Colonial Williamsburg Digital Library

Planting Features (Master Context M5)

Understanding what colonial Virginians found aesthetically pleasing and how they organized their public space is a question many archaeologists find intriguing. However, garden or planting features can be one of the more illusive archaeological features. At the Benjamin Waller house, archaeologists uncovered evidence early on in their excavations which provided a clue as to how the Waller family landscaped the part of their yard which would be available for public viewing. An in-depth study had long since been conducted into the exact arrangement of the Waller gardens, a veritable showplace in the rear of the house, which have been painstakingly reconstructed based on a sketch made of the gardens by the granddaughter of Benjamin Waller (Stephenson 1950). Little was known, however, about the area between the Waller House and Francis Street.

Modern boxwood trees grew along the north or front wall of the house just prior to archaeological excavations. They left behind a large archaeological footprint, nearly obliterating the remains of the Waller plantings. However, six systematically placed planting holes dating to the Waller era were visible beneath these modern boxwood holes. In some cases, whole sections of the Waller planting features had survived, partially cut away by Jimmy Knight excavation trenches and the modern boxwoods.

The actual dimensions of the holes were difficult to determine as they had in most cases been largely cut away by modern intrusions and the north wall of the excavation trench. However, the holes were similar in depth, fill, and profile shape. That, combined with the fact that the features were evenly spaced at approximately two meter (6.6 foot) intervals, suggested that the features were related (Figure 3). The features' proximity to the house, combined with the size and irregular profiles of the features, indicated that the features actually represented planting holes.

Planting feature 01BB-12 was the first of these features to be excavated. Located approximately 50 cm east of the front porch (all measurements concerning M5 are approximate, since in most cases only portions of the original features remained), it was cut both by Jimmy Knight trench 01BB-7 and modern planting hole 01BB-22 (see Figure 3), so that only 95 x 65 cm remained to be excavated. In addition, the north half of the feature was located outside the excavation area. The feature appeared to have been vaguely circular in shape. It contained a friable sandy clay loam fill. While in plan feature 12 seemed relatively straightforward, exploration revealed that the profile was irregular (Figure 4). It was this irregular profile and the lack of a postmold which suggested that it was a planting hole rather than a posthole. A large root stain appeared at the bottom of the excavated hole, probably representing a primary root from the original plant. The hole ranged in depth from 10 to 42 cm and was slightly stepped on the southern half. Artifacts recovered included tobacco pipes, wine bottle and window glass, porcelain, and Jackfield-type earthenware, which provided a TPQ of 1740, among others. The early TPQ date for the feature, along with those of the related planting holes, indicates that the plantings were related to the Waller occupation of the house.

The second planting feature, 01BB-24, had also been cut by modern disturbances (see Figure 3). Located approximately 2.2 m east of the front porch, only a small section, Figure 3. Planting features (Master Context M5). 8 Figure 4. Profile of planing feature 01BB-12. approximately 50 x 47 cm, was left. Most of the feature had been removed by Jimmy Knight trench 01BB-22 and modern planting feature 01BB-10. Like 01BB-12, 01BB-24 was roughly circular in shape, though again its true boundaries were impossible to determine due to modern intrusion. Planting hole 01BB-24 also had an irregular profile, similar to that of 01BB-12, and lacked a postmold (Figure 5). It also contained a large root stain at the bottom, most likely representing a primary root. The hole was approximately 35-40 cm deep and contained a similar fill to planting hole 01BB-12. Several artifacts were recovered, including wine bottle and window glass, nails, and bone. No TPQ date could be established for the feature.

Planting feature 01BB-26 was located approximately 4 m from the front porch of the Waller House (see Figure 3). Again, it should be noted that distances from the porch are approximate, as only portions of the features remained. Feature 01BB-26 was cut both by Jimmy Knight trench 01BB-30 and 1950s archaeological fill (context M2). Only 40 x 15 cm remained of 01BB-26. Like the previously discussed planting features, it was slightly mottled and contained a friable sandy clay loam fill. Its profile was also irregular and ranged in depth from 15 to 40 cm, with the eastern edge being slightly shallower than the western. Like 01BB-12 and 01BB-24, a root stain appeared in subsoil at the bottom of 01BB-26. The only artifacts recovered from planting feature 01BB-26 were brick chunks. The lower concentration of artifacts in this feature is most likely due to the fact that a much smaller segment of the feature remained to be excavated.

The last of the planting features on the east side of the front porch was 01BB-90 (see Figure 3). Located approximately 6.2 m from the front porch, 01BB-90 was cut by modern archaeology fill M2, yet more of it remained than with any of the other planting features located east of the front porch. A full 225 x 52 cm remained to be excavated. The feature, as with the previous planting features, was cut along the north by the excavation sidewall. 9 Figure 5. Profile of planting feature 01BB-24. This feature was slightly drier than the previous features. The fill was similar, though with a slightly higher clay content than the previous fills. This makes sense, because the entire area would have been disturbed by the installation of the brick arch drain which is located just 60 cm to the south. This profile was also irregular, but had also been disturbed by a large, modern tree root which was still extant at the beginning of the digging process (Figure 6). The feature was approximately 40 cm deep, and as with the previous features contained a large root stain at the bottom. Artifacts included, among others, nails, brick, and a fragment of dipped white salt glazed stoneware which provided a TPQ of 1715.

Fewer features in this line of planting features survived to the west of the porch. This was due to the fact that most of the area west of the porch had been previously dug by Jimmy Knight in the 1950s. Planting feature 01BB-57 lay approximately 50 cm to the west of the front porch steps (see Figure 3). It had been cut by Jimmy Knight trench 01BB-45, and like the features to the east of the porch was cut by the north wall of the excavation trench. Approximately 40 x 45 cm remained to be excavated. Again, the feature was vaguely circular in shape where it could still be seen. The fill was again a slightly mottled friable sandy clay loam. The profile of feature 01BB-57 was the most irregular, and most likely represented two planting features with one having been removed and the other placed directly in its removal hole (Figure 7). Due to the nature of planting holes, and their inherent irregularity, it was impossible to determine the extent of each individual planting hole. The two were excavated together, with changes in fill and profile shape noted on the context form. Feature 01BB-57 was approximately 47 cm deep, with two extensions on either side of a shallower depression. Artifacts recovered included bricks, nails, wine bottle, bone, and white salt glaze stoneware which provided at TPQ of 1720.

The only other surviving planting feature to the west of the porch was feature 01BB-72, located approximately 3.8 m from the front porch of the Waller House. Feature 01BB-72 was cut by historic features 01BB-70 and 01BB-68 and also by the north wall of the archaeological excavation trench. Its fill was slightly darker and less mottled than the previously discussed features, but it too was a lightly mottled sandy clay loam, approximately 10 Figure 6. Profile of planting feature 01BB-90. Figure 7. Profile of planting feature 01BB-57. 40 cm deep and with the same root stain located in subsoil at the bottom of the feature. The profile was also irregular with a slight step on the eastern edge of the feature. A TPQ of 1720 was established by white salt-glazed stoneware. Other artifacts removed included, but were not limited to, tobacco pipes, mirror glass, brick, bones, and an upholstery tack.

The 1782 Desandrouins map indicated that there were indeed bushes of some type in front of the Waller House at that time. However, while it is possible that the planting features excavated in spring 2000 dated to the 1780s, their earlier TPQ dates point to a more likely planting date sometime around mid-century. It is possible, and even likely, that these same plants or bushes were still standing in the 1780s or that they had been replaced with similar decorative shrubbery. While archaeologists were not able to determine the exact species which grew along the front of the Waller House, they were able to state with certainty that, like other middling gentry men of the time, Benjamin Waller was concerned that his property be aesthetically pleasing to his peers. This can also be seen in the elaborate show gardens which were planted and maintained behind the Waller home (Schlesinger 1980).

Layer (Master Context M6)

Only one layer which archaeologists could definitively date to the Waller period survived along the north face of the house. Located in the northwest excavation trench, layer M6 had a TPQ of 1775 established by pearlware (Figure 8). It also contained creamware, porcelain, table, wine bottle and window glass, shell, nails and other examples of the standard domestic artifacts generally found by archaeologists in the vicinity of middling gentry homes. The finds list for this layer (see Appendix B) is small, however, because the layer had been almost entirely cut away by both historic and modern features.

The historic features may in fact have actually been contemporaneous with the layer. This was impossible to determine since modern archaeological trenches and planting features had destroyed the archaeological interface between the layer and the Waller-era landscaping features (M5). It is, however, likely that the layer and the features were both extant during Benjamin Waller's occupation of the house. Both the TPQ dates and the stratigraphic relationships which appear to exist between the two support such a conclusions.

The modern archaeological excavation trenches played an active role in the destruction of layer M6. Jimmy Knight trenches cut across the layer in several places. In addition, the 1950s waterproofing trench, M8, also cut the layer, destroying the southern portion of the layer.

The two meters which surround the Waller House have, for the past 250 years, been a high activity area. Archaeologists encountered abundant evidence of landscaping activities, from the Waller era to the present day. This layer is an example of the high priority placed on the house and its immediate surroundings. Layer M6 was criss-crossed with planting and removal features, indicative of the continually changing landscape around the Waller House.

Decorative landscaping, like that in along the north face of the Waller House, was an activity of the gentry class. Throughout his life, Benjamin Waller made an effort to live as an example of middling gentryhood (Greenman 1994). The elaborate Waller gardens, as illustrated by Benjamin Waller's granddaughter Eliza Waller in 1791 (Figure 9), are another Figure 8. Plan view of layer M6. 12 Figure 9. Possible plan of Waller garden (Map is titled "Plan of Tower HILL, Sussex County, believed to be a replica of the Benjamin Waller garden at Williamsburg, VA.). example of Waller's desire to be like the gentry men he befriended-Secretary Carter and Peyton Randolph, for example. So then would the Waller drain which will be discussed later in this report.

Shell Midden 01BB-109 and Related Layers

Shell midden 01BB-109 was located in the excavation trench along the west wall of the main wing of the house. The midden and the three layers which it sealed (01BB-111, 01BB-129, and 01BB-149) were all that was left of the Benjamin Waller era on the west side of the house. In fact, they were all that was left of any pre-1950 strata. The standard 50-cm-wide waterproofing trench ran all the way along the west wall of the house. In 13 addition, the original lightning rod, which still stands against the house today in most of its original form, was entirely excavated in the 1950s, destroying most of the stratigraphy around it. Early in 2000, a new waterline was buried in the Waller yard, cutting away the westernmost portion of the excavation trench.

Shell midden 01BB-109 was located in the most southwestern corner of the excavation trench (Figure 10). The midden consisted of hundreds of whole oyster shells along with 1030 pieces of animal bone and myriad early to mid-eighteenth-century artifacts, including delftware, pearlware, white salt glazed stoneware, Chinese porcelain, pipe stems, table, window, wine bottle, and pharmaceutical glass, window leads, an upholstery tack, and wrought nails, among others. The midden was 92 x 33-90 cm and irregular in shape. It was fairly shallow, reaching a depth of only 5 cm. Its irregular nature, combined with its shallowness, lead to its interpretation as a midden or as sheet refuse rather than a trash pit. The midden's contents were fairly typical for domestic trash refuse, though its location on the opposite end of the house from the kitchen (both the kitchen outbuilding and the later interior kitchen were to the west) raised questions. Why the occupants of the house were traveling across the back yard to dump trash is still an open question.

The midden appears to have been used for a fairly short period of time as it is relatively shallow and not overly large in area. It was impossible to determine the true size of the midden due to the fact that it abutted a large tree stump to the south and was cut by the excavation wall to the west. However, its TPQ of 1775 indicates that it was in use during Benjamin Waller's occupation of the house.

Shell midden 01BB-109 sealed three layers-01BB-111, 01BB-129 and 01BB-149. None of theses layers contained any where near the quantity of artifacts recovered from the shell midden. The three layers abutted a modern utility trench and were also heavily disturbed by roots from the nearby stump. They likely experienced some degree of Figure 10. Plan of shell maiden 01BB-109. 14 contamination due to these disturbances. Still, the layers contained artifacts largely dating to the mid-eighteenth century. Layer 01BB-111 was a brown sandy loam nine centimeters deep containing delftware, pearlware, Colonoware, tobacco pipes, white salt glazed stoneware, window, wine bottle, pharmaceutical, and table glass, wrought nails, 99 bone fragments, and oyster shell, among others. It sealed layer 01BB-129, which was a reddish brown sandy loam six centimeters deep and almost entirely sterile except for a few brick inclusions. Layer 01BB-129 in turn sealed layer 01BB-149, a mottled reddish brown sandy loam 13-17 cm deep containing delftware, pearlware, window and wine bottle glass, and one bone. Layer 01BB-149 sealed sterile subsoil.

These layers most likely accumulated over the course of Benjamin Waller's occupancy. They then served as the base for the small shell midden which built up on the southwest corner of the house. Although small backyard middens are not uncommon in Williamsburg at this time, the location of the midden so far from the kitchen is an interesting oddity. Exactly why this spot was chosen as a dump site remains unclear. However, the Wallers were clearly using this area as a place for disposing of domestic refuse.

Planting Features 01BB-146, 01BB-155, 01BB-158

Few features dating to the Waller occupation remained intact in the trench which ran along the south wall of the house's main wing. The construction and subsequent removal of a Victorian-era porch had obliterated most of the cultural layers and features behind the house. Additionally, the 1950s renovations and waterproofing of the foundation had done damage as well, especially to the area within 50 centimeters of the foundation. However, there were some features which were contemporaneous with the Benjamin Waller years.

Three planting features which dated to Benjamin Waller's occupation of the house were in evidence along the south wall of the House. The features did not appear to relate to one another. The first of these, feature 01BB-146, cut into subsoil (Figure 11). Most likely it was sealed by Waller occupation layer M7 (see below). However, in this area all stratigraphy had been destroyed by the Victorian-era porch. In addition, the feature extended outside the excavation area and was cut away by the south boundary of the excavation trench. Once the modern fill from the porch removal had been excavated, the feature was visible in subsoil.

Planting feature 01BB-146 was roughly circular in shape, 54 x 40 cm, and reached a depth of 50 cm. The fill was a friable sandy clay loam. There were numerous artifacts within the fill, though none which provided a TPQ. Delftware, Colonoware, tobacco pipes, window glass and table glass were all removed during excavation, along with several other artifacts. Although no TPQ was established, the assemblage appeared to be mid-eighteenth century, which would have dated the planting feature to the Benjamin Waller period. No other features which related to 01BB-146 were uncovered.

Feature 01BB-155 was a very shallow planting hole which cut Waller occupation layer M7 (Figure 12). The feature appeared after the removal of layer M8 which had been contaminated during the 1950s excavations when workmen walked over the layer, pressing modern artifacts into the soft dirt. The feature was relatively small and shallow (34 x 44 x 13 cm) and had been disturbed by roots. The fill was a yellowish brown sandy 15 Figure 11. Plan of planting feature 01BB-146. Figure 12. Profile of planting feature 01BB-155. loam. Artifacts recovered during excavations included North Midlands slipware (providing a TPQ of 1670), window and wine bottle glass, and a piece of quartz debitage. Although the TPQ is very early, the feature cuts layer 01BB-160, which has a TPQ of 1762, meaning that the feature could not have been deposited prior to 1762.

Planting feature 01BB-158 was larger than the other two rear planting features and had previously been covered by the Victorian-era porch (Figure 13). The feature was 61 x 58 x 22 cm and consisted of a grey sandy loam. Several small root holes which were 16 Figure 13. Plan view of layer M7. most likely related to the planting itself were in evidence. No diagnostic artifacts which would provide a TPQ date were recovered. However, there were Chinese porcelain sherds, wine bottle glass, and wrought nails in the feature fill, suggesting it dated to the Benjamin Waller occupation period.

Layer (Master Context M7)

Only one layer relating to the Waller occupation was excavated in the rear of the house, along the south wall of the main wing (Figure 13). Like layer M6 it had been cut by both modern and historic features. The entire northern portion of the layer was destroyed during the 1950s waterproofing, as again was the Waller House builder's trench. The eastern section of the layer was cut away by the construction and subsequent removal of a Victorian-era porch. In addition, before Layer M7 could be investigated, a layer which had been contaminated during the 1950s refurbishing of the house (layer M9, see below) had to be removed. Layer M8 appears to have been contemporaneous with Benjamin Waller's residence at the House.

The layer was most likely a living surface during the time of Waller's occupation. Artifact concentrations were moderate, similar to layer M6 along the north face of the house (see above). Finds were of a domestic nature in keeping with the layer's proximity to the house. Some of those finds included delftware, creamware (which provided a TPQ of 1762 for the layer), tobacco pipes, Colonoware, Chinese porcelain, table glass, bottle glass, case bottle glass, dry-bodied stone ware, and wrought nails, among others.

Most of the intrusions into layer M7 were modern. So little was left of the layer that it is impossible to say much about it other than that its artifact content was typical of a mid-eighteenth century domestic layer.

Scaffolding Features 01BB-168 and 01BB-175

Only two features which may relate to the Benjamin Waller occupation period were located along the west face of the "L" wing, which was constructed sometime around 1781, 17 just five years before Benjamin Waller died. As with most areas surrounding the house, most of the stratigraphy had been cut away by modern intrusions. In the case of the west side of the "L" wing, most of the damage had been caused by nineteenth-century boxwoods which were removed in the 1990s when the rear yard and garden of the Waller house were re-landscaped. Large planting stains remained over most of the excavation area. However, in an unexpected development the waterproofing system employed by the 1950s waterproofers changed about half way through the west wall of the "L" wing. Rather than digging a 50-cm-wide trench, they switched to a very narrow trench, around 10 cm wide, into which they simply poured the cement waterproofing agent. Unfortunately, while this method destroyed less of the stratigraphy around the house, it still completely obliterated the original builder's trench.

The two features which did remain, 01BB-168 and 01BB-175, were most likely related to the construction of the "L" wing. Although archaeologists and architectural historians have not been able to determine exactly when the "L" wing was constructed, the Frenchman's Map, which was drawn in 1782, shows the Waller house complete with "L" wing. It is likely that the wing was constructed sometime just prior to that. Dendrochronology was conducted throughout the house and may provide answers as to when the different sections of the house were constructed. However, as of early 2001 results of this testing have still not been received by the Foundation.

The two scaffolding holes are roughly similar in size and shape, although 01BB-175 is larger and they are on different orientations (Figure 14). Scaffolding hole 01BB-168 was 30 x 20 x 5 cm and was oriented east-west. Scaffolding hole 01BB-175 was 45 x 26 x 17 cm and was oriented north-south. Within the fill of the scaffolding hole was a stain related to the actual scaffolding itself (01BB-174). There was no similar stain in scaffolding hole 01BB-168, possibly due to disturbances by a modern driven stake. The only artifacts recovered were from context 01BB-175. They included window glass, bone, and a wrought nail, none of which provided a TPQ date.

Figure 14. Plan view of features 01BB-168 and 01BB-175.

Layer (Master Context M10)

For the most part the rest of the area around the "L" wing had been destroyed during the 1950s waterproofing and restoration. What little soil did remain had been heavily cross-trenched by Jimmy Knight and was also cut with modern utility trenches. A small portion of an early layer was in evidence on both the south and east elevations of the "L" (Figure 15). So little remained, however, that it is difficult to say much about the layer. Few artifacts were removed, including 18 window and wine bottle glass, bone, and one wrought nail. No TPQ was available but stratigraphic relationships would tend to imply that the layer is most likely Waller era.

Figure 15. Plan view of layer M10.

Without a doubt the most interesting feature encountered during the 2000 archaeological excavations of the Waller House was the brick arch drain which extended from the northeast portion of the house past the Office and continued on in a northeasterly direction (Figures 16 and 17). Although the drain had been previously uncovered during Jimmy Knight's 1950s excavations, little was known about the function of the drain.

1950s Excavations

In 1950 Jimmy Knight's crew uncovered the brick arch drain while excavating prior to the waterproofing of the house foundation. At that point the drain connected to the house and then made a sharp turn to the northeast. Knight excavated as far as the office, where the drain had been broken away and thus appeared to terminate. However, the rough nature of the break indicates that the drain did in fact at one point continue on past the office, although how far it extended is still not known.

In order to complete waterproofing and repair activities, workmen removed the section of the drain which attached to the house (an approximately three foot section) and bricked up the southern end of the drain. A rough outline of the drain's entry into the basement was outlined in brick on the foundation in order to provide future investigators with an idea of how the drain was originally connected. Unfortunately, there was error in the both the height and width of the drain when it was outlined on the wall. It is apparent to the naked eye that the drain is larger than the outline indicates. Subsequent measurements confirmed this error, and this was taken into consideration when archaeologists began to speculate about the function of the drain.

Figure 16. Plan of vaulted brick drain.

Figure 17. Profile of vaulted brick drain.

Drain Form

The drain is nine courses high not including the arch (see Figure 17). The arch extends another five courses for a total inside height of approximately 90 cm. The inside of the drain is roughly 60 cm across. The outside measurements are 1 x 1.6 m. The total length of the drain is not known as it has never been entirely excavated.

Three types of drains were typically used in eighteenth-century Williamsburg. The simplest of these was knows as the gutter or French drain. A simple V formed by two rows of bricks served to drain rainwater run-off to lower ground or into larger underground drains through drain boxes (Gilmore 1998). More complex than the open French drains were the enclosed box drains. These consisted of two parallel rows of headers laid into a trench. Walls were made up of two courses of stretchers placed less than one brick width apart. This formed a brick-lined trench which was then covered with additional stretchers. These drains were used to remove water from basements and generally fed into larger vaulted drains (Gilmore 1998). The largest and most complex drains common to Williamsburg were the vaulted brick drains, or brick arch drains, like the one uncovered at the Waller House. Found throughout the Historic Area, these drains were commonly constructed by digging a deep trench and then lining the bottom and sides with bricks. Builders then constructed a vaulted roof to cover these drains. They were commonly found in close proximity to either kitchens, wells, or both, though they are found in many locations throughout Williamsburg. Their massive size (1'8" to over 3' wide) which made them the backbone of Williamsburg's complex drainage system (Gilmore 1998).

Clearly the Waller drain does not fit this typical model. If it had, it a simple box drain would have sufficed for removal of water from the Waller basement. This box drain would then have deposited water from the basement into a larger vaulted drain, similar to the Waller drain. However, this was not the case.

The Waller drain is one of the largest to be uncovered in the Historic Area and is by far the largest drain which leads out of a private dwelling. Although several other buildings do have drains in order to remove water from their basements (i.e., the Governor's Palace and the Anderson House), none compare in size to the Waller drain. This poses a very interesting question: What function of the Waller drain required that it be so large? The answer to that question has eluded scholars, though through combined effort, several plausible explanations have been proffered.

Drain Function

Drains provided two major functions in eighteenth-century Williamsburg. First, they served to drain the streets and low-lying lots within the city, making it not only more inhabitable and traversable, but also considerably more aesthetically pleasing. Second, they served to drain water and liquid waste from many of the buildings throughout the city. Typically, the simpler French and box drains lead from houses and outbuildings and then deposited their liquid into larger underground brick arch drains. This was the case at the Governor's Palace, the Anderson property, and the Public Hospital, among others. However, this was not the case at the Waller House. Rather than constructing a small box drain which then either dumped into a nearby ravine, or into the city's vaulted drain system, Waller constructed 21 one of the largest drains to be uncovered by archaeologists in the city, and he attached it to his house.

Two major stumbling blocks exist which impede our understanding of the Waller drain. The first of these is the lack of any documentary evidence which alludes to the construction of the drain. Humphrey Harwood, who did most of the subsequent repairs to the Waller House, makes no mention in his ledger of either the construction of the Waller House or its drain. Waller himself left behind no memoirs, nothing to indicate what he was thinking as he had the drain constructed. Secondly, the Waller drain has never been fully excavated. Archaeologists do not know how far the drain extends or whether it continues in the same northeasterly direction until its terminus. Archaeologists have twice explored the section of the drain closest to the house, but have yet to see the true terminus of the drain.

These stumbling blocks have not kept archaeologists, or their fellow scholars, from speculating about the size and function of the Waller drain. It is the consensus of archaeologists, historians, and architectural historians that the Waller drain was indeed constructed to remove water from the Waller House basement. The question then remains, why construct such a large drain for water removal when clearly a much smaller drain would suffice.

The most likely theory as to why Benjamin Waller had such a large drain constructed has to do with his acquisition of large tracts of land to the east of the Capitol Building. As discussed in the historical section of this report, Benjamin Waller saw himself as the quintessential gentleman. He worked hard at establishing himself as one of the more prominent residents of the capital city. As part of this, he acquired most of the lots of land east of what is now Waller Street, where Christiana Campbell's Tavern now stands, diagonally across Francis Street from his own house. He intended to establish a neighborhood or subdivision in this area, selling off the lots to individuals who would then build houses upon them. He may then have seen his drain as potentially the main feeder drain for an entire network used to drain the basements and low-lying areas in this new neighborhood. This then would explain the size of the drain, if potentially one day it were to carry the waste water and run-off of an entire subdivision.

In fact, Waller did accumulate this land, clearly with the intention of selling it off, which he began doing as early as the 1750s. In addition, the Frenchman's Map shows some type of barrier extending into Francis Street just to the west of the Waller House (Figure 18), effectively separating the Waller House from the rest of the street. Perhaps this was also intended to set the Waller subdivision off from the surrounding area. This barrier, combined with the route of Waller Street and the placement of buildings along its east side, provided Waller with a vista, something much coveted by the Williamsburg wealthy and increasingly hard to come by as the city bulged and lots became scarcer and scarcer.

It is likely that Waller's subdivision came to fruition. The historical record indicates that Benjamin Waller was quite successful in selling the land he had acquired east of the Capitol (Stephenson 1950). At some later point, the subdivision was annexed into the city and became part of Williamsburg proper. This being true, it is also likely that the Waller drain does in fact continue, crossing under Francis Street and possibly intersecting with 22 other drains on the lots between Francis and Lafayette Streets. Archaeological investigation of the "Waller" subdivision would answer any remaining questions regarding the Waller drain and the network of drains for which it served as the primary repository.

There were several interesting features which postdated Benjamin Waller's occupation of the house. Although most of the post-Waller era finds consisted of past archaeology and landscaping fill, there were some features which provided information regarding the house after 1786.

Nineteenth-Century Foundation 01BB-152

Although foundation 01BB-152 had clearly been encountered by Jimmy Knight in his 1950s excavations, no mention was made of it in any subsequent reports relating to the Waller House excavations or renovations. Located in the excavation trench along the south wall of the main wing of the house, foundation 01BB-152 was covered with debris from the 1950s renovations, mainly plaster and mortar. Some 2.38 m (7.8 feet) long (eight stretchers and six headers) and 11 cm (4.3 inches, ½ course) wide, the foundation was constructed in English bond using sand mortar (Figure 19).

The foundation was cut well into subsoil, the bottom courses (in most cases all that was left) were located 64 cm below the ground surface. The eastern portion of the foundation consisted of three courses of brick which reduced to two and then one as it moved west (Figure 20). The foundation did not appear to turn, but consisted of a simple straight line of bricks a half-course wide. The north face of the foundation abutted the 1950s waterproofing trench, the south face subsoil. It is possible and even likely that part of the 23 Figure 19. Plan view of foundation 01BB-152. Figure 20. Profile of foundation 01BB-152. foundation was destroyed during Jimmy Knight's excavations. Without further information, it is impossible to understand the function of the foundation. It is possible that it was some sort of retaining wall, but any explanation for its existence would at this point be conjecture. Neither archaeologists nor architectural historians were able to decipher its function.

Layer (Master Context M9)

Layer M9 sealed layer M7, the Benjamin Waller era layer along the south wall of the main wing (see Figure 13). Layer M9 was possibly a turn-of-the-century layer, with a TPQ of 24 1880 established by manganese solarized glass. In addition it contained delftware, creamware, North Midlands slip, Yorktown-type earthenware, Colonoware, Chinese porcelain, a crucible fragment, window, wine bottle, table, and pharmaceutical glass, case bottle, pipe stems, bone, and wrought nails. The layer may have in fact dated to the Benjamin Waller era, but during renovations it was exposed to constant trampling by workers, thus contaminating it and giving it a much later TPQ.

The scarcity of late nineteenth-century artifacts and the plethora of mid eighteenth-century artifacts, along with a fair amount of plaster seemingly crushed into the layer (perhaps by workers' feet?) reinforce this conclusion. However, as the layer does date to the late nineteenth century and can not be definitively attributed to the Benjamin Waller era, it was labeled as a post-Benjamin Waller era layer.

Victorian Porch (Master Context M11)

Although it was removed during the 1950s restoration, remnants of a Victorian-era porch still existed along the south wall of the main wing of the house. Extending from the south wall of the house was a section of one of the original foundation walls which had been capped in concrete (01BB-132). A second section of foundation wall (01BB-140) ran east-west and represented the southern extent of the Victorian porch. However, only a soil stain remained of this section of porch, as the bricks had been entirely removed rather than capped. In 1950 this Victorian-era porch connected with the rear porch which is still in existence today. It was removed and capped in concrete, leaving behind only the stains which archaeologists uncovered during the 2000 excavations.

The majority of remaining post-Waller features were related to the 1950s archaeology and renovations or to post-1950s landscaping. Other than providing archaeologists with the challenge of trying to decipher their functions and separating them from historic contexts, these features have little to teach us about the Benjamin Waller occupancy of the House. What they do indicate is that the Waller House has continued to be the site of much activity, from its original construction sometime in the mid-eighteenth century through the ongoing renovations of the new century.