Page 89 - Maryland Historical Trust - Archaeology Colonial MD

itarian wares remain, presumably for household production, reflecting the decreased practice of bulk processing in dwellings proper.56
The trend toward the removal of plantation laborers to separate quarters began early in Mary- land, at least among the elite. As previously noted, Thomas Cornwallis’ Cross Manor appears to have been a clear colonial manifestation of that trend (see figure 3). The early quarter at St. John’s (see figure 2) and the mid-century “quartering howse” at St. Clement’s Manor suggest that the segre- gation of labor from planter’s dwellings was well underway at least by 1650 if not before. All three of these plantations, however, were owned by members of the colonial elite, and recent research has indicated that there was considerable varia- tion between social groups in the adoption of these trends. The disappearance of lobby entranc- es may make sense for middling planters who are directly responsible for the supervision of their labor force. For men like Charles Calvert and Thomas Notley, whose dwellings went up after Patuxent Point, overseers and other supervisors allowed these men to remain in rooms behind unheated lobby entrances.
Moving laborers and their “messy” activities
to subsidiary buildings was one way of reinforcing social and, increasingly, racial identity. Meanwhile, the planter’s dwelling — its organization of space and its furnishings — reinforced English identi- ty even as “English” identity was perhaps better considered “colonial” identity. Historian Joyce Chaplin described an “almost hysterical” anxiety on the part of the English that their interactions with indigenous people (and Africans) might ren- der them as “savages.” This belief was grounded in understandings that using Native goods might actually render an Englishman Native. The segre- gation of spaces for laborers and for their activities as a way of reinforcing status and identity makes sense. Brick chimneys, wooden floors, glazed win- dows, and plastered interiors created cleaner, drier, warmer/cooler, and safer spaces (safe from fire). Brick was the holy grail, but a number of hous- es sported wooden floors and glazed windows. Upholstered furniture, fancy table glass, imported gin and wine, mirrors, “landskip” and other wall hangings — these were the objects that denoted an Englishman or woman.57
Still, care must be taken to see more than “English” or “non-English” identity. Confes- sional identity was also important, although the
figure 31
Cufflinks and dividers, Patuxent Point (18CV271).
87
PHOTOGRAPH BY JULIA A. KING, COURTESY OF THE MARYLAND ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION LABORATORY.