Tag Archives: historic preservation

Notes from the Front

I’ll soon have a new post about my recent trip to Baltimore; but, in the interim here are some news stories on a variety of issues:

The disgusting news that part of the Dachau Concentration Camp gate was stolen: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/pat-gate-dachau-concentration-camp-stolen-26638489 .

The more pleasing news that Prince William County, Virginia has successfully moved a historic home that once belonged to former slaves. While it is always preferred that a historic house remains in its historic setting, development pressures forced the building to be moved in 2004 and now to a place for its long term preservation. See more about that: http://www.insidenova.com/headlines/special-delivery-home-of-freed-slave-moves-to-montclair/article_df4d2d9c-62a2-11e4-aa6a-d79f017cf5a5.html .

Montpelier, the estate that belonged to President James Madison, has been given $10 million by David Rubenstein. $6.5 million will go to research and refurnishing the original house of President and Dolley Madison and another $3.5 million will go toward reconstruction of slave quarters that have long since vanished but have been investigated now for years through archaeology. See more about this exciting news: http://thegrio.com/2014/11/01/james-madison-slave-quarters/ .

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Interpreting Slavery at Historic Sites

On April 21, I posted a video link to a C-Span recording of a session filmed at Monticello regarding interpreting slavery at historic sites. Much of this is centered on a project at Monticello to reconstruct in part or in full Mulberry Row, a series of outbuildings, plantation industrial buildings and slave quarters which sat adjacent to Jefferson’s twice-built mansion.

The author with two friends at the site of a slave cabin along Mulberry Row at Monticello in 2008.

The author (center) with two friends at the site of a slave cabin along Mulberry Row at Monticello in 2008.

Having had time to fully listen to the conversation I had a few thoughts and a few questions for y’all.

The panelists were Sara Bon-Harper, new executive director of Ashlawn-Highland, one of the homes of President James Monroe; Frank Sanchis, World Monuments Fund, United States Programs Director; Ed Chappell, Architectural research director at Colonial Williamsburg Foundation; and Matthew Reeves, Director of Archaeology at James Madison’s Montpelier.

As you’ll see if you watch the video, a lot of the discussion is centered on past case studies of reconstructions of buildings at Colonial Williamsburg and Ashlawn-Highland and methods of interpreting space not reconstructed consume the conversation of Dr. Reeves and Frank Sanchis. However, there were some points made by the panelists and the audience that I think bear repeating.

Sara Bon-Harper reminds us that we often only see the plantation core such as the big house and a kitchen and perhaps a few other outbuildings when visiting historic plantations. We therefore miss the larger plantation landscape. Quite often, this is because a historic site only includes that core as previous owners only saved that core or sold the agricultural and woodlands associated with the estate years ago. Where those lands remain, visitors are either too pressed for time to explore the many acres or there is limited access to those fields provided by the site. Furthermore, unlike in the era of slaveholding, there is usually nothing in the fields now but meadow grasses or woodlands that were not there historically.

Ed Chappell brings up a good point regarding the reconstructed Peyton Randolph slave quarter/kitchen/servants’ hall and the current interpretation there. While the reconstructed spaces contribute to broadening our understanding of the Randolph family and urban slavery in Williamsburg in the eighteenth century, often now when people are cooking in the Randolph kitchen it is being done by white employees. They certainly are well intentioned but Chappell (and I) wonder what type of message does that send? Are people really understanding race relations in eighteenth century Virginia or becoming focused on the cooking demonstration?

The thought of what kind of message are we sending is echoed in Reeves’ comments about the Montpelier slave descendants coming to see Montpelier after the exterior restoration was finished. They were not impressed with the railroad ties and grass representing where the slave housing existed in the Madisons’ time. The foundation has currently installed three-dimensional timber-framed half-finished ghost structures to represent smokehouses and slave quarters. As Reeves states, these buildings juxtaposed with the mansion house create an interpretive tool.

Mr. Sanchis’ comments were centered on his passion for preserving original buildings. He recognized several times that there are few original slave quarters remaining but was generally opposed to reconstructions of missing buildings. Often times, I admit, I found myself in strong disagreement with his commentary especially regarding visitors ability to distinguish reconstructed versus restored buildings (though some of the audience discussion seemed to reaffirm his position; I still think most people can make those distinctions when told). Frank’s comments regarding the Arlington original slave quarters being so altered that he did not feel the originality was curious to me since I had just been to them. While it is true, there have been many changes to those quarters since the 1800s, I still felt the power of them in my recent visit there (which I blogged about). One of the projects Arlington is doing now is restoring one of the buildings with better attention to the details than had been done in the 1930s-1950s when they were interpreted honestly as cottages. One thing he said I agree with, however, I’m curious what you think so I will pose the question later.

One comment from an audience member who works at Colonial Williamsburg is only partly true. While there have been various Blacks affiliated in some manner with Colonial Williamsburg as an operation it is not true that Blacks have always been seen interpreting the experience of eighteenth century free blacks and enslaved people. At least by the 1950s and 1960s, Colonial Williamsburg operated on a specific day of the week for African-Americans to visit the site. Like nearly everything, Colonial Williamsburg was segregated. Recently, a new acquaintance of mine, Tiya Miles reminded folks at a conference to consider that Blacks often had no clue how they would get from their home to a vacation site during the era of segregation and racial violence. Hotels and restaurants often would not serve Blacks and stopping to get gas had the potential to get violent or at least uncomfortable.

Annette Gordon-Reed brought up a concern that reconstructed (and the few originals remaining) slave quarters are often seen as “quaint” by visitors (as was the earlier furnishing of the Arlington slave quarters in the 1940s and 50s) and she wonders how we can make this not seem the case.

Finally, I thought one of the audience members made an amazing point that I was emphasize. Slavery should be interpreted at plantation sites throughout the mansion house tour. Segregating the story to a separate tour, making slavery seem like a beneficial institution for all, or ignoring the story is not acceptable. There are artifacts of slavery in the mansion houses at these sites: who poured wines and served meals in the dining room? Who made the beds in the bedrooms? Who lit the fires throughout the house?

So on to my questions for you (and I hope to hear from y’all with some thoughts/answers/maybe more questions):

  1. In the discussion it was suggested the reconstructed buildings be placed elsewhere for interpretation. How could Monticello illustrate Mulberry Row for the masses of people who come to the site without the reconstructions being on Mulberry Row?
  2. Frank Sanchis asked if there was something to be gained by doing a living history at a plantation site. Are people really grasping what slavery was like through living history?
  3. Sara Bon-Harper’s point about the plantation core is true, so how can plantation sites represent or illustrate the totality of the plantation owner’s lands to the public who are at the mansion house?
  4. Frank Sanchis states that he finds there is little cooperation between historic sites regarding how they interpret slavery. For those of you who are museum professionals, do you find that is true?

So what do you think?


Filed under Uncategorized

Visiting Biltmore

I was fortunate to go visit Biltmore Estate, home of George and Edith Vanderbilt and their daughter, Cornelia. The house was completed in 1895 and has 250 rooms! Biltmore has an amazing collection of the original Vanderbilt furnishings and conservators and curators have worked extensively on recreating the house’s original draperies, upholstery, and wallpapers. Probably my favorite item in the house (if I were forced to only pick one) is The Chariot of Aurora painted by Venetian artist Giovanni Pellegrini in the 1720s, which was originally in Pisani Palace in Venice.

Biltmore, this particular morning there was some car show out front.

In the second floor living hall (a space in the Vanderbilts’ day where the family and guests could mingle before meals or read and chat), there was an exhibition regarding the work of curators, conservators, and contractors in preserving and interpreting the rooms within the mansion. Museums generally struggle with institutional history so this was a refreshing moment as visitors are usually interested in how we know what we know about décor in historic homes. One of the things that stuck out in my mind is that in restoring the Louis XV Room, conservators spent about 21,000 hours working on artifacts and with the architecture of the room itself in cleaning, repairing small items that had been cracked, or items that needed to be polished. There were places within the exhibit that highlighted Biltmore’s staff working directly with companies as far away as France who had originally produced wallpapers back in the 1890s for George Vanderbilt. Equally interesting was the restoration of a chair, whose original upholstery was found, reproduced, and due to the loss of original stuffing, the new conservation-friendly padding was illustrated.

Another successful exhibition I thought was located in the basement which used photographs to illustrate the construction of the house. Photos showed Vanderbilt and the architect, Richard Morris Hunt and landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted but emphasized that they were NOT the builders of Biltmore. In fact, this is an area that often sends a chill down my spine on tours when someone says “Such-and-such famous person built said-grand-mansion.” The photos show the workmen, black and white, who built the mansion and gardens. My favorite image showed a youngster and a group of men and the men’s lunch pails.

There was a really well done exhibit “The Vanderbilts at Home and Abroad” highlighting the schools opened by George Vanderbilt in Asheville for elementary age children at one, crafts in another for adults, and a school teaching domestic service to black women. Numerous fine items owned by the Vanderbilts were exhibited too from jewelry to luggage and their luck in avoiding boarding R.M.S. Titanic (but not so lucky for a servant).

Of course, I would be interested in the work of the servants at Biltmore. The house’s formal rooms were constructed in a manner so as to really conceal the work of servants from view of the guests and the Vanderbilts. However, without these folks, there is no way the house could have been a jewel of entertainment. So I will report on the only specialty tour taken in the visit: The Butler’s Tour.

This call button was located on a porch at Biltmore. If pressed, it would ring to the butler’s pantry. I wanted to know, who answered the bell?

First, in the regular, self-guided tour, you go down into the basement where you see four pantries, two walk-in refrigerators, servants’ bedrooms, pastry kitchen, rotisserie kitchen, the main kitchen, a kitchen pantry, the servants’ dining room (where there was a special maid just for the servants), a storage room converted to an organ motor room, work room, and three laundry spaces! A true catacomb of work that may remind my readers of scenes from PBS shows like Upstairs, Downstairs and Downton Abbey, except in this case on an American nouveau riche scale. I was quite curious about the refrigeration system which I learned about thanks to the helpful docent in the main kitchen. She also shared that in a space not seen on this or the Butler’s Tour was an area where ice blocks were created and the system kept the fridges at 40 degrees.

On the butler’s tour, there was a fair amount of discussion of Emily King, the British housekeeper from 1897-1914. King possessed a suite consisting of a bedroom, private bath, and closet, illustrating her role as the highest-ranked servant. In contrast, you’ll find the single bedrooms in the basement. There were a whole host of smaller spaces than the grand rooms where a flurry of activity occurred such as in the butler’s pantry, sewing room, Mrs. Vanderbilt’s closet, among others.

So what about this tour? First, I had an issue with the name of the tour. After 45 minutes and then standing last in the butler’s pantry I asked “What was the butler’s name?” The response: “I don’t know.” I realize that the staff may not have found this information (yet) in family papers, but I felt like if they don’t know the butler’s name then perhaps the tour should be renamed “Emily King’s Biltmore.” It wouldn’t necessarily change what was discussed, but I didn’t learn what the butler did (now, yes *I* know what a butler does but many people who visit may not) or who he was.

Equally disappointing was in the course of the tour there was no discussion of the number of servants employed as well as differences in ethnicity, gender, ages, and marital status (if any). In my estimation a well-rounded tour is one where the visitor can learn something about the lives and work of servants. I found myself curious as to who was Mr. Vanderbilt’s valet? Who was Mrs. Vanderbilt’s personal maid? I asked someone (not on this tour) who said the maid may have been French but she didn’t know the answer as she was in the maintenance department. That lady was very nice who informed me about the cleaning of the rooms by the modern staff but I had hoped the butler’s tour would answer questions such as these.

Our tour guide knew a lot about the technology of the house and did faithfully describe that the Vanderbilts’ personal servants would have traveled with them in their numerous transatlantic trips and that the sewing room was an area for mending the finer clothing of the Vanderbilts or any of their guests. It was cool to see how bright early electricity was (Biltmore always had electricity), to see a bathroom, and hear about the call system.

I really did enjoy Biltmore despite my critiques of the tour. I think they have some amazing rooms to tell the stories of those who owned Biltmore and those worked there. And don’t miss the gardens and the winery for a little relaxation.


Filed under Uncategorized

Surry County’s visit with Joseph McGill

Preservation Virginia hosted Joseph McGill, of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, whose Slave Dwelling Project came to Bacon’s Castle in Surry County, Virginia on October 5th and 6th. Mr. McGill is a descendent of slaves and with the  Slave Dwelling Project he travels to and sleeps in slave dwellings across the country to raise awareness of the need to preserve these structures so important to our history.

Unfortunately, I was not able to go, but I was particularly pleased to see the press coverage here. Within the link, you will find that two sisters took advantage of the treat to sleep where their great-great-grandmother Camilla Pierce may have slept or at least passed by as, Camilla Pierce was born into slavery at Bacon’s Castle in 1830.

I encourage you to follow Mr. McGill’s efforts here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized