William D.

Rieley Fellowship Report

Prepared for the Garden Club of Virginia
Reynolds Homestead, Critz, Virginia
Matthew Traucht
In a farmer like manner
Copyright 2014 by The Garden Club of Virginia.
All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction:
All material contained herein is the intellectual property of the Garden Club of
Virginia except where noted. Permission for reproduction, except for personal
use, must be obtained from:
The Fellowship Committee, Chair
The Garden Club of Virginia
The Kent-Valentine House
12 East Franklin Street
Richmond, VA 23219
www.gcvirginia.org
The Reynolds Homestead
Critz, Virginia

Prepared for
The Garden Club of Virginia
2013 William D. Rieley Fellowship

Prepared by
Matthew Traucht
4
Contents
Acknowledgements and Methodologies 6
Foreword 8
Site Plan 9
Study Area 12
Context
Patrick County 14
Soils and Geology 18
Vegetation 24
Hydrology 32
Transportation 38
Historical Overview 48
Agriculture and Tobacco 50
The Slave Landscape 56
Cultural Landscape 58
Designed Landscape 60

Rock Spring Plantation 1810-1970

Reynolds Family Tree 66
History of Estate 68
Reynolds Homestead 1970-2013
Documentation 84
Restoration 85
Historical Structures 88
Modern Structures 97
Commemorative Landscape 100
Reynolds Family Cemetery 101
Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants 106
Contemporary Landscape 112
Archaeological Resources 122
Conclusion 132

Appendices 134
References 166
5
View of No Business Mountain from Reynolds Homestead front porch, 2013
Acknowledgements and Methodologies
6
Reynolda House in Winston-Salem, North Carolina
maintains a wide collection of legal papers, maps, and
photographs. Though none of these resources indicated
any concentrated efort of garden or landscape design
in the historic period, they did fll-in many gaps and
helped paint a vivid picture of the historic development
of the Reynolds industry and homeplace. These well-
organized and preserved archives will continue to provide
information about the Reynolds Homestead in particular
and about nineteenth century Piedmont homesteading
in general. Additional historic research was conducted in
Stuart at the Patrick County Ofce of the Clerk and at the
Patrick County, Virginia Historical Society and Museum,
both of which are pleasant places to visit and rich with
local history. In adjacent Henry County, documentary
research involved visits to the Bassett Historical Society
where an extensive collection of maps proved invaluable.
Reynolds Homestead Director Julie Walters-Steele
provided unrestricted access to the Homestead while
employees Terri Leviner and Lisa Martin, lifelong residents
of Patrick County, imparted contextual information
that helped me better understand the landscape and
culture of the region. Reynolds Homestead Historic
Services Assistant Beth Almond Ford is a trove of
information, exceptional storyteller, and strong advocate
for the understanding of the Homesteads evolution.
Former employee and local historian John Reynolds
gave insights about the Homestead and its surrounds.
Richard Kreh, Superintendent of Reynolds Homestead
From June 17, to September 27, 2013 I was privileged
to have the opportunity to conduct feldwork at the
Reynolds Homestead in Critz, Virginia for the Garden Club
of Virginia William D. Rieley Fellowship. To me, Critz was
an isolated, unknown place following a fairly structured
three years in Minneapolis where I had undertaken
graduate work in completion of my Masters of Landscape
Architecture degree at the University of Minnesota.
Fieldwork entailed pedestrian survey of the historic core
and of the nearly 800-acre property guided by aerial
images, 7.5-minute USGS maps (current and historic), and,
following recommendations by Reynolds Homestead
staf, genuine bushwhacking. The goal of these pursuits
was to locate extant structures, roads, refuse, and
vegetation that might indicate historic occupation of
the land. Concentrated efort was made where known
structural foundations existed, near waterways, and in
other likely locations. This detailed examination of the
Reynolds Homestead indicated several key areas, called-
out near the end of this report, where future research
might reveal additional information about the historic use
of the property.
Research of written and photographic documentation
about the Reynolds Homestead was conducted at
several repositories. The Reynolds Homestead maintains
a collection of historic papers, photographs, and
artifacts, which are revealing of the Reynolds family
and of the evolution of the property. The archives at
7
Forestry and Wildlife Research Center from 1969-2002,
provided detailed descriptions and recollections of the
agricultural landscape he found waiting for him when
Nancy Susan Reynolds deeded the property to Virginia
Tech. Employees of the Forest Resources Research
Center, especially Superintendent Kyle Peer, provided
key information that helped guide my feldwork.
Anthropologist Dr. Lynn Rainville (Sweet Briar College)
shared her discoveries about the Cemetery of Slaves
and Their Descendants and provided background on
nineteenth century African American burial practices.
Archaeologist Dr. Cliford Boyd (Radford University),
who has conducted archaeological investigations at
Reynolds Homestead, visited the site with me and ofered
insights and direction. Research scientist and historian
Ann Miller (Virginia Department of Transportation)
helped me understand and appreciate the evolution
of transportation in the region and the efect it had on
the Reynolds industry and Homestead. At Reynolda
House Archives, Todd Crumley and Elizabeth Chew were
particularly knowledgeable and helpful.
Lastly, the members of the Garden Club of Virginia
Fellowship Committee were exceptionally enthusiastic
about my work and provided key guidance regarding
the research. William D. Rieley and Karen Kennedy both
provided a high level of support and encouragement as
I studied the Homestead and ofered key suggestions on
research design and execution. Thank you.
8
In 1825, Abraham Reynolds purchased 598 acres of
land near the small town of Critz in southwestern
Virginia. This land, known locally at the time as Rock
Spring Plantation, was relatively pristine and free of
developments. Eventually, Rock Spring would become
well-known in Patrick County: The Reynolds family would
contribute resources to the Civil War, to local churches,
and to area schools and hospitals.
Foreword
Abrahams son Hardin grew the homestead into a
tobacco manufacturing business at the center of more
than 8,000 acres of cultivated land. Hardins oldest
son, Major Abram David (AD), would lead a Civil War
regiment at the age of seventeen, establish his own
tobacco factory, and father a child who would transform
the metals industry in the frst half of the 20th century
with his Reynolds Metals Company. Hardins second son
Richard Joshua (RJ) would establish a tobacco empire
ffty miles south in Winston, North Carolina that would
grow to become one of the largest in the world. All told,
Hardin and his wife Nancy would have 16 children at Rock
Spring, half of whom would not grow to adulthood. Rock
Spring Plantation, now called the Reynolds Homestead,
remained in the Reynolds family until 1969 when Nancy
Susan Reynolds, RJs daughter, deeded 710 acres to
Virginia Polytechnical Institute and State University
(Virginia Tech). Two years later, the Homestead was listed
on the National Register of Historic Places and, in 1977,
became a National Historic Landmark. The Reynolds
Homestead is actively engaged in community enrichment
programs and forestry research and education. The
Homestead continues to play a major role in our
understanding and interpretation of ante- and post
bellum tobacco farming.
Rock Spring, primary water source throughout the historic period, 2013
9
Forestry Research
equipment area
Cemetery of Slaves
and Their Descendants
Replica tobacco barn
Historic Core (6.99-acres)
Reynolds Family Cemetery
Historic Reynolds
house and outbuildings
Continuing Education Center
Staff residence and
Forestry Research Facility
Historic Rock Spring
Historic Rock Spring, 2013
10
Front of restored Reynolds Homestead house, 2013
Community Enrichment Center, 2013
Restored ice house, brick dairy, and house, 2013
Abandoned tobacco barn, 2013
Forestry research plot, 2013 Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants, 2013
Reynolds Family Cemetery, 2013
11
Reynolds Homestead, located in the east part of Patrick County in
southwestern Virginia, is an almost 800-acre parcel of rural land
surrounded by rolling topography, agricultural plots, and sizeable
woodlots typical of the Virginia Piedmont. The unincorporated
community of Critz, with a population of fewer than 500, is located one
mile south of Reynolds Homestead. Stuart, the county seat of Patrick
County, is ten miles west of the Homestead and has a population of
about 1500.
Stuart
Critz
Woolwine
Meadows
of Dan
Ararat
North Carolina
Henry
County
Franklin County
Floyd
County
Carroll
County
12
Study Area
Surry County
Stokes County
Reynolds
Homestead
Danville
Richmond
Lynchburg
Patrick
Springs
with the historic setting. The remainder of the property
includes both natural secondary forest growth and
controlled forestry research plots on rolling topography.
Several abandoned buildings including houses and
tobacco barns can be found scattered across the
property. Dirt roads used primarily for research-related
vehicles circulate throughout, some of which predate
the research component of the Reynolds Homestead
and likely represent historic farming roads. The entire
property is fenced.
Critz
Historic
Core
13
Reynolds Homestead consists of a 6.99-acre historic core
surrounded by scientifc forestry research plots. The core
includes both historic and modern structures situated
in an open, slightly rolling meadow and grass lawn. The
primary feature of the Reynolds Homestead is a restored
brick house constructed in two stages between 1843
and 1855. Members of the Reynolds family continuously
occupied the house until 1961 when it was rented to
tenant farmers. In 1968, the house was restored to its
mid-nineteenth century appearance and furnished with
period pieces representative of an upper middle-class
family in rural Virginia. At this time, an historic granary,
dairy, kitchen, and ice house were also restored and
the entire property was deeded to Virginia Tech. Two
cemeteries are also present on the property, each a
short distance from the house. Modern facilities include
the Community Enrichment Center to the west of the
house, a forestry research center and single-family home
southwest of the house, and three forestry-related
outbuildings north of the house. A replica tobacco barn
was constructed near the house in 2011 for interpretive
purposes. Rock Spring, the historic domestic water
source, is a tenth of a mile from the house and accessible
by an old road and footpath. A one-mile loop trail
circulates around the historic core providing access to
interpretive material that includes historic structures
and botanic specimens. Though the modern buildings
impinge somewhat on the historic character of the
Reynolds Homestead, the rural landscape is in keeping
Property
Boundary
14
Context: Patrick County
Reynolds Homestead is situated in Patrick County
in Southside Virginia. At the age of thirty, Abraham
Reynolds made his frst land purchase: In 1810 he bought
from Thomas Sneed 180 acres on the waters of the
North Mayo (Appendix I.) At the time of the sale, Patrick
County was less than twenty years old.
Though Virginia was colonized in 1607, the frst European
settlers to the area now known as Patrick County would
not arrive until 1740. For the frst one hundred years
of Virginias colonization, there were no settlements
west of the Fall Line, the geologic feature marking the
drop in elevation from the Piedmont Plateau to the
Tidewater. Though colonists might have explored parts
of the Piedmont and utilized the area for hunting and
trading with Native Americans, most activity was limited
to the Tidewater region. In 1720, Governor Alexander
Spotswoodeager to claim land for the British amidst
the rising push from the west by French colonists from
the Ohio and Mississippi River valleysadded two new
counties to Virginias Prince George County, formed in
1703. Spotsylvania County encompassed the area north
of the James River and Brunswick County the area to the
south. Brunswick County encompassed all the land west
of the Fall Line, east of the Blue Ridge Mountains, south
of the James River, and north of the as yet un-surveyed
Virginia-North Carolina border. Brunswick would
later be sub-divided into the counties of Lunenburg,
Mocklenburg, Charlotte, Halifax, Pittsylvania, Bedford,
Campbell, Henry, Franklin, Prince Edward, a portion of
Amelia, and Patrick Counties.
The push to settle Spotsylvania County happened much
faster than it did in Brunswick. This was partly due to the
fact that all of Brunswick Countys rivers emptied into
North Carolinas treacherous Albemarle Sound rather
than the more navigable harbor at Richmond. Land
grants, supposedly limited to 1,000 acres but oftentimes
much larger than that, enticed people into the area.
So-called Quit Rent, a British tax of one shilling per
year for every ffty acres, was not charged for the frst
ten years of ownership. Homesteaders were required
to cultivate three out of every ffty acres they owned. In
lieu of that, they could maintain three head of cattle or
build a house somewhere on the entire acreage. Mostly
Presbyterians of Scotch-Irish descent and Germans
subscribing to Lutheran, Mennonite, and Moravian
beliefs settled Brunswick County.
In 1728, Colonel William Byrd led a team of surveyors
consisting of Virginians, North Carolinians, servants,
and Indian guides into what would be named Patrick
County 63 years hence. Byrd named many of the features
including the Dan River, Wart Mountain (now called Bull
Mountain), and the Mayo River in what he called the
Land of Eden. Four years later, enough settlers had
come to Brunswick County that a local government was
established to accommodate the land grant patents and
squatters streaming into the area.
1
15
Hotchkiss Geological Map of Virginia and West Virginia, 1835-41
16
The County of Lunenburg was formed in 1745 from
the western portion of Brunswick County. Three years
later, Haman Critz, Sr., who had been camping on
Spoon Creek submitted title for his frst deed. He would
continue to acquire land and eventually the town of
Critz was established a short distance from the Reynolds
Homestead.
As settlers continued to arrive in the area and the need
for localized government increased, Lunenburg County
split and Halifax County was established in 1753. The
French and Indian War began a year later and lasted for
nine years thus creating a need for a military presence.
Fort Mayo, the southernmost of Virginias frontier forts,
was established on the North Mayo River a few miles east
of present day Reynolds Homestead in Stella, Virginia.
In 1764, Pittsylvania County was established from the
western portion of Lunenburg County. The Pittsylvania
jurisdiction included the present day counties of Patrick,
Henry, Pittsylvania, and parts of Carroll and Franklin.
It was during this period that the Americans fought
the Revolutionary War against the British. Like other
counties, Pittsylvania would join George Washington by
sending men to be trained for the Continental Army and
would establish its own brigade of Minutemen to provide
local military enforcement.
Patrick County map drawn in 1821 by John Wood
17
Henry County was formed from a portion of Pittsylvania
County in 1776 and named for Patrick Henry, frst
governor of Virginia. Fifteen years later, Patrick County
was established in its present location. A year later, the
county surveyor sited the courthouse, jail, and streets in
the town of Taylorsville, renamed and incorporated as
the town of Stuart for Confederate Major General J.E.B.
Stuart in 1884.
Today, Patrick County includes approximately 483 square
miles, 34th in Virginia by area with a population density
of 38 people per square mile. Henry, Franklin, Floyd, and
Carroll counties in Virginia and Stokes and Surry counties
in North Carolina border the county. The line separating
Patrick County from Floyd and Carroll counties is on the
Eastern Continental Divide. A portion of the Blue Ridge
Mountains lies in Patrick County. The county contains
96 miles of primary roads including sections of State
Highways 8, 40, 57, and 103 as well as US Highway 58 and
maintains almost 623 miles of secondary roads.
According to the 2010 U.S. census the town of Stuart,
county seat and commercial center of the county, had
a population of 1,408 while Patrick County as a whole
claimed 18,490 people. A single high school, located
south of Stuart, serves the entire county. In 1995,
approximately 100 churches were identifed in Patrick
County, one for every 170 people. These churches
represent Primitive Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian
faiths, among others.
Until relatively recent years, farming was the primary
mode of earning a living. Tobacco was the major crop
grown in the region but orchards and timber are also
money-earning agricultural products. Today, the average
farm is 144 acres and the average value of crops sold per
acre is $335.34. About 22% of Patrick County land is held
in agricultural production and approximately 900 acres
is listed as orchard. The growing season is roughly six
months and the county receives an average of 47 inches
of precipitation per year. The climate is temperate and
the town of Stuart averages a temperature of 58 F with
ranges between zero and 100.
Beginning in the 1920s, textile and furniture
manufacturing in nearby Henry County provided a
source of income for Patrick County residents. By the
1990s however, many of those industries had closed their
doors and relocated overseas where labor and materials
were cheaper.
Fairy Stone State Park in the northwest corner of the
county provides more than four thousand acres of
recreation land and a 168-acre lake. Of the eight still-
standing historic covered bridges in Virginia, two are
located in Patrick County.
18
Context: Soils and Geology
Reynolds Homestead lies in the southeastern quadrant
of Patrick County, established in 1791. Patrick County
is comprised of four distinct geological zones, two of
which are expressed in the 795 acres now preserved
within Reynolds Homesteads boundaries. The gradual
blending of two diferent biomes the steep slopes and
soils of the Blue Ridge Mountains and the moderately
rolling topography of the Piedmontmakes Reynolds
Homestead an ecotone, a place of ecological transition.
The largest biome in Patrick County is the Piedmont
region. The term piedmont frst appeared in the
English language in 1755 as piemont and is derived
from the Italian piemonte, literally mountain foot. In
Patrick County, the land gradually slopes up east to west
from 800 feet above sea level at the Patrick County
Henry County border to 3,400 feet at the mountains.
Historically, most of the tobacco grown in Patrick County
was found in the Piedmont province. Similar conditions
are found more broadly throughout the Virginia
Piedmont and the regional Southern Piedmont, which
spans roughly 64,400 square miles and includes portions
of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and
Alabama.
The Virginia Piedmont is the states largest ecological
province and provides a gradual transition between
the Coastal Tidewater region to the east and the Blue
Ridge mountain range to the west. The Piedmont is
characterized by gently rolling terrain, deeply weathered
bedrock, and complex soils. Piedmont geology consists
of igneous and metamorphic rock having undergone
long cycles of deposition, uplift, and erosion. A large
quantity of the Piedmont consists of a thick mantle of soil
atop gneiss, schist, and granite rocks at shallow depths.
Though this soil is not highly rated for agricultural
practices, it is improved with the addition of organic
material, lime, and fertilizer. Historically, the Piedmont
has been considered relatively good land for farming.
Tidewater Piedmont Blue Ridge Ridge + Valley
2
No Business Mountain from the southern limit of the Reynolds Homestead property, 2013
19
No Business Mountain, purchased in 1849 by Hardin
Reynolds and utilized for timber and orchards but now
no longer part of the Reynolds Homestead property, is
part of Virginias Blue Ridge province and is located on
the northern limit of the Reynolds Homestead. The Blue
Ridge Mountains stretch from Pennsylvania to Georgia
and are among the oldest mountains on the planet. The
Range, comprised of crystalline rock created through
processes of upheaval several million years ago and
subsequent weathering, demonstrates steep slopes,
narrow ridges, and high relief. No Business Mountain
is separated from nearby Bull Mountain by a two-mile
wide gap; Bull Mountain is separated from the more
contiguous Blue Ridge Mountains by a six-mile gap.
Historically, these gaps, hollows, and valleys were the
frst to be settled. Fertile land, plentiful water from
streams, rivers, and springs, and diverse vegetation
provided a habitable environment. The slopes of the Blue
RidgeNo Business Mountain included were too steep
for cultivation and home-building but provided timber
resources and acceptable conditions for orchards.
3
20
Reynolds Homestead lies in the western (or inner) zone
and southern section (south of the James River) of the
Piedmont. The house at the Reynolds Homestead lies
at 1,122 feet above sea level and the land ranges from
1,034 feet to 1,185 feet in an undulating pattern across
the property. Though Piedmont conditions dominate
the rolling landscape at Reynolds Homestead, they are
transitional with more mountainous conditions.
Reynolds Homestead exhibits a patchwork of highly
diverse soils with relatively abrupt transitions. In 2009,
the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) published
a comprehensive soil survey of Patrick County. The
survey demonstrates the highly variable conditions at
the Reynolds Homestead and gives us some idea of
how the Reynolds family might have parsed their land
use. This survey provides a modern interpretation of
contemporary soils, however agricultural practices
and climate change may have drastically altered the
conditions there. Richard Kreh, Superintendent of the
Reynolds Homestead Forestry and Wildlife Research
Center from 1969 to 2002, estimates that in some places
as much as eighteen inches of soil has been lost to
erosion. The agricultural practices of the 19th and 20th
centuries have undoubtedly contributed to soil erosion,
loss of fertility, and the sedimentation of waterways.
According to the USDA survey, the soils of Patrick County
are generally highly leached, acidic, and low in essential
plant nutrients. Excessive runof, soil compaction,
and poor tilth are resultant of poor farming practices
including excessive tillage and trampling by livestock. The
countys soils are structurally weak and low in naturally
occurring organic matter.
Poorly drained, soils no longer support tobacco cultivation, 2013
4
5
4C 29A
5C 40E
26A 4B
43C 5D
19B2 5B
19D2 51C
20D 4D
19C2 21E
19E2 7E
21
As illustrated in this diagram, the highly variable soils found at the Reynolds Homestead created both opportunities and
complications for the production of crops and the raising of livestock. Though the Reynolds family is often associated with
the manufacture and sale of tobacco, records indicate they actually purchased much more of the plant than they cultivated.
USDA Soil Typologies
Property Boundary
22
Tobacco grows best on gradually sloping, well-drained,
fertile soils adjacent to waterways. Tobacco cultivation
quickly degrades soil productivity and integrity requiring
the planter to rotate crops every 3-5 years. The process of
fallowingwhereby land, after several years of cultivation,
is left unused restores some of the balance to soils. The
Reynolds might have also practiced some form of crop
rotation or allowed livestock to pasture on land exhausted
by tobacco production.
Areas of the property not used for tobacco production
were farmed for corn, wheat, barley, and other crops. As
homesteaders, the Reynolds were constantly breaking new
ground to provide for their own nutritional needs. They
sold surplus crops at the mercantile store they operated
from a building near their house. A large quantity of the
property is well suited to the production of wheat, tobacco,
and hay and moderately suited to corn and soybeans. The
fner sandy loams on summits and slopes were ideal for
the cultivation of both tobacco and food crops. The sandy
clay loams associated with more steeply sloping land is
well suited to wheat and moderately suited to corn and
soybeans but do not support tobacco cultivation.
USDA soil type 26A: Floodplain, French Loam on 0-3 percent slopes with
occasional fooding
USDA soil type 4C: Braddock fne sandy loam on 8-15 percent slopes
found on fan remnants and high stream terraces
23
Today, the Reynolds Homestead remains a highly
productive landscape. When the land was deeded to
Virginia Tech in 1969, it was stipulated that the property
should be used primarily for forestry research. The diverse
soils associated with the Homestead are well suited to
woodland crop production. Yellow poplars (Liriodendron
tulipifera), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and eastern white
pines (Pinus strobus) are grown in experimental plots
scattered across the Reynolds Homestead.
The wide range of soils support the growth of eastern white pines and yel-
low poplars
As successful planters, the Reynolds also were involved
in animal husbandry. In an accounting of the Reynolds
livestock in 1882, there were 31 cows, 25 sheep, 12 hogs, and
8 mules and horses. Except for the rocky soils associated
with steep slopes, a high percentage of the soils would
have been suitable for pasturing. Fallowed sections of the
Homestead property might have been used at diferent
times for pasturing livestock.
Except for steep slopes, a large percentage of Reynolds Homestead soils
are suited for pasture
24
Context: Vegetation
Todays landscape surrounding the Reynolds Homestead
is a patchwork of forests, farms, and pastures.
Abandoned agricultural felds have seen the regeneration
of successional forests and land is utilized for timber,
Christmas tree production, and orchards. Early
successional trees include shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata),
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and sweetgum (Liquidambar
stryacifua). Oak-heath forests and oak-hickory forests
are the dominant hardwood ecological community
groups. Oak-heath communities occur on xeric (drier),
acidic, infertile, upland soils while oak-hickory forests
can be found on mesic (wetter), more basic, fertile soils.
White oak (Quercus alba) can be found throughout the
region. The mesic ravines and valleys support American
beech (Fagus grandifolia), oaks (Quercus spp.), and tulip
poplar (Liriodendron tulipfera) while the uplands include
silver maple (Acer saccharinum), sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), American elm (Ulmus Americana), and box
elder (Acer negundo).
Interior of successional forest at Reynolds Homestead, 2013
Forest edge at Reynolds Homestead, 2013
6
25
Reynolds Homestead, outlined in red, is surrounded by a mosaic of farms, pastures, and forests, image courtesy Google Earth 2013
26
10
13
14
16
15
27
17
36
17
18
19
20
25
26
24
23
21
22
27
27
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
28
1
2
3
3
4
5
6 7
7
8
9
10
8
10
12
10
11
13
13
12
Stand Diagram
Native Cover
Cultivated Cover
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
7.8
2.9
10.1
49.5
2.1
2.5
62.3
12.2
4.2
4.0
1.6
1.5
3.2
2.4
16.3
11.6
72.2
2.8
9.5
25.0
4.5
8.9
0.9
4.0
27.2
32.3
~280
18.0
0.8
0.4
0.4
2.6
2.4
0.7
1.9
5.3
Loblolly Pine
Natural, open
Loblolly Pine
Mixed Pine
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine, Mixed Hardwood
Loblolly Pine
Loblolly Pine
Sycamore, Willow Oak
Mixed hardwood
Natural, open
Yellow Poplar
Mixed bottomland Hardwood
Shortleaf Pine
Loblolly Pine
Yellow Poplar, Mixed Hardwood
Natural, open
Loblolly Pine
Hybrid Poplar
Mixed Hardwood
Mixed Hardwood and Pine
Mixed Hardwood
Virginia Pine, Mixed Hardwood
Research Fence
Research Fence
Research Fence
Hybrid Poplar
Hybrid Poplar
Hybrid Poplar
Black Cottonwood
Mixed species
Open
2009/2010
2007
1983
2000
2008
2002
2009
2005
1969
var.
2007
2007
2003
2011
~1930
2006
~1960
2010
2011
1983
2012
2012
2013
2012/2013
~1960
2010
1910-1930
~1950
2010
2012
2013
2011
var.
Harvest 2006; Site prep 2008; Burn 2009; Plant 2009,2010
Harvest 2006; Site prep 2008; Burn 2009, 2011
Plant 1983
Harvest 1998,1999; Plant 2000 - Loblolly, White, Shortleaf, Virginia
Harvest 2006; Site prep, burn 2008; Plant fall 2008
Plant 2002; Fertilizer research
Harvest 2007; Site prep 2008; Burn 2008; Plant 2009; Row mulch 2013
Harvest 2004; Plant 2005
Plant 1969; Understory burn 2001
4 Research blocks
Harvest 2006; Natural regeneration; Pre-commercial thin 2013
Plant 2007; Pre-commercial thin 2013
Plant 2003; 5 Research blocks
Wetland mitigation study; Site prep 2011; Plant 2011
Selective harvest 2004,2005; Wildlife cut; Understory burn 2011
Harvest 2004,2005; Site prep 2008; Burn 2008, 2012
Harvest 2009; Natural regeneration
Harvest 2009; Burn 2011; Plant 2011; Volunteer pine removal 2012
Plant 1983; Thinning/fertilizer research
Harvest 2011; Natural regeneration
Harvest 2011; Burn 2013
Harvest 2011; Plant 2013
Harvest 2011; Site prep 2012; Plant fall 2012,spring 2013
Harvest 2009; Natural regeneration
Mix of upland & bottomland hardwood with scattered blocks of pine species
Plant 2010
Plant 2012
Plant fall 2013
Plant 2011
Dow Chemical Company herbicide research
Continuing Education Center; Historical District
Stand Acres Description Origin Notes
28
Overstory
White oak Quercus alba
Chestnut oak Quercus prinus
Scarlet oak Quercus coccinea
Black oak Quercus velutina
Red maple Acer rubrum
Black gum Nyssa sylvatica
Sorrell / Sourwood Oxydendrum arboreum
Pignut hickory Carya glabra
Mockernut hickory Carya tomentosa
Yellow poplar Liriodendron tulipifera
American sweetgum Liquidambar stryracifua
Southern red oak Quercus falcata
American sycamore Platanus occidentalis
American elm Ulmus americana
Green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Hackberry Celtis occidentalis
Boxelder Acer negundo
Eastern white pine Pinus strobus
Shortleaf pine Pinus echinata
Pitch pine Pinus rigida
Virginia pine Pinus virginiana
Understory
Eastern redbud Cercis canadensis
Eastern hop-hornbeam Ostrya virginiana
Umbrella magnolia Magnolia tripetala
Sassafras Sassafras albidum
Flowering dogwood Cornus forida
Serviceberry Amelanchier canadensis
Blackberry Rubus spp.
Four-leaf milkweed Asclepias quadrifolia
Curlyheads Clematis ochroleuca
Naked-fowered tick-trefoil Hylodesmum nudiforum
Bottlebrush grass Elymus hystrix
False solomons-plume Maianthemum racemosum
Rock muhly Muhlenbergia sobolifera
Goldenrod Solidago spp.
Yellow pimpernel Taenidia integerrima
Yellow horse-gentian Triosteum angustifolium
Wood violet Viola palmata
Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum
Pennsylvania sedge Carex pensylvanica
Hoary mountain-mint Pycnanthemum incanum
Smooth blue aster Symphyotrichum laeve
Purple giant hyssop Agastache scrophulariifolia
Cutleaf conefower Rudbeckia laciniata
Virginia spiderwort Tradescantia virginiana
Narrow-leaved vervain Verbena simplex
Patrick County Vegetative Cover
29
Generalizations about the historic vegetation can
be made through the examination of land deeds for
properties bought and sold by the Reynolds family in
Patrick County throughout the 19th century. According
to a report published by the US Forest Service in 2012, old
deeds are an acceptable and informative source for the
study of historic vegetation. Metes and bounds surveys
were drawn using bearings and distances from rock piles,
trees, and other natural features. So-called witness
trees recorded in the surveys provide a snapshot into
the historic landscape at a precise location and time.
Though a certain surveyor bias may have existed
(unusual trees might have been chosen because they
are easier to relocate, longer-lived species might have
been more commonly chosen), the witness trees found
in these surveys provide a sampling of the historic
vegetation and a very diferent picture than what is
found in Virginias forests today. These historic trees,
fairly well distributed across oak-hickory and oak-heath
communities, demonstrate a diverse forest cover that
is no longer prevalent in Virginia. Though individual
specimens of these trees may still exist in Patrick County,
the prevalence of some has been greatly diminished.
Survey for Hardin Reynolds, February 24, 1881
7
30
Common name Scientifc name Ecology
Maple Acer spp. Stream banks, food plains
Hornbeam Carpinus betulus Coarse soils on stream banks
Hickory Carya spp. Mesic slopes and bottomlands
Chestnut Castanea dentata Dry, deep soils on slopes
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana Wide variety of habitats
Walnut Juglans nigra Deep bottomlands, mesic slopes
Black gum Nyssa sylvatica Uplands and wetlands
Sorrell (Sourwood) Oxydendrum arboreum Well drained, moist soils
Locust Robinia pseudoacacia Well drained soils on slopes
White oak Quercus alba Lowland, tolerant of mesic/xeric
Spanish oak Quercus falcata Dry, sandy uplands
Water oak Quercus nigra Wet, mesic bottomlands
Chestnut oak Quercus prinus Xeric, rocky slopes, mesic bottomland
Red oak Quercus rubra Mesic slopes, well-drained uplands
Black oak Quercus velutina Well drained silty clay loam
Beach gum Unknown
Pine Pinus spp.
Patrick County Witness Trees 1810-1906
31
The dense forests of Virginia were highly exploited
by settlers as they moved into the area. In 1740 when
settlers frst arrived in Patrick County, most timber was
cut and burned or allowed to decay to clear land for
agricultural purposes. Wood was the primary source for
fuel and the dominant building material for all structures.
Oak chestnut bark was in such high demand for leather
tanning that many trees were cut for their bark only,
the rest of the wood being left to rot. As sawmills and
railroads entered the region, forests were clear-cut at an
even faster pace. Furniture manufacturing companies in
neighboring Henry County appeared by the end of the
nineteenth century and further increased the demand for
timber. The American chestnut was all but extinct by the
1930s due to a blight accidentally introduced from Asia
forty years previous.
Undoubtedly, the Native Americans who lived in Virginia
prior to European colonial settlement had some impact
on the regions forest resources. Though a fairly large
village existed on the Roanoke River near present-day
Clarksville one hundred miles east, archaeologists have
found little evidence of permanent habitation by Native
Americans in the Patrick County region. Those who did
use the area most likely were nomadic groups passing
through on gathering-hunting missions. The Great
Warriors Path, which extended from New York to
Georgia and traversed Patrick County slightly northeast
of the Reynolds Homestead, would have seen use by
traders and hunters alike. Nomadic groups would have
found the areas streams and forests abundant with
seasonally available game, fsh, tubers, berries, and
plants. Where they had communities, Native Americans
cultivated squash, yams, tobacco, and corn: These
cultivars had wild antecedents that might have still been
found in nature. Selective plant management might
have occurred at a small scale and forest fres may have
been set as a hunting strategy. That said, Euro-American
settlement afected profound change on the regional
vegetation pattern.
Throughout the homestead period, the Reynolds family
increased their Patrick County land-holdings from
180 acres in 1810 to 7,504 in 1884. Transformation of
this rugged, forested land into a working agricultural
landscape was no small feat and required a high
investment in labor. Prior to the Civil War, the Reynolds
utilized a force of enslaved people; after the War,
indentured servitude and sharecropping was employed
to manage the growing property. Handwritten contracts
between Hardin Reynolds and his various land tenants
demonstrate Reynolds industrial expectations. In all
cases, in addition to erecting fences, constructing houses,
and maintaining barns, the renter was obliged to clear
and improve the land in a farmer like manner to the best
of his ability.
8
9
32
The regional hydrology had a major impact on the settlement
of the entirety of Southside Virginia, and Patrick County was no
exception. Prior to 1860 when railroads became viable, rivers and
canals were the only method by which crops could be transported
from felds to market. Tobacco, the primary cash crop of Virginia,
was marketed in and exported out of Richmond, situated near
the coast and accessible via the James River. Unfortunately for
Southside, most of its rivers drained into the Albemarle Sound via
the Roanoke River. Patrick County planters had no choice but to
deliver their crops overland to markets in Lynchburg, an arduous
110-mile journey from Stuart.
Context: Hydrology
James River (Virginia) and Roanoke River (North Carolina) drainages
associated with tobacco transport
Plymouth
Richmond
Roanoke River
Drainage
James River
Drainage
Reynolds
Homestead
33
Patrick County is drained by four rivers, each of which
originate within the county and empty into the Roanoke
River. The westernmost drainage in Patrick County is the
Ararat, which originates on the eastern slopes of the Blue
Ridge and drains into the Yadkin River in North Carolina
and then joins the Pee Dee River, eventually draining into
the Atlantic near Georgetown, South Carolina. Smith
River, which drains the north part of Patrick County,
is dammed in Henry County to create Phillpott Lake.
The Mayo River, having two main branches, drains the
entire southeastern section of the county. The North
Mayo River originates near Bull Mountain and joins the
South Mayo in Rockingham County, North Carolina. The
major tributaries of the North Mayo include Pole Bridge
Creek, Spencer Creek, Laurel Creek, and Mill Creek,
which originates on No Business Mountain and fows
through the Reynolds Homestead. The South Mayo,
fed by Russell, Spoon, Rhody, Rye Cove, and Poorhouse
Creeks, originates north and west of Stuart. The South
Mayo fows across the southern part of the county,
passes through Henry County, and then joins the North
Mayo in North Carolina. The Mayo River system joins
the Dan River near Madison in North Carolina. The Dan
River, originating in the Meadows of Dan and gaining
momentum on the eastern slopes of the Blue Ridge, is
joined by the Little Dan, Hookers and Peters Creeks
and, later, Big Round Meadow Creek and Little Round
Meadow Creek before it fows into the Roanoke after
several crossings of the Virginia-North Carolina border.
Four major drainages in Patrick County
Smith
North Mayo
Dan
South Mayo
Ararat Stuart
Reynolds
Homestead
34
In Southside, springs, streams, and rivers were prime real
estate for homesteads. Given the available technology,
the uplands were often too steep and rocky to support
agricultural pursuits. Besides fertile soil, the valleys,
or hollows, provided abundant sources of water for
drinking, cooking, cleaning, and homestead industry.
The frst Patrick County permit for a mill was issued in
August 1792 and the next twenty years saw at least ten
more permits. By the time Abraham Reynolds purchased
the Homestead land in 1825, sixteen mills were registered
in Patrick County. The John Wood map, published in
1821, shows twenty-one mills. During the period of
signifcance, all mills would have harnessed their power
from rivers and streams; steam-powered mills did not
arrive in Patrick County until the late 19th century.
1821 Wood Map showing locations of water-powered mills, Reynolds Homestead in red
At this time, farmers raised their own subsistence crops
but relied on area mills to help them process the grains
for consumption. Corn, wheat, rye, and barley were
transported to a local gristmill where massive stone
wheels or, later, wooden rollers would transform the raw
yield into meals and fours. The miller accepted a quantity
of the yield as payment, often as much as a gallon of
grain for every bushel processed. In the early days, the
mills might have operated only one or two days a week
and were the sites of informal community gathering.
10
35
Several small drainages are present on the Reynolds
Homestead, all of which drain into Mill Creek which
then spills into the North Mayo seven miles east of the
property. These creeks, whose wide foodplains would
be used for tobacco cultivation, originate on the eastern
slopes of No Business Mountain. Today, Virginia Tech
utilizes some of these drainages to conduct hydrologic
and stabilization research.
Hydrology in and around Reynolds Homestead
Research project: Drainage stabilization, 2013
Mill Creek in northern part of Reynolds Homestead, 2013
36
The plantation took its name from Rock Spring, a small
seep that still fows a short distance down the hill from
the house. Until the restoration of the house in 1968, Rock
Spring was the main source of water for the Homestead.
Before the pump house was built in the mid-twentieth
century, water would have been gathered at the spring
and carried to the house for drinking, cooking, and
domestic chores.
Aside from its utility for domestic chores, Rock Spring
plays an important role in the Homestead history and the
Reynolds mythology. By 1843, Hardin Reynolds owned
1,433 acres of land in Patrick County but he located his
house based, at least partially, on the presence of the
spring with its plentiful waters.
Almost two decades later, the spring would be credited
with saving the life of little RJ, Hardins second-born son.
In late October 1862, RJs older brother AD returned from
Randolph County where he had purchased a wagonload
of cotton. Upon his return to the Homestead, he was
Sevierly reprimanded by his father who had learned that
the cotton might have been contaminated with small pox.
Hardin, in an attempt to save his family from the disease,
made the risky decision to have his children vaccinated. RJ,
who felt a strong burning sensationfrom the innoculation,
raced from the house down to Rock Spring and washed
his arm with its cool waters. Within four days, RJs
three youngest siblings were dead, presumably from the
vaccination. John Gilmore (aged 6), Nancy Bill (aged 4), and
Ernest C. (aged 1) all died within fve days of one another.
Today, Rock Spring is preserved as part of the Reynolds
Homestead historic core and, as such, is interpreted as the
genius loci (spirit of place) of this cultural landscape.
Russell Critz refreshing himself at Rock Spring in 1962
11
37
Rock Spring, 2013
38
Context: Transportation
Though occasional explorers ventured into Virginias
backcountry on foot and horseback, it would require
settlers transporting goods into and out of the region to
establish the frst roads. Before European colonization,
Native Americans followed game trails that, over time,
became well traveled and would eventually be used as
primary arteries. By the early 18th century, migrating
Scotch-Irish, Anglo-Irish, English, and Germans began to
venture into the hinterland from Philadelphia.
Many of Patrick Countys settlers arrived to the region
via the Great Wagon Road, which followed the same
course as the Warriors Path, a route from New York to
Georgia used by Native American traders. Based on their
own survey work, Thomas Jefersons father, Peter, and
Joshua Fry produced a map in 1751 that traced the route
of the Great Philadelphia Wagon Road, also marked
Trading Path leading to the Catawba & Cherokee Indian
Nations. This map predated the survey work that would
eventually draw many of the political boundaries that
would defne the states of Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina,
Pennsylvania, and Maryland.
As seen on the Fry and Jeferson map, the route departed
from Philadelphia heading west where it passed through
the Pennsylvania towns of Lancaster and York before it
turned southwest to cross the Potomac River at Harpers
Ferry. From Winchester the route passed into the
Shenandoah Valley and then returned to the east side of
the Blue Ridge Mountains via the Roanoke River Gap. The
route then progressed southward into North Carolina
and eventually to Atlanta, Georgia. When the map was
produced in 1751, the only portion labeled Waggon
is the section between Winchester and Philadelphia.
Though the road never passed through Patrick County,
evidence of it is known in adjacent Henry County.
12
Great Wagon Road depicted (red) on A map of the most inhabited part of Virginia containing the whole province of Maryland with part of Pensilvania,
New Jersey and North Carolina. Drawn by Joshua Fry & Peter Jefferson in 1751, published by Thos. Jefferys, London, 1755
39
40
In his Recollections, Abram David Reynolds recounts his
frst independent foray on Virginias roads as he, in 1862
at the age of ffteen, set out to acquire a wagonload of
salt from the Confederate government in Charleston,
South Carolina. In the vernacular of his time he writes:
After the frst day or two I camped with Mr. Paterson
from Franklin County VA he and I Camped togather the
frst night between Floyd CH and Christiansburg He
had a four horse team and a negro driver Just what I
had Except he was riding a poney and I was walking
Except when I road in the wagon. That night we formed
a Covenant with Each other to stick to Each other all
the way to Charleston and back to the Franklin Pike
We followed the McCadem road from Christiansburg
Va to Dublin whare the Confederate Goverment had a
Commersary Storing Supplies to feed the Army in W
Va as that Country was destitute of any thing for man
Or horse - Not having a full load of tobacco I brought
along to peddle out we both applied to the goverment
quarter-master for a part of a load which they were
only too glad to furnish us. So after getting Our load we
moved on down New River by the Narrows Peters town
and on to Raleigh CH which was practically burned up
only the Chimnies and Some wall remained. After leaving
Peraisburg and fnding the goverment was hauling
Supplies to the Army I said to my partner Patterson I am
going to give you a thought which will Save your teem
and my teem aliveWe are about to enter a Country
that both armies have marched over Several times and
distroyed Every thing and what we Should do is ride
this horse a head of the wagons and buy Corn for our
teems & pack Same to the road It was impossable to
buy Corn on the main high way hundreds of teems had
gone on ahead of us and only Chance now was for him
to ride one day and pack Corn to the main road & let me
have his horse the next day and all I Chardged for the
thought was the use of his horse Evry other day He was
delighted to accept my sugjestion and before we reached
Raleigh County whare Evry thing was destroyed We had
laid in about Twenty fve bushels of Shelled Corn (Each)
We would gather it in During the day and Shell Sack and
Sow up the Sacks at night After we Entered Raleigh
County we began to meet Six horse teems that left our
Country fat and Slick Worn out and in Some instances
half the teems had died We could not haul Sufcient
hay so fed our Corn and grased our horses half the night
No fences and no Stock to Eat the grass Except teems
going & Comeing - Before we Could reach Charleston
we were ordered to turn back and Evry thing was being
rushed at such a rate the Salt wagons had to leav a part
of their load which we bought at nearly the Same price
they paid So very soon we had all the Salt we Could pull
with our Corn which was not yet half fed The quarter
masters Came arround Searching wagons to get Corn
As they approached our wagons we would holler at our
drivers not to feed all that Corn to leav some for that
night & in this way they passed our wagons several times
41
without Searching our wagons Things moved on nicely
until we missed our road near Peterstown & found our
Selves at a ford on New River instead of the ferry road
but being assured the water would not run in our wagon
we decided to ford with about 4000 pounds of weight
on our wagons just as my wagon pulled out of the River
my tire run of having bursted on the Rocks and down
Crashed the wheel and no Shop nearer than Pearisburg
Va. The only thing to do was leave my driver with wagon
and put my wheel in Patersons wagon On reaching
Pearisburg I found only the Goverment Shop in the place
and they only did Goverment work I hapened to Keep the
receipt whare I delivered the load of provisions I hauled
for the Goverment on this I got an order to Shop to do
my work at Goverment price which they did by Sundown
So I Struck out for my wagon Some twelve miles back
with the front wheels of a one horse wagon the only
thing I Could hire - I tide the wheel on behind & rode
the mule - It was a dark night when I got in two miles of
my wagon A soldier halted me I did not know whether
he was a friend or foe but proved to be a Southern
picket He thought I had a part of an artilery Cason afetr
questioning me and Examining my turn out he let me go
on to my great delight - As soon as I reached my wagon
I had my mule fed & we hitched up about midnight by
Sun up I rolled in to Pearisburg fed my teem & while they
were Eating I went to work to sell what tobacco I had left
- I Struck a man by the name of Hale a Confederate ofcer
who said if I would deliver it out in Suburb in a residence
and pack it up in the Garrett he would pay me - It was a
load boxes weighed 120s gross but Bob my self packed up
the two Stairways & he dalleyed arround and worried me
before he would pay fnally he Counted out the money
very Slowly & Soon he put my last bill dow I threw my
hand on Same - He rufy removed my hand and Said this
is not my money yet he would let me know when to take
it - but fnally he turned it over and Paterson who had
been waiting for me and I had our teems to roll for home
- I will never forget how my father rejoiced when he saw
his Splendid teem So fat and Slick
Major Abram David (AD) Reynolds, circa 1910
13
42
The turnpike era in Virginia lasted from the mid-
1750s to the end of the Civil War. County governments,
controlled and maintained by the gentlemen justices
who presided over regional administrative afairs,
were in no fnancial position to provide infrastructure
to their rural residents. Facilitating settlement while
capitalizing on the need for planters to move product
to market, turnpike companies spread across colonial
America. Where the typical rural wagon road was a
miserable and oftentimes impassable dirt path, turnpike
companies constructed bridges and paved their road
surfaces with gravel, wood, and broken stone. Never
realizing a substantial proft, the turnpike companies
were completely bankrupt by the Civil War and road
construction and maintenance passed to the counties
through the period of Reconstruction. Though road-
building in Virginia transitioned slowly in the years
following the Civil War and would be interrupted again by
World War I, the secondary highway system was funded
in 1932 by the passage of the Byrd Road Act.
The primary westerly route used by wagons, stages,
and horseback riders through Taylorsville (now Stuart)
was known as the Danville and Wytheville Turnpike,
established in the 1850s. This route carried goods and
settlers west from Danville, approximately 60 miles east
of Taylorsville. Beginning in 1856, goods and passengers
were transported from the more heavily populated
Tidewater region to Virginias western wilderness (and
beyond) via the Richmond and Danville Railroad. At the
end of the line in Danville, passengers would disembark
from the comfort and dependability of rail travel and
then would progress westerly through Taylorsville and
then northwesterly through the Blue Ridge at Meadows
of Dan or southerly into North Carolina.
Following the Civil War, Hardin Reynolds invested in the
Danville and New River Railroad. Hardin had spent his
entire life marketing tobacco and mercantile goods that
had been transported over rough, muddy, unpredictable
roads, and surely the idea of a railroad passing by his
farm was a promising notion. On August 1, 1884, two
years after Hardin passed away, Danville and Evanshams
frst train pulled into Taylorsville via tracks that passed
through Critz. Though the line was supposed to continue
on to Wytheville (Evansham), the company went
bankrupt in 1886 and the Richmond and Danville Railroad,
which changed its name to Danville and Western Railway
Company, then operated the line. Taylorsville, which had
changed its name to Stuart in 1884, was the end of the
line and saw two trains dailyboth carrying passengers
and freightfrom Danville. The villages of Stella, Critz,
and Patrick Springs each thrived during the railroad era
until the Danville and Western (known locally as the Dick
and Willie) slowly declined. The station in Critz closed in
1932 and the last train pulled out of Stuart ten years later.
14
15
43
Critz
Patrick Springs
Station
N
o
B
u
s
in
e
s
s
M
o
u
n
t
a
in
B
u
ll M
o
u
n
t
a
in
P
A
T
R
I
C
K

C
O
H
E
N
R
Y

C
O
P
A
T
R
I
C
K

C
O
H
E
N
R
Y

C
O
Taylorscille
(Stuart) Stella
The Danville and Western (Dick and Willie) Railway Company, 1886-1932
N
44
In a letter to Richard Reynolds penned in 1961, local
historian, teacher, and tireless advocate for the
preservation of the Reynolds Homestead Nancy Ruth
Cooper Terry wrote, The house faces north and fronts
an abandoned pre-Civil War road which was known as
the Norfolk to Bristol Turnpike. A part of this road is
used today as a farm road leading to a tenant house.
Considering the period in which this house was built,
it has a most logical location. On the south side of a
mountain, it is protected from the cold north winds;
and not too far away was a good spring. The house
was almost certainly oriented to face a road passing in
front of it, however no indication of any Norfolk-Bristol
Turnpike can be found in Virginias record of roads.
It is likely that local residents invented the Norfolk-
Bristol Turnpike moniker and that its name became
solidifed in the annals of Patrick County over time. While
it is true that the Reynolds Homestead lies somewhere
between Norfolk, Virginia and Bristol, Tennessee, a
distance of approximately 330 miles (as the crow fies), it
is improbable that any particular route ever connected
the two cities and passed by Rock Spring Plantation.
Rather, a traveler would instead follow a piecemeal
assemblage of turnpikes and unmaintained dirt roads
to navigate the twisting rivers, undulating topography,
and mountainous terrain that separated the two cities.
In searching state and county records and maps, no
indication of any named Norfolk to Bristol turnpike has
been found.
In absence of an actual named route, the term turnpike
can still be found in Hardin Reynolds records including
a rental agreement between Hardin and a tenant
farmer named Joel Tuggle dated November 1, 1855 that
reads Know all men by these presents that I Hardin W.
Reynolds have rented the place on the turnpike now
occupied by Wm. H. High to Joel Tuggle for the year
1856. Given that Hardin owned 3,106 acres of land in
Patrick County at that time, we cannot be sure that the
said turnpike passed through the Reynolds Homestead
property.
Map collection, Bassett Historical Center, Basset, VA
16
17
45
Primary and secondary roads near No Business Mountain, 1926
Critz
Patrick Springs
Station
N
o
B
u
s
in
e
s
s
M
o
u
n
t
a
in
Patrick Springs
B
u
ll M
o
u
n
t
a
in
P
A
T
R
I
C
K

C
O
H
E
N
R
Y

C
O
P
A
T
R
I
C
K

C
O
H
E
N
R
Y

C
O
Stuart
Courthouse
Salem
Methodist













































A
p
p
r
o
x
im
a
t
e
route of D
anv
ille

a
n
d

W
y
theville

T
u
r
n
p
i
k
e
c
irc
a

1
8
5
0
N
46
A map of Patrick County roads produced in 1932 by the
Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Highways pro-
vides numbers for the routes. On this map, County Road
241 (now 798) circles past the Homestead and rejoins with
County Road 240 (now 694). Local legend has it that the
frst automobile to be seen in Patrick County was owned
by RJ Reynolds.
18
47
According to an article published in the Winston Salem
Journal and Sentinel in 1962, the road that passed the
house was a part of the original winding dirt road
to Bassett and Patrick Springs. The article describes
the road as one that forked at the front corner of the
house and passed by a store. The left hand forkstill
used today as a feld roadled on across No Business
Mountain and Bull Mountain beyond, to the resort at
Patrick Springs on the Blue Ridge. The USGS 1:24,000
topographic map for Patrick Springs published in 1967
from aerial photographs taken in 1964 illustrates the
roads and structures in the vicinity.
Reynolds Homestead
48
Context: Historical Overview
Today, the Reynolds Homestead is situated on almost
800 acres of rural land amidst rolling hills, local farms,
and woodlots. The brick house, built by Hardin Reynolds
in two stages between 1843 and 1855, still occupies a
prominent place on a hilltop looking north to No Business
Mountain in the near distance. Following the death of
Hardin in 1882, his wife Nancy Cox Reynolds assumed
possession of the plantation until passing away in 1903.
Four years later, the six living heirs deeded the property
to the youngest male, Walter, who in 1917 deeded it to
his older brother, Harbour, and his wife, Annie. Harbour
and Annie remained on the property until passing away
in 1927 and 1961, respectively. In 1951 the property passed
to Harbour and Annies son, Hardin Walter, who in 1968,
sold it to his aunt Nancy Susan Reynolds, daughter of RJ.
The house, along with its associated outbuildings
including a granary, a small dairy, an ice house, and a
kitchen, was restored in 1968. The family cemetery to the
east and the Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants
to the north can both be seen from the front porch.
Nancy Susan Reynolds deeded 710 acres to Virginia
Tech in 1971 after restoring the buildings. The house is
furnished with articles from the mid-nineteenth century,
including the bed where Hardins wife gave birth to 16
children, half of whom would not live to adulthood. A
modern community enrichment building stands west of
the house and just south of that lies a research facility
and home.
The contemporary vernacular landscape of the Reynolds
Homestead near Critz, Virginia provides opportunities
to research and understand such historical contexts
as land acquisition, environmental change, agricultural
production, and socio-political relationships. Beyond
these, the Reynolds Homestead provides an enduring
legacy for the Reynolds family American industrialists
and philanthropistswhile maintaining a distinctly
community-oriented agenda of engagement and
enrichment.
The Reynolds Homestead has a long history in the
annals of Patrick County particularly and in Piedmont
tobacco plantation production generally. That its
local surroundings are well preserved as an agrarian
landscape, that major restorations of the historic
structures have taken place, and that the Reynolds
history has been well documented makes the Homestead
a prime location for the study and preservation of ante-
and post bellum Southern Virginia.
Reynolds Homestead was listed on the Virginia
Landmarks Register in 1970, was listed in the National
Register of Historic Places in 1971, and became a National
Historic Landmark in 1977.
49
Reynolds Homestead aerial showing historic buildings and family cemetery (circled), modern structures, and Virginia Tech research plots, 2013
50
Context: Agriculture and Tobacco
Describing agrarian life in Virginia, Thomas
Jeferson noted, It is a culture productive of infnite
wretchedness. Those employed in it are in a continual
state of exertion beyond the power of nature to support.
Little food of any kind is raised by them; so that the men
and animals on these farms are illy fed, and the earth is
rapidly impoverished.
For Abraham Reynolds and most of his contemporaries,
homesteading was largely a cyclical process of clearing
land to plant enough grains to support his family, raise
a crop of tobacco, and market his product for a little
cash income to support the purchase of more land.
Homesteading individuals in Patrick County were largely
self-sufcient; food, construction material, clothing,
and domestic goods were all derived from activities on
the farm. Women were usually responsible for tending
vegetable gardens, which provided a variety of food
for the family while men engaged in the cultivation of
feld crops including cotton, fax, corn, wheat, rye, oats,
barley, potatoes, and, tobacco. By the mid 1800s, crop
rotation was practiced to maximize the fertility of land
and lessen the persistence of pests. Tobacco was often
grown in a rotation followed by wheat, corn, and one or
two years of clover.
Oxen, mules, and horses were used to clear land and
pull the plow for the arduous task of converting hilly,
rocky, densely forested land into cultivable felds. Cattle
and sheep were raised for meat, milk, wool, and leather
products and their manure was a key ingredient in
maintaining the lands fertility. Hogs, used for food and
lard, were raised in large numbers and permitted to
range the wild hillsides where they grubbed for chestnuts
and acorns.
Though the poor soils associated with Blue Ridge
outcroppings were not as ideal for tobacco production
as the Piedmont further east, the Reynolds name
would eventually become synonymous with that plants
commercial success. Because a planter could only raise
three to four crops of tobacco on virgin land before
having to abandon it due to lowered yields, tobacco
farmers plantations grew in size not necessarily
corresponding to a growth in production and wealth.
In neighboring Henry County for example, the average
tobacco farm consisted of about 129 acres of which 47
were considered improved. Of the improved land, only
about three and half acres might be under tobacco
cultivation.
19
20
21
51
No accounting of Abraham Reynolds agricultural
pursuits has yet to be recovered but an assessment
of Hardin Reynolds farm operation can be gleaned
from several documents. In reporting for the 1870 US
Census, Productions of Agriculture in Mayo Township
in the County of Patrick (Appendix II), Hardin declared
ownership of three horses, eight mules, 51 head of cattle,
42 sheep, and 80 hogs. His agricultural returns included
125 bushels of wheat, 80 bushels of rye, 1,000 bushels of
corn, 600 bushels of oats, 100 bushels of Irish potatoes,
150 bushels of sweet potatoes, 100 pounds of butter,
25 gallons of molasses, and 2,000 pounds of tobacco.
This accounting should be considered very subjective: In
addition to the above yields, Hardin reported owning 100
acres of improved land and 1,000 acres of woodland but,
according to the Patrick County Land Books for the same
year, Hardin Reynolds owned 7,283.25 acres.
A more accurate depiction of his agricultural pursuits
can be assessed from the 1882 appraisal of Hardins
personal estate (Appendix III) following his death the
previous year. That document provides the following
data for livestock: six mules, two horses, 36 head of
cattle, 26 sheep, 24 hogs, and 2 oxen. The assessors also
accounted for 300 bushels of wheat, 150 bushels of rye,
204 bushels of corn, 85 gallons of molasses, 4,500 pounds
of harvested tobacco, and 1,560 pounds of manufactured
tobacco.
Tobacco production was a year-round process involving
almost constant management and a ready labor force. If
virgin land were available, it would be cleared of timber
and plowed deeply. Previously farmed land would
receive a thorough application of manure for fertilization.
At the beginning of the year, preparation began with
the burning of land to kill weeds and grass seeds. A
plant bed was prepared on a sunny slope of virgin soil
near a water source and sand was mixed into the freshly
prepared loam. Four tablespoons of seed proved enough
to cover a hundred square yards of planting bed. The
plants, susceptible to infestations of the tobacco fea
beetle, would be dusted with ash. Following plowing,
Tobacco growing in a feld near Critz, Virginia 2013
52
felds would be prepared with the construction of as
many as 5,000 raised hills per acre. In May the seedlings
were pitched, drawn from the planting beds and
relocated to the hills. Once the tobacco plants roots
were established, intensive tillage was required to
prevent cutworm infestations and the growth of
unwanted grass and weeds. In July, priming involved
the removal of lower leaves, those that had become
bruised by tillage. During the summer, the removal of
unwanted sprouts known as suckers and the tedious
process of killing green hornworms occupied the planters
and their enslaved from dusk to dawn. About six weeks
after transplantation, topping was performed. This
process, which involved the removal of the uppermost
leaves, bud, and stem, prevented the production of seed
and promoted the growth of sturdier, thicker, and more
marketable leaves.
Throughout this period, the vulnerable plants were
subject to drought, food, disease, hail, wind, and
insects. Because tobacco was inspected and purchased
based on the quality of the leaf, even the smallest
degree of damage could result in signifcantly lowered
marketability. Once the tobacco was ready for harvest,
planters would cut the stalk laterally down the center
to allow the plant to be hung easily on tobacco sticks
and cure quickly. Left in the felds until the sun wilted
the plants, the tobacco was then harvested, loaded in
wagons, and moved to the tobacco barns for curing.
Man Carrying Tobacco Leaves to Drying Shed, 1942. Georges Schreiber
Mighty Fine Leaf, circa 1947. David Stone Martin
53
Though air-curing utilizing natural ventilation on
scafolding was practiced in the early years, open-fre
curing was practiced from about 1815 until 1840. During
this time, consumers began to prefer a less smoky
favored tobacco. In the 1820s experiments in Virginia
resulted in the development of fue-cured tobacco
whereby a fre is made outside the barn and metal fues
were used to deliver a smokeless dry heat. This greater
control over the curing process also reduced the amount
of fuel required to dry the tobacco and lessened the
potential of accidental burning of the product and the
structure.
After curing, the tobacco leaves were stripped from
the stalks and pressed or prized into hogsheads,
large barrels constructed of oak and used to store and
transport tobacco. A painstaking task, prizing involved
a powerful succession of levers and screws to compress
the leaf. Great care had to be taken that the leaves were
not damaged, as this would lower the marketability of
the product. These hogsheads, each weighing more than
1,000 pounds, were then rolled to market. It has been
suggested that Virginias meandering roads are directly
related to the rolling roads, which followed watersheds
but avoided fords to prevent leakage into the hogshead
and spoilage of the product. Prizing and marketing
happened in early spring of the year following the initial
clearing and planting, thus a year and a half usually
passed from seedbed to warehouse.
Cream of the Crop, undated. Arnold Blanch
Untitled, undated. Zoltan Leslie Sepeshy
22
54
Sweet-scented dark leaf tobacco cured over open fres
was the major cash crop in Virginia from about 1618
until 1839 when bright leaf tobacco was discovered. On
a North Carolina farm in Caswell County on the Virginia
border, a slave named Stephen owned by planter Abisha
Slade fell asleep while tending a curing crop of a newly
popularized gold-leaf variety that performed on poor,
leached soils. When Stephen awoke, he discovered the
fre almost extinguished so he promptly added charcoal
from a nearby blacksmith pit resulting in a quickly dried,
yellowish-colored tobacco. The tobacco and the new fue-
curing process were quickly adopted by farmers who had
previously been discouraged by their poorly performing
lands and the tobacco industry was signifcantly altered
by the resulting surge in cultivation.
Tobacco cultivated in Patrick County was delivered to
Lynchburg where it was sold to merchants who shipped
it via the James River to Richmond where it was largely
exported. When he was a young man, Hardin Reynolds
had been sent with a load of tobacco to sell in Lynchburg,
a trip that would take more than ten days. Disappointed
with the proft, Hardin convinced his father to let him
make a press to manufacture tobacco into twists that he
could then sell in the Carolinas. Though this marks the
beginning of Hardins interest in manufacturing tobacco
productsan interest that his heirs would inherithe
was not alone in Patrick County. In the 1840s, there were
fve tobacco factories in Patrick County with annual sales
ranging from $5,000 to $20,000. Twenty years later, there
were seven factories including the one at Rock Spring.
As more and more planters were producing tobacco,
Hardin was able to purchase the product from them at a
cost lower than he himself could grow it.
During Hardin Reynolds time, Patrick County tobacco
was grown for chewing rather than smoking and the
manufacturing process produced either twist or plug
varieties. For twist tobacco, harvested leaves were
cured and then wound together with a reduced mixture
of honey, molasses, licorice, and spices. Plug tobacco
involved combining all of the above ingredients into a
press that then compressed the tobacco into a half-inch
thick solid, which was later cut into bars and wrapped for
transport and sale. The home factory, often employing
Piedmont Tobacco 1860
Bright Leaf Territory 1869
Bright Leaf Territory 1899
23
55
the labor of slaves, was comprised of an assortment of
presses, screws, and other tools: Twisting benches,
at which the hands sat as they rolled and twisted the
leaf, were common items in the inventories of tobacco
houses. There were stoves for the sweat house, boilers
for use in preparing the favorings, cutting knives for
trimming the raw material to plug length, scales and
balances for accurate measurement of ingredients and
for weighing the tobacco in each plug.
In addition to producing crops and manufacturing
tobacco, Hardin rented portions of his land to white
tenants before the Civil War and to both whites and
blacks after it. In addition to paying rent, tenants were
expected to clear and improve the land, construct fences
and tobacco barns, and provide a portion of their crop
yields to Hardin. In 1855, Hardin and Joel Tuggle entered
the following agreement: Know all men by these
presents that I Hardin W. Reynolds have rented the place
on the turnpike now occupied by Wm. H. High to Joel
Tuggle for the year 1856 The said Tuggle binds himself to
make a good fence around the whole of the plantation
and build a good Tobacco house on the Turnpike on the
premises and to pay ffteen Dollars in Tobacco or other
produce at the Market price in the Neighborhood by 1st
of November 1856.
Following the War, Hardin held nearly three dozen
sharecropping and tenant farming contracts with poor
whites and emancipated slaves, some of whom had
formerly been owned by Hardin and continued to bear
his name. One such individual was Dick, a freedman
who entered into a contract stipulating that he would
provide Hardin two-thirds of his crop of grain and one-
half of his crop of tobacco. In 1866 Hardin entered into a
contract with his former slave Abe Reynolds who agreed
to tend the land, install a fence, plant grains and tobacco,
collect frewood for Hardins family, feed the mules, and
establish a vegetable garden. For these eforts, Abe was
permitted to live in Hardins old store and keep half of the
crop yield.
24
25
26
56
According to historian John Michael Vlach, Grand
mansions and elegant grounds have, at least since
the early twentieth century, come to be regarded as
emblematic of the plantation as a place. Generally
overlooked is the fact that a planters house was only
the centerpiece of a holding that necessarily included
felds, pastures, and woodlots. Moreover, these holdings
would not have existed at all were it not for the sizable
profts amassed through the unrelieved labor of enslaved
workers. Because it is often the case that only the
mansion houses remain, the impression conveyed by
plantation sites today is exclusively one of wealth and
easy comfort. Because the slave quarters and various
work spaces are frequently missing, how such splendor
and comfort were sustained remains something of
a mystery. The Reynolds success as farmers and
manufacturers of tobacco would not have been possible
without the massive labor investment of enslaved
people. Though very little of the ethnographic landscape
of slavery remains at Reynolds Homestead, it exists as an
underlying component of the surroundings and should
be considered a signifcant interpretive and historical
feature.
It is unknown if Abraham Reynolds owned any slaves
but it is certain that as his landholdings grew, so too
did his need for inexpensive and dependable labor.
Context: The Slave Landscape
Though slavery was commonplace in Virginia since the
frst importation of blacks as early as 1619, most Patrick
County residents were not in a fnancial position to own
slaves. In neighboring Henry County, Colonel George
Hairston and his descendants became the largest
slaveholders in the country, owning at one time more
than 1,400 individuals. Returns from US Census records
indicate the following numbers of enslaved persons in
Patrick County: In 1800 there were 649 slaves; 721 in 1810;
1,213 in 1820; 1,782 in 1830; 1,742 in 1840; 2,324 in 1850; and
2,070 in 1860.
According to the Personal Property and Farming
Operations ledgers preserved at the Ofce of the Clerk
in Stuart, Hardin Reynolds frst reported owning slaves
in 1839 with an entry of eight individuals. By 1845 the
number was 18; in 1850 he reported 37; in 1855 he owned
54; in 1860 Hardin reported 59; and in 1863 (the fnal
year of reporting) the number had grown to 88. The
relative treatment of slaves by Hardin is unknown but
one individual is memorialized in the current Reynolds
Homestead interpretive material. Kitty Reynolds, it is
said, encountered a bull attacking Hardin in the felds and
was able to distract the animal long enough for Hardin to
escape. For this, she was rewarded with the role of nanny
to his children and was taken care of for the rest of her
life. Hardins eldest son AD was accompanied by trusted
enslaved men on his various expeditions and during his
year as a soldier in the Civil War.
27
28
57
Though the labor associated with tobacco production
was tedious and time consuming, it did not require a
high degree of strength and could therefore often be
performed by women and children. Accounting for his
tobacco-manufacturing factory, Hardin reported eight
men in 1850 and ten years later he reported seven male
and seven female slaves.
With the close of the Civil War, Hardin Reynolds was
devastated by the emancipation of his workforce. In his
Recollections, Major AD reports on his homecoming from
the War: My father was a fne disciplinarian and always
Kept me at a distance and I never Knew he loved me until
then when he saw me he ran to meet me and threw his
arms around me and Said my Son the Yankees have been
here and torn up Evry thing and my Negro men have all
gone with them but Since you have Come back alive and
well it is all right we Can rebuild our lost fortune.
Undoubtedly, the plantation landscape was markedly
diferent when 88 slaves resided there than what is
visible today. The modern visitor, who might hear
Kittys story while standing in the restored kitchen or
consider the contributions and sacrifces of African
Americans while visiting the Cemetery of Slaves and Their
Descendants, will likely be hard-pressed to imagine the
former landscape as it was experienced by an enslaved
individual. Researcher and landscape architect Rebecca
Ginsburg suggests that the slave landscape should be
understood as the system of paths, places, and rhythms
that a community of enslaved people created as an
alternative, often as a refuge, to landscape systems of
planters and other whites. It was largely a secret and
disguised world, as compared to the planter landscape of
display and vistas.
Long vanished are the hiding places and escape routes
that must have been well-known to the slaves at Rock
Spring Plantation, replaced by tangles of forest, orderly
research plots, and ADA accessible paths. In direct
opposition to the ordered, neat, bounded landscape
of the plantation owner, the slave landscape was one
of movement and of clandestine gathering places.
The slave landscape was an ensemble of behavioral
associations created incrementally by a series of
improvisational responses to the given landscape rules
of white masters. The woods, felds, and rows of slave
houses (now irretrievably erased from the landscape),
would have been the domain of the slaves where, though
still controlled, they would have found some sense of
autonomy, choice and, above all, freedom.
29
30
58
The National Park Service (NPS) describes a cultural
landscape as a geographic area (including both cultural
and natural resources and the wildlife or domestic animals
therein), associated with a historic event, activity, or
person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values.
There are four general types of cultural landscapes,
not mutually exclusive: historic sites, historic designed
landscapes, historic vernacular landscapes, and
ethnographic landscapes. Of these four types, Reynolds
Homestead is all but a historic designed landscape,
which is described as having been consciously laid out
by a landscape architect or master gardener working
in an identifable style or tradition. Research has been
unsuccessful in fnding any evidence of intentional formal
design.
The Reynolds Homestead is best described as a historic
site, a landscape signifcant for its association with a
historic event, activity, or person. The Homestead was
listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register on November
30, 1970 and on the National Register of Historic
Places on September 22, 1971. On December 22, 1977,
Reynolds Homestead was inscribed as a National Historic
Landmark, a list that today includes fewer than 2,500
such places. National Historic Landmark status is reserved
for nationally signifcant places so designated by the
Secretary of the Interior as possessing exceptional value
or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the
United States. The National Register of Historic Places
Inventory and Nomination Form, (Appendix IV) prepared
in 1970 by James W. Moody Jr. of the Virginia Historic
Landmarks Commission, remarks that The Reynolds
Homestead has been preserved not only as a typical
plantation complex of its era and place, but as a memorial
to the Reynolds family, who played such a leading role
in the development of the nations tobacco industry. It
was through the eforts of families such as the Reynolds
that tobacco became such an important factor in the
economic rehabilitation of the South following the Civil
War. The National Register of Historic Places nomination
for the Reynolds Homestead lists the following subjects
as signifcant: Architecture, Person, Commerce, Industry,
Greek Revival, and Building. The primary period of
signifcance is listed as 1850 to 1874, however this report
will include discussions of the Homestead and its context
throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
The name Reynolds Homestead does not fully or
accurately depict the historic character of the place
now known by that name. The term homestead,
from the Old English hmstede denoting a home, town,
or village, conjures in the minds eye a rugged farm, a
modest wooden shack, and the toil of breaking ground to
establish a private claim on wild, publicly owned land. By
the time that the house was built in 1843 on the 598-acre
plot of land purchased in 1825, the Reynolds were already
a wealthy family, one well-established in Patrick County.
The land where the present Homestead is located frst
appeared in the Patrick County land records on March 26,
1795 transferred from Brett Stovall to Wilson and Gabriel
Penn and listed as the home of Major Richard Harrison.
Wilson Penn transferred the land to Abraham Reynolds in
Context: Cultural Landscape
31
32
59
1826. If any place is the Reynolds Homestead, it would
be the frst purchase of land registered to Abraham
Reynolds (and his home through his adult life) which was
a few miles north of the current Reynolds Homestead
location on 180 acres he purchased in 1810.
Because the Reynolds Homestead evolved organically
from the natural environment and served most of it
existence as a working farm, it is best described as a
historic vernacular landscape, one that evolved through
use by the people whose activities or occupancy shaped
it. Through social or cultural attitudes of an individual,
a family, or a community, the landscape refects the
physical, biological, and cultural character of everyday
lives. Function plays a signifcant role in vernacular
landscapes. Examples include rural historic districts and
agricultural landscapes. Reynolds Homestead is an
exceptional environment in which to study agricultural
adaptations to the natural context in light of technologies
and traditions available to homesteading tobacco farmers
in Southside Virginia throughout the 19th century.
Another lens through which to view this landscape
reveals a less obvious place, one that underlies the idyllic
country estate now preserved. The NPS designation of
an ethnographic landscape begins to capture some of
the nuances of this signifcant component of the cultural
landscape. An ethnographic landscape is described as one
containing a variety of natural and cultural resources
that associated people defne as heritage resources.
Though normally reserved for ceremonial grounds, sacred
sites, and contemporary settlements, the designation is
herein important to understanding the place as it was
interpreted by the eighty or so enslaved people that
helped put Rock Spring Plantation on the map.
Aside from the cemetery north of the house, there
is very little extant evidence of the slavery landscape
remaining at Rock Spring Plantation. Without the sturdy
bricks used to construct the Reynolds house (most likely
manufactured on-site by slave labor), slave quarters
and overseers residences have long deteriorated into
oblivion. Today, the tidy yard behind the house, still
displaying a few structures associated with livelihood
on the plantation, is serene and quiet. Standing on the
back porch of the house, it is difcult to imagine the
bustle of slave industry that once must have dominated
the surrounding landscape. The sights, smells, and
sounds of slaves performing domestic chores, tending
to the tedious tasks of tobacco cultivation, and the
industrial nature of the tobacco manufacturing facilities
is now absent from the Rock Spring Plantation cultural
landscape. From the front porch, looking across a
peaceful meadow, one can observe the Cemetery of
Slaves and Their Descendants nestled in a grove of trees
on a hillside. One may only speculate what it was like for
Hardin Reynolds to step out onto his porch ornamented
with its triumphant white columns and witness his human
chattel burying their dead and memorializing their own
personal losses.
33
34
60
Context: Designed Landscape
The Reynolds Homestead, now restored as an historic
site, operates as a Commonwealth Campus Center of
Virginia Tech, augmented with a Community Enrichment
Center and the 780-acre Forest Resources Research
Center and Laboratory. With its restored house and
outbuildings, family and slave cemeteries, and natural
setting, the Homestead is an exceptional location to
research and interpret the historic vernacular landscape
of a bygone era. Though documentation about
landscape architecture and ornamental gardening at the
Homestead is scant, the site is useful in understanding
the general design and layout of Southside Virginias
plantations.
One example of this is the exemplifcation of
traditional plantation landscape plans as described by
Norman T. Newton in his treatise Design on the Land:
The Development of Landscape Architecture. In his
descriptions, Newton mentions such historic plantations
as Westover built in the 1730s by William Byrd II,
Gunston Hall constructed by George Mason in the 1750s,
George Washingtons 1785 Mount Vernon, and Thomas
Jefersons Monticello begun in 1771 and completed by
the time Jeferson died in 1826. Though, as far as can be
confrmed, Hardin Reynolds never employed a landscape
architect to arrange his plantation, he did follow one
guiding principle that Newton describes: On the larger
place, where several distinct elements comprised
the whole, some sort of overall organization of parts
was naturally required In the layout of the typical
plantation, even to the end of the eighteenth century and
into the nineteenth, the organizing force was usually the
strong geometric infuence of the English Renaissance
rather than the landscape gardening trend that had
since become the fashion in England. As a rule, then,
the southern plantation had a readily discernible spatial
structure that was not always skillful and in fact was
rather often childishly bungling, but that nevertheless
clearly evidenced an efort at creating an overall scheme
of organization, with perceptible sight-lines tying the
spaces together.
The Reynolds Homestead is organized as an assemblage
of utilitarian structures in a compact arrangement on a
fat, open hill in the center of a contiguous 780-acre plot
of gently rolling topography in a rural setting. When it
was frst constructed, the Homestead was the literal and
fgurative center of plantation life for Hardin Reynolds
family and enslaved people. In 1843 when the house was
frst constructed, the 598-acre plot was the largest of six
distinct landholdings in the Reynolds estate. By the time
of Hardins passing forty years later, he held deeds for 34
plots comprising 7160 acres in Patrick County with an
additional 2180 acres in Stokes County, North Carolina.
The house served as Hardins home and business ofce
where he entertained other members of the Southside
Virginia social elite and his tobacco factory, mercantile
store, and post ofce would have attracted many
peopleboth neighbors and strangersto his property.
Though no evidence exists, his home most certainly
would have been ornamented with landscape plants to
accent his familys wealth and refnery.
35
61
Historian John Michael Vlach describes the 18th century
plantation landscape as one of social dominance and
hierarchical relations expressed through a highly rational
formalism: Implicit in the structured layout of Georgian
houses, formal gardens, and extensive stretches of
fenced and cultivated felds was a strong sense of the
planters dominance over both nature and society.
He goes on to state that plantations constituted an
articulated processional landscape, a spatial system
designed to indicate the centrality of the planters
[and] planters of more modest means still tried to make
their homes and gardens fashionable by incorporating
some formal qualities of design or decoration. A Greek
Revival porch, for example, complete with columns and
entablature, might be grafted awkwardly onto a humble
log cabin as a statement of presumed sophistication.
Certainly the brick house, with its intricate Flemish-
bond brickwork, faux marbre (marbleized) decorative
paintwork, and Backwoods Chinese Chippendale
staircase was a far cry from a humble log cabin. Still, the
organization of the plantation likely exhibited aspects of
the articulated processional landscape, and continues to
do so.
Perhaps the strongest example of this can be seen in the
study of the placement of the Cemetery of Slaves and
Their Descendants. The Reynolds family maintained
and continues to utilizeits own family cemetery just
east of the house. This cemetery, surrounded by an
historic wrought-iron fence (of unknown age), consists
of the graves and tombstones of several generations of
the Reynolds family, with the most recent interment on
February 6, 2014. Headstones indicate that Hardins parents,
Abraham and Polly, as well as his brother, David, several
of his children, and Hardin himself were all buried there.
This cemetery, which lies approximately 150 feet east of
the house on perpendicular axis with the front porch, is
visible from the windows in the downstairs parlor and the
eastern rooms upstairs. Its placement was prominent in the
Reynolds plantation landscape, situated between the house
and the store.
Reynolds Family Cemetery as seen from inside the house, 2013
36
37
62
Even more prominent in the landscape though is the
Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants which lies
approximately 625 feet northwest of the house on a ridge
above the hollow just beyond the front porch. Because
of the axis and its position at the same elevation as the
house, the cemetery is always under surveillance from
the front door. The placement of the cemetery between
the house and the borrowed views of No Business
Mountain seems an unnecessary and unlikely intrusion
upon the idyllic scene initially composed by the siting and
orientation of the house. The placement sets up a spatial
organization where Hardins slaves were watched even
at their most vulnerable, intimate times; where Hardin
could observe their actions even at times of grief; and
where, even at death, his enslaved people were under his
watchful eye.
The placement of the cemetery might also indicate
another interpretation of history though. Given that the
land was purchased in 1826 but that the house was not
built until 1843, the slave cemetery might predate the
house. Though we cannot know what year Hardin left his
fathers homestead and relocated to what would become
Rock Spring Plantation, we do know that he would have
been 16 years old when the land was purchased and 33
by the time he married. Presumably, he was already living
as a planter there for a number of years before he had
acquired the resources to build the house for his bride.
According to historian Nannie Tilley, Hardin owned nine
slaves in 1840. It is plausible that his slaves also lived on
the propertyand died there as well. In any event, the
sight-lines set up between the slave masters house and
the burying place of his enslaved exemplifes Newtons
organizational scheme as well as Vlachs articulated
processional landscape.
38
63
Fieldstones in the foreground indicate burials in the Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants with the house in the background, 2013
Rock Spring Plantation 1810-1970
Early photograph of the Reynolds house with unnamed man and dog, circa 1890
66
Christopher Reynolds 1611-1654
Married Elizabeth
1622 England to America
1636 Isle of Wight Co., VA
Richard Reynolds 1641-1711
Married Elizabeth Sharpe
Newport Parish, VA
Richard Reynolds 1669-
Married Mary Anderson
King William County, VA
David Reynolds 1720-
Pittsylvania County, VA
Abraham David Reynolds 1781-1838
Married Mary Polly Harbour 1784-1853
Patrick County, VA
David Harbour Reynolds
1811-1836
Hardin William Reynolds 1810-1882
Married Nancy Jane Cox 1825-1903
Reynolds Homestead ice house (left), house (center), and kitchen (right), 2013
Reynolds Family Tree
67
Mary Joyce 1844-1888
Agnes Catherine 1845-1861
Abram David (AD) 1847-1925
Richard Joshua (RJ) 1850-1918
Hardin Harbour 1854-1927
John Gilmore 1856-1862
Lucy Burrough 1858-1953
Nancy Bill 1859-1862
Ernest C. 1861-1862
William Neal 1863-1951
Twins 1865
Walter Robert 1866-1921
Nancy Kate 1870-1890
1825
Rock Spring Plantation,
House built 1843-1855
1906
Reynolds heirs deed
Rock Spring Plantation to
William Neal for $1
1951
Rock Spring Plantation
Passes to
Hardin Walter Reynolds
Nancy Susan Reynolds
1910-1985
Rock Spring Plantation
1968 for $100,000
1969
Reynolds Homestead
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
1917
Rock Spring Plantation
Deeded to
Hardin Harbour
Twins 1849
68
On August 11, 1825, Abraham (also called Abram)
Reynolds paid $2,100 for 598 acres on the waters of Mill
Creek. Though we have no evidence that Abraham ever
lived on that land, it would eventually become known
as the Reynolds Homestead. In fact, Abraham lived on
another piece of land, a few miles away on the waters of
the North Mayo River.
Though it is not known exactly how Abraham came to
be in Patrick County, we can trace some of the path that
brought him there. In 1622, one Christopher Reynolds
and his wife Elizabeth departed from England and settled
in the newly established Colony of Virginia. In 1636, he
and his wife were two of the 5,000 people reported to
be residing in Tidewater Isle of Wight County. In 1641,
Christopher and Elizabeth had a son they named Richard.
Richard married Elizabeth Sharpe, and they resided in
Newport Parish, a small shire within Isle of White County.
Their son Richard, who married Mary Anderson, lived
further inland in the newly formed King William County.
These two had a child in 1720 named David Reynolds who
would eventually be reported as living in Pittsylvania
County, formed from the western portion of Lunenburg
County in 1764. On March 1, 1781, David Reynolds son
Abraham David was born. Abraham would have two
children of his own: Hardin William lived from 1810 to 1882
while his brother, born in 1811, would die a young man in
1836, two years before Abraham passed away in 1838.
Hardin married his cousin Nancy Cox Reynolds in 1843 and
History of the Estate
the two moved into the house at Rock Spring Plantation
where they would have 16 children (only half who lived
to adulthood) and established a lucrative tobacco
manufacturing operation.
At the birth of Patrick County, Abraham Reynolds was
in familial company. In a 1791 reporting of landowners,
the list included Bartlett, Jesse, Moses, and Richard
Reynolds. The 1820 Patrick County register of Heads of
Households includes Thomas, Moses, Meekins, Jesse,
James, and Abraham. Though it is unknown how much
interaction these individuals had, early surveys and deeds
demonstrate that, in some cases, the Reynolds were
next-door neighbors to one another. A survey conducted
for Abraham in 1811 for 200 acres on the nobusiness
forke of the North Mayo River begins by recording
a witness tree on land owned by Jesse Reynolds and
concludes at a fallen Red Oak [at] a corner of Moses
Reynolds line Throughout this time of land clearing,
home building, and labor-demanding tobacco cultivation,
the Reynolds, like other families in newly settled
territories, would have depended greatly upon assistance
from their relations and neighbors.
On July 22, 1810, Abraham paid Thomas Sneed $250
for 180 acres on the Waters of North Mayo River. This
land would remain in the possession of Abrahams
descendants until August 31, 1896 when Abrahams
grandson Walter sold it to settle a debt. Twelve years
39
40
69
prior, when the Reynolds lands were subdivided among
Hardins heirs following his death in 1882, the land
was given to Walter: One track known as the Abram
Reynolds or Mayo place lying on North Mayo containing
180 acres valued at $340.00 (Appendix V)
The distinction between the Abraham Reynolds property
and the Reynolds Homestead is a small but important
one. For more than 40 years, the story of the Reynolds in
Patrick County has reported that Abraham purchased the
Homestead in 1814. Tracing the origination of this myth
is a difcult process but the frst written mention of it
appears in Nannie M. Tilleys text Reynolds Homestead
1814-1970 edited by Nancy Susan Reynolds. In the book,
the rich and complex history of the Reynolds family is
recorded through personal stories, photographs, and
genealogies. In her introduction to the book, Nancy
Susan recounts The frst ffty acres of this land were
purchased in 1814 by Abraham Reynolds, often called
Abram, who settled there with his wife Mary Harbor,
nicknamed Polly. Theirs was a log house which no
longer exists, while the one built by their son, Hardin
William, was made of brick and has been recently
restored. This version of the origination of the Reynolds
Homestead has been retold many times.
Abraham was a hard-working individual who spent his
life acquiring land and instilling in his children a sense of
hard work, civic responsibility, and farmer-like virtues. In
1816, Reynolds added to his 180 acres two plots, one of
50 acres and the other 200. Abraham maintained these
three holdings for almost a decade until 1825 when he
purchased the 598 acres that would eventually become
known as Rock Spring Plantation. By the time of his
passing in 1838, he had increased his landholdings from
the 180 acres purchased in 1810 to 1,456 acres. Though
not a contiguous plot of land, Abrahams holdings were
tracts limited to areas around the North Mayo River and
Mill Creek.
On August 11, 1825, Abraham Reynolds paid $2,100 to
George Harrison for three tracts or parcels of land
lying and being in the county of Patrick on the waters
of Mill Creek containing fve hundred and ninety eight
acres more or less with all woods, ways, water and
water courses, trees, orchards Houses, fences and all
other involvements thereunto belonging, or in any wise
appertaining. This land is the present location of the
Reynolds Homestead as demonstrated on the Table
of Tracts of Land for the Year 1881, a document that
lists all of the land holdings Hardin Reynolds was in
possession of at the time of his death the following year.
That document refers to the 598 acres on Mill Creek as
Residence and lists the 180 acres on North Mayo River
as A. Reynolds old Residence.
41
70
1881 Table of Tracts of Land with 598-acre plot called Residence and 180-acre plot called A. Reynolds old Residence
71
Documentation about Abraham Reynolds is scarce. The
voluminous text published in 1999 by Patrick County
Historical Society on the history of the county gives
only a brief accounting of Abraham: Certainly, the
most famous family in the Critz area was the Reynolds
family. Moses Reynolds, Jesse Reynolds, and Abraham
Reynolds all seem to have originally settled in the Smith
River and Rock Castle Creek section of northeastern
Patrick County, but all migrated in the frst half of the
19th century to the area south of No Business Mountain
where they acquired large acreages of land. Abraham
Reynolds married Mary Harbour in 1809 and settled on
the site of the present Reynolds Homestead. His son,
Hardin Reynolds, had sons who have had a great impact
on the business life of this county.
Abraham and Mary Harbour had two children; Hardin
William Reynolds was born in 1810 and David Harbour
Reynolds came a year later. Abraham endeavored
to teach his children how to read, keep accounts,
manufacture tobacco, and speculate on land. David
would become an enterprising businessman in Patrick
County, and in the early 1830s was partnered with
Colonel James M. Redd. The two maintained a mercantile
in Wards Gap and eventually moved the business into
Taylorsville (now Stuart). The venture included peddling
manufactured tobacco twists from Patrick County into
the Carolinas and Georgia in exchange for cotton, rice,
cofee, molasses, sugar, rum, brandy, tin, and other
staples. The business was a successful one, employing
a clerk, owning a horse and a slave, and buying tobacco
in lots as large as half a ton, which was then resold.
Following a trip to the South in September 1836, David
Reynolds returned with $500 in cash plus a load of
groceries worth at least that much. Upon his return, he
was taken ill and succumbed to his sickness a day later.
Abraham Reynolds died less than two years later on
May 3, 1838, leaving Hardin the sole heir to the Reynolds
properties and business interests.
According to Patrick County tax records kept at the Ofce
of the Clerk in Stuart, Abraham Reynolds held 1,080 acres
of land in 1836. The following year, Hardin appears for the
frst time in the records when he and Abraham purchased
376 acres together, thus bringing their total property to
1,456 acres in Patrick County. In the records, Abraham
is listed as deceased until 1861 and with only a slight
changethe 376 was altered to become 353.75the
land remains in his name. Meanwhile, Hardin paid taxes
on that land and began to accumulate his own.
The land records of Hardin William Reynolds serve
to expand our knowledge of tobacco plantations in
America throughout the nineteenth century. Unlike
the cotton, rice, and sugarcane plantations of the
Carolinas, Alabama, and Georgia, which were commonly
large, unbroken tracts of agricultural land, the tobacco
plantations of Southside Virginia were often pieced
together from smaller parcels. Hardin Reynolds, who
would eventually become one of the largest landholders
in Patrick County, grew his plantation bit by bit.
42
43
44
72
Following the deaths of his brother and father, Hardin
focused on building a house and starting his family. At
thirty-two years, he married Nancy Jane Cox on January
31, 1843, the same year he built the frst half of the brick
house that still stands on the hill facing No Business
Mountain. To accommodate his growing family, Reynolds
tripled the size of his house by adding a two-story central
hall ell to the original Colonial Revival house. The second
part was built sometime around 1855.
Nancy Jane Cox Reynolds, ffteen years younger than
Hardin, came from a well-known family in the Quaker Gap
community in nearby Stokes County, North Carolina. Her
father, Joshua Cox, is said to have arrived in America as a
captain in the British Army, then captured by Indians, and
adopted by the chief of the tribe, escaped by swimming
many miles on the Susquehanna River where he killed his
own dog to keep it quiet, and eventually settled in Stokes
County. Nancy Jane apparently inherited this strength
and endurance from her father and bore sixteen children
in the Reynolds Homestead house, outliving her husband
by two decades.
Hardin William Reynolds, 1810-1882 Nancy Jane Cox Reynolds, 1825-1903
73
Following the death of Abraham in 1838, Hardin
maintained the same 1,453 acres for a decade before
he purchased more land. For those ten years, he
concentrated on cultivating and manufacturing tobacco,
establishing himself in his community, and setting up a
small mercantile on the Reynolds Homestead property.
In 1848, Hardin made several land purchases and doubled
his property in a single year. The following year, he would
report 3,431 acres scattered around Patrick County,
including 473 acres on the headwaters of the Dan River
and 1,052 on No Business Mountain. A year later, he
purchased a 1,315-acre tract of land adjacent to the Cox
family in neighboring Stokes County, North Carolina.
Hardin continued to buy land for the next forty years
but limited his purchases to tracts located in Patrick
and Stokes Counties. Tax tables through the period of
signifcance provide limited descriptions of the location
of each of the tracts by recording the number of acres,
the tracts distance from the Patrick County courthouse,
and the general location based on the nearest creek,
stream, or river. For example, the property known now
as the Reynolds Homestead is described as being 598
acres on Mill Creek, nine miles east of the courthouse.
Occasionally, these entries were altered for unknown
reasons. The entries for 1844 and 1845 list the same 598
acres as fve miles east rather than nine.
It is beyond the scope of this research to attempt to
isolate every piece of property ever owned by the
Reynolds family. Because much of the land once owned
by the Reynolds has hence been subdivided and resold
multiple times and because the original surveys and
deeds do not provide exact geographic locations, we are
limited in describing exactly where these tracts existed.
The graphics on the following two pages illustrate a
generalized view of Reynolds properties by decade
from 1810 when Abraham frst appeared until 1882
when Hardin passed away. These diagramsscaled
representations of general locations near reported
rivershave been constructed in order to illustrate
the Reynolds geographic range rather than to provide
precise spatial details about each individual plot. The
blocks do not provide actual depictions of the shape of
each holding nor the exact location but rather provide
numbers of acres in generalized locations based on deed
descriptions.
74
Reynolds Homestead
(Eventually)
1810 180 Acres 1820 430 Acres
1830 1058 Acres 1840 1456 Acres
Reynolds Homestead
(Eventually)
Reynolds Homestead Reynolds Homestead
5mi
10mi
5mi
10mi
5mi
10mi
5mi
10mi
Conjectural locations and representatively scaled estimations of Reynolds land holdings from 1810-1840 based on land records.
75
1860 4709 Acres
1870 7283 Acres
1850 3429 Acres
1882 7160 Acres
Reynolds Homestead
Reynolds Homestead
Reynolds Homestead
Reynolds Homestead
5mi
10mi
5mi
10mi
5mi
10mi
5mi
10mi
Conjectural locations and representatively scaled estimations of Reynolds land holdings from 1850-1882 based on land records.
76
From these diagrams we can observe that, though
the Reynolds land was not contiguous, it was fairly
well organized spatially in a twenty-mile radius of
the Homestead. For tobacco planters in Southside
Virginia, labor and equipment were limiting factors.
The complexities of slavery and tobacco cultivation
inform the general pattern of land aggregation and
use throughout the period of signifcance. Through the
tax records, we can observe that, unlike many other
Southern plantation owners, Hardin remained successful
through the Civil War. In 1860, on the eve of the War
Between the States, Hardin Reynolds reported owning
4,709 acres in Patrick County and another 2,240 in
Stokes County. Six years later at the end of the Civil War,
Hardin reported on 6,249 acres in Patrick County with
no signifcant change in North Carolina. Even though
his eldest son was away at war and the South was
undergoing signifcant political, social, and economic
turmoil, Hardin managed to accumulate signifcant
quantities of farmland, possibly capitalizing on the poor
fortunes of his neighboring Patrick County residents.
Within the next fve years, the Reynolds would increase
their Patrick County land holdings to 7,283 acres. By the
time Hardin died in 1882, the Reynolds held title to 7,160
acres in Patrick County and 2,180 acres in Stokes County.
Survived by his wife and nine children ranging in age
from 38 to 14, Hardin Reynolds did not leave a will. Thus,
W.D. Smith, Special Commissioner to the Patrick County
Court, was assigned to subdivide his lands among his
heirs. In the documentation of the chancery case, Smith
provided written descriptions of the acreages, assigned
monetary values to the parcels, and subdivided the lands
by geographic location such that each of Hardins heirs
inherited several parcels. Though the resulting written
document provides a fairly legible accounting of the
Reynolds land, one important piece is missing. Smith
assigned each inheritance as lots and referenced
a plat made by the commissioners of partition +
assignments in the said suit. Though the plat for the
Stokes County parcels still exists (reproduced, next
page), the one for Patrick County has been lost. This is
very unfortunate as its existence would provide a much
better understanding of the spatial relationships of the
Reynolds property in 1882.
77
1884 Survey and Deed dividing Hardin Reynolds land in Stokes County, North Carolina
78
The resulting deed, made October 6, 1884, dividing
Hardin Reynolds property provides descriptions and
values of the land as well as insights into the valuation of
land at that time. For example, the 952-acre No Business
Mountain tract given to RJ Reynolds was valued at $0.33
per acre, for a total of $317.33. On the other end of the
spectrum, RJs elder brother, AD, received 496 acres in
Stokes County valued at $3472, or $7.00 per acre. Land
values refected the quality of growing conditions rather
than quantity or location. The parcel given to AD is
prime farmland still being used for tobacco production
today while the mountainous tract given to RJ remains a
densely forested and rugged plot.
Hardins wife Nancy Reynolds was given the land on the
waters of Spoon Creek including the Mansion House of
the late H.W. Reynolds, containing 711 acres and valued
at $2000, or $2.82 per acre. She was also given title to 475
acres in Stokes County valued at $2000, or $4.21 per acre.
RJs younger brother, Walter, received title to, among
other lands, the Abram Reynolds or Mayo place lying on
North Mayo containing 180 acres valued at $340.00.
After 39 years of marriage, Nancy Cox Reynolds who
outlived her husband by 21 years, passed away in 1903. By
this time, she had moved from Rock Spring to Bristol, TN
and, eventually, Winston NC. Unlike her husband, she is
not memorialized in the family cemetery and was instead
buried at Salem Cemetery in Winston-Salem.
By the time of her mothers passing, Mary Joyce, the
eldest of the Reynolds children, had married Patrick
County judge Andrew Murray Lybrook for whom she
bore eight children. She died in 1888. Abram David (AD),
the oldest son, had married in 1872 and moved from
Patrick County to Bristol, TN where he pursued a career
in tobacco, politics, and religious afairs. Richard Joshua
(RJ), who had sold his interests in the Hardin William
Reynolds tobacco operation in 1874 and left home at the
age of 24, was enjoying success in Winston by the time
of his mothers passing. The ffth child, Hardin Harbour
had partnered with his father until relocating to Winston
Tobacco growing on land formerly owned by Hardin Reynolds,
Stokes County, North Carolina, 2013
79
where he began manufacturing tobacco in 1882, the year
of his fathers death. He moved to Bristol in the mid-
1890s where he worked with AD until he established his
own tobacco manufacturing business in South Boston,
Virginia. By the time of his mothers passing, Hardin
Harbour had returned to Patrick County where he, his
wife Annie Dobyns, and their four children continued
the tobacco traditions on the Reynolds Homestead. The
second oldest living daughter, Lucy Burrough, married
Robert Critz and the two moved to Winston. William Neal
and Walter Robert, the two youngest of Hardins boys,
entered Trinity College (now Duke University) in 1882. By
the time their mother died, both boys resided in Winston
and were working for RJ Reynolds. The youngest of
Hardin and Nancys children, Nancy Kate, died at twenty
years in 1890.
Upon the death of their mother, the heirs to the Reynolds
Homestead entrusted the land to Hardin Harbour
but retained the deed for William Neal. On March 28,
1906, the living children of Hardin and Nancy Reynolds
transferred their interests in the Homestead to William
Neal for One Dollar, to them in hand paid (Appendix
VI). The contract stipulated that William Neal hold the
title in trust for the use and enjoyment of Hardin Harbour
and Annie for the entirety of their lives and that they
would care for and protect [the land] in a husbandlike
manner. Eleven years later, on June 26, 1917 Walter
Reynolds signed a Deed of Gift whereby he transferred
his title to the Reynolds Homestead to Hardin Harbour
and Annie Dobyns Reynolds in consideration of natural
love and afection.
Hardin Harbour and Annie Dobyns Reynolds made a
life of farming on the Reynolds Homestead. The two
had four children, two boys and two girls. Tragically,
in 1912 their six-year-old daughter, Nancy, died from
injuries she acquired when her nightgown caught fre.
Hardin Harbour and his wife remained at the Homestead
for the rest of their lives, he dying in 1927 and she in
1961. Ten years before Annies death, the deed to the
Homestead was transferred to Hardin Walter Reynolds,
the eldest child of Hardin Harbour and Annie. He rented
the land and the house to tenant farmers. Following
their fortunes, the heirs to the Reynolds Homestead had
dispersed from Patrick County.
80
On September 23, 1962 at the age of 70, the caretaker
of the Reynolds property and family friend Russell Critz
provided background information about the Reynolds
Homestead in an article appearing in the Winston-Salem
Journal and Sentinel. Referencing the small natural seep
down hill from the house, Critz remarked, This spring is
my favorite point on the farm. So little farming is done
here now that there is little need for me to be on the
place all the time. At that time, the farm consisted of
840 acres but only a 4.5-acre tobacco allotment. Critz
went on to say It surprises many people who visit the
farm, expecting to fnd a tremendous tobacco plantation.
But the fact is, this farm never did grow a great deal of
tobacco. The farm factory, in its time, probably used
tobacco also from other farms. The article mentions
a plug tobacco factory to the rear of the house that
burned in the 1880s and describes the cedar-lined
driveway entrance to the farm as marked by rock pillars
and designated Reynolds Home Stead. This article
indicates that there must have been some interest in
the preservation and interpretation of the Reynolds
Homestead as a destination even at this early date.
A year before the article appeared, a local schoolteacher
in nearby Critz named Nannie C. Terry took an interest
in the Reynolds Homestead. In 1961, Terry wrote to
Richard S. Reynolds in Richmond regarding the history
and declining condition of the Homestead. Each day
as our family goes to school we look down on the red
brick house It has a beautiful location at the foot of
No Business Mountain. At the front and west of the
house are a few of the old buildings in good repair,
one used years ago as a general store and later a
Methodist parsonage. The house faces north and fronts
an abandoned pre-Civil War road which was known as
the Norfolk to Bristol Turnpike. A part of this road is
used today as a farm road leading to a tenant house.
Considering the period in which this house was built,
it has a most logical location. On the south side of a
mountain, it is protected from the cold north winds; and
not too far away was a good spring. (Still supplying the
house with water.)
[The house] is now rented to a family who is giving it
good care. The land, more than seven hundred acres,
is also rented out. Unfortunately the farm has now
acquired that rented look.
Richard Reynolds, busy with the afairs of relocating his
Reynolds Metals to Richmond, was unable to help Terry
in her pursuit to preserve the Homestead as a Patrick
County landmark.
45
46
47
81
On June 3, 1967, Terry again enlisted the help of the
Reynolds heirs, this time contacting RJs daughter Nancy
Susan Reynolds Verney, of Winston Salem, NC. She
wrote, The primary purpose of this letter is to call your
attention to the fact that the HOME of your Reynolds
ancestors no longer gets care and attention from anyone
who is actually interested in it and its heritage... Her
reply came more than nine months later when, on March
17, 1968, Nancy Susan wrote As you have no doubt
heard, Hardin is considering selling me the old homeplace
and if this does work I will expect to see something of
you in the near future. Thank you for your interest.
On July 23, 1968, for the sum of $100,000, Hardin Walter
and his wife Catherine deeded the Reynolds Homestead
to Nancy Susan Reynolds. That deed references all of
that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being in
the Mayo River Magisterial District of Patrick County,
Virginia, located near the village of Critz, containing 717
acres, more or less, which land is commonly known as the
Reynolds Homestead. In addition to the brick house,
fve other houses could be found on the Homestead
property. In a letter to Nancy Susan dated December 23,
1968, W. Russell Critz reported You have three renters,
two paying $8.00 per month and one pays $10.00 and
you now have three houses vacant. Presumably, the
old Reynolds house fetched the highest rent. Little else
is known about the condition of the other houses or the
contracts the renters maintained.
1969 survey of Hardin Reynolds Farm at Offce of the Clerk, Patrick
County, 2013
A year later on December 30, 1969 following the
restoration of the brick house and outbuildings, Nancy
Susan deeded the property to the Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University (V.P.I.) Educational
Foundation, which now maintains the Reynolds
Homestead as an educational campus focused on
cultural enrichment, environmental stewardship, and
agroforestry research.
48
49
50
51
Reynolds Homestead 1970-2013
Aerial of Reynolds Homestead following restoration, 1971
84
The earliest documentation of Reynolds Homestead as
an historic property predates Nannie Terrys interest
by several years. Edward K. Williams of Charlottesville
recorded a single page Historic American Building Survey
(HABS) document on July 12, 1956. Williams documented
the owner of the property as Mrs. Thompkins, referring
to Annie Dobyns Reynolds who had remarried after
Harbours passing. Williams reported the historical
signifcance of the property as the home of R.J.
Reynolds, where he started the manufacture of tobacco
products. A photograph of the east elevation of the
house illustrates the character of the landscape abutting
the house. The dense vegetation in the foreground of the
photograph might be interpreted as a fower garden or
as weedy overgrowth. A hand drawn sketch plan depicts
the location of freplaces, steps, the front entry, and a
twentieth century addition (hashed lines). Note: The
north arrow is mistakenly drawn pointing east.
Documentation
Historic American Building Survey (HABS) form, 1952
85
Upon taking possession of the property, Nancy Susan
Reynolds worked with Frank L. Horton to restore
the Reynolds Homestead to its nineteenth century
appearance. Horton (1918-2005) was an antiques dealer
who, along with his mother Theo Taliaferro, was largely
responsible for the restoration of Old Salem, North
Carolina. Horton supervised the restoration of the house
and outbuildings, provided guidance on the selection
of furnishings, and advised Nancy Susan on matters
concerning her management of the property. According
to Reynolds, Horton refused any compensation and
gave freely of his time and talents. Additionally,
Reynolds enlisted the help of Jim Gray, President of Old
Salem who provided recommendations and services.
On May 28, 1968 Nancy Susan Reynolds described
the conditions Horton should expect to fnd at the
Homestead. No doubt, some of what she reported was
based on family myth while other observations came
from her single visit to the Homestead earlier that year.
The barn near the house was built by R.J.s father and
was used as a corn crib The center part of the other
barn beyond the cemetery was built by Hardin Sr., too,
and was used as a store to sell groceries and supplies to
the negroes. I would assume that this must date it after
the civil war (sic). I did not go inside, but it is possible we
would want to repair this and remove the newer sections.
The road past the front of the house was the highway
to the mountains and the only way to get to market
from there. It went straight past the house, down the
hill past the spring and through the woods to Critz. This
can still be walked and would be a more attractive way
to approach the house. The spring is charming, stoned
inbig treesgood water. Harbour Reynolds built a
small pump house to get water to the main house In
the basement of the kitchen the tobacco was sorted for
market. Russell Critz remembers where the tobacco barn
was located as well as the tobacco factory which burned
down. There are some other houses on the property and
some good tobacco barns. Would one of these latter be
worth moving near the house?
Russell Critz in tobacco feld with Hardin Reynolds store in distance,
1962 Sentinel and Journal
Restoration
52
86
Nancy Susan had a two-fold plan for the property: In 1969
she deeded 710 acres to Virginia Polytechnic Institute
for forestry research and education. To that end, in
1974 she further endowed the program by funding the
forestry and wildlife research facility, which included
the construction of greenhouses, ponds, laboratory,
and living accommodations for the staf. Her second
mission was to preserve the historic structures and their
immediate surroundings. To accomplish this, Nancy Susan
retained the deed to 6.99 acres of the property including
the restored historic structures. In a correspondence
dated October 9, 1968, Frank Horton advised Nancy
Susan: Im not sure that I see the reason for retaining
part of the property from the deed to VPI. At any rate,
I would think that a space of about 100 yards on either
side of the drive, terminating on the left side at the barn
corner, along the back line of the barn outward towards
the mountain. The other side should branch out about 50
yeards (sic) from the back of the kitchen, going diagonally
of to include the graveyard and store, thence toward
the mountainI cant say how far would be necessary.
A year later, a draftsman from the Robert C. Conrad
Company of Winston Salem produced a detailed plan that
identifed the 6.99-acre parcel, illustrating the restored
structures and landscape features including ample
parking.
Nancy Susan Reynolds and unidentifed child in front of restored house,
undated photograph
87
Detailed plan of Reynolds Homestead showing restored structures and landscape features in the 6.99-acre historic core, 1969
88
Reynolds house and rear porch, prior to restoration, 1968
Historic Structures
Though Horton did not keep detailed notes about the
work he performed for Reynolds, he did provide a brief
discussion of the restoration for Tilleys Reynolds
Homestead 1814-1970 in which he goes to great length
to describe the process of investigation, planning and
restoration of the Reynolds Homestead property ac-
complished during late 1968 and 1969. His notes, primar-
ily concerned with the condition of the buildings, provide
scant detail about the extant historic landscape. With
Horton supervising from Old Salem, John W. Daniel & Co.,
Inc. of Danville, Virginia, performed the actual work.
Hortons description of work performed on the rear
porchperhaps the most transformative aspect of the
exterior restorationprovides an example of his meth-
odology and approach. When Nancy Susan took control
of the Reynolds Homestead, two major architectural
embellishments troubled the historic interpretation of
the house and yard. First, where the rear porch now (and
historically) occupies the southeast corner of the house,
a two room, single-story addition from an unknown date
was found. The addition projected nearly ffteen feet to
the south of the original house.
89
Undated image showing rear porch shortly after restoration
According to Horton, The rear porch presented the
greatest problem of restoration design since a rear
addition completely destroyed the original structure
and most evidence. Study of the original brick wall
revealed the roof line and certain indications of the
extent of the porch in its lengths. The depth was based
on a conjectural line extending the roof and the ceiling.
The posts and their placement, together with step
placements, are based on the recollections of Hardin
Walter Reynolds of Clemmons, North Carolina. If
Reynolds, born in 1905, could provide a frst hand account
of the placement of the posts, the addition must have
been built during his lifetime.
Hortons contractors removed the structure, flled
the basement, and repaired the historic houses brick.
The ell-shaped wooden porch and accompanying roof
now provide the primary mode of access to the house.
Three doors can be accessed from the rear porch: the
westernmost door provides access to the dining room,
the central door leads to the main hallway to access the
front door, and the west-facing door on the south portion
of the ell provides access to the bedroom.
90
The hierarchy of doors and the placement of the rear
porch illustrate that this portion of the house and farm
saw considerable activity. Though the front faade, with
its Ionic and Doric columns and symmetrical Colonial
Revival construction, presented the public face of the
Reynolds estate, the rear porch would have been the
primary access for most people working on the farm.
In his survey of Southern plantation landscapes, John
Michael Vlach describes the space near the rear of the
house and including the out-buildings and the yard
as the space where slaves performed many of their
household chores. Vlach reports that there were no
ornamental plants in the yard; the yard was work space.
For example, Gunston Hall, George Masons home, had
a large, ornamental garden located behind the house.
The yard to the east was used for the daily chores of a
working plantation.
At the Reynolds Homestead, just beyond the rear porch,
the brick kitchen, icehouse, and dairy can still be found
in their original locations. Domestic chores including
laundry activities, food preparation, and soap making
would have been performed from the rear porch and
into the yard. In close examination of the pre-restoration
photo, a laundry line can still be seen indicating that the
area retained its domestic function.
A
B C
D
E
A House
B Kitchen
C Ice House
D Dairy
E Granary
Site lines from
rear porch
The Yard
53
54
91
The house, having been built in two separate stages
to accommodate Reynolds growing family, was
begun around 1843 and completed by 1855. Horton
hypothesized that the present brick kitchen was built
at the same time as the later part of the house because
the kitchens single window matched one removed
from the house at the time of the addition. Though the
construction dates of the other outbuildings are not
known, they likely were built by 1855.
Hortons second major exterior restoration involved the
removal of a porch from the north face of the kitchen
and a wooden addition from its east face. Prior to the
restoration, the kitchen had been converted into living
quarters. The front porch and overhang were removed,
as was the frame addition that had been attached to the
east elevation of the kitchen. The interior of the kitchen
was stripped of its modern conveniences and designed
to interpret its domestic function. A brick walk was laid
to connect the house with the kitchen and fagstone was
placed around the building, presumably to manifest a
rustic landscape feeling. At the same time that Horton
returned the brick structure to its former appearance as
a nineteenth century kitchen, he also conducted analysis
and restoration work on the other outbuildings.
Kitchen (front view) prior to restoration, 1968
Kitchen (rear view) prior to restoration, 1968
92
Horton reported on his restoration work thusly:
Outbuilding restoration included removal of an
addition to the left of the kitchen and closing of a
later door there, restoration of cellar vent windows
after fragments found, removal of a front porch, and
restoration of a back cellar entrance. This latter feature
is probably inaccurate for it was difcult to determine
an original design which would permit entrance to the
cellar and to an upper door by the kitchen hearth
The milk house was cleaned of exterior paint and left
unrestored on the inside except for removal of a modern
foor slab. The house for ice was re-roofed and a new
base of logs installed. The door and hardware were
replaced. The grainery (sic) was also re-roofed and a few
rafters replaced. Certain logs were repaired and it was
necessary to supply new gable covering and doors. The
rear elevation was completely covered due to its fragile
condition. A shed addition was removed. Connecting
the rear porch with the kitchen, Hortons crew laid a brick
walkway; a feldstone walk led from the kitchen to the ice
house and the dirt road beyond.
Ice house (front view) prior to restoration, 1968
Dairy (side view) prior to restoration, 1968
93
Ice house (right) and kitchen shortly after restoration
Dairy (left) and icehouse shortly after restoration
It is unknown exactly when the dairy, ice house, and
granary were built but they were likely constructed
around the same time as the house. According to Vlach,
dairy buildings were exceptional elements in the built
landscape. A dairy was thus an architectural emblem
signaling the wealth of the planter class. In an 1870
census of Hardin Reynolds farm, Hardin reported owning
nine milk cows and 100 pounds of butter. Some of this
was inevitably sold to neighbors from Hardins store. The
brick dairy would have kept the milk, cream, and butter
at about 50 F in all but the warmest months. At the time
of the restoration, Horton replaced the metal roof with
one of rough cut wood shingles.
The ice house, a low, log structure set on a deep cobble
foundation, would have been packed with ice cut from
nearby streams and ponds in the winter and hauled
to the plantation where it was packed in straw, grass,
or sawdust to keep it from melting. The subterranean
vault would have preserved ice until late spring or early
summer. Close comparison of the before and after
restoration photos of the ice house demonstrate that
when Horton replaced the metal roof with a shingled
one and installed new base logs, he built the walls higher
than he found them. In many cases, ice houses were
little more than a gabled roof resting near the ground
sheltering a deep pit where ice was preserved. Today,
the packed dirt foor is about three feet below grade;
archaeological testing might reveal that the historic
depth was much deeper.
55
94
Restored outbuildings: brick kitchen (left), wooden ice house, brick dairy (right), 2014
95
The granary is the largest extant outbuilding at the
Reynolds Homestead. The two-story log structure is set
on a cobble foundation and has a wood framed roof
of rough-cut shingles. The granary would have held
provisions, tools, and surplus grain and corn. At the time
of the restoration, a frame lean-to shed housing storage
space and restrooms was added to the rear (west) of the
granary. Unlike the other outbuildings, the granary is
generally not open to the public and is used primarily for
storage. Unlike the other historic structures, the granary
is on the west side of the road and stands a few yards
from the modern Community Enrichment Center.
Granary shortly after restoration Restored granary, 2013
96
Store and family cemetery prior to restoration, 1968
A large barn was present a short distance north east
of the house just beyond the family cemetery. Though
utilized for storage by the tenant farmers in the late
1960s, this structure is thought to have been Hardin
Reynolds store. Richard Kreh, Superintendent of
Reynolds Homestead Forestry and Wildlife Research
Center (1969-2002) and frst caretaker of the property,
recalled storing some of his possessions there when he
frst moved onto the property in 1968. Kreh remembers
the interior of the barn as having been much too nice to
be originally built as a storage barn.
In a 1969 memo to Tommy Roberson, foreman of
John W. Daniel & Co., Inc., Frank Horton advised that
the barn should be dismantled: Tear the barn down.
Take anything worth saving in the way of wide planks
or paneling, weatherboarding, beams, etc and fnd
a place to store it... Take up the old fooring and use
what fooring you have stored in the kitchen to put
down for the downstairs room Use some of the
weatherboarding from the storage barn that you take
down to put on the ends of the porch.
The barn was described by Tilley: Hardins store, located
near his dwelling, stood on the old Bristol-Norfolk
highway, which was for years a main thoroughfare across
Virginia. The commodious building with its large cellar,
no doubt for use in handling leaf tobacco, was still sturdy
and strong in 1960.
56
57
58
97
A replica tobacco barn, completed in 2011, now stands
where the old store once was. In 2006, the dilapidated
crib of a historic tobacco barn was dismantled. It stood
near the present forestry outbuildings approximately
500 feet north of the Reynolds house. Because of its
poor condition and proximity to the forestry work
area, the tobacco barn was disassembled, tagged for
reassembly, and stored on the Homestead property. In
2009, these materials were evaluated with the idea that
the structure could be rebuilt. Of the original 50 beams,
half had deteriorated and were no longer salvageable.
Additionally, several components were missing including
many of the foundation rocks, the roof, the door, tobacco
poles, and the frebox.
The Reynolds Homestead, in its continuing pursuit
to provide interpretive materials about 19th century
tobacco plantations, decided to rebuild the tobacco
barn from existing and newly acquired material as an
early example of fue-curing structures. John Larson,
vice president for restoration at Old Salem Museum and
Gardens in Winston-Salem provided guidance and Steven
Cole Builders Inc. of Danbury, North Carolina performed
contract work. Ben and Betty Davenport who donated
two structures from Banister Bend Farm in Chatham,
Virginia provided additional materials for the barn.
The replica, constructed using nineteenth century
techniques, was sited nearer the house so that it is
easily accessible to visitors to the Reynolds Homestead.
Its placement refects the historic tradition of locating
tobacco barns at the junction of two roads. Being on
the periphery of the historic interpretation area, the
tobacco barn provides a visual edge to the farm property
and restores an aspect of the 19th century agricultural
landscape. With the entry facing south, the tobacco
barn maximizes exposure to the sun which historically
would have been the only source of light in the otherwise
enclosed barn. Level, open ground surrounding the barn
would have been necessary to accommodate the work of
loading and unloading wagons and preparing the cured
tobacco for shipment.
Dismantled tobacco barn, 2007
Modern Structures
98
Comprised of locally gathered rocks, the dry-stacked
stone foundation provides a protective barrier from
ground moisture and the intense heat associated with
fue curing. To provide additional support, a concrete
foundation was poured and the basal rocks were
mortared in place. The south elevation of the foundation
includes two stone tinderboxes, one on either side of the
entry, where fres would have been tended to create the
low-temperature, constant heat necessary to cure bright
leaf tobacco. Metal tubes inserted into the freboxes
circulate heat to the interior of the barn and provide
ventilation for smoke.
The tobacco barn walls consist of white oak logs
interlocked with half-dovetail notches, an early and
sophisticated method that required skill to perfect.
Each wall is ten logs high and seventeen feet long. Voids
between logs were flled with small stone chinking
material and sealed with daub made from locally
accessed red clay. The daubing will require occasional
maintenance. The roof is comprised of oak rafters
capped with cedar shingles. A lean-to on the south
elevation provides protection from the sun and rain
when loading and unloading tobacco-laden wagons. The
interior is in keeping with historic tobacco barns: The
foor is packed dirt and horizontal poles are arranged to
provide drying racks for tobacco.
Tobacco growing near replica tobacco barn, 2013
Detail of replica tobacco barn, 2013
59
99
In 1976 Nancy Susan Reynolds endowed the Reynolds
Homestead Continuing Education Center, now known
as the Community Enrichment Center, which is used for
cultural programming. The two-story (ground foor and
basement) modern structure is situated just west of the
historic granary and extends beyond the grade change
that occurs there. In 1990 the center was extended
south to add ofce space on the ground foor and a
library in the basement. The most recent landscape
design was performed in 2000 by Virginia Tech Facilities
Management.
Community Enrichment Center, 2013
Plan of R.J. Reynolds Homestead drawn by George R. Adams, AASLH
for National Register of Historic Places nomination: note Learning
Center, 1976
100
Reynolds Homestead preserves two cemeteries:
The Reynolds Family Cemetery lies 150 feet east of
the house and serves as the resting place of many
members of the Reynolds Family including Hardin
Reynolds, his parents, Abraham and Mary Polly
Harbour Reynolds, and his granddaughter, Nancy
Susan. The family cemetery is fenced with a historic
wrought iron fence of unknown origin.
Approximately 625 feet northwest of the house lay
the Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants. This
burial ground, which lies on a ridge between the house
and No Business Mountain, is in direct sight line from
the front porch. The cemetery is comprised primarily
of unmarked feldstones and is surrounded by a grove
of deciduous trees.
Commemorative Landscape
625 Feet
150 Feet
Cemetery of
Slaves and Their
Descendants
Reynolds Family
Cemetery
N
101
The family cemetery, landscaped, tidy, and trim, displays
a number of markers, varying in height, style, and
material and refecting the long span of interment and the
accumulation of wealth and manner of memorialization
throughout the period. The dates recorded on the stones
illustrate that the cemetery was populated over time in
distinct clusters. Hardins parents and brother are buried
together and, adjacent to them, Hardins children who
died during childhood. A tall obelisk commemorates
Hardin and his children Agnes, John, Naney, Ernest, and
two sets of twin sons. It is unknown when the obelisk
was dedicated but we can infer it was after Hardin died
but before his wife, Nancy Cox Reynolds, who was buried
in Winston Salem in 1903. Hardins headstone, next to his
mothers, reads HWR.
Reynolds Family Cemetery
3
7
.
2
5

F
T
4
7
.
2
5

F
T
6
6
.
2
5

F
T
6
9
.5
0
F
T
N
102
U. Julian Sargeant, 1936 - 1971
V. Richard Samuel Jr., 1908 - 1980
Y. Sandra Reid ,1944 -
X. William Neal II, 1940 - 2009
W. Michael Randolph, 1947 - 2004
Z. Nancy Susan, 1910 - 1985
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
N
*
Q. Hardin Harbour, 1854 - 1927
R. Lucy Ruth, 1914 - 1929
S. Hardin + Catherines Son, 1931
T. David Parham II, 1965 - 1966
P. Annie Dobyns, 1875 - 1961
O. William Neal II, 1910 - 1994
N. Nancy Ruth, 1906 - 1912
A. Abram Reynolds, 1781 - 1838
B. David H. Reynolds, 1811 - 1836
C. Mary Polly Reynolds, 1784 - 1853
D. Hardin W. Reynolds, 1810 - 1882
E. Ernest C., 1861 - 1862
F. Agnes Catherine, 1845 - 1861
G. Twin Sons, 1849
H. John Gilmore, 1856 - 1862
I. Nancy Bill, 1859 - 1862
J. Twin Son, 1865
K. Twin Son, 1865
L. Lucy Critz, 1885
M. Susan Critz, 1878 - 1885
* Obelisk
103
Reynolds memorial obelisk, note repaired headstone, 2013 Horizontal markers (late period burials 1970s-1980s), 2013
Upright markers (early period burials 1830s-1860s), 2013
104
Bricks removed from the headstone foundation, 2004
Repaired headstone, 2004
In 2004 a storm felled a tree near the family cemetery
fence prompting restoration and landscape work. At
this time, landscape improvements around the family
cemetery were made with money from the Richard
S. Reynolds Endowment Fund. Work related to the
cemetery included landscape research and design,
repairs to the damaged wrought iron fence, and repairs
to the broken headstone belonging to David H. Reynolds.
Chicora Foundation, an archaeological consulting frm
from South Carolina, excavated bricks from the substrate
when they made repairs to the headstone. These bricks,
which were associated with the initial stabilization of the
headstone, were not replaced following the repair.
Hill Studio (Roanoke, VA) performed design services
for the restoration and planting of the family cemetery
with Seven Oaks Landscape Company (Glade Hill, VA)
conducting the work. The primary directives included a
landscape plan that would create a pleasant experience
for visitors, accommodate continued interments,
and contribute to the existing Reynolds homestead
interpretive plan. Hill Studio researched period
cemeteries to design a historically accurate planting plan
that included crape myrtles, daylilies, American hollies,
and oaks. They also suggested adding fll to level the
ground surrounding certain graves that had sunk.
105
Another component of the Reynolds commemorative
landscape is the podium erected near the house in memory
of Lieutenant Governor Julian Sargeant Reynolds who spoke
at the Reynolds family reunion at the Homestead in 1970 and
passed away a year later. The memorial reads:
This homesite is part of the rebuilding of the South it was
men like the Reynolds boys of Patrick County who would
develop the industrial and commercial opportunities
and in so doing increase the chance for a decent life for
thousands who otherwise would have been doomed to
the backwardness of a region that had no future and was
burdened with a past that had failed.
Commemorative memorial to Julian Sargeant Reynolds, 2013 Commemorative memorial to Julian Sargeant Reynolds, 2013
106
Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants
In 1969 when she drew the boundary of the 6.99-acre historic
core, Nancy Susan Reynolds was not aware of the presence
of the unmarked cemetery on the hill between the house
and No Business Mountain. In about 1970, Richard Kreh,
Superintendent of Reynolds Homestead Forestry and Wildlife
Research Center from 1969 to 2002, discovered the cemetery
while clearing land. Ten years later, a wooden fence was
erected around the cemetery, which had become part of
the historic interpretation of the Reynolds Homestead. The
cemetery is an assemblage of grave depressions and burials
marked primarily by feldstone headstones and footstones.
Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants (looking west), 2013
The surroundings consist of a grove of hardwoods and
is kept clear of undergrowth. To refect the historic
character of the cemetery, the fence was removed in 2011
and, unlike the family cemetery, turf grass is not used.
In 2001 Virginia State Archaeologist Mike Barber
conducted research at the 100-foot diameter cemetery
and identifed 61 burials, of which only four were
marked with inscribed memorials. His map divides
the cemetery into four clusters of burials, identifes
headstones, footstones, and depressions, and illustrates
a travelway. Barber observed that the long axis of the
graves are oriented east-west and many of them are
marked with unaltered, locally-gathered sandstone and
shallow depressions caused by cofn collapse. Of the ffty
instances of depressions, forty are ovoid indicating that
they were hand-dug and ten are rectangular meaning
that they may have been dug with machines. Barber
wrote that the cemetery may have been designated for
use by particular family or kin groups. While four grave
clusters can be identifed, three may be kin based and the
fourth is more likely related to temporal considerations.
One cluster of graves has several burials known to the
Penn family and another is marked with Will Lee Reynolds
burial. Aside from the stones, the only artifacts found
there were dark brown translucent bottle fragments,
shards of a clear jar, and a milk bottle that read A Bottle
of Milk is a Bottle of Health.
60
107
Survey of slave cemetery drawn by Michael Barber, 2001
108
Very little is known about the individuals buried in the
cemetery across the hollow from the house but inference
and oral history suggests that the cemetery was used
by African Americans from both ante- and post-bellum
periods. In 2010 researcher Dr. Lynn Rainville, Research
Professor of Humanities at Sweet Briar College, visited
the cemetery. She concluded that African Americans,
based on oral histories and the fact that so many
enslaved people lived at Rock Spring Plantation, used
the cemetery. According to her report, On all large
plantations, enslaved individuals were buried somewhere
on the property, usually in separate slave cemeteries,
but occasionally they were buried within or adjacent to
white family cemeteries. There is no reason to expect
that the individuals enslaved at the Reynolds Homestead
behaved any diferently, so either the current cemetery
was used to bury slaves or there is another slave
cemetery not yet found. It is far more likely, that this
site was used during both ante- and post-bellum times.
And while it is unusual to fnd a slave cemetery used by
several post-emancipation generations, some families
prefer to keep kin together in death even if it means
using plantation land.
Rainville researched the marked burials and found that
two identifed the interment of individuals who had
been born into slavery: Kemp Penns stone indicates
that he died in 1914 at the age of 72 and so was born in
1842. Rainville writes The fact that he was buried on
the plantation 50 years after emancipation suggests that
other family members were buried in this cemetery during
the antebellum period and thus he decided to be buried
with them A nearby, carved marble marker for Will Lee
Reynolds indicates that he was born in 1851 and died in 1936.
Will Lees mother was Kitty Reynolds, an enslaved individual
who lived on the Reynolds Homestead. Kitty is credited with
saving Hardin Reynolds from a charging bull, afterwhich
she was entrusted with raising Hardins children. A granite
marker for Mary Bell (Marybelle) Penn (1889-1939) is partially
obscured by dirt. She was buried next to her husband Valle
Penn (1885-1958) and is commemorated by a metal marker.
According to oral histories, Valles brother Harry Penn is
buried nearby.
Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants (looking east), 2013
61
109
Carved marker, Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants, 2013 Fieldstone marker, Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants, 2013
Carved markers, Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants, 2013 Metal marker, Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants, 2013
110
In addition to commemorating the sacrifces and legacies
of individuals and their families, the well-preserved and
accessible Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants
provides opportunities to further our understanding
of the burial practices of enslaved people. In many
cases, contemporaneous cemeteries were relegated to
marginal spaces, refective of the fact that planters would
not want to waste valuable, arable land. One example
of this can be found in nearby Franklin County at Booker
T. Washington National Monument. There, the Sparks
Cemetery is secreted away in the woods, far from the
main activity area of the plantation. The fact that at
the Reynolds Homestead the cemetery is located on a
prominent rise near the house and other central features
might indicate something about Hardins relationship
with his slaves.
It was common to utilize feldstones as markers in African
American cemeteries of the period. At Rock Spring
Plantation, we see the use of medium-sized rounded
feldstones and upright slabs inserted into the ground in
addition to the aforementioned carved markers.
Rainville points out that the variation seen in grave
markers is indicative of socio-economic stratifcation
within African American communities and goes on to say
that If we fail to protect these sacred sites, we will lose
the hand-carved mortuary memorials that document the
struggles and successes of this community.
In addition to feldstone markers, more ephemeral
objects such as bottles, wood planks, and plants were
often used to memorialize the dead. Temporary markers
such as these suggest that it was not of great importance
to know the exact location of any particular grave
and allows for the expansion of the cemetery should
there be a need. In his study of the cemetery of the
Reynolds Homestead, Barber noted the presence of glass
fragments, some of which are still visible today.
At the Reynolds Homestead, preservation, maintenance,
and exhibition of the Cemetery of Slaves and Their
Descendants is one of the highest priorities of historic
landscape interpretation. A mown path and signage
marks the route from the house to the cemetery and
visitors are encouraged to visit. Undergrowth is cut
back on a regular basis and a mulched path follows the
historic travelway to provide access to the burial
ground, limiting the possibility of trampling the graves.
The Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants is the only
extant landscape feature commemorating the presence
of enslaved people at Rock Spring Plantation.
62
63
111
0 25 50
FEET
A scale comparison of the Cemetery of Slaves and Their
Descendants (above, left) and the Reynolds Family
Cemetery (right) provides insight into two similar
but discrete commemorative landscapes. In both we
observe a clustering of graves based upon parentage
and, perhaps, refective of diferent periods of time.
Unlike the orderly rows of marked graves in the Family
Cemetery, the one utilized by enslaved people and their
descendants exhibits a more random placement of
graves. The diference in numbers of individuals is also
notable. The family cemetery is comprised of 26 burials
while the African American cemetery has 61.
N
112
No evidence of historic ornamental gardens was ever
indicated in restorationist Frank Hortons notes. He did
not describe the landscape as he found it nor did he
mention any type of work that he or his contractors
might have performed. Since no plans, diagrams, or maps
depict the Homestead landscape prior to the 6.99-acre
historic core plan drawn in 1969, we cannot know what
type of landscape was present. In searches of the archives
preserved at Reynolda House in Winston Salem, only
one letter was found that indicates any type of historic
ornamental gardening: On October 23, 1918 Annie Dobyns
Reynolds (wife of Harbour Reynolds), who was living at
Rock Spring Plantation, wrote to Katharine Reynolds
(wife of RJ Reynolds) at her home in Winston Salem.
Annie wrote, As I walked around in your lovely fower
garden & enjoyed the magnifcent varieties, I thought it
would perhaps give you pleasure to have a few clumps of
hollyhocks from dear Bro. R.J.s boyhood home, so I am
sending a few seeds by todays mail.
Contemporary Landscape
Letter from Annie Dobyns Reynolds to Katharine Reynolds, 1918
113
There are examples of designed landscapes at similar
contemporaneous country estates in Virginia but many of
those existed in more populated areas that enjoyed the
benefts of longer patterns of settlement, greater wealth,
and better access to landscape gardening traditions.
Though no extant ornamental landscape elements are
present, it is very possible that the Reynolds developed
their own ornamental gardens during their time at
Rock Spring Plantation. Nancy Cox Reynolds owned an
extensive collection of seashells, indicative of both an
appreciation of natural beauty and a desire to display such
objects. The house itself, with its Flemish-bond brickwork
and plastered columns, demonstrates the Reynolds
refnement. Attention to the ornamental landscape and
garden would have had both aesthetic and practical
applications. In the words of historian Raymond Williams
though, a working country is hardly ever a landscape.
Catalpa and pre-restoration granary, undated photo
64
114
A vegetable garden and fruit trees would undoubtedly
have been present in the yard just beyond the rear
porch and other gardens tended by enslaved people
would be near their own domiciles. Though no plans or
letters have been discovered that describe the exact
location of a vegetable garden, analogous evidence
of similar plantations from the time period suggest
that a garden near the house would have been tended
for domestic purposes. At the Booker T. Washington
National Monument 55 miles northeast of the Reynolds
Homestead in Moneta, Virginia, the National Park Service
manages a domestic farm to interpret the character of
an 1850s farm that includes a one-acre garden. A garden
this sizeplanted with peas, greens, cabbages, sweet
potatoes, corn, beans, and cucumberswould have
been sufcient to provide enough vegetables for a large
family. It should be expected that, given the duration of
habitation at the Reynolds Homestead and the potential
for soil depletion, the familys garden might have changed
size and location several times.
Archaeological work conducted in 2001 revealed a
subsurface anomaly between the house and cemetery,
which might indicate organic matter consistent with a
garden plot. An overgrown patch just southeast of the
house photographed prior to the restoration might have
been a vegetable garden.
Vegetation depicting location of possible garden, c. 1968
This area is now maintained as an open turf lawn in keeping
with the rural character of the environs. The lawn is primarily
used for large gatherings. An orchard consisting of twelve
individual examples of heirloom-variety apples and pears
was planted in 2004-2005. A small herb garden is located
between the kitchen and the icehouse.
115
Though its exact location is not known, Hardin Reynolds
tobacco factory stood somewhere in close vicinity. Tilley
quotes an interview with W. Russell Critz from 1960: His
factory was a log building behind his dwelling in a feld
that even today is known as the factory lot despite the
burning of the building about 1904. According to Richard
Kreh, he discovered a straight ridge in the ground that
ran a distance and turned at a right angle in the forest
about 300 yards south of the house. Though the area is
now a nearly 40-year old stand of loblolly pines, at the
time of his discovery the area was a cultivated feld.
This same area may also have served as the setting for
slave quarters for some of the Reynolds enslaved people.
Vlach reports that in many instances, slave quarters
were generally set behind or to the side of the planters
residence, where they would not contend with it visually.
Even if they were visible, they were obviously smaller,
subordinate buildings. Hardin Reynolds is said to have
been among the largest slaveholders in Patrick County:
According to the Patrick County Schedules of Slave
Inhabitants, Hardin reported owning 42 individuals in 1850
and 45 in 1860. Nannie Tilley recorded his slave holdings
as 9 in 1840, 37 in 1850, and 59 in 1860.
Though some of these individuals served as house
slaves and undoubtedly would have kept quarters near
the house, no trace of their former quarters has been
discovered. Other individuals might have been housed
nearer the felds, some a considerable distance from Rock
Spring Plantation.
Forty-year old stand of Loblolly pines behind house, 2013
65
66
67
68
116
There are few known photographs of the Reynolds
Homestead that illustrate the landscape from the historic
period and those from the time of the restoration are
focused on structural components of the built environment.
One photo from just prior to the restoration shows a rather
untidy planting bed positioned to the west of the front
walk. This was not maintained following the restoration. In
her introduction to Nannie M. Tilleys Reynolds Homestead
1814-1970, Nancy Susan Reynolds wrote The large and
ancient boxwoods planted at the front and back doors
[following the restoration] came from the home of Zachary
Taylor Smith, a nephew of Nancy Jane and my grandfather.
These boxwood continue to occupy their original locations.
Undated photo showing house shortly after restoration, c. 1970
House and present-day landscape, 2013 Pre-restoration: Unkempt planting bed just west of walk, c. 1968
69
117
Two trees receive particular attention during interpretive
tours of the Reynolds Homestead landscape. The Southern
catalpa (Catalpa bignonioides) is a much-loved tree just
west of the house near the brick walkway leading to the
rear porch. With its gnarled trunk, showy white fowers,
heart-shaped leaves, and slender bean pods, the catalpa is
a popular ornamental tree. Its strong wood was useful for
fence post construction, fbers from the fruit were useful
for making rope, and the worm (caterpillar stage of catalpa
sphinx moth) that feeds of it is popular as fshing bait. Said
to have been present during RJs boyhood, the tree has
not been precisely aged. In fact, catalpas are naturally fast
growing and assume an appearance of antiquity because of
their twisted growth patterns. Though it imparts a sense of
historicism, the catalpa may be only 100 years old.
Foreground: Catalpa, yucca, dogwood; Background: lilac, boxwood, 2013
Catalpa, 2014
118
Another popular tree is the sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum) located on the creek bank near Rock Spring.
The tree, growing nearly horizontal from a large canker
three feet above the ground surface, appears to have
been tied into a knot as a sapling and trained to point to
the Reynolds Homestead house. So-called trail trees were
important navigational tools used by pre-contact Native
Americans to identify routes and resources. It is easy to
mistake a naturally malformed tree for one actually used
as a wayfnding device. This particular tree is likely fewer
than 100 years old. Several tall white oaks (Quercus alba)
also thrive near the spring.
Sourwood trail tree near Rock Spring, 2013 White oak near Rock Spring, 2013
119
Though no longer present, a number of eastern white
pines (Pinus strobus) grew along the main drive leading to
the house (Homestead Lane) from Abram Penn Highway.
These trees grew on both sides of the then-gravel road
spaced evenly approximately 30 feet on center. According
to Richard Kreh, the trees were planted in the 1930s
based on dendrochronological studies and cut down in
the 1980s when they began to topple in windstorms. Kreh
asserts that Annie Dobyns Reynolds might have brought
them from nearby Floyd County, the edge of their natural
habitat.
Kreh also recalls fnding a few apple trees growing among
piles of rock on the slopes of No Business Mountain.
Given that, when he arrived at the Reynolds Homestead
in 1968, the slopes of the mountain were dotted with
pioneer Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana) and devoid of
primary forest, this area might have once been cleared for
agricultural use including the planting of orchards.
Today the core of the Reynolds Homestead is maintained
with turfgrass and occasional specimen and ornamental
trees and shrubs. The landscape, rather than being
indicative of the historic period to which the interior of
the house has been restored, is planted in a rather casual
and unplannedthough pleasingmanner. Crape
myrtle (Lagerstroemia spp) and American holly (Ipex
opaca) are utilized as ornamentals around the historic
house and modern structures; an American persimmon
(Diospyros virginiana) grows in front of the house. A
number of yuccas (Yucca spp) can be found near the
house and along Homestead Lane. In some cases these
are also found in the out-lying areas of the property and
often indicate historic occupation areas and home sites. A
native grass feld in front of the house provides a pastoral
setting for birds and adds to the agrarian aesthetic of the
Reynolds Homestead. A number of years ago, an artist
designed the Friendship Garden near the spring based
on a historic dough bowl found among the Homestead
collections. Though still present, the garden receives
infrequent maintenance and does not contribute to the
historic character of the Reynolds Homestead.
Friendship Garden near Rock Spring, 2013
120
In 2010 a one-mile interpretive forest trail was installed
as part of the Virginia Cooperative Extension and Virginia
Department of Forestrys Conservation Education
Program, known as the LEAF (Link to Education About
Forests) initiative. These outdoor classrooms expose
Virginians to historical and natural legacies at four
diferent locations throughout the state. The self-guided
tour begins at a signboard near the parking lot where
interpretive pamphlets are available. Visitors follow a
mown trail past research ponds, through the forest near
Rock Spring, then pass by the Cemetery of Slaves and
Their Descendants, replica tobacco barn, and orchard. The
trail also provides access to an ADA accessible birding trail
to an overlook in the loblolly stand south of the Reynolds
house. Twenty-two educational placards identify trees by
common and scientifc name and describe their uses.
LEAF Trail information kiosk, 2013
ADA Accessible LEAF Trail path in loblolly stand, 2013 LEAF Trail mown path west of Community Enrichment Center, 2013
121
The acreage surrounding the historic core is rugged,
diverse, and lush in some places but leveled, mono-
cropped, and tidy in others. Natural vegetation,
geologic outcroppings, and meandering creeks provide
an astonishing sense of the landscape as it may have
appeared to RJ and his siblings as they grew up playing
and working their homestead. In other places, forestry
research has established a grid of rotational experiments
that ofer their own sense of permanence and evolution. In
the wilder places, where saplings have grown to swallow
rusty strands of barbed wire, one can wander aimlessly
and wonder about the sights and sounds around them. In
the agroforestry plots, the gridded lines of trees display
the order and maturity of science and industry. Reynolds
Homestead, as an educational and interpretive institution,
is an attractive juxtaposition of both historic and modern.
Revegetated following homestead-era clearing, 2013 Loblolly experimental plot, 2013
Fencepost on No Business Mountain, 2013
122
Archaeological Resources
Archaeological surveys at the Reynolds Homestead,
primarily conducted by Radford University using
non-destructive methods, have provided a high level
of relevant data about past activities. As discussed
previously, archaeologist Michael Barber (State
Archaeologist, Virginia Department of Historic
Resources) conducted minimally invasive work at the
Cemetery of Slaves and Their Descendants in August
2001. This work, which did not include excavation,
provided data about the numbers, sizes, and
orientations of graves present in the cemetery and
included a description of the grave markers and visible
surface artifacts. Though there are only four inscribed
aboveground markers, Barbers work identifed 61
burials in four clusters separated by a central travel-way.
In 2002, faculty and students from Radford University
led by Dr. Clif Boyd (Radford University Forensic Science
Institute) utilized non-invasive techniques to better
understand the potential for subsurface deposits in
strategically selected areas of the Homestead, primarily
near the main house and family cemetery. Yielding
information about non-native materials, electrical
conductivity measurements were taken using a hand-
operated EM31 device to measure subsurface radio
waves. Another technique, which measures disturbances
in the earths magnetic feld, was employed to locate
ferrous deposits indicating potential artifacts with some
degree of iron content. Both methods provided positive
results indicating the necessity of future work at distinct
locations within the historic core.
Figure from 2002 Archaeological Report illustrating lines of remote
sensing and potential anomalies
The above fgure, included in the 2002 report of Radford
Universitys archaeological survey (Appendix VII),
illustrates EM31 survey lines and potential subsurface
deposits. The report states that the data yielded
obvious anomalies due to subsurface features that are
certainly of human origin. The data are consistent in
that several large anomalies appear in multiple data
lines, and they appear in locations that are consistent
with past human structures or activities. In addition,
the strengths of the signals from these anomalies are
strong so that there is no doubt that the signals are truly
present rather than just an artifact of instrument drift,
operator-origin signal interference, normal uncertainty
in the instruments receiving electronics, etc. Through
70
123
additional research, these anomalies have the potential
to reveal information about structures, domestic
activities, and other relevant aspects of the past. In
his report, Dr. Boyd suggests that his work reveals
subsurface deposits consistent with the presence
of structural foundations, a garden, and magnetic
anomalies indicative of buried metal objects. All of
these fndings warrant future, more precisely directed
investigation. Because the archaeological team had
limited time on site and was using non-invasive modes
of investigation, conclusions drawn from their work are
best guesses based on analogous evidence. A change
in magnetic polarity, for example, might indicate a large
buried object comprised of a small amount of ferrous
material or, conversely, a small object containing a large
amount of iron-containing material.
In 2008 Dr. Boyd and Dr. Rhett Herman (Radford
University Department of Chemistry and Physics)
returned to the Reynolds Homestead with six students
to follow up on the work conducted six years previous.
Again employing remote sensing equipment (magnetic
scans and ground-penetrating radar) as well as
performing limited shovel testing, the researchers
focused on the area near the house, outbuildings, and
both cemeteries, but this time broadened their focus to
include the area around Rock Spring and the adjacent
creek as well as near the Community Enrichment Center.
In a report (Appendix VIII), the researchers described
their fndings.
































Figure from 2008 Archaeological report, Overview of Surveyed Areas
Figure from 2008 Archaeological report, Surveyed areas around the
homestead and family cemetery
124
Shovel testing of the various zones revealed that
modern construction of the Community Enrichment
Center had disturbed the soil enough that relevant data
would be difcult to locate and that, near the spring and
creek, alluvial deposits associated with periodic fooding
rendered the discovery of cultural artifacts unlikely.
Shovel testing of an area isolated from the 2002 study
revealed that the known anomaly was likely a natural
soil change rather than a cultural artifact.
The remote sensing techniques employed near the
house revealed that several subsurface features might
indicate buried utilities or natural hydrologic activity.
Boyds survey of the Cemetery of Slaves and Their
Descendants demonstrated that Michael Barbers 2001
map, though slightly out of scale, was comparable to the
fndings of the remote sensing equipment, somewhat
attenuated by the undergrowth and damp forest foor.
Remote testing of the family cemetery revealed that the
subsurface evidence of burials corresponds generally
with the above ground grave markers but that in some
cases the burials are interior to the markers and in
others the burials are exterior of the orientation of the
stones. This might be described by a change in burial
practices throughout the long use of the cemetery.
Reporting on his 2001 study, Michael Barber wrote in
2010, While it is likely that much activity occurred within
a landscape framework in front of the plantation house,
most plantation activities were carried out in back of
the big house. The slaves involved with the house and
household operations would have lived in proximity but
likely behind the main house. Topographically, a broad
level ridge top is located to the southeast of the house.
This area holds promise for archaeological research.
Throughout my own investigation at the Reynolds
Homestead, I utilized archaeological survey techniques
I learned and practiced as a State Archaeologist in New
Mexico (2003-2006). Through systematic survey of both
the historic core and the surrounding forested area,
I located several areas where further archaeological
survey work might be fruitful. I shared many of these
fndings with Dr. Boyd on his visit to the Homestead on
August 7, 2013. Among those are existing historic trash
dumps, historic buildings and foundations, and apparent
above ground indications of subsurface deposits as well
as the identifcation of the physical locations of potential
subsurface deposits based on historic occupation.
In the acreage surrounding the historic core, several
abandoned structures, remnant structural foundations,
fences, trash deposits, and old roads have the potential
to increase our knowledge of Piedmont planting
activities, homesteading, and historic uses.
71
125
Historic structure repurposed
for Forestry Research Storage
Foundation
Burned house (Patty Bundy
Residence)
Historic tobaco barn
Historic trash deposit
Modern tobacco barn
Map of identifed structures, foundations, trash deposits
Historic structure and trash
deposit
Historic structural foundation
and trash deposit
Historic tobacco barn
126
Historic vegetation near Rock Spring and the Cemetery
of Slaves and Their Descendants may preserve
undisturbed deposits including trash dumps and
foundations associated with slave dwellings. In an old
growth stand between Rock Spring and the Cemetery
of Slaves and Their Descendants, a modern dump of
concrete building materials is likely associated with
the 1968-69 demolition of domestic additions to the
Reynolds house. East of the spring and north of the
culvert and bridge associated with VA-798, an old a grove
of umbrella magnolias (Magnolia tripetala) and leveled
ground might indicate an area cleared for planting or
homesteading and should be surveyed for remnant
structural foundations. East of the spring and along
the creek, leveled ground might be associated with
either natural alluvial action or with the construction
of buildings. Around the spring and on the adjacent
hillsides, a substantial scatter of bricks, bottles, and
crockery should be examined. An aggregation of
partially buried fat rocks a few meters north of the
spring might be associated with historic domestic use:
Historian John Reynolds has identifed this artifact as an
old still.
A network of gravel roads and trails continues to
provide access to various zones related to forestry
activities. A number of these routes appear to have seen
extensive use and likely follow the tracks associated
with the Reynolds planting activities. Some connect to
routes that lead of the property through locked gates
while others meander through the forest and across
creeks only to disappear into the tangle and growth
of forest. Factors including but not limited to the rate
of revegetation, the susceptibility of certain soils, the
slope of land, and the modern use or disuse of these
routes makes it difcult to trace the historic function
and integrity of the gravel and dirt roads. Some of these
roads can be found on historic topographic maps while
others have never been mapped.
Foundations associated with homesteading and
tobacco cultivation are scattered across the property;
archaeologists and architectural historians might fnd
the study of these structures informative. Some might
be contemporaneous with the construction of the
Reynolds home while others might have been built later
when Hardin Reynolds rented plots to tenant farmers.
Further investigation is warranted to understand the
sequence of construction and use of these structures.
These, along with nearby trash dumps, might provide
datable artifacts to help complete our understanding
of the historic use of the property. Rendering the study
of these structures difcult and complex, tobacco barns
and domestic structures have witnessed cycles of use,
abandonment, and reuse. The appropriation of old
materials for new structuresand the adaptive reuse of
certain of the structuresfurther complicate the study
of these artifacts.
72
127
Aggregation of rocks near Rock Spring, possible still site, 2013 Historic period feral vegetation includes garlic and yucca, 2013
Historic period trash midden near Mill Creek, 2013 Historic period car and homesite, No Business Mountain, 2013
128
One particular historic structure, an old domestic
building on the eastern side of Abram Penn Highway
about one half mile north of Homestead Lane, was
partially rebuilt in 1981 by Patty Bundy, Reynolds
Homestead groundskeeper at the time. According to a
newspaper article published in the Martinsville Bulletin
on May 31, 1981, Miss Bundy was ofered the chance
to live in the cabin originally built in 1812 by Abram
Reynolds. The article goes on The rustic cabin, nestled
between tall oak and willow trees, needed a lot of yard
work, says Miss Bundy, who planted several fower and
herb gardens around the cabin While the present
condition of the cabin is a vast improvement from only
fve months ago, Miss Bundy says there is plenty of work
still to be done before its completion. She plans to sand
the wooden foor, build a stone patio of the front
porch, install plumbing and construct a privy close by.
There is no evidence that this cabin was ever a
component of Abrahams cultural landscape and it
is likely that the structure was actually built later.
When I asked him about this cabin, former Reynolds
Homestead Director David Britt (1979-1999) replied
As both Mary and I recall, there were two cabins that
burned, one before we arrived and the other soon
thereafter. I dont know the Patty Bundy cabin by name
but a burned cabin is located about where you said.
Across Abram Penn Highway from this structure, the
remains of another burned building can be found near
an abandoned tobacco barn. Further north, on the edge
of the Reynolds Homestead property, an abandoned log
home and outbuilding are used for storage of forestry
equipment.
Martinsville Bulletin, May 31, 1981
73
129
Abandoned house on eastern periphery of Homestead property, 2013 Ruined former Patty Bundy structure, 2013
Abandoned tobacco barn near Patty Bundy structure, 2013
Abandoned house on eastern periphery of Homestead property, 2013
130
Historic period foundation, 2013 Modern tobacco barn, 2013
Historic period structure and trash deposit, 2013 Historic period tobacco barn, 2013
131
Old-growth vegetation with
potential for slave structures
Potential store basement
Potential foundation
Potential for slave structures
Deposits associated with Rock
Spring including historic still
and historic domestic trash
Potential burned factory
Potential historic privy
Potential garden deposit
Historic demolition deposit
Potential Archaeological Study Areas
Cemetery of Slaves and
Their Descendants
Modern septic drainfeld
132
In 1969 when Nancy Susan Reynolds hired Frank
Horton to restore her ancestral home, she sought the
counsel of Robert Kline and Company, a Richmond-
based public relations and publishing company that
would later produce Nannie M. Tilleys history of the
Reynolds Homestead. In his report A Recommendation
for Maintaining Reynolds Homestead as an Authentic
Restoration and Travel Attraction, Kline suggested that
the house be moved to Winston-Salem and exhibited
on the grounds of Reynolda House, RJ and Katharine
Reynolds estate. The report elaborated Reynolds
Homestead, as either a travel attraction or a permanent
restoration, appears to have little future in its present
location We estimate annual visitors will total a
minimum of 100 and a maximum of 600, even with a
complete public relations and travel promotion. As the
years go by, we foresee (1) closing of the house as a
visitor attraction and (2) eventual loss of its identity as
Reynolds Homestead. At the end of the report, it was
recommended that a bronze plaque be installed in place
of the house and that the cemetery and out buildings
be maintained so that members of the Reynolds
family and travelers to the area will continue to have
meaningful visits. Obviously, Nancy Susan did not
follow the recommendations of that report. Forty-four
years later, statistics from 2012-2013 illustrate that nearly
17,000 participants attended tours, continuing education
classes, and other activities at the Reynolds Homestead.
While I was conducting feldwork at the Reynolds
Homestead, researchers from the Institute for
Museum and Library Services prepared a Conservation
Assessment Survey Report at the behest of Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University. Though
primarily focused on the condition of the historic
buildings and artifact collections, the report mentions
the importance of the surrounds: The 6.99 acre
Reynolds Homestead occupies a hillock overlooking
mowed felds and lawns bounded by woods, all
ringed by mountains in the distance The house,
outbuildings, historic road, and landscape context
form a rich setting. That report provides numerous
recommendations for the stewardship of the historic
buildings and landscape including strategic vegetation
management and a redesign of the interpretive
tour route. It also stresses the need for a landscape
management plan to successfully interpret and preserve
the historic agrarian setting of the Reynolds Homestead.
Conclusion
74
75
133
Today, the Reynolds Homestead maintains appropriate
land uses, preserves important viewsheds, and employs
interpretive programming that educates visitors
about Southside Virginia tobacco plantations, provides
stewardship for the Reynolds family historic property,
and engages the public in a wide variety of cultural
activities. The current model of land management for
both the historic core and the larger property is suitable
to continue to meet these goals. Archaeological testing
and slight modifcations to the interpretation model will
further engage the public in understanding the historic
integrity of the property.
According to the National Park Service Preservation
Brief 36 Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning,
Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes,
preservation planning should involve historical
research, documentation, an evaluation of the sites
integrity and signifcance, the development of plans
for the treatment, management, and maintenance of
the historic resources, and the preparation of future
recommendations. This report, structured as a Cultural
Landscape Report, provides the foundation for that
process and can serve as a resource for Virginia Tech
as it moves forward in the continued stewardship of
Reynolds Homestead as a historic site, a community
resource, and a signifcant National Historic Landmark.
134
This indenture made this 22nd day July in the year if our
lord one thousand Eight Hundred ten between Thomas
Sneed of the County of Patrick and State of Virginia of
the one part + Abraham Reynolds of Patrick County
and state of Virginia of the other Witnesseth that the
said Thomas Sneed for and in consideration of the Sum
of two hundred + ffty Dollars to him in hand Paid by
the said Abraham Reynolds the receipt whereof he
the said Thomas Sneed do hereby acknowledge hath
given granted Bargained + Sold unto the said Abraham
Reynolds his heirs + assigns forever one certain track
(sic) or parcel of land lying + being in the same County
of Patrick on the waters of North Mayo river containing
one Hundred + eighty acres more or less and Bounded
as followeth to Wit Begining [sic] at a Spanish oak in
Adrin Anglins line thence with the Consented line agreed
on by Nathaniel Ross + Thomas Sneed to the old Ridge
Path between Abraham Reynolds + John Sneed then
with that Path to Spencer Martins Corner black gum
thence with Carters line South twenty seven degrees
West Ninety Nine poles to a red oak South twenty nine
degrees East ninety Eight Poles Crossing the river to
a chestnut tree at the Mouth of a branch up the same
as it meanders forty one poles to a poplar North thirty
three degrees West forty Poles to a black gum New lines
South Thirty three degrees West thirty four poles to
Anglins Corner Gum with his line South Eighty degrees
east Seventy three poles crossing a branch to a pine
thence South thirty six degrees east one hundred +
six poles to pointers in said Anglin line with his line to
the begining [sic] with all woods ways water courses
+ every other thing in any wise thereunto belonging
to the said track or parcel of land above Mentioned +
Described + all the estate Right + title Interest Clame +
demand whatsoever of him the said Thomas Sneed of
in + to the said track or Parcel of land + premises above
mentioned and every part there of to have + to hold the
said track or parcel of land and all Singular the premises
above mentioned every part and parcel thereof with
the appurtenances thus unto belonging unto the said
Abraham Reynolds his heirs + assigns forever and the
Said Thomas Sneed hereby Warrants + Defends all the
Right and title of the aforesaid premises unto Abraham
Reynolds against himself his heirs + all other persons
whatsoever in Witness whereof the land Thomas Sneed
hath here unto Set + afxed his hand + seal this day
above Written Signed Sealed + Delivered in present of }
Thomas Sneed S + S
Patrick County July Court
1810 this deed was acknowledged in Court by the said
Thomas Sneed to be his act + deed + ordered to be
recorded Test Sam Staples CCPC
Appendix I: Deed Book 3, Pg. 332 Reynolds from Sneed Deed, Patrick County Ofce of the Clerk
135
Appendix II: US Census, 1870
H.W. Reynolds
136
137
1 Cupboard
1 Sideboard
1 Piano
12 Split bottom chairs
1 Table
1 Carriage
Remnant of goods in store
300 Bushels Wheat 85c per bus
150 Bushels Rye 60c per bus.
1 Mule colt
1 Spotted Mule
1 Bay Horse
1 Sorrel Horse
1 Yoke spotted oxen
1 Black Steer
Brindle steer
1 Red ox
1 Yoke red spotted steers
1 Red steer
1 Bull
1 Do [?]
1 Brindle do.
1 Black steer
1 Yoke Pat. Kennerly Steers
1 Blind Mule
1 Black Mule
1 Black Mule
1 Mouse Mule
1 White-faced cow + calf
1 Brindle do.
1 Red cow + calf
1 White faced do
1 Pale red do.
1 Do.
1 Red Heifer
1 Do.
1 Black Do.
1 White bull
1 Red do.
1 Red heifer
1 Red Heifer
1 Do.
1 Do.
1 Black
1 Red Bull
1 Brindle Heifer
1 Spotted Do.
1 Red Heifer
2 calves
2 Do.
1 Black cow
1 Lot old wagons- fxtures + e
Tarrow[?]
1 Wagon + harness
1 Sc. plow
26 Head Sheep
1 Cider Mill
1 Corn sheller
1560Lb Manufactured tobacco @ 30c
2 Retainer pumps
6 Box screws
2 Iron levers
4
10
150
3
1
40
100
255
90
25
100
40
40
40
15
20
16
35
12
15
15
20
40
12
40
100
60
57
12
15
15
15
12
10
8
10
10
2.5
5
3
5
2.5
7
3
3
5
3
10
3
4
15
8
3
25
1
40
10
16
468
450
150
16
Appendix III: Estate Appraisal, 1882
DESCRIPTION VALUE ($) DESCRIPTION VALUE ($)
138
John Tuder 5 stacks tops [?] .5
John Tuder 12 stack oats
John Tuder shucks of 30 bbls corn at 10c
Murry + Son 2 bbr of corn 50c
Murry + Son 2 black stacks 75c
Murry + Son 200 Lbs Tobacco at 5c
Tyler Hill 10 bbr corn 50c
Tyler Hill 300 run. fodder
Tyler Hill 250 Lbs Tobacco 10c
Tyler Hill 16 gallons Molasses at 35c
Charles Tatum 10 bar corn 50c
Charles Tatum 1000 bbs fodder 75c
Wm. Fesler 10 bar Corn 50c
Wm. Fesler 1000 bbs fodder 75c
Home 115 bar corn 50c
Home 8 [?] Shucks 75c
Home Shucks of 75 bar. corn at 10c
Home 2500 Lbs Tobacco 8c
1 Bedstead [____]
1 Clock
Amt ____ own
1 still at Robert Critz 85 gallons
This amount due from RJ Reynolds to estate
June 1st 1882 to Cash 989.5, 2 checks 51.45, 13,
Reynolds check 23.94.74
June 1st 1882 Stationary + c
July 5, 1882 Patton + Sons Bank
Aug 1, 1882 Do.
June 29, 1882 cash for wheat
July 24,, 1882 From sale of Leaf Tobac.
July 10 for a box of Dan River Tobacco 40 LBs 35c
1 Do.
2 Sets Shapers
10 Clamp bands
2 Stoves
6 Sets Clamps
1 Pr. Scales
1 Factory Bull
Interest in Threshing Machine
1 Cane Mill + 2 Kettles
40 Gals Molasses at 35c
1 Lapplows [?]
1 Scythe + Cradle + 2 Mowing blades
24 head of hogs [?] Pork
Woodall Lafayette 15 B corn at 50crs per bus
Woodall Lafayette 1380 bundles of fodder
200 Lbs of Tobacco 5c
Armstead Penn 8 bus of corn 50c
2 Blade Stacks 75c
500 Lbs Tobacco 5c
Armstead Purdy 7 bus of corn at 50c per bus
3 blade stacks 75c
300 Lbs Tobacco 5c
David Allison 10 bus of corn at 50c bus
300 bus. fodder 45c
600 Lbs Tobacco 10c
John Scales 10 bus corn at 50c
Peter Kennerly 25 bus Do. 50
Grun Penn 10 bus corn 50c
2 Stacks blades 75c
John Tuder12 bus corn 50c
1000 bus fodder 75c
4
2
3
30
5
10
25
2.25
25
5.6
25
7.5
25
7.5
87.5
20
7.5
200
8
2
4341
60
3448.69
6.83
2600
78.68
53.5
21.5
14
14729.30
4
180
20
20
12
12
3
100
25
14
10
5
100
37.5
2
10
20
5
25
17.5
4
15
25
2.25
60
25
62.5
25
5
30
7.5
DESCRIPTION VALUE ($) DESCRIPTION VALUE ($)
139
Appendix IV: National Register of Historic Places Inventory - Nomination Form, 1970
140
141
142
This deed made Oct. 6, 1884 by virtue of a decree in
the case of H.W. Reynolds heirs vs. Robert Critz + wife
rendered at the June Term 1884 of the Circuit Court of
Patrick appointing the undersigned W.D. Smith a special
commissioner for that purpose. Witnesseth that the
said W.D. Smith as commissioner aforesaid grants with
special warranty to Mrs. Nancy Reynolds for life a track
of land lying in said County on the waters of Spoon
Creek including the Mansion House of the late H.W.
Reynolds, containing 711 acres and bounded according
to a plat made by the commissioners of partition +
assignments fled in the said suit valued at $2000 [?]. Also
a track in Stokes County N.C. known as the Molly Cox
place valued at $2000.00 and containing 475 acres.
He also grants to Hardin H. Reynolds the following
tracts lying in said County designated as lot No. 1 in the
report fled by said commissioners in said suit one
track of 60 acres known as the Carter Franz place lying
on Mill Creek, valued at $600. One other track known as
the John Lee place containing 364 acres valued at $1820-
also one other track adjoining the above known as the
____ Car track containing 100 acres valued at $500. Also
one other track adjoining the above known as the Peter
A. Lee track containing 150 acres, valued at $375.00.
Total value of the whole $3290.00. [614ac]
He also grants to Mary J. Lybrook the tracts
embraced in Lot No. 2 of said report as follows- one
track lying on North Mayo and its waters known as
the John R. Cobb place containing 794 acres valued
at $2382.00 also one other track lying on South Mayo
known as the Geo. W. Taylor track containing 29
acres, valued at $354.00 also one other track lying on
the waters of South Mayo known as the Napier place
containing 300 acres valued at $300 also one other
track on Bull Mountain at the High Nob, known as the
Rich Woods containing 100 acres valued at $100.00. The
whole valued at $3136.00. [1223.5]
He also grants to R.J. Reynolds the lands
embraced in Lot No. 3 as designated in said Report
as follows: One track on North Mayo and its waters
known as the Meekins Reynolds place containing 540
acres valued at $1351.25 One other track known as
the Nobusiness Mountain containing 952 acres, valued
at $317.33. One other track known as the Rich Hollow,
containing 180 acres, valued at $180 and one other track
known as the Joshua Keaton place containing 88 acres,
valued at $88.00 and one other track also known as the
Joshua Keaton land adjoining the above on Nobusiness
Mountain containing 49 acres valued at $49.00 One
other track known as the Nancy Hopkins place lying
near Nobusiness mountain containing 10 acres valued at
Appendix V: Deed Book 23, Pg. 430 Heirs of H.W. Reynolds from Deed, Patrick County Ofce of the Clerk
143
containing 60 acres and valued at 4240.00 One other
track lying west of Lees Old Store known as the Peter
Lee place containing 60 acres + valued at $150.00 One
other track known as the William Houchins place, 2 miles
South of Patrick C.H. containing 76 acres and valued at
$132.00 One other track known as the Varner place lying
on the waters of Mill Creek containing 82 acres + valued
at $164.00 One other track known as the Walker land
adjoining the above, containing 30 acres and valued at
$60.00 and one other track on South Mayo River known
as the Joe Himbish place containing 170 acres + valued at
$340.00 making in all in value $3193.00 [1075]
And he also grants to Nancy Kate Reynolds the
lands embraced in what is designated in said report
as Lot No. 5 as follows- One track known as the 5 Fork
or Todd Martin land on the waters of Peters Creek
containing 425 acres and valued at $1490.12 One
other track known as the Gunter place on the waters of
Russells Creek containing 303 acres valued at $910.00,
one other track known as the Clifton place adjoining
the Todd Martin place, containing 15 acres and valued
at $60.00. One other track known as the Bundy Davis
land adjoining Hatchers Dan River place containing 614
acres + valued at $614.00 and one other track known as
the Ferrill land lying west of the Stone House in Stokes
$20.00 One other track known as the Tuggle track lying
near the above, containing 20 acres valued at $40.00
One other track known as the Gilley place near the
above containing 75 acres valued at $112.50 One other
track near the above known as the Hansford Keaton
place, containing 22 acres valued at $22.00. One other
track known as the Lee Anglin place lying on Mathews
Creek on the Rail Road containing 144 acres valued at
$396.00 and also one other track on the waters of Spoon
Creek known as the William Thompson track at Patrick
Springs depot containing 154 acres valued at $616.00. In
all aggregating in value $3192.08. [2234.5]
He also grants to Walter N. Reynolds the lands
embraced in what is noted as Lot No. 4 in said report
as follows: One track known as the Abram Reynolds or
Mayo place lying on North Mayo containing 180 acres
valued at $340.00 one other track known as the H.N.
Reynolds or Rufus Joyce place lying on North Mayo River
+ adjoining the above containing 55 acres and valued
at $275.00. One other track known as the Adrin Anglin
place or quarter place on North Mayo River containing
376 acres and valued at $1128.00 One other track known
as the Thomas Hutchins place on Carters Mountain
containing 144 acres and valued at $144.00 One other
track known as the Kennerly place near Lees old store
144
County N.C. containing 16 acres and valued at $64.00
aggregating in value $3138.62. [1343.25]
He also grants to Lucy B. Critz the lands
designated in said Report as Lot No. 6 as follows, a track
lying in Stokes County N. Carolina on the North side of
Dan River containing 722 acres and mark on the plat
with said Report as Lot No. 1 and valued at $2888.00 also
one other track known as the Sam Numan place on the
waters of South Mayo containing 43 acres + valued at
$258.00 making in aggregate $3146.00. [43]
He also grants to William N. Reynolds the lands
designated in said Report as Lot No. 7 as follows a track
comprised of a part of the Moore place South of Dan
River, with about 40 acres north of the river opposite
the house in Stokes County N.C. containing 794 acres
and marked on said plat as Lot No. 2 and valued at
$3373.00.
He also grants to Abram D. Reynolds a track
comprised of the remainder of said Moore place, marked
on said plat as Lot No. 3 adjoining Lot No. 2 on the South
West side containing 496 acres and valued at $3472.00.
He also grants to said Abram D. Reynolds a right of way
through the lands of William N. Reynolds to the public
road. The above lands are more particularly described in
deeds from various grantors to the H.W. Reynolds now
of record in the clerks ofce of Patrick County Court.
Witness the following signature and seal. Oct. 6, 1884
W.D. Smith Special Comr (Seal)
145
thence leaving creek N. 27 E. 32 3/5 poles to a white
oak bush, N. 25 E. 56 3/5 poles to a small white oak, N.
19 30 3.16 poles, to a leaning black gum, S. 59 E. 43
poles to a stone on the West side of the old Salem road,
S. 66 30 E. crossing road at 4/5 poles, 7 2/5 poles to a
stone, S. 64E. 40 3/5 poles to a maple on the East side
of a branch, S. 61 E. 6 4/5 poles to a white oak on the
west side of a road not public, thence with R.J. Reynolds
line N. 39 E. 94 poles, crossing the Critz Mill road to
a fallen chestnut with marked pointers a-round root of
same, N. 74 E. 4 poles, to a new corner chestnut oak
between H. Gilley and W.J. Callahan, thence with said
Gilleys line N. 34 W. 16 poles to Critz Mill road the same
course continued with Henry Wilsons line crossing a
branch at 73 poles, in all 80 poles, to a small red
oak and stone (formerly post oak) N. 67 W. crossing
old Salem road at 44 poles, 105 poles thence with Jef
Gilleys line in all 54 1/5 poles, to a forked poplar on the
East bank of a branch, thence up said branch N. 12 30 W
11 poles to a Sycamore on the West bank of the branch
N. 54 1/4 W. 74 poles to a Persimmon Tree, N. 59 1/4 W.
47 poles to a small gum and stone N. 89 3/4 W. crossing
a branch at 27 poles, 54 poles to a dead red oak; made
corner on small gum standing by same, corner to the
Floyd land, thence with said lines S. 89 W. 11 1/5 poles
to a small locust (formerly red oak) S. 76 W. crossing a
branch at 7 poles, 23 2/5 poles, to two small maples on
the East side of the road leading across the mountain
from Critz, S. 42 40 W. crossing a branch at 52 poles,
second branch at 83 poles, third branch at 138 poles,
171 poles to an ash on the East bank of a branch N. 37
This deed of Trust, made the 28th day of March 1906,
by and between A.D. Reynolds and his wife Senah [?]
A. Reynolds of Bristol, Tenn, R.J. Reynolds and his wife
Katharine S. Reynolds, Robert Critz and his wife Lucy
B. Critz, W.N. Reynolds and wife Kate B. Reynolds, and
W. R. Reynolds, of the County of Forsyth and State of
North Carolina, all parties of the frst part, and W. N.
Reynolds, Trustee, of the County of Forsyth and State
of North Carolina, party of the second part, Witnesseth:
That the said parties of the frst part, in consideration of
One Dollar, to them in hand paid, the receipt whereof is
hereby acknowledged, and various other considerations
to them moving, have bargained, and sold, and by these
presents do ______ bargain, sell and convey unto the
said W. N. Reynolds, Trustee, party of the second part,
his heirs and assigns, all the right, title, and interest [?] of
each and every of the parties of the frst part, in and to
the following described track of land, lying and being in
the County of Patrick and State of Virginia, and bounded
and described as follows:
A track of 717 acres of land on the waters of Mill
Creek in Patrick County, Virginia, known as the lower
track of Nancy J. Reynolds, deceased, beginning at a set
stone S. 68 degrees W. 5 links from a small red oak
an agreed corner with W.J. Callahan in W.D. Critz line
about 100 rods North of Critz depot, thence with the
said Callahans line and a fence N. 6 degrees E 675 poles
to a sourwood, N. 4 W. 6 poles, N 0 30 E. 86 4/5 poles
to a double ash on the South bank of Mill Creek, thence
up said creek N. 61 W. 10 4/5 poles to a point on the
North bank of creek, N. 37 W. pole from Hornbeam,
Appendix VI: Patrick County Deed Book 34 Pp. 465-468, Patrick County Ofce of the Clerk
146
But in the event the said H.H. Reynolds and wife
shall both die without issue surviving, then the said
property shall revert to and belong to as follows: Three
shares to R.J. Reynolds, and one share each to the
following persons; A.D. Reynolds, Lucy B. Critz, W. N.
Reynolds, and W.R. Reynolds.
That the said H.H. Reynolds and his wife under
the provisions of this trust as aforesaid, enter into
possession of the said land under the terms shall pay all
lawful taxes thereon, and care for and protect the same
in a husbandlike like manner.
In witness whereof, the said parties of the frst
part have here unto set their hand and seals this year
and day frst above written.
A.D. Reynolds (seal)
Senah A Reynolds (seal)
R.J. Reynolds (seal)
Katherine S. Reynolds (seal)
Robb. Critz (seal)
Lucy B. Critz (seal)
W.N. Reynolds (seal)
Kate B. Reynolds (seal)
Walter R. Reynolds (seal)
(With various notary seals for Tennessee and North
Carolina, March + April 1906.)
W. 3 4/5 pos. from fork of branch S. 9 20 E. crossing
branch at 6 links, second branch at 2 poles, 50 poles
to a stone formerly pointers in the Abram Reynolds,
deceased, line, with said lines, S. 44 E striking branch at
24 poles, crossing branch at 29 poles, at 30 poles, and
at 33 poles, in all 76 poles to a stone (formerly gum) S.
56 45 E crossing the road leading to Stuart at 1 poles,
88 poles to a rock in the south side of a branch, S. 46 W.
22 2/5 poles to a white oak stump, S. 86 W. 9 links from a
Locust, S. 23 40 W 4 1/5 poles to a small Gum, S. 45 W.
4 poles to a point, S. 45 E. 15 links from a white oak, and
S. 78 W. pole from another white oak, thence with
W.D. Critzs line S. 70 45 E. crossing a branch at 53 poles,
second branch at 139 poles, and the road leading from
Critz across the mountain at 192 poles, 232 poles to the
beginning.
To have and to hold the aforesaid track of land
unto the said W.N. Reynolds, Trustee, party of the
second part, his heirs and assigns, upon the following
trust, and none other:_
That the said W.N. Reynolds shall hold said
described track of land in trust:
(1) For the use and enjoyment of H.H. Reynolds for
and during the term of his natural life;
(2) If the said H.H. Reynolds should die leaving a wife
surviving, then the said Trustee shall hold said property
for the use, beneft, and enjoyment of the said widow of
H.N. Reynolds during the term of her natural life;
(3) That on the death of the said H.H. Reynolds, and
his wife, then the entire property, freed from this trust,
shall go to their issue, should they leaving any surviving
147
Appendix VII: Reynolds Homestead Preliminary Data, Radford University Faculty and Students, 2002
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
Appendix VIII: Phase I Archaeological and Geophysical Remote Sensing Survey of Selected Areas of the R.J. Reynolds
Homestead, Critz, Virginia, 2008
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
The majority of this section is compiled from History
of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County Historical Society
(Stuart: VA, 1999), 25-41.
William and Mary College. The Geology of Virginia:
Piedmont Province, http://web.wm.edu/geology/virginia/
provinces/piedmont/piedmont.html?svr=www, (accessed
November 4, 2013).
William and Mary College. The Geology of Virginia:
Blue Ridge Province, (accessed November 4, 2013).
Van Lear, Mark A. Soil Survey of Patrick County,
Virginia, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_
MANUSCRIPTS/virginia/patrickVA2009/Patrick_VA.pdf
(accessed March 10, 2014).
Kreh, Richard. Personal communication, August 5,
2013.
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Natural Heritage: The Natural Communities of Virginia,
Classifcation of Ecological Community Groups,
(http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/natural_heritage/natural_
communities/ncoverview.shtml), (accessed July 8, 2013).
Thomas-Van Gundy, Melissa A. and Michael P. Strager.
European Settlement-Era Vegetation of the Monongahela
National Forest, West Virginia, United States Department
of Agriculture, General Technical Report, August 2012.
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), 6-7.
Ibid. 12-18.
Ibid. 397.
Recollections of Major A.D. Reynolds 1847-1925,
Barbara Babcock Millhouse, ed., 1978, (Reynolda House
Inc.: Winston-Salem, NC), 4-5.
References
Learn NC, Mapping the Great Road, http://www.
learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-colonial/2038 accessed March
17, 2014.
Recollections of Major A.D. Reynolds 1847-1925,
Barbara Babcock Millhouse, ed., 1978, (Reynolda House
Inc.: Winston-Salem, NC), 55-58.
Virginia Department of Transportation. A History
of Roads in Virginia, http://www.virginiadot.org/about/
resources/historyofrds.pdf, (accessed February 16, 2014).
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), 276-281.
Letter from Mrs. N.C. Terry to Mr. Richard S.
Reynolds, December 19, 1961. Nancy Ruth Cooper Terry
Letters Collection, Box 1, Reynolds Homestead, Critz, VA.
Reynolda House Archives: PC 194 4/273.
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), 280.
P.L. Ford, ed., Writings of Thomas Jeferson (10 vols,.
New York, 1892-1899), III, 271.
Joseph Clark Robert, The Tobacco Kingdom:
Plantation, Market, and Factory in Virginia and North
Carolina, 1800-1860, Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1965.
Ibid., pg. 19.
Ibid. pg. 54.
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), pg. 391.
Robert, Joseph Clark, The Tobacco Kingdom, Peter
Smith: Gloucester, MA, pp. 211-212.
Tilley, Nannie M. Reynolds Homestead 1814-1970,
(Richmond, VA: Robert Kline and Company, 1970), pg. 20.
Ibid., pg. 21.
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
16
15
14
13
12
17
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
167
Vlach, John Michael. Back of the Big House: The
Architecture of Plantation Slavery, (Chapel Hill and London:
The University of North Carolina Press, 1993), pg. 183.
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), pg. 183.
Ginsburg, Rebecca, Freedom and the Slave
Landscape, http://rebeccaginsburg.net/Rebecca_
Ginsburg/CV_fles/Freedom%20and%20the%20Slave%20
Landscape.pdf (accessed November 30, 2013)
Vlach, John Michael. Back of the Big House: The
Architecture of Plantation Slavery, (Chapel Hill and London:
The University of North Carolina Press, 1993), pg. 13.
National Park Service. Guidelines for the Treatment
of Cultural Landscapes: Defning Landscape Terminology,
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/
landscape-guidelines/terminology.htm, (accessed
November 11, 2013).
National Park Service. National Historic Landmarks
Program, http://www.nps.gov/nhl/, (accessed November
11, 2013).
National Park Service. Guidelines for the Treatment
of Cultural Landscapes: Defning Landscape Terminology,
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/
landscape-guidelines/terminology.htm, (accessed
November 11, 2013).
Ibid.
Newton, Norman T. Design on the Land: The
Development of Landscape Architecture, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, and London, England: The Belknapp Press
of Harvard University Press, 1971), 250.
Vlach, John Michael. Back of the Big House: The
Architecture of Plantation Slavery, (Chapel Hill and London:
The University of North Carolina Press, 1993), 5.
Ibid., 8.
Tilley, Nannie M. Reynolds Homestead 1814-1970,
(Richmond, VA: Robert Kline and Company, 1970), 38.
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), 474.
Ibid. 477.
Patrick County Deed Book 6, pg. 430, Reynolds from
Hairston Deed, Ofce of the Clerk, Patrick County, Virginia.
History of Patrick County, Virginia. Patrick County
Historical Society (Stuart: VA, 1999), 302.
Tilley, Nannie M. Reynolds Homestead 1814-1970,
(Richmond, VA: Robert Kline and Company, 1970), 6-8.
Ibid. 8-9.
Martin Howard. Old Reynolds Homestead in
Virginia, Journal and Sentinel, Winston Salem, North
Carolina, September 23, 1962.
Ibid.
Letter from Mrs. N.C. Terry to Mr. Richard S.
Reynolds, December 19, 1961. Nancy Ruth Cooper Terry
Letters Collection, Box 1, Reynolds Homestead, Critz, VA.
Letter from Mrs. N.C. Terry to Mrs. Nancy Reynolds
Verney, June 3, 1967. Nancy Ruth Cooper Terry Letters
Collection, Box 1, Reynolds Homestead, Critz, VA.
Letter from Nancy Susan Reynolds to Mrs. N.C.
Terry, March 17, 1968. Nancy Ruth Cooper Terry Letters
Collection, Box 1, Reynolds Homestead, Critz, VA.
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
39
38
37
36
35
40
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
168
Patrick County Deed Book 152, pg. 454-456, Deed of
Bill and Sale from Hardin W. Reynolds et al. to Nancy Susan
Reynolds, Ofce of the Clerk, Patrick County, Virginia.
Letter from W. Russell Critz to Mrs. Nancy Susan
Reynolds, December 23, 1968. Nancy Ruth Cooper Terry
Letters Collection, Box 1, Reynolds Homestead, Critz, VA.
Tilley, Nannie M. Reynolds Homestead 1814-1970,
(Richmond, VA: Robert Kline and Company, 1970), X.
Vlach, John Michael. Back of the Big House: The
Architecture of Plantation Slavery, (Chapel Hill and London:
The University of North Carolina Press, 1993), 33.
Ibid.
Ibid. 79.
Personal communication, Richard Kreh interview;
July 13, 2013.
Letter from Frank L. Horton to Tommy Roberson,
July 31, 1969. Nancy Ruth Cooper Terry Letters Collection,
Box 1, Reynolds Homestead, Critz, VA.
Tilley, Nannie M. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company,
(Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1985),
10.
Larson, John C. Reynolds Homestead Tobacco Barn
Project Report. March 1, 2011, pg. 10.
The Reynolds Homestead African-American
Cemetery Survey, Patrick County, Virginia: An Exercise
in Graveyard Mapping and Study by Michael B. Barber
and Michael J. Madden in Quarterly Bulletin of The
Archaeological Society of Virginia Volume 65 Number 3,
September 2010.
Reynolds Homestead: African American Cemetery
Report and Recommendations Submitted by Dr. Lynn
Rainville (Research Professor in the Humanities, Sweet
BriarCollege), 2010.
Rainville, Lynn. Protecting Our Shared Heritage
in African-American Cemeteries in Journal of Field
Archaeology, Volume 34 Issue 2 (01 January 2009), pp. 196-
206.
Grave Matters: The Preservation of African-
American Cemeteries, Chicora Foundation, 1996.
Williams, Raymond. The Country and the City, Oxford
University Press, 1975.
Tilley, Nannie M. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company,
(Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1985),
14.
Personal communication, Richard Kreh interview;
January 21, 2014.
Vlach, John Michael. Back of the Big House: The
Architecture of Plantation Slavery, (Chapel Hill and London:
The University of North Carolina Press, 1993), 21.
Tilley, Nannie M. Reynolds Homestead 1814-1970,
(Richmond, VA: Robert Kline and Company, 1970), 18.
Ibid. xi.
Radford University Faculty and Students, Reynolds
Homestead Preliminary Data, 12/17/2002.
The Reynolds Homestead African-American
Cemetery Survey, Patrick County, Virginia: An Exercise
in Graveyard Mapping and Study by Michael B. Barber
and Michael J. Madden in Quarterly Bulletin of The
Archaeological Society of Virginia Volume 65 Number 3,
September 2010.
71
70
68
67
66
65
64
62
61
63
60
69
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
169
Personal communication, John Reynolds; August 20,
2013.
Personal communication, David Britt; August 5, 2013.
A Recommendation for Maintaining Reynolds
Homestead as an Authentic Restoration and Travel
Attraction, Robert Kline and Company, Inc., Richmond VA,
April 14, 1970.
Watson & Henry Associates and Wendy Jessup and
Associates, Inc. Conservation Assessment Survey Report
for Reynolds Homestead, 2013.
75
74
73
72
170