The 3rd day out in the field, March 25th, was exciting for both the morning and the afternoon groups! The morning group had their first day actually digging in the STPs and they were very excited to get their hands dirty. As for the afternoon group, some pretty spectacular finds were unearthed that caught everyone’s attention. Our efforts over the past few weeks are starting to pay dividends as we can now see notable progress. Most of the STPs are 1 to 2 feet deep at this point and a couple soil changes have been noted. These are consistent with the other STPs.
The morning group worked on some of the existing STPs in addition to opening up some new ones. Fallon and Marissa were one of the pairs that started fresh, they found that the soil layers changed noticeably, and worked all the way down to the fourth level! They uncovered artifacts from every category and noted that the consistency in which they found some of the artifacts, such as coal and clinker led them to question whether or not there was a building on the property at some point.
Continuing off of the morning group’s progress, the afternoon group went straight to work. We broke up into pairs and were each assigned to a hole, with one group rotating to help Dr. De Cunzo with the transit. This time we were measuring the distance between STPs, but nonetheless it was still very difficult and nearly impossible to get them to match up. It was definitely a rewarding experience however, bringing to light yet again how important it is to accurately map out our site.
Friday’s excavation yielded some pretty marvelous finds! Starting with Darcy and Rebecca who found a piece of feather-edged pottery, which was white with blue decoration. It is most likely from the mid-19th century! Excavated from the STP which I was working on was a tiny red toy plane! It is believed to be made of lead and most likely from the mid 1900s. The plane had the word Japan written on it very small letters. The first feature of the site was found by Kate and Colleen! This was recorded in multiple pictures. As they dug into the feature they found that deeper and deeper the feature turned into two smaller, separate holes. In one of them they found a ton of objects; coal, glass, ceramics, and sea shell.
I think it is easy to say that we had a pretty successful day! It was interesting to see the soil layers start to match up throughout the STPs, and the artifacts corresponding to the soil layers. I can’t wait to see what we’ll uncover next!

Our second day in the field, March 18^th, was another great learning experience for everyone. The weather was beautiful, considering the chill that we experienced a few weeks ago.  Everyone was very excited to get back into the field after a day of learning how to correctly clean and label artifacts the week before, and we were not disappointed with the various projects and jobs we worked on.

We were joined by Peter Leach of John Milner Associates, who introduced us firsthand to Ground Penetrating Radar. While we did read up on the process in preparation for Friday’s fieldwork, many of us had never seen or used GPR firsthand. Emily, Marissa, Ashley and Elanor of the morning group helped Peter to lay out the survey grid of the North and Water Lots. Both groups were able to use the GPR unit to view the different features of the Water and North Lots. We were able to identify the drop off of the original 1800s era shoreline as well as what may be the foundations of a stone building, if the GPR survey matches with the various property and insurance maps that we have found in our research of the Read House properties. The afternoon group found the GPR system to be absolutely fascinating. While the afternoon group was viewing the North Lot, an older woman who lives on the property behind the North Lot stopped by to say hello and inquire about our project. We were more than happy to share our observations with her. This is just one example of the various ways that we are able to engage the community in our project and historical preservation. The GPR surveys were definitely one of the highlights of the semester thus far. After we finished working with the GPR unit, we were able to go to the roof of the Read House and see the properties and Historic New Castle from a new perspective. Friday was a perfect day for this and the view was absolutely breathtaking.

The morning group worked in setting up the transit in the Garden of the Read House. As I myself experienced on our first day in the field, they found that our transit is not the easiest to work with. However, it did pique an interest in a few people to read up more on transits in order to better understand why we use them in our work. Later that afternoon, Chrissy and Christine also worked to level the transit, which they also found frustrating. However, we all look at our frustrating experiences as good learning experiences.

In addition to this, Andrea worked with Fallon in the morning and Rebecca and Leah in the afternoon to map and sketch the brick wall of the front of the North Lot that faces the Strand. They took measurements of the wall and mapped its outline while taking scale sketches of the wall’s profile. We are considering creating a visual map that shows the wall via pictures as well as a second, basic drawing of the wall, perhaps with a color coding system of some sort to make interpretations of the different layers and additions easier to future researchers.

Of course, everyone was ecstatic to dig. Of the afternoon group, Chelsea and Mickey, Kate and Darcy, and Caroline and I worked on excavating more of the three test pits that were started in the Water Lot on March 4^th. Kate and Darcy had to even out the bottom surface of their pit before continuing through level 2 of their pit. Around 5.5 inches deep, they noticed their soil was beginning to change color and so stopped, made notes and measurements and closed out their layer before bringing the soil to be sifted. While sifting, they found mostly rocks and coal pieces, but did find a type of battery core. They placed it in a labeled artifact bag before packing up for the day. Caroline and I had our first digging experience with our test pit. We also evened out our test pit before measuring the depth and beginning our excavation. We closed our level at around .6 feet and took our soil to be sifted. We found a metal tack, a metal nail, pieces of brick and coal. We also uncovered what we believe is the top of a brick, but did not have time to completely uncover it before the day was finished.

All in all, everyone is having an amazing time working on the excavation project and I for one am looking forward to this coming Friday to do more work on the project.

During our first week of research, students experienced many challenges in searching for and locating primary source information on the first owners of the North and Water lots.  While many repositories contain land records for New Castle County on the 17^th and 18^th centuries, their organization and formatting makes finding information somewhat difficult, especially for those unfamiliar with the historical research process.  Knowing where to begin the search for information also proved frustrating for many students.  At the end of the week, however, each group had uncovered important clues to the history of the sites and their owners, as well as devised a number of questions for future research.

For the earliest period of our sites, 1650-1680, students were unable to find specific documentation of ownership, or other land record relating to the property.  They did, however, find helpful information on the beginnings of the New Castle County community.  This information traced the town’s origins through Dutch, Swedish and English ownership, detailing how land was granted, and what types of structures early settlers built near the river.  While some sources report that those settling along Front Street would have had an unobstructed view of the water, it is unclear if the bank lots were truly vacant at this time.  All that is certain is that they were not officially granted to settlers before the 1680s.  On the opposite side of the Strand, Penn began to assign plots in 1701 … on condition that within seven years … a good wrarg (?) on (the) plot would meanwhile improve the land.” Eckman (1947b).  Thus, most of the English and Welsh who settled in the area came “not so much to settle in the village as to take up land along the river and bay” (p 13). Dutch missionaries Dankers and Sluyter wrote about New Castle in 1679, “Most of the English, and many others, have their houses made of nothing but clapboards, … not usually laid so close together as to prevent you from sticking a finger between them. … When is cold and windy the best people plaster them with clay.”

The students focusing on the period from 1680 to 1730 selected the Water Lot as their primary target for initial research. While documentation was present for the owners of the Water Lot during the late 17^th and early 18^th centuries, primary sources were difficult to locate and decipher.  In addition, the same individuals listed as owning the property were involved in many transactions from the late 1600’s to the early 1700’s, and their names show up on multiple deeds.  While this might be helpful in indicating something of their economic status, and/or the size of the Water Lot during this period, it made it hard to tell if the tracts of land discussed in the documents were the ones in which we were interested.  The most relevant source found was a document indicating a period transaction between the French and Donaldson families in the New Castle County Deeds Records.

From the period of 1720 to 1770, few documents were located that were immediately legible.  In the Orphan’s Court Records, for instance,  David French’s name appears during the correct time period.  This requires further research in order to gauge the importance of the information.  John Finney appears in the  New Castle County Deed Records multiple times within the time frame 1734-1771, but none of the grantee names fit with our preliminary chain of title.  Again, further research is required in order to tell whether the “correct” information is yet to be located, or if our chain of title is flawed.

Research on the early period of the North and Water Lots concluded with a group of students looking for information on the sites from  1760 to 1790 .  The Delaware Historical Society’s online archive as well as the Delaware Public Archives proved helpful in this effort.  Students were able to find information regarding the Maxwell family, of whom George and Gertrude Read I were tenants.   Students found documentation listing Joseph Tatlow as an esquire on Ancestrylibrary.com, and that Thomas Clark’s full name was actually Thomas Clark Janvier.  This might help in future research.  Unfortunately, there was little to no information recovered on Clark or William Aull and there is still some ambiguity pertaining to the dates in which the North Lot property went from Joseph Tatlow to Aull.

Recurrent Challenges:

During the first week of intense research on the North and Water Lots, each group experienced a number of challenges.  For many of us, these roadblocks included deciphering 17^th and 18^th century handwriting, using microfilm, and the seemingly nonsensical organization of period records.  In addition, vocabulary seemed to pose several questions when interpreting the documents we were able to locate.

Lessons Learned for Future Research:

1. Constantly review all readily available information.  You do not have to reinvent the wheel!
2. Eckman and other early researchers produced work that is very useful.  However, in some cases, newer, more accurate data is available.  Always review your sources.
3. When searching through record books on microfilm, begin with the indices reel in order to save time and effort.
4. Some sources may not be appropriate for certain time frames. For example, newspapers and Orphan’s Court Records for the late 17^th and 18^th centuries yielded no useful information.  Keep relevant dates in mind.
5. Look for information on family members of persons of interest if an initial search fails to turn up any information.

Special Notes:

On Special Collections at the University of Delaware’s Morris Library: The collections give little information about Dr. John Finney, Thomas Clark, Joseph Tatlow, William Aull, or George Read I pertaining to their late 18^th century land holdings on the North and Water Lot sites.  One book regarding these owners is currently missing.

On Dr. John Finney:  M.Film s334 Reel 2 and Reel 7 contains deeds that may be informative.

The afternoon (1-4pm) group’s first day in the field was exciting and fruitful. The opportunity to finally practice what we’ve learned in the classroom over the years to benefit and enrich Old New Castle’s ‘story’ is an honor. The morning group did an excellent job of preparing and setting-up for the work our archaeologists did. They set up the equipment, completed site photography, and began site mapping.

We met with De Cunzo and had a short briefing on the day’s plan, goals, and the progress, and frustrations, of our historical research. The first group wrapped-up with almost all the site mapping done except for the East North Lot. Myself and three other early-bird arrivals completed the mapping of site with that final area. Andrea supervised while the rest of us took turns mapping and measuring. One of us was mapping in site features while the other two used measuring tapes to take precise measurements of the features. The many trees in this area made precise measuring difficult; it was hard to get a straight level measuring line with branches in the way of the tape, but we did our best.

While we were finishing up the site mapping another group was again working with the transit to make sure the site grid was accurate and so we could begin working with the shovel test-pits. Apparently this was a trying task and getting the transit to be level was difficult. The third group was split up into pairs that began laying out the shovel test-pits or beginning to excavate previously existing ones from the morning group. All the shovel test pits and excavations we began were on the water lot. When our group finished mapping we joined those beginning to excavate the shovel test pits and screening the dirt. The top-soil sod layer proved to be the most difficult, it was hard to screen and we had to be very careful not to miss any artifacts that might be tangled in the roots. During the screening the team already had one local approach with his dog to check out our progress and give some encouragement to the group and the project. That was really nice to know the community’s supportive of the project and is already interested in our work and New Castle’s story. Two of the excavating pairs found artifacts in the second level of soil. Myself and Chelsea found a few tiny pieces of brick and a tiny piece of glass, and I believe brick was also discovered in the other pair’s excavated soil. The artifacts were bagged and properly labeled and taken back to the lab to be cleaned and processed the following Friday.

The end of the first field day felt great. Collectively our team accomplished a lot and now we’re really ready to ‘dig-in’ for this coming field day. I, personally, remember the smell of dirt as I was heading home and really feeling excited about the project. It’ll be a wonderful journey to see what tales Old New Castle has buried beneath its surface.

On Friday, March 4, the morning group was bright-eyed and bushy tailed, ready to begin the first day of field work. We had a short briefing with Dr. De Cunzo about the plan for the morning work and what we hoped to accomplish. The group was divided into 3 groups – according to task. One group (where I worked) assembled the transit and began establishing a grid with Dr. De Cunzo, another group worked with Andrea and mapped the North and Water lots, while another group worked with Julie to do site photography.

Assembling and balancing the transit proved to be a very painstaking process. Emily, Ashley and I had quite a task ahead of us. We had to be very careful so as not to damage the equipment, but also to ensure that our measurements would be as precise as possible. We had to adjust the legs of the tripod, turn all sorts of wheels and knobs to level transit itself and then the scope. Precision here is very important because an unbalanced transit or off-level scope could give inaccurate readings for the grid. After the transit was properly set up, Emily and Dr De Cunzo worked with me to establish a primary datum point along the southwest wall of the Read House. Our zero point was the west corner of the house – furthest from the Strand. We measured along the southwest wall to determine the length from the west corner to the south corner. We used a measuring tape in Engineering scale (feet and tenths of feet) to measure horizontal distances and a meter stick to measure elevation. Emily and I worked closely together with laying the grid. I looked through the scope to where she was standing with the meter stick, we had to line up perfectly so I could take an accurate measurement. We marked points in 25 foot intervals across the water lot – Emily holding the meter stick for elevation, and Ashley pulling the tape and marking and flagging the points.  The distances and elevations were recorded at each point by Dr. De Cunzo, Ashley and Kitty. These points will be the starting points for Shovel Test Pits (STPs)

Andrea’s group, Marissa, Clay and Michael used Engineering tape to measure out the Water and North lots. They created scale drawings of each lot, indicating boundaries and other features. These maps will be used continuously through the rest of our archaeological investigation to mark STPs, and other excavation points.

The third group, working with Julie, was Kitty, Fallon and Brielle – Ashley worked a bit with this group also. They walked the North and Water lots taking photographs at different points on the sites. Black and white, color slide, and digital cameras were used – Dr. De Cunzo explained the different uses of each type of camera. Black and White film is used because it preserves the best, according to archivists. Digital cameras have obvious applications in our current age of technology but many curators and archivists are unsure about the future of digital records and how they will be stored. About 40 photographs were taken with each camera.  Information about each image was recorded by Kitty and Ashley, this information included: date taken, photograph number, film canister number (if applicable), facing direction (N, S, etc.), and a short description of the area. Photograph locations were selected so as to best capture the current conditions of each site – pre-excavation.

Despite the frigid wind blowing from the Delaware River, we had a very productive first day in the field.

Our first week of historical research on the Read House, gardens, and water lot was approached from many different directions. Yet, surprisingly, these many different approaches seem to have been performed by everyone, no matter their time period of study.
Most of us started out on the internet, searching Google or delCAT for anything of relevance. In some instances, individuals were able to find online documents pertaining to their time period, such as wills of the owners. However, delCAT seemed to yield more promising results. When search terms were entered into the system, primary and secondary sources were listed. Theses from former University of Delaware students, such as Michele Anstine, and others were found within the system, giving us researchers some interesting information. Many of the primary sources, however, were located in Special Collections. This is where many of the group’s turned to next.
In Special Collections, one group was able to find Records of the Court of New Castle, in which they found mentions of individuals from their time period. Another group also found a small booklet describing some of the renovations and history behind the Read House.
The next logical step for many people was to try and locate the deeds relating to their time periods. The media center in the bottom floor of the University of Delaware Library has a microform section in which many of the deeds pertaining to New Castle before 1850 can be found. Once a microform attendant was available, students were able to find the correct reels for the deeds they were searching for. It seems that some had a hard time figuring out how to search through a reel, but it also seems that they hope to look at them again with a fresh pair of eyes. Perseverance is definitely the key in this situation. Some individuals stated that the handwriting is almost illegible and also that the microform machines can make you a little dizzy and queasy.
There were a few different reactions posted up on our class blog this week. Some felt that the week was not too successful. Whatever the case, it is apparent by reading the research plans and ambitions for the upcoming weeks that we will not give up any time soon!