As part of the class’s public archaeology projects, a group of six of us headed to the Old Court House in New Castle to present at the Colonial Delaware Symposium on Saturday, May 14^th. Our presentation involved a brief introduction at the court house and then an onsite tour at the George Read House site. The chronology of the presentation consisted of a discussion of the historical research and details of the water lot, transit work such as mapping, surveying, and setting up the grid, the GPR and STP findings as well as stratigraphy, soils, and chronology, an artifact display, and details of the north lot. Our program was the last presentation of the day, when we were very grateful that the rain had subsided.

Brielle started our presentation by discussing historical research and the water lot. She discussed different documents for research such as deeds, probate records, wills, tax documents, census information, and maps. She discussed the individual value of these documents. Next she discussed the history of the water lot at the George Read site. She discussed the chronology of men and women who owned the water lot and the different shore lines through time.

Eleanor was up next, and she discussed the transit. Her main point was that archaeology is more than just digging in the field and “treasure hunting”. Accuracy and precision are key aspects of fieldwork. Mapping and surveying the land must first be done to achieve this acuity. As far as the details of the transit go, Eleanor talked about the use of the stadia rod and mapping and surveying techniques. She concluded by stating the significance of the transit overall which is to achieve an accurate sample of the site.

Fallon talked about the GPR survey and findings, which was interesting to observe since Peter Leach, who did the GPR at the north and water lots, was in the audience. She discussed what we learned from the GPR, what and where the GPR found, what was actually found, and what this might mean overall. The audience was very intrigued by this method of archaeology.

The last member of our group to present in the court house was Emily, who discussed the north lot and conclusions. Because the north lot was excavated fairly recently, she mentioned that we only started excavating a few weeks ago. Just as Brielle discussed the historical research in relation to the water lot, Emily did the same for the north lot. She also discussed how we laid out the grid so that we could begin excavating and mentioned GPR anomalies. In her powerpoint, she included pictures of the GPR survey Another aspect of her presentation was comparing the north with the water lot in terms of artifacts and soil type. She concluded by expressing her gratitude for being part of this experience.

The onsite tour started at the water lot, where Colleen discussed the STPs. She chose a sample of STPs to discuss such as the GPR anomalies and some where some really interesting artifacts were found. She discussed our method of excavating, interesting aspects of the individual STPs, and the reason for closing depths. In the water lot specifically, she mentioned the significance of the 1804 shoreline and the house that one stood there. Then the group moved to the north lot where Colleen discussed the structure of the back section. Individuals in the group who actually excavated in the STP commented as well.

The last section of the presentation was the artifact display and discussion which was presented by Rebecca Cruz. The audience was very interested in observing the artifacts and they frequently asked questions. There were a total of eight artifacts to display, including ceramic, pottery, building remains, and faunal remains. The artifacts were a ceramic sherd, a broken bottle, vertebrae, pottery sherds, a piece of schist, brick, and an oyster shell. There was a variety from both the north and water lot. Rebecca discussed the significance and context of the artifacts in relation to the George Read House owners.

The audience casually viewed the STPs and the artifact display in the north lot for awhile, but soon it was time to end the presentation. Every member of the group did a wonderful job in presenting their part of what we learned in the field course, especially with the debatable weather. The audience learned more about the specifics of fieldwork, while also learning about the lifeways of the people of Colonial Delaware in relation to the Read House. I am sure the audience was pleased with our information and findings and will look forward to more excavation and research done on the site.