic district (Minton 1996; Paschal 1996; Robinson 1996). This would have been "the first rural historic district in the state created through the efforts of private citizens" (Robinson 1996). In April of 1996, a public meeting was held in the Elkins High School Cafetorium about the proposed designation which would not "affect landowners' ability to use their property how they choose" while it afforded property owners a 20 % income tax credit against the cost of property restoration (Bowden 1996; Robinson 1996). Residents attending the meeting were "very enthusiastic" about the proposal and the area was described as "a pristine, rural settlement" that had "little invasion from modern development" (Bowden 1996). Despite the enthusiasm and assurances of landowner autonomy, however, the proposal was derailed. In November of 1996 a second meeting was held at the White House Community Center where "several area residents spoke out against [the proposal], citing distrust of the federal government as a reason to avoid any such bureaucratic entanglements" (Bowden 1996). "I don't want people driving by my property," said one landowner, "I want it let alone...I moved up here to get away from people, not to bring them in." (Bowden 1996). Interestingly, a White House community news column in the 118 Washington County Observer characterized the three men who voiced opposition as "mostly outsiders" who misunderstood the intent of the proposal (Paschal 1996). There is much history here, and the land marks and history are well worth preserving for posterity. One hundred years from now who will know the early settlers, their buildings and other footprints of them. For one, I am proud of our history (Paschal 1996). Although this meeting effectively ended the attempt to create a rural historic district in the Middle Fork, it gives us a glimpse into the ways that the hillbilly trope can be ambivalently evoked. On one hand, there are threads of both the Arcadian and the hillbilly trope running through the discourse of the residents who were supporting the district designation. The area was "pristine" with "little invasion from modern development," and those who oppose the proposal were "outsiders." Whether this last fact is true or not (which it was), the deployment of the term is consistent with the hillbilly trope's conceptualization of "furriners" as those who do not share the values of the rural upland South. However, the evocation of a history that needs preservation has its roots in modernity and the nostalgia that created the first historical house museums and historic monuments in the late-nineteenth century. Of course, the opposition deployed the hillbilly trope in a more straightforward way--evoking the desire for isolation and a profound distrust for the government. Conflicts within the region regarding the deployment of the hillbilly trope are also plentiful. Folklorist Vance Randolph even claimed that one man was murdered because of his use of the term "hillbilly" in 1934 (Harkins 2004:138; Randolph and Wilson 1953:252). A more common type of conflict can be illustrated by a tense moment related to the folk festival movement. 119 Following the White Top Folk Festival (held in Virginia in 1931), the first National Folk Festival began to take shape. The first preliminary festival scheduled for Eureka Springs in 1934 with a series of regional folk festivals throughout the Ozarks. Vance Randolph was the first field worker employed by the National Folk Festival and was thus expected speak to and coordinate with the various regional festivals (Cochran 1985:134-135). Things went fine for festivals in Rolla and Aurora, Missouri, but "trouble had been brewing in Springfield for several weeks" (Cochran 1985:135). An official with the Springfield Chamber of Commerce was reported in local newspapers as thinking that the "hillbilly" stuff should be eliminated, a lot of freaks should not be selected to go to the national festival as representatives of the Ozarks...Why call back the thing we've been trying to forget for 50 years? Why advertise to the World that we are ignorant? (Cochran 1985:135). The situation escalated when festival representatives (including Randolph) attended the welcoming banquet in Springfield. There a local hotel owner gave a speech which blasted the "carpet baggers" who had come to the Ozarks to depict them as hillbillies. He denigrated Harold Bell Wright as a writer who "hardly knew a thing" about the Ozarks and even castigated Vance Randolph to his face--stating that he had mistaken "some of the under crust" as typical for the region and implying that some Ozark literature that dealt with hillbilly themes should be suppressed.(Cochran 1985:136). Randolph defused the potentially volatile situation, but it demonstrates the physical clash that can result from conflicts in cultural memory. As the subject of Vance Randolph is at hand, I will now turn towards another deployment of the hillbilly trope. The formal, scientific codification of the Ozark 120 hillbilly as Other and the coming of the anthropologically related discipline of folklore to the Arkansas Ozarks. J. Vance Randolph, Ozark Folklore and Cultural Memory J. Vance Randolph is a figure almost as ambivalent as the hillbilly trope itself to academic researchers working in the Ozarks. Although he never held an academic post and his only Ph.D. was given as an honor by the University of Arkansas, Randolph was synonymous with the Ozarks to many regional boosters, local historians and those interested in folklore and language--he was "a virtual demigod, a name to conjure with," he was known as "Mr. Ozark" (Cochran 1985:12-14). Randolph's large body of work on Ozark folklore included articles in scholarly journals such as The Journal of American Folklore (Randolph 1934, 1936, 1950, 1951a), American Speech (Randolph 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931b), Dialect Notes (Randolph 1926), and the American Anthropologist (Allison and Randolph 1927) as well as a large number of books: The Ozarks: An American Survival of Primitive Society (1931a), Ozark Mountain Folks (1932), From an Ozark Holler: Stories of Ozark Mountain Folks (1933), An Ozark Anthology (1940), the massive four volumes of Ozark Folksongs (1946-1950), Ozark Superstitions (1947), We Always Lie to Strangers: Tall Tales from the Ozarks (1951b), Who Blowed Up the Church House and Other Ozark Folk Tales (1952), Down in the Holler: A Gallery of Ozark Folk Speech (Randolph and Wilson 1953), The Devil's Pretty Daughter and Other Ozark Folk Tales (1955), The Talking Turtle and Other Ozark 121 Folk Tales (1957), Hot Springs and Hell and Other Folk Jests and Anecdotes from the Ozarks (1965), Pissing in the Snow and Other Ozark Folktales (1976). Vance Randolph wasn't a native of the Ozarks; he was born in 1892 in Pittsburg, Kansas (Cochran 1985:14). He first visited the Ozarks in 1899 as a part of the blossoming tourist industry. His parents, like so many other Acadian tourists, brought him to the O-Joe Club near Noel, Missouri, for a week of exposure to nature and all the health and piece of mind that it implied (Cochran 1985:13). The trip would make a lasting impression on him and would, by his admission, be a part of what brought him back to the Ozarks to begin what would become his life's work: I was only seven years old at the time, but I perceived at once that a guide named Price Payne was the greatest man in the world, and that the Ozarks country was the garden spot of all creation (Randolph quoted in Cochran 1985:14). In the years in between his first visit and his return to Pineville in the 1920s, he studied psychology at Clark University in Worchester, Massachusetts, traveled extensively, wrote popular press books on science, philosophy and history, and, in 1915, attempted to persuade Franz Boas to allow him to study "white mountain people" in his anthropology program at Columbia (Blevins 2002:136; Cochran 1985:48). "I wanted to be an anthropologist," Randolph told his biographer, "to write popular books on anthropology. But old Boas didn't have no patience with me" (Cochran 1985:47). But Randolph, who had met Boas while he was appointed at Clark University, could not persuade "Old Boas." He [Boas] was interested in Indians and Eskimos, and blacks, but I don't care anything about blacks or Indians, and I sure as hell could never go up to 122 study Eskimos. I seemed to me ridiculous. I was interested in white mountain people. (Cochran 1985:48) In 1929, Randolph tried again to interest Boas in a dissertation based on his collection of Ozark folksongs (which eventually became his massive four volume Ozark Folksongs), but was again declined (Cochran 1985:173). Whether or not his rejection was due to Boas disapproval of Ozark subject matter or something in Randolph's notorious personality is difficult to discern. Randolph would find his niche, however, in the anthropologically-related field of folklore. Folklore's development is yet another narrative entangled with modernity solidifying over the late nineteenth century. Just as the perceived "decay threatening the social fabric of the nation" had lead tourists and writers like Harold Bell Wright to seek out an Acadian paradise in the Ozarks, it also lead would-be scientists to the rural upland south "to capture cultural treasures before they vanished" (Bendix 1997:74, 121). The plethora of local color writers, like Wright, had given much attention to the Ozarks, but they had done so in overtly emotional and romantic tones. The scholarly need was "to order, classify and explain the rich treasure, not emotionally respond to it. This scientific impulse was qualitatively different and narrower than the exuberant, experiential quest for authenticity that marked Romanticism" (Bendix 1997:97). Just as we have seen in the popular culture of the period, the disciple of folklore seemed obsessed with the stereotypical Others--Native Americans, African-Americans and other non-white minorities. "The folk uncorrupted by civilization, no matter how the concept was constructed," it was thought "could not exist in a nation so recently settled by whites" (Bendix 1997:72). Yet work such as Randolph's (and the countless others 123 that followed him) provided a white Other that could be analyzed. An authentic, unspoiled man that could represent the American spirit (Bendix 1997:74). I do not have the space in this work to analyze the breadth of Randolph's folklore career; that would be a volume unto itself. Therefore, I will briefly examine his first major book, The Ozarks: An American Survival of Primitive Society (1931a). I chose this work because 1) It is the book that transformed Randolph into a heralded expert on Ozark culture; 2) It had acknowledged and profound impact on cultural memory of the Ozarks on a national level; and 3) It is arguably one of his most anthropological-oriented works. The Ozarks is an interesting cross between a history tome and an anthropological ethnography. It begins, like this volume, with a historical overview, but what is interesting is that his overview is a pretext to explaining that there is no history in the Ozarks because the Ozark hillbilly is still in the same state as his forbears (Figure 3.5). Describing Ozark culture is, in a sense, a look at all of America's collective history. It is only in such isolated places that we find the traditional American nowadays, neither refined nor corrupted by the influence of European and Asiatic civilizations. There are not many real Americans left now, and we do not understand them anymore. The Ozark hill-billy is a genuine American--that is why he seems so alien to most tourists. In a sense it is true that the American people are making their last stand in the wilderness, and it is here, if anywhere, that we must go to meet our contemporary ancestors in the flesh. (Randolph 1931a:22-23) The Ozarks resembles ethnography in that Randolph seeks to chronicle and explain the culture of these contemporary ancestors before it slips into oblivion. Although he attempts to develop the idea of Ozark culture "in an atmosphere of sociological and anthropological detachment," like many of his contemporary ethnographers he feels he is 124 salvaging a picture of a society on the very brink (but not yet) of being toppled by the intrusion of missionaries and modernity (Blevins 2002:132). The structure of The Ozarks, in fact, seems half modeled after a similar (but less anthropological) book about Appalachia, John Campbell's The Southern Highlander and His Homeland (1921), and half modeled after Margaret Mead's Coming of Age in Samoa: A Psychological Study of Primitive Youth for Western Civilization (1928). Randolph himself alludes to this connection when he stated that "Vanguard asked me to write a book about the Ozarks like Margaret Mead's Coming of Age in Samoa. I couldn't do it. She was much better" (Cochran 1985:99). His narrative style and the way he compartmentalized his chapters into various aspects of Ozark culture--"The Hill-Billy at Home, "Womenfolk and Social Life," "The Ozark Dialect," "Signs and Superstitions"--are a good indication of his anthropological intent as is his detailed description of his methodologies for collecting songs from informants (Randolph 1931a:167-172). Randolph even made it clear that he was not "of" the Ozark people, but simultaneously he took the pains to establish his authority and authenticity as any anthropologist of the same period. I first visited the Ozark country in 1899, and since 1920 I have spent practically all of my time here, living in many parts of the region, sometimes in the villages and sometimes in the wildest and most isolated "hollers." I fished and fought and hunted and danced and gambled with my backwoods neighbors; I traveled the ridge roads in a covered wagon, consorting with peddlers and horse traders and yarb doctors and moonshiners; I learned to chew tobacco, and dabbled in village politics, and became a deputy sheriff, and solicited local items for the newspapers. By marriage and otherwise I associated myself with several old backwoods families, in both Missouri and Arkansas. I spared no effort to become intimately acquainted with Ozarkers of the hillbilly type, and 125 succeed insofar as such intimacy is possible to one who was born a lowlander" (Randolph 1947:5). Almost all of the chapters in Randolph's The Ozarks have a similar structure. They begin or contain statements about the strangeness and/or timelessness of Ozark culture The hillman of today eats very much the same sort of food his "fore-parent" ate... (Randolph 1931a:35) The Ozark hillman is still living in the eighteenth century, and it is no where more evident than is the subordinate position occupied by the women of his household. (Randolph 1931a:41) When the Ozark Country was first settled everybody drank whiskey as a matter of course... (Randolph 1931a:223). Each chapter then goes on to describe in detail aspects of daily life relevant to the particular thematic topic--spinning, food preparation, folk beliefs, hunting, weddings, songs, the peculiarities of speech and so on. Finally almost every chapter ends with a lament about the passing of these traditions. The book itself echoes this lament wit the final chapter entitled "The Coming of the Furriners" (Randolph 1931a:299). The first city people to invade the Ozark country were sportsmen--deerhunters and fishermen who came down from Kansas City and St. Louis in the [eighteen] eighties. These fellows were quite willing to rough it with the natives...Of late years, however, hundreds of tourist camps and summer hotels have sprung up along the new highways, and the people who stop at these places are "furriners" of an altogether different sort... (Randolph 1931a:299) The tourist who visits a few backwoods cabins often imagines that he understands the hillmen perfectly, regarding him as a simple child of nature, whose inmost thoughts and motivations may be read at a glance. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The hillfolk are simple in that they live close to the essential; facts of life, and they ask intimate and personal questions in a childish fashion, but they are secretive and sensitive and suspicious beyond anything that the average city dweller can imagine...concealing his real thoughts and desires behind a mask--often a mask of childish vacuity (Randolph 1931a:303). 126 Here, and in many other places in The Ozarks, Randolph's work takes on a defensive tone despite his own status as "furriner." When comparing the Ozarks to the rest of modern America--even as it depicts its inhabitants as "alien" and "unprogressive"--he clearly sees the inequalities at work in the "great corporations" who are "taking their timber," water and land for a growing modern America and "follies and vices" of the tourist industry (Randolph 1931a:309). It is Modern America that is threatening to kill off our contemporary ancestors. I have stated above that as the Ozarks are inhabited by contemporary ancestors, it is a place without history. Historian Brooks Blevins has put forth that this aspect of cultural memory might explain why the region never had an early, serious historian. Van Randolph and his folklore successors...have so dominated the region's perception that historians have maintained their distance, perhaps in the belief that any region whose life and people are this static lacks the transformations, dialectics, or basic struggles that form the backbone of social history (Blevins 2002:220). Without a historical narrative in its way, cultural memory can be used to depict the current state of the Ozarks is as it ever was. The Ozarks, for example, is full of references to the absence of African Americans in the region. No less than three times in The Ozarks Randolph has to explain that there are no black hillbillies (Randolph 1931a:18, 136, 203-204). First, in his historical overview he erases slavery in the Ozarks (quoted above) using the logic that if there are no black folks in the Ozarks today, and the Ozarks never change, then there never have been--despite the historically documented population drop in the African-American Ozark community (Randolph 1931a:18). The 127 Figure 3.5. "Old Ways are Best," the frontice piece from the first edition of J. Vance Randolph's The Ozarks: An Survival of Primitive Society (1931a). Figure 3.6. Front view of the church and high school on Community Hill, the Presbyterian mission established in Kingston, Arkansas (after Burnett 2000:82). 128 second and third references to blacks are made to deny that African-American culture had any influence on Ozark folk culture. Many of the Ozark superstitions listed above are also known to the Southern Negroes, and have frequently been regarded as relics of some primitive African culture, but it now fairly well established that they came originally from Europe, and have been preserved by the illiterate Negroes long after the more progressive whites have rejected and forgotten them. Negroes are not very common in the hill country, and the Ozarker has even less traffic with them than with the Indians from Oklahoma. Personally, I do not believe that either Negroes or Indians have ever made any important contributions to the Ozark folklore; it seems to me that most of the hillman's peculiar folk-beliefs came to him from the British Isles. (Randolph 1931a:136). Genuine Negro folk-songs are not very common in the hill country...the vast majority of early settlers came from the poverty-ridden mountain districts of the Southern Appalachians, and had never made any considerable contact with either slaves or slave-owners. There are comparatively few Negroes in the Ozarks today, and large numbers of people in the more isolated sections have never seen a Negro. A friend of mine who used to go into the White River country for the bass fishing told me that the natives came from miles around to see his colored cook, and children stood about his camp for hours on end, gazing at the black man in open-mouthed amazement (Randolph 1931a:203-204). Both Randolph's erasure of African-American heritage in the Ozarks and his insistence on the hillbilly as the "true American" leads us to consider the juncture of race, especially the construction of whiteness, and the hillbilly trope. "There is No Melting Pot in These Mountains": The Ozark Hillbilly and Race During the course of the Van Winkle's Mill archaeology project, perhaps the most "shocking" voiced by visitors was the presence of enslaved African Americans in this 129 upland, industrial setting. Indeed, it was such a profound disjuncture that it became one of the goals of the Roger's Historical Museum's educational project to expose the public to slavery in the Ozarks. As we have seen in Chapter 2 and will further see in Chapter 4, recent historians and archaeologists have made inroads into investigating the African-American experience in the Ozarks just as they have engaged what previous archaeologists have called the Ozark traditional myth (e.g., Froelich 1997; Froelich and Zimmerman 1999; Smith 1995., Stewart-Abernathy 1987, 1992). Although these investigations have engaged various aspects of both the forgotten African-American heritage and the hillbilly trope of cultural memory the connection between the two remains to be examined in the Ozarks. We have already examined the connections between modernity and the construction of its foil, the hillbilly trope. But the conceptualization of whiteness itself has also been linked to this transition to modernity (e.g., Flores 2002; Hale 1998; Ignatiev 1995; Jacobson 1998; Roediger 1991). The working conceptualization of whiteness has been fashioned and refashioned by various contending forces in the United States across time (Jacobson 1998:13). In the late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the forces that accompany modernity (capitalism, republicanism, immigration, urbanization and industrialization) remade whiteness to solve the problems of the post-civil War era and clearly establish a decidedly modern version of white-skinned privilege (Hale 1998:5) By the early twentieth century, whites were constructing a modern racial identity: a mass cultural rather than a localized, socially embodied, 130 particularized self, an absolute division that dissolved any range of racially mixed subjectivities, a natural and embodied but not strictly biological or legal category, a way to mediate the fragmentation of modernity and still enjoy freedom (Hale 1998:8). Having lived through this transition, W. E. B. DuBois made the bold statement that "[t]he discovery of personal whiteness among the world's peoples is a very modern thinga nineteenth and twentieth century matter, indeed" (DuBois 1920:17). Some strands of this entanglement between race and the hillbilly trope have already been mentioned. At its most basic level, the trope of the Ozark hillbilly masks the diversity inherent in the regionthis, of course extends not only to class and the rural/urban dichotomy but also to race. The fact that the backwoods yeomen farmer of the trope is invariably white erases any African-American heritage in the Ozarks. The 2,000 enslaved people listed in the 1840 census and the freemen who stayed in the region following emancipation are invisible to cultural memorypeople like Aaron Anderson Van Winkle, Seabe Tuttle, and the Fayetteville poet George Ballard. More than that, removing racial diversity from Ozark history erases racismsuch as the racially motivated mob violence in 1905 and 1909 in Harrison, Arkansas. There are strong connections between the construction of modern whiteness and the hillbilly trope in cultural memory--a connection that has not yet been examined the in the region. This is all the more important as whiteness in the Ozarks plays on a national stage entangled with the stabilization of both the modern conceptualization of race and the hillbilly trope. That is to say that the trope of whiteness in the Ozarks is more powerful than simply erasing diversity. Within some discursive regimes the Ozarks 131 become a bastion of whiteness, and in fact, the savior of the American white race at a time when we are just beginning to delineate the modern version of white-skinned privilege. For instance, when a Presbyterian mission was established in Kingston, Arkansas in 1917 (Figure 3.6), the Rev. Elmer J. Bouher would write copiously to his patron church in Rochester, New York that Kingston was a "cultural seed-bed" of "Anglo-Saxon and Elizabethan culture" and that the dialect and customs of the Ozarks were "virtually unchanged from those in England in the sixteenth century." He would write to one local that... You and your family have maintained the British character exemplified when their ancestors first settled on the Atlantic seaboard. There is no melting pot in these mountains. Your people have maintained your integrity, habits and racial purity. (Burnett 2000:38-39, emphasis added) These sentiments were clearly influenced by the eugenics movement that was gaining popularity as a "solid field of science" following the turn of the centurya field that, of course, was tied in a reactionary way to the increased immigration of "less fit" eastern and southern Europeans who were mingling with the still unstable construct of whiteness (Kevles 1985:57-69). Rev. Bouher makes the connection with eugenic-leaning sentiments clear when he was quoted in a 1920s human-interest story in the Madison County Record: America's greatest problem today is in the flood of immigration from the lower levels of European society that is threatening to submerge and destroy our American ideals. Sociologists tell us that there remain in America only two great seedbed of Anglo-Saxon intellect, and they are in Southern Appalachians and in the Ozark uplift. Right here in these Ozark hills is a greater wealth of native Anglo-Saxon intelligence than in any other section of the United States. In my opinion there are 2,000 132 descendants the pure clean-bred, sturdy stock that settled America and founded our government, the same stock that produced such men as Jackson and Lincoln...The Ozark mountaineer is America's best bet today. These are the people we are working to save and keep. On this hill we are fighting for things eternal. (Burnett 2000:187-186) Thus, by the turn of the century, the "backward Ozark hillbillies" were seen not only as an Other, but also a solutionas the end of the century saw the closing of the frontier and streams of urban immigrants a clamoring for an decisively America nostalgia began. To those seeking American nostalgia, what was appealing about the hillbilly was his whiteness and the possibility of a genetically pure remnant of a tradition that was uniquely American. We can seen echoes of these statements in the works of later Ozark authors, such as Vance Randolph and Otto Rayburn's denials of the existence of black hillbillies, but what makes Bouher's statements are all the more ironic is the fact that Harrison, Arkansas is only 40 miles to the northeast of Kingston. That Bouher could sincerely claim that there has never been any diversity in the area when he arrived a mere eight years after race riots disbanded a community of more than 100 African Americans so close to Kingston is a tribute to the power of cultural memory. The racial purity metaphor evoked by Presbyterian project in Kingston is a version of the Arcadian Ozarks. The connection is so strong, in fact, that one article printed in a 1928 Kansas City Star refers to Bouher as a shepherd of the hills (A Shepherd of the Hills Transforms Arkansas Backwoods Into a Modern Canaan, quoted in Burnett 2000:175). 133 In this version of Arcadia, the people are pure both by their racial isolation as well as their anti-modern stance, But they are also flawed. They have been "bound down by continuous poverty" (Burnett 2000:38). Although they have developed a race physically hardy" and are "intelligent, kind-hearted, and honest, they lacked the leisure, preparation, and vision to plan a system that would take care of their educational and social needs" (Burnett 2000:39). Thus the church was needed to provide the vision and protect them from the "evils" of the modern outside world (Burnett 2000:39). Reverend G. B. F. Hallock, reporting back to Rochester after a visit to Kingston in 1925 indicated that "improved roads and bridges would someday bring greater prosperity to the area, but with it would come harmful influences (Burnett 2000:39). Here all of the tropes of cultural memory we have discussed so far converge. The end of the Civil War required a remaking of the national and racial identity even as it brought the nation into full articulation with modernity. The hillbilly trope emerges at the same time the other liminal whites (Jews, Italians, Irish, etc.) are being differentially accepted into white-skinned privilege. The hillbilly manifests itself as a contradictory category. Simultaneously a white Other, the representatives of our contemporary ancestors and the true Americans who are racially pure whites directly descended from British. The creation of the hillbilly trope conflates the upland South with rualness, nature, poverty and whiteness. The same racial formation behind the need for the hillbilly spawns the segregated South--separated by equal doctrine of the post-Plessy vs. Fergusson South. It is the racial tensions, racism and hardships of Jim Crow era that causes the out migration and 134 nucleation of many African-Americans in the Ozarks. It works in concert with the hillbilly trope to wipe both their existence and the reason for their hardships from historical memory. A plethora of modernity-related mechanism--such as the discipline of folklore, mass consumer culture in the form of books, articles, films, comics and merchandise--make this transition all the more smooth. Now that we have examined the historical development of some of the tropes used to understand Ozark history (both nationally and locally) we can understand the sources of the cognitive disjunctures in the region's historical narratives. The erasure of AfricanAmerican heritage, the erasure of industrial enterprises and the entrepreneurs who controlled them are all related to the deployment of the tropes of the hillbilly, frontier or Civil War as frames for understanding history. These tropes clearly overlap and morph into each other, all developed over the same historical span (the nineteenth century), and all engage modernity in some regard. As anthropologists we have come to understand that culture is a moving target-- always in flux, constantly changing and constantly in motion. The field has even come to see the concept of culture as problematic as it reifies and places boundaries on something much more fluid that its usage allows. Along these lines, the historical analysis provided in Chapter 2 depicts the Arkansas Ozarks--like the entire nation--as a place in constant transition. Likewise, this 135 chapter has attempted a cursory analysis of how this moving target has become frozen and reified in our cultural memories. But there is one nagging continuity in the Ozarks and that is the region's ambivalent relationship with modernity. Since the late nineteenth century many of the inhabitants of the Arkansas Ozarks have seen themselves as a rural culture under siege by modernizing forces, outside migration and urbanization. The voices of Wright, Bauher, Randolph, Rayburn and countless others (both from within and outside of the region) have decried the change brought by railroads, modernity and "furriners." The resistance to and defeat of the historic district on the Middle-Fork of the White River is just one prime example. Despite the place that the Arkansas Ozarks holds in our national cultural memories as backwards and primitive, it has also, through the Arcadian trope and other mechanisms, been a large draw for new waves of people relocating for a better and more simple life. To use Kathleen Cande's metaphor, the Ozarks have always been a destination. The Northwest Arkansas area was the eighth fastest-growing region in the country from 1990 to 1998, with population growth of 29% (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette December, 17,1999). In the last five or ten years, Fayetteville and Northwest Arkansas have regularly appeared in many "Best Places to Live" lists. It has been listed in 50 Fabulous Places to Raise Your Family (Giovagnoli et al. 1997), US News & World Report's "The Best Towns in America" list, and Money Magazine's "Best Place to Live Today." In 2003, the Milken Institute named Fayetteville the best job performing city in 136 the United States, Harrison was included in the "100 Best Small Towns in America" list, Lowell was the fastest growing city in Arkansas and the 13th fastest growing city in the nation and, according to census figures, the population of the city of Rogers has grown 57.3% over the 1990-2000 period (Arkansas Department of Economic Development 2003). Thus, it is widely acknowledged a one of the fastest growing regions in the country. Ironically this region, saddled with the anti-modern label, is the home of the world's largest retailer and center of a highly modern capitalist economy--Wal-Mart Incorporated. Like it has since the postbellum period, however, the Arkansas Ozarks has grown and changed in waves, despite its place in national cultural memory. I will now turn to examine the archaeology of the Arkansas Ozarks and Van Winkle's Mill with two goals in mind. First, to see how these tropes have influenced previous archaeological investigations and, secondly, to examine the archaeological materials at Van Winkle's Mill with these tropes and their construction in mind. Through this methodology I hope to gain a better understanding of the different perceptions of Van Winkle's Mill in the past and present and what meanings we may attach to those materials. 137 Chapter 4 Archaeology, Cultural Memory and Van Winkle's Mill Archaeology is another avenue of exploring the past--one that is often entangled with cultural memory and history as well. Memory is, however, often embodied in objects, memorials, texts, talismans, and images. (Sturken 1997:19). This fact alone, combined with the "backward-looking nature of the archaeological enterprise" (Van Dyke and Alcock 2003:3), should make archaeology a well-suited discipline to examine the historical interconnectedness between cultural memory and history. Archaeologists are currently beginning to explore cultural memory as a frame for understanding the past (e.g., papers in Shackel 2001 and Van Dyke and Alcock 2003); including critiques of the place of the upland South in our national memories (Horning 1999, 2001, 2002). All too often, however, historical archaeology, despite its tradition as a counterpoint to history, is simply another part of the uncritical narratives of cultural memory. This is even truer given the tight entanglement between cultural memory and historical places--places historical archaeologists are often called upon to interpret. In this chapter I will explore previous archaeologies in the Arkansas Ozarks and how they have been informed by and engaged with cultural memory. Then I will offer a brief chronological and topical outline of the archaeological investigations at Van Winkle's Mill. As I have stated elsewhere, this overview is not meant to be comprehensive and present all of the excavated data recovered from Van Winkle's Mill. Those details may be found in the Van Winkle's Mill project technical reports and 138 monograph currently in preparation (Brandon et al. 2000; Brandon and Davidson 2003; Brandon 2005). I will here offer the information that will enable the reader to place the following chapters into some interpretive context. Archaeology and the Prehistoric Hillbilly An assessment of archaeology's entanglement with cultural memory and the hillbilly trope must begin with the way in which archaeologists have characterized the prehistoric portion of the archaeological record. The roots of archeology in the Arkansas Ozarks also lie at the very beginning of the twentieth century (e.g., Peabody 1903) and it was, therefore, articulated with the development of modernity as its sister discipline folklore and the hillbilly trope itself. Thus is should not be surprising that the hillbilly trope has also directly played a role in the construction of the prehistoric narrative of Ozark cultural memory. For instance, Daniel Wolfman's archeological assessment of the Buffalo National River (1979) provided a brief but instructive overview of archeological work in the Central Arkansas Ozarks and was one of the first truly synthetic looks at cultural resources in the Ozarks (Scholtz 1969 provides a similar synthesis for Northwest Arkansas). Wolfman's synthesis stressed the need for paleoenvironmental reconstruction and ecological approaches to the archeological record, but it also painted the Ozarks as a region which "probably lagged somewhat" in its "cultural development...due to its marginal location and rugged mountain terrain" (Wolfman 1979:19). This overt reliance on environmental explanation, although quite normal for archaeologies of the period, is in 139 this instance code for a long held belief that the prehistoric Ozarks were culturally backward. This conceptualization of the Ozarks as a backwater periphery to neighboring regional "main stream" centers has been promulgated since a rather early date. The legendary Willey and Phillips (1958:124-5) cast the region as essentially culturally Archaic through the late-prehistoric period and Stephan Williams referred unabashedly to a prehistoric "Hill-billy stage" in the Ozarks where more advanced Caddoan and Siouan traits slowly filtered into this "cultural isolate" (Williams 1961 quoted in Trubowitz 1980:11). By the 1980s, however, researchers had turned against the idea of the Ozarks as backward and culturally conservative (e.g., Brown 1984; Sabo 1986; Trubowitz 1980:11) and began to more fruitfully examine the region's "cultural development within broader comparative frames" (Sabo 1986:ix). In fact, following Wolfman, the next major synthesis of Ozark archeology (Brown 1984) took the debunking of the myth of Ozark marginality as its major theme. Brown not only provided a very detailed examination of all three states that make up the Ozark region (Oklahoma, Missouri and Arkansas), but managed to marshal these various sequences into a critique of Ozark prehistory. The roots of the marginal myth, Brown stated, lie in the original conceptualization of the "Bluff-dweller" culture and the reliance on bluff-shelters as the almost sole source for the construction of the cultural sequence (Brown 1984:32-59). This criticism is echoed in the Arkansas State Plan, which proclaimed the Ozarks "an archeological terra incognita" due to the historical reliance on bluff shelters and the Ozark marginality thesis (Raab et al. 1982:NW4). 140 Brown and Raab were, of course, right. The reliance on a single data set helped promulgate the Ozarks as isolated prehistoric hillbillies, but overlooked in their analysis was that these data were read through a trope in cultural memory that was already in existence. This trope was made even more powerful by its entanglement with environmental determinismif it was the upland isolation of modern hillbillies that made them backward and inbred, then those living in the Ozark Mountains during prehistoric times must also have been backward. Historical Archaeology and the Arkansas Ozarks There is certainly an established tradition of historical archeology in the Ozarks (see Cande 1995 for a recent overview). Although some researchers have stated that much of it may have been "poorly handled theoretically, analytically and managerially" in the past (Stewart-Abernathy 1999:228), there are some important projects that have quite satisfactorily added to our understanding of life in the nineteenth and twentieth-century Arkansas Ozarks and, moreover, contributed to a broader theoretical conceptualization of Ozark history (e.g., Cande 1995; Sabo et al. 2001; Stewart Abernathy 1986, 1987, 1992). Table 4.1 shows the mitigations and large-scale excavations that have been conducted on historical sites in the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks. These excavations have concentrated on what has been termed "late historic rural domestic sites," or LHD sites (H. Davis 1995; Jurgelski et al. 1996). 141 Site Name Phase III Ridge House Moser Farmstead Dowell Homestead Mt. Comfort Church Lambert Farmsead Dement Farmstead Van Winkle's Mill Phase II Unnamed James Leeper Site McGarrah-Reed Hwy 71 sites Hwy 412 sites Wilson Farm Archibald Yell House Site Number 3WA209 3BE311 3WA577 3WA880 3CW674 3CW685 3BE413 Date of Occupation (1834) 1871-1902 1875-1919 1885-1975 1841-1864 1890-1940s 1881-1950 1850-1960 Date of Field Work 1972-1976 1985 1989 1991 1992 1993 1997-2002 References Jurney 1973* Stewart-Abernathy 1986 Lafferty et al. 1997 Hilliard 1992* Cande 1995 Cande 1995 Brandon et al. 2000 3BE264 3WA410 3WA841 3CW674, 3WA577, 3WA772, 3WA777 3BE403, 3BE471, 3BE529, 3BE534, 3BE535, 3BE541 3WA988 3WA981 Late 19th Century Late 19th Century 1830s-1950s LHD LHD 1870-present 1938-1960s 1980 1984 1989 1987 1992 1994 1997 Santeford 1980 Hilliard and Sabo 1984* Hilliard and Thomson 1998* Lafferty 1989 Harcourt 1993 Memory 1994* Lafferty et al. 1997 Table 4.1. Historical archaeology projects conducted in the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks. Asterisks indicate unpublished manuscripts on file at the Arkansas Archeological Survey. 142 Again, unlike what we encountered in Chapter 2, little economic or temporal diversity is reflected in the historical archeology of the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks. With the exception of the early domestic sites of the Ridge House, McGarrah-Reed and the Yell House most excavations have occurred on postbellum sites in Northwest Arkansas and likewise, with the exceptions of sites like Mt. Comfort Church and Van Winkle's Mill they have occurred exclusively on rural domestic farms and plantations. Moreover only excavations at two sites, Wilson Plantation and Van Winkle's Mill, attempt to directly grapple with racial diversity in the Ozarks and the troublesome topics of slavery and racism in Northwest Arkansas. This concentration on rural domestic sites, like the prehistoric conceptualizations before it, plays into the hillbilly trope (what Stewart-Abernathy has called the "Ozark Traditional Myth" in archaeological literature) and places emphasis on the stereotypical protagonist of this myth--the rural, white, yeoman farmer (cf. Stewart-Abernathy 1986, 1987, 1992). Furthermore, this disparity goes a long way toward upholding the stereotype of the Ozark region as backward, non-industrial, poor, and exclusively white. The most successful historical archeology in the Ozarks has directly engaged this mythic tradition. The first and most direct of these is Skip Stewart-Abernathy's work at the Moser Farmsteadthe monograph and series of articles resulting from this mitigation cites Ozarkian participation in the consumption of the latest popular goods from the global market to refute the isolated nature of the region. This is a good example of excavations on a LHD site which does much service in problematizing our preconceived notions of Ozark history (Stewart-Abernathy 1986, 1987, 1992). 143 Of course the archaeological picture is more complicated than simply refuting or bolstering the Ozark Traditional Myth. While some of the materials recovered from the Moser farmstead belong in the "Agrarian Ozark Order," other recoveries offered contradictionssuch as the constant replacement of entire dish sets every few years (keeping up with the decorative fashions) or a souvenir from the 1893 Chicago's World Fair. Conversely, Sabo and Lockhart's GIS landscape analysis of the Lee Creek area has demonstrated the ways Ozark inhabitants may have used the physical landscape to actively create isolation when it was to their advantage (Lockhart et al. 2001; Sabo et al. 2001). A least-cost-path analysis between Ozark settlements in the Lee Creek study unit revealed that while period roads between smaller settlements did, in fact, roughly follow the least cost path, roads to county seats seemed to go out of their way to create distance. This creation of distance was interpreted by researchers as an example of the social differentiation and topographic separateness that characterized the hunter/herder adaptation (as opposed to the agriculturalist adaptation), but it can also be interpreted as the situational deployment of the hillbilly trope by these settlers--creating isolation between themselves and the more urban/modern community while maximizing efficiency of connection between other settlements. Thus "a trend of purposeful separation among the hunter/herders" can be seen "not only between households or clans, but also between households and county courthouse towns" (Lockhart et al. 2001). As previously mentioned, Kathleen Cande's work at the Lambert and Dement farmsteads in Crawford County have explored the multiple, contrasting ways people 144 experienced the Ozarks through time. (e.g., Cande 1992, 1995). Taking the "Ozarks as destination" as her theme she has examined multiple generations of Ozark settlers: the first from the eastern portions of the Upland South, a second group, largely city-dwellers returning to the Ozark country-side seeking a subsistence living during times of economic hardship, and finally a wave of "weary urbanites" seeking an Acadian get awaykicking off the new tourist economy and spawning an early version of the "back to the land" theme which would constantly repeat in the Ozark region. This conceptualization, of course, points to the interconnectedness of the so-called urban and rural populations and blurs the lines between the two. The brief testing at the Wilson Plantation (Memory 1994) began to examine the institution of slavery in the Ozarks, as John Solomon Otto urged us to do in the 1980s when he took a historical look at slavery in Yell County, Arkansas. Otto's point, touched upon in Chapter 2, was that another trope, one that emphasized slavery as almost exclusively a trait of the lowland South engaged in cotton agriculture, had obscured slavery in other contexts, such as the Ozark highlands. My own work at Van Winkle's Mill, has likewise attempted to get at a large cross-section of this Ozark diversity (Brandon and Davidson 2003; Brandon et al. 2000). Peter Van Winkle used enslaved labor in his saw and gristmill operations before the war, and freedmen stayed on following the war to help make Van Winkle's Mill the most dominate lumber provider for the rebuilding of Northwest Arkansas in the postbellum period. With its combination of industrial facilities, upper class residences, worker's quarters, and possible slave quarters (not to mention all of the dependencies and 145 outbuildings), the site provides archeologists a unique look into how industry, class, and race all functioned in reference to one another in nineteenth-century Northwest Arkansas. The Archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill Van Winkle's Mill (state site number 3BE413) was originally recorded as an archaeological site in 1984 during an archeological reconnaissance survey of selected locations on Beaver Lake conducted by a private archaeological firm for the Little Rock District of the Corps of Engineers (Bennett and Swanda 1985:4). It was one of two sites that comprised the only archeological resources identified within survey unit 5D whose terrain was described as "steep to gently sloping hillsides with small, level creek valley" covered with brush and scrub vegetation affording "poor to excellent" visibility (Bennett and Swanda 1985:11). The second site, Little Clifty Creek Shelter (3BE412), was then described as a "small bluff shelter measuring about 5m x 3m under a 20 foot high bluff outcrop" with a rock overhang that "covers a small dry area where rocks have been piled up for walls" (Bennett and Swanda 1985:24). These walls were not given a cultural affiliation in the report, but the state site form hypothesized the rock walls to be the remains of a probable "historic sherton [sic] or livestock pen." Evidence of vandal activity was observed during the visitincluding a "screened back dirt pile" (Bennett and Swanda 1985:24). Looter excavation reached a depth of approximately 50 cm revealing a dark brown loam and a scatter of lithic debitage. A total of six pieces of undiagnostic chert debitage were recovered from the vandalized areas (Bennett and Swanda 1985:V-6). All material 146 observed on the surface of the site was collected. No historical material culture, aside from the rock walls, was noted in either the survey report or on the state site form. Subsurface investigations were not attempted within the shelter as "shovel testing in the matrices of such sites is most often extremely difficult and yields such equivocal results" (Bennett and Swanda 1985:5). Based on this visitation the firm recommended "further investigations to determine extent of damage" to the shelter (1985:24). Van Winkle's Mill, however, was simply described as "a house site with spring house. Stone-mortar walls are still standing. This was the Van Winkle home dating to at least the 1890s...the buildings were demolished" (Bennett and Swanda 1985:25). No sub-surface investigations were performed, no material was collected and no further investigations were recommended for the site. The fact that an extremely small, highly disturbed prehistoric bluff shelter yielding a small number of undiagnostic stone flakes was seen as potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historical Places, while the large, archaeologically rich site of Van Winkle's Mill was not given a second glance speaks to another problem in prioritizing our archaeological resources--the frequent disregard for late nineteenth and early-twentieth century sites in some portions of the United States (see Barile 2004). Thanks to the work of several historical archaeologists in the state and the success of investigations at sites such as Moser, Lambert, Dement, and the Lee Creek study unit, however, this is not a common problem in Arkansas. 147 Beginning in October of 1997 an extensive mapping and limited archeological testing project was conducted at Van Winkle's Mill by the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville Station of the Arkansas Archeological Survey (Brandon and Hilliard 1998; Hilliard 1997). This project was initiated by personnel at the recently formed Beaver Lake State Park (now integrated into the Hobbs State Park and Conservation Area) who had written to the State Archeologist "requesting guidance concerning the documentation and historic interpretation of the mill and related features" (Brandon et al. 2000:2). This original mapping project established the landscape approach to the site (cf., Brandon and Davidson 2005 and Chapter 5 of this volume) and identified 24 major cultural features associated with the Van Winkle's Mill community. These features included elements of the main house, a raised garden terrace, a stone-lined springhouse, a brick privy, elements of the mill complex and a chimney fall associated with a possible worker's quarters (Brandon et al. 2000:15-25; Figure 4.1, Table 4.2). Between March 1 and 25, 1999 and again between March 17 and 24, 2000 two testing programs were conducted at Feature 9, a suspected mill worker's quarters. These "spring break" excavations were undertaken by a mix of AAS personnel and students enrolled at the University of Arkansas. Excavations established the domestic character of Feature 9 and provided us with some basic architectural and chronological information (Brandon et al. 1999, 2000:31). Following the publication of the excavations conducted at Van Winkle's Mill between 1997-1999 (Brandon et al. 2000), the Arkansas Archeological Survey's Sponsored Research Program, entered into a cost-share project with the Little Rock 148 Feature 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Description Garden Terrace Springhouse Privy Van Winkle house chimney Mill flywheel support Circular rock feature at mill Concrete creek slab Building foundation Mill worker's home Spring box at creek Rock wall at mill "Mill pond" Flywheel trench in mill area Van Winkle home yard wall Brick concentration Small depression Fenceline at bluff Fenceline at road Van Winkle Road Road segment at mill Road segment Road segment Outbuilding in photo "House" midden Probable Dump (Late 1800s-1920s) Feature 28, Probable Dump (1940s-1960s) Gasoline-powered Portable Mill Location Unidentified Possible Structure(s) Blacksmith Shop Possible Livestock Enclosure/Barn Possible Slave Quarter Blacksmith Shop Spring Table 4.2. Cultural features identified in Van Hollow, 1999-2003. 149 Figure 4.1. Map showing the features identified by the original 1997-1999 mapping and testing project at Van Winkle's Mill (after Brandon et al. 2000:16). 150 District of the Corps of Engineers and the Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism. The project was designed to find and test all cultural resources in the northern portion of Van Hollow on the Corps of Engineers' right-of-way to Beaver Lake (Brandon and Davidson 2003). Fieldwork was conducted sporadically over a three-year period (June 2000 through October 2003) and a number of features associated with Van Winkle's Mill were identified and investigated. The entire east-west breadth of Van Hollow was surveyed from the foundation of the mill on the south (Feature 5; Brandon et al. 2000:20) to the shores of what is now Beaver Lake in the north (Figure 4.2). A total of 472 artifacts were recovered from 186 shovel tests and various general surface collections (Brandon and Davidson 2003:24-33). Six loci were given archeological feature designations as a result of this survey (Table 4.2) and testing was conducted at the blacksmith's shop (Feature 31) and portions of the mill proper (Brandon and Davidson 2003:40-60). Nonintrustve, technologically oriented techniques, such as archeogeophysics and magnetic fraction percentage analysis, were deployed along with traditional testing measures at several features (Brandon and Davidson 2003:34-39, 4850; Tennant 2003). Finally, test excavations were also conducted at the neighboring Little Clifty Creek Shelter (Brandon and Davidson 2003:61-67). During the months of July and August in 2001 a University of Arkansas at Fayetteville archeological field school returned to the Van Winkle's Mill site. Excavations concentrated on uncovering the remainder of the Feature structure, 9 but test excavations were also conducted at a possible slave quarters (Feature 33) and on the 151 Figure 4.2. Survey area and features identified by the June 2000 systematic survey of the northern portion of Van Hollow (after Brandon and Davidson 2003:25). 152 boiler platform within the mill complex (Bowers 2003:36-39; Brandon and Davidson 2003:17). Excavations at the Home of Peter Van Winkle and Family A series of test excavation units and backhoe trenches were placed at the former location of the home of Peter and Temperance Van Winkle during the initial 1997 fieldwork (Figure 4.3; Brandon et al. 2000:25-29). Excavations revealed extensive disturbance associated with the razing of the second Van Winkle home (built circa 1870, demolished in 1969). This was disappointing as it meant that future excavations in the main house area would probably not yield intact archaeological deposits. However, these excavations also uncovered a thin artifact-bearing stratum of dark brown silt loam (Feature 24) some 70 cm below the surface (Figure 4.4). Artifacts recovered from this buried "midden" included burned aqua glass, cut nails and other indicators of a nineteenth-century domestic deposit (Brandon et al. 2000:28). "The discovery of Feature 24 underneath debris clearly associated with the occupancy of the second home is significant in that this may be associated with the 1850s-1870s occupation of the site" (Brandon et al. 2000:29). In other words, the first Van Winkle home, occupied from the 1850s and burned during the Civil War, may have been "capped" by sterile fill prior to the construction of the second Van Winkle home (1870-1969). The discovery of the remains of the first house buried so far below sterile deposits was quite a surprise. Geomorphologic evidence indicated that these sterile strata are not 153 Figure 4.3. Plan map of main house excavation area (after Brandon et al. 2000:25). Figure 4.4. North profile of backhoe trench N487-488/W488 showing buried midden associated with the first Van Winkle house (Feature 24). 154 the result of natural depositional episodes, which may have important implications that we will examine in the next chapter. 3BE652, The Mill's African-American Cemetery Of the various known historical accounts regarding Van Hollow, only one mentions the existence of a slave cemetery (Brandon et al. 2000:57; M. S. Johnson 1963:33). In a short article a 77 year-old woman referred to as Mrs. Homer Yeager (Bertha Blackburn Yeager), who was born at Van Winkle's Mill in 1886 and spent a good deal of her childhood in the hollow, recounts to Martha Sherwood Johnson seemingly random memories of her life at Van Winkle and nearby War Eagle Mill. One of these memories is a ghost story she heard and its association with the graveyard: She tells, among her reminiscences, how frightened she was of the old Negro graveyard near her home at Van Winkle, where the Van Winkle slaves were buried. And she remembers hearing the story of a slave named Peter, a Van Winkle slave, who had come into the gift of a swallow tail coat, of which he was so proud that he wore it even at work in the mill. One day at the Mill, so she was told, the tails of Peter's fancy coat caught in the big saw, he was drawn into it, and, as she heard it, "made into a terrible sight." He is buried in the old slave cemetery, too. (M. S. Johnson 1963:33). The cemetery is given more detail in another article. Blanch Elliot, the long-time resident of War Eagle Mill who helped launch the War Eagle Crafts Fair in 1954 and who has authored several articles on Van Winkle's Mill herself, relates information to a staff reporter from The Springdale News. Mrs. Elliot, who is a history buff, recalls her and her husband's visits to the Negro slave burial grounds. She commented that when they visited the grave site, there were remnants of barbed wire strands embedded in 155 trees and depressions in the ground and also huge trees growing in what had been an enclosure. "It is possible that if a person ventured to the grave site today, he would find only a weed-infested, hidden plot of ground," Mrs. Elliott said (Edminsten 1969). Efforts to locate this feature during the preliminary mapping project failed, however. In 1998 State Parks personnel, following information passed on by a local hunter, found a possible location for the cemetery atop the hill located to the west of the worker's quarters chimney fall (Feature 9). The cemetery consisted of four possible grave markerstwo sets of paired, upright fieldstones in east-west alignment (Figure 4.5). The "remnants of barbed wire strands embedded in trees" were also observed, although this is not an uncommon occurrence in the area. In 1999, a small, shallow trench was excavated across and perpendicular to the area demarcated by the stones in order to verify that they were, in fact, human graves. No artifacts or human remains were observed during excavation as trenches were designed to be shallow enough only to detect soil staining. Although no feature stains were noted during excavation (probably due to upland organic leeching), slight slumping or dips in the soil profile aligned with the gravestones offered circumstantial evidence for the grave shafts (Brandon et al. 2000:59). The suspected African-American cemetery was given a separate state site number (3BE652). This was done in order to maximize protection against potential cemetery vandals and to aid in future preservation efforts. 156 Figure 4.5. Field stones marking probable slave cemetery 3BE652. 157 Feature 9: Mill Worker's Quarters In 1999 a total of six one-meter-by-two-meter units and three one-meter-by-onemeter units were excavated centering on the chimney fall identified during the mapping project. Excavations revealed a rough-hewn limestone foundation and chimney box possibly belonging to a frame structure (Figure 4.6; Brandon et al. 2000:31-32). Excavations in March of 2001 expanded these excavations with another six one-meterby-two-meter test units following the south wall of the foundation towards a second suspected chimney fall (Figure 4.7). Finally, in 2001, full excavation of the footprint of Feature 9 (a total of 36 one-meter-by-two-meter units and six one-meter-by-one-meter units) revealed the foundation of a double-pen frame structure, perhaps a dogtrot, with two end chimneys (Figure 4.8; Brandon and Davidson 2003:17; Brandon 2005). Artifacts tentatively indicated a construction date of ca. 1870 with the possibility of more ephemeral antebellum occupation (Table 4.7; Brandon et al. 2000:53). Furthermore, both artifacts and archival data supported an abandonment date sometime shortly after the turn of the twentieth century (Brandon et al. 2000:54-55). While some of the recovered artifacts have manufacturing ranges that continue into the early twentieth century (e.g., aqua bottle glass, plain white ware ceramics, etc), it would seem clear from an examination of the complete artifact assemblage that the residence was not extensively occupied into the twentieth century. Chiefly, the assemblage is virtually lacking in common twentieth-century temporal markers (e.g., mason style glass canning jars, tin cans, etc.; see Stewart-Abernathy 1986:156). 158 Figure 4.6. Extent of 1999 excavations at Feature 9 uncovering one chimney box and part of the foundation. 159 Figure 4.7. Extent of 2000 excavations at Feature 9 uncovering the back foundation wall. 160 Figure 4.8. Plan view of the entire excavated footprint of Feature 9, a postbellum mill worker's quarters. 161 The archival record also documents only sporadic and ultimately brief occupations of Van Hollow after 1900. Furthermore, none of the living descendants remembered a structure standing where Feature 9 is located, and this living memory stretches back to the 1930s (Brandon et al. 2000:55). The range of artifact types recovered strongly suggested that the former structure was a residence and not a barn or other types outbuilding. Further, the residence did not seem to have been a segregated barracks or bunk house where single workmen were housed en mass, but rather the artifacts confirm the presence of children and suggest that a family once resided at the structure. Assuming for a moment the 1870 beginning occupation date, the 1870 Federal Census lists five likely candidates for the occupants of our structure: James B. Steele, Charles Dackel, Joel Lemming, Arron Anderson Van Winkle and Perry Van Winkle. Joel Lemming lived alone with his wife and had no children in 1870 (he is no longer in the hollow by 1880). Charles Dackel is likewise gone by 1880, although in 1870 the federal Census reports that he is living in the hollow with his wife (Martha) and at least two children. Both Arron and Perry, former slaves of the Peter Van Winkle, had substantial numbers of children within the occupation period. Steele, however, had only a single child (Guy, age 1) in 1870. Additionally, Steele would relocate to Springdale in 1872 not to return until the end of the decade (when he and Peter were coalescing their capital in order to launch the Van Winkle Hotel in Fayetteville) making the dates of his residence in the hollow (under an independent roof) very few. 162 Conversely, Aaron and his wife Jane raised four sons and five daughters in the hollow. In the 1870 Federal census, Aaron and Jane have 4 children, but by the 1880 census the number of children listed is nine, spanning the ages of seven to 20 years. In the 1870 census, Perry and his wife Agnes were also living in Van Hollow with nine children, but by the next enumeration (in 1880), Perry and his family are no longer living there. Thus, the data currently assembled suggest that it is probable that the structure was inhabited by the family of one of the laborers in the mill--perhaps by one of the Van Winkle freedmen (such as Aaron or Perry). Save for the Eagle cap pistol (introduced circa 1895), the dating of all of the toys recovered in testing is consistent with the occupations of these families. The data "imply that the structure was inhabited by the family of one of the laborers in the mill" perhaps the family of Aaron Van Winkle, the freedman who continued to work at the mill until at least the 1880s (Brandon and Davidson 2005; Brandon et al. 1999, 2000:55). Features 27 and 28: Trash Dumping Areas A probable dump dating as early as the late-nineteenth century and as late as the 1920s was found along the existing road in the northern portion of the hollow (Figure 4.2; Brandon and Davidson 2003:2526). Material from this feature was collected in both subsurface tests and from surface expressions. Material recovered included square-cut nails, whiteware sherds, porcelain sherds, molded ironstone fragments, salt-glazed stoneware, a small porcelain doll leg fragment, a bottle neck with a hand-applied lip, 163 Figure 4.9. Artifacts recovered from Feature 27: a) alkaline-glazed stone ware; b) molded ironstone; c) ironstone base with maker's mark; d) hand-[painted whiteware; e) patent medicine bottle with hand-tooled lip; f) ceramic doll leg; g) mule shoe; h) handforged hook. Description Porcelain, button Porcelain, doll part Porcelain, plain Whiteware, plain Whiteware, handpainted (polychrome) Ironstone, molded Stoneware Glass, clear Glass, green Glass, aqua Glass, cobalt Glass, flat (window) Nail, cut 6d Nail, cut unid Ammo cartridge Pony shoe TOTAL Weight (g) 0.4 3.1 19.0 14.6 4.3 29.9 49.9 52.5 27.6 12.8 1.6 2.6 2.2 7.6 7.4 148.2 383.7 Count 1 1 1 4 1 2 2 4 4 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 30 Comments white, 4-hole, dish leg cup maker's mark crock, black (painted?) 1 with hand tooled lip insulator .44 mag; Table 4.3. Artifacts recovered from Feature 27. 164 Description Ironstone, plain Stoneware Glass, clear Glass, amber Glass, aqua Glass, flat (window) Mule shoe Railroad spike Brick Prehistoric biface TOTAL Weight 14.0 151.8 129.0 15.3 4.9 5.3 383.0 147.2 344.5 37.9 1232.9 Count 1 3 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16 Comments 2 alkaline exterior/Ablbany interior, 1 Albany interior and exterior frags. From machine-made whiskey; see text melted machine-made, stamped "brick co." amorphous Table 4.4. Artifacts recovered from Feature 28. Figure 4.10 Artifacts recovered from Feature 29: a) Albany-slipped stoneware; b) alkaline-glazed stoneware; c) automatic machine-made bottle neck; d) bottle base with Owens scar and maker's mark; e) railroad spike. 165 window glass fragments, hand forged utility hook and a light horseshoe (Figure 4.9; Table 4.3). Feature 28, a second dumping area (Figure 4.2), was located approximately 20 meters north of Feature 27 (Brandon and Davidson 2003:27-28). All material was recovered from surface collections, including a large quantity of machine made bricks and brick fragments, salt-glazed stoneware, Albany-slipped stoneware, several machinemade bottle fragments (all dating post-prohibition, several dating the 1930s-1960s), and a railroad spike (Figure 4.10; Table 4.4). Feature 29: Vernon T. West's Portable Mill Location Several archival sources reveal that Vernon T. West operated a portable, gasolinepowered mill in the hollow for the Hobbs Western Tie and Timber Company (see Chapter 2). This mill operated from 1944 until 1960, when he moved to a nearby hill in order to take advantage of the new road networks (Brandon and Davidson 2003:28; Brandon et al. 2000:14; D. Miller 1966). A shallow, oblong pit (five meters long by three meters wide by 50-75 cm deep) of unknown function was located on the northeastern edge of a surface scatter that appeared to have been at least one of the locations of West's portable sawmill (Figure 4.2). Large drive belts and a set of in situ machine anchors were surrounded by a large quantity of oilcans, spark plugs, mason jar fragments and assorted metal fragments. Both the types and dates of the materials observed were consistent with Feature 29 being West's mill (Brandon and Davidson 2003:28). 166 Features 31 & 30: The Blacksmith Shop During the 2000 survey, a limestone forge base and associated surface scatter were discovered on the west side of the main road immediately to the north of a substantial spring (Brandon and Davidson 2003:29-31). Relatively large numbers of metal artifacts (>8.5 kg) were recovered from an initial non-intensive surface collection (Brandon and Davidson 2003:29). This collection included: steel plate scrap, at least five mule shoe fragments, three iron wagon "boxes" (axle hubs), a wrought-iron axle clip, large iron Lbrackets, iron strapping, an aqua-glass bottle-base, and Albany-slipped stoneware (Figure 4.11, Table 4.5). In 2002 a geophysical survey (using both magnetometry and resistance technologies) was conducted in the area of Feature 31 (Figure 4.12; Brandon and Davidson 2003:36-39). The test excavation phase at Feature 31 included six test units; two of the one-meter-by-two-meter units were used to bisect the forge box while the remainder were used to ground-truth archeo-geophysical anomalies suspected to indicate either structure foundations or blacksmith activity areas (Figure 4.11). The two one-meter-by-one-meter units bisecting the forge box encountered a large limestone slab foundation for the forge (approximately 1.8m or 5 ft. square). This had been covered with a thick layer of lime mortar to level the uneven surface and allowed courses of brick to be laid on the limestone base (Figures 4.14, 4.15, and 4.16). The remains of what appears to be at least four courses of bricks were found in these units scattered along the outside periphery of the forge box, but historically forges are often constructed to "hip height" or taller to make working material in the forge as easy as 167 Figure 4.11. Artifacts recovered from Feature 31: a-b) wagon axle "box"; c) "L" bracket; d) wagon bolster plate; e) wagon strap bolt. Description Stoneware Glass, aqua Nail, cut 8d Bolster plate Collar for tool or yoke support Iron bar stock Iron L-bracket Metal strapping Mule shoe Scrap metal Sheet metal Wagon box hub Wagon box strap bolt Other metal TOTAL Weight 58.5 60.0 4.1 500.0 82.5 500.0 500.0 98.7 735.8 952.7 44.3 626.7 159.0 4176.2 8498.5 Count 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 6 2 2 1 6 31 Comments Albany interior/exterior large bottle base see text square see text see text see text Table 4.5. Artifacts recovered from Feature 31, general surface collection. 168 Description Whiteware, plain Stoneware Glass, aqua Glass, clear Glass, green/black Glass, milk Glass, flat (window) Porcelain cuff stud Black glass button Ammo cartridge Bolts/nuts Center clip for single tree Chain Copperous eyelet Harness ring Iron bar stock Iron pipe Loop eye Mule shoe Nail, mule shoe Possible chisel Screw driver shaft Screw top Shield nickle Static bail drawer pull Suspender/overall gallus Trunk lath Wagon bolster spring Wedge Wire/barbed wire Metal scrap Other metal Brick Coal Slag Tin can fragments Prehistoric projectile point/knife Prehistoric lithic debitage TOTAL Weight 9.8 26.3 15.8 306.8 10.8 1.9 15.3 0.5 1.3 5.2 1205.8 307.0 492.1 0.8 13.0 5190.2 522.6 114.9 680.5 13.3 55.0 55.9 3.9 4.4 31.9 3.7 19.0 1700.0 159.1 17.4 1125.6 1867.9 8751.4 325.5 3916.8 711.9 9.3 30.8 27723.4 Count Comments 2 4 7 117 2 3 17 1 1 2 14 1 9 1 1 53 2 1 7 6 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 10 na 15 na na na na 1 2 290 Albany interior/exterior 3 pepper sauce bottle framents 2 Boyd's cap fragments see text see text see text see text see text see text hand forged from round bar stock see text see text gary point Table 4.6. Artifacts recovered from testing at Feature 31 (without nails). 169 possible. Layers of sand (like that used to mix with the lime mortar) and what appeared to be sub-soil had been used to fill the interior of the forge box (Brandon and Davidson 2003:42). A section of continuous limestone foundation was encountered in three of the onemeter-by-two-meter units that had been placed on the western side of Feature 31. Foundation stones appeared to be at least two courses thick in places and stones ranged from 20cm to almost 50cm in width (Figure 4.17). A massive amount of metal, including wagon parts, a bolster spring, raw bar stock, a large cast iron pipe fragment and 3080.50g of metal were recovered from units along this foundation wall (Brandon and Davidson 2003:42-53). A total of 181 (741.10g) intact cut nails were recovered from Feature 31, while only ten intact wire nails (30.55g) were recoveredindicating that the structure is decidedly of nineteenth-century origin (Brandon and Davidson 2003:44-45). The small number of wire nails may indicate repair in the waning years of the nineteenth or early twentieth centuries, but their scarcity does not support major twentieth-century use. Bricks and mortar were ubiquitous in the two excavation units bisecting the forge, but largely absent from other excavation units. Aside from the bricks themselves, the most commonly recovered artifacts from Feature 31 are blacksmith related. A total of 5,190.20g of unmodified iron bar stock were recovered during the testing of Feature 31. Both round and square varieties of bar stock were represented, in various sizes. Additionally, great amounts of both coal and 170 Figure 4.12. Topographic map and geophysical grid area for Feature 31 (blacksmith shop). 171 Figure 4.13. Magnetometer (left) and resistance data (right) from geophysical survey of Feature 31 (blacksmith shop). 172 ''' Figure 4.14. Planview of test excavations at forge box, Feature 31 (blacksmith shop). Figure 4.15. Test excavations at Feature 31 showing blacksmith's forge box, view from the east. 173 Figure 4.16. Profile of forge box excavations at Feature 31. Figure 4.17. Photographic view of excavations along the back wall of the blacksmith shop. 174 slag were recovered from test excavations. Save for a tiny amount of similar materials recovered from the adjacent Feature 30, no other known feature within Van Hollow is associated with coal burning or the creation of slag as a by-product of combustion (scrap lumber was presumably the fuel sued to power the mill's steam engine and keep the residential hearths burning). Finally, numerous general industrial artifacts were recovered, including many examples of bolts (or lynch pins) and nuts; 2 cast iron pipe fragments, 10 partial lengths of iron chain, a static drawer pull; a hand forged "punch-like" object; numerous unidentifiable iron objects (some possibly representing elements of wagons) a large amount of iron scrap metal. Both the size (penny weights) and spatial distribution of the nails recovered from Feature 31 could indicate that the shop may not have been a fully enclosed building. Perhaps four uprights (framed with 10d and 8d nails) supporting a roof over the work area (4d nails), but lacking framed walls and trusses. Another possibility is that the structure was extensively salvagedthis could account for the removal of larger to moderate pennyweight nails while leaving smaller pennyweights intact. At any rate, the pennyweight distribution at Feature 31 radically differs from the pattern at Feature 9, a fully framed domestic structure of comparable age (Brandon and Davidson 2003:44; Brandon et al. 2000:37). Feature 30 was located during the 2000 survey adjacent to the Feature 31 Blacksmith shop, but separated by a wet-weather gulley (Brandon and Davidson 2003:28-29). Feature 30 was originally described as an "amorphous scatter of brick, 175 limestone and metal objects" which a sizable amount of stacked bricks (Brandon and Davidson 2003:28). Aside from the bricks, no clearly intact cultural deposits were encountered during the later testing phase of Feature 30. Material recovered, especially the large amounts of bar stock, seemed to suggest that this area may have served as a "scrap pile" area associated with Feature 31 (Brandon and Davidson 2003:52). The presence of both the .44 and the .38 cartridges places the brick pile itself to a least afterturn of the twentieth century (i.e., 1902-1920). The brick pile may represent a dismantling phase of the forge box at Feature 31 as it is known to have a brief twentiethcentury occupation, and it does not appear on the 1946 aerial photographs of Van Hollow (Brandon and Davidson 2003:52). Feature 32: Livestock Enclosure/Barn During the 2000 survey of the northern portion of Van Hollow, Feature 32 was identified on the flat area just north of Little Clifty Creek's northernmost bend and to the east of the main roadan area shown as a clearing on the 1957 War Eagle USGS quadrangle (Figure 4.2; Brandon and Davidson 2003:31). Most of the materials recovered during the initial survey included mule shoe fragments and large machine cut nails. Further investigations were aimed at assessing the identity of this feature as structural (i.e., a barn) or semi-structural (i.e., a paddock). Unfortunately, due to the ephemeral nature of the feature itself, traditional test excavation methods would probably prove unfruitful. Similarly, Feature 32 was not a good candidate for geophysical investigation because of the current vegetation and frequent inundation. 176 Therefore, immediately following the initial survey a more intensive metal detector survey was conducted. All hits were marked with pin flags and mapped using the digital theodolite in order to assess artifact patterning. Shovel tests were then excavated over each mapped metal detector hit. This approach was thought to afford investigators clues to the feature's function, form and date through artifact patterning and the recovery of diagnostic artifacts without resorting to wholesale destruction of the feature's faint subsurface archeological expression. In all a total of 28 shovel tests were excavated during this intensive metal detector survey (Figure 4.18) recovering a total of 43 artifacts. All recovered artifacts were, of course, metal. Material recovered included five mule shoes, 18 cut nails and cut nail fragments, seven large common cut nail "spikes" (i.e., 20d or greater), 2 wire nails, an apparent wrought nail, a fence staple, wire fragments, a large chain link fragment and a iron L-bracket (Figure 4.19). Aside from the broad temporal significance of the wrought and cut nails, no diagnostic material culture was recovered from Feature 32. The lack of domestic refuse and the consistency in the classes of artifacts lead to interpreting this feature as a possible livestock enclosurespecifically a large-scale pen for mules. It is known through documentary sources that Van Winkle owned and maintained several teams of mules for use in timbering (Hicks 1990:20, 25; Mitchell 1969). At present, however, this enclosure is not thought to be the large barn described by Conable (1903) as the density and number of nails recovered does not indicate a substantial structure (Brandon and Davidson 2003:51). 177 Figure 4.18. Plan view map showing the distribution of shovel test at Feature 32 (possible mule paddock). Figure 4. 19. Artifacts recovered from Feature 32. a-b) mule shoes; c) L-bracket; d-h), large penny cut nails from various shovel tests. 178 Feature 33: Possible Slave Quarters Feature 33 was originally located in June of 2000 during an informal survey designed to assess the impact of the construction of a visitor's parking area for the park on the south side of Highway 12. The feature was located on the south side of Highway 12 and the west side of Clifty Creek on a very small, flat flood plain between the creek and the sharp rise of the uplands (Figure 4.1). There were no obvious surface indications of the existence of Feature 33. It was originally discovered through shovel test transects conducted across the flat portions of the narrow Clifty Creek valley. Material was recovered from 11 shovel tests in the area and included large cast iron stove fragments, salt-glazed stoneware, whiteware and a large quantity of cut nails. In conjunction with the 2001 University of Arkansas archaeological field school, geophysical surveys were conducted for student training and to gather data in advance of excavations at Feature 33. Figure 4.20 illustrates the imagery for multiple technologies in a ten-meter-by-ten-meter area, some interpretations and a recommended test unit. During the 2001 field school a total of seven one-by-two-meter units were excavated in the Feature 33 area (Figure 4.21). Six of these concentrated on assessing the geophysical anomalies thought to represent the structure's corner while the remaining unit was deployed to investigate a strong dipolar anomaly southwest of the structure's footprint. 179 Figure 4.20. Results of geophysical survey at Feature 33 (possible slave quarters). Figure 4.21. Extent of 2001 test excavations at Feature 33 (possible slave quarters). 180 Although no evidence of a continuous limestone foundation (like the one at Feature 9) was encountered, what appeared to be the edge of a significant nail rain was observed in the approximate anomaly location. Although this evidence is more ephemeral than expected, these preliminary excavations are currently being interpreted as the edge of frame structure without significant foundation beyond, perhaps, stacked limestone piers. Artifacts recovered from the Feature 33 testing program strongly suggest a antebellum occupation and do not indicate any substantial postbellum activity. The artifactual evidence is also in sharp contrast with the material recovered from Feature 9, despite the similar function and situation on the landscape of Van Hollow. Not only was the foundation of the Feature 33 structure much less substantial, it lacked evidence for a hearth and chimney (instead excavations yielded several large cast iron stove parts) and virtually no window glass was recovered from Feature 33. Likewise, the household material recovered from Feature 33 was much more spartan, a subject to which we will return in later chapters. Based on the aforementioned archival evidence (see Feature 9 discussion) and its geographical location, it is possible that Feature 33 represents an antebellum slave quarter that was not used following emancipation. 181 Excavations in the Van Winkle Mill Complex The only known photograph of the mill was taken looking towards the grist mill with the saw mill buildings off to the side and extending out of the shot (Figure 2.6). Most historical sources repeat what was printed in Goodspeed's 1889 History of Benton County: "The mills are inclosed [sic] in a building 70 x 90 feet in size, two stories high, and all covered with an iron roof" (Bowers 2003:21; Goodspeed 1889:108). As I have pointed out in the introduction, the only remaining above-ground evidence of the mill at Van Hollow is a large (approximately 9 meter by 9 meter) limestone foundation, which is likely the foundation for the engine boilers. Directly adjacent to this on the west side, is a deep (approximately 3 to 4 meters) trench, which is bounded on its west side by a limestone wall that extends into the flywheel trench (Figure 4.22). Our early investigations at Van Winkle's Mill had pointed out that the inherit intricacy of the mill complex proper requires "researchers armed with specialized knowledge of industrial construction, layout, and function in order to properly understand the archeological record of the mill" (Brandon et al. 2000:63-64). Between August 9 and 13, 2000 and July 14 and 18, 2001, Dr. Patrick E. Martin, an industrial archeologist affiliated with Michigan Technological University, conducted a assessment of the mill complex as a part of the cost-share project (Brandon and Davidson 2003:32). 182 Figure 4.22. View of the boiler platform (left) and the flywheel support (right) during the 2003 spring break excavations in the mill complex. Description Whiteware, plain Stoneware Glass, clear Glass, aqua Glass, flat Ammo cartridge Belt staple Bolts/nuts Chain Copper rivets File Iron bar stock Iron pipe Iron rivets Iron washer Wire/barbed wire Metal scrap Other metal Brick Prehistoric lithic debitage TOTAL Weight Count Comments 21.2 16.4 106.4 35.7 297.8 11.4 2.2 266.2 110.0 5.2 92.1 415.5 773.9 470.3 29.3 164.9 2423.8 1318.3 9258.2 3.6 6560.6 12 2 27 13 321 2 1 9 1 3 1 3 3 5 3 15 na 36 na 1 457 1 salt glazed exterior, 1 Albany interior/exterior 9 shards melted .40 and .22, see text see text see text see text see text biface thinnning flake Figure 4.7. Artifacts recovered from mill complex area (without nails). 183 Figure 4.23. Topographic map of the mill complex area delineating the geophysical grids and excavation areas. 184 Figure 4.24. Results of geophysical investigations in the mill complex area: magnetmoetry (left) and electrical resistance (right) from RSG3; in the inset, electromagnetic conductivity (left) with possible data trends (right) from RSG1. 185 "Thorough surface examination of site features and consultation with archival records revealed that the Van Winkle Mills included both a sawmill and a gristmill, powered by a single large steam engine in the postwar decades" (Martin 2000). Significant portions of those mills are preserved in archeological contexts. The ruins of the boiler platform and engine house are well preserved and visible, with a combination of massive limestone slab and block construction and rubble from the additional brick masonry that surrounded the boilers. Remnants of the external foundation walls are evident and suggest that excavation would easily reveal their full extent. "The retaining wall along the creek probably served as the east foundation for the gristmill, as well as keeping the creek within its banks during high water periods" (Martin 2000). Following Martin's recommendations, two geophysical surveys at the mill complex were carried out. One shortly following the completion of the cultural resource inventory in August of 2000when soil conditions were comparatively desiccated-- and a second under more ideal condition prior to the 2003 spring break excavations. Figures 4.23 and 4.24 illustrate the location and size of the geophysical grids in relationship to the extant features of the mill. Geophysical technologies used include magnetometry, electrical resistance, and electromagnetic conductivity (Brandon and Davidson 2003:36-39). No clearly defined foundation lines were evident in either geophysical survey. Test excavations were conducted in 2001 and 2003 to ground-truth the geophysical surveys and to investigate the scattered anomalies recorded using the various technologies. A total of five one-meter-by-two-meter units were used to investigate these anomalies--all encountered sterile subsoil at a shallow level and recovered only a small 186 number of artifacts associated with the mill operation (Figure 4.25, Table 4.7). No foundation remnants or other cultural features were encountered in these test excavations (Brandon and Davidson 2003:54-55). The imagery again suggested concentrations of metal and brick rubbleconfirmed by the excavationsbut no clearly delineated foundation lines. It was known that the mill had been dynamited to facilitate the salvage of scrap iron (see Chapter 2), and consequently iron is apparent on the surface and presumably just below the surface. Juxtaposed intensely high (black) and low (white) EM values likely indicate concentrations of metal. Less distinct mottling within the data may indicate brick rubble. The geophysical imagery for this area, as well as archeological observations indicate repeated inundation of this area of the site, which is located on Little Clifty Creek that culminates in an arm of Beaver Lake. These factors have undoubtedly contributed to disturbance of the archeological record. Two efforts in the area of the mill indicated the location of archaeological features and materials, but no defined foundations were confirmed by excavations. In the immediate mill area it appears that extensive salvage, explosions and repeated flooding from the bounding creek drainage have obfuscated more clear cultural patterning that might otherwise have been discernable in both the imagery and excavations. During the 2001 field school excavations were conducted on the boiler platform in order to provide information about the mill's equipment and operations (Bowers 2003:36-38). Two three-meter-by-three-meter units on the boiler foundation were placed 187 Figure 4.25. Artifacts from the mill complex testing: a-d) large rivets; e) large squareheaded bolt; f) belt staple; g) file. 4.26. Extent of 2001 excavations on the boiler platform in the mill complex. 188 to quarter the entire platform with the gravel fill, which had been deposited on the boiler foundation at some point in the past, removed from the foundation, exposing the limestone base. Figure 4.26 shows the northwest quarter of the foundation after excavation. The foundation appears to have been rimmed with stone and then filled with gravel. A cast iron "door" was found at floor level in this unit. It appears to have been mortared to the stone floor (Bowers 2003:38). This door looks very much like a boiler door but was mortared to the floor perhaps as an anchor point for the boilers proper. Although the archaeological investigations within the mill complex have not been completely conclusive and have, perhaps, posed more questions than they have answered. The mill excavations have been used as a spring board for a thesis project in anthropology (Bowers 2003). Under the direction of George Sabo, Robin Bowers examined the Van Winkle saw and grist mill operations using a combination of excavated material, archival data and general information about the history of the saw mill industry. Bowers' work poses possibilities for the type of steam engine that powered the mill complex, analyzes environmental impact of the mill on the region and, most importantly for our purposes, poses some interesting ideas about settlement patterns which I will engage in Chapter 5. Other Features of Note There are a number of unexcavated features which add to our understanding of the cultural landscape of Van Winkle's Mill and will be used in the following chapters. First, 189 the raised garden terrace (Feature 1) which was recorded during the initial archaeological mapping project in 1997 (Brandon et al. 2000:17). This is one of the most distinctive landscape features visible that is associated with the Van Winkle home (Figures 1.1 and 2.6). Located adjacent and directly west of the main road, this prominently elevated and partially artificial landform faced the center of the front yard. A front easterly facing stone wall fa ade with central steps is adjacent to the road and spans the length of the terrace on the front side. Hicks also notes (1990:47) that a workers home was built in the garden area where Norman Van Winkle, one of Peter's sons, lived at one time. Much of the front rock wall is missing today, apparently robbed a number of years ago for building material. The terrace is about two meters above the front yard of the house. It is unclear whether the garden terrace feature was built in association with the construction of the first (ca. 1850) or second Van Winkle home (ca. 1870). The second set of features important to the Van Winkle landscape is the natural springs (Features 2, 10 and 34). The first of these (Feature 2) is known historically as the Van Winkle Spring or Van Winkle Hollow Spring (Brandon et al. 2000:18; Fenno 1978:331-332). Rock walls, an iron plate at the bluff that served as a back retaining wall and roof support constitute the remains of this once formal rock and wood structure. Even so, the existing stone masonry consisting of large rough cut sandstone positioned at the bluff and spring is visually impressive (Figure 4.27). This spring served the occupants of the Van Winkle home; the back rooms were located about 25 meters to the northwest of the spring. 190 Figure 4.27. Feature 2, the Van Winkle Spring house, 1997. Figure 4.28. View of the Van winkle house showing the semi-detached kitchen and kitchen addition. 191 Feature 10 is a naturally occurring spring 35 meters west of the worker's quarters (Feature 9) on the west bank of Little Clifty Creek (Brandon et al. 2000:21). The spring is semi-enclosed by stones that have been placed adjacent to the spring and creek. It was a nearby potable water source for the occupants of Feature 9. Feature 34 is a spring associated with the blacksmith shop (Feature 31; Brandon and Davidson 2003:29). Located immediately to the southwest of the shop and forge, it is much more substantial than Feature 10 and provided the water necessary for blacksmithing activities. Additionally, in the southwestern arm of the hollow two more potential worker/slave quarters may exist, although their material remains have not be discovered to this date. First, there is a structure of unknown function (but "not a barn") that may have been buried under fill by the construction of Highway 12 which bisected Van Hollow in the 1960s (Steve Chrychel, personal communication) and, second, a standing structure indicated to the west of the Feature 33 location on the 1900 USGS Quadrangle. Although spatial placement on this large-scale (15') quadrangle is vague, it is not believed to be Feature 33 as that feature yielded no postbellum material and, thus, may not have been standing in 1900. Although some effort has been made, the remains of this structure have not been located. With the addition of these two potential structures, a line of buildings running along the southwest arm of Van Hollow begins to emerge. Although little is known about the function of these buildings, their placement between Features 9 and 33 may indicate a row of worker's quarters. 192 Finally, it should be pointed out that the Van Winkle home was serviced by a twostory, semi-detached kitchen (Figure 4.28). Historical sources point toward this kitchen as being not only a place for food preparation, but also a home for some of the enslaved African-Americans who lived at Van Winkle's Mill. This use is consistent with other detached kitchen investigated throughout the South (e.g., McKee 1992; StewartAbernathy 2004). Armed with this overview of the archaeology that has been conducted at Van Winkle's Mill, we now turn to two case studies that seek to integrate our excavated material and understanding of the Van Winkle landscape with the historical material provided in Chapter 2 and the understanding of cultural memory as outlined in Chapter 3. The first of these two case studies looks at the large-scale landscape of Van Winkle's Mill where we will attempt to understand Van Winkle's Mill as it was seen in the late-nineteenth century and how has been subsequently viewed by successive generations using decidedly different tropes of cultural memory. 193 Chapter 5 "Pines in Place of Magnolias": The Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill As cultural memory is produced through concrete objects, images and representations (Sturken 1997:9), it can be inextricably linked to places. It infuses locations with a sense of place and places with a sense of history. We know that memories are material; they have texture, they exist in the world rather than solely in our imaginations (Zelizer 1998:4). This is all the more true of places identified as historically significant. In these locations, the combination of place and cultural memory results in "a past made real because one stands--quite literally--in its wake" (Flores 2002:18). Examining the physical and cultural landscapes of these places imbued with cultural memory (in this instance Van Winkle's Mill) can provide us with concrete case studies of how historical narratives, cultural memory and places are dialectically related. The seven years of archaeological work conducted in Van Hollow outlined in the previous chapter makes it possible to reconstruct at least a portion of the mid-to-latenineteenth-century landscape of Van Winkle's Mill. Examining this landscape is our first step to analyzing how the material aspects--landscapes and artifacts--of Van Winkle's Mill have engaged cultural memories in the Arkansas Ozarks. I will begin by attempting to discern what the structure of the mid-to-late nineteenth-century landscape of Van Hollow might reveal about the inhabitants of Van Winkle's Mill and how they may have conceptualized their place in society. I will then turn to other views of Van Winkle's 194 Figure 5.1. Map of the late nineteenth century of the cultural landscape of Van Winkle's Mill. 195 Figure 5.2. Map of the late nineteenth century of the cultural landscape of Van Winkle's Mill showing industrial and residential zones and activity flow. 196 Mill and its landscape through time in order to ascertain what tropes of cultural memory have been deployed and what these deployments have emphasized and minimized throughout history. In short, I hope to see how the disjunctures that we have followed through the previous chapters come to be deployed in relation to one particular place-- Van Winkle's Mill. Archaeologies of Landscape Landscape-oriented archaeology is, by all accounts, becoming a ubiquitous line of inquiry in historical archaeology (e.g., Delle et al. 2000; Epperson 1999a; M. H. Johnson 1996; Leone 1984, 1995; Kealhofer 1999; Kelso and Most 1990; Stine et al. 1997; Worrell et al. 1996; Yamin and Metheny 1996). Thus it is, by now, no longer a novel concept to see cultural landscapes as intimately connected to social structures (e.g., Cosgrove 1984; Lefebvre 1991; Jameson 1991:97-129; Soja 1989). Unfortunately, in historical archaeology landscapes have been often objectified, dehumanized, reified (Thomas 2001:170) or reduced to a simple reflection of social relations (compare Beaudry et al. 1991; Leone 1984). Here, in an attempt to avoid this frequent pitfall, I will be also deploying concepts from humanist geography, with its emphasis on human awareness and perception of space (e.g., Tuan 1976 and papers in Adams et al. 2001) by concentrating on landscape as a form of representation (Mitchell 2000:99). Following Thomas, I see landscapes as a: "...network of related places, which have gradually been revealed through people's habitual activities and interactions, through the closeness and affinity that they have developed for some locations, and through the important events, festivals, calamities and surprises which 197 have drawn other spots to their attention, causing them to be remembered or incorporated into stories" (Thomas 2001:173). Thus landscapesseries of places through which people's lives are threadedhelp people "give account of their own identity" and is an "arena in which and through which memory, identity, social order and transformation are constructed, played out, re-invented and changed." (Knapp and Ashmore 1999:10; Thomas 2001:173). Peter Van Winkle's Landscape Upon examining a spatial representation of the archaeological data outlined in Chapter 4 (Figure 5.1), a few things quickly become evident about the configuration of the Van Hollow landscape. First there seems to be a clearly discernable industrial zone in the northern area of the hollow (Figure 5.2). Here, in the widest portion of the hollow, were the mills, blacksmith shop, metal scrap areas, lumberyards and mule paddock. This area was, of course, a hub of activity and the locus that made Van Winkle's mill "a lively place" (Goodspeed 1889:107) that "resembled a fair as people gathered to trade their produce and wares to each other as well as for the sawmill products" (Hicks 1990:20). Moreover, the mill's industrial features would have been constituent parts of the whole of the industrial enterprise. All would have variously interacted as nodes in a network designed to produce lumber and sell commodities to the public. For instance, the blacksmith shop would be busy casting and repairing mill parts, re-shoeing mules from the paddock, fixing log wagons after delivering their cargo to the mills, and selling goods and services to the general public. Likewise, Bowers (2003:40-51) reconstructs 198 the probable system of interaction of these parts as timber moves from logging and log storage, through the mill and specialty woodworking shops to final distribution. The efficiency of this system of logging and lumber distribution certainly represented an engagement with the modern, industrial mindset of Fordism and is consistent with historical references to Peter Van Winkle's commitment and investment with the modern project (Gramsci 1971:277-278; Harvey 1990:125). The road that passes between Peter's house and his formal garden was no ordinary lane, it was a major thoroughfare which lead to a ferry, which he operated on the White River, and to the towns of Rogers, Huntsville and Eureka Springs. Thus, a constant parade of people would have admired the small world within the hollow that Peter had created. More importantly for Peter, he could see (and be seen by) these passers-by quite easily from his second story balcony or his elevated garden--both conveying Peter's importance and augmenting his already formidable stature. Despite the road's importance and apparent high traffic, it should be noted that at its articulation with the Van Winkle home and raised terrace garden, the road way bottlenecks to such an extent that someone standing in the bed of a wagon could reach out and touch either Peter's picket fence (demarcating the boundary of the outer yard), or the walls of the family's terraced garden. The aforementioned narrowness of the Ozark hollow imposed constraints that had to be accommodated. In many ways, the fact that Peter could have fit all of his landscape into Van Hollow could have been viewed as a status symbol in and of itself. Specifically, these somewhat drastic modifications to the "natural" Ozark hollow can be seen as a 199 reference to the "man's mastery over nature" theme common to modern thought with its origins in the enlightenment. Massive amounts of labor, possibly enslaved, created flat spaces out of slopes when the formal garden was constructed, and again, after the war, a great deal of time was taken to build up the landform on which his first house had stood before the construction of the second structure. This labor, in addition to "capping" the old burned building's remains, widened and flattened the landform making more space for the large house and its dependencies. Meanwhile, in keeping with the Victorian ideology of separate public and private spheres, the western arm of Van Hollow is entirely residential and contains at least three (if not four) homes for the enslaved and later free workers in residence. The mill workers were thus both "out of sight" (i.e., around the bend) and kept nearby. The landscape creates a north-south line that symbolically delineates a work/home dichotomy. The southern portion of the hollow, where the "domestic" activities of both Peter and the laborers took place, can be contrasted with the northern portion where production, in the formal economic sense, was conducted and managed. The Van Winkle house itself was situated at the center of this narrow, linear world--the mill was situated in the northeastern portion of the complex, Peter's house in the virtual center, and the worker's quarters (Features 9 & 33), located past the bend in the hollow in the southwestern portion of the complex (out of sight of the main house for "aesthetic" purposes, but close enough to allow labor to be "on call"). Like the spatial separation and segregation noted 200 on lowland plantations it was yet "another layer of social insulation between the owners and the owned" (McKee 1992:173). Not only did this landscape replicate and legitimate the social hierarchy of the hollow (placing Peter in the center, with all things revolving around him), but this landscape actively sought to remind others of this implied hierarchy. Laborers who lived in the Feature 9 and Feature 33 structures would have been required to walk past Peter's large, impressive home at least twice a day on their way to and from the mill proper-- where these "worlds" collide. The mill itself would have been the one place where Peter interacted with the entire spectrum of the mill's labor on a daily basis. Van Winkle's Mill and Settlement Patterns in the Regional Landscape Widening our scale of analysis slightly, we move to the settlement system immediately surrounding Van Winkle's Mill. Bowers (2003:66-92) examined settlement patterns of six townships surrounding the location of Van Winkle's Mill. Although this analysis is self-described as a "preliminary study of settlement patterns near the mill" (Bowers 2003:69) it does raise interesting questions regarding Van Winkle's Mill and its landscape. Bowers evaluated the influence the Van Winkle's Mill had on general settlement choice following William Langhorne's work on settlement patterns and industrial location in New York State (Langhorne 1976). Plainly stated, Langhorn (and Bowers) hypothesized that certain industries (namely mills) and the services they provide will influence people to settle nearby. Based on land patent data, Bowers' study found that 201 "the Van Winkle Mill exhibited little influence on settlement of the region" and concluded "that settlers were most influenced by flat, arable land and access to markets" (Bowers 2003:92). Given the above observations about Van Winkle's Mill and its placement on the regional landscape, this lack of "settlement pull" poses some questions. How is it that the largest, most important mill in the region, one that offered both a saw and grist mill in addition to a blacksmith, did not draw a population that could sustain it as a settlement following Peter's death? How could a place that was listed among the "towns and villages" of Benton County and described as a "very lively place," disappear almost overnight? One of the answers lies in the relationship between labor and the mill itself. Van Winkle's Mill was not so much a settlement with a mill at its center as it was a fully integrated capitalist enterprise whose "settlement" solely existed to man the mill and its related undertakings. I will now turn to an analysis of the socio-spatial dialectic at work within Van Hollow (Soja 1989:79) and examine the similarities between the landscape of Van Winkle's Mill and that of a plantation of the lowland South. The Plantation Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill Several tantalizing strands of information point to the southern plantation as the model for Van Winkle's mill. First, on a superficial level, Peter's house was described in both period references and later family history as a "southern-type" home or in a home in the "plantation style" (Hicks 1990:21; Yeager quoted in M. S. Johnson 1963:33-34). 202 This, along with its formal raised garden area, certainly alludes to a style of life that was present but not common in this mountainous frontier--the life of an affluent planter. But a deeper look into what is (and is not) defined as a plantation may lead us to see more than just passing similarities between the characteristics of Van Winkle's Mill and southern plantations. Landscape geographer Charles Aiken points out that although slavery has been consistently seen as the principle feature of the southern plantation, it is "was not the critical factor that distinguished a plantation" (1998:9). Instead, he outlines what he sees as six characteristics that distinguished plantations from other types of farms. First, plantation agriculture requires high capitalization compared with most other types of farming. For new crops and in new regions, the potential profit that can be realized from a planting venture is so large that even speculative capital is invested. Second, plantation agriculture is significantly focused at both the farm and regional scales. Although subsistence crops might be grown to help sustain the labor force, only one commercial crop is emphasized. As in other types of commercial ventures, specialization leads to efficiency. Skills required for planting, harvesting, and processing a crop are competently learned and perfected. (Aiken 1998:5-6) These first two characteristics are broad, and the Van Winkle enterprise certainly falls within their bounds. Peter had expended a great deal of capital into the mill, including venture capital borrowed from local speculative capitalists (Easley and McAnelley 1996:156; Goodspeed 1889:107-108). Likewise, Van Winkle's Mill focused on a single, specialized form of agriculturethe growth and harvesting of hardwood and pine timber and their manufacture into lumber and finished products for the marketplace. 203 Aiken's third, fourth and fifth characteristics regard managerial practices. He insists that both the size of the landholding and the labor force are large enough to achieve economies of scale. He points out "a few intensely farmed plantations of 100 or 200 acres have existed, but most have contained 300 acres or more and have been larger than the legendary American family farm." (Aiken 1998:6). By the time of Peter's death he owned over 7,000 acres of forestland, including the 3,575 acres surrounding the mill itself (Bowers 2003:13-17). The fact Peter Van Winkle owned all of the land surrounding the mill is undoubtedly the major reason that Van Winkle's Mill was not a "pull" for regional settlement. All of the inhabitants of Van Hollow--Peter's relatives as well as the resident skilled and unskilled laborwere, in effect, tenants of Peter Van Winkle. As only the hollow itself was developed, the vast majority of this acreage was only used for its timber. These were the "fields" of Peter's plantation landscape. Aiken specifically mentions the fact that "the labor force historically was composed of entire families, not just heads of households." Again, Van Winkle's Mill conforms to this criterion. Not only were whole enslaved and freedmen families involved in the mill's operation and its domestic support (Brandon et al. 2000:10-14), but Peter's own family extended to the skilled labor working in the mills and associated enterprises (e.g., John Steele, Norman Van Winkle and J. A. C. Blackburn). Thus, it seems that the Van Winkle operation would fit into Aiken's first five characteristics of a plantation fairly well. Although it is admittedly odd to think of a timber operation in terms of plantation agriculture, it should be pointed out that Aiken and other researchers (including archaeologists) have noted similarities between some 204 industrial enterprises and plantations. Having established a relative number of structural similarities between Van Winkle's timber enterprise and the southern plantation model, we return to the landscape of the mill. Aiken's sixth and final characteristic is of much interest here: The sixth characteristic is that a plantation has a unique geographical form that spatially distinguishes it from other types of farms. A nucleated settlement complex has traditionally been an overt element of the geography. The most important building is the one from which management disseminates. Although the storied big house historically served this purpose on many of the South's plantations, the headquarters often is an office. (Aiken 1998:7). As previously mentioned, the narrow Van Hollow is the only developed settlement on the decidedly nucleated Van Winkle landscape and the "big house" at the center of the hollow's cultural landscape seems an easy fit as the management center for the enterprise. Furthermore, according to Aiken, one of the striking features of settlement complexes on southern plantations were "a facility to process the crop" before it is shipped to market along with auxiliary structures such as "mule and horse barns" (Aiken 1998:7). "Houses for workers are also major components of the settlement complex" and these were often situated in a row along one or both sides of a road near the headquarters (Aiken 1998:7). The landscape of Van Winkle's Mill, with the its mill complex processing the timber harvested on Van Winkles holdings, its associated mule paddock, blacksmith shop and worker's housing roughly in a row in the southwestern portion of the complex near the Van Winkle residence, seems very much a plantation landscape. Adding to this Van Winkle's use of enslaved labor, not common for industrial enterprises, and the plantation 205 picture is nearly complete. Both the structural elements (Aiken's criteria) and the social elements of the landscape (designed to reinforce the social/racial order) are in keeping with the patterns of plantations of the lowland South. The very fact that Peter, a New York native, chose a southern model for the layout of his operation can be seen as indicating an intricate understanding of the southern taste culture and a desire to attain a greater standing within its hierarchical structure. Peter had been in Arkansas for at least fifteen years before building his first mill in Van Hollow, during this time he was able to learn how the social and economic systems were structured in this corner of the South. It is his southern social "competence," if you will, that is being expressed in this industrial landscape. As we will see below, the deployment of the plantation model for his timber enterprise seems to have directly contributed to its erasure from the landscape in a concrete way. Following the Civil War changes in the landscape of Van Hollow can be related to changes in social relations in the hollow, but more prominently, changes in the tropes of historical memory, which occur simultaneously with the region's articulation with modernity, serve to effectively erase Van Winkle's Mill from the dominate historical narrative. These tropes are tied to changes conceptualizations of race, class and the character of the Ozarks themselves. Below we will examine the landscape changes that occurred following the war and factors that relate to Van Winkle's Mill in the cultural memory of the Ozarks. 206 Mapping Cultural Change in Van Hollow An added dimension to this landscape analysis is, of course, the temporal aspect. Van Winkle's Mill is advantageous in that it contains both antebellum and postbellum components with the two separated by the archaeologically convenient trauma of the Civil War and the accompanied burning of many of the structures in the hollow. This trauma has implications beyond mere chronological significance, as the period is also one of profound reorganization of the social fabric of the region along with the incorporation of new tropes of cultural identity and race (Bishir 2000; Savage 1999). During the original 1997 field work, a series of 2 meter by 2 meter excavation units were placed into the area where Peter Van Winkle's house had stood until 1969 (Hilliard 1997). These units revealed that the demolition processes entailed in the dismantling of the Van Winkle house had disturbed most of the archaeological deposits up to 50 cm below the surface. However, subsequent backhoe trenching at the location of the house revealed a thin charcoal lens some 50-75 cm below what appeared to be subsoil. Associated with this charcoal lens were cut nails and melted glass--indications that this lens was indeed the remains of Peter's first house which had been built in the early 1850s and burned during the Civil War. This surprising discovery seemed to indicate that Peter had buried the remains of the original house under a large amount of excavated soil. A short, stone "retaining wall" discovered on the south side of the landform during the clearing of vegetation helped support the hypothesis that Peter had in fact used this opportunity to rebuild and expand the landform upon which he built his second house in the 1870s. 207 Little is known about Peter Van Winkle's first house in Van Hollow--no photographs, drawings, or detailed descriptions have been found regarding the structure. All we have is a period reference to Peter's "plantation style" home that he built in the hollow after setting up the mill operation in the early 1850s (Brandon et al. 2000; Hicks 1990:21). He lived here less than a decade, however, before the carnage that was the American Civil War disrupted the lives of everyone in the hollow as it did the lives of virtually everyone in the eastern United States. What we can garner about the second house's original layout and appearance comes from a set of photographs taken in 1870--shortly after its construction (Figure 2.5). It was a two and one-half story, five bay, double pile house with four-over-four double hung sash windows, probably with a brick foundation and a pressed tin roof. Although it would have been somewhat pass for the 1870s, the house's ornamentation appears to at least surfacially reference a sort of folk Neo-Greek Revival movement--a pediment porch with double wooden column supports. Interestingly, the facade of Peter's second house may, in fact, give us some clues as to what the first Van Winkle house looked like. Nostalgia could be one explanation for the "out-of-fashion' appearance of the second Van Winkle home--it was fashioned to look like the first house built twenty years before. This act can be seen as simultaneously recalling his conception of a more idyllic life before the war and making a statement that he was not going to let the upheaval of the Civil War change his life. Other details of interest relating to the main house include: the formal garden opposite the major thoroughfare that passed in front of Peter House and a massively 208 constructed stone spring house behind the Van Winkle home. The garden was an artificial flat space in the hollow created by building up fill (approximately 2 meters tall) and holding it in place with a limestone retaining wall. This garden is still largely intact, as is much of the limestone holding it in place. In the hollow, the very fact that we seem to have a spatially desecrate antebellum slave quarter and postbellum worker's quarter (inhabited by freedmen) seems to point to important changes following emancipation. Conversely, if Peter did effectively reconstruct his 1850s home in 1870 to make the statement "the war will not change me," then the spatial organization of the remainder of his operation undermines that assertion. Comparisons between the antebellum and postbellum structures may also be instructive. Prior to the March 2000 excavations it was assumed that Feature 9 represented two separate structures--single pen dwellings in a row, perhaps with others obscured beneath the fill of Highway 12. This configuration would, in fact, have been in keeping with examples of labor housing in many of the southern plantations during both slavery and tenancy (e.g., Orser and Nekola 1985; Vlach 1993), as well as housing in industrial wage-labor settings (such as those encountered in mining operations, rail-road construction camps, and logging towns). Further excavations, however, revealed a continuous foundation running toward the second chimney fall, it seems likely that both chimneys served the same structure--a large double-pen or dog-trot style dwelling. There is a clear break that occurs between the pre- and post-emancipation occupations of the hollow by the Peter Van Winkle family, with the raising of the landform upon which the first house was built to make way for the construction of the 209 second house on the site circa 1868. Although not known with certainty, there is archaeological evidence to suggest a similar amount of elaboration and attempt at architectural permanence poured into Feature 9, which experienced a long occupation likely as both an African-American slave quarter and later freedman residence. Feature 33, interpreted as a slave quarters, has an artifact temporal signature suggestive of a pre-emancipation occupation, with little or no occupation after the Civil War and the family's return to the hollow circa 1868. This pre-emancipation residence has the most ephemeral architectural footprint of any structure excavated in Van Hollow to date, with not even undressed stone piers present on the site. In stark contrast to Feature 33, Feature 9 (the residence to the north) has an elaborate continuous stone foundation and impressive twin chimneys composed of dressed stone masonry. Artifact analysis from Feature 9 narrows the possible dates of construction, inhabitation, and abandonment of the structure--the majority of artifacts recovered from the archaeological excavations point toward a primary occupation between 1870 and 1890--in keeping with the hypothesis that this structure served as the postbellum worker's quarters (with a probable ante-bellum ephemeral occupation). Nail types and frequencies indicate that the structure was framed in the nineteenth century with some structural repairs and/or modifications occurring after the turn-of the century (Brandon et al. 2000:52-55). Flat glass thickness distributions indicate that the first window panes installed in the structure were hung around 1870; possibly upon the Van Winkles' return from Texas (Brandon et al. 2000:40-42). 210 While some of the recovered artifacts have manufacturing ranges that continue into the early twentieth century (e.g., aqua bottle glass, plain white ware ceramics, etc.), it would seem clear from an examination of the complete artifact assemblage that the residence was not extensively occupied into the twentieth century. Chiefly, the assemblage is virtually lacking in common twentieth-century temporal markers (e.g., mason style glass canning jars, tin cans, etc.; cf. Stewart-Abernathy 1986:156). While exposing the northern chimney footing of Feature 9 in 2001, whiteware sherds were found directly beneath that portion of the house foundation that skirts or "dog legs" around the chimney's firebox. These sherds, part of a partially reconstructable shallow refined earthenware bowl, have an impressed makers mark tentatively dated to the 1820s to 1840s (Figure 5.3). Although artifacts of preemancipation dating had been recovered from Feature 9 previously, the position of these sherds, directly beneath an element of the stone foundation, is strongly suggestive of an occupation on the site prior to the foundation's construction, likely pre-emancipation in dating. If true, this fortuitous discovery suggests a great deal; that the remaking of the landscape of the hollow following the Civil War occurred not only with the home of the elite and white Van Winkle family, but with the newly emancipated Freedman home as well. The ephemeral Feature 33, farthest from the white residence, was never occupied again after the war. Rather, it was Feature 9 (the former slave quarters nearest to the home of Peter Van Winkle) that was not only re-occupied after the war, but greatly improved in the process, with the laying down of the impressive and permanent 211 Figure 5.3. A partially reconstructable shallow refined earthenware bowl with an impressed makers mark found under the foundation wall at Feature 9. Figure 5.4. Drawing by Darby Hicks included in the Van Winkle family history (Hicks 1990:15) demonstrates the importance of the frontier trope to the Hicks family. 212 continuous stone foundation, double stone chimneys, and glass windows (e.g., the temporal indications derived from the window glass thickness suggests an initial hanging of windows circa 1868). These physical landscape changes almost certainly reflect changes experienced within the social landscape of the hollow. A geographical distancing and little economic investment in labor's housing before the Civil War, alters in the post emancipation years, with a shrinking of the space between black and white, labor and capitalist, and at least some investment in the quality of life and standard of living of the freedman labor. Certainly material culture recovered from the two structures are indicative of vastly different consumption patterns reflective of this pre and post emancipation dichotomy. I will examine African-American consumerism at Feature 9 in detail in Chapter 6, but there are a few points which I will make now. The predominately postbellum Feature 9 was full of mass-produced personal items and "non-essentials" such as the large array of children's toys (Brandon et al. 2000:45-52), while the antebellum Feature 33 assemblage was almost entirely architectural and kitchen related. This change is surely influenced by the newly freed African-American desire to assert their humanity and equality through consumption (Mullins 1999a:160-170), and the region's quick move toward modernizations following the war, ensuring that a large number of cheap, mass produced goods were available to consumer markets via mail order catalogs (Harvey 1990:125140). Finally, the change in geographic placement of the two domestic structures, especially when compared to the non-changing placement of the Van Winkle's house, may also point toward a exercising of newly acquired freedmen's rights. 213 Conversely, the second spring serving the predominately postbellum Feature 9 (no spring was observed in association with Feature 33) also seems to anticipate the "separate but equal" metaphor that would come to dominate southern culture in the Jim Crow era (Hale 1998:23). Since at least the eighteenth century the enslaved peoples of the American South were seen as property and perhaps not quite human (Deetz 1997:246; Epperson 1999a:164), while emancipation required a reworking of the oppressive systems. Now a subtly new, decidedly modern, construction of difference emerged along with a whole suite of material expressions. This new modern metaphor was the segregation of the "non-white" (Hale 1998; Mullins 1999a:185-190). Following the death of Peter Van Winkle, the landscape of the hollow continued to change. A brief term of activity under J. A. C. Blackburn, the dismantling of the mill in the early twentieth century, the defaulted purchase by the Pathfinders and the renewed logging activity of Vernon West all radically changed the way the nineteenth century landscaped functioned. Here Features 27 and 28, disposal areas with no primary context that, in all likelihood, would have been ignored by traditional archeological approaches, provide important information adding to our understanding of Van Winkle's Mill. As they represent relatively discrete dumping episodesone dating to the late nineteenth/early twentieth centuries and one to the middle portion of the twentieth. The timing of these dumping episodes coincides with 1) the abandonment of Van Hollow following Blackburn's sell of equipment in 1902 (prior to the attempted sell to the Pathfinders in1903-1905) and 2) the arrival of Vernon West to the property in 1944. As such they may indicate "clean up" episodes pursuant to, or following, a change in occupants in the 214 hollow. Thus, they point toward two possible "cleaning" episodes associated with changes in hollow inhabitants and, thus, marking important transitions in the history of the landscape. Moreover, as "dumping" sites, these features are directly connected to other unidentified features on the Van Hollow landscape whose fill contributed to their making. Likewise, Vernon West's Mill (Feature 29), being abandoned relatively recently (circa 1960), may not have been deemed historically important if encountered on its own. West's mill, however, represents the closing chapter of a long history of timber milling in Van Hollowa history that stretches back one hundred years prior to West's operation. African-American Perceptions of the Van Winkle Landscape In the earliest portion of this chapter, I concentrated on what the landscape meant for its primary architect (Peter Van Winkle). Both the examination of the temporal changes in the landscape and the experiential model I outlined previously, however, beg that I take into account African-American perceptions. It is clear that "when one approaches a problem as important as that of taking inventory of the possibilities for understanding between two different peoples, one should be doubly careful" (Fanon 1967:84). Specifically, one needs to be wary of casting the oppressed as the dupes of the dominant ideology as "oppressed peoples everywhere understand that they are being oppressed" (Franklin 1997:34). Following this assertion, some researchers have stressed that enslaved/free black populations classified the landscape in which they lived in radically different ways than their enslavers and other 215 free persons (e.g., Epperson 1999a; Kryden-Reid 1994). In this vein it is tempting to look for agency and an exercise of power in the postbellum relocation of quarters--a move that is not uncommon across the South. As the material and historical record offer weak support for this assertion, there are interesting possibilities suggested by the spatial arraignment of the Van Hollow landscape. From the perspective of the enslaved of the antebellum period and the AfricanAmerican mill workers of the postbellum period, the spatial separation of Features 9 and 33 from the Van Winkle home and mill could have been both racially charged and, in a smaller way, liberating. It is true that the landscape of Van Winkle's Mill in the mid-tolate nineteenth century is no less a racialized than the urban landscapes of postbellum southern cities in which I have worked (Brandon 2000; Brandon and Davidson 2001; Davidson 2004). Like those urban landscapes, however, the racialized space in Van Hollow may have also provided some privacy, a brief refuge and a small degree of freedom. Similarly, and in keeping with my conceptualization of Van Hollow as a plantation landscape, spatially distanced detached kitchens on southern plantations have been seen as affording the enslaved some degree of refuge from surveillance (e.g., McKee 1992; Stewart-Abernathy 2004). A privacy absent from those living in the semi-detached kitchen and not present at the mill complex which can be easily seen as a contested space--the major space in the hollow where blacks and whites (of various social standings) had to interact for extended periods of time and under tight hierarchical circumstances. Thus these two social groups were much closer than symbolically conceived as the African-Americans living and 216 working in the hollow, like those living in detached kitchens throughout the lowland south, "were not as socially distant from the owners in the main house as those owners hoped or recognized" (Stewart-Abernathy 2004:69). Cultural Memory and the Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill Now that we have examined the nineteenth-century landscape of Van Winkle's Mill, I want to return to our disjunctures in order to examine in a concrete example how cultural memory in the Ozarks works to silence both the Van Winkles and AfricanAmerican heritage in the historical narrative. While the archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill seems to reveal that Peter Van Winkle sought to evoke the southern plantation landscape in the creation of his sawmill enterprise and that his landscape was transformed in uniquely southern ways following emancipation, much of cultural memory works to erase his overt connection to his southern model. In the face of dominant cultural memory tropes that accentuate the Scotch-Irish and southern character of the region, many researchers, historians and newspaper reporters need to explain the presence of the anomalously industrial Van Winkle's Mill by either stressing either Peter's "indomitable Dutch nature" (e.g. Rose 1953) or his Illinois boyhood (e.g., Edmisten 1969). He is seen, for example, as a "dauntless Dutchman" who places a machinery order with his brethren in Pennsylvania (Scott 1962:170). These discursive moves serve to sever Peter's connections to the southern and Confederate tropes (and his use of the plantation landscape template)--despite his well 217 documented affiliation with the southern cause. Thus, in 1975 in a bicentennial history of Benton County, local historian J. Dickson Black could state: Business was just getting well started when the Civil War started. This disrupted Van Winkle's plans. In the fall of 1862, he moved his family and 15 or 20 slaves to Texas, to get away from the invading Union Army. He could not bring himself to take a part in the war, as he felt both sides were wrong. (Black 1975:130-131, emphasis added). He could not bring himself to take part in the war? He felt both sides were wrong? As we have seen in Chapter 2, Peter was not only a slaveholder who contracted with the Confederate government to construct barracks; he also named two of his own children who were born during the war after Confederate icons (Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis). The Van Winkle flight to Texas had little to do with Peter's lack of involvement in the war; rather it was a part of the mass exodus outlined earlier in Chapter 2 which left much of Northwest Arkansas depopulated until the close of the hostilities. But it does create a conveniently abandoned landscape in Van Hollow which became the backdrop for the deployment of the Civil War sans Peter Van Winkle, Aaron Van Winkle and the other inhabitants of the hollow. This phenomenon allows the landscape of Van Winkle's Mill to figure into the cultural memory of the Civil War, but it is a landscape without Peter Van Winkle. The landscape of Van Hollow is mentioned in more versions of the historical narrative than Peter himself as both Confederate and Union forces marched through Van Winkle Hollow and on to encounters at the Battle of Pea Ridge, Shelby's Raid on Missouri and other conflicts--availing themselves of the grist mill, burning down the mill to keep 218 infrastructure from falling into enemy hands and perhaps, according to popular legend, stealing a large chest of gold buried by Peter prior to his flight to Texas. This removal of the Van Winkles from the Civil War narrative works in concert with the hillbilly trope (and its particular brand of whiteness) examined in Chapter 3 to affectively mute or obscure both the white and black Van Winkles in the larger cultural memory. Other tropes examined in Chapter 3 also have been situationally deployed on the Van Winkle landscape. The frontier trope is clearly important in Hick's family history (Figure 5.4) as it is in countless newspaper articles which mention not only Peter's early arrival in the region, but also his involvement in making wagons for those heading to California following the Gold Rush of 1849. The Arcadian trope was marshaled to describe the Van Winkle landscape in 1903--just a few years before Harold Bell Wright would entrench the trope in Ozark cultural memory. E. W. Conable, the spokesman for the Pathfinders (the utopian commune that took possession of Van Hollow at the turn of the century), described the "homestead" which he redubbed "Pathfinder Park." "As this residence sits on a slight rise in the beautiful valley where there is an ever-flowing stream of spring water, and there is no time even in the hottest part of the season when there is not a beautiful breeze to gently kiss the cheek and make life exquisitely enjoyable...as I sat on one of the ample porches of this old historic home (for this home has a history) and drank in the vital waves from the very breast of Mother Nature, I knew that this is where Ozark and Ozone touch lips and greet one another in the fullness of ever living life. Could I surrender all this beauty and grandeur and inspiring influences pouring in on me from the Mighty Without--gifts from the hand of the Great Creator?" 219 Here the gritty, modern, industrial landscape that had dominated the nineteenthcentury community of Van Winkle's Mill is eschewed in favor of the region's "natural" connection to nature's beauty and a simpler way of life represented by the never-to-be Pathfinder Park. Conable's deployment of the Arcadian trope eschews the prominent industrial capitalist (Peter Van Winkle) and the nasty image of enslaved AfricanAmericans (both probably aberrant to Conable's utopian project) in favor of a natural, unspoiled Van Hollow. By the time that State Parks took possession of the property the Arcadian version of the hollow had given way to an entirely natural vision. In the original 1984 master plan for the Hobbs property there is no acknowledgement of the historical community of Van Winkle's Mill. The lives of those who lived in the hollow were erased; in their stead is Roscoe Hobbs logging operation. "[Van Hollow] has been used almost exclusively for timber production. Roscoe Hobbs began purchase of the area in the 1920's. Area residents leased the land for logging, with the last logging operation occurring in 1976. Old logging roads are still discernable on almost every major ridge of Hobbs State Management Area. Some of these were still in use at the time the area was purchased by the State (Miller and Eastin 1984:52). The hollow was seen, until the recent efforts of Park managers and interpreters, as primarily a natural resource that could "provide wildlife habitat, recreation and natural areas for the benefit of all Arkansans" (Miller and Eastin 1984:4). The secondary nature of Van Winkle's Mill to the larger, recreational and conservation mission of the park is still evident in recent State Park documents. "Because of its resources--abundant wildlife, a fragile limestone environment, a large lake and a thick forest--Beaver Lake State Park has all the makings for a "Natural State" park. But, the underlying historical 220 elements of the property make today's exploration of the area all the more interesting." (Rohrbach 2004). I have examined the landscape of Van Winkle's Mill on a number of levels. Peter Van Winkle's use of a plantation model for the construction of his landscape, the careful separation of public (industrial) and private (domestic) zones in the landscape, and some of the changes that occurred following emancipation and the conclusion of the Civil War, all which have bearing on the implications of this landscape for the labor who lived and worked in Van Hollow. Peter Van Winkle sought to create a plantation landscape at his industrial enterprise in the Ozark Mountains. His ideas were decidedly influenced by modernity, although they relied on a model long associated with the agrarian lowland South. This landscape, however, was destroyed by war and its recreation reflected social changes not entirely of Peter's making. Finally, both Peter and the labor of Van Winkle's Mill were obscured by historical tropes that spring into being through modernity and the pronounced social shift that these actors lived through. The sense that the South "shifted gears" after the war is by no means a new observation, and in Northwest Arkansas the feeling of change (towards the "bigger and better") is evident in local histories. For instance, the Van Winkle hotel took a prominent position as "showplace" in this "new" Northwest Arkansas. Fayetteville removed the scars of Civil War by rapidly replacing the structures destroyed with larger and better buildings. By the time the 1870s were coming to a close about 30 buildings had been erected in the town in a 221 six month period. Among these was the Van Winkle Hotel on the north side of Center Street. (Donat 1995, emphasis added) This shift did not just include the urbanization and industrialization of the South (i.e., its transmogrification into the "New South"), but it also meant a complete reorganization of the concept of race and its spatialization. No longer could the conflation of "black" and "slave" hold as they had since the eigteenth century (when they replaced the "Christian/non-Christian" trope [Epperson 1999a, 1999b, Issac 1982]). In its stead stood a broader construction of opposed opposites--white versus non-white--that were increasingly seen as immutable and non-fluid (note that terms such as "mulatto" present in the 1860 census disappear in the1870 census). The monumental Plessy vs. Fergusson decision codified in 1896 the post-reconstruction process (signaled in the 1880s and 1890s by laws segregating transportation and public spaces) which already seemed underway in 1870--the spatialization of race and the racialization of space underlying the refusal of larger American society (which was increasingly and selfconsciously "white") to consider the possibility of racial mixing (Hale 1998:23). Almost simultaneously, this larger American society created the Ozark Other erasing the possibility of this local rupture in a region comprised of our backward, white "contemporary ancestors." To this day the ambivalent figure of the hillbilly complicates the region's relationship to the Civil War, slavery, modernization and any AfricanAmerican heritage. An analogue can be found in Richard Flores' informed discussion of the Alamo as both reality and myth (Flores 1998, 2002). Flores emphasizes the means wherein the past and the present come together within a "memory-place." Flores concisely pinpoints 222 when and why the Alamo, a crumbling and relatively unimportant building located in San Antonio's old downtown, came to be viewed as sacred ground, literally "The Cradle of Texas Liberty". Although it is stressed by Flores that the Texas Revolution was not fought along simple racial lines, but rather along class lines and individual political interests, by the late-nineteenth century the dominate Anglo culture in Texas (and the United States as a whole) needed a symbol and an appropriately distorted history to justify a social and economic oppression of Hispanics. The "Remembering of the Alamo" and the "forgetting" of Peter Van Winkle as historic figure (and by extension the free and enslaved labor of Van Winkle's Mill) strike similar though opposite resonances; Peter, his accomplishments and steadfastness to modernity did not mesh with the twentieth-century construction of the "Ozark Traditional Myth," which stresses instead isolation and a definite anti-modernity; consequently, his very existence is downplayed to the point of erasure from the landscape he helped create.. This is what is revealed by the large-scale analysis of the landscape of Van Winkle's Mill as it is informed by archaeology. To further explore the disjuncture, let us now turn to the smaller-scale analysis of particular pieces of material culture recovered from the Van Winkle excavations at Features 9 and 33 and what they might tell us about the people who inhabited the hollow. 223 Chapter 6 "Independent But Not Isolated?": Consumerism and African-American Identity at Van Winkle's Mill In his analysis of the Moser site, an early twentieth-century farmstead excavated in Washington County, Arkansas, Leslie Stewart-Abernathy stressed that despite the traditional myths (pulled from cultural memory) that depict the Ozarks as an isolated place, rural Ozark farmers were a part of the modern capitalist consumer economy (Stewart-Abernathy 1986:161-162, 1992). Furthermore, he has argued that the residents of the Moser farmstead chose certain goods "that had both functional and coherent symbolic content within a world view that emphasized agrarian ideals" (StewartAbernathy 1992:102). Thus they negotiated a significant contradiction--they participated in the larger economic marketplace in a way that, in some aspects, stressed their independence and rural farm traditions. This led Stewart-Abernathy to declare Moser, and by extension the rest of the Arkansas Ozarks, "independent but not isolated" (Stewart-Abernathy 1986). The archaeological record is more complex and nuanced (and less coherent) than this simple moniker denotes, however, and the artifacts recovered from the Moser farmstead also reflect many of "the smaller themes of Ozark transitions" (StewartAbernathy 1986:160). These transitions speak to the disjunctures between the historical 224 and archaeological records and the dominant tropes of cultural memory that we have explored in earlier chapters. At Van Winkle's Mill this complexity is further deepened by the presence of enslaved African Americans and later freedmen. If Peter Van Winkle and his family are either forgotten or molded to fit a trope in cultural memory, then the African-Americans who lived and worked in Van Hollow are doubly silenced. Cultural memory erases African-American heritage in the wash of hillbilly whiteness while (with the erasure of slaveholders and industrialists like Peter Van Winkle) other tropes erase the condition of enslavement altogether. If the artifacts recovered from Moser speak to white Ozark consumers' connection to the larger economic world of global production, what can the artifacts recovered from African-American communities in the Ozarks tell us about an overtly racist marketplace and the desire for equality in a region that was increasingly being labeled backward and white? Keeping this question in mind, I will now tighten the scale of my analysis and examine material consumption and participation in the marketplace through the artifacts recovered from the two residences thought to be associated with Van Hollow's AfricanAmerican communityFeatures 9 and 33. Here I will attempt to recover some possible meanings in the recovered material culture that will shed light on aspects of daily life that have been doubly obscured by the tropes of cultural memory. This analysis has the added advantage of a diachronic temporal perspective as Feature 33 has been interpreted as a possible antebellum slave quarter while Feature 9 seems to be primarily a postbellum occupation (see Chapter 4). 225 First, however, I would like to explain how I will approach the material recovered at these two households and how material consumption enters into the entangled ticket (made up of concepts such as modernity, race, industrialization and the hillbilly trope) that was rapidly growing in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century Ozarks. Modernity, Race, Consumption and Desire During my discussions of the history and cultural memories of the Arkansas Ozarks I have referred to the second half of the nineteenth century as a period of rapid and profound change. Within this period, on the heels of a devastating but rejuvenating war that reorganized the nation's social and economic structure, came "the expansion of an industrial capitalist system across the continent, not only tightening systems of transport and communication" but also spreading the market economy to all regions--including the Arkansas Ozarks (Trachtenberg 1982:3). Coinciding with (and entangled with) this spread are a host of other phenomena which I have touched upon. The closing of the western frontier, the increasing urbanization of America, the rise of nostalgic views of the rural (and hillbilly) Ozarks and the codification of modern whiteness all transpired largely between the Civil War and the early decades of the twentieth century. Some historians and archaeologists have referred to this new model as "Victorianism" and stressed the elements of propriety, progress, and domesticity (e.g., Praetzellis and Praetzellis 2001:646) while others have simply referred to it as the dawning of modern America (e.g., Brandon 2004:197). Nevertheless, what is clear is that the 226 "...deepest changes in these decades lay at the level of culture, difficult for contemporaries to recognize, and baffling for historians. The deepest resistances and oppositions also lay there, in the quality and well as the substance of perceptions in the style as well as content of responses." (Trachtenberg 1982:7) One way archaeologists can observe both this articulation with modernity and some of its responses is through another element attached to this profound shift: the rise of consumer culture. Following the Civil War and leading up to the 1890s, consumption had won acceptance as a term and large department stores and mail-order catalog businesses were not only making goods more available and easier to consume, but were instructing buyers how to consume. It was "a pedagogy of modernity" teaching the symbolic aspects of consumption and creating the desire to possess those symbols (Trachtenberg 1982:130131). At the same time it allowed for increasing standardization and "sameness" while perpetuating the semblance of competition and range of choice (Horkheimer and Adorno 1944:123). Thus, although consumption and production are typically explained in technological terms and the "need" or "demand" for various goods, material consumption becomes fueled by "the desire for new social possibilities and individual pleasures which consumers believe will mediate (or evade) various social contradictions" (Mullins 1999b:177). Material consumption becomes intimately connected with identity construction (Mullins 1999a, 1999b; Trachtenberg 1982:133; Wilkie 2000:149-153). In the final analysis, the same modernity that sets off urbanization and lead to the nostalgia that made the Arcadian and hillbilly tropes dominate in the Ozarks is the force 227 which brought consumption to the fore of the American economy--including the consumption of leisure time which helped feed the growing tourist economy in the Ozarks (see Chapter 3). This concurrence of desire and identity construction in consumption is even more complicated in the case of racialized subjectivities such as the African-American inhabitants of Van Winkle's Mill. Following Reconstruction in the South, a growing number of African Americans were beginning to articulate the "mass prophesy that material affluence harbored inevitable social empowerment" (Mullins 1999a:1)a theory canonized in the nationallevel discourse of the period (for example in the writings of Booker T. Washington [1907]), and documented in a variety of localized contexts such as Durham (DuBois 1912), Annapolis (Mullins 1999a, 1999b), Chicago (Drake and Cayton 1945:51), Dallas (Brandon 2000; Davidson 2004), New Bern, North Carolina (Gilmore 1996), West Oakland, California (Mullins 2001; Praetzellis and Praetzellis 2001:649-651) and the Arkansas lowland delta (Gordon 1995). As the "black middle classes" began to form across the nation (a process which happened unevenly across time and space) attempts to equate participation in the capitalist economy with social equality went hand and hand with the attempt to define oneself through that consumption. Of course, postreconstruction consumerism is a double-edged sword as the racist underpinnings of consumer space and the racialization of products made almost every transaction a confrontation with one's racial identity. Mullins, like bell hooks (1990:3-5), proposes a critical awareness in African-American consumption (Mullins 1999a:3-4), but it is an 228 awareness which does not preclude their desire to consume (Adorno and Horkheimer 1944:167). Thus some African-Americans "believed consumer space harbored genuine possibilities for social and material change" (Mullins 1999a:2). In some cases "the hope vested in consumption was idealistic or naive, yet consumer space offered precious possibilities for African-American socioeconomic self-determination" (Mullins 1999b:18). In other cases, this very same participation in consumption may have been a factor in the anxiety driving white racism. Period diatribes on the subject of AfricanAmerican consumption tend to simultaneously trivialize it and fear it (Mullins 1999a:162-170, 1999b, 2001). Not only has Mullins pointed out that "relatively mundane objects inspired apprehension because they posed the specter of a society in which material culture would not clearly mark subjectivity" (1999a:156), he likewise figures consumption as one of the terrains where social struggle can take place with profound implications on citizenship and racial subjectivity. The opening of this terrain elicited dramatic responses from threatened whites anxious about their own position. Many racial "riots" seem directed at African-American property holders (Gilmore 1996) or at those who were perceived to threaten white access to jobs, and thus, consumption (Foley 1997; Roediger 1991; Whayne 1996). Moreover, a plethora of period African-American theorists from the 1890s to the 1940s agreed that economically successful blacks, and the fear they evoked in white America, was one of the factors leading to the institution of Jim Crow-era segregation (e.g., DuBois 1935, 1940, 1995:174-192 ; Drake and Cayton 1945:51 and many others). 229 Archaeologies of Consumption Consumer studies have a long history in historical archaeology (see Yentch and Beaudry 1999 for a discussion of that history). In the 1980s and 1990s consumer analyses were closely related to the pattern analyses of the 1970s and focused sharply on artifacts as commodities and on economic scaling (e.g., G. Miller 1991; papers in Spencer-Wood 1987). This approach while often useful, only examined one attribute of consumption (price) and used it to look at only one element of consumer behavior (class and economic expenditure). By the late 1990s, however, archaeologists began to deploy more sophisticated and nuanced approaches to the consumption of material culture by "weaving threads of the Marxist focus on inequality with a consideration of minority groups as active agents" (Yentch and Beaudry 1999:223). Examples of this mode of analysis include Mullins' (1999a:19-39; 1999b, 2001) interpretations of political material culture (pipes, bottles, etc. with partisan images and slogans on them) in the deposits of a disenfranchised African-American family in Annapolis; Wilkie's (2000:179) careful, contingent interpretations of an antiseptic bottle whose label evoked Confederate nostalgia (recovered from a post-Reconstruction African-American tenant farmer's house in Louisiana), and Franklin's (2001) nuanced interpretation of the material remains of foodways and their relation to black identity construction on Virginia plantations. These researchers (and several others) have focused on the multiple and contradictory meanings embodied in material consumption. They eschew both innate economic values and essentialist readings of material culture to offer a fairly 230 sophisticated reading of consumerism as it relates to racism and the formation of black middle-class identity. "Rather than reduce consumption to a series of marketing transactions of symbolically insipid goods" these researchers seeks examine "how consumption was an African-American sociopolitical statement of civil aspirations, material desires and resistance to monolithic racist caricatures" (Mullins 1999a:18). Following these works, I will not concentrate on quantifying and calculating monetary expenditures, but on the unique individual "small finds" and "personal items" which can be used to tease out possible meanings which in turn offer potential clues to identity construction and the daily lives at Van Winkle's Mill that have been lost in cultural memory. Antebellum Artifact Assemblage: Feature 33 As mentioned in earlier (Chapter 4), Feature 33 was originally located in June of 2000 during an informal survey designed to assess the impact of the construction of a visitor's parking area for the park on the south side of Highway 12. The feature was located on the south side of Highway 12 and the west side of Clifty Creek on a very small, flat flood plain between the creek and the sharp rise of the uplands (Figure 5.1). Although artifact counts are still preliminary, an approximate total of 1,159 artifacts were recovered from the 11 shovel tests and seven one-by-two-meter units that were used to locate the feature and test the geophysical survey which indicated linear anomalies interpreted as possible house walls. These artifacts were analyzed using the typology 231 created for the Van Winkle project (see Brandon and Davidson 2003:20-23 for an explanation). The typology was a compromise hybrid; first classifying material functionally (i.e., architectural materials, household-related materials, transportationrelated-materials, personal items, etc.) and, secondly by material type (i.e., metal, ceramic, glass, etc.). Of these artifacts 694 were classified under the architectural category (nails, flat glass, bricks), 448 were classified as being household related (ceramics, vessel glass, etc.), 12 were classified as being transportation related (primarily mule shoes) and 5 were classified as personal items (pipes, buttons, etc.). The absence of wire nails, along with the building's absence from the 1900 USGS quadrangle map indicate that the building did not have a twentieth-century occupation. Moreover, Feature 33 lacks any definite postbellum diagnostic artifacts. Although the absence of certain artifacts cannot be taken conclusive proof of an exclusive antebellum date, as a whole the artifact assemblage from Feature 33 demonstrates an ephemeral antebellum occupation with no indication of postbellum activity. This taken together with the structure's geographic location (discussed in Chapters 4 and 5), leads me to an interpretation of Feature 33 as a possible slave quarter. The high incidence of annealed nails and melted glass, along with the low percentage of pulled or salvaged nails, points toward a catastrophic fire as the terminus for occupation at Feature 33. Whether or not the structure was burned during the Civil War-related incident that destroyed the first Van Winkle home and the mill cannot be determined. The distribution of nails sizes and conditions indicate a normal pattern for 232 an unsalvaged frame structure. The lack of any continuous foundation and the recovery of several large stones and bricks (although not in situ) seem to indicate that the structure sat on four or more stone and/or brick piers. As only a very few fragments of flat glass were recovered (N=3), it seems unlikely that Feature 33 had hung glass windows. Of particular interest in this artifact assemblage are the low numbers of household items (in relation to the architectural materials and comparison to the materials from Feature 9) and the incredibly low numbers of personal items (restricted largely to one tobacco pipe and a few porcelain buttons). Also of interest are the fragments of iron bar stock, several mule shoes (both similar to the materials found during excavations at the blacksmith shop (Feature 31), and a disproportionately large number of patent medicine bottle and vial fragments. Postbellum Artifact Assemblage: Feature 9 Like Feature 33, the final artifact analyses from Feature 9 have not yet been finalized. However, an estimated total of 6,452 artifacts were recovered from the 36 onemeter-by-two-meter units and six one-meter-by-one-meter units excavated into Feature 9. As outlined in previous chapters, these excavations revealed the foundation of a doublepen frame structure, perhaps a dogtrot, with two end chimneys (see Chapter 4; Brandon and Davidson 2003:17; Brandon 2005). The continuous foundation and end chimneys were constructed using rough hewn stone at least three courses deep. At total of 1,035 fragments of window glass were recovered indicating the presence of windows near the 233 corners of the building. Other chronological and structural details have been discussed in Chapter 4 and elsewhere (Brandon et al 2000; Brandon 2005). The recovered artifacts from Feature 9 were classified as follows: 4,450 were placed in the architecture category, 1,503 were classified as being household related, 85 were classified as personal items 414 were classified under "miscellaneous artifacts." Artifacts of note include iron door hinges and ceramic door knobs (Figure 6.1), a partially reconstructable stoneware crock, a large number and variety of clothing buttons (N=20; Figure 6.2), a relatively large assortment of children's toys (Figure 6.3), several harmonica fragments, a variety of shell casings, a copper "shield" nickel and a tobacco tag (Figures 6.4 and 6.5). Isolated and Independent: African-American Subjectivity, Consumerism and Identity at Van Winkle's Mill The materials recovered from Features 9 and 33 point toward both the drastic shift to modernity (and, by extension, the consumer culture discussed above) and to the newly gained free status of the inhabitants of Feature 9. Although the fact that Feature 9 was more extensively excavated precludes a direct comparison between the two assemblages, we can use a number of abstract measures to quantitatively compare the two sets of recovered materials. 234 Figure 6.1. Door hinge and ceramic doorknob recovered from Feature 9 excavations. 235 Figure 6.2. Clothing buttons recovered from Features 9 and 33. Specimens a-d, f-h, j, k, m-v and x were recovered from Feature 9. Specimens e, i, l, and w were recovered from Feature 33. 236 Figure 6.3. A sample of some of the children's toys recovered from Feature 9 excavations: a-c) transfer print alphabet plate fragments; d-h) porcelain doll fragments; i) a cast iron cap pistol fragment; j) a porcelain marble; k-l) bakelite children's rings. 237 Figure 6.4. Harmonica reed plate fragments recovered from Feature 9. Figure 6.5. Small objects recovered from Feature 9 excavations: a) a copper "shield" nickel; b) a "Granger Twist" tobacco tag excavated from Feature 9; c) a pristine "Granger Twist" tobacco tag for comparative purposes (from the collection of the author). 238 Architectural artifacts made up approximately 60% of the Feature 33 assemblage and 69% of the Feature 9 materials indicating a similar investment in the construction of the structures despite the absence of windows, chimneys or a continuous foundation at Feature 33. Household items made up 23% of the Feature 33 assemblage and 38% of the Feature 9 assemblage indicating a slightly greater investment in household wares during the postbellum period. Likewise, personal items make up 0.5% of the Feature 33 materials and 1.4% of the Feature 9 assemblage. A total of 12 different ceramic types were recovered from Feature 33. The majority of these ceramics recovered were plain whiteware or ironstone with very few exceptions. Conversely, 35 different ceramic types were identified at Feature 9; including transferprinted patterns, sponge and spatter-decorated wares, hand-painted ceramics, yellow wares and a variety of stoneware. Although it should be noted that plain whitewares and ironstone also make up the bulk of this assemblage. While these measures are far from unproblematic, they indicate a greater participation in the capitalist marketplace at Feature 9 than at Feature 33. This, of course, should come as no surprise as the condition of enslavement no doubt curtailed engagement in both basic economic freedom and conspicuous consumption. The difficulties arising from the simultaneous occurrence of emancipation and the growing culture of consumption cannot be full overcome here. However, a look into individual items and their potential symbolic meanings may be instructive regarding life experienced across the antebellum/postbellum continuum. 239 Figure 6.6. A variety of decorated ceramics recovered from Feature 9 and Feature 33 excavations. Figure 6.7. A fragment of a rooster ceramic figurine recovered from Feature 9. 240 Feature 33: Antebellum Enslavement The extent to which Peter Van Winkle provisioned those enslaved at Van Winkle's Mill is unclear, but the artifacts recovered from Feature 33 seem to indicate a relatively utilitarian assemblage. The small numbers of decorated ceramics and personal items offer few opportunities for symbolic interpretation. The glass vessel assemblage and transportation-related artifacts, however, can offer some insights into the conditions of life at Van Winkle's Mill before the war. Various researchers have proposed a distinctly African-American approach to medicine during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (e.g. Edwards-Ingram 2001; Wilkie 1997, 2000:169). One element of this approach was the usage of patent medicines and mineral water. However, African-American usage of patent medicine cannot be "distilled to an alien African culture or covert spiritual tradition simply lurking within mass produced goods" no more than their usage can be accredited to a total assimilation to dominate white ideology (Mullins 1999a:50). A combination of traditional ethnomedical systems (as documented in WPA ex-slave narratives and other folk resources; see Davidson 2004b; Leone and Fry 2001; Wilkie 2000:167) and a hybrid recontextualized usage of white medicinal materials is suggested. Unfortunately, none of the handful of ex-slave narratives available for Northwest Arkansas (see Chapter 2) mentions medicinal practices rendering the local historical record silent on this topic. 241 Commercially manufactured patent medicine bottle and vials, however, were both widely popular and very distinctive in form, making them easily identified in the archeological record. A total of 20 patent medicine bottles and small, mold-blown medicine vials were recovered from Feature 33. Wilkie (2000:166-197) has documented the ubiquity of such artifacts in African-American contexts and noted a drop in the usage of commercially provided medicine from slavery to postbellum tenancy at Oakley Plantation in Louisiana. Wilkie interprets this pattern within the rubric of emancipation and active identity creation. Prior to emancipation, slaves were often treated by a doctor and patent medicines were administered by the plantation owner as the "health and procreation of enslaved people were major concerns for slaveholders, both for economic and humanitarian reasons" (Edwards-Ingram 2001:35). This was well documented at Oakley Plantation through the extensive local historical record (Wilkie 2000:170). The post-emancipation drop in the usages of such medicines was interpreted at Oakley as evidence of the deployment of more diverse ethnomedical practices in the absence of the strict control present during enslavement. These postbellum choices in medical care are in turn linked to performance and identity construction in the form of "ethnically distinct medical and magical practices that serve to tie [the user] to the community" (Wilkie 2001:119). Although Van Winkle's Mill lacks the direct historical evidence present at Oakley Plantation, a similar pattern in the archaeological materials is evident. Commercially provided medicines are disproportionately large at antebellum Feature 33 (5% of the glass container fragments recovered) and, although present, a decided drop in the usage 242 of these medicine is evident at postbellum Feature9 (1% of the glass containers recovered). The patent medicine vessels found at Feature 33 and 9 illuminate the complexity of African-American health care in the nineteenth century (Mullins 1999a:53). "The construction of spiritual identity is both a public and private process, taking place in both the home and community" although this dichotomy is not altogether straight forward (Wilkie 2000:196). The use of patent medicines prior to emancipations may indicate an economic investment on the part of the white Van Winkle family, but the purchase of such items following emancipation would necessitate the negotiation of the modern marketplace where the "racist underpinnings of consumer space and the racialization of products made almost every transaction a confrontation with one's racial identity" (Brandon 2004:205). It is difficult, therefore to discern whether the drop in consumption of patent medicines was an actively resistive move to return to more traditional medicinal practices, or a more subtle aversion designed to circumvent the overtly racist marketplace by seeking non-mass-produced alternatives. Nevertheless, if Aaron Anderson Van Winkle and his family were in fact the residents of Feature 9 following the war, then the household would have contained an 80year-old man (at times referred to as "Vincent" or "Aron", presumably Aaron's father; see Chapter 2) and four to nine children ranging from sixteen years of age to 5 months old. This is a household that will undoubtedly need medical attention--and probably a good deal of it. By comparison, the final (1860) slave schedule for Van Winkle's Mill shows that among the possible occupants of Feature 33 there were only four children in 243 the entire hollow and most of those enslaved at the mill were in the prime of their lives (between the ages of 16 and 31). Clearly this indicates that there may be something other than a functional explanation for the decline in commercially available medicines at Feature 9. Among the very few personal items recovered from Feature 33 was a large fragment of a clay, reed-stemmed pipe with a molded cross-hatch design around its lip. Across the South, large numbers of tobacco pipes have been associated with AfricanAmerican sites and plantations (e.g., Adams 1987; Emerson 1999; Kelso 1984; Otto 1984; Wilkie 2000; Wheaton and Garrow 1985). Although the high level of usage documented at these sites is not evident at Van Winkle's Mill, the tobacco pipe recovered from Feature 33 and the tobacco tag recovered from Feature 9 attest to tobacco usage at the site. The presence of this pipe and tag prompts a discussion of the nature of some elements of material culture (or particular patterns in material culture) and their status as racial or ethnic markers--in this case Africanisms. "Establishing an African presence through the identification of Africanisms is hardly necessary" as the "study of Africanism in historical archaeology is fundamentally associated not with the establishment of an African presence but wit the study of the character of that presence" (Perry and Paynter 1999:300). Items such as blue beads (such as the one recovered from the corner of Feature9), pierced dimes, crystals and the like or patterns of artifacts such as the high incidence of patent medicine bottles or tobacco pipes cannot and should not be used as the sole source of identifying sites as African-American. Establishing the presence of African-Americans (or any other racialized group) through racialized material culture is a 244 theoretical dead end. Examining these materials, such as the use of patent medicines above, in light of the confirmed presence of racialized subjects, however, can help us get at the multivalent meanings of material culture and the lives of these subjects. In this vein, I will turn toward other classes of cultural material recovered at Feature 33. Although personal items are largely absent from the Feature 33 assemblage, the presence of bar stock and mule shoes poses some direct connection with the blacksmith shop. Of course, it is assumed that enslaved African-Americans would have regularly come in contact with the blacksmith operation during the course of their work at the mill. However, why and how they would obtain iron barstock and broken mule shoes and what purpose did they serve at Feature 33? The answer is unclear, but it may point to the fact that while "slaveholders had considerable power over their enslaved people, these people were never powerless, but through overt and covert practices built a life for themselves" (Edwards-Ingram 2001:35). 245 Feature 9: The Postbellum Marketplace At Feature 9 it is easy to see the explosion of consumer activity brought about by both emancipation and the increasingly available (and popular) consumer goods. The diversity of ceramic vessel form and decoration recovered from Feature 9 is much greater than the ceramic assemblage recovered from Feature 33, but it pales in comparison with other late-nineteenth and early twentieth-century ceramic materials recovered from excavations in Northwest Arkansas (e.g., Stewart-Abernathy 1986). This could indicate a relatively poor economic condition of the freedmen family that occupied Feature 9, or perhaps, it could point toward the afore mentioned aversion to the racist marketplace. Nevertheless, certain artifacts classes present at Feature 9, but absent at Feature 33 allude to a growing engagement with consumerism and desires that the black Van Winkle family might have sought to fulfill through judicious consumption. Below I will examine three of these artifacts types recovered from Feature 9: harmonicas, brick-a-brac, and children's toys. Brick-a-Brac: Bric-a-brac is the "somewhat inexact term referring to a range of primarily decorative objects that were common in American homes" in the latenineteenth and early-twentieth centuries (Mullins 2001:158). Common items classified as bric-a-brac include figurines, vases, and small statuary. A fragment of a rooster ceramic figurine (Figure 6.7) represents the one element of bric-a-brac recovered from Feature9. 246 Mullins' interpretations of material excavated from Annapolis and West Oakland have placed a great deal of importance on knickknacks and bric-a-brac--especially in the context of marginalized or racialized subjectivities (Mullins 1999b, 2001). The importance given to "knickknacks" as symbolic capital (and proof of one's humanity) among free African Americans is evident in Mullins' analytic work and in the period debates over the African-American use of such items (1999a: 155-184, 1999b, 2001). These period perspectives either assumed that African Americans were too impoverished to consume such non-utilitarian trinkets or saw the purchase of such goods as proof of the hedonistic and frivolous nature of black consumers (Mullins 1999a:155, 2001:170) The personal importance of such items, however, is alluded to in literary treatments such as Ellison's Invisible Man (1947:272-273). Similar references underling the importance of small, common, mass-produced material items can also be seen amongst whites in such works as Let Us Now Praise Famous Men (Agee and Walker 1939:162165), and Grapes of Wrath (Steinbeck 1939:139-140)not to mention the important, if ambivalent, relationship between identity and participation in mass consumption demonstrated archaeologically among white yeomen farmers in Northwest Arkansas itself (e.g., Stewart-Abernathy 1992). Thus, these small, inexpensive objects could hold great meaning; constructing subjectivity in the face of forces, like cultural memory, which sought to strip that status from the hillbillies of Northwest Arkansas and altogether erase the African-American presence from the region. 247 The symbolic meaning of the chicken figurine found at Feature 9 is ambiguous. Possible interpretations could range from a fondness for the animals to an unlikely nostalgia for rural farmyard life. If the structure's date were a few years later than the material culture indicates, however, a plethora of interpretations could be applied. For example chickens became an important economic force in Northwest Arkansas during the 1930s and the 1928 presidential slogan "a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage" might have had some saliency to a growing African-American family. In the end, however, the symbolic meaning of this figure probably does not lie in its form as "bric-a-brac was routinely produced and consumed with no absolutely clear sense of what an object or motif `communicated'" and it "could evoke pleasant yet inchoate sentiments about romanticized past, household class identity, Western cultural and racial roots, patriarchy, personal style, aristocratic behavior, or any number of things" (Mullins 2001:160). Aaron Anderson was serving as a foreman at the mill following emancipation, and his standing in the community appears to have transcended, to some small degree, the racist social structure of the region. This, along with the fact that following his departure from Van Winkle's Mill he buys his own farmstead in eastern Benton County, paints a picture of a man with desires and aspirations to a middle class status and greater equality. This upward-looking mobility may have seemed natural to Aaron, despite the racial divide. Many of his white co-workers at the mill had greatly improved their social standing following the war--John Steele had gone from a lathe operator to a store owner and was on his way to public office in Rogers, J.A.C. Blackburn was in position to run 248 the mill after Peter's demise and, most of all, Peter Van Winkle had ascended the social ladder of the Northwest Arkansas elite right in front of Aaron's eyes. Aaron may have seen emancipation as an opportunity to ascend that ladder (as much as he could) himself. The fact that Aaron kept not only the Van Winkle name following emancipation, but his previous master's name as well may indicate his knowledge of the power structure of Northwest Arkansas--both the Van Winkle and the Anderson name would have carried weight in white social circles and would have perhaps conferred a fraction of their import to their past "servant." But not of the all artifacts recovered from Feature 9 point toward Aaron's upward aspirations. Other artifacts, such as the harmonica fragments, offer symbolic contradictions within material consumption of the Feature 9 household. Harmonica Fragments: The three fragments of harmonic reed plates recovered from Feature 9 may conjure up stereotypical visions of bluesmen on the porches of tenant farms across the South to some. To others it may seem discordant with the instrument's other roots in Germany and its role in markedly white country music. Aaron (or other members of his family) obviously enjoyed the instrument as they purchased more than one at a cost between five and 45 cents a piece (Sears, Roebuck & Co. 1897:527). The history of the western mouth blown reed harmonica is, unfortunately, a bit cloudy at best. Popular histories claim that in 1821, a German clockmaker named Christian Ludwig Buschmann put 15 pitch pipes together and invented what we know as the modern harmonica. The harmonica was introduced to the American markets in the 249 1820s and by 1867 the M. Hohner Company was producing 22,000 harmonicas a year. The growing popularity of the small instrument can be charted in its production numbers: one million a year in 1887 and three million a year in 1897 (Hohner 2004). Cultural memory plays a role in the history of the harmonica as well, and a plethora of tales associate the harmonica with prominent white endeavors throughout the nineteenth century. From metal-plated harmonicas saving the lives of Confederate soldiers during the Civil War, the harmonica's popularity with pioneers on the western frontier, and even the harmonica's place in the white house. During the Lincoln-Douglas debates, when worried friends told President Abraham Lincoln that his opponent was bringing a brass band, Mr. Lincoln reached into his pocket, grinned and said "the harmonica will do it for me!" (Hohner 2004). The harmonica's other life in cultural memory is predominately associated with African-Americans. It is unclear when harmonicas began to become popular among African-Americans and when the instrument began to be incorporated into minstrel shows which depicted black stereotypes. However, the first African-American harmonica player to make a record was probably Pete Hampton (Missin 2002). Hampton was born in Kentucky in 1871 and made a string of recordings between 1903 and 1911, mostly done in Britain and Germany. His harmonica playing was featured on "Mouth Organ Coon", which he recorded as an Edison cylinder in 1904 (Missin 2002). Vaudeville and Minstrel recordings such as these were the beginning of a long trek wherein the harmonica would become ensconced in both "hillbilly" and "race" 250 records throughout the 1920s and 1930s allowing Blues, Country, Jazz and Jug Band artists to be heard for the first time by a mass audience. Although the harmonica has racially ambiguous place in cultural memory, it is clearly marked along class lines. Pioneers, hillbillies, immigrants and African Americans are predominately associated with the instrument. The exceptions come in particular contexts such as the populism associated with Lincoln (especially compared to Douglas' brass band in the above mentioned anecdote) or the racist underpinnings of a minstrel or Vaudeville show. Even the harmonica's place in period mail order catalogs (following proper Victorian instruments such as the piano, organ, and guitar) mark it as less than appropriate for the gentility. Thus the purchase and use of these harmonicas by the family members at Feature 9 offers an interesting counterpoint to the chicken figurine--one pointing upward toward a forming black middle-class, the other clearly marked as a lower class and perhaps racialized object. Toys: Finally, the large number of children's toys recovered from Feature 9 provides us with a wide possibility of interpretations. Toys recovered from the excavations at Feature 9 include 10 fragments of porcelain doll parts, three fragments from at least two alphabet plates, a cast iron pistol fragment, two clay marbles and two small, black, hard rubber rings. Such items were not found at antebellum Feature 33 and can, on one hand, be seen in a similar light as the chicken figurine; a mark of upward mobility and increased 251 humanization through the consumption of seeming frivolous goods. In "providing certain toys to children, adults were selling a larger ideological package. Working-class parents buying expensive dolls for their daughters may have been expressing dreams of upward mobility" (Wilkie 2000:150). This large assemblage of toys does, after all, represent a considerable investment in the children living at Feature 9. On the other hand, for this recently emancipated family (which was rapidly adding children between 1870 and 1880), it may be interpreted as a desire to provide certain aspects of a childhood that the parents themselves had not been allowed to experience during enslavement. In the racialized atmosphere of late-nineteenth-century Arkansas, this would have been a radical and subversive material statement indeed. Such a statement is not without precedent, however, as children's toys have been documented as being used in dialogs on race by archaeologists in similar contexts (e.g., Brandon 2004:197, 207-208; Wilkie 2000:151). Most pointed among the children's assemblage from Feature 9 are the three fragments from two alphabet plates. These fragments of blue transfer-printed whiteware were from vessels typically used in Victorian America as serving dishes for children. The alphabet printed around the rim of the plate was meant to aid in the instruction of children in the learning of their ABCs (Brandon et al. 2000:49). As literacy was forbidden to enslaved African-Americans prior to emancipation and Aaron reported to the 1870 census that he could not read or write, these plates take on an important meaning. In period discourse education was stressed as a path to equality as often as (if not more often than) judicious consumption. The Freedmen's Bureau and African- 252 Americans throughout the South quickly moved to provide at least a rudimentary education to the newly freed masses. These plates may represent Aaron and Jane's desire to raise the first generation of literate African-Americans in Arkansas and, thus, provide opportunities that they themselves had not had through enslavement and illiteracy. Thus the picture of consumption among the African-American community at Van Winkle's Mill offers us a complex, contradictory picture. Like the material recovered from the Moser farmstead in neighboring Washington County, it allows us to glimpse individuals' attempts to construct identity that, in some ways, contradict the tropes in cultural memory. If the residents of the Moser farmstead were "independent but not isolated," then the African-American inhabitants were doubly so. Their purchases of objects such as the chicken figurine, the diverse ceramics, harmonicas and other items points toward the desire to be independent and equal human beings. Their isolation lay not only in their geographical location in the Ozarks, but also in the racist public space late-nineteenth century America. Examining cultural memory materially can thus provide "insight into how American culture functions, how oppositional politics engages with nationalism and how cultural arenas such as art, popular culture and consumer culture intersect" (Sturken 253 1997:3). Consumers such as Aaron, Jane and the inhabitants of the Moser farmstead used material culture to "imagine new social possibilities, mediate lived contradictions, and envision new personal pleasures, posing new relationships between consumers and society and portraying who we wish to be" (Mullins 1999a:29, emphasis in the original). These analyses remind us that African-Americans and whites in the Arkansas Ozarks (and everywhere) used a similar range of objects in multivalent ways. The tropes of cultural memory we have examined displace these small but meaningful actions and replace them with grand statements about what the Ozarks were and are. Warren Perry and Robert Paynter have pointed out that The problem with multivalent objects is not that historical archaeologists have no idea how to interpret them. It is not that multivalent objects are somehow obscure and exotic items that appear in our miscellaneous categories. It is rather that all too often they are given the interpretation used by the dominant culture (Perry and Paynter 1999:303). In this case, the historical interpretations of the Ozarks have also given way to cultural memory. The archaeology of the Van Winkle landscape in the previous chapter and the recovery of the material culture from Features 9 and 33 have, hopefully, pointed toward some ways we can challenge and complicate the narratives of cultural memory. Having examined both cultural memory and the archaeological perspectives on Van Winkle's Mill, I will know return to the scene used to introduce this work--The Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle educational program. This is where a true engagement between the public perceptions of cultural memory and our archaeology and historical investigations takes place. 254 Chapter 7 Engaging Cultural Memory and Presenting the Past to the Public at Van Winkle's Mill Having examined both historical memory and the archaeological perspectives on Van Winkle's Mill, I will now return to the scene used to introduce this work--The Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle educational program. This is where a true engagement between the public perceptions of cultural memory and our archaeology and historical investigations takes place. It should be evident that although highly flexible and contradictory, there is also a certain resilient quality to cultural memory. This can be seen in works such as Richard Handler and Eric Gable's The New History in an Old Museum (1997) which chronicles the complications and difficulties of the attempts of social historians to introduce critical views of colonial America (including a revised examination of slavery and the AfricanAmerican colonial experience) into the public interpretations at Williamsburg. The identity of Williamsburg's white citizens had been actively remade in cultural memory with the American Revolution as its focus (Handler and Gable 1997:33). This substitution of the colonial trope for the Civil War trope in both local and national cultural memory is not unlike the hillbilly trope's ascendancy in the Ozarks--focusing attention on a favored protagonist and erasing the diversity of Williamsburg from memory. As we will see, resistance to constructionist views of history and alternative historical narratives at Colonial Williamsburg strike a resonance with some of our 255 experiences at Van Winkle's Mill. It is difficult to complicate the cultural memory of the Ozarks with such topics as diversity, modernity, industrialism, slavery and racism. Clearly, however, works such as those undertaken by Flores, Swedenburg, and many others (see Chapter 3) attempt to complicate both history and cultural memory by placing them in dialog with each other. Their hope, like mine, is that we might, in some small way, aid in the undoing of certain master-narratives at play in both history and cultural memory--to lead the past to bring the present into a critical state (Benjamin 1999:471). To do this we must do more than talk to our academic colleagues. We must engage the public with our ideas. In this vein, archaeologists are increasingly aware of how the past is interpreted to the public and the public benefits of archaeology (e.g., Little 2002; Potter 1994; Shackel et al 1998). As this project has grown out of the intent to publicly interpret Van Winkle's Mill for visitors to Hobbs State Park, the subject is all the more germane. As I have written technical reports, text for park signage and provided State Parks with other interpretive opinions, I have always thought my job was to "encourage visitors to identify the evidence used to support historical interpretations, recognize how that data is used to interpret a research issue, and critically examine interpretations, particularly those presented as self-evident facts" (Shackel et al. 1998:3). Thus when the Rogers Historical Museum launched its ambitious Van Winkle educational program, I saw it as an opportunity to observe the public engagement between archaeology and cultural memory, but also to understand how we can make public interpretation at Van Winkle's Mill both more critical and accessible--especially 256 as we tackle such "sticky and unsettling" topics such as slavery, racism, capitalism and class-conflict. The Rogers Historical Museum and The Van Winkle Educational Program The Rogers Historical Museum opened on the eve of America's bicentennial in 1975. By 1982, the Museum had hired its first director and moved into its own building. The museum has been honored in both 1988 and 1996 as the Arkansas Museums Association's "Museum of the Year." It has created four award-winning and nationally touring exhibits (Final Respects: Dealing with Death in the Victorian Era, Play: Pastimes from the Past, What's Cookin'? Two Centuries of American Foodways, and Here Comes the Bride: Weddings in America) and is currently very involved in adult, children's and class-room educational programs. "The Van Winkle Story" was one such program. "The Van Winkle Story" was presented during April and May in 2003. The program focused on fifth-grade students from Bentonville and Rogers school districts who were studying Arkansas history. Funding was provided by grants from the Arkansas Humanities Council and the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation. The project was directed by Janet Hargus, Curator of Education for the Rogers Historical Museum. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the Van Winkle educational program represents a collaborative effort between the Rogers Historical Museum, Hobbs State Park, the Arkansas Humanities Council, the Arkansas Archeological Survey and the Bentonville 257 and Rogers School Districts as a part of their educational programs for schools. Using historical documents, archaeological information, family history and other sources, they proposed to expose some 1,300 fifth-grade children in Benton County schools to critical history through a multidisciplinary examination of the story of Van Winkle's Mill. The Van Winkle program was structured in two parts. The first was an orientation in the classroom. Museum staff introduced the people and places of Van Winkle's Mill "through an exploration of primary source documents, explain how this story was `rediscovered' by museum historians, archaeologists, and State Parks personnel" (Rogers Historical Museum 2003). The orientation was designed not to directly provide a historical narrative about Van Winkle's Mill for the students; instead the Museum staff asked the students a series of questions and presented historical photographs and documents to the students for them to evaluate. This approach was clearly in line with my own interest in introducing a critical awareness of knowledge production into the Van Winkle's Mill project. A second benefit of this approach lies in the feeling of student involvement--as the students "discover the story themselves their confidence builds and they soon begin to act like the `own' the information" (Rogers Historical Museum 2003). The second stage consisted of a field trip to Van Winkle's Mill where students rotate through four key locations within the hollow--the mill, the blacksmith shop, the Van Winkle home and garden. Each of these locations was interpreted for the students by Museum and State Parks personnel. It is here that they were introduced to the bulk of the archaeological information outlined in Chapter 4. Here the "experienced past" was emphasized. 258 Remnants of the Van Winkle home and business, as well as recent archeological excavations, remain visible for students to observe. Still in excellent condition, the pre-Civil War road that cuts through the Hollow once connected the site to Elkhorn Tavern and the Pea Ridge Battlefield. Students walk along the same highway traversed by Civil War soldiers, Union and Confederate alike, over a century ago. (Rogers Historical Museum 2003). Overall, the Van Winkle program had seven learning objectives 1) to help the students understand how the natural environment of Northwest Arkansas made the Van Winkle lumber empire possible; 2) for the students to gain insights into the social, political and economic history of frontier Arkansas; 3) for the students to be exposed to the concept of industrial slavery and a part of the African-American heritage in the Ozarks; 4) to appreciate the impact of the Civil War on Northwest Arkansas; 5) to understand how family history, documentary research, and historic archaeology together can reconstruct the history of a site; 6) to recognize that transportation plays a part in the development of a community; and 7) to gain practice in using and analyzing primary sources (Rogers Historical Museum 2003). The Van Winkle program was widely considered an overall success from an educational standpoint. Thirty six fifth-grade classes with a total of 1081 students participated and the Rogers Historical Museum won the "2004 Educational Program of the Year" award from the Arkansas Museums Association for the program. Yet some aspects of the program were clearly more successful than others and I believe this is due to several forces--the aforementioned resilience of cultural memory, the general preprogram education preparation of the students and some aspects of presentation. 259 In order to asses these forces and the engagement between cultural memory and the history and archaeology presented in the program, however, I will now turn to the teacher and student evaluations of the Van Winkle program as complied by Janet Hargus (2003). Student and Teacher Response to the Van Winkle Program As grant moneys underwrote a portion of the Van Winkle program (mainly the transportation to and from Van Winkle's Mill), a series of student and teacher evaluations were administered in order to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of the program (Hargus 2003). Thirty one teacher evaluations were received from the 36 classes which participated in the Van Winkle program. Eighty percent of the teachers surveyed ranked the program as extremely age appropriate (48 % rated it a five on a one to five scale, while 32 % rated it a four; Appendix A). Fifty-eight percent of teachers thought that program "lead students to a better understanding of the varied experiences of African-Americans under slavery" (Teacher Survey; Figure 7.1). Teachers also agreed that the program added to the understanding of the social impact of the Civil War on the region (64 %) and that the evaluation of primary sources (primarily done in the classroom phase) demonstrated how documentary research was conducted (68 %; Appendix A). Overwhelmingly the teachers thought that the field visit to Van Winkle's Mill "to observe the architectural remains and locations of the archaeological excavations" enriched what was learned in the classroom (Teacher Survey; Figure 7.1). Teacher 260 Figure 7.1. Teacher evaluation forms from the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle education program. 261 Figure 7.2. Student evaluation forms from the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle education program. 262 suggestions to improve the program largely focused on shortening the length of the program, making it faster paced, including more visuals, more "stories" and artifacts. Some suggested that future programs should "focus on fifth, sixth and seventh grade who have more background information to work with." (Hargus 2003). The student evaluations (Figure 7.2) consisted of a three sections. The first asked them to identify the primary sources used in the Van Winkle's Mill research. The second section asked the student to write a sentence about one of the four locations they had visited in Van Winkle's Mill (the house, garden, forge or mill) and the third section asked four specific questions: 1. What natural resource(s) of Northwest Arkansas made it possible for Peter Van Winkle to have a successful business? 2. What types of transportation were used by Peter in his lumber business? 3. Most African Americans who were slaves worked on plantations. How was slavery different in Van Winkle Hollow? 4. What historical event led to Peter's slaves becoming paid employees? Out of the 1081 students who participated in the Van Winkle program, 695 evaluations (64%) were returned to the museum. These evaluations reveal that most of the learning objectives outlined for the Van Winkle program were met. Students could identify correctly primary sources (68 % chose three or more correct responses), the types of transportation (wagons and horses/mules/oxen) and resources (primarily timber) at work at Van Winkle's Mill (Appendix A). Incidentally, 56% of students (N=392) picked archaeology as one of their three identified primary sources. The most popular primary resource chosen was the family bible which was chosen by 70 % of students (N=490). The one area where students did not perform as expected, however, can be found in the questions related to African-American heritage at Van Winkle's Mill. Here cultural 263 memory's depiction of a Northwest Arkansas either without slavery or with a kinder, upland version of the peculiar institution (such as expressed by Morgan in Chapter 2) seems to win out. Whether this is due to 1) the strength of cultural memory; 2) the fact that some students were unprepared to assimilate ideas about the Civil War and slavery in general (let alone challenging their assumptions about hem); 3) metamessages corroborating cultural memory within the program itself or; 4) a combination of these forces is not entirely clear. Below we will examine students responses to the questions about slavery at Van Winkle's Mill and examine some aspects of the educational program in order explore some of the possibilities. A Better, Kinder Slavery? Student Responses to Industrial Slavery in the Ozarks A total of 673 students responded to the question "Most African-Americans who were slaves worked on plantations. How was slavery different in Van Winkle Hollow?" Despite the direct efforts of the program designers to confront the popular stereotypes of upland slavery, 281 students (41.8 %) responded with an answer that depicted slavery at Van Winkle's Mill as better, more kind or otherwise indicated that the slaves were better treated by Peter Van Winkle than they were in plantation settings. This included the single most popular answer "He treated them good/better/nice/well/kind/fair" which was given by 54 respondents. Other examples of answers in this vein included: "The slaves were treated kindly like Rock," "He treated his slaves good and not bad," "He didn't treat them like slaves/ he treated them like normal 264 people ensted [sic] of slaves," "He treated them like real people," "Peter was nicer than the other slave owners," "Rock was basicly [sic] accepted as part of the family," "They were part of the Van Winkle Hollow family," "Van Winkle treated his slaves good by not whipping them," "Mr. Van Winkle treated like people not like trash, dirty, or dogs," and "It was different because he was kind and generous and they loved Peter." Interestingly, other examples of the "kinder, better" response to upland slavery struck an eerie resonant chord with the Northwest Arkansas slave narratives which juxtaposed the condition of enslavement with the availability of food, clothing and/or housing (see Chapter 2). For example, one student replied that "Peter and his family treated the slaves nice. Tempy fed the slaves so that they would not die or get sick," another stated that "he was really nice to them they got to live in the house and they always got food" and "he gave them a good place to sleep, gave them good meals, and he let them have a good life." Moreover, 114 students (16.4 %) mentioned food or the fact that slaves (and sometimes Aaron in particular) ate with the Van Winkle family directly. As the in-class orientation only makes mention of Aaron eating at the Van Winkle table in passing, an only then to point out that it was against custom and the exceptional status that Aaron held, both myself and Janet Hargus were confused about why it seemed to strike such a chord with the students. In the end it may be that the social status accorded to people being allowed to eat with one another was certainly grasped by the young fifth graders who themselves, not doubt, engage in complicated cafeteria seating behaviors that are clearly linked to social 265 relationships. The time-honored "kids table" present at large family gatherings and holidays may also come into play in this interpretation. Keeping this in mind, it is no surprise that 62 students (9 %) mention that a slave or slaves were allowed to eat at the family table. On a more positive note, 194 students (28 %) mentioned the varied task and the nature of work as what made slavery at Van Winkle's Mill different from lowland agricultural slavery. Students noted that the enslaved African Americans in Van Hollow "were housekeepers" who had to cook, do yard work, take care of the garden, chop wood, grind corn, and get water. However, they also "worked around the mills" where they "helped work the machinery" or "turned wheels," "cut down trees," "made horseshoes," "managed the mill," fed horses and "made horse shose [sic]." In short, it was clear to most students that slavery at Van Winkle's Mill meant that "Van Winkle Hallow was different because they were in a forset [sic] so they had different jobs" and that they "worked on machines and not plantations." This last comment speaks to the comparisons between Van Winkle's enterprise and the more common lowland agricultural plantation. As I have argued in Chapter 5, I believe that this difference is, in some ways, a matter of semantics as Peter Van Winkle may have modeled the landscape of his hollow on a plantation model--implying that conditions may have not been as different as commonly depicted. Nevertheless, students clearly caught on to the upland/lowland dichotomy--perhaps because the question asked them is leading them to make such a comparison. 266 For the students the slaves of Van Winkle's Mill were "taught different skills." "The plantation slaves had to do the same thing over and over again" while the "slaves here did a bunch of different things." They didn't work on plantations, they built stuff. This is certainly a real difference between the experiences of enslavement in the Ozarks and those enslaved on cotton plantations across the south. As I documented in Chapter 2, enslavement in the Ozarks did, in general, mean more diversified labor tasks than those undertaken by their lowland plantation counterparts. The enslaved population of Northwest Arkansas worked in the fields cultivating wheat, corn, cotton, sorghum and potatoes, raised livestock, sheared sheep, made yarn, cooked meals, made shoes, worked in hotels, mills, stores, and were even used to build public roads and bridges (Smith 1995:69-74; Taylor 2000:113). As I have stated earlier, this variety of experiences and skills, no doubt led to more individual opportunities and a degree of freedom for some of the Ozark enslaved (perhaps Aaron falls into this category). It did not, however, obscure the fact that they were not free and were considered property under the law. This sentiment is echoed in the Rogers Historical Museum program's classroom orientation where they state... Their experience was definitely different. Yet, in some ways, they were the same. They were still forced to work very hard, still bought and sold like property rather than people, and they were definitely subject to whatever disciple the master fancied. (Hargus 2003). Yet this is not the message emphasized by the majority of students. For them, the often cited fact that slaves in Northwest Arkansas usually worked along side their masters seemed more prominent. Although not overtly referenced, this leads to the "mutual benefit relationship" cited by Morgan, Otto and others where the degree of personal 267 interaction between slaves and masters is thought to create a close social relationship between enslaver and the enslaved (Morgan 1973:28). Thus children state that what makes slavery different at Van Winkle's Mill is that "Africans at Winkle's house got jobs that white people do," "The slaves most often ate what the masters did and worked along side them." In this logic one can see potential connections between the categories of responses. Starting with "they worked as much as Peter did" and "The slaves worked in the house, garden, and at the mills" and jumping to "the slaves were treated fairly." It is heartening, however, that the complex message of "different, but the same" was not lost on all students. At least one student responded that "all the slaves were treated equal, got fed better than other slaves, and were still slaves at the same time." Some students grasped the inequality quite well stating that "he [Peter] had them do his work," that "they were very mean to the African-Americans," and that "they didn't think like them." Still others had answers that were cryptic, but could be interpreted as understanding resistance (i.e., "They wispered [sic] and were never caught), understanding the material advantages after slavery (e.g., "dolls, dish"), or at least understanding what archaeology brings to the interpretation of history (i.e., "It was different because we did not see where they put the slaves and we did know [sic] where the slaves lived"). Proving the inability for interpreters to foresee how statements (like the diner table comment) will be interpreted, one student went as far as to claim that the enslaved experience was different in Van Hollow because "the slaves went and traveled with the 268 family." This is a clear reference to the fact that Peter took his slaves with him when he fled to Texas--hardly a family vacation. Some student responses indicate that they were confused as to the basic nature of slavery or were at least confused by the social changes that took place within the temporal span of the Van Winkle story. Thus one student would report that the difference between plantations and Van Winkle's Mill was that "back in Peters [sic] time there were no slaves like they do [sic] now." Another simply stated that "there was slavery" while several students would contend that "it was different because they were free and got payed [sic]". There were many responses that conflated the postbellum workers with the antebellum enslaved in Van Hollow. Sixty-seven responses included some reference to money and/or payment with thirty one stating the difference between slavery on plantations and at Van Winkle's Mill was that the slaves got paid (i.e., "slavery was different with Van Winkle by [sic] Van Winkle paid his slaves") . This might be the result of student's unfamiliarity with slavery as a historical institution or simply a difficulty in understanding the dynamic changes brought about by the Civil War and emancipation. This is obviously something that interpreters should strive to clarify. However, many students did get the transition correct stating that "after the war they came back as free people and worked for money" or "the war allowed them to become paid employees." These responses were few (N=9) and, perhaps, disturbing in their own right as they seem to indicate that the major advantage to emancipation was an entrance into the capitalist economic system as free labor. This, of course, is how 269 freedom and equality was couched by some in the late nineteenth century and as we have seen (in Chapter 6) consumerism as a mode of attaining equal rights had mixed results at best. Evaluation of the Van Winkle Program The Evaluation Committee of the Van Winkle education program met on September 26, 2003 (Hargus 2003). The committee, which consisted of local educators on both the grade-school and college level, had some specific suggestions on how to handle the questions regarding slavery on the student evaluation form. They recommended a change in the phrasing of the question below. Most African-Americans who were slaves worked on plantations. How was slavery different in Van Winkle Hollow? The committee suggested it be broken into the following two questions on the grounds that it would help obtain a better measurement of student understanding. 1. Peter Van Winkle had a special manservant named Rock. What privileges did Rock have that most slaves did not have? 2. Slavery in Van Winkle Hollow is not an example of plantation slavery. List some of the chores that Peter's slaves might have done. I agree that the original question was problematic in that it leads the students to set up a dichotomy between the plantation slaves (who were treated bad) and Ozark slaves (who were treated good). The new phrasing does two positive things. First, it emphasizes that Aaron's experiences were not necessarily typical of the enslaved experience in general. Second, it focuses on the fact that the diversity of chores is what 270 was different from slavery in the lowland South, not necessarily the quality of treatment. There are, however, still some problems with the rephrased questions. First, as discussed in Chapter 2, the status of Aaron as Peter's manservant is not entirely historically clear (he has also been described as working at the mill). Second, question 2 still sets up the dichotomy between plantation slavery and enslavement at Van Winkle's Mill. As I have outlined in Chapter 5, archaeological investigations into the landscape of Van Winkle's Mill may point toward more similarities than differences between the two. The evaluation team also discussed the length of the program and the logistical problems. I whole heartedly support the proposed option of breaking the program into two presentations to elaborate the slavery lesson. Although it contradicts teacher opinions about the program (i.e., that is already too long) I agree that slowing down the pace could contribute to an increased understanding of the difficult slavery issue. Another proposed addition to the program discussed by the evaluation team was the creation of a discovery box on the topic of slavery in Northwest Arkansas. Discovery boxes are lessons designed to be used in the classroom by the teachers. The box would include accounts and oral histories of African Americans who lived under slavery in this area--such as the narratives of Nelson Hacket, Jenny Flowers, Adeline Blakely, Seabe Tuttle and even the murder of James J. Anderson discussed in Chapter 2--as well as a discussion of the multiple roles of slaves in this area. Teachers could teach the local story in conjunction with their lesson on plantation slavery. Together the two lessons would better prepare students to understand the roles of slaves in the industrial setting of Van Winkle Hollow. However, while some fifth-grade teachers would use the discovery box and integrate the local slavery component into their lesson plans, it is expected that most participants would not. (Hargus 2003). 271 These approaches and additions will, not doubt help clarify slavery as a concept and, from the students perspective, allow for a better understanding of the material. However, I would like to briefly examine some potential pitfall connected to cultural memory and the presentation of history that interpreters might take into consideration. From the Wythe House to the Van Winkle House: Critical History and Cultural Memory Handler and Gable's (1997:102-115) analysis of "Christmas at the Wythe House," a first person historical interpretation that was meant to focus on the relationship between masters and slaves at Colonial Williamsburg, may offer a cautionary tale that has implications for the Van Winkle educational program. Despite intentions to be a "sustained discussion of the conflict between masters and slaves" the presentation was overwhelmed by both cultural memory (e.g., visitors interpreting the presentation through their already formed notions about history) and metamessages built into the presentation. Following an introduction that described George Wythe ("a lawyer, a teacher, a scholar, a revolutionary"; Handler and Gable 1997:103), the presentation continued with first person reenactment of 1) a conversation between two unnamed slaves and a second verbal exchange between a young enslaved man (Charles) and woman (Lydia) who demonstrate a critical awareness of their situation as slaves and 2) a conversation between a Rev. Henley and Wythe in which it is revealed that Wythe is deeply against 272 the institution of slavery and eventually freed all of his slaves (Handler and Gable 1997:104-108). Interviews with visitors who attended the program demonstrated that what came across was not the social history that was intended. Visitors seemed to "identify with Wythe and to participate in a kind of joyful relief that he acted humanely toward his slaves and recognized that slavery was wrong" and that "the privileged have `a bond' with those whose lives they oversee" (Handler and Gable 1997:110). Although it clearly presented "a positive glimpse of the development of an AfricanAmerican culture of resiliency and resistance," it was, in the end "Wythe's troubled conscience, his declaration that slavery is wrong, that made the audience happy" (Handler and Gable 1997:111). Paternalistic tropes, common in many historical narratives of slavery, are clearly at play here. Helped, no doubt, by the fact that the program "sandwiched its depiction of slavery from the slaves' perspective between an introduction and conclusion that celebrated George Wythe" (Handler and Gable 1997:111). This analysis is meant to demonstrate the difficulties of historical interpretation and resilience of cultural memory. Although the program at the Wythe House was meant to introduce a nuanced understanding of enslaved African-Americans, it failed because it could not decenter George Wythe as the protagonist of the narrative. Overall the Williamsburg programs, no matter how well intentioned, were found to downplay hierarchical relationships between blacks and whites in favor of a type of begin multiculturalism where group differences appear less threatening. "More generally, it does what American public discourse almost always does: it [the interpretive programs] 273 minimizes a critique of social class in favor of a celebration of individual success" (Handler and Gable 1997:116). As we are at the beginning of public interpretation at Van Winkle's Mill, this is the time to take such examples into consideration. Many of the factors present in the Wythe House example are present at Van Winkle's Mill and a similar failure to get across the complicated social relationships could result--not only along racial lines, but along class and gender lines as well. It is unclear at this point if the difficulties of the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle educational program in getting the intended message across about industrial slavery in the Ozarks was due to the structure of program (as per the evaluation committee's suggestions), the students rudimentary understanding of slavery coming into the program, or the effects of cultural memory. One thing is clear, however, that attempting to tell both the story of Peter Van Winkle and those enslaved at Van Winkle's Mill will be a difficult, but worthwhile task. Both stories work against the grain of cultural memory and bring heretofore undiscussed aspects of the history of the Arkansas Ozarks to the foreground. It would be easy, however, to lose the troublesome and nuanced aspects of slavery at Van Winkle's Mill in favor of the narrative of Peter Van Winkle as a self-made lumber king and "the greatest genius and captain of industry that the hills of northwest Arkansas ever nurtured" (Elliot 1959). Below is an examination of some possibilities that may help interpreters avoid the results demonstrated in the Wythe House example. 274 Cultural Memory, Archaeology and Race in the Ozarks: Recommendations for the Van Winkle Program & State Park Interpreters The suggestions made by the Van Winkle educational program evaluation committee are, indeed, a good starting place for the improvement of the program. In addition to rephrasing the questions regarding slavery, extending the orientation, and introducing the discovery box on the topic of slavery, however, there are a few other matters which may aid in interpretation. Following the teacher criticism, I would agree that the inclusions of more visuals and artifacts will help the program. Visuals such as the "Old South" print (which includes Sam Van Winkle; Figure 2.11) and the 1901 Van Winkle family photograph (the only picture we have of Aaron Van Winkle; Figure 2.10) can help humanize and individualize the enslaved African-Americans at Van Winkle's Mill and serve as a starting point for discussions about the slaves as individuals. At the same time, it is important not to allow the students to conflate Aaron Van Winkle with the entire slave community (this obviously happened in the case of the "diner table" reference). His is only one story (and an unusual one) of how slavery was experienced in Northwest Arkansas. To these ends, the committee's suggestion to include the few ex-slave narratives for Washington and Benton Counties (and stories such as those of Nelson Hacket and the murder of James J. Anderson) is valuable. It is also consistent with the teacher request to include more stories. 275 Including Feature 9 as a station in the Van Winkle's Mill field trip will also give the students an opportunity to learn about slavery and emancipation. Taking about the temporal differences and social transformations between what life was like at the antebellum Feature 33 and the postbellum Feature 9 may clarify the change to students and avoid the conflation of enslaved and free African-Americans in the hollow (see Chapter 6). Also using the landscape information presented in Chapter 5 may help students understand similarities and differences between plantation and industrial slavery. Clearly the story of Peter Van Winkle and Van Winkle's Mill is an important one. It challenges the hillbilly trope in Arkansas and reveals that Northwest Arkansas was not solely inhabited by the Scotch-Irish history immigrating from the eastern portion of the upland South and that it reveals the regions investment and involvement in modernization in both the technical and ideological meanings of the word. Moreover, telling this story "that was almost forgotten" (Hargus 2003) can reveal how and why cultural memory favors some narratives at the expense of others. Complicating the story of Peter Van Winkle, however, and dispelling some of the discourses that have entered the narrative (such as Black's assertion that Peter did not identify with the Confederate cause) is essential in avoiding the image of Peter as a reluctant and paternalistic enslaver (as Wythe was depicted at Williamsburg). Historical reality is much more complicated. Peter did rise up the social hierarchy through his industrial vision, but the links between early settlers, the best and largest land holdings, and slave holding has been explored in Chapter 2. Slave holding was not only symbolic capitol for people such as Peter Van Winkle, it was practically a necessity for his rise up the social ladder. Moreover, there is 276 not historical documentation regarding Peter's feelings about slavery aside from his support of the Confederate cause and little information, aside his complicated relationship with Aaron, about his relationship with those he enslaved. Following these notions, including critical assessments of primary sources to the public is important. What do we do when letters, census record, newspapers, or archaeological material contradict each other? How are primary sources differential formed and used. While these may be difficult concepts to get across to students just learning what primary documents are, they are essential components to general historical interpretation at Van Winkle's Mill and can help sort out where the historical narrative begins and cultural memory ends. 277 Chapter 8 "When With Sighs We Seek to Find Thee": Conclusions and Summary What to us is life without thee-- Darkness and despair alone. When with sighs we seek to find thee This tomb proclaims that thou art gone. In 1882 Temperance used the above poem to eulogize her husband, Peter Van Winkle. It was a stock poem, one found on a handful of other tombstones dating between 1875 and 1904 across the South and Midwest; from Lawrence County, Mississippi to Cazenovia, Iowa (Fogo 1957; Hamler and Gossett 2000). The phrase "this tomb proclaims that thou are gone"--along with the size of the monument (one of the largest in Evergreen Cemetery) and the Masonic emblem--was obviously meant to convey Peter's importance to future generations. In the 1960s, a short Arkansas Historical Quarterly article observed that although Peter had died in 1882, "his spirit lingers on" (Scott 1962:172) In 2003, however, the Rogers Historical Museum called the Van Winkle story "almost forgotten." The others who called Van Winkle's Mill home faired even worse. For instance, the African-American cemetery's location was lost until it was rediscovered in 1998 during this project. Others, such as the seasonal white labor drawn from the surrounding farms, seem almost entirely lost to history. The place itself was transformed from a "lively place" in the late nineteenth century, to a ghostly abandoned building in the second half of the twentieth. Finally, it 278 manifested itself as a completely natural place under the care of Arkansas State Parks until Park managers and interpreters became interested in Van Hollow's history. This dissertation was meant to explore some of the reasons that Van Winkle's Mill and those who lived and worked in the hollow have faded from history and, hopefully, I have used an examination of history, cultural memory and archeology to understand a part of the dynamic relationship between various forces that form our historical narratives. Modernity is the theme that connects many of these elements together. Scott was referring to Peter's commitment to the modern project when he said the ghost of "Citizen Van Winkle...lingers on" (Scott 1962:172). Peter was a man "who believed in progress and did something about it." (Scott 1962:170). Thus, although he has been forgotten, Peter lives today in the modern infrastructure of Northwest Arkansas. The full force of this modern project came to bear on Northwest Arkansas following the trauma of the Civil War. This was, of course, the same modernity that was connected with urbanization, industrialization and the angst associated with these changes. In turn, this angst was what created the need for the Arcadian and hillbilly tropes of cultural memory. These tropes established foils for the increasingly alienated, complicated, diverse urban dweller and, in turn, they erase Peter Van Winkle, African-American heritage in the Ozarks and all of Van Winkle's Mill. 279 Ozark History I began my explorations of Van Winkle's Mill by exploring the historical context of the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks. I attempted to show the diversity inherent (but never emphasized) in the region and expose the complexity of the historical narrative. Thus the nineteenth-century Ozarks inhabitants were a hybrid community on the frontier of the western world, but were not completely isolated from it. The Ozarks formed an ambivalent relationship with the Southern cause on the eve of the Civil War--the reasons the region narrowly supported secession were overdetermined and individual reactions to the war and collapse of Northwest Arkansas society were quite varied. Following the war, the rebuilding of Northwest Arkansas afforded a further articulation with modernity and the blossoming of more industrialized modes of farming, extractive industries and the new and ever-growing tourist economy. I also included a parallel examination of the lives of African Americans in the Ozarks. Contrary to some historians' claims, I outlined a system of enslavement that was not unlike the peculiar institution of the rest of the South. Although the few existing slave narratives for the region do offer some support for "less master-servant social distance" in the Ozarks (Morgan 1973:28), many narratives (most dramatically the escape of Nelson Hacket and the murder of James Anderson) do offer ample evidence for active resistance and rebellion by those who were enslaved. Following emancipation, personal experiences of race relations were even more varied--from the positive, if patronizing, experiences of Fayetteville poet George Ballard to the outright violence and fear experienced by those who lived through the Harrison riots. 280 I closed my historical overview with a brief examination of the history of Van Winkle's Mill and those that called Van Hollow home. Here I emphasized the Van Winkles' contradictory positions as stalwart proponents of modernization and their symbolic and material commitment to the anti-industrial agrarian south (expressed in their adoption of a southern planter-class lifestyle, their use of enslaved labor prior to the Civil War and their role in supporting the Confederate military during the war). I also traced what is known about the mill workers and changes in the make-up of the mill's labor force throughout its history. This not only included a detailed look at the enslaved African Americans and the two freedman families that worked the mill following emancipation, but also the white semi-skilled labors (lathe operators, sawyers, blacksmiths and bookkeepers), and the seasonal unskilled white labor drawn from nearby farmsteads in the area. Despite popular assumptions, Peter Van Winkle, the black and white laborers at the mill and the mill itself seem to fit comfortably within the historical narrative of the Ozarks. Thus, Van Winkle's Mill provides historians and archeologists with an interesting cross-section of the nineteenth-century Ozark population along class and racial lines. The disjuncture between what people expected from Ozark history and what we encountered at Van Winkle's Mill thus cannot be explained through historical facts. Taken as a whole, the history outlined in Chapter 2 presented a more complicated picture of the Ozark past than the tropes I had encountered during public presentations of the archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill. In order to understand the origins of theses tropes and how certain elements of the historical narrative get remembered while others get 281 forgotten, I turned to cultural memory and its constant evolution and situational rearticulation (Chapter 3). Ozark Cultural Memory Cultural memory, the amorphous narrative conveys how the present derives from the past, explains the present even as it shapes the present reality by providing a symbolic framework that enables us to make sense of the world. Thus, I have attempted to "excavate" the narratives of Van Winkle's Mill and the Ozarks in a doubly historical way. First (in Chapter 2) I examined the historical phenomena, but secondly (in Chapter 3) I attempted to unfreeze the frames with which historical phenomena have been understood. I followed the historical origins of various, overlapping memory tropes (the Ozark hillbilly, the Ozarks as frontier and the Civil War Ozarks) and the differing ways these tropes were deployed throughout time and in different situations to various effects. As I have stated elsewhere, in the end the Ozarks are largely seen as a place that is uniquely American, decidedly rural, anti-modern and white. I examined some of the genres of popular culture which have contributed to the making of the humorous and sometimes violent hillbilly trope--including important master narratives such as Harold Bell Wright's The Shepherd of the Hills (Arcadian Ozarks) and J. Vance Randolph's Ozarks: An American Survival of Primitive Society ("salvage" folklore among an endangered culture). The Arcadian trope outlined in Shepherd drew sharp contrast between the modern urban centers of America and the idyllic, remote countryside which represented a simpler life more in touch with morality 282 and God. It was a largely positive depiction of mountaineers in the upland South who, by their actions and nature, critique American modernity, but Shepherd was more than a bestseller. It was an interesting example of the synergy between popular culture, cultural memory and regional identity. The book's theme quickly became the master narrative for the Arcadian version of the Ozarks. In turn, that narrative was the blueprint the region used to transform itself into a commercial imitation of the image the book presented (Morrow and Myers-Phinney 1999:31). Drawing on both the degenerate hillbilly icon and the virtuous Arcadian Ozark trope, Randolph's Ozarks: An American Survival of Primitive Society established that there is no history in the Ozarks because the Ozark hillbilly is still in the same state as his forbears. Thus he sought to chronicle and explain the culture of these contemporary ancestors before it slipped into oblivion. Randolph's explicit erasure of African-American heritage in the Ozarks and his insistence on the hillbilly as the "true American" lead me to consider the juncture of race, especially the construction of whiteness, and the hillbilly trope at the end of Chapter 3. Here I attempted to unpack the shifting national discourse on race and eugenics and why the Ozark hillbilly might emerge as both the contradictory, racially threatening "white other" and the racially pure, Anglo-Saxon "hope for the white race." Ozark Archaeology Beginning with Chapter 4 I turned to the archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill. First I explored previous archaeologies in the Arkansas Ozarks and how they have been 283 informed by and engaged with cultural memory (i.e., how archaeology has been affected by the hillbilly trope). I then, seeking to avoid the pitfalls of past works that played into the trope, offered a brief chronological and topical outline of the archaeological investigations at Van Winkle's Mill. An overview of the archaeological investigations conducted in the hollow from August 1997 to Spring 2002 provided some necessary details of the cultural landscape of the hollow as understood from the extensive mapping, survey and testing of archaeological features within the hollow. These details were provided to spatially and chronologically orient the reader. Through archaeology I have examined some of the forgotten strands of history in Chapters 5 and 6. By identifying individual features at Van Winkle's Mill we have been able to partially reconstruct the late nineteenth century landscape--Peter Van Winkle's use of a plantation model for the construction of his landscape, the careful separation of public (industrial) and private (domestic) zones in the landscape, and some of the changes that occurred following emancipation and the conclusion of the Civil War. All of these elements had bearing on the implications of this landscape for the labor that lived and worked in Van Hollow. This landscape analysis also establishes Peter Van Winkle as a figure in direct opposition to the hillbilly trope of cultural memory. His industrial enterprise, his creation of a bustling public place in the rural hinterlands, his Victorian separation of spheres and use of enslaved labor all run counter to the anti-modern, isolated, and organic (i.e., non-divided) sphere of the archetypical Ozark hillbilly. 284 From the Chapter 5 analysis it is clear that Van Winkle's mill stands at a metaphorical and literal crossroads. It is only marginally located in the South, the heartland of large scale agricultural plantations with their associated institutions of slavery and later peonage and its habitation crosses the antebellum/postbellum divide. Archaeology also afforded us a closer look at the lives of the African-Americans who lived at Features 9 and 33 in Chapter 6. By looking at the material remains at these features--one occupied solely during antebellum enslavement and the other primarily occupied after postbellum emancipation--I have been able to offer suggestions as to one way these freedmen were able to exercise their new found freedom through a direct encounter with modernity. The consumer patterns at Van Winkle's Mill show a complicated, conflicted approach to this the racist underpinnings of consumer space and figures consumption as one of the terrains where social struggle and identity formation can take place with profound implications on racial subjectivity. Presenting the Past to the Public Finally, I have returned to the subject of cultural memory by examining the Rogers Historical Museum's Van Winkle education program and the difficultly it has had in successfully portraying industrial enslavement at Van Winkle's Mill. As previously alluded to, the Van Winkle's Mill project was spurred on by the Arkansas Department of Heritage and Tourism's desire to develop Hobbs State Park into a locus for heritage tourism in what had previously been a wildlife management area solely used by sport hunters and fishermen. Heritage tourism is a phenomenon that 285 seems to be growing in recent yearsa phenomenon many theorists have implicated in a variety of postmodern comodifications of history and historical senses of place (e.g., Delyser 2001; Harvey 1990:83-87; Jameson 1991:119, 360-1). These "invented traditions" as they are expressed in the landscapes and the "interpretative aspects" at historical sites may serve nationalist agendas, as suggested by Hobsbawm and Ranger (1983). More often they are simply calculated to sell a historicized commodity whose messages can often be a jumble of nationalist rhetoric, surfical multi-culturalism (as long as no conflict is involved), and a variety of other discourses pastiched together and decontextualized, all with an eye towards selling a "historical" experience. From Colonial Williamsburg (Handler and Gable 1997) to Rune Stone State Park in Oklahoma, from "folk" performances paid for by the San Antonio Conservation Society (Flores 1995:154-156) to the Johnstown Flood Museum (which focuses on industrial heritage without mentioning the labor movement; Mitchell 2000:9699), it is clear that the culture industry is in the cultural history business. However, it is also clear that even an activist-minded social history may fail to get its point across due to the interpretive frames through which their work is seen. Take, for example, the Wythe House Christmas program at Colonial Williamsburg which attempted to challenge common-held beliefs about enslaved Africans in eighteenthcentury Virginia (Handler and Gable 1997). In the end, Colonial Williamsburg's attempts at "radical" social history were filtered through preconceived, well-worn ideas such as the paternalistic nature of slavery and the kindness of certain masters. 286 The Rogers Historical Museum project was successful in imparting the majority of its interpretive messages, but failed (like the Wythe House program) in its initial attempts to impart a critical history of the institution of enslavement and the position of race at Van Winkle's Mill and rest of the nineteenth-century Ozarks. It is with these thoughts in mind that I made a final return to the archaeology of Van Hollowthis time armed with some understanding of the work that popular cultural/historical frames influence our understanding of Ozark history. This final substantive chapter of my dissertation attempted to offer ways in which the archaeology of Van Winkle's Mill can be made accessible to the public while also problematizing (if not outright challenging) many of the silences and stereotypes constructed in Northwest Arkansas cultural memory. The thicket of vegetation at the Van Winkle's Mill site had slowly been cleared between 1997 and its current state--complete with trails and a visitor's center which are being constructed as I write. I, however, have obviously not completely untangled the thicket of modernity, industrialization, racial construction and cultural memory that is at work at this site and across the nation. These forces are so enmeshed with each other that determining where one begins and another ends is daunting, much less proclaiming which is the causal factor in any given phenomena. The degree to which these concepts are overdetermined again evokes Temperance's "when with sighs we seek to find thee," but this time in reference to the frustration of historical researchers such as myself. I hope, however, I have at least revealed that fact that these concepts are entangled and demonstrated the effects that cultural memory has on our historical 287 narrative and how archaeology can provide some counterpoint--even in "the most deliberately unprogressive region in the United States." 288 Appendix A Van Winkle Program Student Evaluations on Slavery Evaluation Question # 2: Most African-Americans who where slaves worked on plantations. How was slavery different in Van Winkle Hollow? Answer (blank entry) They had food for the slaves. He fed them more food He would feed them at his table. Slavery was different because Van Winkle let them eat the leftovers. They got to eat with the VanWinkles'. They ate what the owner ate and knew the family almost like friends. They had rooms and got food to eat that they cook and some was friend with Peter. Peter let them eat with him and be his friend. Slaves were given housing, food The slaves were fed well and they let them in the house /He fed them well and let them sleep in their house They were given food and a place to live, treated fair They ate a lot and live in the slave house They had food, clothes, and housing. The slaves were treated like everyone else in the house. They got food and beds. He fed them well. They could stay in house or he would build them one. It was different because the slaves got good food and they got paid the same as employes (sic) He let them eat with him and he pages (sic) them Peter Van Winkle fed his slaves and were nice to them, and I think they got paid. The slaves ate with the family/employees They got to have full dinners and well taken care of./ The slaves were fed and well taken care of. He treated them really well he also fed them/ They treated them better & the slaves got fed like everyone else. They could eat at the table. Peter and his family treated the slaves nice. Tempy fed the slaves so that they would not die or get sick. Well they ate in the house even the slaves. They got treated alot more better and more decentsey (sic) and they get real food to eat. Peter let them eat out the kitchen table and sleep in his house, and paid his slaves. Peter helped the slaves and 1 of his slaves ate at the table with him and his family. Slaves wern't (sic) heart (sic) or they had food They had more food, clothes, and houses. All the slaves were treated equal, got fed better than other slaves, and were still slaves at the same time. Because they where treated nice they got nice clothes and ate the same food Peter ate. They feed the slaves and were nice to them. And changed there (sic) life. He was really nice to them they got to live in the house and they always got food. They got treated better than other slaves would, because they got to eat inside the house. Most of the slave got to eat at the table and go places with Peter. The slaves ate what the family ate. Peter was nice to them, and they got days off. Some got to eat with Van Winkle, some did work like we do now. They wern't (sic) treated like real slaves. Slavery was different in Van Winkle Hollow because Peter Van Winkle didn't wip (sic) them and he had a favorite and he sat at the Van Winkle table. They all ate on the same table. They made bricks, worked in the mill, and the garden. They were all fed and did different things. They made food and constructed. He fed them right and Pete worked with them slaves to. There were only 18 slaves. I do not know!/ Can't answer It had a lot of trees and it was big./ Van Winkle Hollow have a lot of trees and others parts not. They wispered (sic) and were never caught Times Answered 22 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 4 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 3 2 1 289 Slavery was different because a slave named Moses. liberty and (unreadable) after the war dolls, dish Mr. VanWinkle did not (unreadable) is slaves. No Lots of slaves They didn't think like them. They were black or meolon (sic). Very different like other states One slave can go thr Broock Because back in Peters time there were no slaves like they do now. Some slaves stay but when the war was over slave were free You could yelo ofer y Hore and here it (sic all). Van Winkle Hollow was where the General and those people, and slavery didn't have a roof over there (sic) head. The Van Winkle Hollow was very good There were lots of trees and paths. All the slaves came back to work with Peter Slaves were freed He had employes (sic). There were more than natural. In Van Winkle Hollow they needed more slaves because it was in the middle of no where. They had 17 or 18 slaves! There were 18 slaves in the house. He had more slaves in the area than anyone in the area. There was slavery. It was freed It was the sam (sic) thing that the nixed (sic) of Americans He could do what he wanted to do. In Van Winkle Hollow Van Winkle had 18 slaves, 12 children and a wife and slaves were sold and bought for a lot of money. They got to break a few of the social worker's rules. They were paed (sic)./ They got payed (sic) Slaves worked and got paid of their jobs. Some slaves got paid some didn't. The slaves got payed (sic) each month/ The slaves were being paid $11.67 a month. Slavery was different with Van Winkle by Van Winkle paid his slaves Peter Van Winkle payed (sic) the slaves the same as everyone else. They were hired and got paid. Slaves were still used and they paid them. After the war they came back as free people and worked for money. The war allowed them to become paid employees They were paid to fight the north and east. Peter's slaves were well fed most became payed (sic) servants after the Civil War The slaves were were (sic) different because they got payed (sic) and fed. It was different because they were free and got payed (sic). After the war the slaves were free so after the war they were paid as employes (sic). Slavery was different because they were treated nicely, and were paid. They were payed (sic), treated better than other slaves and could stay around the family. Peter was nice to them and one man had his own house and he paid them. After the Civil War Peter's slaves were different than other slaves because the slaves were free and paid. His slaves where (sic) treated as employees and got paid. Van Winkle was not mean to the slaves he payed (sic) them for working their (sic). They got special treatment, fresh water, got paid good money, and they had a good owner They ghote (sic) pad (sic) and had equol (sic) rites (sic) They got paid after the Civil War and Rock got his own house They didn't live on a plantashion (sic) In Van Winkle Hollow they had a lot of slaves & they didn't live on a plantation. Slavery was different in Van Winkle Hollow because they were not on a plantation. Peter paid the African-Americans to work at his plantation and other slave owners didn't pay. The plantations of Peter were different. Peter Van Winkle didn't have a plantation, he had a garden and a mill. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 19 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 290 Most plantations had about a hundred slaves and Peter had 17-20 slaves He had a favorite and that slave would sit at the table. The slaves were treated better/kindly. Rock [a slave] ate at Van Winkle's table. Slavery was different because he gave his slaves better food better house & he let one slave, Rock, eat at the family table Rock would, and the other slaves, be able to sit at the table./The slaves got to sit at the table like Rock did. Rock one of the slaves sat at the table. Some slaves like Rock broke rules like when he was put in the family photo. It was different because Rock got to eat at the family table. Peter let rock eat with him. Rock, and 17 slaves One out of 18 or 17 slaves (Rock) was treated like one of the family members. Slavery was differant (sic) in Van Winkle Hollow because Rock got to stay with Peter at his dinner table and eat with the Winkle family, but no other slave got to. In the plantations it was different for salvery (sic) because of Rock. Rock was Van (sentence end) He broke the rules a little he let Rock seat at the table Rock was basicly (sic) accepted as part of the family. The slaves were treated fairly good. It was different because Rock, one of the slaves got to stuff (sic) with the family. Also they were treated a little bit better. He broke rules with Rock. Rock was special and got to brake the rules. The slaves were treated a little better than they would be treated on a plantation. Rock was one of those that was treated better because he got to eat at the table with Van Winkle. Peter kept Rock by him at all times he did not live on a plantation. It was different because "Rock" was treated different than the other salves (sic). Peter treated Rock like a royal person He was nice to rock a kind herd. The slaves were treated kindly like Rock. He treat his slaves very good. But he treted (sic) rock really good. Slavery was different because he had a personalized slave that got paid and followed him everywhere. It was more different because one of the slaves were close to him. Only sexten (sic) slaves did surtain (sic) jods (sic) and Rock was a slave and ate at the tadle (sic) with the Wickuls (sic). The slaves might have been nicer too, and let Rock sit at his table. Peter was very close to a slave named Rocky he let him even sit at the dinner table. The slaves were treated nicly (sic). Rock got to sit at his table. It was different because a slave named Rock was very respected. They worked for him and Rock got to eat at the table. He treated them good./better/nice/well/kind/fair He didn't treat them like slaves/ he treated them like normal people ensted (sic) of slaves./ He treated them like real people. They treated them nicer than average slave owners. They were treated better than other slaves./ They were treated differently from other slaves. He treated them nicer than other people He treated his slaves good and not bad. They were treated nice and were able to do things that other slaves couldn't. Slaves were allowed at the table./ Slaves sat at table. He cared for them. Their work besome (sic) there build and they got travel (sic) right. Because they were nice and treated them like normal people never treated them bad. He had more slaves and he treated them better He didn't treat them poorly./ Not as bad as some The slaves were not badly mistreated, if not at all./ He didn't mistreat them. He let his slaves use the front door. They got to sit at the table and go through front door. It was different because the slaves had to go to the back door instead of the front. He treated them better than in most places. Van Winkle treats his slaves a lot different and a lot nicer. They were very mean to the African-Americans. They were treated exactly like slaves. Not allowed in garden, only in yard and on road. They were treated differently and got to do funnor (sic) stuff. Peter Van Winkle treated his slaves normally. 1 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 54 8 7 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 291 They weren't treated so bad. They were treated differently. They wer treted diferant (sic all). They wore (sic) allowed to set at the vault. More better diseplen (sic). The 18 slaves that were at Van Winkle Hollow were treated better because some of the slaves got clothing that could not be worn by the kids. He treated some of his slaves nicely. Peter was nicer than the other slave owners. Slaves were not allowed inside, they had thier (sic) own ways to water the garden and to go to other places. He treated them differently than other people would. They didn't punish them and they didn't have a lot. On their breaks they could play. They were treated nicely and they didn't have to work as hard. Well they weren't that strict. They treated them fairly. They didn't treat him really bad. Mr. Van Winkle treated like people not like trash, dirty, or dogs. Peter Van Winkle took good care of most of his slaves He let them have more prevliges (sic) Because slaves weren't treated as bad at the hollow. He didn't treat them like hard with them the treat them nice. The slaves at Van Winkle hollow were treted (sic) a little different because slaves could only enter in the back door of any place. He didn't treat them mean all though they didn't use the front door. Peter treated his slaves different by having his slaves where ever he went. They come in the front door Van Winkle treated his slaves good by not whipping them. They didn't beat or hurt the slaves. The slaves got to eat more often, and after war he hired some of them. He was much nicer to the slaves and did not beat them or kill them. It was different because he was kind and generous and they loved Peter. The slaves had a side entrance to Peter's house. The slaves were appreciated in Van Winkle Hollow. He triet (sic) them good and wasn't mean to them. He gave them a good place to sleep, gave them good meals, and he let them have a good life. Peter cared for the slaves he owned by giving them good meals, a good place to sleep, and a good life. He even took some slaves where ever he went. Tredded (sic) slaves better by giving them edutions (sic). They did not just call them slaves they made them into employees. They were more like employees. They treated them like employees not slaves all the time sometimes yes but sometimes no. They were treaded (sic) equl (sic)/ He treated them equally. He kind of treated them like equals and was nice to them. They were like family / he treated them like family Some of the owners of the slaves were nice and were like family. The slaves went and traveled with the family. They were usually treated like family and allowed to come in the house like Rock. They were part of the Van Winkle Hollow family. They lived with Peter Van Winkle. There was a slave that was part of the family He treated them like family and paid them. They were treated more like family and had so many skills. They were free men./ The slaves were more free. They had more freedom than other slaves. It was different in Winkle Hollow because it was more free for the African-Americans if they work for Peter. He had a friendship with one of the slaves./ He had friendships with some slaves It was different because one of his best friends was a slave./ He was a friend to one slave. He treated them with good maners (sic) and one of them like a good good frend (sic) Some could have been friends and employes (sic). The slaves that worked for Peter were his friends also. He had relationships. He considered them as his friends. The slaves at Van Winkle Hollow they were friends He treated his slaves like friends and he help some to. Slaves got homes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 292 The slaves on Van Winkle Hollow were treated fairly and had a bed, and a house. It was different because we did not see where they put the slaves and we did know where the slaves lived. The slaves were different in Van Winkle Hollow was that they had better (unreadable) and homes. They were treated better than other slaves on plantions (sic). They didn't work on plantations and Peter treated them fairly. There were no big plantations so his slaves were treated well since he didn't have much. They were treated farely (sic) and not all of them worked on plantations. They were treated better because there were fewer slaves than on a plantation. He treated his slaves with respect./ He treated his slaves or mades (sic) with respect. They were treated with respect and fairly. The slaves were fed better and were respected. They were treated with respect and not like dogs Slaves would not be treated badly enough that they did not have any rights. Slaves had more rights. They didn't treat them bad, in fact one African-American ate dinner with the family. They were allowed to set at the table/ They were allowed to eat at the master's table They were able to do anything like sit at the table with the family. Slaves were given more oppourtunities (sic), brakes. One even got to sit at the table. Slaves wer (sic) treted (sic) good and some ate at the table. The slaves were treated much better and one even ate at the dinner table. He let them ete (sic) at the table & go throu (sic) the front door. Usually slaves wouldn't eat at the table and they wouldn't be supported by his or her owner. The slaves where (sic) treated diffrently (sic). They were more trusted in Van Winkle Hollow. They used to work on the mill, the house and the garden They worked in the mill, blacksmith (or forge), garden, house. They worked around the mills, house, and garden. / Slaves in the hollow worked in the mill or tending to gardens and the house instead of on fields. They worked in the houses, mills, and the fields. That is how slavery is different in Van Winkle Hollow. They worked in the house and garden. The slaves worked in the house and outside. They worked in the house, and the mill. /They worked in the house, and Peter's business. Took care of garden made bricks, cooked, worked mill, delivered. Took care of garden made bricks, worked the mill./ cooked He made them make some stuff/ they helped him make the stuff cooked, drivers, working. They had jobs. They did wood or mill or Black smith work./ They helped at the lumber & grist mill & in the blacksmith's house. Had them do his work. They did a lot of easy work./ They didn't have to work that hard. They had to walk around the house to get water. They had to get water and made bricks and more like picking weeds from the rose garden. blacksmith, gardener, cook & mill worker They didn't have to do everything. fields, house, and mill It was different because his slaves worked in his house and others worked in the garden. It was different because they word (sic) at a mill, grinder, and in the rose garden. In the house and the (unreadable). They made bricks, build walls, they started to weel (sic), and they cut down trees. His slaves worked on things like planting and building instead of following cruel orders. They took care of the garden build things with bricks and they made other things. The helped work the machinary and help water the plants insted (sic) of picking crops. They worked in Peter's wife's garden and on his mills. They work and the kitchen and the garden The slaves cooked, did yard work and many different things. They worked at the mill and were blacksmith. They worked in the fields and mills. They did not work in fields. The slaves only had to work on the garden and in the house. The staves (sic) kept working for him. They helped build things, run the mill, and other jobs. Van Winkle Hollow just made them do work. Yes. In Van Winkle hollow they turned wheels, made horseshoes, and other things. 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 18 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 293 Africans at Winkle's house got jobs that white people do. The slaves made bricks, cleaned the house, and water the garden. They cooked, they made bricks, they cut wood, they worked in the garden They worked in the mill and fort sometimes or garden, and cleing (sic) his house. Take care of the garden, cook, clean, make bricks. The slaves wanted to work. He only had seventeen slaves, and most of them helped him do his job, instead of just planting and picking. He though them how to do stuff in moontes (sic) It was different because slaves helped the people do stuff The slaves worked different from now. It was different for slavery to end up to Van Winkle Hollow is that the slaves worked more. It was different because they work different. They had to work a hole (sic) lot. They worked really hard making bricks. They where taught different skills The slaves came back to be an employee./ After the Civil War they were called employees. They work like if they were employees. They work like employees in the house of Peter. They worked in the garden and the house also ate. The slaves most often ate what the masters did and worked along side them. They were fed. They worked in the mill and blacksmith Slavery was different around the Van Winkle hollow by working in the hallow's (sic) and the forge was the hardest job of slavery. Took care of the garden. Picked weeds all day long./ They pulled weeds. It was different because they didn't do gardens, but they did do fields. The slavery in Van Winkle Hollow was different because the slaves worked at Van Winkle Hollow's house. They were housekeepers Slavery on Van Winkle Hollow was different by slaves working inside the Van Winkle house. The slaves in Van Winkle Hollow worked in and around the house because there wasn't a farm. They had to to (sic) dishes Do landrey (sic) and a bunch of other stuff. houses He had them cut logs/lumber/trees The slaves work in lumber. They worked in the woods. They mostly work on the wood shop. He thought that he should use slaves for clear cutting. In Van Winkle Hallow was different because they were in a forset (sic) so they had different jobs. They work in the lumber with Peter Van Winkle. They were better treated and worked on a lumber mill. The slaves in Northwest Arkansas usually worked by their masters. The slaves worked along their owners learning skills. The slaves had to help Van Winkle in Van Winkle Hollow They work so hard for him He taught the slaves a-lot and not all of them worked on plantations In Van Winkle Hollow the slaves learned skills, the master knew and some were even friends with the master. They weren't treated badly and Peter worked with them. The slaves did whatever their masters did. They liked their masters They worked with the owner. And had better housing, cloths, and food. They work in the house or the mill. Treated better. Learned the skills from Van Winkle. Peter worked beside his slaves and gave them break. They worked by orders (sic) or their owners & were treated better. They worked in the mills. They worked with saw mills, grist mills, saws, etc. He treated them nicely. They worked on his mills. They got paid and got to do different things It was different because the slaves got paid after the Civil War, if they wanted to work. Slaves were free. They worked in gardens, they worked in the house, and they got paid. Van Winkle's slaves worked in the woods and got paid a lot. After the slaves work they got paid. Blacks slaves in time were not paid for their work, but Peter paid his slaves. They didn't work on big farms/plantations They didn't have to work on plantations, but around the house for ex. in the kitchen, house, rose garden, or 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 2 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 3 294 mill... They didn't work on plantations and they are treated good. They didn't work on plantations, they built stuff. It was different because they worked on his plantations and a long time ago those slaves worked in the house and cleaned, serve you food. Slaves worked alongside their owners doing different things, since there weren't any plantations. They didn't work on a plantations they worked in & around the house & at the mills. In Van Winkle Hollow, Peter didn't work in plantations he worked on horses shoes. They worked on machines and not plantations. Some did not work the plantations but managed the mill They didn't have plantations for slaves to work in. The plantation slaves had to do the same thing over and over again. The slaves here did a bunch of different things. It was different by he did not have a plantation and one of his slaves did what he did. They worked because they had different jobs than on a plantation. Instead of plantations it was lumber factories and the slaves ate at the table. They worked and got old fancy clothes. /They wore different things and they worked in gardens. They worked as much as Peter did. The slaves were treated fairly. The slaves worked in the house, garden, and at the mills. They got treated right and they built buildings. They where (sic) treted (sic) well maked food, feed horses made horse shose (sic) Yes because the slaves worked on mills and one slave was almost treated like a brother. It was different because slaves were mostly traded life them and diden't (sic) alaways (sic) do the same job. He treted (sic) them different. He worked with them, let them stay in his house. They had to chop wood, grind corn and a lot of other stuff. He treated them kindly. He had eighteen of slaves. All worked in house. They worked on the filds (sic) and garden had a diffrent (sic) way in to the garden and had one slave that ate with him. They would be a blacksmith and they would be like employees almost There was not many slaves because there were blacksmiths and people working on there own. They were kinder. Peter didn't treat his slaves as badly as others did. And they didn't grow cotton. He was kinder to his slaves and sometimes he would let the slaves take the stairs in front of the garden to get in instead of the back. They helped and were treated fairly. They had a bit more work and one impertcaller (sic) slave got to eat at the table as family. They didn't get wipped (sic) they just did their work. Van Winkle was nice and gave his slaves less work. They were treated well and were fed and worked all over the hollow The slaves at Van Hollow didn't work on a plantation, did different jobs than on a plantation, were treated better, and were more skilled. There were also less slaves. Vrey nice he Treat Them Vrey good But if Van Wike Did Save Them if Did Do thre work the might get kill (sic all) He didn't whip them and the (sic) worked togethor (sic). They had to take side trails, worked in garden, possibly swam in spring. They got to break the rules they to care of garden make food work mill (sic all) 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 295 Bibliography Adams, William H. 1987 Waverly Plantation: Ethnoarchaeology of a Tennant Farming Community. National Technical Information Service, Washington, DC. Adams, Paul C., Steven Hoelscher, and Karen E. Till (editors) 2001 Textures of Place: exploring Humanist Geographies. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Agee, James and Walker Evans [1939] 1988 Let Us Now Praise Famous Men. Houghton Mifflin, New York, New York. Aiken, Charles S. 1998 The Cotton Plantation South Since the Civil War. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Allison, Vernon C and J. Vance Randolph 1927 Prehistoric Inhabitants of Crawford County, Kansas. American Anthropologist 29(3):258-261. Arkansas Democrat (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Arkansas Department of Economic Development 2003 Arkansas Department of Economic Development Web Site. http://www.1800arkansas.com/. Site Accessed: 06/21/03. Arkansas Gazette (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Federal Writers' Project of the Works Progress Administration 2001 Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers' Project, 1936-1938. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/snhtml/snhome.html. Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Washington, DC. 296 Ballard, George 1928 Ozark "Ballards" of a Negro Singer Being a Collection of Verse by George Ballard, Lay-poet of the Ozarks, Written as Comment on the Common Current Events and Passing Seasons by One a Little Less Inarticulate than the Majority of His Race and Who Finds His Greatest Pleasures in and Best Self-expression Through Rhyme and Meter. Democrat Publishing and Printing Co., Fayetteville, Arkansas. Barile, Kerri S. 2004 Race, the National Register, and Cultural Resource Management: Creating an Historic Context for Postbellum Sites. Historical Archaeology 38(1):90-100. Battershell, Gary 1999 The Socioeconomic Role of Slavery in the Arkansas Upcountry. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 58(1):45-60. Beaudry, Mary C., Lauren J. Cook and Stephen A. Mrozowski 1991 Artifacts as Active Voices: Material Culture as Social Discourse. In The Archaeology of Inequality, McGuire and Paynter, (editors), pp. 150-191 Blackwell, Oxford, England. Becker, Jane S. 1998 Selling Tradition: Appalachia and the Construction of an American Folk. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Bendix, Regina 1997 In Search of Authenticity: The Formation of Folklore Studies. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin. Benjamin, Walter 1968 Theses on the Philosophy of History. In Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, Hannah Arendt, (editor), Harry Zohn (translator), pp. 253264. Schocken Books, New York, New York. 1999 The Arcades Project, Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin (translators). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Bennett, W. J., and Michael Swanda 1985 Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Survey: Selected Locations, Beaver Lake Northwest Arkansas. Report. Archeological Assessments, Inc. Submitted to US Army Corps of Engineers, Little Rock District, Little Rock, Arkansas 297 Benton County Democrat (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Bhabha, Homi K. 1994 The Location of Culture. Routledge Press, London, England. Birshir, Catherine W. 2000 Landmarks of Power: Building a Southern Past in Raleigh and Wilmington, North Carolina, 1885-1915. In Where These Memories Grow: History, Memory and Southern Identity, W. Fitzhugh Brundage (editor), pp. 139-168. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Black, J. Dickson 1975 History of Benton County: 1836-1936. International Graphics, Little Rock, Arkansas. Blight, David W. 2001 Race and Reunion : The Civil War in American Memory. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Blevins, Brooks 2002 Hill Folks: A History of Arkansas Ozarkers and Their Image. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Bolster, Mel H. 1951 The Mountain Mind: A Study of Backwoods Americans from 1908 to 1940. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 10(4):307-327. Bolton, S. Charles 1999 Slavery and the Defining of Arkansas. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 58(1)1-23. Bowden, Bill 1996 Historic District Proposal Scrapped. The Morning News, November 19, A8. Bowers, Robin F. 2003 Ozark Industry: The Van Winkle Saw Mill, 1857-1890. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 298 Brandon, Jamie C. 2000 Constructions of Race, Class, and Gender in Dallas, Texas, 1870-1930: Views from the Historical and Archeological Records. Paper presented to the 44th annual meeting of the American Studies Association of Texas, Waco, Texas. 2004 Segregating Households, Reconstructing Domesticity: The Intersection of Gender and Race in the Postbellum South. In Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, Kerri S. Barrile, Jamie C. Brandon (eds.). University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 2005 The Archeology of Van Winkle's Mill: A Nineteenth Century Saw Mill Community in the Northwest Arkansas Ozarks. Arkansas Archeological Research Series, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Brandon, Jamie C. and James M. Davidson 2003 Archeological Inventory and Testing of Cultural Resources at Van Winkle's Mill (3BE413) and Little Clifty Creek Shelter (3BE412), Beaver Lake, Benton County, Arkansas. Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers, Little Rock District, Little Rock, from the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 2005 The Landscape of Van Winkle's Mill: Identity, Myth and Modernity in the Ozark Upland South. Historical Archaeology 39(3):113-131. Brandon, Jamie C. and Jerry Hilliard 1998 The Van Winkle Mill and the Anderson Slave Cemetery: AfricanAmerican Related Sites in Northwest Arkansas. African-American Archaeology 22:1. Brandon, Jamie C., Jerry E. Hilliard and James M. Davidson 1999 Return to Van Hollow: 1999 Excavations at a 19th Century Mill-Worker's Residence. Field Notes 282:10-12. Brandon, Jamie C., James M. Davidson and Jerry E. Hilliard 2000 Preliminary Archeological Investigations at Van Winkle's Mill (3BE413), Beaver Lake State Park, Benton County, Arkansas, 1997-1999. Report to Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism, Little Rock, from the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Brown, James 1984 Prehistoric Southern Ozark Marginality: A Myth Exposed. Missouri Archeological Society special publications, No. 6, Columbia, Missouri 299 Brundage, W. Fitzhugh (editor) 2000 Where These Memories Grow: History, Memory and Southern Identity. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Burnett, Abby 2000 When the Presbyterians Came to Kingston: Kingston Community Church, 1917-1951. Bradshaw Mountain Publishers, Kingston, Arkansas. Cande, Kathleen H. 1992 The Ozarks as Destination: Data Recovery Excavations at the Lambert Farmstead, Mountainburg, Arkansas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southeastern Archaeology Conference, Little Rock, Arkansas. 1995 The Ozarks as Destination: Phase II Archeological Investigations at the Lamberts Farmstead (3CW674) and Phase II Testing at the Dement Farmstead and Cemetery (3CW685), Crawford County, Arkansas. . Report to Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, Little Rock, from the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Cantrell, Andrea 2004 WPennsylvannia Sources for African-American Oral History in Arkansas: Ex-Salve Narratives and Early Settler' Personal Histories. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 63(1):44-67. Campbell, William S. [1928] 1977 One Hundred Years of Fayetteville, 1828-1928. Washington County Historical Society, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Capp Enterprises 2004 The Official Lil' Abner Web Site. http://www.lil-abner.com/index.html. Site created 2003. site accessed 06/21/2004. Catalfamo-Serio, Chris 1979 The Effect of the Civil War on Ozark Culture. Cavanaugh, Prairie Grove, Arkansas. Cathey, C. W. 1944 Slavery in Arkansas, The Arkansas Historical Quarterly 3(1):67-90. Chudleigh, Gerry 2003 Harold Bell Wright. http://www.hbw.addr.com/index.htm. Site created 01/09/00, site accessed 05/16/2003. 300 Cobb, James C. 1984 Industrialization and Southern Society, 1877-1984. The Dorsey Press, Chicago, Illinois. Cochran, Robert 1985 Vance Randolph: An Ozark Life. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois. Conable, E. W. 1903 The Old Van Winkle Home. The Path-Finder. Pathfinder, Roswell, Colorado. Periodical on file at the Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Cosgrove, Denis 1984 Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin. Curtis,H. Z. 1862 The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, General Orders No. 56. Official Records, Series I, Volume VIII, p. 653. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Davidson, James M. 2004a Rituals Captured in Context and Time: Charm Use in North Dallas Freedman's Town (1869-1907), Dallas, Texas. Historical Archaeology 38(2):22-54. 2004b "Living Symbols of Their Lifelong Struggles": In Search of the Home and Household in the Heart of Freedman's Town, Dallas, Texas. In Household Chores, Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, Kerri S. Barile and Jamie C. Brandon (editors), pp. 75-107. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. James M. Davidson and Jamie C. Brandon 2001 The Field of Dreams: Problematizing Urban Households in Turn-of-theCentury Dallas, Texas. Paper presented to the SHA Conference on Historical and Underwater Archaeology, Long Beach, California. Davis, Hester A. (editor) 1995 An Overview of Late Historic Domestic Sites in Ouachita and Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, H. A. Davis (ed.). Report. Arkansas Archeological Survey. Submitted to the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest, Russellville, Arkansas. 301 Davis, Michael A. 1999 The Legend of Bill Dark: Guerrilla Warfare, Oral History and the Unmaking of an Arkansas Bushwacker. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 58(4):414-429. DeBlack, Thomas A. 2002a Prosperity and Peril: Arkansas in the Late Antebellum Period. In Arkansas: A Narrative History, Jeannie M. Whayne, Thomas A. DeBlack, George Sabo and Morris S. Arnold (editors), pp. 135-165. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 2002b "Between the Hawk and the Buzzard": The Civil War in Arkansas. In Arkansas: A Narrative History, Jeannie M. Whayne, Thomas A. DeBlack, George Sabo and Morris S. Arnold (editors), pp. 166-204. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Deetz, James 1997 In Small Things Forgotten: An Archaeology of Early American Life. Anchor Press, New York, New York. Delle, James A., Stephen A. Mrozowski, and Robert Paynter (editors) 2000 Lines that Divide: Historical Archaeologies of Race, Class and Gender. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Dew, Charles B. 1994 Bond of Iron: Master and Slave At Buffalo Forge. W. W. Norton and Company, New York, New York. Dew, Lee A. 1980 "On a Slow Train through Arkansaw"The Negative Image of Arkansas in the Early Twentieth Century. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 39(2):125135. Donat, Pat 1995 The Van Winkle Hotel: A Fayetteville Showplace When it Opened in 1880. Flashback 45(2): 9-23. Doolin, James 1980 Conditions of Slavery in Washington County, Flashback 5(8):30-34. 302 DeLyser, Dydia 2001 When Less is More: Absence and Landscape in a California Ghost Town. In Textures of Place: Exploring Humanist Geographies, edited by Paul C. Adams, Steven Hoelscher, and Karen E. Till, pp. 24-40. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota. DuBois, W. E. B. 1912 The Upbuilding of Black Durham. The World's Work. pp.334-338. [1920] 1999 Darkwater: Voices from Within the Veil. Dover Publications, Mineola, New York. [1935] 1999 Black Reconstruction in America. Simon & Schuster, New York, New York. [1940] 2000 Dusk of Dawn: An Essay Toward an Autobiography of a Concept of Race. Tansacion Publishers, London, England. 1995 W.E.B. DuBois: A Reader. David L. Lewis, ed. Henry Holt, New York, New York. Drake, St. Clair and Horace R. Cayton [1945] 1993 Black Metropolis: A Study of Negro Life in a Northern City. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. Easley, Barbara Pickering and Verla Pickering McAnelly (editors) 1996 Obituaries of Washington County Arkansas, Volume I: 1841-1892. Heritage Books, Bowie, Maryland. Edminsten, Bob 1969 Famed Van Winkle Home Bows to Prgress. The Springdale News, February, 4 1969. Edwards-Ingram, Ywone 2001 African American Medicine and the Social Relations of Slavery. In Race and the Archaeology of Identity, Charles Orser (editor), pp. 34-53. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. Elliott, B. H. 1959 Story of a Sawmill King. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, August 2, 1959. Ellison, Ralph [1947] 1995 Invisible Man. Vintage Press, New York, New York. 303 Emerson, Matthew C. 1999 African Inspirations in a New World Art and Artifact: Decorated Tobacco Pipes from the Chesapeake. In "I Too, Am America": Archaeological Studies of African-American Life, Theresa Singleton (editor), pp. 47-75. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Virginia. Epperson, Terrence W. 1999a Constructing Difference: The Social and Spatial Order of the Chesapeake Plantation. In "I Too, Am America": Archaeological Studies of AfricanAmerican Life, Theresa Singleton (editor), pp. 159-172. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Virginia. 1999b The Contested Commons: Archaeologies of Race, Repression, and Resistance in New York City. In Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, Mark Leone and Parker Potter (editors), pp. 81-110. Plenum/Klewer, New York, New York. Ewen, Charles E. 1991 Gulf States Current Archaeology. Society for Historical Archaeology Newsletter 24(1):31. Fanon, Frantz 1967 Black Skin, Black Masks. Grove Press, New York, New York. Fayetteville Democrat (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Fayetteville Sentinel (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Featherstonhaugh, George W. 1835 An Examination of the Elevated Country Between the Missouri and Red Rivers. Gales and Seaton, Washington, DC. 1844 Excursion through the Slave States. Harper and Brothers, New York, New York. Fenno, Cheryl Barnwell 1978 The Place Names of Benton County, Arkansas. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 304 Flanders, Robert 1979 Regional History. In Cultural Resource Overview of the Mark Twain National Forest, M. L. Douthit, R. Flanders, B. Fischer and L. Morrow, editors, pp. 114-242. Center for Archaeological Research, Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, Missouri. Flores, Richard R. 1995 Los Pastores: History and Performance in the Mexican Shepherd's Play of South Texas. Smithsonian Press, Washington, DC. 1998 Memory-Place, Meaning and the Alamo. American Literary History 10(3):428-445. Remembering the Alamo: Memory, Modernity and the Master Symbol. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas. 2002 Fogo S. W. 1957 Tales The Tombstones Tell. Republican Observer - December 11, 1958, p. 166. Foley, Neil 1997 The White Scourge: Mexicans, Blacks, and Poor Whites in Texas Cotton Culture. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. Franklin, Maria 1997 Out of Site, Out of Mind: The Archaeology of an Enslaved Virginian Household, Ca. 1740-1776. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California at Berkley, Berkeley, California. 2001 The Archaeological Dimensions of Soul Food: Interpreting Race, Culture and Afro-Virginian Identity. In Race and the Archaeology of Identity, edited by Charles Orser. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. Froelich, Jacqueline 1997 Eureka Springs in Black and White: The Lost History of an AfricanAmerican Neighborhood. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 56(2):158-179. Froelich, Jacueline and David Zimmermann 1999 Total Eclipse: The Destruction of the African American Community of Harrison, Arkansas, in 1905 and 1909. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 58(2):131-159. 305 Funk, Erwin 1962 Flywheel of Van Winkle Sawmill Sold to Junk Man. Benton County Pioneer 7(5):7-9 Genovese, Eugene D. 1974 Roll, Jordan, Roll : The World the Slaves Made. Vintage Books, New York, New York. Gerlach, Russel L. 1976 Immigrants in the Ozarks: A Study in Ethnic Geography. University of Missouri Press, Columbia, Missouri. Gilmore, Glenda Elizabeth 1996 Gender and Jim Crow : Women and the Politics of White Supremacy in North Carolina, 1896-1920. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Giovagnoli, Melissa, Lee Rosenberg and Saralee H. Rosenberg 1997 50 Fabulous Places to Raise Your Family. Career Press, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey. Goodspeed Publishing Company 1889 Goodspeed's History of Benton, Washington, Carroll, Madison, Crawford, Franklin and Sebastian Counties, Arkansas. Goodspeed Publishing Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Gordon, Fon Louise 1995 From Slavery to Uncertain Freedom: Blacks in the Delta. In the Arkansas Delta: Land of Paradox, Jeannie Whayne and Willard Gatewood, eds. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Gramsci, Antonio 1971 Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers, New York, New York. Grant Susan-Mary and Peter J Parish (editors) 2003 Legacy of Disunion : The Enduring Significance of the American Civil War. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Hahn, Steven 1982 The Roots of Southern Populism; Yeoman Farmers and the Transformation of the Georgia Upcountry, 1850-1890. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. 306 Halbwachs, Maurice [1926] 1992 On Collective Memory, Lewis A. Coser (translator). University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. Hale, Grace E. 1998 Making Whiteness: the Culture of Segregation in the South, 1890-1940. Vintage Books, New York, New York. Hamler Loretta White and Billy J.Gossett 2000 Fox-Arrington Cemetery 1807-1923, Lawrence County, Mississippi. http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/ms/lawrence/cemeteries/foxarrin.tx t. Site created: December 20, 2000. Handler, Richard and Eric Gable 1997 The New History in an Old Museum: Creating the Past at Colonial Williamsburg. Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina. Hargus, Janet 2003 Evaluation of Van Winkle Program. Report submitted to the Arkansas Humanities Council from the Rogers Historical Museum, Rogers, Arkansas. Harkins, Anthony A. R. 2004 Hillbilly: A Cultural History of an American Icon. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. Harvey, David 1990 The Condition of Postmodernity. Blackwell Publishers, London, England. Hicks, Marilyn Larner 1990 Peter Marseilles Van Winkle (1814-1882): His Life and Times, His Ancestors Back to the 16th Century and Most of His Descendants. Henington Publishing, Wolfe City, Texas. Hilliard, Jerry E. 1983 The Political-Social Elite in the Development of a Frontier Territorial Town: Fayetteville, Arkansas. Paper presented at the 16th annual meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology, Denver, Colorado. 1997 A Brief Look at One of Northwest Arkansas' Largest Sawmills: The Van Winkle Site, 3BE413. Field Notes 279:10-12. 307 1998 Historical and Archaeological Account of the Anderson Salve Cemetery (3BE625), Benton County, Arkansas. Report submitted to Scott Van Landingham, Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport Authority by the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Hobsbawm, Eric and Terrence Ranger (editors.) 1983 The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. hooks, bell 1990 Yearning: Race, Gender and Cultural Politics. South End Press, Boston, Massachusetts. Hohner, Inc. 2004 History. http://www.hohnerusa.com/ahistory.htm. Site accessed: 06/21/04. Horkheimer, Max and Theodor W. Adorno [1944] 2001 Dialectic of Enlightenment. Continuum Press, New York, New York. Horning, Audrey J. 1999 In Search of a "Hollow Ethnicity": Archaeological Explorations of Rural Mountain Settlement. In Historical Archaeology, Identity Formation and the Interpretation of Ethnicity, Maria Franklin and Garrett Fesler (editors), pp. 121-137. Colonial Williamsburg Research Publications, Williamsburg, Virginia. 2001 Of Saints and Sinners: Mythic Landscapes of the Old and New South. In Myth, Memory and the Making of the American Landscape, Paul Shackel (editor), pp.21-46. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida. Myth, Migration and Material Culture: Archaeology and the Ulster Influence on Appalachia. Historical Archaeology 36(4):129-149. 2002 Hughes, Michael A. 2000 Wartime Gristmill Destruction in Northwest Arkansas and Military Farm Colonies. In Civil War Arkansas: Beyond Battles and Leaders, Anne J. Bailey and Daniel E. Sutherland (editors), pp. 31-45. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 308 Inge, M. Thomas 1994 Snuffy Smith. In Barney Google and Snuffy Smith: 75 Years of an American Legend, Brian Walker (editor). Kitchen Sink Press, Amherst, Massachusetts. Ignatiev, Noel 1995 How the Irish Became White. Routledge, New York, New York. Inscoe John C. 1989 Mountain Masters, Slavery, and the Sectional Crisis in Western North Carolina. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Isaac, Rhys 1982 The Transformation of Virginia: 1740-1790. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, New York. Jacobson, Matthew Frye 1998 Whiteness of a Different Color. European Immigrants and the Alchemy of Race. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Jameson, Fredric 1971 Marxism and Form: Twentieth-Century Dialectical Theories of Literature. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 1981 The Political Unconscious : Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York. Postmodernism, Or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina. 1991 Johnson, Matthew H. 1996 An Archaeology of Capitalism. Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, England. Johnson, Martha Sherwood 1963 Bertha Blackburn Yeager Recounts The Van Winkle Home. Benton County Pioneer 8(2):33-34. Bentonville, Arkansas. Joyner, Charles 2003 "Forget, Hell!" The Civil War in Southern Memory. In Legacy of Disunion: The Enduring Significance of the American Civil War, SusanMary Grant and Peter J. Parish (editors). Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 309 Jurgelski, Willaim M., Kathleen H. Cande and George Sabo III 1996 Farms in the Forest: A Study of Late Historic Domestic Sites on the Ozark and Ouachita National Forests, Arkansas. Report, Project 958. Arkansas Archeological Survey. Submitted to the USDA Forest Service, Russellville, Arkansas. Kealhofer, Lisa 1999 Creating Social Identity in the Landscape: Tidewater, Virginia, 16001750. In Archaeologies of landscape: Contemporary Perspectives, Wendy Ashmore and A. Bernard Knapp (editors), pp. 58-82. Blackwell Publishers, London, England. Kelso, William M 1984 Kingsmill Plantations, 1619-1800: Archaeology of Country Life in Colonial Virginia. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida. Kelso, William and Rachel Most (editors) 1990 Earth Patterns: Essays in Landscape Archaeology. University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. Kevles, Daniel J. 1985 In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Knapp, A. Bernard and Wendy Ashmore 1999 Archaeological Landscapes: Constructed, Conceptualized, Ideational. In Archaeologies of Landscape: Contemporary Perspectives, Wendy Ashmore and A. Bernard Knapp (editors). Blackwell Publishers, London, England. Kryden-Reid, Elizabeth 1994 "As is the Gardener, So is the Garden": the Archaeology of Landscape and Myth. In Historical Archaeology of the Chesapeake, Paul Shackel and Barbara Little (editors), pp. 131-148. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Langhorne, William T. 1976 Mill Based Settlement Patterns in Schoharie County, New York: A Regional Study. Historical Archaeology 10:73-92. Lefebvre, Henri 1991 The Production of Space. Blackwell Publishers, London, England. 310 Leone, Mark P. 1984 Interpreting Ideology in Historical Archaeology: Using the Rules of Perspective in the William Paca Garden in Annapolis, Maryland. In Ideology, Power and Prehistory, Daniel Miller and Christopher Tilley (editors), pp. 25-35. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 1995 Historical Archaeology of Capitalism. American Anthropologist 97(2):251-268. Leone, Mark P. and Gladys-Marie Fry 2001 Spirit Management Among Americans of African Decent. In Race and the Archaeology of Identity, Charles E. Orser (editor), pp. 143-157. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. Levinson, Sanford 1998 Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies. Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina. Lim n, Jos Eduardo 1998 American Encounters : Greater Mexico, the United States, and the Erotics of Culture. Beacon Press, Boston, Massachusetts. Little, Barbara J. (editor) 2002 Public Benefits of Archaeology. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida. Lockhart, Jami J., George Sabo and Jerry Hilliard 2001 Exploratory Applications in Human and Natural Ecology: Using GIS to Examine Historic Settlement and Change. Paper presented to the joint meeting of the American Society for Environmental History and the Forest History Society, Durham, North Carolina. Loewen, James W. 1999 Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong. Simon and Schuster, New York, New York. Malone, Bill C. 1985 Country Music USA. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas. Martin, Patrick E. 2000 Interim Report on the Van Winkle Project, 2000. Interim Report. Arkansas Archeological Survey. Submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers, Little Rock District, Little Rock, Arkansas. 311 Matsuda, Matt K 1996 The Memory of the Modern. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. McNeil, W. K. 1995 Ozark Country. University of Mississippi Press, Jackson, Mississippi. McKee, Larry 1992 The Ideals and Realities Behind the Design and Use of NineteenthCentury Virginia Slave Cabins. In The Art and Mystery of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of James Deetz, Ann Yentsch and Mary Beaudry (editors), pp. 195-214. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. Memory, Melissa 1994 Public Archaeology at the Wilson Farm Site (3WA988). Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Little Rock, Arkansas. Mills, Cynthia and Pamela H. Simpson (editors) 2003 Monuments to the Lost Cause : Women, Art, and the Landscapes of Southern Memory. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Miller, Dorothy 1966 For Vernon T. West: Log Business in His Blood. Oklahoma Ranch and Farm World, March 18, 1966. Miller, Jay and Ken Eastin 1984 Master Plan: Hobbs State Management Area. Report to the Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism, Little Rock, Arkansas. Miller, George L 1991 A Revised Set of CC Index Values for Classification and Economic Scaling of English Ceramics from 1787 to 1880. Historical Archaeology. 25: 1-23. Minton, Mark 1996 Ozark Buffs Want to Make River Valley a Historic Site. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, April 21, 1996. Mintz, John J. and Jerry E. Hilliard 1992 Slavery in Ozarkia: A Preliminary Assessment. Paper presented at the 57th annual meeting of the Society of American Archaeology, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 312 Missin, Pat 2002 A Brief History of Mouth Blown Free Reed Instruments. http://www.patmissin.com/. Site created: 2002, Site accessed: 06/03/03. Misztal, Barbara A. 2003 Theories of Social Remembering. Open University Press, Maidenhead, Berkshire, England. Mitchell, Dorothy 1969 The Van Winkle Heritage at War Eagle. Ozark Mountaineer, October, 1969. Mitchell, Don 2000 Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction. Blackwell Press, New York, New York. Moneyhon, Carl H. 1994 The Impact of the Civil War and Reconstruction on Arkansas: Persistence in the Midst of Ruin. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 1996 The Creators of the New South in Arkansas: Industrial Boosterism, 18751885. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 55(4):383-409. The Impact of the Civil War and Reconstruction on Arkansas: Persistence in the Midst of Ruin. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 2002 Morgan, Gordon D. 1973 Black Hillbillies of the Arkansas Ozarks. A Report of the Department of Sociology, University of Arkansas to the Russell Sage Foundation, New York, New York. Morrow, Lynn and Linda Myers-Phinney 1999 Shepard of the Hills Country: Tourism Transforms the Ozarks, 1880s1930s. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Mullins, Paul R. 1999a Race and Affluence: An Archaeology of African America and Consumer Culture. Klewer Academic Press, New York, New York. 313 1999b "A Bold and Gorgeous Front": The Contradictions of African America and Consumer Culture. In Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, Mark Leone and Parker Potter (editor), pp 169-198. Klewer Academic Press, New York, New York. 2001 Racializing the Parlor: Race and Victorian Bric-a-brac Consumption. In Race and the Archaeology of Identity, Charles Orser (editor), pp. 158-176 University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. Myers-Phinney, Linda 1990 Arcadia in the Ozarks: The Beginnings of Tourism in Missouri's White River Country. Ozarks Watch 5(3):6-11 Neal, Joe 1977 George Ballard of Fayetteville: Remembering an Arkansas Poet. The Grapevine 8(26):6. Nora, Pierre 1992 Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past, Volume I: Conflict and Divisions, Aruthur Goldhammer (translator). Columbia University Press, New York, New York. Nuttall, Thomas 1821 A Journal of Travels into the Arkansas Territory During the Year 1819. Thomas E. Palmer Publishers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Orser, Charles E. and Annette M. Nekola 1985 Plantation Settlement from Slavery to Tenancy: An Example from a Piedmont Plantation in South Carolina. In The Archaeology of Slavery and Plantation Life, Theresa Singleton (editor), pp. 67-91. Academic Press, New York, New York. Otto, John S. 1980 Slavery in the Mountains: Yell County, Arkansas 1840-1860. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 39(1):35-52. 1984 Cannon's Point Plantation, 1794-1860 : Living Conditions and Status Patterns in the Old South. Academic Press, New York, New York. Paschal, Ronnie 1996 White House. Washington County Observer, December 5, 1996, p. 10. 314 Peabody , Charles 1903 Cave Deposits in the Ozark Mountains. American Anthropologist 5:579580. Perry, Warren and Robert Paynter 1999 Artifacts, Ethnicity and the Archaeology of African Americans. In "I Too, Am America": Archaeological Studies of African-American Life, Theresa Singleton (editor), pp. 299-310. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Virginia. Phillips, George H. 1979 Handling the Mail in Benton County, Arkansas 1836-1976. Benton County Historical Society, Siloam Springs, Arkansas. Potter, Parker B. 1994 Public Archaeology in Annapolis : A Critical Approach to History in Maryland's Ancient City. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Praetzellis, Adrian and Mary Praetzellis 2001 Mangling Symbols of Gentility in the West: Case Studies in Interpretive Archaeology. American Anthropologist 10(3):646-654. Raab, L. Mark, Gayle Fritz, Daniel Wolfman, Robert H. Ray and George Sabo III 1982 The Arkansas Ozarks. In A State Plan for the Conservation of Archeological Resources in Arkansas, Hester A. Davis, editor. Research Series No. 21. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Radley, Alan 1990 Artefacts, Memory, and a Sense of Place. In Collective Remembering,. David Middleton and Derek Edwards, editors, pp. 45 59. Sage Publications, London, England. Rafferty, Milton D. 2001 The Ozarks: Land and Life. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Randolph, J. Vance 1926 A Word List From the Ozarks. Dialect Notes 5:397. 1927 1928 1929 The Ozark Dialect in Fiction. American Speech 2:283. A Possible Source of Some Ozark Neologism. American Speech 4:117. Is There an Ozark Dialect? American Speech 4:203-204. 315 1930 Dialectal Survival in the Ozarks: Grammatical Peculiarities, with Patti Sankee. Offprint from American Speech 5:268-269 1931a The Ozarks: An American Survival of Primitive Society. Vanguard Press, New York, New York. 1931b Recent Fiction and the Ozark Dialect. American Speech 2:427-428. 1932 1933 Ozark Mountain Folks. The Vanguard Press, New York, New York. From an Ozark Holler: Stories of Ozark Mountain Folks. The Vanguard Press, New York, New York. 1934 Ozark Mountain Riddles. The Journal of American Folk-Lore 47:6-89 1936 Ozark Mountain Party Games, with Nancy Clemens [pseud. Nancy Nance]. The Journal of American Folk-Lore 49:199-206. An Ozark Anthology. Caxton Printers, Caldwell, Idaho. Ozark Folksongs. University of Illinois Press, Urbana,. Illinois. Ozark Superstitions. Columbia University Press, New York, New York. Children's Rhymes from Missouri. The Journal of American Folklore, ? pp. 425-437. 1940 1946 1947 1950 1951a Folktales from Arkansas. The Journal of American Folklore 65:159-166. 1951b We Always Lie to Strangers: Tall Tales from the Ozarks. Columbia University Press, New York, New York. 1952 Who Blowed Up the Church House and Other Ozark Folk Tales. Columbia University Press, New York, New York. The Devil's Pretty Daughter and Other Ozark Folk Tales. Columbia University Press, New York, New York. The Talking Turtle and Other Ozark Folk Tales. Columbia University Press, New York, New York. Hot Springs and Hell and Other Folk Jests and Anecdotes from the Ozarks..: Folklore Associates, Hatboro, Pennsylvannia. 1955 1957 1965 316 1976 Pissing in the Snow and Other Ozark Folktales. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois. Randolph, J. Vance and George P. Wilson [1953] 1979 Down in the Holler: A Gallery of Ozark Folk Speech. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma. Rea, Ralph R 1955 Boone County and Its People. Press-Argus, Van Buren, Arkansas. Read, Lessie Stringfellow 1928 George Ballard. In Ozark "Ballards" of a Negro Singer Being a Collection of Verse by George Ballard, Lay-poet of the Ozarks, Written as Comment on the Common Current Events and Passing Seasons by One a Little Less Inarticulate than the Majority of His Race and Who Finds His Greatest Pleasures in and Best Self-expression Through Rhyme and Meter, pp. 13-16. Democrat Publishing and Printing Co., Fayetteville, Arkansas. Robinson, Deborah 1996 Pioneering A New Historic District. Northwest Arkansas Times, April 10, 1996. Roediger, David R. 1991 The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class. Verso Press, London. Rohrbbach , Jill M. 2004 History Enriches Natural Beauty at Beaver Lake State Park. Citiscapes Metro Monthly 4(5):41-42. Rohrbough, Malcolm J. [1978] 1990 The Trans-Appalachian Frontier: People Societies and Institutions 1775-1850. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, Massachusetts. Rogers Daily News (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Rogers Democrat, (newspaper, on microfilm Mullins Library, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas). 317 Rogers Historical Museum 2003 The Van Winkle Program. Program announcement on file Rogers Historical Museum, Rogers, Arkansas. Rose, F. P. 1953 Van Winkle Mill Did Yeoman Duty, Pioneer Maker of Lumber in Western Ozarks. The Ozarks Mountaineer, November, 1953. Rothrock, Thomas 1973 Peter Manelis Van Winkle. The Arkansas Historical Quarterly 32:61-70. Russ, John 2004 Dogpatch USA. http://users.aristotle.net/~russjohn/attractions/dogpatch.html. Site accessed: 06/21/04 Sabo, George 1986 Preface. In Contributions to Ozark Prehistory, G. Sabo III, editor. Research Series No. 27. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 1990 Historic Europeans and Americans. In Human Adaptation in the Ozark and Ouachita Mountains, George Sabo, Ann M. Early, Jerome C. Rose, Barbara A. Burnett, Louis Vogel and James P. Harcourt (editors), pp 135170. Arkansas Archaeological Research Series No. 31, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Native American Prehistory. In Arkansas: A Narrative History, Jeannie M. Whayne, Thomas A. DeBlack, George Sabo, and Morris S. Arnold, editors, pp. 1-19. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 2002 Sabo, George and Ann M. Early 1990 Prehistoric Culture History. In Human Adaptation in the Ozark and Ouachita Mountains, George Sabo, Ann M. Early, Jerome C. Rose, Barbara A. Burnett, Louis Vogel and James P. Harcourt (editors), pp 135170. Arkansas Archaeological Research Series No. 31, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Sabo, George III, Jami J. Lockhart , and Jerry E. Hilliard 2001 Nineteenth-Century Cultural Landscapes in Northwest Arkansas Paper presented at the fourth annual meeting of the South Central Historical Archeology Conference, Historic Arkansas Museum, Little Rock, Arkansas. 318 Savage, Kirk 1999 Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War and Monument in 19th Century America. University of Princeton Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Schlotterbeck, John T. 1982 The `Social Economy' of an Upper South Community: Orange and Greene Counties, Virginia, 1815 to 1860. In Class, Conflict and Consensus: Antebellum Southern Community Studies, Orville V. Burton and Robert C. McMath, editors, pp. 3-28. Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut. Schoolcraft, Henry Rowe 1819 A View of the Lead Mines of Missouri Including Some Observations on the Mineralogy, Geology, Geography, Antiquities, Soil, Climate, Population and Productions of Missouri and Arkansas and Other Sections of the Western Country. Wiley, New York, New York. 1955 Journal of a Tour into the Interior of Missouri and Arkansas in 1818 and 1819. In Schoolcraft in the Ozarks, Hugh Park (editor), pp. 20-199. Press-Argus, Van Buren, Arkansas. Scott, E. 1962 Peter Van Winkle. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 21(2):170-172 Scholtz, James A. 1969 A Summary of Prehistory in Northwest Arkansas. Arkansas Archeologist 10(1,2,3):51-60. Sears, Roebuck & Co. [1897] 1993 Sears, Roebuck & Co. Catalogue. Chelsea House Publications, New York, New York. Shackel, Paul A. (editor) 2001 Myth, Memory and the Making of the American Landscape. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida. Shackel, Paul A., Paul R. Mullins and Mark S. Warner (editors) 1998 Annapolis Pasts: Historical Archaeology in Annapolis Maryland. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Shea, William L. 2001 A Semi-Savage State: The Image of Arkansas in the Civil War. In Civil War Arkansas: Beyond Battles and Leaders, Anne J. Bailey and Daniel E. Sutherland (editors), pp. 85-99. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 319 Shepherd of the Hills Outdoor Theater 2004 The Shepherd of the Hills. http://www.theshepherdofthehills.com/. Site created: 2004, Site accessed: 06/21/2004. Smith, Ted J. 1995 Slavery in Washington County, Arkansas, 1828-1860. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of History, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 1999 Mastering Farm and Family: David Walker as Slaveholder. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 58(1):61-79. Snelling, Louis 1973 Coin Harvey: Prophet of Monte Ne. S of O Press, Point Lookout, Missouri. Soja, Edward W. 1989 Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. Verso Press, London, England. Spencer-Wood, Suzanne (editor) 1987 Consumer Choice in Historical Archaeology. Plenum Press, New York, New York. Stampp, Kenneth M. 1956 The Peculiar Institution: Slavery and the Antebellum South. Vintage Press, New York, New York. Steele, Phillip W. and Steve Cottrell 1993 Civil War in the Ozarks. Pelican Publishing Company, Gretna, Louisiana. Stewart-Abernathy, Leslie C. 1986 The Moser Farmstead, Independent But Not Isolated: The Archeology of a Late Nineteenth Century Ozark Farmstead. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series No. 26. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 1987 From Memories and From the Ground: Historical Archaeology at the Moser Farmstead in the Arkansas Ozarks. In Visions and Revisions: Ethnohistoric Perspectives on Southern Cultures, Sabo and Schneider (editors), pp. 98-113. University of Georgia Press, Athens, Georgia. 320 1992 Industrial Goods in the Service of Tradition: Consumption and Cognition on an Ozark Farmstead Before the Great War. In The Art and Mystery of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of James Deetz, Ann Yentsch and Mary Beaudry (editors). CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. From Famous Forts to Forgotten Farmsteads: Historical Archaeology in the Mid-South. In Arkansas Archaeology: Essays in Honor of Dan and Phyllis Morse, Robert C. Mainfort and Marvin Jeter (editors), pp. 225244. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Separate Kitchens and Intimate Archaeology: Constructing Urban Slavery on the Antebellum Cotton Frontier in Washington, Arkansas. In Household Chores, Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, Kerri S. Barile and Jamie C. Brandon (editors), pp. 51-74. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 1999 2004 Stine, Linda F., Martha Zierden, Lesley M. Druker and Christopher Judge (editors.) 1997 Carolina's Historical Landscape: A Archaeological Perspectives. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Steinbeck, John [1939] 1986 The Grapes of Wrath. Penguin Books, New York, New York. Sturken, Marita 1997 Tangled Memories: The Vietnam War, the Aids Epidemic and the Politics of Remembering. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. Sutherland, Daniel E. 2000 Guerrillas: The Real War in Arkansas. In Civil War Arkansas: Beyond Battles and Leaders, Anne J. Bailey and Daniel E. Sutherland (editors), pp. 133-153. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Swedenburg, Ted 2003 Memories of Revolt: The 1936-1939 Rebellion and the Palestinian National Past. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Tai, Hue-Ham Ho 2001 "Remembered Realms: Pierre Nora and French National Memory" in The American Historical Review 106(3):906-921. Taylor, Orville W. [1958] 2000 Negro Slavery in Arkansas. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 321 Tennant, Edward 2003 Magnetic Fractioning: Remote Sensing with Percentages Inferring Work Areas within an 19th Century Blacksmith Shop. Unpublished honors thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Thomas, Julian 2001 Archaeologies of Place and Landscape. In Archaeological Theory Today, edited by Ian Hodder. Polity Press, Cambridge, England. Trachtenberg, Alan 1982 The Incorporation of America: Culture and Society in the Gilded Age. Hill and Wang Publishers, New York, New York. Trouillot, Michel-Rolph 1995 Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Beacon Press, Boston, Massachusetts. Trubowitz, Neal L. 1980 Pine Mountain Revisited: An Archeological Study in the Arkansas Ozarks. Research Report No. 23. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Tuan, Yi-Fi 1976 Humanistic Geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 66:266-76. United States Bureau of the Census 1820 United States Manuscript Census: 1820. Washington, DC. 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 United States Manuscript Census: 1840. Washington, DC. United States Manuscript Census: 1850. Washington, DC. United States Manuscript Census: 1860. Washington, DC. United States Manuscript Census: 1870. Washington, DC. United States Manuscript Census: 1880. Washington, DC. Van Dyke, Ruth M. and Suasan E. Alcock 2003 Archaeologies of Memory: An Introduction. In Archaeologies of Memory, Ruth M. Van Dyke and Susan E. Alcock (editors), pp. 1-14. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Massachusetts. 322 Vlach, John M. 1993 Back of the Big House:Tthe Architecture of Plantation Slavery. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Washington County Landowners Plat 1835 On file Washington County Courthouse, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Washington County Marriage Book B (on file Washington County Courthouse, Fayetteville, Arkansas). Webb, Pamela 1983 By the Sweat of the Brow: the Back-to-the-Land Movement in Depression Arkansas. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 42(4):332-345. Whayne, Jeannie M. (editor) 1993 Shadows Over Sunnyside: An Arkansas Plantation in Transition, 18301945. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 1996 A New Plantation South: Land, Labor, and Federal Favor in TwentiethCentury Arkansas. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Virginia. Wheaton, Thomas R. and Patrick Garrow 1985 Acculturation and the Archaeological Record in the Carolina Low Country. . In The Archaeology of Slavery and Plantation Life, Theresa Singleton (editor), pp. 239-259. Academic Press, New York, New York. Willey, Gordon R., and Philip Phillips 1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. Williams, C. Fred 1980 The Bear State Image: Arkansas in the Nineteenth Century. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 39(2):99-111. Williamson, J. W. 1995 Hillbillyland: What the Movies Did to the Mountains and What the Mountains Did to the Movies. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 323 Wilkie, Laurie A. 1997 Secret and Sacred: Contextualizing the Artifacts of African-American Magic and Religion. Historical Archaeology 31(4):81-106. 2000 Creating Freedom: Material Culture and African Identity at Oakley Plantation, 1840-1950. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Wolfman, Daniel 1979 Archeological Assessment of the Buffalo National River. Research Report No. 18. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Worley, Ted R. 1958 The Arkansas Peace Society of 1861: A Study in Mountain Unionism. Journal of Southern History, 24:445-456. Worrell, John, Myron O. Stachiw, and David M. Simmons 1996 Archaeology from the Ground Up. In Historical Archaeology and the Study of American Culture, Lu Ann De Cunzo and Bernard Herman (editors), pp. 35-46. Winterthur/University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Wright, Harold Bell [1907] 1987 The Shepherd of the Hills. Shepherd of the Hills Historical Society, Branson, Missouri. Yamin, Rebecca and Karen Bescherer Metheny (editors) 1996 Landscape Archaeology: Reading and Interpreting the American Historical Landscape. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Yentsch, Anne and Mary C. Beaudry 2001 American Material Culture in Mind, Thought and Deed. In Archaeological Theory Today, edited by Ian Hodder. Polity Press, Cambridge, England. Zelizer, Barbie 1998 Remembering to Forget: Holocaust Memory Through the Camera's Eye. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. Zorn, Roman 1957 An Arkansas Fugitive Slave Incident and its International Repercussions. Arkansas Historical Quarterly 16(2):139-149. 324 VITA Jamie Chad Brandon was born in Camden, Tennessee on June 21, 1971 the first child of Jerry Wayne Brandon and Doris Jeanette Deason Brandon. Jamie grew up in Eva, Tennessee a small unincorporated town in a county whose entire population was only 12,126 in 1970. After graduating from Camden Central High School, he enrolled at Memphis State University in Memphis, Tennessee as an anthropology major working under Dr. Charles H. McNutt. During his tenure at Memphis State (now the University of Memphis), Jamie also worked as an archaeologist for the Memphis State Center for Anthropological Research, the Tennessee Division of Archeology, Panamerican Consultants, Garrow and Associates, DuVall and Associates and various other archaeological consulting/research organizations. His research interest included Early and Middle Woodland ceramic types, Mississippian ceramics, burial practices and textiles, and a growing interest in historical archaeology. On March 17, 1995, Jamie and his wife, T. J. Vestal, were married in downtown Memphis. Following his matriculation from Memphis State, Jamie attended the graduate program at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, Arkansas, from 1996-1999 where he studied under Drs. Robert C. Mainfort, George Sabo and Jerome C. Rose. While in Northwest Arkansas he continued to work for local firms such as Mid-Continental Research Associates and the Arkansas Archeological Survey's Sponsored Research Program. Jamie completed his thesis, Death and the Parkin Phase: Mortuary Patterning in the Archaeological Data Recovered from the Durham Excavations in Northeastern Arkansas, 1932-1933, in the summer of 1999 but had long since become entangled in 325 historical archaeology at Van Winkle's Mill. He entered the Ph.D. program in anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin in August of 1999. In addition to his experience with state agencies and contract firms, Jamie has served as an instructor and/or part-time faculty at the University of Arkansas, University of Texas at Austin and Northwest Arkansas Community College. He has co-directed two archaeological field schools, written numerous technical reports and journal articles and is the co-editor (with Kerri Barile) of Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology. Permanent Address: 1725 N. Lynns Place, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 72703 This dissertation was typed by the author. 326

Find millions of documents here - Study Guides, Homework Solutions, Papers, Exam Answer Keys and more. Course Hero has millions of course related materials that will enable you to learn better, faster and get an A in all your courses.
Below is a small sample set of documents:

MATH107A46024536.doc
Path: MD University College >> ASIA >> 2092 Fall, 2009

crawforda65881.pdf
Path: Texas >> CRAWFORDA >> 65881 Fall, 2009
achacosom07761.pdf
Path: Texas >> ACHACOSOM >> 07761 Fall, 2009
jarroldwl86380.pdf
Path: Texas >> JARROLDWL >> 86380 Fall, 2009
sharyginany026.pdf
Path: Texas >> SHARYGINAN >> 026 Fall, 2009
goncalvesac026.pdf
Path: Texas >> GONCALVESA >> 026 Fall, 2009
zieglerkj47418.pdf
Path: Texas >> ZIEGLERKJ >> 47418 Fall, 2009
burtnerjc90760.pdf
Path: Texas >> BURTNERJC >> 90760 Fall, 2009
alvarezla07232.pdf
Path: Texas >> ALVAREZLA >> 07232 Fall, 2009
MATH012A46124534.doc
Path: MD University College >> ASIA >> 2092 Fall, 2009
bonningew86532.pdf
Path: Texas >> BONNINGEW >> 86532 Fall, 2009
CMIS141AA44024445.doc
Path: MD University College >> ASIA >> 2092 Fall, 2009
CMIS102AA42086692.doc
Path: MD University College >> ASIA >> 2088 Fall, 2009
STAT200A42186896.doc
Path: MD University College >> ASIA >> 2088 Fall, 2009
kulkarnis86095.pdf
Path: Texas >> KULKARNIS >> 86095 Fall, 2009
chapmanbg60287.pdf
Path: Texas >> CHAPMANBG >> 60287 Fall, 2009
slattonkc78713.pdf
Path: Texas >> SLATTONKC >> 78713 Fall, 2009
michalskylo026.pdf
Path: Texas >> MICHALSKYL >> 026 Fall, 2009
batemanmt33508.pdf
Path: Texas >> BATEMANMT >> 33508 Fall, 2009
lodowskid97061.pdf
Path: Texas >> LODOWSKID >> 97061 Fall, 2009
raichlend29983.pdf
Path: Texas >> RAICHLEND >> 29983 Fall, 2009
perkinsjd44616.pdf
Path: Texas >> PERKINSJD >> 44616 Fall, 2009
mehdiabadinj026.pdf
Path: Texas >> MEHDIABADI >> 026 Fall, 2009
borisovasa86653.pdf
Path: Texas >> BORISOVASA >> 86653 Fall, 2009
Abuhakema504399.pdf
Path: Texas >> ABUHAKEMA >> 504399 Fall, 2009
hw03_solution.doc
Path: Penn State >> ME >> 581 Fall, 2009
oestreichj19588.pdf
Path: Texas >> OESTREICHJ >> 19588 Fall, 2009
evstatieve01477.pdf
Path: Texas >> EVSTATIEVE >> 01477 Fall, 2009
paschvaldesg042.pdf
Path: Texas >> PASCHVALDE >> 042 Fall, 2009
alvaradocg86236.pdf
Path: Texas >> ALVARADOCG >> 86236 Fall, 2009
martinssonpj026.pdf
Path: Texas >> MARTINSSON >> 026 Fall, 2009
makowitza504694.pdf
Path: Texas >> MAKOWITZA >> 504694 Fall, 2009
andersonmw81540.pdf
Path: Texas >> ANDERSONMW >> 81540 Fall, 2009
martinezrs39334.pdf
Path: Texas >> MARTINEZRS >> 39334 Fall, 2009
elshayebta87380.pdf
Path: Texas >> ELSHAYEBTA >> 87380 Fall, 2009
cowmeadowr17589.pdf
Path: Texas >> COWMEADOWR >> 17589 Fall, 2009
schougaardsb029.pdf
Path: Texas >> SCHOUGAARD >> 029 Fall, 2009
kordoskyma87090.pdf
Path: Texas >> KORDOSKYMA >> 87090 Fall, 2009
metcalfets016-x.pdf
Path: Texas >> METCALFETS >> 016 Fall, 2009
bocknackbm84986.pdf
Path: Texas >> BOCKNACKBM >> 84986 Fall, 2009
mahdjoubid26824.pdf
Path: Texas >> MAHDJOUBID >> 26824 Fall, 2009
vanderveenaa029.pdf
Path: Texas >> VANDERVEEN >> 029 Fall, 2009
crabtreejc17037.pdf
Path: Texas >> CRABTREEJC >> 17037 Fall, 2009
steubingdm73657.pdf
Path: Texas >> STEUBINGDM >> 73657 Fall, 2009
johnsonhl692102.pdf
Path: Texas >> JOHNSONHL >> 692102 Fall, 2009
quintopozosd022.pdf
Path: Texas >> QUINTOPOZO >> 022 Fall, 2009
micklerpj516685.pdf
Path: Texas >> MICKLERPJ >> 516685 Fall, 2009
00000011.pdf
Path: Carnegie Mellon >> TERA >> 05102571 Fall, 2009
00000011.pdf
Path: Carnegie Mellon >> DISK >> 05102571 Fall, 2009
strycharskiat042.pdf
Path: Texas >> STRYCHARSK >> 042 Fall, 2009
podorozhnyr48572.pdf
Path: Texas >> PODOROZHNY >> 48572 Fall, 2009
alexandermw25054.pdf
Path: Texas >> ALEXANDERM >> 25054 Fall, 2009
batchelorme80690.pdf
Path: Texas >> BATCHELORM >> 80690 Fall, 2009
franzosajw504611.pdf
Path: Texas >> FRANZOSAJW >> 504611 Fall, 2009
brumbaughms81936.pdf
Path: Texas >> BRUMBAUGHM >> 81936 Fall, 2009
abplanalpbs52539.pdf
Path: Texas >> ABPLANALPB >> 52539 Fall, 2009
notes_05_02.doc
Path: Penn State >> ME >> 481 Fall, 2009
ulloabarbaran022.pdf
Path: Texas >> ULLOABARBA >> 022 Fall, 2009
poppendieckdg026.pdf
Path: Texas >> POPPENDIEC >> 026 Fall, 2009
abelturbyms87316.pdf
Path: Texas >> ABELTURBYM >> 87316 Fall, 2009
adejumobisa73660.pdf
Path: Texas >> ADEJUMOBIS >> 73660 Fall, 2009
mckelveyme504487.pdf
Path: Texas >> MCKELVEYME >> 504487 Fall, 2009
sankaralingamr029.pdf
Path: Texas >> SANKARALIN >> 029 Fall, 2009
santamariarh60629.pdf
Path: Texas >> SANTAMARIA >> 60629 Fall, 2009
ritchiedunhamj022.pdf
Path: Texas >> RITCHIEDUN >> 022 Fall, 2009
19800529.TXT
Path: Penn State >> BUB >> 1980 Fall, 2009
malachowskil62902.pdf
Path: Texas >> MALACHOWSK >> 62902 Fall, 2009
schwartzkopfwc029.pdf
Path: Texas >> SCHWARTZKO >> 029 Fall, 2009
loveelharimj66305.pdf
Path: Texas >> LOVEELHARI >> 66305 Fall, 2009
ruizpalaciosd18663.pdf
Path: Texas >> RUIZPALACI >> 18663 Fall, 2009