Marble Springs

8/13/2019 Marble Springs

1/112

Preliminary Site Assessment, 2013

Marble Springs State Historic SiteKnoxville,Knox County, Tennessee

December 2013


2/112

2

Preliminary Site Assessment 2013

Marble Springs State Historic SiteKnoxville,

Knox County, Tennessee

Prepared for:The Governor John Sevier Memorial Association and

The Tennessee Historical Commission

Prepared by: Center for Historic Preservation at MTSU

Ginna Foster Cannon, Graduate Research Assistant

Brad Eatherly, Graduate Research Assistant

Ashley Poe, Graduate Research Assistant

Jessica White, Heritage Area Fieldwork Preservationist

Dr. Carroll Van West, Director

December 2013


3/112

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Marble Springs History

Existing Conditions Overviewo Exterior

! Smokehouse! Building One 5! Building Two! Building Three 10! Springhouse

Needs Assessment Exterior:o Smokehouse 14o Building One 15o Building Two

19

! Building Three..24

! Springhouse/Overall Property..30

Interior Descriptions:

Building One 33

Building Two 39

Needs Assessment Interior:

Building One 47

Building Two 50

Interior Description:

Building Three.. 57

Needs Assessment InteriorBuilding Three.. 65

Furnishings:

Building One. 70

Needs Assessment. 74

Building Two. 75


4/112

4


Building Three... 87


Appendices:

Appendix A... 90

Appendix B... 95

Appendix C... 100


5/112

5

AcknowledgementsLocated in Knox County, Marble Springs, the home of John Sevier was purchased

by the state in 1941, was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1971, and

has been operated by the Governor John Sevier Memorial Association since 1979. Thenomination form for the National Register of Historic Places listed its primary

significance as it being the only remaining home of Tennessees first governor, JohnSevier, who occupies a place in importance second to none in the building of the state.

Its date of significance was listed as the 1790s. Secondary significance is listed asarchitecture, typical of the style of the early Tennessee frontier which is rapidly

disappearing. (See Appendix.)

The Center for Historic Preservation gratefully acknowledges the hard work anddiscernment of the three MTSU pubic history graduate students Ginna Foster Cannon,

Brad Eatherly and Ashley Poe and Jessica White, Heritage Area Fieldwork Coordinatorwho undertook the study under my guidance.

Cannon, Eatherly, Poe, and White with the assistance of Dr. West, measured,photographed, and assessed the condition of principal historic buildings on the site(Smokehouse, Building One, Building Two, Building Three and the Springhouse) as well

as inventoried the historically significant furnishings. Work on the project was broken upas follows: Eatherly documented and assessed the exteriors with Dr. West; Cannon

documented and assessed the interiors with White: and Poe documented and assessed theinterior furnishings with White.

In future reports, we will recommend amending the nomination form and

interpretation for the site to reflect recent findings. According to The HistoricalDendroarchaeology of Two Log Structures at Marble Springs Historic Site, Knox

County, Tennessee (2007) conducted by University of Tennessee, Building Two datesfrom the early to mid-1830s more than fifteen years after the death of John Sevier (See

Appendix). This is the oldest building on the site. The revised significance of the site willbe architectural (circa 1830s-1850s) for a farm in Tennessee on the eve of the Civil War.

Secondary significance will be ascribed to the land being owned by John Sevier.

Special thanks go to Mike Bell, curator at the Tennessee State Museum, for hisgenerous assistance in evaluating the interior furnishings. We also thank EthielGarlington, current board chair of the Governor John Sevier Memorial Association and

Ashleigh Oatts, Interim Director of Marble Springs for providing access to the site.

Carroll Van WestDirector

The Center for Historic Preservation


6/112

6

Marble Springs History

The Marble Springs entry in the Tennessee Encyclopedia of History and

Culture by Dr. Carroll Van West (last updated February 2011) provides a historicaloverview of the site.

Marble Springs is a state historic site that documents the Knox County farmstead

of General John Sevier, the first governor of the State of Tennessee. As a soldier in theRevolutionary War, Sevier received 640 acres from North Carolina in 1785; his property

was located at the foot of Bays Mountain, where deposits of marble had been found aswell as large springs. Thus, Sevier named his farm "Marble Springs." He established his

farm residence before 1792, and he and his family periodically lived in this Knox Countythree-room log residence, as well as in a fine Knoxville dwelling, until his death in 1815.

Three years later, the property was sold to James Dardis.

Restoration efforts at Marble Springs date to 1941, when the state purchased the

remaining original log residence and 40 acres. The John Sevier Memorial Commissiondirected the property's restoration with the assistance of the Tennessee HistoricalCommission. Since 1964 the John Sevier Memorial Commission, the Sevier Family

Association, and the Sevier Community Club have promoted and maintained the site. In1971 the property was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Eight years later,

in 1979, the Tennessee Historical Commission appointed the Governor John SevierMemorial Association to manage and guide future restoration at Marble Springs.

Source: http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/entry.php?rec=833 Accessed November 25,

2013.

Note: As part of future interpretive planning, a full history of the property, from 1790s to1979, will be developed.


7/112

7

Overall SiteThis report covers the principal historic buildings on the site shown below.


8/112

8

Exterior Elevation Descriptions

Smokehouse

The smokehouse (12-3 x 12-2) is a single pen log structure that features a

cantilevered gable roof, half-dovetail notching, limestone and Portland cement chinking,

and a stacked limestone foundation. The roof is composed of cedar shingles and verticalwood planks enclose the eaves. The structure has a single entryway on the north faade.The building is not original to the property and it is unknown when it was brought to the

property. The structure might not have always been interpreted as a smokehouse butperhaps also as a corncrib.


9/112

9

Figure 1-1: Front faade, facing west.

Figure 1-2: South elevation.


10/112

10

Figure 1-3: North elevation.

Building One

The kitchen (18-3 x 13-11) is located to the east of the Main house and is

connected by a breezeway. This single story log building features a cedar shingle gable

roof, dovetail notching, a shed roof porch, limestone and Portland cement chinking, andlog chimney. The south elevation features a central entryway and a six-light casementwindow on the southwest corner of the elevation. The west elevation features an exterior

log chimney. The chimney has been fashioned out of hewn logs similar in fashion tothose that comprise the rest of the cabin. As the chimney increases in height, the logs

become much smaller. Limestone and Portland cement has been used for the chinkingfor the chimney. Historically, the chimney most likely would have been a "catted

chimney." A "catted chimney" would have used stone or brick for the firebox while thestack and the exterior would have been made from a mixture of clay or mud and sticks.

Because of the potential fire hazard involved, the chimney most likely would have beenbuilt leaning away from the main structure so that it could be easily pulled down if it

caught on fire. The north elevation features a central entry door beneath a shed roofporch. This back porch typically would not have been a part of the structure and it is

doubtful that Governor Sevier's original structure would have had one.


11/112

11

Figure 1-4: Front facade. The kitchen is on the right.

Figure 1-5: East elevation.


12/112

12

Figure 1-6: Northeast elevation

Figure 1-7: North elevation. Kitchen is in the center.


13/112

13

Building Two

The main house (22-3 x 18-0) is connected to the kitchen by a breezeway.This two story log building features a cedar shingle gable roof, half-square notching, and

limestone and Portland cement chinking. The front faade features a single center

entryway with a six-over-six single hung window on the southwest side. The eastelevation features a six light casement window on the second floor. The north elevationfeatures a single center entryway underneath a shed roof overhang. The west elevation

includes an exterior stone chimney.

Figure 1-8: Front facade of the Main House, with breezeway on the right.

Notice the sag in the roof of the Main House.


14/112

14

Figure 1-9: North elevation. Main House on right.

Figure 1-10: West side elevation.


15/112

15

Building Three

The Walker Tavern (23-2 x 20-2) is located approximately 73 to thesoutheast of the main cabin. It is not original to the property and was moved to this site

in 1987. This two-story log dwelling features a cedar shingle side gable roof, dovetail

notching, a limestone block chimney, and limestone and Portland cement chinking. Thefront faade features an off centered entryway with two symmetrical six-over-six doublehung windows on either side. The top floor features two three light awing windows. The

west elevation features a centered single entryway and a small vent hatch on the top floor.The south elevation features an off-centered entryway with a centered six light awing

window on the top floor and another small non-functioning entryway on the southeastside of the structure. The east elevation features an exterior stone chimney with a three-

over-three double hung window to the left of the chimney.

Figure 1-11: North elevation. Notice the sag in the roof.


16/112

16

Figure 1-12: West elevation

Figure 1-13: Southwest elevation.


17/112

17

Figure 1-14: South elevation

Figure 1-15: East elevation.


18/112

18

Springhouse

The springhouse (9 x 9) is a single pen log structure featuring a cantileveredgabled roof, round log notching, limestone and Portland cement chinking and a stacked

limestone foundation. The structure has a dual entryway on both the north and the south

facades.

Figure 1-16: Front faade.


19/112

19

Needs Assessment - Exterior

Smokehouse

Portland cement has been added to the existing chinking. (Fig. 1-17) This needs

to be addressed and performed in a historically accurate way.

Figure 1-17: Close-up of smoke house wall depicting the Portlandcement used in the chinking and daubing process.


20/112

20

Building One

The roof is sagging in the middle on both the north and south elevations. Theroof is made of wood shingles and several of them are warped. Portland cement has been

used in the chinking. (Fig. 1-18) Carpenter bees have infested the wooden logs, causing

significant damage. The logs on the front faade have also had significant charring. Awindow on the front facade is cracked and needs repair, along with the entire windowneeding a new layer of caulking. There are marble steps that lead to the front door of the

building cemented together leaving an aesthetic that is not historic. The chimney, locatedon the east elevation, is not historically accurate. (Fig. 1-19) The construction of a catted

chimney would be a long-term preservation project for the site. A lean-to porch has beenadded to the rear elevation that is not historically accurate to the time period. Two of the

three logs supporting the porch are resting on stone that is not secure. (Figs. 1-20, 21)Drainage is also an issue where the supporting log rests on the stones. The overhang of

the roof over the porch does not extend far enough out, which is causing the floorboard todeteriorate significantly. (Figs. 1-22, 23)

Figure 1-18: Portland cement


21/112

21

Figure 1-19: Historically inaccurate chimney. A long-term project

would include building a catted chimney.


22/112

22

Figures 1-20, 21: Back porch support beams are not on solid footing.


23/112

23

Figures 1-22, 23: The short overhang on the porch roof is causing damage to the

floorboards.


24/112

24

Building Two

There is a sag in the roof on both the north and south elevations. The Portland

cement that has been used is retaining water in several places. (Fig. 1-24) This will needto be addressed. Several of the logs used for the house are severely deteriorated. Some

of the joints at the corners of the house are reinforced by steel rods, which are causing the

logs to warp. (Fig. 1-25) The ends of the logs where the rods are have been covered witha sealant that is wearing away and is not congruent with the rest of the structure. Thewindows need to be caulked. There are marble steps leading to the front door with a

handrail that needs to be replaced. (Fig. 1-26) Some sort of temporary ramp at the frontdoor should be used for wheelchair access. A boot scrape lies haphazardly near the front

entryway and needs to be used in a historically accurate way or be removed. Abreezeway in between the main cabin and the kitchen would not have been roofed. (Fig.

1-27) There is an overhang coming off the rear entryway, along with marble steps thathave been cemented together. (Figs. 1-28, 29) These need to be removed. The chimney

on the west elevation is historically inaccurate. (Fig. 1-30) A small planter is in disrepairby the chimney and needs to be removed. (Fig. 1-31)

Figure 1-24: Portland cement retaining water.


25/112

25

Figure 1-25: Steel rods used to support joints are causing logs to warp.

Figure 1-26: Front steps cemented together.


26/112

26

Figure 1-27: Roof covering the breezeway connecting the kitchen to the main house.

Also note the large support log connecting the two buildings. It should be removed.


27/112

27

Figures 1-28, 29: Back steps cemented together, overhang, and handrail that needs to be

removed.


28/112

28

Figure 1-30: Historically inaccurate chimney.

Figure 1-31: A small, broken planter is beside the chimney and should be removed.


29/112

29

Building Three

There is a sag in the roof on both the north and south elevation. The eaves of theroof do not extend far enough. (Fig. 1-32) Portland cement has been used for the

chinking and needs to be replaced by more historically accurate material. (Fig. 1-33) The

dovetails at several of the joints are deteriorating and can easily be broken by hand. (Fig.1-34) The stone piers are cemented together creating an aesthetic that is not historic.(Fig. 1-35) The north elevation wall begins to lean out at the top. (Fig. 1-32) There is a

broken window on the north elevation that needs to be replaced. (Fig. 1-36) A windowon the west elevation is broken and needs repair. (Fig. 1-37) All windows need new

caulking. The front, west side, and rear entryways are not compatible with the rest of thestructure. (Fig. 1-38) Marble steps located on the front, west and rear entryways have

been cemented together and need to be removed. A handrail by the marble steps at therear entryway is loose and needs to be made sturdier. (Fig. 1-39)

Figure 1-32: The eaves do not extend out far enough. Also note that the top few logs ofthe north elevation are beginning to protrude outward.


30/112

30

Figure 1-33: Portland cement on the Walker Tavern.

Figure 1-34: Deterioration of dovetails.


31/112

31

Figure 1-35: Example of stone piers that have been cemented together.


32/112

32

Figure 1-36: Broken window on north faade.

Figure 1-37: Broken window on east elevation.


33/112

33

Figure 1-38: Example of the doors on the north, west, and south elevations that need to bereplaced with something more historically accurate.


34/112

34

Figure 1-39: Example of cemented marble steps with a handrail on the south elevation

that needs to be replaced by something sturdier.


35/112

35

Springhouse and Overall Property

The springhouse is not made in the same fashion as the other structures on theproperty. A long-term goal would be to replace the springhouse with a structure that is

more compatible. Appropriate fencing should be constructed to block off the spring and

the creek that it runs into. (Figs: 1-40, 41) There is a rock wall lining the dugout portionof the ground that could be utilized as an interpretive feature. (Fig. 1-42) The pathwaythat leads to the springhouse is in severe need of being repaired. An old log bench atop

the hill looking towards the springhouse should be removed. (Fig. 1-43) A painted barrelstands over a cistern in the middle of the property. Something more aesthetically

pleasing and historically accurate should be placed here.

Figure 1-40: Fencing should extend to the edge of the springhouse.


36/112

36

Figure 1-41: Fencing should be extended to block access to the creek.

Figure 1-42: Stone wall that could be used as an interpretive device.


37/112

37

Figure 1-43: Old log bench.


38/112

38

Interior Descriptions

Building One

Building One, the kitchen, is a single-story log structure measuring 13 x 17-3.According to the National Register Nomination (1971), the original structure was

destroyed by fire in 1929 and was rebuilt in 1963 using locally-sourced oak logs per theoriginal dimensions. (Fig. 2-1) The floorboards are made of pine. (Fig. 2-2) The walls are

split logs with mortar. The interior of the pitched roof is comprised of wooden planks,tarpaper and poplar beams. (Fig. 2-3)

The north wall is bare save the 3 plank door leading to the shed-roof porch. (Fig.

2-4) A large stone fireplace and hearth is centered on the east wall. (Fig. 2-5) Thechimney is composed of small heart of poplar logs and mortar. (Fig. 2-6) Gaps are

visible on both the right and left sides. The south wall contains a six-light casement

window. (Fig. 2-7) The window is framed on three sides by oak boards. There is a 3plank door. (Fig. 2-8) The west wall is composed of split logs and mortar to the height ofthe rafters and then by wood planks. A triangular gap is visible where the west wall androof meet. (Fig. 2-9)


39/112

39

Figure 2-1: Interior shot

Figure 2-2: Floorboards


40/112

40

Figure 2-3: Pitched ceiling and west wall and northwest corner.

Figure 2-4: Door on north wall.


41/112

41

Figure 2-5: Notice gap between top of north wall and the roof.

Figure 2-6: Stone fireplace and hearth on east wall.


42/112

42

Figure 2-7: Small hearth of poplar logs and mortar on the east wall.

Figure 2-8: Window located on south wall.


43/112

43

Figure 2-9: Door on south wall

Figure 2-10: West wall shows a gap between the kitchen and breezeway.


44/112

44


45/112

45

Building Two (John Sevier House)

The National Register Nomination (January 1971) states, Of all the original logbuildings, only the main cabin remains. This assertion is called into question in the

University of Tennessee report titled The Historical Dendroarchaeology of Two Log

Structures at the Marble Springs Historic Site, Knox County, Tennessee (April 2007)submitted to the Tennessee Historical Commission. Tree-ring dating suggests that thecabin was built in the early to mid-1830s; John Sevier died in 1815. The report suggests

the cabin was likely built by a later tenant George Kirby. Archaeological and historicalresearch by Charles H. Faulkner and others at the University of Tennessee further calls

into question the authenticity of the cabin.

The National Register Nomination states:Through the years various changes were made. In the 1930s, the

exterior of the logs were covered with weatherboarding and a tinroof was put on the cabin. The interior walls were covered with pine

ceiling boards In 1961 and 1962 work continued on repair andrestoration on the main building, including replacing some of the

logs, rebuilding of the stone chimney and fireplace, repairing thefloor and joists, and chinking and daubing the logs. A new roof of

hand-riven shingles from a large white oak on the place was put onthe cabin.

Building Two, interpreted as the John Sevier House, is a two-story log structure

measuring 16-10 x 21-2. The second floor is accessible by a box-staircase (3-3 x 5-10) in the northwest corner. A closet is built under the staircase. The floorboards are

pine and the rafters are made of pine poles. (Fig. 16) There is also a 3 door on the northwall. The east wall is composed on split logs and mortar. The door on the south wall

measures 3 and parallels the door on the north wall. A 2-3 double hung six-over-sixcasement window on the south wall is the only source of direct light when the doors are

closed. The west wall contains a large stone fireplace and hearth.

The second floor is currently closed to the public and being used as a storage room. Thereis a single window located on the east wall.


46/112

46

Figure 2-11: Floorboards

Figure 2-12: Rafters repairs visible


47/112

47

Figure 2-13: Repairs are visible where the ceiling has been stabilized.

Figure 2-14: North wall and door. Staircase in the northwest corner with a closet beneath.


48/112

48

Figure 2-15: North and east walls visible

Figure 2-16: Southeast corner


49/112

49

Figure 2-17: West wall

Figure 2-18: Northwest corner showing box staircase, closet and fireplace hearth.


50/112

50

Figure 2-19: Detail of split log mantle.

Figure 2-20: Second Floor north wall


51/112

51

Figure 2-21: North wall alternate view with wooden railing that was used for exhibit

purposes when the second floor was open to the public.

Figure 2-22: Second flooreast wall with casement window.


52/112

52

Figure 2-23: Southeast corner

Figure 2-24: Northwest corner


53/112

53

NEEDS ASSESSMENT - INTERIOR

Building One

The principal issues to be addressed are sealing the building and ridding it of

pests. There is a triangle shaped gap between the wall and roof. This is a majorconservation issue as the gap is large enough to allow both animals and pests. (Fig. 2-25)

A wasp nest is visible on the pitched roof. (Fig. 2-26) There is another access point forvermin in north wall where wall and roof meet. (Fig. 2-27) Notice crack in upper right

pane as well as gap between window frame and the wall. (Fig. 2-28). The chinking needsto be repaired on the chimney. There are several points of access that allow the

infiltration of pests. These should be sealed to prevent further damage. The debris leftbehind by pests, such as wasp nests and bird guano, should be removed.. (Fig. 2-29)

Figure 2-25: A gap is visible between the top of the wall and the roof, and should berepaired.


54/112

54

Figure 2-26: There is a wasp nest on the pitched roof.

Figure 2-27: Access point for vermin in north wall where wall and roof meet.


55/112

55

Figure 2-28: Notice crack in upper right pane as well as gap between window frame andthe wall

Figure 2-29: Notice gaps in chinking on the chimney.


56/112

56

Building Two

Overall, the first floor of Building Two is in good repair. Remnants of green paintare visible on the ceiling along the rafters. They appear to speak to the changes made to

the interior during the twentieth century as discussed in the National Register

Nomination. The paint should be removed or perhaps included into the interpretation ofthe building. A notable need is to close the gap between the doorframe and the southwall. Additional dubbing would fix the problem and keep out pests. Spider nests and

webs have gathered on many furniture pieces, particularly the cradle. Cleaning isrequired, and proper insect traps placed to prevent further damage.

The second floor is currently closed to the public. It is reasonable to assume this is

due to safety concerns. A sign placed by Marble Springs staff states, For your safety, noguest beyond this point please. The primary safety concern appears to be the integrity of

the floorboards and joist system. They appear weak in certain areas, particularly in themiddle of the room. The stairs leading upstairs are also narrow and slippery from heavy

traffic. This too is a potential safety issue. Animal droppings and dead pests coverportions of the stairs and floorboards. Lastly, numerous wasp nests are visible in the

rafters. It is not clear if they are currently inhabited.

In addition to safety concerns, there are other areas in need of repair. Thechinking along the north wall leading up the stairs requires repair. A gap is visible

between the window frame and the east wall. The planks on the west wall are damagedand should be inspected. It appears to be water damage that may indicate a leak in the

roof or chimney. Or, it could be a result of the wall not being properly sealed, as smallgaps are visible.


57/112

57

Figure 2-30: Green paint visible on the ceiling along the rafters

Figure 2-31: Note the gap between doorframe and south wall.


58/112

58

Figure 2-32: Second floor is currently used for storage.

Figure 2-33: Sign indicating safety concerns


59/112

59

Figure 2-34: Narrow and slippery stairs

Figure 2-35: Gaetano and dead pests are visible on the stairs and second floor.


60/112

60

Figure 2-36: Gap between window and frame allows in pests.

Figure 2-37: Gaps visible and damage to planks on west wall.


61/112

61

Figure 2-38: Close up of damaged planks on the west wall.

Figure 2-39: Wasp nests are visible along the rafters.


62/112

62

Figure 2-40: Chinking is in need of repair along staircase located in the northwest corner.

Figure 2-41: Close up of chinking on northwest wall


63/112

63


64/112

64

Building Three

Interior Description

Building Three, the Walker Tavern, is a two-story log structure measuring 22 x19-3. The National Register Nomination does not mention Building Three. This

building was moved to the property in 1987 from a site near Walker Springs Road inwestern Knoxville. The floorboards are pine and the walls are split logs with mortar.

The north wall contains two six-over-six double hung windows and an exterior

door (3-2). The width of northwest window is slightly more narrow that of the northeastwindow (2-2 vs. 2-4). The non-standard size of the windows speaks to their age. A

large stone fireplace and hearth are centered on the east wall. A single six-pane window(2-8) on the east wall provides additional light. The south wall contains a narrow non-

functioning door (2-7) in the southeast corner; an exterior door (3) is aligned with the

door on the north wall, and a staircase leading to the second floor. A closet is built underthe staircase. The west wall contains a 3 exterior door.

The second floor has an open floor plan. On the north wall are two three panewindows. The east wall has only one of the three pane windows, while the south wall has

a three-over-three window. All of these windows are single pane. The window on thewest wall has been boarded over with three wooden planks running horizontally, flanked

by two planks vertically. Two brass hinges were installed at the top, and a pole leansagainst the middle. Like the first floor, the floorboards are pine. Joists and rafters are

exposed in the ceiling.

Figure 3-1: Floorboards are pine.


65/112

65

Figure 3-2: View northwest corner.


66/112

66

Figure 3-3: View of Northeast corner and east wall

Figure 3-4: Fireplace detail


67/112

67

Figure 3-5: View, southeast corner

Figure 3-6: View, southwest corner


68/112

68

Figure 3-7: Southwest view

Figure 3-8: Staircase


69/112

69

Figure 3-9: Stairs (Photo 0389)

Figure 3-10: Floorboards on the second floor


70/112

70

Figure 3-11: North wall on second floor

Figure 3-12: East wall on second floor


71/112

71

Figure 3-13: South wall on second floor

Figure 3-14: West wall on second floor


72/112

72

NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Several windows need repair, as there are cracks in the panes. The cracks let inpests, including a live wasp on a windowsill. A major issue to be addressed is electrical.

The electrical wires are strung along the beams using metal brackets. It appears as if theywere improperly installed or improper size and watt bulbs have been in use. There is

ample smoke damage from light bulbs. Newspaper and fire kindling are being stored in alarge container to the side of the fireplace. These should be moved further away to

mitigate the risk of fire damage.

On the second floor, water damage is evident on the gables. The hand railing is weak

and should be reinforced or replaced for safety concerns. The roof is also in need ofrepair, as there are holes and cracks that allow in pests and water.

Figure 3-15: Window on north wall


73/112

73

Figure 3-16: Window on east wall

Figure 3-17: Spiderweb crack in a first floor windowpane.


74/112

74

Figure 3-18: Wasp on window sill

Figure 3-19: First floor ceiling, showing the damage from the bulbs.


75/112

75

Figure 3-20: Closer view of first floor ceiling. Note the metal brackets holding in thewire.

Figure 3-21: Closer view of the lighting system and metal brackets on the first floor.


76/112

76

Furnishings

Building One

Building One is interpreted as a kitchen. There is a mixture of antique and modern

pieces in this space. The space has one key period piece (period furniture dating between1790-1815), described and photographed below, as well as several reproduction and non-

period pieces, which will be covered briefly. In the west corner of the room, a ladder-back chair has been placed. A butter churn, a ladder-back chair, and a drop leaf table are

located in the northwest corner. A pie safe sits against the north wall. In the northeastcorner there is a large wooden unpainted chest, along with several iron pots. The

andirons can be seen in the east wall fireplace. In the southeast corner is a small, lightcolored side table. Off centered in the room is a long wooden table, with various

reproduction kitchen items on it (tea, mortar and pestle, spice jars, etc.).

The key period piece is a cherry drop leaf side table, c. 1815-1825. This table is a

Sheraton style piece, with a cylindrical foot. The foot is separated from the block leg bya ball and ring design.

Figure 1-1: Drop leaf side table with block legs, c. 1815-1825.


77/112

77

Figure 1-1: View of the drop leaf table from the door of the kitchen.


78/112

78

Figure 1-2: Close up of the legs of the Sheraton style drop leaf table. This image showsthe damage to one of the legs, as well as the splitting on the upper part of the same leg.


79/112

79

Figure 1-3: Closer view of the top of the Sheraton style drop leaf table, showing the

damage near the hinge.

A non-period piece of note is the unpainted chest, c. mid-1800s. This light wood (mostlikely birch or pine) chest is likely a blanket chest. Square nails are used on the front and

sides, and there are two metal hinges holding on the lid. The side boards are shaped in atriangle to form the feet. The inside of the chest is divided by a wooden board place

vertically.

Figure 1-4: Side of the mid-1800s unpainted chest.


80/112

80

Figure 1-5: Closer view of the square nails on the unpainted chest.

Needs Assessment

Building OneAll pieces need conservation, and the Sheraton style drop leaf table and unpainted

chest need restoration. The drop leaf table has damage to the top, to the legs, and sides.There are many splits and cracks, and the tabletop is stained as well. This drop leaf table

is most likely the oldest piece of furniture on-site, and protection is needed to ensure thispieces future. Items such as a tea brick displayed on the long table near the center of the

room may cause damage and should be removed from the table surface. The table ispositioned directly beneath a window, and should be moved from direct sunlight. The

mid-1800s wooden unpainted chest is used to store an older bowl that has been heavilydamaged. This bowl needs to be removed from the container and stored properly.Openings allowing pest infiltration should be sealed to prevent further damage to

furnishings.


81/112

81

Figure 1-6: This damaged bowl is being stored inside the mid-1800s unpainted chest andshould be removed for the protection of both items.

Figure 1-7: This photograph shows a gap between the lid and body of the unpaintedchest. Gaps such as this should be sealed to prevent pest infiltration.

Figure 1-8: Metal items that are displayed on top of this unpainted chest have causeddamage.


82/112

82

Figure 1-9: This table is placed near a window and receives direct sunlight several hoursa day. Pieces should not be displayed in direct sunlight to prevent damage.


83/112

83

Building Two

Building Two is interpreted as the Sevier cabin. There are no period pieces in this

building. Here again, the room is open to guests to touch and move about as they please;

the older pieces are easily opened to damage from this. The first floor has a fireplace onthe west wall, next to the staircase. At the foot of the staircase is a small side table, aswell as a cradle. On the south wall is a small sideboard with a ladderback chair in front.

In the southeast corner is a sideboard, with a ladderback chair placed in front of it. Thissideboard is decorated with a plate of faux fruit in the center, and a set of hurricane lamps

on the left and right. In the center of the east wall is a large secretary desk, with the deskopened. In the northeast corner is a roundback chair, next to a large table with a silver tea

set. On the south wall is a small sidetable, with a lace doily covering the top. Thistabletop has much sun damage to it. A book cradle and candleholder are on the table.

Next to this, under the window, is a large bench. The second level has a collection ofassorted items, both antique and reproduction, including a Victorian bed frame, Civil War

era table with spool-turned legs, and china set.

Although there are no period (1790-1815) pieces in this building, there are severalnineteenth century pieces, including a buffet, secretary desk, and cradle dating to the

1830s. There are several late nineteenth century pieces on both floors of the cabin aswell, such as the roundback chair, Victorian bed frame, and spool-turned chair.

The buffet is an American Empire piece made from cherry wood, c. 1830s. The piece

has two serving side boards, spiral columns on the cabinets, and turned bun feet. Thecabinet doors on each of the side boards have split in the middle. There is a typically

American Empire style patera in the center of the piece, surrounded by two drawers withbrass knobs. There are four drawers total on the piece: one on each side board and two in

the middle. These four drawers have a lighter wood inlay .


84/112

84

Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2: These pictures show the crack to the middle of the left sideboard (left) and the

right side board (right) of the cherry buffet.


85/112

85

Figure 2-3: Sideboard, c. 1830s. This is done in the American Empire style from cherry.This piece requires conservation, as there are many splits and cracks on the piece. The

right cabinet door will not open without force.


86/112

86

Figure 2-4: Close up of the sideboard patera.

Figure 2-5: Brass mushroom-shaped knobs and carving on the left top section.


87/112

87

Figure 2-6: Closer view of the spiral on the bottom portion of the buffet. Note thecracking in the corner, and damage just at the bottom of the turning.

Another piece of note is the c. 1830s secretary desk. This piece is also an American

Empire, and made of cherry. Currently, staff interpret the piece as a wedding gift to JohnSevier and his first wife, Sarah Hawkins in 1761. The secretary has an attached

bookcase, and the desk is displayed as open. The doors to the bookcase remain closed,and one can see the papered inside of the bookcase. This paper has considerable damage

to it, and is held to the inside by white tacks. The secretary has three drawers, and oneither side, a ringed column leading down to a turnip foot.


88/112

88

Figure 2-7:10 Secretary, c. 1830s. The piece goes from floor to ceiling, leaving no roomwhatsoever at the top.

Figure 2-8:11 Inside of bookshelf, lined with paper. Many of the glass panes have been

replaced. Note that opening the door fully is impossible, as a crossbeam is blocking thedoor. The white tacks holding the paper in are also visible.


89/112


90/112

90

Figure 2-11: Lower half of secretary, with desk open. Inkwells have been placed directly

on the wood. The knobs are mushroom-shaped wooden knobs, and the rings of thesupporting columns are intact.


91/112

91

Figure 2-12: Closer view of the rings on the supporting columns.

A third piece of interest is the c. 1830s cradle. The cradle itself is very simply made

with a slope upwards, cut round nails, and the piece rests on two cheese cutter rockers.The wood is possibly birch or white pine.


92/112

92

Figure 2-13: Cradle, c. 1830-1850. This piece has a reproduction doll lying inside, and alarge amount of spider eggs underneath. Cleaning and conservation are necessary in

order to stop insect damage to the piece.

Figure 2-14: Close view of the cut nails of the cradle.


93/112

93

Needs Assessment

Building Two

Several pieces, including the secretary, buffet, and side table require restoration.

The side-table is placed next to the door and near a window, and the sun damage to thetop is evident. Although an embroidered doily covers it today, the damage from the past

is evident.

Figure 2-15: Sun damage to the side-table (c. early 1900s) near the door of Building Two.In this photograph, the light coming in from the nearby window also shows.

The secretary is tightly placed in Building Two; the top is less than a half-inch

from the ceiling. The doors of the bookcase will not open in the space that it is in. Anexposed beam blocks the doors. (Fig. 13) The paper inside of the secretary should be

conserved immediately, to avoid silverfish and/or beetle damage. The cornice of thehutch has split, and at one point, a repair attempt was made with modern nails. Thisshould be reversed and correctly restored.

The upstairs of the cabin needs a great deal of attention. The upstairs flooring is weakand unstable, and yet the floor is littered with a mixture of contemporary and modern

pieces, including china, pictures, a bed, a table, boxes, fire irons, a powder horn, a deer

head, and a toilet chair. Many of these items are stacked together, placed on top of eachother, or in an area where damage is imminent. These pieces should be separated,catalogued, and stored in order to stave off deterioration. The cloth stored in the room,

including the rugs and large sheet, need to be removed, cleaned, and stored as well.The buffet sideboard on the first floor needs restoration. There are cracks and

splits all over the piece, most severely on the top and the cabinet doors. Another sidetable, just to the side of the buffet, has significant damage to the top and legs. The leaf to

this table leans against the wall in a corner. Repair is needed on this piece as well.


94/112

94

Figure 2-16: This is the upstairs of Building Two. Note that pictures in frames are

stacked together, and the space is shared by a large bed (c. late 1800s), farm equipment,and cardboard boxes. The spool-turned leg table dates to the Civil War era.


95/112

95

Building Three

Building Three is interpreted to as the Walker Tavern. All three buildings contain

a mixture of 19th

, 20th

, and 21stcentury furnishings; however, this building relies on non-

period (post-1815) and reproduction pieces the most. The downstairs area has a largetable in the middle, and the room is decorated as a common space. Along the west wallwas a pie safe with shelving on top. The stairs run along the south wall, and the west

wall has the fireplace. The upstairs was decorated as a shared bedroom, with three bedsalong the north wall.

The key pieces in this building are a mid to late 1800s pie safe, and one bed. The piesafe is in a very popular and simple design. It looks to be cherry, with very short legs and

an arrow foot.

Figure 3-1: Full view of the mid to late 1800s pie safe, with a separate shelf placed on

top.

Another key piece in building three is one of the three beds in the upstairs portion. Of

the three beds, the oldest sits near the west wall. This is a c. 1825 rope bed, crudely madeof walnut. The headboard is a simple H shaped piece, and the legs are rectangular

pieces of wood. A rope supports the stuffed mattress that rests upon it.


96/112

96

Figure 3-2: All three beds in the upstairs section of Building three are rope beds. Thisbed dates to c. 1825-1835.


97/112

97

Needs Assessment

Building Three

The pie safe on the first floor needs repair work and restoration. Metal and other

items are being stored in the safe and could stain or damage the wood further. The metalpunching is rusted and stained, and needs conservation. The upstairs is decorated with

three beds of various ages, from both the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The beds situnderneath a damaged roof, and are exposed to water and sun. There is no protective

roping to keep visitors from touching, leaning, or lying on the beds. It is recommendedthat either newer beds replaced the older pieces, or they be roped off to prevent damage

from the public.

Figure 3-3: The three beds in the upstairs of Building three are placed in the open.Cracks in the wall can be seen to the left, and the beds are placed near an improperly

sealed window.


98/112

98

Appendix A National Register of Historic Places Nomination


99/112

99


100/112

100


101/112

101


102/112

102


103/112

103


104/112

104

Appendix B

THE HISTORICAL DENDROARCHAEOLOGY OF TWO

LOG STRUCTURES AT THE MARBLE SPRINGS

HISTORIC SITE, KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE, U.S.A.

THE HISTORICAL DENDROARCHAEOLOGY OF TWO LOG

STRUCTURES AT THE MARBLE SPRINGS HISTORIC SITE, KNOX

COUNTY, TENNESSEE, U.S.A.

JESSICA D. SLAYTON1

, MAGGIE R. STEVENS1

, HENRI D. GRISSINO-MAYER1

*, and CHARLES H. FAULKNER2

1Laboratory of Tree-Ring Science, Department of Geography, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville,

Tennessee 37996, USA

2Department of Anthropology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996, USA

ABSTRACT

The Marble Springs homestead in south Knox County serves as a significant heritage site for the

state of Tennessee because it was the final home of one of our nations most important founding

statesmen and first governor of Tennessee (1796 to 1801, 1803 to 1809), John Sevier. Recent

archaeological and historical research had called into question the authenticity of the original John

Sevier log cabin located at the Marble Springs homestead. We used tree-ring dating to determine the

year(s) of construction of the Governor John Sevier cabin and the adjacent Walker Springs log cabin

(which had been relocated to the site later and has no ties to Gov. John Sevier) by first extracting cores

from all accessible logs in the cabins and then evaluating the cutting dates of these logs. A nearby

reference chronology at Norris Dam anchored the Gov. John Sevier cabin chronology from 1720 to

1834 and the Walker Springs cabin chronology from 1675 to 1826. The cutting dates obtained from six

logs in the Gov. John Sevier cabin suggest construction of the cabin was completed sometime between

late 1835 and early 1836. We were able to date cores from 29 logs from the Walker Springs cabin,

which strongly support final construction between late 1827 to early 1828. Our dendrochronological

analyses suggest that the cabin at Marble Springs long thought to be the original cabin occupied by

Gov. John Sevier was instead likely built during the occupancy of the property by a later tenant,

George Kirby, in the early to mid-1830s, well after the death of Sevier in 1815.

Keywords: Tree rings, historical dendroarchaeology, Governor John Sevier, Marble Springs,

Tennessee.

INTRODUCTION

The study of dendroarchaeology uses tree-

ring dating techniques to determine when a tree

was harvested in order to derive the year or years

of construction for a structure composed of wood

or with wood incorporated (Bannister 1962; Dean

1978). The information from this type of analysis

allows agencies charged with the care of historical

structures to authenticate the historical signifi-

cance and authenticity of a structure. These tree-ring dating techniques are increasingly being used

in the Southeastern U.S. to date the construction

of historic structures (Bowers and Grashot 1976;

Stahle 1979; Bortolot et al. 2001; Mann 2002;

Reding 2002; Wight and Grissino-Mayer 2004;

Lewis et al. 2006; Grissino-Mayer and van de

Gevel 2007). Such structures can be accurately

dated with existing reference tree-ring chronolo-

gies that have been developed previously in the

Southeast and housed in the International Tree-

Ring Data Bank at the National Climatic Data

Center in Asheville, North Carolina. In some

cases, these studies have proven that accepted

construction dates based on documentary evi-

dence and oral tradition are inaccurate (Mann

2002; Grissino-Mayer and van de Gevel 2007).

The tree-ring records from such structures are

also valuable for extending existing chronologies

further back in time to the 16 th and 17th Centuries

or perhaps earlier. This is accomplished by cross-

dating where matching, overlapping patterns of* Corresponding author: [email protected]; Fax 865-

974-6025; Telephone 865-974-6029

TREE-RING RESEARCH, Vol. 65(1), 2009, pp. 2336

Copyright 2009 by The Tree-Ring Society 23


105/112

105

narrow and wide rings from living trees are

compared against progressively older pieces of

wood (Fritts 1976; Baillie 1982). The unique

temporal patterns of wide and narrow rings are

essential for crossdating the samples of wood. The

variability in ring widths is caused by changes in

regional climate on a year-to-year basis so that the

patterns are recorded in a similar pattern in the

ring widths (Fritts 1976). Other sets of tree rings

can then be dated by comparing them to the

established reference chronology.

The cabin located at the Marble Springs

Historic Site (Figure 1) is believed to have beenthe home of Tennessees first governor, John

Sevier (b. 1745, d. 1815). Sevier was the first and

only governor of the short-lived State of Franklin

(17851788), served as brigadier general of militia

for the Washington District of the Territory South

of the River Ohio (as Tennessee was known then),

and then served as governor of Tennessee from

1796 to 1801, and again from 1803 to 1809.

Governor John Sevier is thought to have acquired

the Marble Springs property via a North Carolina

land grant sometime around 1796 when he began

to live there part-time. He named the site Marble

Springs for the two year-round flowing springs

on the property (Miller 2000; Barber 2005). Over

the years, several buildings were located at the site,

including the main cabin attached to a kitchen by

a dogtrot (a covered passageway), a springhouse, a

barn and crib, an ash hopper, a smokehouse, and

four or five other cabins. Sevier himself is believed

to have made improvements to structures on the

site during the years he spent at Marble Springs

(Sevier 17901815).

Local lore has recently questioned the legit-

imacy of the main structure at the Marble Springs

homestead dating to the period of occupancy by

Governor John Sevier. Although archaeological

testing around the John Sevier cabin produced

numerous artifacts that dated to the late 1700s, the

cabin has been subject to a persistent rumor

that the present building was not his [John

Seviers] home at Marble Springs (Faberson

and Faulkner 2005). Sevier himself never men-

tioned building the cabin (Barber 2005) and, for

someone of Seviers national stature, the cabin israther small and simplistic, even by the standards

of 1800. Furthermore, Ramseys famous 1853

description of the secluded spot where stood

the cabin of Governor Sevier (Ramsey 1853,

p. 710) is actually describing a location far from

the current Marble Springs homestead (Faberson

and Faulkner 2005).

To help settle this controversy, our goal was

to determine the year(s) of construction for Gov.

John Seviers cabin at the Marble Springs home-

stead to verify whether or not this cabin could

indeed have been the home of Governor John

Sevier. We used a well-established reference tree-

ring chronology that exists for the east Tennessee

region to date the Gov. John Sevier cabin, but also

took advantage of the tree-ring record in the well-

preserved oak logs found in another cabin located

on the Marble Springs property. Called the

Walker Springs cabin (Figure 2), this two-story

structure was originally located in the western area

of the city of Knoxville, Tennessee, near Walker

Springs Road (Faulkner 1991). It was moved to its

current location at Marble Springs in March 1987

and has no ties whatsoever to Gov. John Sevier.

The logs in this cabin consist of oak timbers

exclusively, many containing well over 100 tree

rings.

METHODS

Field Methods

We extracted 0.5 diameter cores from oak

and pine logs in the Gov. John Sevier cabin with a

Figure 1. The Governor John Sevier cabin (larger structure on

the left), showing the doorway on the south entrance. The

reconstructed kitchen is located to the right, separated from the

main cabin by a narrow covered walkway.

24 SLAYTON, STEVENS, GRISSINO-MAYER, and FAULKNER


106/112

106

specially designed hollow, cylindrical drill bit

attached to a hand drill (Figure 3). To assist the

crossdating process, we also cored logs from all

four walls and both levels of the Walker Springs

cabin. Sample identifications were assigned to the

cores, which consisted of an abbreviation for the

building (JS or WS), the cardinal direction of

orientation of the wall (N, S, E, or W), the log

number (beginning with the bottom log 5 01),

and sequential letters for each core extracted from

the log (A through D). Each side of the cabin was

sketched and all sampled locations indicated onthe sketch.

Whenever possible, each log was sampled

both at the basal (bottom location on the tree

trunk) and distal (upper location of the tree trunk)

ends at a location with a smooth, intact, curved

surface where the outermost rings were most likely

to be preserved. At least two cores per log were

taken to minimize the expected effects of intra-ring

variability and also for replication should internal

defects occur in one of the cores. Before coring,

the outer surface of the target area was marked

with permanent ink to verify that the outer rings

had remained intact after coring. An appropriate

angle and depth for coring was estimated by

examining the end of the log and locating the treepith. After the appropriate depth was reached, the

core was extracted by dislodging the attached end

of the core with a hooked, thin steel rod designed

for that purpose. The extracted cores were then

immediately glued onto wooden core mounts with

the cells aligned vertically so that the wood surface

could be sanded on a transverse plane. All relevantinformation about each sample was written on the

core mount.

Laboratory Methods

The cores were sanded using progressively

finer sandpaper, beginning with ISO P40-grit

(425500mm) and ending with ANSI 400-grit

(20.636.0 mm) (Orvis and Grissino-Mayer 2002).

The sanding process produced a surface on the

wood that allowed the cellular structure of the tree

rings to be visible under standard 103 magnifica-

tion. All tree rings on each core were then marked

by decades starting from the innermost complete

ring (complete earlywood and latewood 5 ringnumber 1) to help with the measuring and

crossdating procedures. Each 10th ring was

marked with a single dot, every 50th ring with

Figure 3. Extracting a core from the Walker Springs cabin (east

side, log WSE04, basal end) using an electric drill and the

specially-designed hollow corer.

Figure 2. The two-story Walker Springs cabin sits near the

Governor John Sevier cabin, but was relocated to the Marble

Springs Historic Site in 1987. View is of the north side. Note the

differences in log sizes and their state of preservation in this

cabin with logs in the Governor John Sevier cabin (Figure 1).

Denroarchaeology of the Marble Springs Historic Site, Tennessee 25


107/112

107

two dots, and every hundredth ring with three dots

(Stokes and Smiley 1968). The ring widths of each

core were then measured to the nearest 0.001 mm

using a Velmex measuring system and Measure

J2X software. The measurement files created by

this process were used for statistical crossdating.

Crossdating

The ring-width measurements for each core

were then statistically crossdated to reference tree-

ring chronologies that already existed within the

region. Reference chronologies were obtained

from the International Tree-Ring Data Bank

(IGBP PAGES/World Data Center for Paleocli-

matology) in Asheville, North Carolina. We used

the Norris Dam State Park (1633 to 1980) and

Piney Creek Pocket Wilderness (1651 to 1982)

reference chronologies (both white oak, Quercus

alba L.) from eastern Tennessee to anchor the

measurement series from the two structures in

time (Duvick 1981, 1983). Of these two chronol-

ogies, the Norris Dam chronology proved the

most useful. The chronology consists of 71 dated

series with an excellent average inter-series corre-

lation of 0.61 and an average mean sensitivity of

0.20.

The undated measurements were compared

one at a time to these reference chronologies usingthe computer program COFECHA (Holmes 1983;

Grissino-Mayer 2001). COFECHA first removes

age-related and other low-frequency trends

through a three-step iterative process to ensure

the year-to-year (i.e. high-frequency) trends are

emphasized as these are necessary for successful

crossdating. COFECHA then uses segmented

time-series correlation techniques to crossdate

the undated series against the reference chronol-

ogies. We tested 40-year segments of each mea-

surement series lagged 20 years. Correlation coef-

ficients were calculated for each segment as a

measure of the strength of the relationship of that

segment with other 40-year segments throughout

the reference chronologies. For an undated series

to be considered dated, the temporal placements

suggested by COFECHA had to be systematic for

all or most of the tested 40-year segments, i.e.

most segments had to have the same date

adjustment (such as +1727). The correlation

coefficients also had to be statistically significant

(r $ 0.37, p , 0.01), although some erratic ring

patterns caused the correlations for certain seg-

ments to fall below this critical threshold, which is

common in dendrochronology, especially for

eastern tree species. Notable marker rings were

then identified and recorded to assist in the

crossdating of other series via the list method

(Phipps 1985; Yamaguchi 1991) and using scatter

plots. The final placement of a series in time had

to be both visually and statistically convincing

(Grissino-Mayer 2001).

Once dated against the reference chronolo-

gies, all series were combined into one measure-

ment file and again tested using COFECHA to

ensure crossdating accuracy internally among the

series. COFECHA flagged low correlations (r ,

0.37, p . 0.01) that required re-inspection. If the

alternate position suggested by COFECHA was

unrealistic (for example, a +9 adjustment when

both 40-year segments on either side were dated

correctly) or displayed a statistically significant

correlation, the segment was kept at its original

placement. Series that did not crossdate convinc-

ingly against either of the reference chronologies

or with the crossdated individual series were

temporarily put aside. We later attempted to

crossdate them with the final crossdated tree-ringchronology created from each cabin.

Two statistical descriptors were used to assess

the quality of the crossdating. First, the average

inter-series correlation calculated by COFECHA

is an average of the correlation coefficients for

each measurement series when correlated against

the master chronology created from all the other

dated series (Grissino-Mayer 2001). In general, an

inter-series correlation of 0.40 or higher is

desirable for consideration as a correctly dated

series. Second, we used the average mean sensi-

tivity, a measure of year-to-year variability, for all

dated series. Because crossdating is a high-

frequency process, high mean sensitivities (gener-

ally above 0.20 for southeastern tree species)

facilitate the crossdating process. Low mean

sensitivities result when the tree-ring series exhibit

very little year-to-year variability. This lower

amount of variability, known as complacency,

26 SLAYTON, STEVENS, GRISSINO-MAYER, and FAULKNER


108/112

108

occurs when trees experience little environmental

stress. Mean sensitivity values around 0.20 are

common for oak tree-ring patterns from the

southeastern U.S. (DeWitt and Ames 1978).

Establishing Cutting Dates for Logs

We examined the outermost dated ring on

each core at high magnification and then assigned

a symbol to determine the likely period of cutting

(Bannister 1962; Nash 1999):

B: bark is present, indicating the outer ring is

fully intact (certainly a cutting date);

r: outermost ring is continuous and intactaround a smooth surface, but no bark is

present (considered a cutting date);

v: the date is within a few years of the cutting

date, based on presence of sapwood;

vv: impossible to determine how far the outer

ring is from the true outer surface (no

sapwood present and rings in the heartwood

are likely missing).

++: a ring count was necessary for the

outermost core section on a core with two

sections separated by decay.

We carefully inspected the completeness of

the outermost ring by looking for complete

formation of earlywood vessels in the oaksfollowed by complete formation of latewood with

no earlywood vessels formed in the following year.

The latewood and earlywood of prior rings guided

us in assessing whether the outermost ring

appeared completely formed. If a ring was

completely formed, the tree was most likely cut

during the trees dormant period after that year, a

period spanning several months from the fall of

one calendar year to the spring of the next.

Because of the possibility of the tree having been

cut in either of the two years in the cases of fully-

formed outer rings, we assigned the cutting date

based on the year of the complete outer ring,

although the tree may have been cut the following

year before growth resumed.

Cores taken from dry seasoned wood are

often brittle and the sapwood can be decayed

considerably or riddled with insect galleries,

causing the cores to be in two or more sections.

We crossdated the rings on each core up to the

gap, and then counted the number of rings in the

outermost detached section of the core (which

included the outermost ring and therefore the

cutting date of the log) and added this ringnumber to the outermost crossdated ring on the

innermost core section. For these cores, the

outermost date was a terminus post quem, i.e. a

year after which the log had been harvested for

inclusion in the structure (Baillie 1995).

RESULTS

We extracted 31 cores from 11 oak logs and 7

cores from 5 pine logs in the John Sevier cabin,

while 53 cores representing 31 oak logs were

extracted from the Walker Springs cabin. The final

oak chronology for the John Sevier cabin consist-

ed of 16 oak cores representing 6 logs (Table 1).

Although some crossdating was evident for the

pine cores when compared to the oak reference

chronologies, the matches were not conclusive

enough to warrant assigning exact calendar years.

For the Walker Springs log cabin, 48 cores were

Table 1. Statistics for oak cores from the Governor John

Sevier Cabin.

Series

Begin

Year

End

Year *

Inter-series

Correlation

Mean

Sensitivity

JSE01A 1739 1812 0.42 0.18

JSE01B 1718 1813 0.40 0.24

JSE01C 1734 1813 0.65 0.22

JSN03B 1740 1804 0.81 0.27

JSN03C 1738 1833 0.70 0.23

JSN03D 1744 1814 0.77 0.23

JSN09C 1766 1817 0.45 0.18

JSN09D 1759 1820 0.52 0.18

JSS01A 1723 1814 0.73 0.23

JSS01B 1745 1829 0.47 0.20

JSS03A 1746 1833 0.70 0.18

JSS03B 1725 1834 0.70 0.26JSS03D 1751 1834 0.67 0.19

JSS03E 1747 1818 0.60 0.25

JSW04B 1740 1832 0.81 0.19

JSW04C 1747 1833 0.79 0.20

Average 0.64 0.22

*End Year represents the last measurable ring on the series.

Many cores had additional rings on small detached segments

that could be counted and added to obtain a more accurate

harvest date.

Denroarchaeology of the Marble Springs Historic Site, Tennessee 27


109/112

109

Appendix C

John Sevier entry in the Tennessee Encyclopedia of History and

Culture

ByRobert E. Corlew, Middle Tennessee State University

John Sevier, pioneer, soldier, statesman and a founder of the Republic, was Tennessee's

first governor and one of its most illustrious citizens. Married and on his own at agesixteen, he was in the vanguard of frontier life and accomplishment from his late teenage

years until his death. First and only governor of the aborted State of Franklin, six-termgovernor of Tennessee, and congressman for four terms from the eastern district, he was

also a soldier of no mean accomplishment, having risen to the rank of general in theNorth Carolina militia.

Born near the present town of New Market, Virginia, Sevier was the oldest of seven

children of Valentine and Joanna Goad Sevier. His forebears--the Xaviers--were of

Huguenot religious persuasion who had fled France for England, anglicized their name,and become prosperous farmers. By 1740 Valentine had arrived in Virginia and settled inthe Shenandoah Valley on Smith's Creek.

Not much is known of Sevier's early life. Educational opportunities were limited, but as achild he apparently learned to read and write; later his state papers and correspondence

with Andrew Jackson and others exhibited a concise and direct style. Married in 1761 toSarah Hawkins (1746-1780), a daughter of Joseph and Sarah Marlin Hawkins, the couple

settled in the valley of his birth. There Sevier farmed, dealt in furs, speculated in land, rana tavern, and fought Indians--along with raising an ever-increasing family.

By 1773 he lived on the Holston River, but three years later he had moved to a farm on

the Watauga River near the present town of Elizabethton. In the same year, NorthCarolina authorities created the Washington District, which included the Watauga

settlements, and Sevier was sent to the Provincial Congress of North Carolina asrepresentative.

The Revolutionary War began in 1775, and in the following year Sevier was named a

lieutenant colonel of the North Carolina militia and assigned first to protecting thefrontier settlements. He fought elsewhere but was confined primarily to the South. The

encounter for which he became best known was the battle of Kings Mountain (1780), inwhich he and his fellow frontiersmen fought Tories and British soldiers at a location just

north of Spartanburg, South Carolina.

The British, having met with only moderate success in the middle and northern colonies,had turned in late 1780 to the soft underbelly of the rebellious provinces where they

prevailed without difficulty in Georgia. Then they moved northward without seriousopposition. Major Patrick Ferguson, assigned to the command of the British left flank,

viewed the western settlements with disdain. Overconfident, he ordered frontiersmen tolay down their arms and give allegiance to the Crown; otherwise, he wrote, he would

march over the mountains, "hang . . . western leaders and lay the country waste with fire


110/112

110

and sword." Sevier and others, accepting the challenge, gathered at Sycamore Shoals latein September 1780, determined to engage Ferguson before he could reach Watauga. They

soon found him on a narrow ridge in northwest South Carolina where he, with perhapsone thousand men, had ensconced himself, claiming that even "the Almighty" could not

drive him off. But the backwoodsmen ascended the heights and assaulted him from both

south and west, taking care to remain well camouflaged behind trees, logs, and rocks.Although forced to fall back several times, the westerners rallied each time, and, afterabout an hour of fighting, claimed victory. They had lost fewer than one hundred men

while the British had lost three times that number, including Ferguson. The victory turnedthe British from the West and pushed Sevier forward as the foremost figure among the

transmontane people. One of Sevier's biographers thought it "impossible to state just howgreat an influence this exerted upon his future political career."

Several months before Kings Mountain, Sevier's wife of nearly twenty years died andwas buried in an unmarked grave just outside Nolichucky Fort in Washington County.

She and Sevier had raised ten children. Sevier later married Catherine ("Bonny Kate")Sherrill (1754-1838), whom he had rescued four years earlier during a surprise attack by

the Cherokees. They reared eight children.

Soon after the Revolution, Sevier became involved in a movement designed to secureseparate statehood for the people living in Washington, Sullivan, and Greene Counties.

The Continental Congress in 1780 had urged that lands claimed by North Carolina andVirginia should become states soon after hostilities might end. Thomas Jefferson had

presented a plan whereby eighteen new states might be carved from the westernterritories. But North Carolina authorities objected vehemently when western leaders

assembled in Jonesborough in August 1784 to make plans for statehood. When theychose Sevier as governor and drafted a constitution, claiming an "inalienable right" to

form an independent state, Governor Alexander Martin threatened to "render the

revolting territory not worth possessing" if North Carolina did not retain sovereignty overit. Attempts at conciliation divided the Franklin people into factions, and border warfaredeveloped. Several men were killed or wounded, and two of Sevier's sons were captured,

threatened, and held briefly.

Sevier's term as governor of Franklin expired in the spring of 1788, and for all practicalpurposes the state came to an end. Sevier was arrested and charged with treason but never

tried. Within less than a year he had taken an oath of allegiance to North Carolina andwas elected to the state Senate. A few months later he was restored to his rank of

brigadier general in the North Carolina militia.

North Carolina permanently ceded its western lands to the central government in 1789,and in the following year President George Washington signed into law a measure for the

governance of the region. Sevier probably was the choice of most of the western peoplefor the post of territorial governor, but Washington appointed William Blount instead.

Soon Sevier became a member of the Territorial Legislative Council--a group of five menprovided for under the Congressional Ordinance of 1787 designed for the governance of

territories. He was among those who urged Governor Blount to call the legislature intosession to make plans for statehood as required under the ordinance. Blount complied,

and early in 1796 leaders drafted a constitution and applied to Congress for admission.


111/112

111

After several weeks of debate--at times acrimonious, as Federalists and Anti-Federalistshaggled over terms and reasons for admission--Congress recommended statehood, and

President Washington signed into law a bill creating Tennessee as the sixteenth state.

The new constitution had provided for a two-year term for governors with the right to

serve "not . . . more than six years in any term of eight." The other qualifications to holdthe office of governor were simple. One must be at least twenty-five years of age, possess

a freehold of at least five hundred acres, and be a citizen for four years. Sevier met theserequirements and became the only serious candidate.

For months before the admissions bill was enacted, Tennesseans had been conducting

affairs as though the state had been legally admitted to the Union. Elections were held inlate February and legislators convened in late March. On March 29 they examined the

returns of the gubernatorial race and determined that Sevier had won. On March 30Sevier took the oath of office at Knoxville. In a brief inaugural address, he thanked voters

for the confidence reposed in him and he pledged to discharge "with fidelity" the tasks ofchief executive. A sixteen-gun salute ended the brief ceremonies. When Sevier became

governor, the total population of the new state was only about 85,000, but by the end ofhis gubernatorial service it had increased to nearly 250,000.

Although the office of governor was not considered a full-time task, still Sevier faced the

usual problems which the foibles of human nature are sure to create. Indian problemswere vexatious as any, and Sevier met them with characteristic vigor. The Tellico and

Dearborn treaties, negotiated in 1805 and 1806 respectively, did much to clear Indianclaims in both east and west, but the attitude and actions of the federal government in its

strict policy of enforcement angered Tennesseans.

Many disputes over military rank tried Sevier's patience. Free men between eighteen and

fifty were subject to military duty, and they elected their own officers. But allegations offraud permeated the contests in many of the counties and at all levels, and the governor--

who issued the commissions--had to decide who had been legally and duly elected.Although Sevier apparently handled these matters as judiciously as he could, he was

frequently criticized in many counties for allegedly selecting political friends andfavorites. His disputes with Andrew Jackson over these and other matters led to

considerable bitterness between the two. Indeed, Jackson's charges that Sevier was guiltyof forgery and bribery in his procurement of lands brought challenges to duels and bitter

words.

Internal improvements such as wagon roads interested Sevier from his early days asgovernor. He also frequently mentioned a need for "the encouragement of education,"

and a measure chartering schools in most of the counties was enacted in 1806. Improvingconditions in the state militia and the development of a better means of settling disputes

over land titles were other matters of concern.

In March, 1809--a few months before his final term ended--Sevier ran before thelegislature for the U.S. Senate but was defeated by Judge Joseph Anderson. Later in that

year, voters in Knox County sent him to the state Senate. Then, in 1811, he was elected toCongress. His advanced years and his unfamiliarity with federal procedures resulted in


112/112

112

his being an ineffective legislator on the national level, however.

Sevier died on September 24, 1815, while on a mission to the Alabama territory where he

had gone with U.S. troops to determine the proper location of the Creek boundary. Hewas buried on the eastern bank of the Tallapoosa River near Fort Decatur.

Sevier was a product of the frontier and a hero to Tennesseans who understood andappreciated his varied career. When in 1887 his body was reinterred on the courthouselawn in Knoxville, a monument was erected whose inscription well describes his life of

public service: "John Sevier, pioneer, soldier, statesman, and one of the founders of theRepublic; Governor of the State of Franklin; six times Governor of Tennessee; four times

elected to Congress; a typical pioneer, who conquered the wilderness and fashioned theState; a protector and hero of Kings Mountain; fought thirty-five battles, won thirty-five

victories; his Indian war cry, 'Here they are! Come on boys!'"

Suggested Reading

Carl S. Driver, John Sevier: Pioneer of the Old Southwest (1932).

Source: http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/entry.php?rec=1190 Accessed November 25,

2013.

Marble Springs

Documents

Transcript of Marble Springs