Attachment_0007_Lally_Noble_1991_HRS_MPDF_0002.pdf

NFS Form 10-900-b 0MB No. 1024-0018 (Jan. 1987)

United States Department of the Interior j National Park Service t ^ T

I i r . \ ' j National Register of Historic Places " Multiple Property Documentation Form

REGISTER

This form is for use in documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900-a). Type all entries.

A. Name of Multiple Property Listing

Mammoth Cave National Park Historic Resource Study ______________________________

3. Associated Historic Contexts ___________________________________________ _

A) Exploration and Settlement in the Mammoth Cave Area, c. 1754-1927 _______________ B) Discovery and Early Uses of Mammoth Cave, 1798-1849 __________________________ C) Commercial Cave Development and the Growth of Tourism in the Mammoth Cave Area, 1849-1926 D) Establishment of Mammoth Cave National Park, 1924-1941

C. Geographical Data ___________________________________________________

See Section I, page 1 (Part A).

Also, see Historical Base Maps in Section V., Appendix A.

See continuation sheet

D. Certification

As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60 and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Planning and Evaluation.

:?)zo\q\ Date

>J3j-^/V*x^/_____________________________ State or Federal agency and bureau

•i I, herebyy certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for ev4lua)ing related properties for listing in the National Register.

.A^A ____________________________ 5 Signature of the Keeper of the National Register Date

E. Statement of Historic Contexts Discuss each historic context listed in Section B.

See Section III.; pgs. A-l to A-6, pgs. B-l to B-7, pgs. C-l to C-7, and pgs. D-l to D-20

XISee continuation sheet

F. Associated Property Types

I. Name of Property Type See Section III.; pas. A-6 r O7 f and D-2Q.

II. Description

See Section III.; pg. A-6, pgs. C-7 to C-8, and pg. D-20.

III. Significance

See Section III.; pg. A-7, pgs. C-8 to C-9, and pgs. D-20 to D-21, IV. Registration Requirements

See Section III.; pgs. A-7 to A-8, pg. C-9, and pg. D-21.

>ee continuation sheet

I I See continuation sheet for additional property types

G. Summary of Identification and Evaluation Methods Discuss the methods used in developing the multiple property listing.

See Section I, pgs. 2 to 5 (Part C).

See continuation sheet

H. Major Bibliographical References

See Section IV., pgs. 1 to 6.

IxlSee continuation sheet

Primary location of additional documentation:

GL! State historic preservation office L_3 Local government [ . Other State agency GD University HT! Federal agency LJ Other

Specify repository: Kentucky Library, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY National Archives, Washington, DC _____

I. Form Prepared By_________________________________________________ name/title Kelly A. Lally. Consultant____________________________________— organization Kentucky Heritage Council ————————————— date October 1, 1990—————— street & number 7Q1 D Daniel? Street_________________ telephone 919-828-9123————— city or town Raleigh_____________________________ state NC_______ zip code _£

Bruce J. Noble, Jr., Historian National Park Service P.O. Box 37127 Washington, DC 20013-7127

MP8 Form 1040fr« OMB Approv* No. 10244019

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number I * Page 1

I. INTRODUCTION

A) Description of Mammoth Cave National Park

Located in south central Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park currently consists of 52,428 acres. Most of the park is located within Edmonson County, with smaller portions in Barren and Hart counties. Green River divides the park into northern and southern halves, while Nolin River flows north-to-south near the park's western border (See map 1). In addition to the sinks and sinkholes which dot the land, the area is characterized by steep ridges, long valleys, and a number of creeks and springs. The region includes a multitude of caves of all sizes, many of which may be connected to Mammoth Cave. The Mammoth Cave system is the most extensive in the area with more than 300 miles of mapped passages.

In geological terms, the Mammoth Cave area includes numerous deep cracks, sinkholes, and underground streams. Alternating rock layers, primarily limestone and sandstone, make up the cave region geology. The karst landscape is produced when these rock layers are eroded and dissolved by steadily flowing, slightly acidic, water.

This water drains underground through cracks between layers of stone, eventually forming sinkholes and caves.

A great volume of water flowing underground over millions of years has formed spacious passageways, such as those found in Mammoth Cave and other caves in the region.

The relationship between Mammoth Cave and the Mammoth Cave system requires some additional explanation.

Cave experts did not begin to understand that the numerous caves in the area somehow connected into a larger Mammoth Cave system until the middle of the twentieth century. Before that time, Mammoth Cave was viewed as a single cave which could be entered through its original, natural entrance (today called the Historic Entrance) or a variety of manmade entrances constructed after 1900 (these include the New Entrance, Frozen Niagara Entrance, Violet City Entrance, and Carmichael Entrance). Other caves in the area were also believed to be discrete entities.

During the 1950s, awareness of the existence of a much larger cave system began growing. Although cave explorers have discovered connections between caves previously thought to be separate, many of the links are very small and complete understanding of all the connections in the cave system has not yet been achieved. Thus, although places like Colossal Cavern and Crystal Cave probably constitute parts of the larger Mammoth Cave system, the following context statements will treat them as individual caves.

B) Scope and Purpose of Historic Resource Study

In historical terms, visitors to Mammoth Cave National Park today would have a difficult time understanding the history of the park simply by employing their own powers of observation. The pristine landscape which typifies the aboveground portions of the park suggests that few humans have ever inhabited this section of the earth.

The Federal government constructed most of the limited number of buildings in the park and these remain discreetly hidden from public view. Primarily interested in the underground portions of the park, most visitors who cared to notice the aboveground world would see ample evidence that nature reigns supreme.

1 Cecil E. Goode, World Wonder Saved: How Mammoth Cave Became a National Park (Mammoth Cave, KY: Mammoth Cave National Park Association, 1986), p. 3.

Mapl: Adapted from Montell and Lynwood, eds., Folk Medicine of the Mammoth Cave Area, 1976. The map shows Mammoth Cave National Park in conjunction with the surrounding counties.

Rough RiVer \

Mammoth Cave National Park

Sreen. "River

Green River

NPSftrm 10400* OMB Approv* No. 1(044018

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number Iu Page 2

Closer inspection reveals a different story. The park includes three church buildings and dozens of cemeteries as evidence of past human occupation which pre-dates the establishment of the park. Travelers who leave the main park roads might find farm building foundations, weathered fences, and an occasional orchard as indicators that an agricultural population once inhabited the area. The park's present natural appearance belies the area's human history. Where are these early settlers?

Understanding how the park attained its present natural appearance requires some understanding of the history of the Mammoth Cave area preceeding the establishment of the park, as well as some analysis of the events surrounding creation of the park. To summarize briefly, the effort to establish a predominately natural park led to the relocation of inhabitants within the proposed park area and the eventual razing of buildings these residents had occupied. While the history of early settlement in the area and the history behind the founding of the park will explain a great deal about the process through which the park assumed its present appearance, any examination of settlement history will encounter a variety of difficulties.

First of all, the process of creating the park obviously eliminated most visible historic resources associated with early settlement in the Mammoth Cave area. This places certain restraints on our ability to understand these settlers. Secondly, while voluminous government documents detail the founding of the park, little archival documentation exists concerning the lives of the settlers who arrived before the park. This undoubtedly explains why Edmonson County, in which most of the national park is situated, has received little study by historians.

These factors create an unusual situation where the historian can know more about the demolition of buildings during the establishment of the park than about the human settlements which once occupied the area. While this study will attempt to provide a complete evaluation of Mammoth Cave National Park's historical resources by considering both visible and invisible vestiges of the past, the nature of the source material dictates that the predominance of the documentation will focus on the park establishment process.

To further complicate this difficult scenario, the park also contains historic resources located inside the cave.

Although the entire cave system remains inaccesible even to the most intrepid explorers, large areas of the cave have hosted a variety of human activities for many centuries. While the possibility of considering the entire cave as a historic resource is beyond the scope of the present project, several man-made cave entrances will be proposed for nomination. In addition, a Mammoth Cave Historic District will also be nominated. This underground historic district can be accessed through the cave's Historic Entrance and encompasses a variety of novel resources including the remnants of a saltpetre mining operation, huts constructed as housing for patients undergoing experimental tuberculosis treatment, and the remains of a failed mushroom growing venture.

Finally, this Historic Resource Study will focus only on aboveground historic properties located both inside and outside the cave. The Southeast Archeological Center is presently completing the final draft of an Archeological Overview and Assessment for Mammoth Cave National Park. This document will focus specifically on developing archeological contexts for the park and discussing archeological resources associated with those contexts.

C) Summary of Identification and Evaluation Methods

The survey and evaluation of historic resources in Mammoth Cave National Park originated as a cooperative project involving the park, the State Historic Preservation Office of the Kentucky Heritage Council, the Southeast Region of the National Park Service, and the Washington, DC office of the National Park Service. The Interagency Resources Division of the National Park Service provided the Kentucky Heritage Council with Historic Preservation Fund money to administer the project. The Kentucky Heritage Council also provided

MP8 Form 10400* QMB App^m MO. 10244018

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number Im Page 3 matching funds. The project objective involved organizing a cooperative Federal-state effort to survey, evaluate, register, and manage historic resources located in Mammoth Cave National Park.

As the initial step in the project, the Kentucky Heritage Council contracted with Dr. Charles E. Martin to provide a comprehensive study of cultural resources in the Pennyrile Region of Kentucky. In response, Dr. Martin compiled a report entitled "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview." This region encompasses a large block of thirty-eight counties located in the west central part of the state and includes the three counties in which Mammoth Cave National Park is located: Edmonson, Hart, and Barren. (See accompanying map entitled "The Pennyrile.") In addition to providing a general outline of historic contexts and associated resources of the Pennyrile Region, the report provided an initial framework for evaluating the significance of cultural resources in the national park.

The Kentucky Heritage Council also contracted with Kelly A. Lally to conduct a survey of historic resources located in Mammoth Cave National Park. She used the park's List of Classified Structures (LCS) to determine the initial scope of her survey. The LCS provides a Servicewide inventory of park resources which are potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. For Mammoth Cave National Park, the LCS included cemeteries, old roads, churches, cave entrances, interior cave structures, and buildings and structures constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps. With the assistance of park staff, Lally surveyed these resources between November 1987 and March 1988.

Following completion of the survey, Lally updated the LCS forms for the National Park Service and completed state survey forms for the Kentucky Heritage Council. She also completed individual National Register nomination forms for eligible resources in the park. Finally, she prepared draft historic context statements to provide documentary material for evaluating the significance of the resources surveyed.

As the project evolved, two divisions in the Washington, DC office of the National Park Service-the Interagency Resources Division and the History Division-began to recognize many obvious similarities between National Register nominations completed on Multiple Property Documentation Forms and Historic Resource Studies.

Given the numerous similarities, both divisions worked jointly to develop a strategy for integrating the two documents into one. The resulting document would serve to nominate resources in compliance with Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and would provide a body of information to assist in interpreting National Park Service historic resources to the public. Such a document would prove useful to the State Historic Preservation Office, the national park unit, and the National Park Service in general.

In order to develop a single document that would serve both to nominate significant historic properties to the National Register and provide material to support interpretive programs in the park, the original draft historic context statements required revision and the addition of supplementary information. Whereas multiple property nominations generally only include contexts directly associated with a group of resources considered eligible for the National Register, Historic Resource Studies provide documentation essential to interpreting a park's history to the visiting public. This interpretive evidence may require the development of historic contexts which have few, if any, tangible resources associated with them. Bruce J. Noble, Jr., of the Interagency Resources Division of the National Park Service, assumed the task of developing the additional context material.

The first of the four historic contexts is entitled Exploration and Settlement in the Mammoth Cave Area, c. 1754- 1927 (Context A). This context provides a broad overview of exploration and settlement in the park area beginning with the arrival of the first Europeans in the area who came in conjunction with the French and Indian War effort. The context concludes with the construction of Mammoth Cave United Baptist Church, the most

KENTUCKY tat Hit Sciln * i

NP8 Fonni0400* 102+0018

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number If Page 4 recently constructed extant resource which retains settlement associations. This church, along with two other older churches, are the only resources nominated in association with this context. (See Chart 1.)

The second historic context is entitled The Discovery and Early Uses of Mammoth Cave, 1798-1849 (Context B). This context begins in 1798 because this year is generally accepted as the point when a settler in the area first established Anglo-European ownership of Mammoth Cave. The context concludes in 1849 to coincide with the death of Dr. John Croghan, an early cave owner. Individual resources nominated hi association with this context include the Old Guides Cemetery and underground resources collectively nominated as the Mammoth Cave Historic District. The Old Guides Cemetery has additional historic associations with Context C, while the Mammoth Cave Historic District has additional associations with Contexts C and D. (See Chart 1.)

The third historic context is entitled Commercial Cave Development and the Growth of Tourism in the Mammoth Cave Area, 1849-1926 (Context C). This period included increasing development of Mammoth Cave as a tourist destination, along with intense rivalry among local owners of other cave properties determined to attract their own share of tourist business. The context begins in 1849 because this year marked the implementation of the terms of Dr. Croghan's will which would guide operation of both above and below-ground portions of Mammoth Cave for well over a half-century. The context concludes in 1926 with the enactment of Federal legislation providing for the establishment of Mammoth Cave National Park. Although this legislation did not immediately terminate either private land ownership in the national park area or the competition between private cave owners, the process of establishing the National Park Service as primary owner of the cave system initiated a profound change in the character of the area. Resources nominated in association with this context include the Crystal Cave Historic District, Great Onyx Cave Entrance, and Colossal Cave Entrance. (See Chart 1.)

Finally, the fourth historic context is entitled Establishment of Mammoth Cave National Park, 1924-1941 (Context D). The beginning of this context corresponds with the initial efforts of the Mammoth Cave National Park Association to promote the idea of founding a national park and ends in 1941 when the park had been fully established and received its first Congressional appropriation. This period witnessed simultaneous efforts to raze settlement-era buildings and structures in order to restore a "natural" appearance in the park, along with the construction of new resources associated with the National Park Service infrastructure. Individual resources nominated in conjunction with this context include the Residential Area Historic District, Maintenance Area Historic District, Superintendent's House, Bransford Spring Pumphouse, Three Springs Pumphouse, and Maple Springs Ranger Station. (See Chart 1.)

Historic context research was conducted in a variety of locations: the Mammoth Cave National Park library, the Kentucky Library on the campus of Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, and the National Archives in Washington, DC. The final compilation of this context documentation into a single Historic Resource Study represents a joint effort contributed to by Kelly A. Lally and Bruce J. Noble, Jr.

The typology of significant property types is based on function and association with the historic contexts. The three property types include the following: Commercial Cave Entrances and Related Structures, Civilian Conservation Corps Buildings and Structures, and Churches. Individual National Register nominations have been prepared for at least three examples of each property type. (See Chart 1.)

The Mammoth Cave Historic District represents a novel collection of underground resources not placed under a property type heading. Given the unique nature of this resource, and the fact that property types serve as a convenient mechanism for grouping together some number of similar resources, this solitary historic district will be nominated as an individual resource outside the three broader property type categories. Contributing

Chartl

Mammoth Cave MRS Contexts

Property Types

Individual National Register

Nominations

Exploration and Settlement in the Mammoth Cave Area, c.

1754-1927

Churches

Good Spring Baptist Church and Cemetery, Joppa Baptist Church and Cemetery, Mammoth Cave Baptist Church and Cemetery

Discovery and Early Uses of Mammoth Cave, 1798-1849

Mammoth Cave Historic District, Old Guides Cemetery

Commercial Cave Development and the Growth of Tourism in the Mammoth Cave Area, 1849-1926

Commercial Cave Entrances and Related Structures

Mammoth Cave Historic District, Old Guides Cemetery, Crystal Cave Historic District, Colossal Cavern Entrance, Great Onyx Cave Entrance

Establishment of Mammoth Cave National Park, 1924-1941

Civilian Conservation Corps Buildings and Structures

Mammoth Cave Historic District, Residential Area Historic District, Maintenance Area Historic District, Maple Springs Ranger Station, Three Springs Pumphouse, Bransford Spring Pumphouse, Superintendent's House

Chart 1 illustrates each of the four Mammoth Cave Historic Resource Study contexts, and the property types and individual National Register nominations associated with each context.

NP8 Form 10400* OM0 Approvtl No.

(M6)

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

I. 5 Section number ___ Page ___ resources within this historic district maintain associations with three of the four context statements defined in the Historic Resource Study.

Following the field survey, registration requirements were developed to determine which properties possessed National Register eligibility. These registration requirements revolve around such issues as the strength of association between a given historic resource and one or more of the four major historic contexts developed for Mammoth Cave National Park. The National Register criteria also played an obvious role in determining property eligibility. After determining the eligibility threshold, the decision was made to nominate four historic districts and ten individual properties to the National Register.

In addition to the fourteen resources proposed for National Register listing, the survey identified 82 other resources which were not nominated. Although not nominated, 27 of the 82 properties were added to the List of Classified Structures. The decision not to nominate the remaining properties rests on a variety of factors.

In one case (Hercules and Goach #2), the property had been previously listed in the National Register. In several other cases, resource integrity problems stood in the way of nomination. In most instances, however, time constraints prevented the completion of all research necessary to allow for final decisions about property eligibility. This suggests that a number of properties identified during the survey, but not presently nominated, should receive further eligibility consideration in the future. (For more detailed discussion, see list of Other Surveyed Properties and Recommendations attached to each historic context section.)

D) Historical Base Map Discussion

Using Mammoth Cave National Park field data provided by the Southeast Archeological Center of the National Park Service, the Cultural Resources Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Facility of the Interagency Resources Division produced the Historical Base Map included as an appendix to this document (see Section V., Appendix A.). The Historical Base Map conforms with standards provided in the National Park Service Cultural Resources Management Guideline commonly referred to as NPS-28. NPS-28 provides an overview of the cultural resource management process utilized in the national park system and also summarizes the contents of a variety of National Park Service cultural resource documents.

The completion of a Historical Base Map, as defined in NPS-28, does not require the purchase of an entire GIS system complete with all the necessary hardware and software.2 Indeed, at minimum, a Historical Base Map need only show the location of cultural resources known to exist within a national park. Computer technology is not essential for the completion of such a map.

However, use of GIS technology can transform a static map showing property locations into a dynamic instrument which suggests solutions for management issues. For example, a map showing cultural resources can be layered over a park planning map which shows areas of proposed development within a national park. Taken together, this data forms a single map which offers strategies for planning future projects that avoid the location of significant cultural resources. Thus, GIS maps provide a mechanism for assuring that land management activities grant adequate consideration to cultural resource management issues during the planning process.

^The Cultural Resources GIS Facility uses software called GRASS 5.1, a public domain Unix-based GIS program developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's Research Laboratory. The hardware consists of a SUN 386i computer and a 19" high-resolution color monitor enhanced by a 327 megabyte hard disk utilizing an expansion unit and tape drive. Supporting peripherals include a WYSE-60 monitor and keyboard for text input, an Altek digitizer for map data input, a Tektronix 4696 color printer to produce maps, and an Epson FX100 printer for text output.

NP8 Fom 104004 1024-0018

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number IIj Page 1

II. REGIONAL HISTORIC CONTEXTS

For the purposes of the Kentucky Heritage Council preservation planning process, the state has been divided into five separate planning regions. These five regions consist of the following: Bluegrass, Pennyrile, Western Purchase, Eastern Kentucky, and Urban Areas. Mammoth Cave National Park is located in the thirty-eight county area of west-central Kentucky known as the Pennyrile Region. As the first step in the Mammoth Cave project, Dr. Charles E. Martin prepared a regional study entitled "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview."

"The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview" study relies heavily on the use of census data to achieve an initial understanding of potential historic resources in the region. This data is organized around ten basic themes: Agriculture; Manufacturing; Commerce; Religion; Transportation; Education; Military, Politics and Government; Ethnic History; Social and Cultural Organizations; and Architecture and Landscape. Although these themes do not specifically include the time and place components generally used to define historic contexts, closer reading of the study demonstrates that the themes apply to all of the Pennyrile region during the historic period.

The Kentucky Heritage Council encourages that historic resource surveys be undertaken at the county-wide level.

Anyone initiating such a survey can begin by referencing the regional landscape study to identify themes associated with the particular county of interest. As the survey progresses, field work and further documentary research help to refine the regional themes into historic contexts which operate at the county level and assist in defining the significance of related property types.

Most of the 52,428-acre Mammoth Cave National Park is situated within Edmonson County, with some small portions overlapping into Barren and Hart counties. While the park differs from a county in many obvious respects, the Mammoth Cave project represents an effort to conduct a survey of historic resources in the park and thereby further refine some of the themes articulated in "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview." Much like a historic context statement for a county-wide historic property survey, this Historic Resource Study (HRS) attempts to forge a connection with the regional landscape study.

The National Park Service undertakes Historic Resource Studies to accomplish several objectives: to document the results of historic resource surveys in national parks, to develop a body of contextual data which will assist to interpret those resources to the public and to evaluate their historic significance, and to provide a vehicle for nominating properties to the National Register of Historic Places. The most direct connection between the Mammoth Cave Historic Resources Study and "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview" occurs in the first context of the HRS entitled Exploration and Settlement in the Mammoth Cave Area, c. 1754-1927 (Context A). In this context, the Historic Resource Study draws on the regional study in an effort to establish a broader framework for understanding the history of the greater Mammoth Cave area prior to the establishment of the national park.

Other contexts in the Historic Resource Study have fewer connections to the Pennyrile region study. In one extreme case, a context has no direct association with the Pennyrile region study. In this particular instance, the context entitled Establishment of the Mammoth Cave National Park, 1924-1941 (Context D) focuses exclusively on the park. The process of creating this national park represents such a unique phenomenon within the region that this context bears no relationship to any larger regional themes. (See Chart 2 which illustrates the linkage between the contexts in the Historic Resource Study and the themes in "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview.")

MP8 Form 10400* 0MB Aflwovtf Mo. 10244018

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet ii.Section number Page

While "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape Planning Overview" serves to connect the Historic Resource Study to the State Historic Preservation Office planning process, the HRS also links to the National Historic Landmark themes which the National Park Service utilizes for planning purposes. Of critical importance in drawing a connection between the contexts in the Mammoth Cave Historic Resource Study and National Historic Landmark themes is a publication entitled History and Prehistory in the National Park System and the National Historic Landmarks Program. This booklet outlines the thematic structure of the National Historic Landmarks program and explains how these themes apply to various units of the national park system. Primarily considered a natural area, Mammoth Cave is not listed among those national park units specifically identified with a historic theme or themes. However, the thematic framework maintains some relationship to the contexts defined in this Historic Resource Study. (See Chart 2 for a graphic explanation of the connection between the contexts in the Historic Resource Study and related NHL themes.)

Chart2

Mammoth Cave MRS Contexts

Related NFS Ttiemes

Related Pennyrile Cultural Landscape

Themes

Exploration and Settlement in the Mammoth Cave Area, c. 1754-1927

IIIA.2. Territorial Expansion

X.F. The Farmer's Frontier

XXX.B. Farming Communities

VI. The Civil War

Agriculture

Religion

Transportation

Architecture and Landscape

Military, Politics and Government

Discovery and Early Uses of Mammoth Cave, 1798-1849

V.E. War of 1812,1812-1815

XIIA.3. Other Metals and Minerals

XVTII.F. Extraction and Conversion of Industrial Raw Materials

XVI.W.4. Cemeteries

XIII.F. Medicine

Military, Politics and Government

Commerce

Commercial Cave Development and the Growth of Tourism in the Mammoth Cave Area, 1849-1926

XXXTV.C.3. Recreation (other)

Commerce

Establishment of Mammoth Cave National Park, 1924-1941

XXXII.C.6. Origin and Develop ment of the National Park Service

None

Chart 2 illustrates the relationship between Mammoth Cave National Park historic contexts, National Historic Landmark themes employed by the National Park Service, and Kentucky Heritage Council regional themes defined in The Pennvrile Cultural Landscape study.

NP8 Form 10-800* 0MB Appmnl No.

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number IIIu Page A" 1

III. PARK HISTORIC CONTEXT

A) CONTEXT TITLE: Exploration and Settlement in the Mammoth Cave Area, c. 1754-

1) CONTEXT NARRATIVE:

This context will provide a broad overview of settlement history in the Mammoth Cave area as a basis for discussing the creation of the national park in Context D. Context A will begin in c. 1754 when the French and Indian War first brought Europeans to the Green River area of Kentucky. The context concludes in 1927 with the construction of the Mammoth Cave United Baptist Church. The church remains as the most recently constructed extant resource which retains settlement associations from the pre-park era.

The somewhat vaguely defined "Mammoth Cave area" refers principally to the locality now occupied by the park.

Edmonson County contains the majority of the park's 52,428 acres. Small parts of the park also overlap into Warren and Hart counties. The national park's 1926 enabling legislation authorized a maximum area of 70,000 acres which was never achieved. The geographic extent of the context area does not correspond precisely to politically defined park boundaries. More extensive research and survey work may ultimately indicate that this context documentation can be used to assist with the evaluation of properties outside park boundaries.

Although European exploration had begun in Kentucky during the early 1700s, the French and Indian War led to the arrival of the first Europeans in the immediate Mammoth Cave area. Prior to the war, relations between the British and French deteriorated as each nation struggled to establish sovereignty over the American frontier.

This struggle ultimately led to the French and Indian War (1754-1763). During the war, British soldier Thomas Hutchins apparently entered the present-day Mammoth Cave area while conducting a military survey along the "Buffaloe River" (now called Green River).

Following their victory in the French and Indian War, the British gained control over all lands east of the Mississippi River. King George II then issued the Land Proclamation of 1763 which established the land west of the Appalachians and south of the Ohio River as an Indian reservation. This land did not long remain in Indian hands as English hunters and explorers quickly occupied this area described by Daniel Boone as an "earthly paradise."

The colorful "Long Hunters" were among the early arrivals in this region. Between 1769 and 1771, these intrepid men may have ventured as far as the upper Green River. Legend holds that Long Hunter John Phelps died near the junction of Green and Nolin rivers during this time period. His comrades supposedly left his body in Temple Hill Cave. If correct, this would have placed the Long Hunters near the present western border of the national park.

Guy Prentice, Overview and Assessment of the Archeological Resources of Mammoth Cave National Park (Tallahassee, FL:

National Park Service, Southeast Archeological Center, October 1989), pp. 8-9; Margaret M. Bridwell, The Story of Mammoth Cave National Park Kentucky: A Brief History (Mammoth Cave, KY, 1952), p. 11.

NFS Form 1040O« 0MB Approval No. 1024401$

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number II][ ' Page A"2

As governmental influence crept slowly westward, political boundaries in the Mammoth Cave vicinity began a series of changes which lead to their present configuration. Beginning in 1738, Kentucky was included among western lands held by Virginia. Kentucky became a separate county of Virginia with the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. The establishment of the Commonwealth of Kentucky in 1792 placed Mammoth Cave within Warren County, named for Boston, Massachusetts patriot Capt. Joseph Warren who was killed during the Battle of Bunker Hill in 1775. As mentioned, most of today's national park falls within Edmonson County which was created in 1825 and named after Capt. John Edmonson who died during the War of 1812 in the battle of River Raisin.2

Initial land purchases and settlement in the Mammoth Cave vicinity began several decades before the establishment of Edmonson County. In September 1783, nineteen Philadelphia merchants organized a speculative land company. These merchants hired agents to secure western lands for them in the Ohio River area of Kentucky. In April 1784, the land agents located a parcel of almost 30,000 acres between the forks of Green and Nolin rivers in present-day Edmonson County. Virginia Governor Patrick Henry issued a patent for this land on January 10, 1786.

In addition to dividing Mammoth Cave National Park, Green River also splits Edmonson County into northern and southern segments. While a good deal of land north of the Green had been claimed by the Philadelphia merchants in 1784, lands south of the river had been reserved by Virginia for settlement by Revolutionary War veterans. Although Virginia opened these lands for settlement in 1784, the region remained largely uninhabited for more than a decade. Finally, John, Charles, and Francis Houchin settled south of Green River about 1797.

Although 1799 marks the first year of recorded land ownership around the original "Historic" entrance to Mammoth Cave (other cave entrances have since been discovered and, in some cases, artificially constructed), the story of the discovery and development of the cave will be told in later context statements. However, it is important to note that the discovery of the magnificent cave tends to overshadow the history of the settlers residing hi the hills and hollows encompassed within the present boundaries of Mammoth Cave National Park.

While numerous nineteenth-century travel guides described the wonders of Mammoth Cave, these travel writers devoted little attention to the surrounding area. The prominence of the cave escalated dramatically during the nineteenth century, but the occupants of the nearby hill country were not sufficiently noteworthy to warrant inclusion in travel guides or study by historians. Thus, beginning about 1810 we can speak with some authority about the cave interior and the tourist facilities which eventually developed in the immediate area around the cave entrance, but the subsistence farmers living in the region left few records through which we can reconstruct their history today.

Shenandoah National Park in Virginia was also carved out of a rugged area occupied by isolated subsistence farmers. The author of that park's administrative history, Darwin Lambert, has commented on the park's role in establishing an identity for the populace of the mountainous locality. He wrote, "It was with the creation of Shenandoah National Park that these people became historically significant-as the people displaced for the first large preplanned reversal of civilization's long-established direction, from more and more material exploitation

%rentice, Overview and Assessment, pp. 9-10; Bridwell, The Story of Mammoth Cave, p. 14; Kenneth H. Lee, Near Elko. p. 3;

Charles E. Whittle, Edmonson County Flashlights in Folklore, p. 57.

^Whittle, Flashlights, pp. 52-54; Prentice, Overview and Assessment, p. 11.

NPSr Form 104004 OM0 Appro** No. 10244018

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number IIIm Page A" 3 of natural resources toward re-creation of natural wilderness." This same statement could apply to the early inhabitants of the Mammoth Cave region. Serious historical study of these early settlers remained largely uninvestigated until after the establishment of the park essentially removed all tangible vestiges of their past.

The lack of written documentation and the paucity of extant cultural resources present difficulties in reconstructing the early history of this area. However, we can make some informed observations about the people who settled among the hills around Mammoth Cave between the creation of Edmonson County in 1825 and the passage of Congressional legislation authorizing establishment of the national park in 1926. Initial understanding of these settlers requires some discussion of the terrain they inhabited.

The segment of Green River which flows through Edmonson County forms the approximate boundary between two physiographic zones of Kentucky~the Western Coalfields to the north and the Mississippi Plateau to the south.5 Unlike the relatively flat, open land typical of the Mississippi Plateau, the topography characterizing the Western Coalfields is less well suited for agriculture. Primarily located within the Western Coalfields area, the majority of land in the Mammoth Cave region had limited agricultural value. As a result, settlers did not arrive in this area until after the more desirable farm land in south central Kentucky had already been taken.

The earliest settlers were predominately farmers, but the nature of the land they acquired placed definite limits on the level of affluence they might hope to achieve.

As mentioned previously, few settlers lived in the Mammoth Cave area before 1800. The earliest arrivals hailed primarily from Virginia, western North Carolina, and eastern Kentucky. These early settlers no doubt found their new surroundings quite similar to the hill country homes they had left behind. Most of these initial immigrants were of Scotch-Irish heritage, with a smaller number of Pennsylvania Germans and French Huguenots. The great majority already spoke English upon arrival and most practiced the Baptist faith. By the time of the first Edmonson County census in 1830, the county included a population of 2,6427

From the beginning of the settlement period, religion played a prominent role in Mammoth Cave area communities. Census materials gathered between 1850 and 1916 indicate that most Edmonson County residents attended the Baptist church, followed by a lesser number of Methodists. As the population of the county grew from 4,459 in 1870 to 8,005 in 1890, the number of church buildings in the county rose from sixteen to 44. This gave Edmonson County the highest number of churches per capita in the Pennyrile Region of Kentucky. In spite of the numerous churches, most were small buildings serving rural congregations.

Although statistics indicate that county church attendance dwindled somewhat in the early 20th century, religion remained a strong instrument of social and political control. Church services, weddings, baptisms, funerals, and

^Darwin Lambert, Shenandoah National Park Administrative History. 1924-1976. (n.p., 1979), p. 219.

^See Prentice, Overview and Assessment, p. 1; and P. P. Karan and Cotton Mather, eds., Atlas of Kentucky (Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 1977), pp. 8-11.

^Cecil E. Goode, World Wonder Saved: How Mammoth Cave Became a National Park (Mammoth Cave, KY: The Mammoth Cave National Park Association, 1986), p. 82.

Gordon Wilson, Folklore of the Mammoth Cave Region, ed. Lawrence S. Thompson (Bowling Green, KY: Kentucky Folklore Society, 1968), p. 12; Lee, Near Elko. p. 3; Bridwell, The Story of Mammoth Cave, p. 11.

°For information about census data pertaining to religion in Edmonson County and the Pennyrile Region, see Martin, "The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape," pp. 130-145.

NP8 Form 104004 0MB ApprovH No. 1024-0018

|W^WJ

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

III A—4

Section number ___1 Page ___ revivals provided an important social outlet for the area's rural population. In addition, local church leaders worked to enforce standards of proper moral behavior. Expulsion from the church served as the penalty for nonconformance. Thus, churches served to maintain order in rural areas far removed from the seats of government.9

Three churches remain in the national park today. Although rarely used, the modest wood frame buildings collectively represent the significance of religion to the history of the Mammoth Cave community. The three extant churches in the park-Mammoth Cave United Baptist Church, Joppa Missionary Baptist Church, and Good Spring United Baptist Church-comprise the only resources presently proposed for nomination to the National Register in conjunction with Context A.

Cemeteries comprise another aspect of Mammoth Cave area religious history. The Mammoth Cave United Baptist Church includes a cemetery as part of the property proposed for nomination to the National Register.

The Old Guides Cemetery is individually nominated in conjunction with Context B. Most of the several dozen cemeteries in Mammoth Cave National Park today maintain their primary association with Context A. The National Register eligibility of these cemeteries should receive additional consideration in the future. (For further cemetery information, see Recommendations section of Context A.)

Agriculture formed the foundation of the local economy. Census statistics indicate that Edmonson County had among the highest per capita percentage of farms in the Pennyrile Region prior to the Civil War. Despite this fact, the county had among the lowest percentage of land cleared for agriculture. This juxtaposition suggests the existence of an agriculturally-dependent population living on farm land which remained heavily forested. The prevalence of unimproved land probably indicates both the marginal quality of the local soil and underutilization of the land for agricultural purposes. Furthermore, the value of farm buildings and agricultural implements in the county also ranked among the lowest in the region. Tobacco provided the county's only significant cash crop production and this commodity was grown only in modest amounts. Thus, minimally successful subsistence farming generally prevailed in Edmonson County.

In the meantime, by 1860 the white population of the county had grown to 4,361. The slave population had declined from 334 in 1840 (the first year when such statistics were recorded) to 273 in 1860. The county also included eleven free blacks in 1860. The relatively small number of slaves, and their numerical decline over the twenty-year period, may indicate the marginal nature of agricultural endeavors in the area.

Straddling the border between North and South, Kentucky displayed divided loyalty during the Civil War years.

The current state capital, Frankfort, became the Union capital during the war years. The city of Bowling Green, located approximately thirty-five miles from today's Mammoth Cave National Park headquarters, became Kentucky's Confederate capital for a short five month period. In spite of this brief division, Kentucky remained largely under the control of Union forces for most of the forty-three month war.

The conflicting allegiances within the state and the proximity of Mammoth Cave to the temporary Confederate capital in Bowling Green meant that several minor skirmishes did occur in the cave vicinity. However, Unionist sentiments prevailed in the immediate Mammoth Cave area. This sense of Union loyalty in the locality may

%ee Kelly Lally, draft National Register nomination context documentation, "Introduction," pp. 3-5.

1 Martin, The Pennyrile Cultural Landscape," pp. 22-32.

1 tee, Near Elko. p. 3.

NP8 Form 10400* QMS Agprovaf Mo. 1024-0018 (Mo)

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet

Section number IIT - Page A"5 perhaps have related to the predominance of relatively small farms and the absense of a sizeable slave-holding population.

In addition, Union supporter E. K. Owsley held the lease to the Mammoth Cave Estate during the Civil War years. As a result, Owsley controlled access into the cave and also managed the hotel and other tourist facilities outside the cave. With Owsley in charge, Mammoth Cave did not serve as an important source of saltpetre (a raw material used to manufacture gun powder) during the Civil War as it had during the War of 1812 (see Context II). Disinterest in Mammoth Cave saltpetre may have resulted from some combination of Owsle/s personal politics and the strength of Union support in the general Mammoth Cave vicinity. More significantly, Mammoth Cave's precarious position between North and South may well have dissuaded both sides from attempting to control the cave's saltpetre resources. 12

Edmonson County continued to grow after the Civil War, but agricultural prosperity remained elusive for most residents during the late 19th century. The population exceeded 10,000 by 1900 and the number of farms had multiplied, but the average farm size had dropped considerably. The decreasing farm size indicates the division of farm land among family members, rather than an influx of new immigrants from outside the county.

Otherwise, percentages of unimproved agricultural land remained high and the value of land, farm machinery, and farm buildings remained low. The county continued high production of subsistence crops like corn and low production of cash crops like wheat and tobacco. By 1930, with efforts to establish Mammoth Cave National Park well underway, the Mammoth Cave area had not enjoyed all the advantages of the post- 1900 growth of commercial farming prosperity which characterized most of the Pennyrile Region.13

The lack of…