- Historic Brattonsville
Historic Brattonsville is a 775-acre American Revolution living history site and is a member of the Culture & Heritage Museums of York County,
South Carolina. The Bratton Plantation was owned and lived on for three generations by the wealthy Bratton family; the Revolutionary War Battle of Huck's Defeat took place on the grounds of Brattonsville in 1780.
Historic Brattonsville presents the history of the Scotch-Irish (also known as Scots-Irish or Ulster-Scots) in the South Carolina upcountry largely through preserving and interpreting the story of the Bratton family. Featuring more than 30 historic structures from the 1760s to the late nineteenth century, the site provides visitors with an opportunity to see the evolution of Southern culture and architecture in the South Carolina Piedmont.
In 1971 the Colonel William Bratton House and the Homestead House were listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Restoration of the Homestead began in 1975 and it was opened to the public a year later. Since 1998 Historic Brattonsville has been a part of the York County Culture and Heritage Museums.
After 1915 Brattonsville continued in operation for several decades under the stewardship of a series of tenant farmers who worked for the Bratton family. In 1958, a retired IBM manager named R. Fisher Draper purchased 630 acres, which included Hightower Hall, from the heirs of John Simpson Bratton Jr. In 1962 he obtained the property that included the Col. William Bratton House.
About the same time, a York County judge and former state legislator, Samuel Mendenhall, purchased Napoleon Bratton’s old estate, including the Brick House and the Bratton Store. Senator Mendenhall spearheaded an effort to have Brattonsville designated as a historic district and helped establish the York County Historical Commission to manage the property.
In 1963 the Col. Bratton House was placed in the care of the Historical Commission, and in 1971 the Brattonsville Historic District was officially created with Joe Rainey as its first director. This Historic District included the Col. Bratton House, the Homestead, the Brick House and Forest Hall (now called Hightower Hall), and was placed on the National Register of Historic Places that same year.Over the next two decades the Historical Commission obtained control of much of Brattonsville, either through gift, purchase or lease, and Brattonsville was officially renamed “Historic Brattonsville” and opened to the public.
In 1994 the York County government purchased 435 acres of the R. F. Draper estate which included Hightower Hall, and in 2001 the 55-acre Mendenhall tract was purchased by the county as well. The Homestead House remains in the possession of the descendants of Dr. Rufus Bratton and is operated by the York County Culture and Heritage Commission under a perpetual lease. Through its venues, Historic Brattonsville, the McCelvey Center, the Museum of York County and the new museum being developed on the
Catawba River, the Culture & Heritage Museums actively provides public education about the cultural, historical, and natural heritage of York County and the Southern Piedmont region through the collection of artifacts and archival material, the preservation of historic sites, ongoing research programs, interpretive programs, exhibitions, and education. Annual special events include Children’s Day on the Farm (March), Battle of Huck’s Defeat (July), By the Sweat of Our Brows (September), Piedmont Pottery Festival (September), Civil War Reenactment (October) and Christmas Candlelight Tours (December). Special admission rates apply for these events.
Backwoods Cabin – 1740s-early 1800s
Europeans began settling the Carolina Piedmont or “the Backcountry” in the 1740s. Most of these settlers were Scotch-Irish immigrants who originally settled in
Maryland, Pennsylvaniaor Virginiabefore migrating south along the Great Wagon Roadto the Backcountry of the Carolinas. Others came directly from the Ulster Province in northern Ireland and landed in southern ports like Charleston, S.C., or Wilmington, N.C. Lowcountry plantation owners welcomed these Scotch-Irish settlers, for their reputation as strong fighters promised to provide a buffer against Indian raids, while their presence in the South counterbalanced the ever-increasing black slave population. [Maldwyn, 296]
The Backwoods cabin at Historic Brattonsville is a recreation built in the 1980s to illustrate the type of structure built by many Scotch-Irish settlers upon their initial arrival in the Carolina Backcountry. Most historians believe that the
log cabins built by the Scotch-Irish were an adaption of a building tradition employed by earlier German, Finnish, and Swedish settlers in Delaware and Pennsylvania. [Ibid. 306; Jordan and Kaups, 126] This cabin is typical of those preliminary structures built in the Backcountry between the 1740s and the early 1800s. Most of these early structures were crude and were intended to be temporary homes until better facilities could be constructed. These frontier cabins were usually small and had no windows; they were built of round logs and had dirt floors, stick and mud chimneys, and board- or plank-covered roofs. The cabin at Historic Brattonsville has a rough stone chimney and a shingled roof, both somewhat better than the norm. As the shingles are attached with nails, they represent an additional monetary investment.
The door to the cabin often stayed open even on the coldest days to provide both light and a draft for the chimney. While this cabin has intact chinking and daubing between the logs, travelers such as Reverend Charles Woodmason and
William Henry Draytonfrequently commented upon the openness of these buildings. Although drafty, missing chinking and daubing did allow for additional light and ventilation. [The term "chinking" refers to the materials, including sticks, chips, moss, newspaper, etc., that were used to fill the cracks between the logs. "Daubing" is the clay mixture applied over the chinking.]
Living in such frontier conditions was difficult. In 1766 Rev. Woodmason described recent settlers near Camden as “extremely poor—live in logg cabbins like hogs—and their Living and Behavior as rude or more so than the Savages.” [Woodmason, 7] Although the standard of living of many improved with the passing of time, for others it did not. William Drayton, who passed through the area in 1784, wrote that “Huts along the Road in general are miserable Dwellings, built of logs, open to the Wind and Rain, & inhabited by a Parcel of half naked Beings, almost everyone without shoe or Stocking, & amongst them great numbers of children.” [Krawczynski, 198-99]
The Scotch-Irish pioneers used different methods to make a living on the frontier. Some of these strategies they borrowed from other cultures; others they brought with them. The most important of these were farming, hunting, and raising livestock.
Upon arrival the pioneers were faced with a seemingly endless forest of enormous trees. Equipped only with rudimentary tools, the early settlers had little time or inclination to extensively clear land for crops and gardens. Rather than laboriously chop down trees to make fields, the settlers “girdled” them—that is, they cut grooves around the bases of the trees which killed them and allowed sunlight to penetrate to the ground. The settlers initially abandoned their use of European plows and grains and adopted the Native American techniques of planting corn, squash and beans in small hills or mounds around the tree stumps. The cultivation of Indian corn on the frontier soon gave rise to another coveted Scotch-Irish tradition—making whiskey. Corn whiskey rapidly became the drink of choice on the frontier and was employed at every social occasion. Whiskey also became one of the few items the frontier settlers could sell for cash, and it often took the place of money in trade and barter.
Most of these settlers did not rely solely on raising crops to sustain their families. Many also employed their ancient Celtic traditions of cattle raising to make a living. Taking advantage of vast, unsettled lands, some of these pioneers amassed large numbers of cattle. These cattle roamed freely in the forests and fields of the Piedmont. When ready, they were collected at “cow pens” and driven to market. Some of these markets were as close as Camden, but drovers often took cattle as far as Philadelphia.
As the landscape became more thickly settled, the pioneers abandoned cattle ranching and adopted other livestock. Swine or pigs ultimately became the most important animal raised by the Scotch-Irish settlers; they easily acclimated to the woodland forest environment, were prolific breeders, and were easy to keep around the farm. Along with Indian corn, pork became one of the staples of the Southern diet. Sheep, traditionally a favorite among many Celtic peoples in Europe, were not raised extensively in the Piedmont. Poultry were rare on pioneer farmsteads as they often fell victim to forest predators. [Jordan and Kaups, 119-20] Other means of acquiring food were also available to the Scotch-Irish settlers. With the abundance of game animals in their new North American environment, settlers quickly developed hunting skills which supplied them not only with additional food but also gave them some cash income. Hunting became a significant factor in the settlement of the area. In Ireland, Scotland and England, hunting was a privilege reserved solely for the upper class; on the North American frontier, it was open to everyone. Deerskins (or buckskins) became a valued export commodity. Thousands of skins were exported to England where they were made into gloves, bindings, and knee breeches. These animal skins, along with other items like homemade whiskey, hemp, goose down, beeswax, and cattle, were the only source of cash income for most families. [Weir, 33]
Colonel William Bratton House – 1760s
In 1766 William Bratton (ca. 1742-1815) purchased 200 acres of land from Thomas Rainey on the South Fork of Fishing Creek in what was then Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. According to the deed of transaction, Bratton was already living on the property at the time he purchased it. [Mecklenburg County Deed Book 1, 337-8] At this time, the Fishing Creek area was on the Carolina frontier and was only thinly settled. Mecklenburg County records show several Bratton families settling in the Fishing Creek area in 1765 and 1766, and William’s purchase of land was likely part of a larger family migration. Bratton’s whereabouts prior to his settling on Fishing Creek are unclear, although ongoing research by Culture & Heritage Museums staff seeks to shed light on this question. Colonial records indicate that Brattons were living in Augusta County, Virginia, as early as 1740 and were quite prominent there by the 1750s. At this time Augusta County was on the Virginia frontier and during the French and Indian War (1754-1763) its inhabitants suffered greatly from Indian raids. Many of the families in Augusta County migrated to the Carolina Piedmont in the 1750s and 1760s to escape Indian depredations, and the Brattons may have been a part of this migration.
What is clear is that Bratton’s ancestors (probably his parents) were immigrants from the Ulster Province in northern Ireland and were part of the large Scotch-Irish migration to America in the first half of the eighteenth century. Bratton family traditions indicated that they came either from County Armagh or County Antrim; however, current research leads us to favor County Tyrone as the most likely point of origin. William’s wife, Martha Robinson or Robertson (ca. 1749-1816), was also Scotch-Irish. Bratton family traditions recorded in the late nineteenth century state that William was born in Ireland and that Martha was born at sea during the Atlantic crossing. These same traditions indicate that William Bratton lived in Pennsylvania before moving South and that he married Martha in Rowan County, North Carolina. These traditions are as yet unverified by any reliable documentary evidence.
The date of the Bratton house’s construction is also uncertain. Virginia Mason Bratton (1867-1960), the last family owner of the house, claimed that the house was built in 1776, but there is no documentation to support this. The Rainey-Bratton deed transaction clearly indicates that William was living on the property in 1766, but this does not necessarily prove that the house is that old. It is certain that by 1780 William Bratton, his wife Martha and five of their children were living in what is now known as the William Bratton House. It is probably safe to say that the house dates between 1766 and 1776. The location of the house was well-chosen and lay at the intersection of two important colonial roads: a north-south road known variously as the Armour’s Ford Road, Armstrong Ford Road, or Lincoln Road; and a road running to the southeast known as the Rocky Mount Road.
For many years, the William Bratton House probably looked a lot like the McConnell House. It was a single-pen, story-and-a-half log house that rested upon stone piers. The log walls were likely uncovered and the few shuttered windows would have been small. The date of the brick chimney is unknown—it may be original to the house or a later addition. The timber-framed back room was probably added by 1800. Family tradition states that by 1780 a porch was located on the front and archaeological investigations seem to confirm this. The date and function of the narrow windows above the porch are debated. They may be original to the house or a later addition. Some suggest they were used as gun ports while others conjecture that they were built simply to allow light and air into the upper level. It is possible that the openings were designed with all of these functions in mind.
At the time of the American Revolution William Bratton was a significant individual in the New Acquisition District of South Carolina, now known as York County. He was appointed a justice of the peace in 1776 and a tax collector in 1777. He served as a captain, major and colonel in the New Acquistion militia and was one of the few slave holders in the area. The New Acquistion played an important role during the American Revolution. Men from the New Acquisition like William Bratton served in all of the important campaigns and battles in South Carolina between 1775 and 1783. On July 12, 1780, a small yet significant battle known as Huck’s Defeat took place on the plantation of James Williamson, a nearby neighbor of William Bratton. [The Battle of Huck's Defeat is also known as the Battle of Williamson's Plantation or Battle of Williamson's Lane. Some veterans of the battle also referred to it as the Battle of Bratton's Plantation, indicating its close proximity to William Bratton's home.] It was here that Loyalist forces under the command of Capt. Christian Huck of the British Legion were defeated by local militiamen led by William Bratton, Edward Lacey, John McClure and others. According to several sources, prior to the battle one of Huck’s soldiers put a reaping hook to Martha Bratton’s throat and demanded to know her husband’s whereabouts. Martha risked her life by refusing to betray the location of Col. Bratton’s camp. [Scoggins, 12-16] Huck’s men camped at the nearby Williamson plantation that night, and the next morning they were attacked by the Patriot militia and defeated. The Battle of Huck’s Defeat was a turning point for the Patriot cause, serving as “a precursor of the larger-scale defeats the British suffered at King’s Mountain and Cowpens...demonstrat [ing] for the first time that local militiamen could fight and win against better-trained, better-equipped forces of the British Royal Army.” [Ibid., 1]
After the American Revolution, William Bratton, now referred to as “Colonel Bratton” from his service in the war, continued to prosper socially, politically and economically. In 1786, Col. Bratton, eager to take advantage of the heavy traffic on the road that ran in front of his house, obtained a license to operate a tavern. [The ditch in front of the Col. Bratton House is this road. It was a part of an extension of the so-called Great Philadelphia Wagon Road that ran from Salisbury, NC to Augusta, GA.] He was again appointed tax collector in 1784 and in 1785 he became a justice of the peace and a district representative to the
South Carolina House of Representatives, a post he held until 1790. In 1791 he became a state senator and remained so until 1794, when he became sheriff of the new Pinckney District (1795-98). [Bailey and Cooper, 88-89; Reynolds and Faunt, 185] At some point after 1793 Bratton acquired a cotton gin and joined the surge of cotton cultivation occurring throughout the upper South. To facilitate his cotton planting, Bratton acquired more land and slaves. In 1790 Bratton owned 12 slaves, making him one of the larger slave owners in the region. [Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of the Census, "Heads of Families at the First Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1790": South Carolina (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1908), 28] By the time of his death in 1815, Bratton had increased his slave ownership to 23. [William Bratton's will, 51-56]
William Bratton died on February 9, 1815. The City Gazette of Charleston, S.C., published this obituary: “He was one of the old revolutionary characters, worthy to be remembered. . . His services were zealously devoted to his country throughout the Revolutionary war and for many years afterward in the [State] Legislature. . . He has left a widow and numerous family, besides a large circle of friends and acquaintances to lament his loss.” [Bratton's obituary, SC City Gazette] Martha Bratton died a year later, on January 16, 1816. Both are buried at Bethesda Presbyterian Church cemetery in York County, South Carolina. An inventory of Colonel Bratton’s property dated April 12, 1815, valued his personal property (excluding house and land) at $8247.75. Of that amount, $6,505 was listed as “Negroes.” [William Bratton's estate inventory, case9, file 378]
Much of William and Martha’s economic success can be attributed to their slaves who worked in the home and in the fields. It is unknown at this time where William Bratton’s slaves lived. Excavations conducted in the early 1990s indicate that at least some of the Bratton slaves resided in a small structure located just north of the house. This building is shown in an 1840s painting by Martha Bratton, granddaughter of Col. William and Martha Bratton. This small building might also have served as a detached kitchen, a common feature of Southern homes. [Beck, 124-128]
Upon entering the house, visitors will find the interior furnished as a tavern from the late 1780s. Although we know Col. Bratton operated a tavern, we do not know exactly how he would have utilized his house as both a residence and a tavern. To date, there are no surviving records that indicate how he divided the home between living quarters and public space; thus the current furnishings and appearance of the house interior is conjectural. The furnishings in the house are a mixture of antiques and reproductions. The large pine corner cupboard in the main room probably dates from between 1790 and 1810. The fearsome boar’s head over the mantel is that of a European wild boar; such trophy heads were not uncommon in taverns of that time. In the kitchen, the bed likely dates to the second quarter (1825-1850) of the nineteenth century whereas the chest of drawers likely dates between 1790 and 1820. The small corner cupboard also likely dates to the early nineteenth century.
Like the McConnell House, the furnishings of the Bratton House feature a considerable quantity of relatively inexpensive red ware and some of it, such as the platters on the mantel, are very Germanic in design; again, this is another sign of Moravian influences. The house also features reproductions of two sets of very common eighteenth century style chairs-- ladder backs and Windsors. Ladder, or slat back chairs were produced by local craftsmen throughout America from the colonial period well into the twentieth century in the South. Ladder back chairs exemplified regional characteristics such as the design of the slats and finials, the style of the feet, and the turnings. Ladder back chairs were frequently painted and their seats were covered in a variety of materials, including leather, cane, split oak, rush and wood plank. Generally not considered “formal” seating, ladder backs were the seating of common people or were relegated to informal spaces in elite, style-conscious households. Windsor-style furniture was tremendously popular with Americans of all classes throughout most of the eighteenth century and well into the nineteenth century. Often painted in bright colors like green, black, red and yellow, there were many regional variations in design and detailing. As a furniture style that was relatively inexpensive and basically mass-produced, Windsor furniture was traded across America. The Windsor chairs in the William Bratton house are “bow-backs” a very common Windsor variation. [Glassie, 127-135] In 1839 the house underwent a major renovation. Col. Bratton’s son, Dr. John Simpson Bratton, converted the house into a young ladies’ academy for the education of his seven daughters and other local girls. To operate the Brattonsville Female Seminary, he hired Catherine and George Ladd of Macon, Ga. Both were accomplished in their fields. George trained as a portrait painter under Samuel F. B. Morse, the noted artist and inventor. Catherine was an educator, needleworker and poet; her poetry was occasionally published in the "Southern Literary Messenger" under the pseudonym Morna, along with
William Gilmore Simms, Edgar Allan Poeand other lesser known writers. [Veasey, 18]
To modernize the old house and make it useable as a school, a frame addition was constructed on the south side of the building. The entire building was covered in weather boarding, the windows were enlarged and glass was added, and new Greek Revival-styled mantels were installed. The total cost for these renovations was $442.32. [Bratton Family Papers] Thus, the house in its present appearance most accurately reflects the 1840s.
In Southern antebellum society, planters looked upon education as an asset for daughters entering marriage. Rather than a means for advancing a career, such an education provided young ladies with the social skills and knowledge with which to navigate in elite and polite society. At Brattonsville, the Ladds offered courses in arithmetic, grammar, geography, history, rhetoric, astronomy, natural and moral sciences, music, fancy needlework, “modern” languages, reading and writing. The Ladds remained at Brattonsville from the summer 1839 to December 1841 before moving to Feasterville, S.C. During much of the 1840s, the Bratton daughters attended other schools like Limestone High School. In the 1840s the seminary served as many as thirty students. By the Civil War both males and females attended the academy at Brattonsville. The success of the academy was so great that Dr. Bratton commissioned the building of a brick building (the Brick House or “Bricks”) to accommodate the growing school. It is not clear whether the Brick House was ever actually used for this purpose, but we do know that it was used as a store and home by Napoleon Bonaparte Bratton, the youngest son of Dr. John S. and Harriet Bratton. [Fairey, 31, 44] The interior of the academy is furnished to reflect a typical schoolroom of the 1840s. The needlework sampler is a reproduction of a York County piece originally stitched by Jane Meek Adams. Although it has no direct connection to Brattonsville Female Seminary, it is similar to the type of work that young ladies in attendance were expected to complete. The painting of a ship on the far wall is believed to be an original work by Martha Bratton (granddaughter of William and Martha Bratton) under the tutelage of Catherine Ladd. There is also a landscape painting showing the Col. Bratton House and lands circa 1840. This work is a reproduction of another painting by Martha Bratton that is still in the possession of Bratton descendants. The Italian-style landscape painting on the back wall is a reproduction of a work by Elizabeth Robinson, a student at the academy also under the tutelage of Catherine Ladd.
McConnell House – Early 1800s
Moved to the site in 1983, the McConnell House is a historic structure that originally stood in the nearby town of McConnells, South Carolina It was probably built by Reuben McConnell before his death in 1837. This structure represents a common house type found throughout the Carolina Piedmont from the late eighteenth century through much of the nineteenth century. Housing for most Americans during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was generally small and simple, and often poorly built. In 1798, approximately half of the free Americans lived in houses valued under $100.8 The McConnell house probably falls into this category. Historians such as
Richard Bushmanhave classified the people living in this type of home as “middling sort.” [Bushman, 433-4. As defined in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language authored by Noah Webster in 1828 [Facsimile edition published by the Foundation for American Christian education. 1998] defined middling as "Of middle rank, state, size or quality...Thus we speak of people of the middling class or sort, neither high nor low." American historians such as Bushman and David Hackett Fischer (Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in American, 1989) generally use it to define a large class of working people also variously known as yeomen or freeholders] The total acreage attached to a home of this sort might have ranged from as little 50 acres to several hundred. Clearly, agriculture was the foundation of the Carolina Piedmont settlements. Although family sizes varied (just as they do today), in 1790 the average family in North Carolina was seven, whereas in South Carolina it was five. [Krill and Eversman, 35; LeCount, 115] There were, of course, exceptions: Rev. Woodmason claimed in 1768 that in parts of South Carolina that there was not a “Cabbin but has 10 or 12 Young Children in it.” [Woodmason, 37] Col. William Bratton, a neighbor of the McConnell family, had eight children.
The house is a one and a half story, single-pen log structure with half-dovetailed notching. According to architectural historians, half-dovetail notching is either a central European import or a technique developed in America. It eventually came to be a favored notching technique among the Scotch-Irish. [Jordan, 147] At some point in its history the house was covered with weather boarding as it is today; the current weather boarding was added by Historic Brattonsville in the 1980s. [Interview, Rusty Robinson. September 14, 2002] The house is elevated on piers of stone. Elevating houses off the ground became a common Southern practice that allowed air circulation during the hot summers and kept the foundations out of the mud during the winter.
One of the most curious architectural elements of the McConnell house is the
Federal-stylemantel. The style of this mantel, also referred to as Adams- or Classical-style, suggests it was built around 1820. Seemingly out of place in this simple house, it is not known whether the mantel is original to the house or was added later.
Two features suggest the house’s Ulster origins. Rectangular shaped dwellings with opposing doors were common in
Ulsterand the northern British Isles, though most dwellings there were made of stone or sod rather than wood. The gable-end exterior chimney is a recreation based on the ruins found at the original house site. According to some architectural historians, gable-end exterior chimneys originated in the British Isles. [Jordan, 25. The attribution of Ulster origins to architectural elements of buildings has been long studied but is still controversial. What is Irish, Celtic, German or British is not always easily defined. Many ethnic groups including the English, Germans, French, and Irish built rectangular single cell, pen or room dwellings. And the Irish were not the only group to exclusively employ opposing doors. However, many architectural historians (led by Henry Glassie) contend that the rectangular floor plan with opposing doors is a clear indicator of Ulster Irish building traditions. Exterior chimneys seem to have been common in western England and Wales and in the 17th century Chesapeake colonies of Maryland and Virginia exterior frame chimneys were referred to as “Welch” or “Welsh” chimneys. Exterior chimneys seem to have been first seen in the Chesapeake region and spread from there. Exterior chimneys do not appear to have been common in Ireland. According to some architectural historians the one and a half story elevation in log houses with a three to five foot high knee wall is Germanic in origin. If correct, the McConnell house is a true amalgamation of ethnic building traditions—with an English or Welsh derived exterior chimney, Germanic story and a half profile, and Ulster floor plan and door placement. See Alan G. Noble, Wood, Brick & Stone The American Landscape. Vol. 1: Houses. (Amherst, MA: The University of Massachusetts Press, 1984); Henry Glassie, Pattern in the material Folk Culture of the Eastern United States. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968); Henry Glassie, Vernacular Architecture. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000); Dell Upton, Ed. America’s Architectural Roots Ethnic Groups That Built America. (Washington, D.C.: National Trust For Historic Preservation, 1986); Cary Carson, Norman Barka, William Kelso, Garry Wheeler Stone and Dell Upton, “Impermanent Architecture in the Southern American Colonies,” Winterthur Portfolio, 16.2/3 (Summer/Autumn 1981); Peter C. Marzio, “Carpentry in the Southern Colonies during the Eighteenth Century with Emphasis on Maryland and Virginia,” Winterthur Portfolio, 7 (1972).]
The enclosed corner staircase is another feature found in houses built by families who emigrated from the British Isles. Although we cannot say with certainty how the upstairs was used, it is likely that children and/or any slaves the family might have owned would have slept there. Tools and equipment, a loom, and/or grain might also have been housed there.
As would be expected for the home of backcountry farmers, the interior of the house is rather plain and sparsely furnished. Most furnishings are purely functional with little decoration. The walls are whitewashed to improve the structure’s appearance and to brighten the interior. The bed and single-drawer table are two of the few antique pieces in the house. Both of these items probably date to the second quarter of the nineteenth century (1825-1850). Most of the rest of the items found in the McConnell House are reproduction pieces, including the long table and kitchen dresser or cupboard.
The bedstead is one of the central pieces of furniture in a house such as this. On this simple bedstead is a single mattress. Historically, mattresses were usually stuffed with corn shucks or straw. Wealthier people used goose down, chicken feathers or cotton batting and frequently used two mattresses. During the winter the bed would be moved closer to the fire for warmth.
The ceramics on display are mostly red ware (red clay fired at a low temperature) with a few pieces of white salt glaze (imported ware fired at high temperature). Some of the red ware pieces feature designs favored by the German Moravians and traded throughout the Carolina Piedmont. The most “Germanic” pieces are the yellow or cream slip-decorated plates on the mantel. Most of the iron tools and kitchen utensils on display are reproductions. Locals might have purchased or bartered for similar items from William Hill’s Ironworks, “the largest and only important iron establishment in the state.” [Bascot, 694]
For much of America’s early history, specie or hard currency was scarce. Consequently, most people relied upon complex systems of barter and credit. Stores kept careful accounts and often served as banks, extending credit to their customers. Farmers brought hemp, coarse linen, goose down feathers, beeswax, leather, whiskey, deerskins and other items and “sold it” to the store owner. In return they were extended credit or purchased material such as salt, gunpowder, sugar, ceramics, iron wares, tools and finer textiles.
The Homestead – 1820s
The Bratton family was one of the most influential families in York County for several generations. Business endeavors begun in the eighteenth century by Col. William Bratton were continued in the nineteenth century by his youngest son, Dr. John Simpson Bratton (1789-1843). Seizing the new opportunities and wealth cotton planting offered, Dr. Bratton turned a modest plantation into a large one. Records from the York County Comptroller’s Office reveal that by 1827 Dr. Bratton owned 3540 acres, 40 slaves, 80 town lots (most likely in Yorkville), and stock in trade worth $500. As a significant planter and slave owner, Dr. Bratton also acted as banker and store owner, while his son Robert McCaw Bratton served as postmaster of the Brattonsville Post Office. As their wealth increased, Dr. Bratton and his wife, Harriet Rainey Bratton (1795-1874), were able to position themselves as leaders in local society. In the early 1820s they began building a grand new home to accommodate their growing social status.
Construction on the Homestead began in 1823 under the supervision of contractor Henry Alexander. The lumber used in the house was likely cut from the property and processed in the Brattons’ own sawmill; the stones used in the foundation were quarried from the property, and the bricks used in the chimneys and outbuildings were made on the plantation. When the house was completed in 1826, it was a typical
Federal-stylefour-over-four with a center hall, interior chimneys, Federal (Adams or Classical) style mantles, wainscoting (the paneled lower part of the walls) and carved staircases. Alexander’s addition of the side wings after 1826 demonstrates a Greek Revival influence. The present porch is a reproduction of one added in 1854.
The bright red and gold paint colors inside the Homestead are one of the most striking aspects of the building’s interior. The paint colors used throughout the Homestead are based on paint analysis of original remains. The painted wainscoting found upstairs is original to the Homestead and is very similar to that found downstairs. Paint was an indicator of the Brattons’ status, as many paint pigments (especially reds and yellows) were costly. ‘Graining,’ or creating a faux finish, was an attempt to imitate more exotic and expensive woods and was considered stylish in its own right. With the exception of the north wing, every room in the Homestead was used in the filming of the Mel Gibson movie The Patriot (2000).
The Bratton family continued to prosper after the death of Dr. Bratton in 1843. The 1850 Federal Census of York District, South Carolina, shows Harriet as the third wealthiest person in the district in terms of land, with real estate holdings valued at $25,000. A decade later the census valued Harriet’s personal property at $85,000, with $24,000 in real estate. Her son, John Simpson Bratton, Jr., had $110,800 in personal property and $24,000 in real estate. [U.S. Population Schedules, 217] He went on to build Hightower Hall (Forest Hall) in the 1850s. At the outbreak of the Civil War, both equally shared land holdings totaling at 8000 acres. The Bratton family occupied the homes on site into the late 1910s. By the late 1950s the Homestead was electrified (but did not have indoor plumbing) and served as a boarding house, while the detached assembly/dining hall was used for hay storage.
The Homestead parlors displayed the Brattons’ interest in social refinement. In the first half of the nineteenth century, when most Carolinians lived in houses with only a few rooms, homes with distinct parlors were rare; thus their presence suggests the level of the Bratton family’s wealth. There are two parlors in the Homestead—the “family parlor” (also known as the old parlor) and the formal parlor. The family parlor was probably the most important parlor when the Homestead was first completed. It would have served as a sitting room and entertaining room for the Bratton family. Here the family might meet to discuss daily events, and the women might engage in activities such as embroidering, reading or music. The family parlor is decorated in the “elegant simplicity” of the
Neo-Classical style. The reproduction portrait on the wall in the family parlor is that of Harriet Rainey Bratton, wife of Dr. John Simpson Bratton who died unexpectedly in 1843. It is believed that this is a mourning portrait, since having a mourningportrait made a show of status and was a sign of respect for one’s late husband. Southern society placed great emphasis on mourning during the Victorian Era, and Harriet was expected to enter a long period of official mourning after her husband died. It appears on average that the length of time widows observed mourning was from 2 to 2-1/2 years, with the absolute minimum being one year and a day. During deep mourning (the first year or two), the widow was expected to wear dresses of solid black with heavy black crepe. Her fabric needed to be without any luster, hence wool or bombazine (a mixture of wool and silk) were popular choices. As the widow moved beyond deep mourning into second, ordinary and half mourning, she could wear black silk and finally grays, lavenders and whites. [Queen, 12; Victoria was Queen of England from 1837-1901. Although she is noted for remaining in mourning for the remainder of her life following Prince Albert's death in 1861, elaborate mourning customs were already popular prior to that time.]
Elaborate mourning practices affected women more than men. Some women feared public shame if they failed to abide by the rules of mourning. Men, on the other hand, generally did not subscribe to the belief that the wearing of black was necessary to show one’s grief. As a result, the extent of some widowers’ expressions of grief was simply wearing a weed in their hats. Even widowers who observed official rules of mourning were only expected to signify their loss by wearing a black crape armband for six months.
The picture of
George Washingtonabove the mantel is also of interest. Washington was a popular public image in the nineteenth century; his “love of country, freedom from petty self-interest, and the desire for the public good” were traits portrayed in biographies of the first president. [Smith, 58-59] His image was mass-produced to meet demand. During a period when family and national holidays were seldom celebrated, George Washington’s birthday (February 22, 1732) was celebrated with great fanfare; the birthday of America’s first president and Independence Day were the two most important days of the year.
Around the year 1828 the Brattons remodeled their home, adding two one-story side wings with Greek Revival elements. It is likely that the south or left room became the formal parlor used for entertaining guests. As such it would have been equipped with the best and most up-to-date furnishings. This room is decorated circa 1840 and is furnished en suite—that is, with matching furniture and coordinated colors used in the upholstery, curtains, and picture frames. The ability to decorate en suite was made more achievable during this period by advances in technology. By the 1840s fabrics were power woven and machine printed and furniture was made in factories using steam-driven machinery.
Most of the furnishings in the formal parlor are Bratton pieces. One of these is the sofa, originally covered in horsehair, which was considered parlor furniture in the mid-nineteenth century. The form dates back to early
Egypt, but did not become stylish in America till the early 1800s. This sofa is most likely one of two that John and Harriet Bratton purchased from a Charleston cabinetmaker in the 1840s; it is known that these sofas were the two most expensive pieces of furniture they acquired. Sofas were rare in York County in those days and they do not show begin to show up in York County estate inventories until the 1850s. Around 1864 this sofa was acquired by Dr. Bratton’s youngest son Napoleon Bonaparte Bratton and his wife Minnie Mason, and was passed down to their descendants.
Another interesting Bratton family piece is the cellaret located at one end of the sofa. This piece originally belonged to John Simpson Bratton, Jr., and his wife Harriet, who built Forest Hall (now referred to as Hightower Hall) in the 1850s. It dates to the 1850s and was used to store wine and spirits. Both the sofa and the cellaret were donated by Bratton descendants.
On the side wall is a pier table. The mirror at the base was NOT used by women for checking their petticoats, but rather reflected light and helped illuminate the room. The Empire or Late Classical style furniture in this room is typical of the late 1840s and 1850s. The difference in mantels and architectural elements in the formal and family parlors suggests the evolution of the house and the relative hierarchy of the rooms. In the original part of the house, the mantels are Federal or Adams style, while in the later rooms the mantels are a plainer Greek Revival style. The family did not replace the older styles when adding newer ones and apparently did not mind having dissimilar mantels in adjoining rooms. They did, however, attempt to unify them somewhat by painting them black. Within the original part of the house, the apparent hierarchy of rooms is indicated by the treatment of the wainscoting. In rooms that were “public” or formal, the wainscoting is actual paneling. In less important rooms, the wainscoting is imitated by painting.
Breakfast or Informal Dining Room
The breakfast room or informal dining room was probably used by the family on a daily basis, thus there was little need to formalize its furnishings. For example, the wall space beneath the chair rails was painted to resemble the wainscoting in the more public rooms rather than using actual wainscoting. The furniture was not en suite, nor did it need be modern. The linen press is an original Bratton piece and may have been made on the plantation by a slave artisan. The corner cupboard dates to around 1790 and reflects Pennsylvanian influence. The theorem painting is a reproduction of a work done by Martha Bratton while she was a student at Brattonsville Female Seminary, and is still in the possession of the Bratton family.
The room to the right of the Homestead's entrance is portrayed as Dr. Bratton's medical study. In his study Dr. Bratton might have studied medical literature, kept his accounts and stored his medications. He may also have managed the plantation from here. The medical profession in rural South Carolina in the nineteenth century was in a period of transition from cruder, more informal folk practice to a more scientifically-oriented professional practice. From the earliest settlements in America, domestic medical traditions were a vital part of the culture, livelihood, and well-being of the newcomers. Settlers faced new environmental conditions and illnesses; not surprisingly, they adapted their medical treatments to combine local herbs and native American remedies with traditional European and African medicinal lore. Some communities might have individuals who specialized in herbal treatments, while in isolated rural areas “every man [was] his own physician,” relying on oral traditions passed down for generations. [Moss, 6] By the 1820s, medical practices were becoming more formalized in structure. Some men attended newly formed medical colleges in the larger cities, such as the Medical College of South Carolina which opened in Charleston in 1824; others apprenticed under local, self-taught physicians. Despite the formalization of medical training, the herbal remedies of the early settlers continued to remain a major part of the trained physician's medical knowledge.
Like many of his peers, Dr. Bratton did not attend medical school, but rather trained as an apprentice under another physician. His older brother William Bratton, Jr., was also a doctor, and both men probably received their earlier training from their brother-in-law Dr. James Simpson, husband of their sister Jane. Doctors’ offices were rare in the rural areas of America; instead, doctors traveled to their patients. The bust on the table is illustrative of a common nineteenth century medical theory called phrenology, whereby personality is determined by the pattern of the bumps of one’s skull. We do not know whether Dr. Bratton practiced phrenology.
The furnishings in the master bedroom are original to York County but are not Bratton pieces. The large size of the room, the quality of the mantel and the use of real wainscoting suggest that this room was important and at one time was used as a public space. It is possible that before the construction of the two wings and the assembly/dining hall the family entertained in this space.
The adjacent room is interpreted as a dressing room. Note the fine faux wainscoting. The linen press in the dressing room is a Bratton piece.
The two other rooms upstairs are furnished as children’s rooms. John and Harriet raised fourteen children: William (1814-1856), John Simpson, Jr. (1819-1888), Samuel Edward (1820-1893), James Rufus (1821-1897), Robert McCaw (1825-1850), Martha Elizabeth (1825-1908), Mary Caroline (1827-1889), Sophia (1829-?), Elizabeth (1830-1904), Harriet Jane (1832-1854), Jane Eliza (1834-1902), Agnes (1835-1914), Thomas (1837-1875) and Napoleon Bonaparte (1838-1918). One other child was born in 1816 but died within three months. Although they had many children, it appears that at no time did all of them reside in the house. By the time Napoleon was born his eldest sibling, William, was already 24. The third floor is an open space conjectured to be sleeping area, perhaps for the children and/or girls attending the Brattonsville Female Seminary.
The detached assembly/dining hall was a multi-purpose room that was used for formal dinners, parties, recitals, and dances. Probably built around 1840, the separate dining hall was an uncommon architectural form. Although extravagant in concept, the hall was rather plain in appearance. It reflects the austere esthetic of the Greek Revival period in which it was built. The interior of the hall has changed greatly over time. At one time cupboards or closets were built into the front corners of the room. A staircase in the far back corner led up to the attic.
The portraits are of Dr. Rufus Bratton (son of John and Harriet) and his wife Mary Rebecca Massey. The piano forte, while not an actual Bratton piece, is the same model as the three purchased by Harriet; one of the original Bratton piano fortes is in Hightower Hall (originally known as Forest Hall) and another is in the Brick House. The two corner cupboards presently in the hall are examples of late eighteenth and early nineteenth pieces. The table is set for a large dinner party.
The assembly/dining hall is perhaps the most recognizable room from The Patriot. The Homestead was used as Charlotte’s home in the movie, and in one scene Charlotte flees with her children across the breezeway and into the dining hall. In the movie she sends her children down a dumbwaiter into the basement below, but one child hides under the dining room table. The curtains on display were used in the movie, as were the table and tablecloth. All food displays currently on site and in the movie were made by the Culture & Heritage Museums Exhibitions Department.
This room was a central storage and work area. Here meats and bottled wines were probably stored. The placement of a fireplace at one end allowed for a wide range of work to take place here. Here the house slaves might have performed laundry, cooking and dyeing chores to keep the household running. At one time the basement was referred to as a warming kitchen; however, there appears to be little manuscript evidence to support its use in this manner. Furthermore, there appears to be no physical evidence to support the belief that there was a dumbwaiter located in the corner closet at this time. The brick flooring was also added during the 1828 restoration; it appears that the floor might have originally been dirt like that of the brick house next door.
The Slave House
The slave house is a replica of an original dwelling. Slave houses in the South were made of many materials: stone, tabby, brick, log or wood frame. Brick dwellings were rare. The actual date of these structures is unknown, however there is some evidence to suggest that they were built around 1828. While clay for brick-making was available on the Bratton plantation, actual construction of these buildings required considerably more skill, time and labor than the construction of frame or log cabins. Although slaves were not paid wages, slave labor was not necessarily free. Owners provided their slaves’ food, clothing, medical care, tools, equipment, housing, firewood and other necessities.
We know relatively little about the life of slaves on the Bratton plantation. The family rarely mentioned them in writings and no former Bratton slaves were interviewed by
Works Progress Administrationinvestigators in the 1930s. From census records and inventories we know numbers and names and occupations. By the time Dr. Bratton died in 1843 he had approximately 140 slaves, making him a significant slave owner in the region. Life in these brick dwellings might have been better materially than those in more flimsy log or frame dwellings, but their status as slaves still meant that the occupants of these houses had virtually no rights, worked at the desire of their owners, and lived in conditions not of their own making. Furnishings in the dwelling reflect a Spartan lifestyle: a cast-off bed from the owner’s family, barrels used as tables, and benches for seating. It is questionable whether this or any other of the slave dwellings would have had glass in the windows.
A number of factors may explain the Brattons’ decision to use brick for their slave structures. First, brick was manufactured on site and was thus relatively inexpensive. It is possible that during this period, brick might have been cheaper and more readily available because clear-cutting of the property had made wood more scarce. Secondly, brick slave houses would have displayed the Brattons’ wealth to all who visited. Other theories suggest that the use of brick slave houses reflects the Bratton family’s concern for their slaves’ well-being, or that these well-built structures were a response to abolitionist criticism about the treatment of slaves. Whatever the reason, the brick cabins were likely reserved for slave artisans and domestic slaves, while the field hands lived in log or frame cabins near the fields. Not until the late 1850s did progressive slave owners begin to advocate the construction of brick structures as permanent, more humane dwellings for slaves.
Visitors often question the holes in the structure’s walls. These are openings for “putlogs,” which were short pieces of lumber inserted through the holes to support scaffolding during construction of the building. On better houses, these openings were filled in with brick after construction was finished, but on outbuildings and slave dwellings they were often left open. You can see original evidence of these on the dairy and slave house on the opposite side of the main house.
One of the most interesting aspects of the Homestead’s back yard is the layout of its outbuildings. The plantation’s most prominent outbuildings apparently were laid out according to classical principles of symmetry. From the front of the assembly/dining hall were two rows of brick outbuildings (service buildings and slave quarters). Recent thermal imaging suggests that other structures were once standing in a line along the north side of the yard.
Hightower Hall – 1850s
Located at the northern entrance to the historic site on Brattonsville Road, Hightower Hall is a white frame Italian Villa mansion. The house was built for John Simpson Bratton Jr. and his wife Harriet Rainey Bratton in 1856. Then called “Forest Hall,” it was the seat of a significant nineteenth and twentieth century plantation.John Bratton, Jr., was born in 1819, the second son of Dr. John Simpson Bratton and Harriet Rainey Bratton. As a young man John Bratton Jr. studied medicine along with two of his brothers, James Rufus and Samuel Edward. In 1843 Dr. Bratton died unexpectedly and John was left to administer his father’s estate and assist his mother in running the plantation. Dr. Bratton’s estate was settled in 1849 and John, Jr., inherited the largest share.
In 1850, John, Jr., and Harriet were still living on his mother’s plantation, known as the Homestead. They owned nineteen slaves and operated a farm valued at $9,000. About four years later they contracted with a local builder to construct a house of their own 3/4 of a mile north of the Homestead.
The house plan they chose was right out of a book—William Ranlett’s two-volume 1851 compendium “The Architect,” to be exact. Included in the chapter on “Cheap Houses” in the second volume of “The Architect,” the plan was originally conceived by Ranlett to accommodate two families.
Designed in an Italian-inspired or “Italianate” style, the house featured a prominent central tower and wide, bracketed eaves that gave it the appearance of an Italian country villa. John and Harriet’s Italianate house featured a three-story central tower and a nearly square two-story floor plan with a wide central hall flanked by two rooms on each side, built upon a high brick foundation providing a sub-ground floor. Illustrating the Italianate style, the exterior featured deep eaves, large vertical windows, bracketed mounts and a low pitched hip roof. During their occupation, the Brattons called their home Forrest Hall.
By the eve of the Civil War, John and Harriet were moderately wealthy cotton planters. Their plantation consisted of 4,000 acres of land valued at $24,000. They owned 3-8 slaves who in 1860 produced more than 60 bales of cotton, 1,500 bushels of corn, and tended over 130 head of livestock including pigs, sheep, beef and dairy cattle. John and Harriet also owned three horses and twelve mules. Around their house were located a separate kitchen, smoke house, 12 slave dwellings and other plantation outbuildings.
Unlike his father, but like his grandfather Colonel William Bratton, John S. Bratton, Jr., was politically active. Prior to and during the war John served as Brattonsville’s postmaster, a position he assumed after the death of his brother Robert. He also assumed proprietorship of the Bratton Store. During the Civil War, John was a member of the
South Carolina House of Representativesand the Soldier’s Board of Relief and served in the state militia.
Following the end of the war, John attempted to maintain the local pre-war social and racial status quo. Embittered by the South’s loss and likely angered by the demands for equality by local African Americans, John joined the
Ku Klux Klanalong with his brother Rufus. In 1871 a local black militiaman named Jim Williams was hanged after allegedly threatening to burn Brattonsville to the ground. The Brattons were suspected of involvement, and in 1872 both John and Rufus fled York County to escape prosecution and imprisonment. After several years of exile, both men received pardons, returned home and resumed their lives as best they could. John not only ran his own plantation but assisted his aged mother in managing her agricultural operations until her death in 1874.
John died in 1888 and his wife Harriet died in 1912. Forrest Hall passed to their daughter Sophia and her husband Robert Witherspoon, and the home was referred to locally as the “Witherspoon place.” Following the deaths of Robert (1930) and Sophia (1937), their descendants rented the plantation out to tenant farmers. By the 1960s Forrest Hall had become known as “Hightower Hall,” a name generally attributed to John Gettys Smith, a local businessman, historian and preservationist. In 1958, Mr. and Mrs. R.F. Draper purchased John and Harriet’s old plantation house. Draper was an executive with IBM and it was his intention to reside at the farm once he retired. He continued adding property to the farm and by the time of his death in 1995, he had acquired 1,285 acres. With the help of the Nation Ford Land Trust, the Friends of Historic Brattonsville and the York County Council, Historic Brattonsville was able to acquire John and Harriet’s plantation house and 485 surrounding acres of the Draper estate. The rest of the Draper property was purchased by the state government and became part of the South Carolina Wildlife Management system.
This is a reconstructed out-kitchen built upon the foundations of the original building. According to some sources the original kitchen may have been larger. Archaeological investigation has confirmed the existence of a paved walkway that led from the door of the kitchen to the steps of the breeze way. This walkway facilitated the flow of traffic and food to and from the house.
We do not know how involved Harriet Bratton was in managing the affairs of the kitchen and the slaves who worked there. The daily work in the kitchen would have been carried out by slaves. The kitchen is furnished primarily with reproductions and they are frequently used in living history programming.
Aside from the slave dwelling on the adjacent property, this is the only original outbuilding. Once interpreted as Dr. Bratton’s office, the original use of this building is unknown. The building is unusual in that it has a full basement. The presence of windows, a jack arch in the north wall at floor level, and an arched chimney suggest that the basement level could have been used as a dairy or spring house. The upstairs may have been the residence of a slave or overseer, an office or a work area.
Battle of Huck’s Defeat
In the spring and summer of 1780, the Revolutionary War moved full force to the area between the Broad and
Catawba Rivers now known as York and Chester Counties. After capturing Charleston in May, the British occupied Camden and established a strong post at Rocky Mount, a high elevation overlooking the area where Rocky Creek enters the Catawba. Rocky Mount was commanded by a British officer, Lieutenant Colonel George Turnbull, and was garrisoned by 150 men loyal to the British Crown, including elements of Turnbull’s own regiment, the New York Volunteers, and a troop of British Legion dragoons or light cavalry under Captain Christian Huck. Huck was a lawyer from Philadelphia of German ancestry and a staunch Loyalist, and he had a particular dislike for the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians in the South Carolina backcountry, most of whom were Whigs or “rebels,” as the British called them. In June 1780, Turnbull dispatched Huck to destroy the Whig militia camps at Fishing Creek Church and Hill’s Iron Works, which Huck accomplished with great satisfaction. The Whigs moved to the east side of the Catawba River and began organizing a partisan militia brigade under the command of General Thomas Sumter.
In early July, Turnbull received intelligence that many of the rebels, including Captain John McClure and Colonel William Bratton, had returned home to check on their wheat harvest and to enlist recruits for Sumter’s Brigade. Turnbull gave Huck instructions to apprehend McClure and Bratton and disperse the rebels in the upper Fishing Creek and Bethesda communities. On the evening of July 10, Huck set from Rocky Mount with 35 British Legion dragoons, 20 mounted New York Volunteers, and 50 mounted Tory militia. Early on July 11, he visited the home of John McClure. McClure had already left for Sumter’s camp, but Huck captured McClure’s younger brother and brother-in-law and sentenced them to be hanged the next day. He terrorized the boys’ mother, set fire to their home, and then departed for the plantation of William Bratton some ten miles to the north.
Bratton and McClure soon learned that Huck was once again on the rampage, and they quickly made plans to intercept him. Believing that Huck was camped at Walker’s Mill in Chester County, they set off on July 11 in an effort to ambush the Loyalists. Other local Whig commanders, including Colonel Edward Lacey from Chester County and Colonel Andrew Neal from York County, also learned of Huck’s expedition, and began gathering men from all over the area to intercept Huck.
Meanwhile, Huck’s force continued north into York County, headed for Bratton’s plantation. They arrived at the Bratton home late on the afternoon of July 11. The Tory militia was first on the scene, and one of them threatened William Bratton’s wife Martha with a reaping hook. Lieutenant John Adamson, a Loyalist officer from Camden, intervened and saved Martha’s life. Local tradition states that Martha sent a trusted African-American slave named Watt to find her husband and warn him of the British presence. Captain Huck then arrived and interrogated Martha, trying unsuccessfully to persuade her to reveal her husband’s whereabouts. Martha refused to give him any information. After forcing her to prepare supper for him and his officers, Huck moved his troops to the neighboring home of James Williamson, who had a large field of oats that Huck needed for his horses.
When the various Whig companies rendezvoused at Walker’s Mill, they found that Huck had moved on toward the Bratton plantation. Arriving at Bratton’s before dawn, the Whigs learned that Huck was camped at Williamson’s. The Tory militia was positioned in an old field in front of Williamson’s house, while the New York Volunteers were camped in a fenced-in lane running from the main road down to Williamson’s homeplace. The Legion dragoons were arranged around the house, and Huck was asleep inside. The Whigs made plans to attack at daybreak and divided their forces into two companies. One group would attack the west end of the lane while the other attacked the east end, thus cutting off any chance for the Loyalists to escape to the main road. The Whigs took cover behind the fence and the trees and prepared to open fire as soon as they were spotted by Huck’s sentinels.
Just as the sun began to rise the Whigs commenced their attack, and the Loyalists were caught completely by surprise. The Legion dragoons and the New York Volunteers tried to counterattack but were frustrated by the fenceline and the trees, which the Whigs used as cover. Many of the Tory militia, seeing the road blocked by the Whigs, abandoned their horses and fled to the surrounding woods. Other Tories, seeing no chance to escape, grounded their arms and surrendered without a fight. Huck tried to rally his dragoons, but a militaman named John Carroll loaded two balls in his rifle, took aim and fired, killing the captain instantly. The battle was over in about ten minutes. The Loyalist casualties numbered 35 killed and 30 wounded, and a large number were taken prisoner. The Whigs loaded up the prisoners and sent them back to Rocky Mount later that day. The only Patriot casualty was a man from the Chester area named Campbell.
The destruction of Huck’s Loyalist force at Williamson’s Plantation on July 12, 1780 helped revive the morale of the people in South Carolina just when British victory seemed inevitable. It served as a rallying point for the backcountry Whigs, and set into motion a series of significant events which eventually led to the even larger Patriot victories at King’s Mountain in October 1780, Cowpens in January 1781, and finally to the British surrender at Yorktown in October 1781.
African American History at Historic Brattonsville
Historic Brattonsville is one of the few living history sites with African-American interpretation.In 1838 Dr. John S. Bratton collected a debt of $153.75 owed to him by Thomas Hyde Smith. A wealthy man, Dr. Bratton frequently lent money to his neighbors. Business was business, however, and Dr. Bratton, for whatever reason, called in his debt. But instead of getting cash, Dr. Bratton received a Negro man slave named Sampson, of a yellow color, about nineteen years of age. Known as Sam, he was a carpenter by trade according to his descendents and he remained in Bratton ownership until the end of the Civil War.With freedom, Sam adopted the surname of Smith probably from his previous owner Thomas Hyde Smith. Since 1838 the stories of Sam Smith and his descendents and that of many of the Brattons have been closely linked. In fact, 160 years later, Sam’s great grandson Leon Smith still frequents his ancestor’s place of enslavement at Historic Brattonsville. Although the landscape has changed a lot since his great grandfather’s time, the memories of family stories bring life to the buildings that still survive at Historic Brattonsville. It’s not hard for Leon to envision images of his enslaved ancestors at the door of the one remaining brick slave cabin near the “Big House.” And it’s not hard for him to imagine slaves working mules in the fields, driving a carriage or wagon, nursing the Bratton children, milking cows or picking cotton. The Bratton family arrived in York County, South Carolina with the wave of Scotch-Irish migration in the 1760s. We are not sure when William Bratton, who settled the land that is now Brattonsville, acquired his first slave, but it is clear that he owned some by the time of the American Revolution. During the American Revolution, one of his slaves became legendary in local history. Watt, possibly just a boy at the time of the Battle of Huck’s Defeat in 1780, helped warn Colonel Bratton of the whereabouts of the enemy. The British Loyalists under the command of Captain Christian Huck were soundly defeated and Watt entered local lore as an important messenger. So grateful were the Bratton’s of Watt’s services, the tradition goes, that he never had to work another day in his life. Whether this was true or not, the Bratton’s indeed remembered Watt. In the Bratton slave cemetery a single stone inscribed by a stone carver from Charleston, marks Watt and his wife Polly’s graves. The stone reads: Sacred to the Memory ofWATTWho diedDec. 1837 During the Warhe served his master Col. W. BrattonFaithfully and his childrenWith the same fidelityUntil his death.ALSOPolly his wife who died July 1838Who served the same familyWith equal faithfulness
A reproduction of this headstone now stands next to the DAR monument commemorating the Battle of Huck’s Defeat. After the American Revolution Colonel Bratton continued to acquire property, wealth, and political power. By 1790 he owned 12 slaves, making him a significant slave owner in a region where most residents did not own any slaves. Likely taking advantage of the cotton boom during the late 1790s, Colonel Bratton increased the number of his enslaved workforce even more. Through the hard labor of his enslaved workers, Colonel Bratton progressed from a pioneer farmer to a prosperous backcountry planter. By the time he died in 1815 Col. Bratton owned 23 slavesómaking him one of the largest slave owners in the county. These enslaved people were bequeathed to his wife Martha with the understanding that they would be divided up between their eight children when she passed away. Martha died a year later and the slaves were indeed divided up amongst the children.
Twenty-seven year old John Simpson Bratton, Martha and John’s youngest son, inherited four individuals-Watt, Polly, Jim and Nelson. After his father’s death John Simpson Bratton remained on the family property. John not only inherited four slaves but also 860 acres, all his parents livestock, some blacksmithing tools, a wagon, “plantation tools” and a “cotton machine” (a cotton gin) among other things. This valuable inheritance, along with his marriage to Harriet Rainey, the daughter of a prosperous planter, and his medical practice helped set the stage for John to amass a great deal of wealth.
Today, Leon Smith carries the history and memories of the plantation where his enslaved ancestors labored. The stories that he keeps shed light on the larger picture of plantation life, making it come alive with stories of real people and places. His family history helps us put personalities and events with names found on various family documents. Fortunately, Leon remembers a lot of his family’s stories and his memory is a goldmine of information about the many things that went unrecorded or have been lost. Leon often recounts a poignant story about his great grandmother Nancy. Unfortunately, we know little of her from Bratton family records, only that she first appears in an 1843 listing of slaves owned by the deceased Dr. Bratton.
However, from Smith family tradition we learn more. Nancy’s mother came from Virginia and was part African and part American Indian. And, according to the Smith family, Nancy’s father was a Bratton. As a girl Nancy cared for children of the slave Sam and his wife Amy. In this situation, Sam once took advantage of Nancy. She sought comfort from her plight by lying down on Watt and Polly’s grave. Nancy knew the great esteem of Watt who during the Revolutionary War warned Col. William Bratton of the presence of the enemy at his plantation. Nancy survived this traumatic experience and after the Civil War, she became the wife of Hiram Bratton, another former Bratton slave. Aside of what we know from Leon’s recollections, little is known so far about the lives of the many other enslaved African Americans on the Bratton plantation. Nor do we know much about who did what specific work on the plantation. No doubt most labored in the Bratton’s vast cotton fields. Others would have worked in the Bratton’s brickyard and tended their cattle, horses and mules. And some would have cooked the Bratton’s food, served the family their meals, washed their clothes, made their beds, cared for their children and drove their wagons and carriages.
One exception to this mystery was a slave named Adam. Like Sam, he was acquired by Dr. Bratton to settle a debt. In 1829, Adam was purchased as a mortgage debt by Dr. Bratton from James M. Rainey of Chester County. As a blacksmith Adam likely made and repaired plows, mule and horseshoes and tools. In 1843 Adam was valued at $1000, the highest of all Dr. Bratton’s slaves. Adam’s wife was a woman named Letta or Letty. She was born in Virginia around 1818. She, and three of her children were purchased by Dr. Bratton in 1842 from the estate of William Erwin. Adam and Letty probably had three children together: Ella or Ellen, Adam and Isabella. Between 1820 and 1840 Dr. Bratton dramatically increased the number of enslaved African Americans he owned. According to the 1820 census he owned 24 slaves, and an 1827 county tax assessment showed him with 40. In the 1830 census he was listed with 49 slaves, and by the time of the 1840 census he owned 112.
Where did all these people come from? Most certainly some were born on the plantation, but most were purchased. As we have seen, Dr. Bratton acquired slaves from local individuals who were financially unable to keep themóeither through short-term debt or estate insolvency. But it is also possible that Dr. Bratton traveled elsewhere to buy slaves. And he may have purchased slaves as they were herded in coffels through the county from the old plantation states of Virginia and Maryland to the Deep South where the demand for slave labor was increasing. The fact that both Nancy and Letty were identified as having been born in Virginia helps illustrate this general population movement from Virginia to newer plantation areas. In the spring of 1843 Dr. Bratton died unexpectedly. An inventory and appraisement of his estate taken that summer listed 139 slaves on his plantation. We don’t know how these slaves reacted to Bratton’s death, but no doubt many would have been concerned for their future. After the death of an owner, slaves were frequently sold to pay for their master’s debts. Families and friends could be separated forever by such events. From what is known so far, however, this does not appear to have happened after Dr. Bratton’s death. Dr. Bratton’s estate was financially secure and it appears that most if not all of his 139 slaves remained in family ownership on adjacent plantations.
Nevertheless, the division of Dr. Bratton’s slaves amongst family members still probably caused a great deal of fear, anxiety, and resentment.One of Dr. Bratton’s slaves who may have experienced a difficult transition was a young man named Lewis. At Dr. Bratton’s death he was valued at $500 making him one of the most valuable individuals on the plantation. From Dr. Bratton’s estate records we also learn that Lewis and another slave named George were paid by the Brattons to make charcoal. Charcoal was primarily used as a fuel for blacksmith’s forges but it had other applications as well. After Dr. Bratton’s death Lewis was transferred to the ownership of John S. Bratton Jr., probably around 1849 when the estate was finally settled. In 1851 Lewis ran away and hid at the home of a man named Able Jonas (or Jones). Eventually Bratton located Lewis and accused Jonas of “Harbouring concealing and entertaining a runaway slave.” Jonas was fined $200 for concealing a runaway slave and Lewis was returned to Bratton. What propelled Lewis to runaway from Bratton? Poor treatment? Possibly, but we don’t know. At the outbreak of the Civil War, widow Harriet Bratton and her sons Thomas and Napoleon resided at Brattonsville with 80 slaves.
John Simpson Bratton, Jr., lived nearby at Forest Hall, now known as Hightower Hall, with another 38 slaves. And son Dr. James Rufus Bratton operated an adjacent plantation with 34 slaves. At the close of the war it appears that most of Harriet’s former slaves remained on the plantation, at least for a while. In a list of freedmen present in 1865, the names of Sam and Amy Smith appear with their five children. So do Letty and her childrenóAdam apparently having died some time between 1860 and 1865. Former slaves continued to grow cotton for the Brattons, but now as tenant farmers. During the turbulent period of Reconstruction after the Civil War, the Brattons and their former slaves attempted to reorient their lives according to the new order.The transition was not easy and, in fact, at times was violent. Some Brattons, including John Simpson Bratton Jr. and Dr. James Rufus Bratton, resisted the efforts of African Americans to assert their equality. Rufus was especially active in the Ku Klux Klan and he fled to Canada for a while due to his involvement in the murder of Jim (Rainey) Williams, a local African American militia officer. Nevertheless, some former slaves managed to struggle through those difficult times and prosper. Sam Smith acquired an old log house from the Brattons and took up farming. His son, John, continued farming and his grandson, Jim, also a farmer, fought in France during World War I. Jim’s son, Leon Smith, although he no longer farms his great grandfather’s fields, still owns the land and lives on it to this day.Please revisit this link from time to time to see informational updates regarding our growing knowledge and understanding of the important history of African Americans at Historic Brattonsville.
Heritage or Minor Breeds of Livestock at Historic BrattonsvilleHistoric Brattonsville is home to an award-winning Heritage Farm Program. Demonstrations of historical farming techniques, including plowing a field using a horse, and day-to-day activities are presented by costumed interpreters throughout the year on the Bratton Plantation.
The farm maintains representative numbers of livestock to interpret the important role they played in the life ways of historic peoples in the region. The farm currently keeps a flock of sheep, small numbers of poultry, cattle, pigs and horses.
The farm maintains a herd of about 15 Milking Devon cattle. Although the breed has been in America for some 300 years, it is now one of the rarest breeds of cattle in the United States. The American Livestock Breeds Conservancy estimates that there are fewer than 500 Devon cattle left in North America. Historic Brattonsville has been breeding Devons since 1999.
Among the herd is a pair of oxen. Oxen are two steers (at least four years of age) trained to work. The current pair, Cain and Able, are approximately 15 years old.
Gulf Coast Sheep
Historic Brattonsville is home to a flock of rare Gulf Coast Sheep. The breed is listed as “critical” by the American Livestock Breed Conservancy because their worldwide numbers are fewer than two thousand. Brattonsville’s Heritage Breed Program is actively working to preserve this unique and important animal. Gulf Coast Sheep are a remnant population descended from Spanish sheep first brought to Florida in the 1500s. With nearly four centuries of free ranging the Gulf Coast region, and strong natural selection, they have developed a great tolerance to heat and humidity and a strong immunity to parasites. Every spring Historic Brattonsville’s ewes have lambs that have been sold to other museums and breeders throughout the United States.
Ossabaw Island Hogs
Recently Historic Brattonsville acquired new Ossabaw Island hogs. The hogs of Ossabaw Island (an island off the coast of Georgia) are descendants of Spanish pigs brought to the New World in the 1500s. Offspring of Historic Brattonsville’s pigs have been distributed across the United States to various historic sites and breeders.
The site maintains a flock of rare Dominique and staff is currently working to raise a flock of Red Dorkings.The Dominique was developed from chickens introduced during the early settlement of New England. By the mid 19th century they were widely distributed across the Eastern half of the United States. They are hardy breed, and do well on open range as well as in confinement. The Dominique is a medium-sized bird with distinctive black and white striping over the entire body. They are generally calm, easy to work with and produce brown eggs.
Currently the farm staff at Historic Brattonsville is working to raise a flock of Red Dorkings, an extremely rare breed of chickens that were brought to the American Colonies from England. They are characterized by their red and black plumage, large standing combs and the unique fifth “toe” on their feet. Five-toed chickens can be traced back to ancient Rome. They are a large bodied, short legged bird with white skin and Red Dorkings lay small white eggs.
Walt Schrader Trails
This 8.5 mile network of backcountry paths crosses land steeped in local history and tradition. The trail’s fields and woodlands exhibit the history and geographical diversity of the Carolina Piedmont through forests, wetland and prairie, each with its own distinctive plants and wildlife, as well as historic landmarks dating back to the 1770s.
Visitors may use the trails for hiking, bicycling and for horseback riding on special access days.
last = Bacot
first = D. H.
year = July 1923
title = The South Carolina Up Country at the End of the Eighteenth Century
publisher = American Historical Review 28, no. 4
last = Bailey
first = N. Louise
coauthors = Elizabeth Ivey Cooper
year = 1981
title = Biographical Directory of the South Carolina House of Representatives, Vol III, 1775-1790
publisher = University of South Carolina Press
location = Columbia, SC
last = Beck
first = Monica Leigh
year = 1996
title = Servant to Chattel: African American Slaves and Their Masters on an Upcountry Plantation. MA Thesis
publisher = University of South Carolina
location = Columbia, SC
title = Bratton Family Papers. RG 25.
location = York County Historical Center, York, SC
last = Bushman
first = Richard L.
year = 1992
title = The Refinement of America: Persons, Houses, Cities
publisher = Vintage Books
location = New York
last = Edgar
first = Walter
year = 2001
title = Partisans and Redcoats: The Southern Conflict That Turned the Tide of the American Revolution
publisher = Harper Collins
location = New York
last = Fairey
first = Wade
year = 1993
title = Historic Brattonsville: A Wedge of County History
publisher = York County Historical Commission
location = McConnells, SC
last = Faragher
first = John Mack
coauthors = et al.
year = 1997
title = Out of Many: A History of the American People. 2nd ed. Vol. 1
publisher = Prentice Hall
location = Upper Saddle River, NJ
last = Hutslar
first = Donald A.
year = 1986
title = The Architecture of Migration: Log Construction in the Ohio Country, 1750-1850.
publisher = Ohio University Press
location = Athens, OH
last = Jones
first = Maldwyn A.
editors = Bernard Bailyn and Philip D. Morgan
year = 1991
title = “The Scotch-Irish in British America.” In Strangers Within the Realm: Cultural Margins of the First British Empire
publisher = University of North Carolina Press
location = Chapel Hill, NC
last = Jordan
first = Terry G.
year = 1985
title = American Log Buildings
publisher = University of North Carolina Press
location = Chapel Hill, NC
last = Jordan
first = Terry G.
coauthor = Matti Kaups
year = 1989
title = The American Backwoods Frontier: An Ethnic and Ecological Interpretation
publisher = Johns Hopkins University Press
location = Baltimore
editor last = Krawczynski
editor first = Keith
year = July 1996
title = “William Drayton’s Jounal of a 1784 Tour of the South Carolina Backcounty.” South Carolina Historical Magazine 97, no. 3
last = Krill
first = Rosemary Troy
coauthor = Pauline K. Eversman
year = 2001
title = Early American Decorative Arts, 1620-1860: A Handbook for Interpreters
publisher = Alta Mira Press
location = Walnut Creek, CA
last = Larkin
first = Jack
year = 1988
title = The Reshaping of Everyday Life, 1790-1840
publisher = Harper Row
location = New York
last = LeCount
first = Charles
editor = Debra A. Reid
year = 2002
title =Their indifference to personal comfort is hard to understand’: Travelers Accounts of Life Within Single Room Houses of the South and Midwest Between 1760 and 1860,” in Association for the Living History, Farm, and Agricultural Museums: Proceedings of the 2001 Conference and Annual Meeting, Vol. 24
publisher = ALHFAM
location = North Bloomfield, OH
editor last = Lounsbury
editor first = Carl R.
year = 1994
title = An Illustrated Glossary of Early Southern Architecture and Landscape
publisher = University of Virginia Press
location = Charlottesville, VA
last = Masson
first = Ann
coauthor = Bryce Reveley
year = Fall 1988
title = “When Life’s Brief Sun Was Set: Portraits of Southern Women in Mourning - 1830-1860.” Southern Quarterly 27, no. 1
last = Moss
first = Kay K.
year = 1999
title = Southern Folk Medicine, 1750-1820.
publisher = University of South Carolina Press
location = Columbia, SC
last = Queen
first = Sally A.
year = 2001
title = Textiles for Colonial Clothing: A Workbook of Swatches and Information
publisher = Q Graphics Production Company
location = Arlington
last = Reynolds
first = Emily Bellinger
coauthor = Joan Reynolds Faunt
year = 1964
title = Biographical Directory of the Senate of the State of South Carolina 1776-1964.
publisher = South Carolina Archives Department
location = Columbia, SC
last = Scoggins
first = Michael C.
title = “Huck’s Defeat: The Battle of Williamson’s Plantation.” January 2002. Unpublished manuscript on file
location = York County Historical Center, York, SC
last = Smith
first = Roy McBee
year = 1997
title = Vardry McBee: Man of Reason In an Age of Extremes
publisher = Laurel Heritage Press
location = Spartanburg, SC
first = U. S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of the Census
year = 1908
title = Heads of Families at the First Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1790: South Carolina
publisher = U. S. Government Printing Office
location = Washington, DC
title = U. S. Population Schedules, York District, South Carolina, 1850.
location = York County Historical Center, York, SC
title = U. S. Population Schedules, York District, South Carolina, 1860.
location = York County Historical Center, York, SC
last = Veasey
first = Pat
year = 2001
title = “Unknown Flower: Catharine Ladd, Antebellum Educator, Author, Journalist.”
location = Unpublished manuscript on file at Historic Brattonsville, McConnells, SC
last = Wells
first = Laurence K.
year = 1981
title = York County, South Carolina Minutes of the County Court 1786-1797.
publisher = South Carolina Magazine of Ancestral Research
location = Columbia, SC
last = Weir
first = Robert M.
year = 1997
title = Colonial South Carolina: A History.
publisher = University of South Carolina Press
location = Columbia, SC
title = William Bratton’s deed of purchase from Thomas Rainey, August 11, 1766. Mecklenburg County Deed Book 1, 377-8,
publisher = North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Raleigh, NC
location = Photocopy on file at York County Historical Center, York, SC
title = William Bratton’s estate inventory, case 9, file 378.
publisher = York County Court of Probate
location = York, SC
year = February 28, 1815
title = William Bratton’s obituary
publisher = Charleston, SC City Gazette
year = December 27, 1813
title = William Bratton’s will
publisher = York District Estate Records Book D, 51-6
location = York County Historical Center, York, SC
title = William Bratton Jr.’s reminiscences of Huck’s Defeat contained in a letter from Gen. John Bratton to Dr. E. M. Boykin. April 18, 1876
location = Photocopy on file at York County Historical Center, York, SC
last = Woodmason
first = Charles
editor = Richard J. Hooker
year = 1953
title = The Carolina Backcountry on the Eve of the Revolution: The Journal and Other Writing of Carles Woodmason, Anglican Itinerant
publisher = University of North Carolina Press
location = Chapel Hill, NC
Scoggins, Michael (2003). “A Brief History of Historic Brattonsville.” York County Culture & Heritage Commission.African American oral history recollections of Leon Smith, Ruth Moore, Ella Bowen and their families.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.