It’s the most wonderful time of the year! There’ll be dirt out for screening, ceramics for cleaning, and lots of good cheer…. Okay, sorry, that might be a little too far. But it is a super exciting part of the year here at Ferry Farm, George Washington’s Boyhood Home. We have officially started this summer’s dig season!
Building off of the previous two years’ exploration of the kitchen site, we are revisiting the 18th-century kitchen cellar again this year. While last year’s dig focused on locating and exposing the kitchen’s stone wall foundations, our focus this year will be excavating the fill within the cellar walls that had been deposited as a result of a fire sometime in the 1740s. The fire caused the building to collapse in on itself, filling the cellar space with ash and debris.
Excavating sites like this are very exciting because they represent preserved moments in time, leaving the possibility to find artifacts left in situ or in place, when the fire occurred. It is likely that most of the artifacts excavated will have evidence of the extreme heat caused by the fire. Toasty artifacts from the 2023 preliminary kitchen exploration have been washed and catalogued, showing damage to artifacts, such as glass bottles and ceramic storage vessels, ranging from being slightly charred and burnt to being completely melted. Toasty or not, these artifacts will help us nail down the date of the fire and what was being stored in the kitchen cellar when it went up in flames.
18thc kitchen cellar fill area within stone foundation to be excavated this seasonPortion of burnt cellar fill uncovered during the 2023 excavation season.
Our 18th-century kitchen, unfortunately, lies beneath the foundations of two farmhouses with full cellars dating from the 19th and 20th centuries. The construction of these homes severely impacted the kitchen structure and its burnt cellar fill, making it difficult for our archaeologists to accurately interpret the kitchen’s architectural features. A small portion of the kitchen cellar fill was also the subject of previous archaeological excavations in the 1990s, so we are not the first team to sample the fill. But in the interest of site preservation, the kitchen remnants were covered over twenty-five years ago with protective geofabric, and the farmhouse cellars backfilled completely with sand.
Luckily, we had the help of an excavator at the beginning of this season to remove the five feet of protective sand covering the kitchen cellar fill so we could get to the fun stuff sooner! But our fun isn’t restricted to the cellar, as we still have multiple 5” x 5” units around the outside of the kitchen foundations to investigate. Our team is still trying to locate the midden (trash deposits) and fireplace associated with the kitchen, as well as additional architectural evidence that would give an idea of the overall form and dimensions of the complete kitchen structure.
Excavator carefully removing the sand covering the cellar fill under the watchful eye of GWF archaeologists. The concrete wall foundations seen in the photo are the remnants of the 1914 farmhouse built atop the kitchen foundation. Exposing the cellar fill
Every excavation year brings new and exciting finds as we sift through thousands of years of site habitation. Come visit us while we dig weekdays from opening until 3:30 pm through July 11th. Hope to see you there!
On July 22, 1942, Annie Fleming Smith wrote a letter. Smith was a prolific letter writer—her innumerable missives had helped raise the funds that saved Kenmore two decades earlier—so it is not surprising that she put pen to paper on that summer day. What is surprising is that the intended recipient of that letter was not a prospective donor, a fellow regent of the Kenmore Association, or a friend. Instead, she addressed her epistle to Frank Knox, the Secretary of the Navy. Smith wanted “confirmation of the fact of the naming of the U.S.S. KENMORE” after the home and “any other information you can release” about the ship.[1]
Letter that Annie Fleming Smith sent to Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox asking for confirmation that the first USS Kenmore had been named after the historic home. Smith, Annie Fleming to Frank Knox, July 22, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.
Although there is no record that Knox responded to Smith (there was, after all, a war on), the USS Kenmore was, in fact, named for the historic estate. The Naval History and Heritage Command ship-naming file on Kenmore I (AP-62) includes an April 13, 1942, memo to the Secretary of the Navy from the chief of the Bureau of Navigation and prepared by Louis Emil Denfeld, then assistant chief of the Bureau of Navigation, recommending that the President Madison be renamed Kenmore, in honor of the “[h]ome of Betty Washington at Fredericksburg, Virginia, sister of George Washington who married Col Fielding Lewis.”[2] The recommendation was approved on April 16 of that year, and the newly renamed vessel was “commissioned at Baltimore, Md., on 5 August 1942, Cmdr. Myron T. Richardson in command.”[3]
USS Kenmore (AP-62) on trials in the Chesapeake Bay on August 14, 1942. Shipscribe
Smith had learned of the ship during a mid-1942 visit to the estate from Lt. Commander William VanC. Brandt (USNR) of the Kenmore, who later wrote to “Miss Annie” to thank her for her hospitality.[4] “All the Officers of the Kenmore,” Brandt told Smith, “were most interested in learning the history and record of the beautiful estate for which our ship is named.”[5] Brandt planned to have framed and displayed in the ship’s wardroom photographs of the property given to him by Smith; later, the vessel’s captain requested a picture of the house for his room.[6] For her part, Smith was “thrilled” to meet Brandt and “to know about your ship,” although she was skeptical enough of the origin of the transport’s new name to write Knox.[7]
The Arlington National Cemetery headstone of William VanC. Brandt, from whom Annie Fleming Smith learned that a Navy ship had been named after the historic home she had helped save from development in the 1920s.
The Kenmore operated primarily in the Pacific until September 1943; she was then converted into a hospital ship and renamed Refuge.[8] The Navy must have liked the name Kenmore, as it was bestowed in October 1943 on another transport, originally called the James H. McClintock.[9]The Kenmore II also served in the Pacific Theater and, after “hostilities ended on 15 August 1945, [began] returning veterans to the U.S.”[10] She was decommissioned on February 1, 1946.[11]
USS Refuge (AH-11), formerly the Kenmore (AP-62), photographed in February 1944 in Baltimore after her conversion from transport to hospital ship. Shipscribe.The second USS Kenmore (AK-221, ex AP-162) in San Francisco Bay around December 1945. Shipscribe.
The Kenmores were not the only vessels named for properties associated with George Washington and his family. The Wakefield (AP-21) borrowed its name from the Westmoreland County birthplace of the first president, today owned by the National Park Service.[12] There have been five Mount Vernons; the first was built in 1859 and chartered by the Navy two years later, before they bought it later that year.[13] The most recent vessel named after Washington’s residence and plantation was a dock landing ship commissioned in 1972 and decommissioned in 2003.[14] The possible birthplace of Mary Ball, George Washington’s mother, lent its name to the Epping Forest, a dock landing ship launched in 1943.[15]
The monikers of other ships are connected more tenuously to places tied to George Washington and his family. For example, a 1943 submarine chaser was rechristened the Abingdon in 1956.[16] The vessel’s new name came from the town of Abingdon, in Washington County, Virginia (named, yes, for George Washington).[17] According to the county’s official history, “myths claim that [the town] was named for Martha Washington’s ancestral home” in England.[18] While this may be a false etymology, were those who named the ship drawing on the tale when they chose to call the vessel Abingdon? Additionally, the many Arlingtons that have served the Navy over the years have each been named after Arlington County, which draws its appellation from Arlington House, built for George Washington Parke Custis, the step-grandson of his celebrated namesake.[19]
Arlington Mansion was built by George Washington Parke Custis. Union soldiers posing on the lawn, June 28, 1864.
The Navy’s infatuation with the commander in chief of the Continental Army has, of course, also been expressed by naming ships directly after Washington and his family, not just their properties. While a complete inventory of such vessels is beyond the scope of this post, it is worth noting that four ships have been named the George Washington, including CVN-73, an active nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, while several others have sailed under just his surname.[20] Martha, George’s wife and the nation’s first first lady, has inspired the names of at least two Navy ships: the Lady Washington and the Martha Washington.[21] Civilian shipbuilders have also found inspiration in the Washington family: the SS Mary Ball was a liberty ship active during World War II.[22]
U.S.S. George Washington in Yokosuka, Japan in 2008. Four boats shared the name “Lady Washington.” The first was commissioned by the Continental Congress in 1776.USS Martha Washington inbound to Hampton Roads, Virginia, from Brest, France, 1918.
Who was responsible for naming these ships? As hinted at above, while final authority for ship names was (and still is) the responsibility of the Secretary of the Navy, during World War II, it was the Bureau of Navigation (renamed the Bureau of Personnel on May 21, 1942) that researched and recommend ship names based on the traditional naming conventions associated with each class of vessels.[23]
Typically, it was dock landing ships, or LSDs, that were named for “cities and places of historical interest of same name, or places of historical interest only.” [24]Epping Forest, Gunston Hall I (named for George Mason’s home), Ashland (for the boyhood home of Henry Clay), Carter Hall (after the Virginia estate), Oak Hill (for the home of President James Monroe), and Shadwell (for the birthplace of Thomas Jefferson) are all examples of LSDs whose names aligned with this convention.[25]
But the Kenmores, the Mount Vernon IV, and the Wakefield were not LSDs; they were transports, classified AP, and anyone seeking consistency in the Navy’s naming of troop transports during World War II is bound to be disappointed. Some vessels in the AP class were named after celestial bodies, others after Revolutionary War heroes, and others, as we have seen, after historic estates.
Dang it, Ben, you had one rule.One of the original six frigates whose construction was authorized by the Naval Act of 1794.
This lack of consistency is not surprising. After all, when Benjamin Stoddert named the Navy’s sixth ship, a frigate, he chose to call it the Chesapeake, despite President George Washington’s agreement with the recommendation that frigates be named after “principles or symbols found in the US Constitution.” Therefore, “the very first naming decision by the very first Secretary of the Navy resulted in the ‘corruption’ of the established naming convention.”[26] This tradition of flexibility regarding ship names has endured, and ship names continue to excite interest (and occasionally strong feelings) from many parties, including those who propose denominations for new vessels. If you are such a person, here’s an idea: how about another Kenmore, or maybe a Ferry Farm?
Adam Nubbe
Manager of School & Youth Programs
[1] Smith, Annie Fleming to Frank Knox, July 22, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.
[2] Naval History and Heritage Command, Kenmore I, ship-naming file, April 13, 1942.
There once stood a large horse chestnut tree on the corner of Fauquier and Charles Street in Fredericksburg. It was noted as one of the thirteen legendary Washington horse chestnut trees planted by George himself. By the 1930s, it was becoming clear that the tree needed some help, so the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) took up the cause to protect this historic tree.
Washington’s Horse Chestnut TreeGroup of ladies and small child posing in front of horse chestnut tree, ca. 1930s
The tree legend states that George, while visiting his mother in June 1788 in Fredericksburg, decided to plant thirteen horse chestnut trees from her house to his sister’s house, Kenmore, just a few blocks away. This provided a scenic path for his mother when she visited her daughter Betty. These trees commemorated the thirteen original states.
Mary Washington’s House, c. 1930sAmerica’s Historic Horse-Chestnut TreeMap showing the distance between Mary Washington’s house and Kenmore…following the potential path of the horse chestnut trees.
It is a great story. It is patriotic and nostalgic, showing George as a man of the earth with his love of trees, gardening, and horticulture. He planted these trees for a future America to remember the struggles to create this country and the precious nature of our land that we must protect. But is it true? Did George plant that tree? What is the evidence?
The horse chestnut tree is a native of the Balkans region (Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, and Northern Macedonia). It made its way to Europe and England during the seventeenth century, noted as growing in South Lambeth, London, and being planted by Sir Christopher Wren at Hampton Court.
Horse chestnut trees Bush Park, Hampton Court, England planted by Christopher Wren in 1669-1670.
There is documented evidence of some horse chestnut trees crossing the Atlantic to Mr. John Bartram, one of America’s first botanists in the 1740s. In a letter from Peter Collinson, an English botanist, dated September 16, 1741, he wrote to Bartram, “I have sent some Horse-Chestnuts which are ripe earlier than usual; hope they will come fit for planting.”. Bartram acknowledged receiving them and stated that most were blue-molded, and only one germinated and grew. Over twenty years later, Bartram updated Callison on the success of the lone seedling, writing, “But what delights me is that our horse chestnut has flowered. I think it must excel in America.”
Letter from Royal Parks and Gardens, Hampton Court, May 24 1936
Bartram’s Gardens in Philadelphia was quite popular and visited by many founding fathers while working there. George visited the gardens twice in the summer of 1787 while in the town during the Constitutional Convention, noting, “Sunday, June 10, 1787, breakfasted at Mr. Powell’s and in company with him rid to see the Botanical Gardens of Mr. Bartram, which, though stored with many curious plants, shrubs, and trees, many of which are exotics, was not laid off with much taste, nor was it large.”
John Bartram’s house and upper garden at Bartram’s Garden
Why mention this? In some versions of the story, Washington got his horse chestnut trees from this garden, but there is no evidence that the legendary trees were obtained from this famous historic garden. George only made two diary entries about horse chestnut trees on April 13, 1785, writing, “Received from Col. Henry Lee of Westmoreland 12 horse chestnut trees (small) and an equal number of tree boxes. They appeared to have been some time out of the ground. Planted 4 of the Chestnuts on my serpentine walk – two on the east end and the rest in the vineyard.” And again, on April 2, 1788, wrote, “Transplanted from a box in the garden, thirteen plants of the horse chestnut into shrubberies by the garden walls.”
Fruit Garden and nursery at Mount VernonSmall botanical garden at Mount VernonUpper garden at Mount Vernon
The entry shows evidence of planting the famous Washington trees, right? No, because George was at Mount Vernon in April and didn’t leave for Fredericksburg to visit his mother until June 10, 1788.
But could he have had them sent down and have them planted before he came to see his mother? Yes, but the story says that George planted these trees with his own hand. Additionally, it would be odd for George to mention planting the trees while in residence at Mount Vernon and not say that they were in his mother’s garden in Fredericksburg. Washington was a diligent diarist but never mentioned planting thirteen horse chestnut trees in his mother’s garden.
Mary Washington’s house gardens, Fredericksburg.
Further, no known letters from George, Mary, or Betty mention any horse chestnut trees between Mary’s gardens and Betty’s Kenmore.
Spring time in the gardens at Kenmore Plantation (can you spot the cat?)
This was all the primary source evidence I could find relating to George and any horse chestnut trees. So, I looked further into the story to see what other evidence was being used to verify that this tree was indeed one of the thirteen Washington trees.
As I said in the beginning, by the 1930s, many, including the DAR, were trying hard to save this lone surviving chestnut tree. With their extensive reach, they got Fred H. Arnold, the Assistant Forester for the National Park Service, to do an age-determination test on the tree in May of 1934. Mr. Arnold noted some issues with the test, stating that the lower twelve feet of the tree was filled with concrete, so the coring sample had to be taken above this “repaired defect”. Even then, a complete coring sample could not be extracted due to decay in the interior of the main stem. Additionally, Mr. Arnold said that it was very difficult to count the annual rings due to their obscurity because the texture difference between the springwood and summerwood for the horse chestnut tree (genus Aesculus) is very slight. Taking into account all this, Mr. Arnold estimated the tree to be around 139 years old with as much as 10% in error, either plus or minus, which would put the date it was planted somewhere between 1781 and 1809, which means that the tree is indeed old and could have been planted during Washington’s time in Fredericksburg.
Age Determination, May 6 1934
Lastly, local historian James Henry Heron collected local citizens’ recollections of the tree and the story. Mrs. Lilias Hamilton Scott, the wife of Mr. John Scott, who owned the lot on which the tree stands, wrote that her grandmother (Mrs. Janet Scott Hamilton) stated her great-grandmother (Mrs. Francis Scott) resided in Fredericksburg in 1788 and was Mary Washington’s neighbor and intimate friend. She said the trees were planted by Washington.
Letter from Mrs. Lilias Hamilton Scott, January 10 1934Letter from Mrs. Vivian (Emily) Fleming Smith, January 20 1933Letter from Mrs. Alice Ashby Coghill, January 10 1934Letter from PV Daniel, January 1- 1934
Mrs. Vivian Minor Fleming traces the story back to Miss Lou Carruthers, her sister Mrs. Davis, and their grandfather Rev. S.B. Wilson’s housekeeper, Mrs. Polly Skelton, who had previously been a housekeeper for Mary. Mr. P.V. Daniel, who remembers five of the original thirteen trees, lived across the street from the remaining one for over sixty years and said Miss Anna Wilson, granddaughter of Rev. S.B. Wilson, told him the story. Mrs. Alice Ashby Coghill says her aunt, Mrs. James Hipkin Dickinson, who lived at Mary Washington House after Rev. S.B. Wilson said Washington planted the trees and passed out horse chestnuts to friends. While I have no doubt these people are truthful in their recollections, they do not offer any definite evidence. They merely document that the legend was a well-known story but not that it was true.
Regardless, the much-loved old tree was rightfully given proper emergency care with a donation and service from Senator Martin L. Davey from Ohio and The Davey Tree Expert Company. The famous tree lived happily for over another half century before being taken down in 2004.
The Last of the Thirteen Horse Chestnut Trees postcard, ca. 1930sWashington’s horse chestnut tree being removed, 2004
Whether this tree was planted by George along with twelve others will probably never be conclusively proven. Were the people wrong to save the tree all those years ago without better evidence? Absolutely not. They saved a beautiful 200-year-old horse chestnut tree with a legendary attachment to George Washington, but they also saved a bit of their own past, nostalgia, and pride in their own town’s history.
October just happens to be Virginia Archaeology Month, and what better way to celebrate than to recap this summer’s excavation at George Washington’s Boyhood Home at Ferry Farm.
You might remember from our dig preview, that this year’s dig (FF-44) focused on the continued exploration of the 18th-century kitchen site located just northeast of the main house. In 2023, our limited investigations uncovered just a small section of the kitchen’s stone foundation and cellar, giving us a sneak preview of the conditions and parameters of future site work. Armed with this knowledge, our aims this year were to uncover more of the original foundation walls of the kitchen cellar, to uncover additional architectural evidence of the kitchen outbuilding, and explore the surrounding landscape for features. So, did we do it?
Location of the 18th century kitchen foundation in relation to two later farmhouses dating to 1876 and 1914.
We did! But before we get to the fun discoveries, let’s go over how we got there. As far as sites go here at Ferry Farm, this one has been through a lot. Not only did the original 16’ by 16’ kitchen building burn and collapse in on itself in the middle of the 18th century, but it also had two subsequent farmhouses built on top of it that were either moved, damaged in a fire, or demolished all within the last 150 years. A previous archaeology project on the site introduced another element of complexity in understanding the depositional sequence of fills on the earlier 18th-century site, which had obviously been heavily disturbed by all these later events.
All this led to an interesting excavation. Since a significant portion of the site had previously been excavated in the 1990s, a sizable amount of our site time was spent re-excavating backfilled archaeology units with the purpose of exposing unexcavated layers around the site. Not only would these unexcavated layers allow us to gather new data, but it would also give us the opportunity to better understand the findings as recorded in the earlier reports.
With the help of our wonderful field school students and interns, we opened a total of twenty-seven 5’x5’ units across the kitchen site. Sifting through the dirt, hundreds of artifacts were found dating to all occupations of Ferry Farm. Super cool finds that date to the 18th-century period of use for the kitchen included tobacco pipe fragments, wine bottle sherds, and a variety of ceramics, including English stoneware, Chinese porcelain, and a German Westerwald ‘GR’ sherd. The prehistoric Native American occupations of the site were represented by an unusually high number of projectile points found (8 and counting!), dating to both the Early Archaic (8000 BC – 6500 BC) and Early Woodland (1100 BC – 500 BC) periods. Civil War bullets came up in our screens, of course, as did 20th-century plastic, tools, toys, and bottle caps.
But when it comes to finds, our most exciting discovery did not turn up in our sifting screens. In fact, it was discovering that the western foundation wall of the kitchen cellar, thought to have been demolished, still survived! During the 1990s excavations, the archaeologists did not see this portion of the stone foundation and assumed the construction of the 1914 Colbert house had destroyed it. Fortunately for us, it was hiding under a 20th century utility pipe and trench and lay directly adjacent to the Colbert concrete foundation. Now we have all four foundation walls that we hope to fully uncover next year.
Exposed south and west stone walls of the colonial kitchen lie adjacent to and just outside of the 1914 concrete foundation wall. Judy Jobrack cleaning the newly exposed west wallAbbie Wood cleaning the south wall of the kitchenWest wall of colonial kitchen that was hiding under the pipe trench
Our excavation units surrounding the kitchen foundation have not, as of yet, exposed additional building features associated with the kitchen outbuilding, such as foundations or fireplaces. That search will continue next year as we continue taking those units down and expanding our site area. Features exposed in the 1990s dig, but not excavated by them or us, such as possible post holes and trash middens, also await our return in 2025, when we plan on finishing their excavation.
Each year’s excavation is built on the work accomplished in the previous years. With the incredible amount of work done this past summer of exposing the original kitchen foundation, as well as the later farmhouse foundations, removing old fill, and opening up the adjacent landscape, we are looking forward to expanding our investigations of the kitchen site next year. Stay tuned as we unravel the mysteries that are here at Ferry Farm, George Washington’s Boyhood Home.
Many readers will undoubtedly recognize these two artifacts (Fig. 1). Known as cowrie shells, these artifacts have become synonymous with slavery and serve as identifiers for the presence of free and enslaved Black individuals in the Americas. Still, the role of cowries in the 18th century goes far beyond that of a marker.
Origin
Cowries (Cypraeidae), a taxonomic family of sea snail, live throughout the world (Fig. 2). However, the species with the most relevance to the 1700s reside in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly in the waters around the Maldives. They include Monetaria annulus (alt. Cypraea annulus, Annulus Linnaeus) and Monetaria moneta (Fig. 3). Even if your Latin proves non-existent, each species’ genus, along with M. moneta’s epithet, easily identifies the original role cowries played in human hands – money.
Centuries before the 1700s, West Africa thrived as a region of independent kingdoms and tribes. With these groups engaged in trade, they required a shared currency that served as a medium of exchange and a store of value. In choosing cowries as currency in the fourteenth century, West Africa continued a long history of groups throughout the world using shell money. Through pre-existing trade routes to the Indo-Pacific, West Africans could easily import the shells via other parts of Africa and had them transported across the Sahara. As the cowries used did not reside in West Africa and proved difficult to forge, the market had built in protections against hyperinflation and counterfeits.
Once in West Africa, the shells served as the basis of the region’s economies. Still, the shells took on several cultural roles. To keep cowries on hand, the shells often underwent modifications, including slicing off the rounded side of the shell or piercing them (Fig. 4). This allowed for stringing them together and weaving into hair or onto clothing. While done for practical reasons, this led cowries to enter the world of personal adornment. With this, their role expanded to symbols of status, fertility, and beauty while further appearing on ceremonial garb (Fig. 5).
Figure 5: Benin Bronze plaque; 16th-17th century. The warriors on either side of the central figure wear helmets decorated with cowries British Museum
Atlantic Trade Routes
Europe and Africa had a long history of trade and exchange networks prior to the late 1400s, but the boom of global exploration led to an immediate escalation of these market connections. With European nations expanding their territories abroad and seeking to gain resources not found within their borders, they developed a need to break into the African markets while establishing permanent trade posts in the region. To achieve this, Europeans needed to supply goods that were in demand, and their minds set upon cowries.
Map by Adrian Kitzinger from Sahel: Art and Empires on the Shore of the Sahara West African Kingdoms and Trading StatesMap centered on the Atlantic Ocean with colored arrows showing movement of Enslaved Africans to the Americas, Raw Materials from Americas, and Manufactured goods from Europe Map showing the primary movement of Enslaved Africans, raw materials, and manufactured goods
While an item of currency and self-adornment to West Africans, cowries became a commodity in the hands of European, and later American, merchants. With cowries, merchants could navigate the local economy and barter for desired goods. Inevitably, this included kidnapped Africans. In his memoir, Olaudah Equiano (c. 1745-1797), a famed writer and abolitionist, recalled how one enslaver sold him to another for 172 “little white shells” while still in Africa. An examination of eighteenth-century shipping records reveals that cowries ranked amongst the most common goods transported to West Africa and used to trade for captives (Fig 6). For Africans who then faced the Middle Passage, they forcibly traveled aboard these same ships that in turn provided West Africa with the currency driving the economy and their enslavement — cowries.
Figure 6: List of goods imported to the Isle of Man via Rotterdam for trade in Africa, 1761 Manx National Heritage
Cowries in the Americas
Indo-Pacific cowries arrived in the Americas through several carriers, but ultimately all traveled on slave ships. In trading cowries to West Africa, foreign merchants supplied both types even though the market preferred M. moneta. As such, they often had leftover M. annulus which remained onboard as cargo and ballast when the ships continued their trans-Atlantic journeys. Once in the Americas, some captains elected to dump or sell off the remaining cowries rather than transport them back across the Atlantic. Cowries additionally arrived in the Americas on the bodies of kidnapped Africans. While common practice involved stripping captives in Africa, primary accounts report individuals retained beads and shells in their hair and as necklaces. Enslavers further distributed beads, and likely shells, as pacifiers during the Middle Passage.
Once in the Americas, cowries largely remained within Black communities though they did face geographical restrictions. For Virginia, archaeological distribution of the shells, mainly M. annulus, places them within the Tidewater region. Higher counts of shells appear in urban areas (Yorktown = 252) while plantations typically only have a few. Although Virginia’s current archaeological cowrie count falls above 353, this remains too few to support the traditional role as currency. Instead, the shells continued in roles of adornment and ritual with added symbolism of cultural loss, memory, and survival. Outside random finds in areas associated with enslavement, cowries recovered in the Americas have derived from burials, spirit caches, and sub-floor pits (Fig. 7).
Figure 7: Necklace recovered from an enslaved burial ground at Newton Plantation, BarbadosJerome Handler
At Ferry Farm
Over the course of our twenty-plus year excavation, two cowries have appeared at Ferry Farm. Found in contexts located around the Washington House, including one in a root cellar, our shells represent M. annulus and have undergone modification to allow for stringing or weaving (Fig. 8). As with findings in previous studies, we believe these shells took on cultural roles through self-adornment. Despite not knowing the identity of the shells’ owner(s), the cowries provide enough information to form an interpretation of who they belonged to and how they arrived at Ferry Farm.
Figure 8: Ferry Farm cowries with modifications visible
As their contexts of origin line up with the Washington House, the enslaved individuals who left them behind likely lived and worked close to the Washington family. This places them within the working realm of the house or the nearby work yard. For accommodation, the owner(s) may have occupied the Quarter adjacent to the Washington house or lived in one of the work yard’s support buildings.
Regarding the arrival of cowries on the plantation, this likely happened through the movement and exchange of people and goods. To provide the labor required to meet their goals, enslavers moved those they enslaved between different plantations as needed and expanded their workforce through the enslavement of more people or hiring of persons enslaved by others. This could account for the arrival of cowries at Ferry Farm. Alternatively, Ferry Farm’s proximity to the (port) city of Fredericksburg meant the enslaved community had access to a regional economy and trans-Atlantic vessels. Either network may have transported cowries to the city, but it additionally meant that Fredericksburg served as a meeting and trade point for those enslaved in the region.
Legacy
Cowries have a long and nuanced history in the Atlantic World. Beginning as a unit of currency and cultural symbol, cowries fell prey to the demands of the market, taking on a new role in the hands of foreign merchants. What once served to strengthen economies and nations suddenly worked to strip away the very people who inhabited West Africa. For those who endured enslavement, the cowries that accompanied them became symbols of a stolen home, a continuation of culture, and a determination to survive. Today, cowries remain important items in African and African American cultures by symbolizing their history as currency, continuing in self-adornment and ritual roles, and appearing prominently in works of art (Fig. 9-11).
Alpern, Stanley B. 1995 What Africans Got for Their Slaves: A Master List of European Trade Goods. History in Africa 22: 5-43
Equiano, Olaudah 1789 The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, Or Gustavus Vassa, The African. Written By Himself. London, UK
Handler, Jerome S. 2006 On the Transportation of Material Goods by Enslaved Africans During the Middle Passage: Preliminary findings from Documentary Sources. African Diaspora Archaeology Newsletter 9 (4): 1-22 (Article 16).
2007 From Cambay in India to Barbados in the Caribbean: Two Unique Beads from a Plantation Slave Cemetery. African Diaspora Archaeology Newsletter 10(1): 1-10 (Article 1)
Heath, Barbara J. 2016 Cowrie Shells, Global Trade, and Local Exchange: Piecing Together the Evidence for Colonial Virginia. Historical Archaeology 50 (2): 17-46.
National Museum of African American History & Culture n.d. Cowrie Shells and Trade Power. National Museum of African American History & Culture, Smithsonian, Washington D.C. <https://nmaahc.si.edu/cowrie-shells-and-trade-power>. Accessed 3 June 2024.
Ogundiran, Akinwumi 2002 Of Small Things Remembered: Beads, Cowries, and Cultural Translations of the Atlantic Experience in Yorubaland. The International Journal of African Historical Studies 35 (2/3): 427-457.
Pallaver, Karin 2023 Cowries, the currency that powered West Africa. ReThink Quarterly 7 <https://rethinkq.adp.com/artifact-cowries-west-africa/>. Accessed 3 June 2024.
Pearce, Laurie E. 1992 The Cowrie Shell in Virginia: A Critical Evaluation of Potential Archaeological Significance. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, College of William & Mary. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI.
Radburn, Nicholas J. 2009 William Davenport, the Slave Trade, and Merchant Enterprise in Eighteenth-Century Liverpool. Master’s thesis, Department of History, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
Samford, Patricia 1994 Searching for West African Cultural Meanings in the Archaeological Record. African Diaspora Newsletter 1 (3): 1-3 (Article 2).
Archaeologists tend to have strong feelings about ceramics. Ceramics can play a major role in interpreting a site, as their materials often reflect their function. This can be helpful when determining how a site was used. For instance, finding an abundance of redwares and stonewares could indicate a primarily utilitarian site like what would have been used in our Cellar House whereas porcelain and refined earthenwares may reflect a more domestic space. So, it really isn’t surprising that we feel some type of way about these artifacts.
Redware and stoneware storage vessels Porcelain and refined earthenware tablewares
But don’t let that fool you. Archaeologists have feelings about ceramics based solely on their appearance as well. It has come to my attention that Whieldon Ware just might hold the title as the most polarizing ceramic type as of late. These feelings were made very apparent during our recent acquisition of some Whieldon Ware pieces. Most either love or hate it; rarely is there an in-between. Before we get into the ceramic and its distinct look that conjures images of either vomit or a work of art (depending on whom you ask), let’s go over a little background on its creator, Thomas Whieldon.
Thomas Whieldon was an influential English potter producing examples of early creamware beginning in the mid-18th century. He gained popularity for his innovative shapes and decoration, which can be seen on various figurines, dishes, and other vessels. Whieldon is also well known for his partnership with the MVP of the ceramics world, Josiah Wedgwood, Mr. Creamware himself. Together, they developed advances in the realm of refined earthenware, like the perfecting of the green glaze as seen on the pineappleware we have found at Ferry Farm (Wedgwood & Ormsbee, 1947).
Whieldon agate ware coffee pot. Source: British MuseumWhieldon figurine. Source: The British Museum.
With that said, what we commonly think of when referring to Whieldon Ware is Whieldon’s tortoiseshell or clouded wares. These were created by sponging metal oxides on cream-colored earthenware and then adding a clear lead glaze. The mixing of the metal oxides with the liquid glaze caused the colors to blend and streak, creating splotches of green, yellow, purple, blue, and brown, depending on the types of metal oxides used (Gallagher, 2015). This resulted in a clouded or tortoiseshell decoration. Due to the nature of the technique, no two pieces look exactly the same. For Whieldon lovers like myself, the uniqueness of each piece gives it its charm.
Examples of Whieldon’s tortoiseshell/clouded ware with similar decoration to sherds found at Ferry Farm – Teapot. Source: Earle D. Vandekar of Knightsbridge, IncExamples of Whieldon’s tortoiseshell/clouded ware with similar decoration to sherds found at Ferry Farm – Platter. Source: Met Museum
Now that we know more about Whieldon Ware and how some of us feel about it today, let’s talk about how Mary Washington may have felt about it. I firmly believe that she was not team Vomit Ware and instead found the decoration quite desirable. Our excavations have found evidence of at least four Whieldon Ware plates, a teapot, teacup, and other medium-sized holloware vessels at Ferry Farm. Considering the short-lived popularity of the type, lasting only from 1740-1775, we can be quite certain that it was Mary who was buying these items.
Some Whieldon Ware vessel mends and sherds excavated at Ferry Farm
Toward the end of the 1770’s, Whieldon Ware quickly went out of style and was replaced by Wedgwood’s new, improved creamware and its more subtle decoration. While it may have gone out of style, potters continued to replicate the technique for many years, which makes it difficult to attribute all examples of the type to Whieldon himself. After 1780, he retired from the business, demolished his factory, built an ornamental garden in its place, and spent the rest of his years as a sheriff (Hildyard, 2005; The London Gazette, 1785).
So, there you have it, the very brief story of Whieldon and his wares.
While Mary Washington and a couple of us in the lab are Team Whieldon all day, every day (or at least the days concerning Whieldon), the majority are a hard pass. Where do you stand? Are you Team Whieldon or team Whieldout?
Danielle Arens
GWF Archaeologist
References
Gallagher, B. (2015). British Ceramics 1675-1825: The Mint Museum. Charlotte: The Mint Museum.
Hildyard, R. (2005). English Pottery 1620-1840. London: V&A Publications.
The London Gazette. (1785, November 12). The London Gazette(12699), p. 522.
Wedgwood, J., & Ormsbee, T. H. (1947). Staffordshire Pottery. New York: Robert M. McBride & Company.
Think about a portrait or painting of George Washington. What is a common element in the paintings? His uniform, yes, he is indeed painted quite a bit in his impressive military uniform. But how about a horse? George is often painted riding beautiful horses with a quiet dignity and noble appearance we expect from the father of our country.
Washington at Verplanck’s Point by John Trumbull, Source: Winterthur
However, the horses in these paintings are not mere symbols of wealth or power. They are depicted with George because, from a tender age, his life has been intertwined with these creatures. As a surveyor, soldier, landowner, farmer, gentry, commander-in-chief, and president, he was inextricably linked with horses, not just as a mode of transportation but as a vital part of his daily life.
And it all started at Ferry Farm…
George moved to Ferry Farm around 1738 at the age of six. His father, Augustine Washington, was a member of the “planter class,” or Colonial American gentry. This meant he was a prominent member of society, involved in politics, and owned lots of land. Augustine purchased 150 acres across the river from Fredericksburg and later added an additional 450-acre parcel. In total, he owned Little Hunting Creek, Pope’s Creek, and the Ferry Farm properties.
The point? Augustine needed help because there were places to be, people to see, and fields to farm. So, horses were a fundamental necessity for the Washington family, and George would have grown up around them, taking care of them and learning to ride.
We have two great sources that give us some understanding of the horse situation at Ferry Farm. First, in 1743, the Washington patriarch died, leaving behind a widow, an 11-year-old George, and a probate inventory. On page two of the inventory, three horses and one mare are listed.
Augustine Washington Probate Inventory, 1743
Secondly, some pretty cool horse tack dating from the Washington occupation has been found during various archeological digs.
The Finds
One of the most universally known horse tack, essential for all horse maintenance – is the horseshoe. The horseshoe was used to protect the hooves because “…being rendered subservient to the use of man…applied to severe and continued labour, and compelled to tread frequently…on the irregular and stony surface of the roads, it became necessary to secure his feet from ruin by strengthening them with the iron band which we call a shoe” (Vial de Saint Bel, 1793). These shoes were handmade with no standardization across makers in shape, narrowness, or thickness. (Hume, 2001). This makes it difficult to pinpoint and assign a time on shape alone.
Our horseshoe was found in the second cellar of the Washington Home. It is quite wide between the branches (the curving sides), and the toe seems to straighten a bit at the center. The crease (the groove that runs down the sides) gives enough depth to allow the shoe to be firmly attached to the hoof with six nails (which we found a few originals). (University of Zurich, 2024) This find illustrates that there was active shoeing and horse maintenance going on at the farm. Additionally, these horses were ridden or used for farm work because shoes were used to protect the hooves from the wear and tear of hard roads, distribute the horse’s weight evenly on uneven ground, and provide traction on various surfaces.
Horseshoe with original nails
Another artifact found in the cellar of the Washington Home, the stirrup, further demonstrates horse riding as a family necessity. (Cofield, 2014)
Stirrup
The stirrups are used as foot support for the rider, and they hang from a saddle on straps known as stirrup leathers. Basic stirrups are made of three parts the eyes for the stirrup leathers to attach the stirrup to the saddle, a platform or base where the rider places their foot, and arms which connect the eye to the base. (Cofield, 2014)
Examples of Stirrup Forms Source: Diagnostic Artifacts in Maryland
Horseback riding master and author VS Littauer described the Forward Seat as a stirrup-centric approach versus traditional riding’s seat-centric. He argued riding without stirrups taught people to grip with the knee, which he considered a dangerous habit and likely to stiffen the rider. With stirrups, you can ride with a looser knee, letting your weight flow PAST your knee and into the stirrup. That is a more secure approach than riding with the thigh and knee. (Littauer, 1962)
Captain Vladimir Littauer – Forward Seat Riding,1947
Stirrups allow the rider’s legs to absorb up/down motion by allowing them to stand in matching balance with the horse, which makes riding longer distances more comfortable. Augustine certainly had to travel a great distance to check on his properties and perform his civic duties, like serving as a justice of the peace and sheriff for the county of Westmoreland.
One final utilitarian bit of horse tack found again in the cellar is a mullen mouth bit or snaffle bit. This bit consists of two rings on each side of a half-moon-shaped bar with no joint. The bit applies even pressure on the horse’s tongue and bars (gums) and allows the horse’s lips to feel the pressure from the bit and side rings. The bit, bridle, and reins function to create communication between the rider and the horse.
Mouth Bit
The Washington children would have used bits to learn to control. They would have learned how to work with the horse in a cooperative way that would create an effortless and seamless ride. George used this skill of communication and intuition to become a great rider. As Thomas Jefferson reminisced in a letter in 1814, “his person, you know, was fine, his stature exactly what one would wish, his deportment easy, erect, and noble; the best horseman of his age, and the most graceful figure that could be seen on horseback.” (National Archives, n.d.)
Lastly, just south of “The Quarter,” we uncovered around twenty leather ornaments. They were used to decorate the leather straps, nosebands, harnesses, and reins of horses. We wrote a post about them earlier explaining their purpose, which was purely aesthetic. Horse tack could be made without these pieces, but where is the fun in that? These flashy accessories were a great way to grab the attention of the public and hint at how fashionable and elegant you were as you trotted through town.
Ferry Farm leather ornaments dating from the 1700sThis copper-alloy mount dates from the mid-to-late 1700s
These artifacts illustrate that not only were horses actively used by the family, but it also fostered an environment where young George would have taken his first steps into learning about horsemanship. This knowledge and skill would help him in his future careers of surveying the Shenandoah Valley, as a lieutenant colonel during the French and Indian War, as a farmer and landowner at Mount Vernon, as a representative in the House of Burgesses, as commander-and-chief of the Continental Army and finally President of the United States.
Come see our new pop-up exhibit at Ferry Farm, where all these wonderful artifacts are displayed and put together with the help of our Fleming-Smith scholar, Sarah Moore.
The archaeology and curatorial departments for The George Washington Foundation have long worked together to furnish the reproduced Washington house with historically accurate items that resemble as closely as possible the ones that George and his family would have lived with daily. These pieces are not originals, which means visitors touring the house can handle them.
In our latest collaboration we’ve been examining sherds of ceramic vessels owned by the Washington’s to obtain actual eighteenth-century dishes. We want to display these dishes in our gallery to give visitors an idea of what the whole vessels looked like. Four such ceramics have recently been acquired at auctions by the Foundation and you can see them first here along with the excavated remnants they resemble.
Creamware tankard with strawberry terminals and twisted reeded handles, ca. 1750-1800Creamware tankard with strawberry terminals and twisted reeded handles, ca. 1750-1800Creamware jug with strawberry terminals and twisted reed handles; face below the spout of the jug. ca. 1750-1800 Creamware sauceboat with curved handle which terminate with strawberry flowers. Moulded detail finials
Three of our acquisitions are a type of English ceramic called ‘creamware,’ which was invented in the early 1760’s and was very popular with George’s mother, Mary. Both this lovely pitcher and mug exhibit decorative elements represented by our excavated ceramics. Most prominent are the elegantly curved handles that terminate in delicate strawberry flowers. At least two vessels with these types of handles have been recovered at Ferry Farm. The first is a highly decorative creamware sauce boat and the second a petite teacup, both of which were considered quite fashionable for the time. The jug and teacup also share a common form of decoration called a ‘beaded rim.’
Creamware jug with strawberry terminals and twisted reed handles; face below the spout of the jug, ca. 1750-1800Creamware jug with strawberry terminals and twisted reed handles; face below the spout of the jug. ca. 1750-1800Creamware sherd with “beaded rim”Creamware teacup sherd with “beaded rim”
Another teacup owned by Mary was this beautiful piece hand-painted with a detailed swag motif. But from the sherds it’s difficult to really appreciate how graceful this decoration is. Luckily, our curators hunted down a similar cup and saucer with the same decoration, which is unusual. The saucer also features a beaded rim that has been filled in with gold gilding, although we believe the gold to be a later addition to the piece. The cup and saucer also have handwritten tags affixed to the bases which indicate they had the distinction of having been in the collection of a well-known (at least to ceramics geeks like yours truly) collector of creamware. This man by the name of Donald Towner had written extensively on the topic of English ceramics and over his career had amassed a large study collection, of which this was one. His book on the Leeds Pottery in England features a catalogue from the pottery that includes many of the decorative elements and shapes discussed above (Towner, 1965).
English Creamware Cup and Saucer, ca. 1775-1780English Creamware Saucer, ca. 1775-1780. Formerly in Donald Tower Collection, 1968, A Belton, 1988 and Diana Edwards MurnaghanTeacup from Donald Towner Collection, 1968.Teacup sherd with swag motif
But my favorite is this delightfully potbellied creamer with three legs featuring lion’s heads and paws for feet. The ceramic type in question is called Whieldon and started to come on the market in England around 1749. Of note is the raised molded leaf decoration which resembles one sherd from our collection. While we may never know the exact type of vessel our leaf came from, the complete creamer gives one a better idea of how the decoration was placed and looked. Mary’s choice of ceramics played a large part in emphasizing her and her children’s place among the Virginia Gentry and we’re very pleased to have some whole examples now to help illustrate to visitors just how lovely some of these dishes were!
Whieldon ware sherd, ca. 1740-1770Staffordshire Mottled Creamware Milk Jug, c. 1755-1765Staffordshire Mottled Creamware Milk Jug, c. 1755-1765
Mara Kaktins, Archaeologist & Lab Manager
Bibliography
Towner, Donald. The Leeds Pottery, 1965. Taplinger Publishing Co., Inc., New York.
Not every president gets their birthday celebrated every year with a federal holiday, but George Washington, a favorite of his countrymen and the first president, has had that privilege since 1879. But one year was a little different from the others: 1932. It marked Washington’s 200th birthday, and the United States was going to make a big deal about it.
In honor of the upcoming birthday, we decided to look at some of the memorabilia in our collection created to celebrate and educate the American public.
George Washington Bicentennial Commission
The planning for this celebration started early when Calvin Coolidge signed a joint resolution that established a commission to oversee the bicentennial ceremonies on Dec 2, 1924. The resolution was to mark the occasion of the birthday across the country and increase the understanding of Washington. (George Washington Bicentennial Commission, 1932) Under the direction of Representative Sol Bloom, an experienced entertainment promoter who got his start at the 1893 World’s Colombian Exposition, the committee initiated thousands of events, released educational resources for students, and had plays written in honor of Washington. (Larson, 2004)
Handbook of the George Washington Appreciation Course for Teachers and Students“Washington Takes the Risk”, including George Washington, Fielding Lewis, and Betty Washington Lewis
The commission additionally worked with over 250,000 local commissions to organize special events at not only a federal level but a state and city too. (The Washington Post, 1932) Special volunteers and prominent local people were often given commemorative metals as thanks for their service. We have one from the state of New York. It is a circular bronze medal attached to a blue and white ribbon. The back of the medal states, “1779 / Planned Sullivan / Clinton Campaign 1782 / Newburgh Temple Hill / Refused a crown / 1789 April 30th / New York City / Inaugurated first / President of the / United States.”
The medal is encased in a paper envelope with “New York State / George Washington Bicentennial Commission / In appreciation of / Services generously / Rendered to the / Commission / During / 1932” written on the front along with the signature Charles Tobin, chairman representing New York state on the Bicentennial Commission.
New York State George Washington Bicentennial Commission, 1932New York State George Washington Bicentennial Commission Medal, 1932New York State George Washington Bicentennial Commission Medal, 1932
Historical Context Help: The Sullivan-Clinton campaign was ordered by George Washington in response to the 1778 attacks by the Iroquois and British in central New York. Newburgh Temple Hill was a Continental Army encampment near Washington’s headquarters, where he gave a speech to quell the mass of soldiers who were getting ready to mutiny and attack Congress to get their promised back pay and pensions. Finally, in 1789, George was sworn in as President at Federal Hall in New York City.
The U.S. Post Office became involved in the commemoration of George with the release of a dozen stamps celebrating his life. The stamps were incredibly popular, and when they were first released for sale in D.C., there was a crowd of 50,000 people waiting to get their set of stamps. (The Washington Post, 1932)
Commemoration celebrating George Washington’s visit to Kenmore on April 8, 1791, as part of the birthday celebrations. Note the stamps. Commemoration of George Washington’s birth at Wakefield. Note the stamps.
Marketing George
Private companies even got in on Washington-mania by releasing all types of souvenirs like postcards, pins, coins, bottles, calendars, cigar box covers, books and pamphlets, hat stands, billheads, stationary, cartes-de-visite, playing cards, and puzzles. (Subseries 5.8. Washington’s Birthday, Bicentennial Souvenirs, 1931-1932 , 2024)
We have two bottles created for the Bicentennial celebration. The green water bottle has a likeness of George with “Washington/Bicentennial” underneath the image and 1732 and 1932 written on the sides. The water bottle was produced by the Hemingway Glass Company in Muncie, Indiana.
The clear pear-shaped bottle is embossed on one side with a cherry tree and the dates “1732 and 1932”. On the other, with a profile of Washington. It was created by the Owens-Illinois Glass Co. of Huntington, West Virginia.
Bicentennial bottle with George Washington profile. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., 1932. Bicentennial bottle with cherry tree. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., 1932
Plates were another big commemorative item. We have three plates issued by Crown Ducal, with the same scene of “Washington and his Mother” based on the print of the same name. On the back with the Crown Ducal crest, it says, “George Washington Bicentenary Memorial Plates / 1732-1932 / First in War / First in Peace / First in the hearts of his countrymen”. Crown Ducal released a series of twelve plates documenting Washington’s life. Of course, we are a little biased and like the one with his mother, Mary Ball Washington, the best.
Some companies even brought in Mrs. Martha Washington, like this set of plates from the Capital Souvenir Company. These are two round commemorative plates depicting George and Martha Washington, both with an elaborate floral gilded border.
George and Martha plate set, Capital Souvenir Company, 1932. George and Martha plate set, Capital Souvenir Company, 1932.
Fun Bicentennial Fact: On the eve of the birthday, Sears Roebuck was awarded a commission by the U.S. government to create a full-scale replica of Mount Vernon at the Exposition Coloniale Internationale in Paris. The agreed-upon price was around $75,000, and every detail of the home was reproduced from brass hardware, mantelpieces, and even cabinets. After the exposition, the house was bought by an American doctor working in Paris, and it was relocated to Vaucresson (a western suburb of Paris). It still stands today as a private residence and was even on the market in 2012 for 27 million dollars.
George Washington’s Mount Vernon in Paris, France,1932George’s Mount Vernon in Vaucresson, France today
Sears Roebuck also built the exact replica in Prospect Park, Brooklyn, NYC for the Bicentennial Commission. However, the house was not taken care of and boarded up and abandoned until it was eventually torn down. (The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 1933)
Sears’ role in the reconstruction of Mount Vernon led to interest in their kit homes. In 1932, they offered a house in their catalog, loosely based on Mount Vernon. This model was oddly called “The Jefferson”.
Sears Roebuck house kit “The Jefferson” which strangely resembles Mount Vernon.
While we may not have as many George souvenirs, we are still putting on a big birthday party to celebrate George Washington and his time at Ferry Farm.
The party is on Monday, February 19th from 10am – 3 pm. While enjoying the grounds of Ferry Farm, you can take a selfie with “George Washington,” participate in our annual stone-throwing contest, play colonial games, and eat birthday cupcakes (while supplies last).
Additionally, guests can enjoy several educational stations, take an abbreviated Washington House tour, and talk with archaeologists, historians, and other experts to learn about Ferry Farm and the Washington Family.
Heather Baldus
Collections Manager
References
George Washington Bicentennial Commission. (1932). History of the George Washington Bicentennial Celebration. Washington D.C.
Larson, E. (2004). The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair That Changed America. New York City: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
The George Washington Foundation believes the Washington and Lewis families’ story is worth protecting for future generations. We are in contact with many descendants of the Washingtons and Lewises who have assisted the foundation in presenting the families’ legacies by adding to our collections and archives. We decided to explore the ancestors and descendants interesting tales and life accounts, using the artifacts and documents in our collections as a starting point.
The first person in our spotlight is Catherine Dangerfield Willis, who was born in Virginia, lived on the Florida frontier, became a historic preservationist, and became a Princess of the Second Empire because of her Washington relation.
Virginia Native and Washington Descendant
Catherine Daingerfield Willis was born in Fredericksburg in 1803. She was the daughter of Colonel Byrd Charles Willis and his wife Mary (née Lewis) Willis. From her maternal family side, Catherine was the great-granddaughter of Fielding and Betty Lewis and the great-grandniece of George Washington. (Glenn, 2014)
Catherine married Atcheson Gray at an early age, around 13 to 17 years old; accounts vary. The newlywed couple resided at their father-in-law’s house, Wakefield (yes, George’s birthplace). (Unknown, 2004) Sadly, their marriage was cut short when Atcheson died of malaria less than a year after their union, along with their first child. (Bellet, 1976)
Catherine Daingerfield Willis Gray Murat, watercolor generously donated to GWF by Mrs. Lucy Robb Winston Works and family.
The Florida Frontier
After being widowed, Catherine and her family moved south to Tallahassee, the recently christened capital of the Florida Territory (Florida didn’t become a state until 1845) (Gannon, 2003). It had previously been an important Apalachee settlement which had been abandoned after it was burned to the ground by Andrew Jackson in 1818 during the first part of the Seminole Wars. (Smith, 2023) When Catherine and her family took up residence in Tallahassee in the 1820s, it was a rough place and had a reputation as an outlaw frontier town. Men carried guns and knives to protect themselves from the many duels, brawls, and knife fights that were common in the city. The eminent Ralph Waldo Emerson (a noted friend of Prince Murat) traveled to Tallahassee in 1827 and called it “a grotesque place…rapidly settled by public officers, land speculators, and desperadoes.” (Downes, 1956)
The less-than-stellar reviews of the city didn’t stop the Legislative Council from building three crude log huts for their official meetings. (Gannon, 2003) There was even the establishment of a city police force in 1826 to combat lawlessness. The police force consisted of only one guy, a City Marshal, but it still counts. (Tallahassee Police Department, 2023)
In this primitive but developing city, a love story blossomed between Catherine and an exiled French prince.
Portrait of Prince MuratCatherine Daingerfield Willis Gray Murat
A quick look at the tumultuous life of Charles Louis Napoleon Achille Murat
Achille Murat was born in the Hôtel de Brienne in Paris to Caroline Bonaparte, Grand Duchess of Berg, Queen of Naples, and sister to Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of the French By 1815, after his uncle’s second exile and the execution of his father Joachim Murat, the family fled to Austria. (Burnett, 1996)
Hôtel de Brienne, Paris, France where Prince Achille Murat was born.Achille (in uniform), with his brother, sisters and mother Caroline Bonaparte
When Achille turned twenty-one, he emigrated to the United States, landing in New York and immediately applying for naturalization. (Niles, 1823) Additionally, he renounced all European titles and citizenship. (Brandon, 1944) Before long, he made his way down to Florida to get in on some of the land deals in the newly acquired territory. His first stop was St. Augustine, where he purchased land and established a plantation called “Parthenope,” which utilized slave labor to grow oranges, sugar cane, cotton, and tobacco. (Roberts, 2004) (Bellet, 1976)
Prince Murat immediately on arrival in America applied for naturalization and renouncing his European titles.
While in St. Augustine, he developed a reputation for being a little eccentric. He liked to sit naked in the local Moses Creek during the sweltering Florida summers. (Hanna, 1948) He was obsessed with eating all different kinds of animals, like turkey buzzards, owls, alligators, and rattlesnakes. (Roberts, 2004) Finally, he disliked bathing and changing his clothes while living in a humid subtropical climate, and he “washed his feet only after he wore out his shoes.” (Hanna, 1948)
Home of Prince Murat, which was built around 1790 – Saint Augustine, Florida
Shortly before he met and married Catherine, he purchased another plantation named “Lipona,” which would be his primary residence in the US until his death.
A Marriage Between the Bonaparte’s and Washington’s and Entertaining Europe
In 1826, Catherine Daingerfield Willis Gray married the ex-prince of Naples and nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, Achille Murat. Catherine’s father was initially against the match because of the Bonaparte and Murat families’ opposition to the union. Luckily, the Bonaparte’s and Murat’s were made aware that Caroline was the great-grandniece of George Washington, and the family warmly welcomed her. (Bellet, 1976)
Louis Napoleon Bonaparte (Napoleon III), 1852Portrait of Prince Murat
The couple lived at Lipona outside of Tallahassee until the July Revolution of 1830 in Paris when Charles X abdicated, and Louis Philippe was selected as King. The Murats traveled to Europe as Achille tried to press claims to restore the families’ money and lands, but he failed. (Bellet, 1976) The couple moved to London, where they spent a few years in high society. Catherine became a favorite of Louis Napoleon (who would become the first President and then Emperor of France, Napoleon III). While in London, Catherine even attended and was given a seat in Westminster Abbey for the coronation of William IV of the United Kingdom. (Bellet, 1976)
Coronation of William IV, 8 September 1831
Return to America
Around 1835, the pair returned to America and set up residence just outside New Orleans, where Achille attempted to run a sugarcane plantation and practice law, both of which failed. (Hare, 2002) . They returned to Florida to their plantation Lipona, which he had mortgaged to the bank and subsequently lost due to nonpayment, requiring the couple to move to a smaller property. (Hanna, 1948)
Achille died in 1847, leaving his widow in a precarious financial situation, having acquired massive debt during his life. After the death of her husband, Catherine purchased a cotton plantation named Bellevue (now part of the Tallahassee Museum). She successfully managed the property and, after ten years, had paid all of Achille’s debts. (Sandler, 1999)
Bellevue Plantation
When Napoleon III became Emperor in 1852, Catherine was pronounced French royalty and Princess of the Second Empire, which granted her an annuity from the French government and allowed her to use the livery of France. (Bellet, 1976)
Catherine Daingerfield Willis Gray Murat, Princess of the Second Empire
Preservation and the Mount Vernon Ladies Association
In 1853, Ann Pamela Cunningham founded the Mount Vernon Ladies Association (MVLA) to preserve and restore George Washington’s Mount Vernon. There had been other failed attempts by owner John Augustine Washington to sell the property to the US government and the state of Virginia, and even vile rumors of it being looked at by “speculators” to turn it into a resort hotel. Seeing the state of the property belonging to one of the most beloved founding fathers, Cunningham was able to make a deal with Washington after much discussion to sell the property (house, outbuildings, and 202 acres) to the Association for $200,000 (around 7 to 8 million dollars today). (West, 1999)
Mount Vernon in 1858 before restoration by the MVLARecord of payment from MVLA, 1858
To raise money, Cunningham created a nationwide network of women by appointing one lady from each state as a vice regent to assist in fundraising. (Grabitske, 2004) In Florida, the daughter of the territorial governor, Ellen Call Long, was asked to become the state regent. She declined but suggested Catherine because of her family ties and influence. Catherine enthusiastically took on the role of vice-regent. She raised $3791.25, which was no small feat, with the entire population of Florida in 1860 being 144,424 people. (United States Census Bureau, 2021) The MVLA raised the funds and paid off the purchase price within two years despite The Panic of 1857 and the economic recession just before the beginning of the Civil War. (Casper, 2008) (Huston, 1987) Mount Vernon was saved and continues to be owned and maintained by the Association, as it is overseen by a board of regents of ladies from 27 states. (George Washington’s Mount Vernon, 2024)
Princess Catherine Murat died in August 1867 at her plantation, Bellevue. She is buried beside her husband, Prince Achille Murat, in the Tallahassee Episcopal Cemetery. They had no children.
Close up view of a plaque on the Prince and Princess Murat tombs – Tallahassee, Florida, ca 1900Graves of Prince and Princess Murat, 1949
Heather Baldus
Collections Manager
References
Bellet, L. P. (1976). Some Prominent Virginia Families, Volumes 1-2. Clearfield.
Brandon, E. E. (1944). A Pilgrimage of Liberty. Lawhead Press.
Burnett, G. (1996). Florida’s Past: People and Events That Shaped the State. Pineapple Press.
Casper, S. E. (2008). Sarah Johnson’s Mount Vernon : the forgotten history of an American shrine. New York: Hill and Wang.
Downes, A. J. (1956). The Legendary Visit of Emerson to Tallahassee. The Florida Historical Quarterly, 334-338.
Gannon, M. (2003). Florida A Short History. University Press of Florida.
George Washington’s Mount Vernon. (2024). About Mount Vernon. Retrieved from George Washington’s Mount Vernon: https://www.mountvernon.org/about/
Glenn, J. (2014). The Washingtons. Volume 1: Seven Generations of the Presidential Branch. Savas Publishing.
Grabitske, D. M. (2004). First Lady of Preservation: Sarah Sibley and the Mount Vernon Ladies Association. Minnesota History, 407-416.
Hanna, A. J. (1948). A Prince in Their Midst: The Adventurous Life of Achille Murat on the American Frontier. University of Oklahoma Press.
Hare, J. (2002). Tallahassee: A Capital City History. Arcadia Publishing.
Huston, J. L. (1987). The panic of 1857 and the coming of the Civil War. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.
Niles, H. (1823). Niles’ Weekly Register, p. 272.
Roberts, D. (2004). Dream state : eight generations of swamp lawyers, conquistadors, Confederate daughters, banana Republicans, and other Florida wildlife. New York City: New York: Free Press.
Sandler, R. (1999, October 23). The Princess Who Saved Mount Vernon. The Free-Lance Star, pp. 3-4.
Lives & Legacies 