Site 8

House 1, whose evidence consists of three sub-floor pits, was discovered in 2001 when a 5 x 5 foot quadrat following the stratified random sampling strategy intersected with a sub-floor pit. That sub-floor pit, Feature 1, has regular edges and a rectangular shape below upper layers that were disturbed by tree roots. Feature 2, a second sub-floor pit, also has regular edges and a rectangular shape. It partially overlaps Feature 1. The area of overlap is about three tenths of a foot in the northwest corner of Feature 1 and the southeast corner of Feature 2. The very small area of overlap adds to the ambiguity of the relationship between the two pits. The two pits were bisected at the same time to allow the inspection of a section across the two. The bottom layer of fill in the two pits is a dark reddish brown silty clay mottled with red clay and 10% charcoal. Visually, this fill was indistinguishable between the two pits. The slight overlap between the two would argue against their being used simultaneously, but the apparently single fill layer covering the floors of both pits makes a case for their use at the same time.

Feature 8 partially bisected, looking north.

Pollen and macrobotanical analyses from the remaining features have not yet been completed.Pollen and macrobotanical analysis from Features 1 and 2 indicate that the surrounding landscape had both cleared and forested areas when the pits were filled, c.1775-1780. Tree pollen, including pine, oak, ash, sycamore, chestnut, hickory/pecan, and juniper or cedar among others, contributed between 35 and 67% of the pollen in twelve samples from the two pits. Cultigens and herbs, including weeds, make up 30 to 60% of the pollen from the two pits. The taxa represented include low-spine Asteraceae (likely ragweed and goldenrod, but may include other field weeds), Cheno-Am (goosefoot or pigweed, opportunistic plants that might have been encouraged by residents of Site 8), grasses, plantain, cereal grains, cattail, and members of the raspberry-blackberry family. Fragments of oak and pine wood were predominant in the macrobotanical remains of arboreal taxa, and the hickory family was also represented in many samples. Smaller amounts of elm, willow-poplar, chestnut, ash, birch, and maple further indicate the diversity in the plantation’s forests and the possible use of these trees as firewood. The fill of the sub-floor pits contained apple and persimmon seeds and peach stones from nearby woods and orchards. Peas, blackberry-dewberry and grape seeds, corn kernels, and wheat indicate food-plants that may have been grown in gardens and fields or gathered nearby. The seeds of ruderals, or weeds that grow around human habitations, included sedge, Rumex (dock or sheep sorrel), amaranth, goosefoot, and grasses. The amaranth, goosefoot, and dock or sheep sorrel may have been encouraged as a source of greens for food and for medicine. Seeds and seed fragments of pea, peach, blackberry-dewberry, wheat, grape, persimmon, apple, sedge, Rumex (likely dock or sorrel), amaranth and grasses, as well as corn kernel fragments also add to our understanding of the presence and use of weeds and cultigens as foods and as possible medicinals at the site.

House 2 in the northeast portion of Site 8 is known from the identification of a cellar (Feature 6) that was partially excavated in 2005. This feature, projected at 8 x 8 feet square, is lined with unmortared brick. Brick, cobbles, and artifacts including tools and ceramic and glass vessels, were present in considerable quantity in the fill. A smaller feature (Feature 7) to the southeast of the brick-lined cellar was also partially excavated in 2005 and appears to be a small sub-floor pit. Thirty contiguous quadrats were excavated over and around these features comprising House 2. Further excavation is intended on the features in future seasons.

Excavation of a feature from the third house was begun in 2005 and continued in 2006. House 3 is in the center of Site 8 and is identified by a single oblong sub-floor pit, bordering on cellar in size (Feature 8). The pit itself is only partially excavated, but from the excavated sample appears to be as much as seven feet long and nearly four feet wide. The cut of this feature presents very straight walls and squared corners. Compared with Feature 6, Feature 8 has relatively few artifacts in its fill. Notably, it did contain several pieces of charred planks; one plank fragment appears to by lying on the floor of the pit, and a small pile of several others is stacked on the middle of the pit floor. Preliminary species identification of these indicates that at least some of these are chestnut. It is conceivable that these planks were part of a wooden lining of the pit, which would partially explain its very squared profile. However, if that is the case, at least some of the planks are out of place.

A possible fourth house was identified in 2006 through the partial excavation of two adjacent sub-floor pits (Features 9 and 15) and the identification of a likely third feature, all northwest of Feature 8. The two partially excavated features are small and roughly square-shaped with rounded corners. Feature 9, the northern of the two, had a fill that was characterized by heavy concentrations of charcoal and had a level bottom. Preliminary analysis of several pieces of charcoal from Feature 9 indicates that the wood, like that in Feature 8, is likely chestnut. The fill of Feature 15 was rocky, characterized by a concentration of angular cobbles. This fill may have once been a part of a stone lining, as tabular stones were encountered along the edges of the pit. The rocky fill combined with the small size of the pit made it difficult to excavate a full bisection, so that the shape of the pit is somewhat unclear. Their sizes are still yet to be determined, as they are not completely excavated. Estimated size for each pit is approximately 2.5 x 3 feet. Neither pit had a significant quantity of artifacts, and none rested on the floors of the pits. These pits intersect and were likely used in succession, with Feature 9 being the earlier. The third House 4 feature will be excavated in future seasons.

There is only one cultural feature at Site 8 that is not a sub-floor pit or a cellar. It is 23 feet northwest of the closest sub-floor pit or cellar (Feature 6 in House 2). It was identified and excavated in 2002 as Feature 4. It is a basin-shaped pit that may have been a borrow pit or clay source for daub chinking, similar to Feature 10 on Site 7. Its proximity to House 2 suggests that clay from the pit may have been used in that construction.

A correspondence analysis of ceramic assemblages from the plowzone quadrats suggests that they fall into three major groups. Two of these are early, dating to the 1770s and 1780s, and the third group is later, representing the 1780s and 1790s. The quadrats adjacent to House 1 belong to one of the early groups, while quadrats southeast of House 1, in which no architectural features have been found, belong to the second. The quadrats adjacent to Houses 2, 3, and 4 fall into the third group (Neiman and Smith 2005).

Recent research suggests that the users of the large storage spaces, Features 7 and 8, in Houses 2 and 3 may have also shared a common yard space, maintained by the regular removal of refuse (Bon-Harper and Wheeler 2006). Combined with the presence of large storage spaces, the location of this maintained space between the two houses would imply a sharing of economic and social activities, perhaps in the production of food or other goods for common consumption, or perhaps sale.

It is likely that the enslaved field hands who lived on Site 8 were moved to less central and more sloping lands when Jefferson reorganized Monticello’s agricultural system in the 1790s. The new regime turned over more land to the plow and scattered a once-centralized community of agricultural workers to marginal lands along more distant fields. All the storage features on Site 8, including those in Houses 2-4, which may have been in use at the end of the site’s occupation, were empty of stored goods when they were backfilled. At the abandonment of these houses, the inhabitants were able to remove their belongings before the buildings were demolished.