CONCLUSION: To a private archaeology

Tags

Abram Storms, Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Birdsall, Birdsall Cemetery, Chenango Canal, Chenango County, Chenango County NY, Chenango Forks, David Davis, Dutchess County NY, educational, Greene NY, Henry Birdsall, History, Hudson Valley, Jean Guillaume deBesse, John BIrdsall, Juliand, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, North Fenton, Oyster Bay, Preston Manor, Quaker, Revolutionary War, Thomas Tew, Town of Barker, Town of Greene

CONCLUSION

Before anything else in this conclusion I must admit that despite the gathering of historical documents, and in conversation with a resident of the Village of Green, I continue to be plagued by one simple fact; one document and one conversation identify Henry and Benjamin Birdsall as brothers.

 I remain to be convinced of that.

 It is documented that Benjamin was raised a Quaker and rejected his creed, therefore his rejection of pacifism. He did this in order to join the Revolutionary Forces. The remainder of Benjamin’s life and continuity of his descendants then holds true; i.e., mutual benefits in all endeavors, “one for all and all for one, no matter the risk”.

If Henry and Benjamin were indeed brothers, then Henry was a Quaker and this would explain the culture he carried and passed on to his kin.  Pacifism appears almost as a given. Brotherhood with neighbors and in-laws appears to be a given. BUT, I have no direct proof that Henry was a Quaker. AND, Henry could have been a Quaker without being Benjamin’s brother.

Despite the above facts there appears to be too large of a gap between Henry’s culture and Benjamin’s culture. There is no mention of business or social activities between the two. Henry and his son(s) could not write their names (and therefore it is assumed that they could not read). Benjamin’s sons could read and write. Henry’s family tended to migrate locally and Benjamin’s tended to migrate across the USA. There is no commonality in lawyers names on legal documents of the two. If they were brothers, why would they settle so close to each other and not continue the relationship?

Despite that burning question let us get on with the conclusion. We have sufficient documentation, copies of historical records, excerpts from historical books and theory from archaeological books and articles, and last, a smattering of artifacts.

Louann Wurst, 1999, tells us that “The wealthy farmers were publicly conspicuous in their use of material culture.”  I do not see the Henry Birdsalls as being terribly wealthy but they were not terribly poor either. I do not see the Henry Birdsalls as being publicly conspicuous in their material culture. From this I must assume that the Henry Birdsalls were somewhat introverted, and that appears to be born out in their daily work and lives.

They could have easily traded raw unworked stone for a finished “grand monument” in their family cemetery. Their family cemetery is reverent and simple and the stones progress in design as the century progressed in time.

Birdsall Family Cemetery

Wurst (1999) also states that “[wealthy farmers] occupied a highly visible place in the community through their presence in the local “vanity press” histories, the use of large ostentatious gravestones, and the construction of large, costly Greek Revival style homes.”

We have looked at the gravestones and home sites of the Henry Birdsall family and neither are ostentatious. However, in comparison are the gravestones of Benjamin Birdsall’s descendants (see Appendix H, cemetery records and photos), and what you can read about them in the “History of Greene”, or peruse the background of “Maurice Birdsall, banker, [who] obtained plans from I.G.Perry [famous Binghamton, NY architect], and from them built, in 1873, what was the most expensive residence built in the village to that time. It far exceeded the estimated cost of $8,000- – -“, as stated in “Echoes of the Past”, Mildred Folsom, 2nd printing 1991.

A second anomaly of the Henry Birdsall compound is the scattered sheet midden (garbage strewn) in close proximity to the side door of the last existing home on the eastern side of Stillwater Road . This is not what one would expect at the turn of the century (‘1890’s). Yet the artifacts do date to that time. Epinetus is the last Birdsall living in that home.

Newspaper records place his death as occurring on November 28th, 1893 in Preston, NY. The County [Poor] House records show a bill for one “Nathan” Birdsall who died on November 28th, 1893 in Preston, NY as well as a bill dated November 29th, for Two Burial Cases and Outside Boxes, one set for Margaret Hicks and one for Nathan Birdsall.

Aside from the bureaucracy renaming poor Epinetus to “Nathan” it is most likely that Epinetus could no longer take care of himself either physically or mentally while at home. If his mobility was limited he would surely be throwing his garbage out the side door. However, the “Brunswick Pattern” of discards indicates a low percentage of bone; exactly what was found in the scatter pattern found at Epinetus’ house. South (1977) stated that the lack of bone was a conscious decision; bone and other garbage that would attract animals was thrown far away from the home. Was Epinetus more mobile and thoughtful than it would appear or did someone else live in the home after Epinetus?

Sian Jones (1999), writing about ethnicity states “[Textual sources] rather than being taken at face value, – – should be considered in terms of the social and political contexts in which they were produced, the positions and interests of the authors and the audiences – – and the roles that texts play in – – cultural identity”

I hope that these concerns have not only been taken into consideration, but also stated throughout this paper. I would hasten to add that I, the author, should also be questioned as you are reading this material. My vantage point should not be your vantage point. However, I hope that my vantage point has enlightened your knowledge of the Henry Birdsall family.

Sian Jones (1999) has made the point that “Shared habitual dispositions provide a basis for the recognition of commonalties of sentiment and interest, and the perception and communication of cultural affinities and differences, which ethnicity entails.”

Hence, my reason for including the narrative about the friendship between Henry Birdsall and Abram Storms. They, although possibly unconsciously, recognized the similarities and differences in their ethnicity. John Bessac and David D. Davis’ ethnicity  would also play a part in this discourse. Henry and Abram would likely “mentally misstep” when attempting to assimilate what they heard and saw about each of the distinct and different ethnic backgrounds of John Bessac and David D. Davis.

Sian Jones reflects these missteps as ” – – taken for granted modes of behavior. Such exposure to the arbitrariness of cultural practices, which had hitherto been taken as self-evident and natural, permits and requires a change in the level of discourse – – -.”

Henry and Abram had to think differently to conceive what Davis and Bessac were ethnically displaying. This was surely a learning experience and possibly some minor cultural adaptations took place on the part of Henry and Abram . . . . . and possibly on Davis and Bessac also.

Cook, Yamin and McCarthy, Historical Archaeology, 1996, state that the term “socioeconomic status – – – appears to have found its way into the discipline [of historical archaeology] without any critical evaluation of its assumptions. Among these is the assumption that social status and economic status are somehow equivalent, or that the two concepts cannot or should not be analyzed separately from one another.”

Obviously I have fallen into that trap as this paper discusses social status, social levels, economic levels and socioeconomic levels all in one section on class and ethnicity. I have attempted to break that section down into subsections describing each of the above. I hope that I  have not confused the reader.

That would leave this conclusion with more questions than answers. However, thanks to Wurst’s article on “Internalizing Class”, other methods were made available that give us a sense of who Henry and Benjamin were, whether they gave cultural continuity to their descendants, and the way this continuity played in the face of a farm economy that was changing into a capital economy.

The whole has been broken down into its manageable parts and analyzed.      

It is now up to the reader to reassemble those parts back into a whole that tells a story about two families, separated by culture (and possibly not by birth), who each wove their way through life in very different ways.  However different, each family left the world in better condition that they found it; and that is our inheritance whether you are a descendant or an unrelated observer, such as I.

THERE WILL BE SIX OR SEVEN MORE POSTS THAT WILL ACT AS THE APPENDICES; Historical documents and photos.

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky

GENDER AND AGE DYNAMICS: Phase 9 of a Private Archaeology

Tags

Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Birdsall, Chenango Canal, Chenango County, Chenango County NY, Chenango Forks, educational, Greene NY, Henry Birdsall, History, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, North Fenton, Town of Greene

GENDER AND AGE DYNAMICS

The area of observed gender issues appear in the legal papers such as property deeds and wills. Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall’s will had been removed from the Chenango County Courthouse over 150 years ago and has not been returned. Therefore, there are no records of his thoughts or what he may have left for his heirs and heiresses. Likewise I have no copies of property deeds for this family although they surely may be reviewed in the Chenango County Courthouse if the need is evident sometime in the future.

The only tangible things remaining of Benjamin Birdsall, other than his list particulars (inventory at death), is his gravestone are the accomplishments of his offspring.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=50874637

 

COMPARISON

Gender comparisons, for this report, are better addressed as a comparison between the years ‘1792’ and ‘2012’  rather than between the Henry Birdsall family and the Benjamin Birdsall fam ily. As a starting point in 1792:

Madame d’Autremont contracted for her 300 acres in Greene, Chenango County, with Charles Felix Bue’ de Boulogne “while yet in Paris”, ( ‘From Rafts to      Railroads’, by Cochrane, 2nd printing 1991).

The power of attorney under which the contract between Madame d’Autremont   and William M. Morris via agent de Boulogne, for 300 acres became lost. However, the contract was later upheld.  (“The Story of Some French Refugees”, by L. Murray, 2nd edition 1917)  and (Wendell Common Law Reports, NY, page 82, Vol. 7)

The above facts indicate that women were allowed by  law to hold property rights, both in post French Civil War Paris as well as in New York State. However, it must be stated that Madame d’Autremont was a widow at that time and may have had more property rights than a married woman. As an example of this:

“This indenture made the twenty ninth day of April in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifteen Between Peter B. Garnsey and Polly his wife  the town of Norwich County of Chenango and state of New York of the first part and Henry Burdsil (sic) now of the town of Greene and County aforesaid of the second part [sold for $700, 100 acres.” (Book of Deeds “V”, page 346, Chenango County Clerks Office, dated 4/29/1815)

The above document contains the fact that Polly Garnsey, Peter’s wife, was a co-owner of the property, yet Henry was not required to place his wife, Abashaby, on the deed as co-owner.  The presence of Polly as an owner may have been a result of Peter, being legally and financially prudent, placing Polly on the deed for financial protection from possible future debts.

Additional documentation in subsequent pages of the same book:

 Book of deeds “V”, page 348:

Chenango County

What exactly does the above indicate?  It may indicate exactly what is on the surface of the document; that is, that the law and  legal process are protecting women from selling property, which they own (or co-own), while under duress from their husbands. On the other hand why would such a law be necessary?  Was it a common practice for men of that time to make their wives sell property that the wife was entitled to?  Did some women who owned property (through whatever means) then become married only to find themselves threatened by a husband forcing them to sell the property against their will? The answer appears to be an obvious ‘yes.’

Another set of documents that raise gender issues are the papers surrounding the Last Will and Testament of Henry Birdsall dated June 3, 1836. (Chenango County Surrogate Court Record “60A”, with copies for review in Appendix L,  Archived Documents)

Henry, an obviously God-loving or God-fearing man, who dearly loves his wife, and has spent the least 60 years of his life with her leaves his beloved  “ONE GOOD COW” ?

(Current common property laws have changed in New York so that man and wife hold property as equal owners and the rights of the deceased’s ownership reverting to the survivor.)

One must hasten to recognize that a combination of society/culture/class made proper arrangements for widows. This may be observed later in the documents surrounding Henry’s death. Henry’s wife, Abashaby (“Basheba” on her gravestone), who lived with Henry, was quickly taken in by (assumedly) one of her daughters who had married and moved to Broome County (probably North Fenton or Chenango Forks) which can be seen on the following transcribed document:

(The strike-through is transcribed exactly as they appear in the original document)

From the above death certificate it can be seen that James Burroughs, who had written this document (See copy in Appendix L, Archived Documents), assumed that Abashaby still resided in the Town of Greene, Chenango County. That is where she resided when Henry died.

However, she had moved to the Town of Chenango, Broome County sometime within the 2 -3  month period after Henry’s death.

Additional observations regarding gender are those of education and privilege. These can also be found on Henry’s Last Will and Testament.

Henry’s wife and daughters had to wonder why their culture placed them in a position of not receiving any real property or ‘real’ status. Their status appears to have been limited with respect to the men. This becomes apparent when their husbands had to be notified of ‘who received what’ in Henry’s legacy

(‘Citation of Notification’ to be discussed later in this section).

This issue of status had to be apparent when it became obvious that, although their father apparently loved them, they were relegated to second class citizens.

Documented, here, for all to see, at the end of the last will and testament, a woman (apparently James Burroughs wife or daughter), Ann Burroughs, had the status and capacity to sign her name as a witness.

What was true in the culture of others was surely not true in the culture of Henry and his family. This is not to be misconstrued as the actions of a vengeful old man. Just the opposite, for Henry’s will leads one to see the caring he has for his wife, daughters and granddaughters. It was Henry’s obvious belief that they will be taken care of by their husbands, and, that in their culture the men will be making all the financial decisions.

 

The end of Henry’s Will documents the power and authority of other women in their community (Ann Burroughs as an example). Feminine power was the privilege of education and class.

A final document found in the Chenango County Surrogate Court file “60A” was a “Citation” which was circulated to those who received real or personal property as a result of Henry’s Last Will and Testament. This “Citation” was a document stating that the heirs had been notified and it ensured that this notification had been acknowledged. The document exemplifies the fact that the husbands of Henry’s daughters had at least an equal status (if not higher) for being notified of the daughter’s legacy in the will.

With regards to the dynamics of “Age” it has been noted above that the elderly widow, Abashaby, was absorbed into the home of one of her children. This method of caring for the elderly appears to be substantiated by the fact that other elderly people left their homes some years prior to their deaths. See the section of this report on “Maps”.

The descriptions of who lived in which Birdsall home during what years documents the fact that the elderly left their homes prior to their deaths. The location of these elderly can easily be seen in the ‘census’ documents in Appendix A. Quite often the reader can observe that the last person listed in the household is a widow or widower.

The only document that shows a direct change of this ‘family care of the elderly’ occurred just prior to the turn of the century. Epinetus Birdsall, Henry’s grandson and son of Horace, became a resident of the “County Home” and died there in 1893.

Conclusion of Gender and Age Dynamics

The rights and status of women have changed significantly in the period between “1792” and “2012”.

In the 1800’s  there were apparent dichotomies in the status of women. This can be observed in the ownership of real property by the wife of a lawyer (Polly Garnsey).

Another example is the example of a woman (Ann Burroughs)  signing the “Last Will and Testament of Henry Birdsall”.

At the same time Henry’s daughters were required, by citation, to notify their husbands of their inheritance. These dichotomies were the apparent result of class, status and education as well as the family culture of the Henry Birdsalls.

The responsibility of caring for the elderly has also changed significantly during the same period of time. ‘Family care’ was replaced by ‘county care’ and has now progressed on to ‘private care’ in institutions owned by profit makers.

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky

CULTURAL CONTACTS: Phase 8 of a Private Archaeology

Tags

Abram Storms, Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Birdsall, Chenango Canal, Chenango County, Chenango County NY, Chenango Forks, David Davis, educational, Greene NY, Henry Birdsall, Jean Guillaume deBesse, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, North Fenton, Revolutionary War, Town of Greene

CULTURAL CONTACTS

 Henry Birdsall was a farmer in Greene who appears to have struggled to keep the modern world out of his family compound. It was a compound in the truest sense due to the quantity of homes and the continuity of the modes of production. There were three homes and all apparent means of production could be accomplished on the property or in very close proximity. This continuity in the face of the ever-changing world around the Henry Birdsall family appears to have almost created a culturally impenetrable wall.

But before we move too fast we should inspect a few other areas of Henry’s life and the life of his descendants.

Cultural Contacts in a Social Setting

Let us first review Henry’s neighbors. There was Abram Storms, a man who Henry was most likely to have visited for advice or in emergencies. Abram settled in the immediate area prior to Henry and therefore would have been well settled and knowledgeable about the area. The Native Americans at times still passed through the land on hunting excursions. Abram Storms would know best how to approach them, or if they should even be approached. The weather in the Chenango Valley could be almost cataclysmic when the northwest winds swept off the western ridges, dipped down into the valley, and then swept up the eastern ridge, a rise of 400 feet in a distance of 1000 feet. Even today these winds appear to create a Bernoulli affect that rips down the most mature of trees. This same weather pattern causes a rainstorm in the valley and, simultaneously, a snowstorm on the ridge. Abram Storms could advise him about the dangers of these woods, when to work them and when to avoid them. Abram Storms was the man famous for hauling a set of grinding stones from Coxackie to Greene. He surely must know how to handle a team of oxen and would be a source of assistance in the event that Henry’s teams could not handle a specific job alone. And then there was that subject that may or may not have been discussed; Abram took part in a war, the Revolutionary War, and Henry had not. Abram may have killed; and Henry, most likely, could not.

ABRAM STORMS GRAVESTONE

Abram is buried in Henry’s family cemetery. What better way to honor a good friend and neighbor than to be buried near each other. This alone substantiates the premise that Henry and Abram must have spent a lot of time working together and conversing together, learning from each other, depending on each other and exchanging ideas and thoughts, some that may have been personal, political, or spiritual in nature.

And then there was that French fellow named Jean Guilliame deBesse; or called John Bessac by most. What a delight he must have been!  He was a gentleman first and foremost. Henry must have been drawn to him for that reason alone. They both had their own worlds but would make room for each others. John Bessac would honor Henry’s, just because that was John’s gentle nature. Henry would honor John’s because that was Henry’s creed; “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

Jean Guilliaume De Bessac's History in Library of Congress

John loved the land and the river as much as Henry did. And so did Abram Storms. But again, Henry did not engage in a war. Abram did and so did John, serving under Count Rochambeau. One can almost see these three gentlemen, each from a different world, each with their own creeds and backgrounds, each with their own thoughts on peace and war, exchanging viewpoints. The evening hours, after chores were completed, would have been a joyful time for Henry to walk up to John’s home, pick him up and then go visit Abram for an evening discussion.

How could anyone know about that other neighbor, David D. Davis?  Could he take time from his busy schedule? A highly productive fellow but quite an intense one also. Davis would probably join in from time to time but it appears that he may have been temperamental when least expected. Who could have imagined that he would pick up stakes and join the gold rush?

Who would have imagined that upon his return from California to Greene, he would commit murder upon his wife and brother-in-law, and then, put the gun to himself and end his own life? Surely some of this intense nature was obvious to others, even if not understood.

(For the above four paragraphs please see Appendices B and F, Historic Books and Greene History respectively)

I hope that the above narrative brings to light that multiple cultures were present in these one-on-one (or three-on-three) conversations and work sessions when these men helped each other. Each of these men may have gone back to their own homes 99.99% as pure, culturally, as before the day started. But over time, each of them must have gained new insights and at times engaged in new cultural ideas, even if ever so slightly. Henry and Abram may have sampled some pork or vegetables that John had cooked, French style. Henry and Abram may have listened to John as he read from his French books and translated to English for them. And John must have been learning the ways of the land from Abram. John and Abram exchanging war stories as Henry listened and wondered what would make men do such horrible things to each other. And Henry, at times, telling John and Abram what others had taught him from the bible; that prized possession that they saw displayed so proudly on that rough-sawn table near the entrance to his home.

Cultural Contacts and Conflicts

The Chenango Canal opened up new opportunities for Henry and his descendants to earn a living. It also brought new ideas and concepts from far-away places. Some of these ideas were very welcome and other cultural trappings may have been frowned upon within the Birdsall compound. However, with the canal lock right in the middle of their property, these cultural contacts, both acceptable and unacceptable, were present.

“During the construction of the canal, Irish, Scots and Welsh entered the region bringing new skills and ethnic diversity, and many of them stayed after the canal was built.”

PADDY’s REBELLION – – [after a work slow- down/stoppage on the canal at Deansboro, the militia was called out]

“with drums beating, flags flying, and plumes nodding.  [the workers wives won the first skirmish by pummeling the militia with rock-filled socks. The ringleaders were jailed that evening.]”

“Benjamin Parsons, of Chenango Forks, was a packet boat captain. He was fiery-tempered man, short and stocky, with black curly hair.”

“There were many quarrels between the Erie and Chenango boatmen. Simeon Walker and Sidney Delamarter (both – – famed for their fighting ability) won a victory over a gang of boatmen.”

“People working the boats – – to break the slow moving monotony in the southern part of the canal – – chatted with the local[s and] the lock tender – – -“

“Ausburn Birdsall [from Otsego, built] a sawmill to run on wastewater from lock           

#32, just below Chenango Forks. [Eight boatmen claimed that the water utilized by this mill encumbered their rafts and petitioned the Canal Board to have the mill removed].”

(CITATIONS:  See Appendices F and J, Greene History and Miscellaneous Book Extracts respectively)

The variety of people and their cultures were all around Henry and his descendants from the time the canal construction started until the canal closed. What the Birdsalls may have thought about these cultures and the events that surrounded them can only be surmised. One thing is obvious. With this beehive of activity surrounding them other cultures could not be avoided. The Birdsalls may or may not have struggled to maintain their own lifestyle and culture, however, the children in their formative years must have remembered and been affected by what they had seen.

What internal conflicts did they feel when balancing their Christian background against the violent manner in which the canal-men acted?  How could they possibly understand the conflicts between the State Militia and the Canal Workers? Did they understand that these conflicts, between the canal-men themselves, between the state and the workers, and at times between the canal-men and local businessmen,  were the results of each group attempting to maintain their own livelihoods? 

Cultural and Social Migration

The Henry Birdsalls tended to socially migrate towards North Fenton and Chenango Forks. Several of Henry’s descendants are not buried in the family cemetery but rather in the North Fenton Cemetery. The children and grandchildren carry surnames of families that also settled in the area, both north and south, but with the preponderance of movement being southward. Some census records show movement into Lisle, NY also.

The gravestones in the family cemetery speak volumes about their simple roots AND the cultural changes that impinged upon their lives. There are gravestones with Willows and others with the Fig design and lastly a cast bronze obelisk of quite modern design.

The Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall gravestone is rather simple, however his descendants cemetery plots are decorated with modern stones depicting the latest styles and displaying significant size.

A visual comparison of gravestones and grave sites can be seen in Appendix H, Cemetery Records and Photographs

An attempt to answer questions of cultural change will be offered in the section on Ethnicity, Class and Cultural Transformations.

COMPARISON

Henry Birdsall and his immediate descendants were pushed and pulled by the cultural tides that swept through their world during the construction and operation of the Chenango Canal. Conflict would tend to be an abhorrent concept to the Birdsalls. Yet here it was, observed and talked about, almost every day. This situation surely would have caused the Birdsalls to struggle to maintain their peaceful ways from being invaded by this conflict and vulgarity. They were not the agents of change but more likely the unknowing intended targets of change. And yet there was the obvious opportunity of enhancing their own lives by taking advantage of the monetary opportunities that arose from the construction and operation of the canal. Internal conflicts must have existed. We may identify families such as the Henry Birdsalls as unwilling agents of a new capital economy that replaced a rural farm economy; and the cultural modifications that accompany significant changes such as this. Cultural changes are reflected in the cemetery stone designs and the family center-of-gravity moving towards the villages (North Fenton and Chenango Forks among others).

Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall and his descendants also observed the cultural tides that swept through the village. However, quite unlike Henry’s family the Benjamin Birdsalls were very active agents of change. Their various enterprises were built around these changes. They actively pursued new opportunities and technological innovations that enhanced these opportunities (Stores, product depots, first elevator, first telephone). Cultural/Social changes are reflected in their upward mobility, both locally and in their westward movement from NY to TX (see section on modes of production), and in gravestone design and gravestone magnitude in the Canal Street Cemetery.

(See appendix H, Cemeteries, Photos)

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky

ECONOMIC CONDITIONS: Phase 7 of a Private Archaeology

Tags

Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Chauncy Rogers, Chenango Canal, Chenango County, David Davis, educational, famine, Gloudy Hamilton, Henry Birdsall, History, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, passenger pigeons, Peter Garnsey, Polly Garnsey, public policy, Thomas Tew, year without a summer, yellow fever

                                    ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

The economic conditions that Henry Birdsall and his family experienced were at first controlled by nature, later by public policy, and in the end by economical depression that was the unintended consequence of a series of public policies.

Henry Birdsall moved his family to Greene about 1812, settled on the east side of the Chenango River and purchased the property on April 29, 1815 from Peter B. and Polly Garnsey.

(For documentation see Appendix G, Property Specific Records)

ECONOMIC CONDITIONS CONTROLLED BY NATURE

The economic conditions that the Henry Birdsall family encountered over the first few years were the results of their own productivity; however the economics were drastically effected by nature. Clearing enough ground to plant a few grain products/tubers and building shelter for the family and animals must have utilized all of Henry’s time. It would seem natural that the family would have had at least one gun that would help them harvest the abundant deer, turkey and bear. However, guns were not present on Henry’s itemized list of personal property upon his death.

Quite remarkably, among the items of personal property was listed a bible, but neither Henry or Henry [Jr.] could read. Does this combination of the absence of one item of survival, a gun, and the presence of one item of conspicuous religious beliefs, a bible, tell us more than what is on the surface? If Henry and his male heirs were pacifists, which this combination may point out, this ethnic trait may have placed self-limitations on the manner in which they approached various economic opportunities. This aspect of ethnicity, possibly Quakerism, which we will discuss in another section of this paper, could have wide ranging consequences on the micro-economy of the family.

At this point in the life of the Henry Birdsall weather conditions were synonymous with economic conditions. As mentioned in the section on Modes of Production Henry did raise rye, wheat, potatoes, and corn. He also tended to cows, calves and pigs. When the weather was playing to his favor the economic conditions were enough to survive.

In 1816 a phenomenon occurred that could terminate the Birdsall family for good.

“NOTE: The year 1816 has been known as the ‘year without a summer.’ It was the coldest year ever known, with frosts or snow each month of the year. No crops matured and prices of provisions soared. The average price of flour was $3 per barrel. People suffered with hunger and near famine resulted. Old seed corn from the 1815 crop sold in 1817 for $5 per bushel but, fortunately, bumper crops were harvested in 1817 – – -.” (See Appendix F, Greene History)

Some fresh game may have helped the family get through that winter because although they may not have owned a gun there were passenger pigeons. These pigeons would serve as food and as a product that could be sold in order to get them through these poor economic times.

“Netting [passenger] pigeons was a popular sport and the game birds were brought [to Binghamton] and sold. They were caught in nets fastened to two bent saplings which         were released at the right time to hold the catch. The merchant who did not have a large stock of dressed birds in barrels or strung by their bills on a string for display, was rare. They were considered excellent meat and townspeople bought four or five at a for pigeon pies.” 

(“Rafts to Railroads”, by Mildred English Cochrane, copyright 1967)

{Also;  See Map Section, “Pigeon Hill”, 1 mile south of Birdsall farm}

Henry had purchased the property for cash in 1815 as there was no mention of mortgage. If this is true then his harvest in 1815 was free and clear. This would not only have placed Henry in a good position for surviving but may have placed him in an advantageous one for making a high profit in 1817. One can not help but to wonder, though, if Henry would have thought first of high profits or thought first of helping a neighbor by giving him seed grain and then negotiating price at a later and less critical time in the year. (See previous section on “Mode of Production” regarding debts owed to Henry by relatives and neighbors)

The yellow fever epidemic of 1822, which killed 2,500 in New York, appears to have little effect on Henry Birdsall and his family. (See Appendix K, page K8, Making of America, “Historical Collections of New York State, Past and Present”, by John W. Barber, 1851, pub. by Clark, Austin & Co., Broadway)

(THE UPSIDE OF ECONOMICS CONTROLLED PUBIC POLICY)

Economic conditions in the 1830’s improved drastically with the advent of the Chenango Canal, a much debated subject during the late 1820s and 30s. Political action committees made up of prominent citizens along the Chenango River continued to press for the construction of the canal realizing that it would bring economic life to their areas. Short term economic advantages were available from the construction and long term economics were touted, expecting benefits from the continuing trade. The current New York State Governor at that time was Enos T. Throop. His concern over the exhausted condition of the general fund and his foresight with regards to the upkeep and short life of the canal would not make it feasible. Gov. Throop predicted that competition from railroads would drastically shorten the expected life of the canal. (See Appendix K, Making of America, “Lives of the Governors of the State of New York”, by John S. Jenkins, 1851, pub. by Derby and Miller, Auburn).

The approval for the canal was given after Governor Marcy was elected. Economic benefits that have been documented show the following influx of money to Henry Birdsall, his family and neighbors:  

Henry Birdsall           $30.00 for moving a barn from the path of the canal

                                  $133.31 for building a new fence

Thomas Tew *          $62.50 for building a sluice around lock #34

Gloudy Hamilton *   $464 for building a wooden culvert on a creek

                                    $212.62 for building a new fence

Chauncy Rogers *      $?/per day  as a workman on repair of a dam

 David D. Davis        $139.28 for constructing a sluice around lock #29

                                   $164.25 for constructing a new fence

TOTAL =    at least $1,206

* Henry Birdsall’s sons-in-law

Not taken into consideration is the money that Henry Birdsall, his family and his neighbors may have made for selling the real estate for canal right-of-way as it passed through their land.

An additional economic advantage that has not been quantified in the documentation is the amount of stone that was removed from the quarries. The first quarry (lower elevation) is 10 meters wide by 50 meters long. The depth varies but an average depth would be about 3 meters.  Calculations yield about 1,500 cubic meters of stone that have been removed. The second quarry (higher up the dug road) is 15 meters wide by 30 meters long consisting of three shelves, each being 3 meters deep. These calculations yield another estimated 2,250 cubic meters of stone.  Utilizing a 50% waste factor yields a total of over 1,800 cubic meters of stone, a sizable economic prize for Henry and the workers that extracted it, not to mention the money earned for cutting it to size and laying up the walls of the lock.

Multiply this by the number of locks and aqueducts located between Greene and Chenango Forks for an idea of how the canal affected the economy in this small area.

Regarding materials such as the raw stone from the quarries and what is listed above as a minor portion of what canal construction did for the immediate community, there is the following that depicts the additional lifting of the economy for those along the canal route:

“Most of the material used was purchased locally, but many immigrant laborers were employed to supplement local labor. Farmers with their teams welcomed the opportunity to earn $1.50 per day”   (See Appendix F, Greene History)

Henry Birdsall died in 1838, soon after the canal opened. His sons Henry and Horace continued to live on the farm as the canal boats eased on past their homes.

Economic opportunity continued to emanate from the repairs to the locks. Lumber and stone continued to be needed for these repairs. Horace died in 1850, 12 years after his father, and Henry [Jr.] lived until 1879.

Henry [Jr.] was able to see the total life of the canal as the economies tended to “Rise and Descend” just as the title of Michelle McFees book describes it. (See Appendix J, Miscellaneous Book Extracts)

The Canal SUCCOMBS TO THE RAILROAD

(THE DOWNSIDE OF ECONOMICS CONTROLLED BY PUBLIC POLICY)

In 1869 Maurice Birdsall (Grandson of Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall) as President of the Greene Railroad Company was engaged in a bitter dispute with the Smithville (Flats) Railroad company. Ethical misconduct and bribery by officers of the Smithville company almost cost Greene the loss of a railroad through their town.

Considering the deteriorating business state of the Chenango Canal, this would have been a blow to Greene’s economy. (See Appendix F, Greene History)

This particular public policy, based more on individualistic capitalism than on government action, brought the railroad to Greene. This was an economic boom to the village and rural families alike. A village rail station was built on the east side of the river and dairy stops were built between the village of Greene and Chenango Forks.

The bad news for Henry Birdsall’s descendants was that the railroad crossed to the other side of the river a mile north of them. The railroad served almost everyone in the Township of Greene except for the few families located on the southern 2 -3 miles of Stillwater Road.

This was an economic blow to the Birdsalls. Their canal transportation to Greene and Binghamton was gone and the railroad would not serve them. Their goods had to be transported by team four miles north or south; and then loaded onto the train.

Economic opportunity in the form of working for wages in the factories of Greene and Binghamton was not available on a daily basis. A trip to Binghamton would require them to find rental rooming for the week. Any wages made would be degraded by the cost of “room and board”.

Most likely it would be just as profitable to work the farm and raise a few animals. The new economy worked against the descendants of Henry Birdsall in this southeastern corner of Greene, however, it worked well for the descendants of Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall who lived in the village and did business there.

The economy of the Birdsall farm appears to have dwindled along with the dwindling number of small farms that were eking out a living during that period; to wit;

“Nineteenth- and Early Twentieth- Century Domestic Site Archaeology in New York State” edited by John P. Hart and Charles L. Fisher, Published by NYS Museum, 2000

“The Farmhouse View: The Porter Site, by Sean M. Rafferty

Page 128         [First paragraph under heading “Nineteenth-Century Farming”]

“The nineteenth century saw profound changes in the lives of New York farmers, as technological innovations sparked a shift toward industrial farming. This undercut the family-based rural farmers who had dominated agriculture until the mid-nineteenth century. Construction of the canal system and railroads made it easier and more profitable for farmers to get the products to urban markets (Barron 1984:3), but also resulted in a shift of agricultural production away from New York State. The growth of urban industrial production with wage-paying jobs stimulated a migration from rural areas to urban centers (Gibb 1994); many took the opportunity to escape from the routine of the family farm, while others remained to carry on the farming tradition. Some farmers were adversely affected by shifting markets,  while others actually saw an improvement in their economic situation (McMurry 1995). All were forced to make choices in order to adapt to changing circumstances, and these choices can be analyzed from their material consequences and from documentary evidence.

Epinetus Birdsall, grandson of Henry, died in Preston, NY in the year 1893. No known relatives lived in Preston. However, this is the home of the old “Chenango County Poorhouse” now operating as Preston Manor. Records of his death in this institution reflect a “Nathan” Birdsall. It has been proven through other records that Epinetus and Nathan are one and the same person.

Epinetus had been renamed by the state!

(THE Implications of Gender on Economics)

We will see from the last will and testament of Henry Birdsall that the women of the family inherited some nominal amount of money while the male heirs inherited the real estate. (See Appendix D, Surrogate Records)

By 1890 there were not many male descendants of Henry remaining. As noted above, Henry’s two sons Horace and Henry [Jr.] had died in 1850 and 1879 respectively. John (Henry [Jr.]s son) died in 1881. The remaining male descendent of Henry Birdsall who still carried the surname was Epinetus Birdsall. Epinetus had one son George McClellan Birdsall but he had died as a two year old infant in 1867.

The remaining members of the family were females who took on the husbands surname. Therefore, the remaining members of the family had surnames of Turner, Delamarter, and Burrows. The real estate shifted back and forth between these remaining members. Each shift included a division of the property or a repackaging of previous divisions. This continued on until 1929 when a tragedy occurred.

Three members of one family, the mother, father and a daughter all died within one week of each other. The property ownership shifted, once more removed to another level from the original Birdsalls. This occurred at a time when money was scarce and times were tough.

(THE EFFECTS OF THE ECONOMIC DEPRESSION)

The depression and the devaluing of farm property that accompanied it placed the Birdsall property in a difficult position; not being able earn enough to pay for itself.

The oil rich City of Bradford, Pennsylvania dispatched a trustee, Jack Cleaves, who saw a potential value deep in the earth of Chenango County. This city, operating as a capitalistic entity, recognized a cluster of economically desperate people who had title to this potentially valuable land. The City of Bradford bought the property, withdrew the gas, oil and mineral rights {in perpetuity} and promptly sold the surface rights to a Broome County resident.

(For documentation on the above three paragraphs see Appendix G, Property Specific Records)

(THE SAME ECONOMIC ERA EXPERIENCED IN THE VILLAGE)

Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall continued to be an active agent in various capitalistic pursuits. For example; founding businesses that took advantage of the more stable economy based on the needs of the residents in the village; a clothing works and a grist mill on the Genegantslet River.

His descendants were active agents in getting approval for the canal and establishing the company that founded the railroad.

Activities, that may well have been planned around these transportation links include:

• a bank,
• a butter depot,
• various real estate dealings
• professional services

(See Appendices C & F, Newspapers and Greene History, respectively)

Comparison:

Henry Birdsall and his descendants worked within the economy that was given to them. Their economic condition was tied to their original modes of production: farming, quarrying, and miscellaneous labor intensive activities. They appear to have made a conscious decision to keep a continuity in their lifestyle and, in fact, struggled, economically, in order to maintain that lifestyle.

Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall and his descendants were active agents in transforming the economy around them, and thereby, transformed themselves, intentionally or not.

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky

 

MODE OF PRODUCTION: Phase 6 of a Private Archaeology

Tags

Abram Storms, Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Birdsall, Chenango Canal, Chenango County, Chenango County NY, Chenango Forks, d'Autremont, David Davis, Dutchess County NY, educational, Garnsey, Greene NY, Henry Birdsall, History, Hudson Valley, Jean Guillaume deBesse, Juliand, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, Mode of production, Morris, North Fenton, Oyster Bay, Quaker, Revolutionary War, Thomas Tew, Town of Barker, Town of Greene, Treat, value of property, wages

Henry Birdsall’s mode of earning a living was from farming. The land that he had purchased was configured like the farms cut out of the Hudson Valley territory. That is, it was long and narrow, giving the owner access to the river for transportation, access to flat lands for growing crops, and lastly, having a large upland section that could be used for lumber or grazing.

A history of Henry’s Farming Property

This land was originally in the hands of the Oneida and Tuscarora native americans. Subsequent to the Treaty of 1785 it was divided into eight townships, one being Greene.  A tract of 15,360 acres was granted to Malachi Treat and William W. Morris and subdivided by their agent Charles Boulogne. A portion of this was sold to Madame d’Autremont and other refugees from the French Civil War.

Madame d’Autremont and a few others lived on the land for a few years. Boulogne died without filing a power of attorney that he had from Morris and Treat. The land sale was therefore voided.

These refugees subsequently moved on to Asylum near Wyalusing, PA.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=53304924

Tallyrand visited the French Asylum and took one of d’Autremont’s sons with him as an aide. That son filed a suit to override the voided sale and won. The following is that petition to the French Courts.

International law stated that court decisions such as this in France were valid in the United States. The land was returned Madame d’Autremont.

A Chenango County lawyer, Peter B. Garnsey, purchased Madame d’Autremont’s portion of 300 acres. The deed states that these 300 acres could be selected from within a nine mile stretch southward along the east side of the Chenango River. Peter B. Garnsey sold a 100 acre section to Henry Birdsall. This 100 acres turned out to be approximately 170 acres and was not necessarily the property that Madame d’Autremont resided on during her short stay in Greene; 1792 – 1796. However it was most probably the property path:     d’Autremont to Garnsey to Birdsall.

(See Appendix G, “Property Specific Documents”)

Henry and his family made good use of the property. Some of the produce that they generated and the tools that they used in production were;

Rye and wheat at $5 per bushel, milk and cows valued at $13-$24 each, calves, a wind mill, dry casks for storage, hay at $  .25  per hundredweight, hay forks, potatoes at  $ .25 per bushel, grinding stones, plow shares (cast), vinegar and vinegar casks, round [spoke?] shaver, adz’, staple & ring [weaving or animal neuter device?], looms, harness, frowers[?],  iron wedges, corn, wagons, stored barrels of pork, tubs of lard, cedar storage barrels, and corn plows, hogs worth $7.80 each,  churns, tubs filled with butter, and brass kettles.

Henry also carried at least nine promissory notes which indicates that he also collected interest as a means of monitory production. Most of his notes were to family and neighbors making it apparent that he viewed this lending as a sign of support more than a main means of earning a living.

In addition to the above Henry also had two large quarries that were surely used for stone for the canal lock on his property and possibly for other nearby canal locks. In addition once the railroad was established Henry’s descendants had the opportunity to ship stone to  New York City. Upstate stone was in great demand for construction projects down state.

The canal also yielded other opportunities for earning a living. The construction of locks, bridges and culverts was accomplished by local people. Henry’s son-in-laws, Thomas Tew and Gloudy Hamilton were contracted by the Canal Board to build a sluice on Lock #34 and a wooden culvert over a stream. David D. Davis, one of Henry’s neighbors, constructed a sluice around Lock #29. Tew, Hamilton and Davis made $62.50, $464.00 and $139.28 respectively for these contracts. Henry [Jr.?] was paid $30 to move his barn. Fence moving/building was also a means of earning money. David D. Davis was paid $164.25 to build a new fence, Henry Birdsall was paid $133. 31 for his new fence and Gloudy Hamilton was paid $212.62 for a new fence. Chauncy Rogers, another of Henry’s son-in-laws, was paid workers wages to repair a dam at Chenango Forks. John Rogers was the contractor working on the dam which was owned by S. Rogers. Chauncy was probably paid $17 or $18 per month which was a dollar less than those working in Binghamton. This discrepancy in wages caused job walk-offs as disgusted workers returned to their fields for harvest.

Henry Birdsall is also listed in the Binghamton Library Names Card file as applying for the position of Lock-tender in Chenango Forks, possibly the lock on his property. This must have been Henry [Jr.] as Henry [Sr.] was deceased at this time. [There is no source for this information other than this note on a card.]

Benjamin Birdsall’s mode of earning a living was from various enterprises. There was a quarry on the west side of the Chenango River and several enterprises on the Genegantslet River. Due to Benjamin’s Last Will and Testament being missing we do not know the extent of real estate that he held. At that time real estate appeared in the will and personal property was recorded as an inventory. From the following it can be gathered that Benjamin did hold some real estate until his death but his personal property was quite meager.

Benjamin’s mode of production can be seen in the following summary of his personal property: One yoke of oxen (out on loan) worth $50, one looking glass worth $1, one bureau worth $7, one cow, one bed and bedding, one table, necessary clothing for the widow of the deceased properly given to the widow by statute.

                                    Debts due to Benjamin when he died:

1.   A lease for a clothing works and privileges on the Genegantslet River to Arron Dewey and Nicholas B Slater for 30 years, payable starting June 1828, and continuing until paid at the rate of $100 per year. Mortgage to be secured by building and machinery on the premises. Said mortgage clandestinely got into the hands of one Joseph Pixley who claimed he owned the property. {Due to this confusion} there remains due two installments of $100 each and 4 months besides interest and it remains the decision of the estate as to follow this claim which is doubtful as to collection.     $255

2.  A lease for a grist mill on the Genegantslet River to Joseph Pixley of Waterloo in Seneca County for the term of 2 years at a rate of $200 per annum.. Some amount was paid but the remainder is questionable as the circumstances of said Pixley is doubtful.   $266.50

3.  Benjamin Birdsall {late Junior} occupied the Mill House on the Genegantslet belonging to  the deceased from the spring of 1824 without written or verbal lease rather known as the annual rent of $200.   $800

{Said Benjamin Birdsall is notoriously insolvent & it is doubtful whether any part of this amount can be collected from him.}

4.   A judgment on Bond of Atty. entered upon April 1821 in favor of the deceased against Morris S. Birdsall for the amount of:  $238    Costs=$10

{It has been said that this judgment has been canceled by the deceased afore his death, also that the said Morris Birdsall is in doubtful circumstances and it is doubtful whether this amount can be collected.}

5.    Two notes against Nehemiah Walker of Smithville in Chenango County. These notes are now outlawed and said Walker has taken the benefits of insolvency and is now poor. The collection of any part of these notes is very doubtful.          Value = $0

Comparison:

Henry Birdsall appeared to have several modes of production: farming, quarrying, and miscellaneous fill-in activities. These activities were labor intensive and did not allow for leisure except during the dark hours of evening or bitter cold winter days. Even then, the emergencies of new farm animals being born and the feeding and watering of stock in the dead of winter must have kept Henry well occupied.

Benjamin Birdsall, as a man of enterprise, worked his businesses at day and most likely to have been required to work the social circuit evenings and weekends. Contacts and opportunities came about during those times of social intercourse. People had to get to know each other quite well to entrust their invested money in each other’s projects. I am sure that social gatherings, where the males gathered together, were also places where a person learned ‘where not’ to invest his money.

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky

HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS: Phase 5 of a Private Archaeology

Tags

Abram Storms, Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Birdsall, Chenango Canal, Chenango County, Chenango County NY, Chenango Forks, David Davis, Dutchess County NY, educational, Greene NY, Henry Birdsall, History, Hudson Valley, Jean Guillaume deBesse, Juliand, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, North Fenton, Oyster Bay, Quaker, Revolutionary War, Thomas Tew, Town of Barker, Town of Greene

Several historical documents have been found and copies are included in future posts. These documents include Wills, Personal Property Inventories of the Deceased, Property Deeds, Death Certificates, Affidavits, Newspaper Articles, NYS Archives; both the actual archives and the new digitized archives.

The above map is a digitized map of Henry Birdsall’s farm and lock number 105 on  the Chenango Canal. Notice the controls that allow you to make an inset map. This capability is found within the NY State Archives;

http://iarchives.nysed.gov/PubImageWeb/viewImageData.jsp?id=151290

Or go  to the front page of the NYS Archives Website for an overall view of what is available:

http://www.archives.nysed.gov/aindex.shtml

 Abstractions from old books have been a fruitful source of information. These books were located in various libraries (which have been cited) including the “Making of America”, Cornell University’s on-line digitized library holding hundreds of historic books and periodicals.

                                    http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/m/moa/                           

The detailed documents above will be posted after the various aspects of this archaeology are investigated. These “document” posts will appear after the “conclusion”; approximately the 12^th post of this series. Therefore the 12^th to 18^th posts will act as an appendix of documents related to this study.

HOWEVER; if you are like me, these documents may prove more interesting than this actual study itself.

Historical maps have previously been posted.

As noted, there was a very small sample of surface artifacts. This meant that other methods of collecting data had to be found. The historical documents offer insight and comparisons between the lives of the Henry Birdsall Family and the Benjamin Birdsall Family including some of their descendants.

These documents also allow one to:

• understand the pathway of property ownership prior to Henry’s purchase
• visit the NY counties where Henry and Benjamin lived prior to the Town of Greene
• understand the origins of Henry’s neighbors and their background
• gain insight as to how public policy effected Henry and Benjamin
• perceive what social forces may have modified the lives of Henry and Benjamin
• document gender issues that were obvious to the female members of the families
• see the change of culture through at least four generations

Some of these observations will be clarified on the following pages.

Henry Birdsall’s Life Prior to Residing in the Township of Greene, Co. of Chenango, NY

The origins of Henry can be seen in census documents for NY State in 1790 and proceeding forward. There were several ‘Henry Birdsalls’ in various townships and counties within NY, however, only one Henry had the same family structure. Henry Birdsall from Salem Township matched the family structure of Henry Birdsall subsequently appearing in the Township of Greene. That unique structure was seven daughters and two sons, of which a group of five daughters were the eldest, followed by two sons, who were followed by the youngest child, a daughter. (See Appendix A, “Census/Directory”)

Although there is historical data, in text form, to be gleaned about ‘Birdsalls’ in Salem Township, Westchester County, NY, there is no specific mention of Henry. Other Birdsalls had signed various petitions.  Revolutionary War records listed other Birdsalls as members of the American Revolutionary forces but no direct record of Henry (other than census records) has been found in Salem Township. (See Appendix B, “Historic Books”)

This is not surprising as Henry could not write his name. This is evidenced by his ‘mark’ being placed on his Last Will and Testament. Affidavits associated with this Will also show that Henry’s namesake son, Henry Birdsall (no Jr. used), also could not write his name. Son Henry’s ‘mark’ appears on these affidavits and therefore attests to this inability. It would follow, then, that both Henrys could neither read nor write, often leading to a lack of record for those who could not assist in recording their own history; or even parts of it. (See Appendix D, “Surrogate Records”)

Henry Birdsall left the best record of his family on his land.

http://www.usgenweb.info/nychenango/cemetery/birdsall.htm

The cemetery document above fails to list some names in the cemetery. That may be due to some of the stones reading “In Memory Of – – -” and not verifying an actual burial. The totality of the cemetery will be covered in a following post.

Benjamin Birdsall’s Life Prior to Residing in the Town of Greene, Co. of Chenango, NY

On the other hand, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall is listed as a member of the Revolutionary Army and as having accepted farmland(s) as a reward for his service. These farmlands were ‘abandoned’ (most likely confiscated from farmers that remained loyal to the crown). A point of interest regarding Benjamin’s religious beliefs; at one time he was a Quaker but  rejected that creed in order to defend his country during the revolution. (See Appendix B, “Historic Books”)

Benjamin Birdsall moved to Chenango County and brought two of his sons with him. One son had moved to Chenango County prior to Benjamin.

Benjamin Birdsall’s last will and testament is missing from the Surrogate’s office. In place of it is a document stating that one of his sons had removed the will sometime after Benjamin’s death. The absence of this document does not allow us to determin if Benjamin could sign his name although it would be highly likely that he could, due to the various business transactions that he was involved in.  His sons, being merchants and professionals, were surely literate.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=50874769

COMPARISON:

Independent genealogical records would lead a reader to believe that both Benjamin’s and Henry’s families originated in the Oyster Bay area of Long Island, NY, with subsequent generations moving into Connecticut and the Hudson Valley. Oyster Bay and Dutchess County were both heavily laden with Quakers and loyalists. In fact, one recently generated genealogical record lists Henry as Benjamin’s brother. This is possible, however, as the data is assembled, various information leads the researcher to seriously question this purported relationship.

(See Appendix E, “Genealogy Documents”)

While Henry and Benjamin’s histories both originate in Hudson Valley townships the commonality between them tends to end there. Historical records for Greene, NY abound in the mercantile, professional and political accomplishments of the Benjamin Birdsall family. Additionally, the Benjamin Birdsall family and the other most prominent family in early Greene, the Juliands, are intertwined in business and marriage. The social structure that Benjamin apparently moved within was typical for upwardly mobile settlers carrying the credentials of ‘Lieutenant Colonel’ and businessman. (See Appendix C, “Newspaper Accounts”)

http://www.quic.net/~philmeister/Evrybdy6/f_4f5.htm

On the other hand there is little mention of Henry’s family other than in census, vital statistics and death certificates. In fact, government records of Henry and his descendants become very confusing. This results from the fact that Henry and his family gravitated towards families in North Fenton, Chenango Forks, and possibly the Town of Barker. Census records lump some of these areas into a geographical area called  ‘Chenango.’  It is obvious that some Broome County census takers inadvertently collected data across the Chenango County line. Therefore, they included at times, Henry’s family as part of the Broome County census and leaving them out of the “Chenango County” census.

http://genforum.genealogy.com/birdsall/messages/461.html

NOTE:

Additional pieces of information originate in historical documents that appear to have greater impact in other sections of this report. Therefore, the cultural impact will be discussed in those sections. This historic information indicates that Henry had three neighbors and a son-in-law who appear in cross documentation and, more importantly, in the family cemetery of Henry Birdsall as well as a single gravestone north of the Birdsall cemetery. These individuals are:

1.   Abram Storms; an early settler, arriving before Henry. Abram was a member of the Revolutionary Army. Historical records identify Abram as the person who first brought grinding stones to Chenango County ‘from the Hudson Valley by Oxcart’ and as one of two men who constructed the first grinding mill within the town of Greene. Abram subsequently bought property along the eastern side of the Chenango and started a farm. He is buried, along with his wife Eve, in Henry Birdsall’s family Cemetery.

2.   Jean Guillaume deBesse (also known as John Bessac), born 1760 in France, died 1824 and buried on his property north of the Birdsall Cemetery. Jean Guillaume (Bessac) is documented as having served under Count Rochambeau. Additionally a pamphlet was written about him by George Park, Esq., extolling Jean deBesse’s mental capabilities and personal traits. A copy exists in the Library of Congress. Abram Storms appears as one of two people who inventoried John Bessac’s personal goods after Bessac’s death.

3.   David D. Davis lived directly to the north of Henry Birdsall. Davis worked his own farm. When the Chenango Canal was being constructed he contracted for some construction work. The gold rush of 1849 had its effect on Greene, as Davis and several others went west leaving their families behind. Davis was a hunter during the rush, making money by furnishing the prospectors with deer and bear meat. It appears, from the documentation, that he made as much money by hunting as others did by prospecting for gold. Davis, upon his return from California, was involved in a multiple murder and suicide. The impact of this will be discussed in following sections.

4. Thomas Tew was a son-in-law of Henry Birdsall. Thomas did not fit the mold of Henry’s other son-in-laws; he was not a rural farmer. Thomas Tew appears as an entrepreneur, mechanic, cabinet maker, member of the ‘new’ Masons (after the anti-Masonic movement had died down) and a villager. Nothing is known about where Thomas originated. Some “Tews” first appear in an ‘1820’ census.

A namesake pirate, “Thomas Tew”, appears in the history of New York State as the questionable friend of New York Governor Fletcher in ‘1696’. They apparently “exchanged presents” as described in appendix K, pages K37 through K41 

[Editorial Note: For over three centuries things have not changed much in New York State. “Exchanging Presents” seems to remain a way of life in NY politics.]

(See Appendix IDs A, B, and D:  Census/Directory, Historic Books and Surrogate Records)

(Also see Appendix F, Greene History: extracts from “Rafts to Railroads” & “Annals of Greene”)

I do not plan on putting ALL of the appendices on this blog. However, if there are points of interest please leave a comment on whatever post you wish. I will do my best to fulfill your interests.

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky

INTRODUCTION (To a private archaeology on a public blog)

Tags

Archaeology, Benjamin Birdsall, Cheif Justice of the Supreme Court of The Republic of Texas, Chenango Canal, Chenango County NY, Dutchess County NY, educational, Greene NY, Henry Birdsall, History, John BIrdsall, Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, Revolutionary War, Salem Township, Town of Greene

Introduction

This is the first post of many within a blog that I hope is both entertaining and educational.

The blog is an archaeological study of two families who settled in Chenango County, NY in the early 1800’s.

Both families have the surname of Birdsall. However they lived quite different lives.

One lived in the center of Greene, NY [previously “Hornby”] the other lived in a rural setting of the same township.

This blog will be a comparison between the two families to determine what we may learn from each.

There were two distinct portions of the original study. The first was a physical archaeology in which artifacts were obtained and analyzed. The second portion of the study was a “historical archaeology.”  The name applies to a study of available documentation about the subject and the time period that the subject was studied.

Lest you become concerned about the artifacts losing their provenance and data, allow me to assure you that neither occurred. The data and artifacts are in professional hands.

There is a place in the town of Greene, Chenango County, NY, that is as peaceful and serene as any remote location in the Adirondacks. There, in that place, hours of refuge have given my mind the ability to recreate and escape the environment of corporate deadlines, technology gone mad, and mindless meetings; a rest from the racket of my own choice. There, in that place, a tapestry of well executed natural fresco blends with the emotions of feathered creatures, seeking each other in the curtains of hemlock that flow to the ground. One can sit and enjoy the sights and sounds of tranquility, or, one can walk, still-like, and catch a glimpse of a wild turkey; that gray ghost of the forest.

It is there, far in the background; the mountaintop.

This magic place was once the home of Henry Birdsall, the first settler on this remote land. Others had passed by, but did not settle, as that was the nature of the Native Americans who fished the river and hunted the upland areas; and then moved on. Henry, though, carved out fields from the forest, constructed homes, stone fences and thereby established a compound for his descendants.

But “technology gone mad” had already established itself despite Henry’s efforts to ignore it. His beloved farm was about to be cut in half by a trench, a trench 4 1/2 feet deep, 46 feet wide, and 95 miles long. The trench would bring cultural change and daily conflict. This trench was the Chenango Canal; three years in construction and only 39 years in existence.

This blog is about Henry Birdsall and his family. It also compares his life to that of a Benjamin Birdsall who lived in the Village of Greene. Support actors and actresses are present and their roles in life, as well as Henry’s and Benjamin’s, are considered from various points of view.

I can not continue without a few acknowledgements.

            First of all I would like to thank my wife of 50 years, Pury, for her understanding and patience as I drove around central NY State collecting data. I also wish to acknowledge her patience for those times I ‘widowed’ her as I worked on this project.

I would like to thank Michele McFee, author of “Limestone Locks and Overgrowth” for depicting daily life on the canal and the towns along its path. Michele was also kind enough to furnish a copy of an old canal map depicting Henry Birdsall’s farm.

I would also like to thank Dr. Gabriella Castro for her enthusiastic mentoring in a class on “Laboratory Methods in Archaeology”, Dr. Randy McGuire for his extensive background and lectures on “Historical Archaeology”, and Dr. Nina Versaggi for allowing me to work in the Public Archaeology Facility. All three of these people are associated with Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY.

 

PROJECT GENESIS

Henry Birdsall lived in Salem Township, Westchester County, NY in 1800. He moved to the Town of Greene, Chenango County, NY and settled on a large piece of property. He, his sons and daughters, and their sons and daughters continued to farm for the next hundred years.

Public policy created tremendous pressures on their way of life. At times these pressures were economically beneficial. However, this came at a cost of cultural modification. In other instances public policy created drastic economic hardship, which in an ironic way, allowed the family to escape some social pressures. The family then often found itself faced by other and newer pressures.

During the same time period Lt. Col. Benjamin Birdsall, a revolutionary war veteran, also moved from Dutchess County to Greene. His family also expanded. However they tended to be real estate and mercantile entrepreneurs as well as lawyers and politicians.

Much has been recorded regarding the Benjamin Birdsall family. Almost nothing has been written about the Henry Birdsall family.

Gathering data on the family of Henry and comparing the two families is the purpose of this blog.

The common thread that allows this comparison is the building of the Chenango Canal, the demise of this canal, and the replacement of it by a railroad. The creation and operation of these transport links allowed both families to be in New York State documents.

This project originated as a fuzzy idea on how I could best record the origins of the people who initially settled a parcel of property that we own. The property is used for recreation (hiking and peaceful solitude). Nature and logging had taken a toll on the remnants of the existing features (home foundations, springs, stone walls and dug roadways).

At the beginning of this endeavor it was decided not to disturb anything without recording its exact provenance (location) and there definitely would be no excavations. Therefore all artifacts are catalogued with their found location, diagnostics and photographs.

In preparation for determining what I could about the Henry Birdsall family it became apparent that there was another Birdsall family; the Benjamin Birdsall’s. An attempt was made to establish family relationships between the two. However, no documentation or circumstantial evidence proves that point. Other aspects regarding each family’s culture tend to show a wide chasm between the way each family responded to various social and public policy pressures.

The next post will cover the features of the Henry Birdsall compound; foundations, privies, dug roads, corrals, quarries, etc.

© Copyright – Waldo Tomosky