(if h;iiul-fori;cd nails, in quantities of window glass 

 inched and distorted, and in pieces of plaster. The 

 last is the t\pical hard, coarse oyster-shell plaster of 

 the area, having a smooth surface coat, except for 

 line lines left by the trowel. There is no evidence of 

 paint. .A small slide bolt of wrought iron probably 

 lilted on a cupboard door, or possibly the gate in 

 the bar (ill. 87). Another iron fixture is not identified. 

 Two kinds of window glass occurred. One, the 

 earliest type, is a thin, yellowish glass which is coated 

 with irridescent scale caused by the breakdown of 

 the glass surface. None of this glass shows signs of 

 fire or, at least, of melting. The remainder is a 

 grayish-blue aquamarine, much of it melted and 

 distorted, and some of it accumulated in thick masses 

 where tremendous heat caused the panes literally 

 to fold np. A fragment of yellowish-green glass pane, 

 related to the early type and again coated with scale, 

 varies in thickness and was apparently from a bulls- 

 eye. Xo evidence exists of diamond-shaped panes, 

 but, as should be expected, there is indication of 

 ^quare-cornered panes in both types of glass. 



.\RCHITECTURAL ANALYSIS 



The plan of the footings (fig. 60) shows a T-shaped 

 foundation. This was an immediate clue to the 

 nature of the structure, for the T-shaped courthou.se 

 was virtually a standard 18th-centuiy form in \'ir- 

 ginia. This foundation, in fact, is almost a replica 

 of the plans of both King William and Hanover 

 County courthouses, each built about 1731 "'° (figs. 

 .% 61, and 62). 



The King William courthouse measures 50 feet 

 4K inches long and 26 feet 4 inches wide in the 

 main structure. Its T section extends 14 feet 9 inches 

 to the original end (to which an extension has been 

 added) and has a width of 23 feet I OS inches. The 

 Stafford foundation is 52 feet long and 26 feet wide 

 in the main structure. The T-section is 14 feet 5 

 inches long and 25 feet wide. A clcscr comparison 

 could scarcely be expected. 



Hanover's length is 52 feet 4^ inches, the width of 

 the m-iin section 27 feel 10 inches, while the T-scction 

 is 15 feet 2K inches long (in its original part) and 26 

 feet 7 inches wide. 



A third e.xaniple, completed in 173'' .rj 



City County courthouse.''" The ni> .»f 



this building are not available to us, but < . u- 



nation of photographs discloses a building of abuut 

 the same size. 



The earliest of these T-shaped buildings ihiu far 

 recorded was the York Ck)tinty conrthou.sr, completed 

 in 1 733. Destroyed in 1814, its site has l)ecn excavated 

 by the National Park Ser\-ice. Its foundation, measur- 

 ing 59 feel 10 inches in length and 52 feet i: -h, 

 including the T, was somewhat larger iha:. .....irs 



known to us. The records show that it was rather 

 elaborate, with imported-stone floors and conip.ro- 

 head windows.'"' 



All these buildings had arcaded verandas. Marcus 

 Whiffen raises the question as to which of them, if 

 any, was the prototype, then concludes by speculating 

 that none was, and that all four may have derived 

 from the 1715 courthouse at Willi imsburg, the di- 

 mensions of which, however, remain unknown. 

 The introduction of the loggia first at the College of 

 William and Mary and then at the capitol led him to 

 postulate that its use in a courthouse also would have 

 originated in Williamsburg."* The Stafford founda- 

 tion showed no trace of stone pa\ nlc 

 might have been, but, since vii i < ks 

 had been taken away, it is likely that such a valuable 

 commodity as flagstoi\es also \\' '■'■en re- 

 moved as soon as the building \\ : or dis- 

 mantled. Two brick piers at the west end of the 

 structure (fig. 36) remain a m\-sterv. The\ are equi- 

 distant from the longitudinal walls, and may have 

 been the foundations for a chimney. Howe%cr, their 

 positioTis do not relate to the fltx>i ' - at 

 Hanover or King William cc) iier 

 features of which are so nearly comparable. Our 

 woiiUl suppose every basic i " of the Staf- 

 ford building would ha\e |.. .is in these 

 buildings. The piers were perl>aps late additions or 

 modifications. 



The I oof was apparently of wood; there were no 

 evidences of slate shingles. The bricks wrrt approxi- 

 mately 8^, inches by 4 i ' ' " ' id were 

 probably laid in a p.i . .i» Ji 

 Hanover or King William, siikc »n>e of the bricks 

 were glazed. No lead or other signs </ ' ' 



'•» Marcus VVuifh;n, "The F,.irly Count>- Coiirtl>»u»ri of 

 \'irgini.i," Journ.il of the .Society of .\rchitcctural lli«tori.ii« 

 (Amherst. M.ws., lO.iO). vol. 18, no. 1. pp. 2-1". 



'•• Ibid. 



'■> Ritrv, op. ri«. (IbcMimle SI ), pp. Wi If. 



i'< WiiirriM, op. cit. ifooliiole 160). p. 4 



121 



