Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18AN998 Lee
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The Lee Site (18AN998) is a late 18th-early 19th century dwelling (a possible tenant house) near the Woodland Beach community of eastern Anne Arundel County, Maryland. A minor prehistoric component is also present. The site is situated on an interior flat between Beards Creek (to the west) and Warehouse Creek (to the east). At the time of its discovery, the landform was a fallow corn field with significant development (commercial, residential, and other) on all sides. Soils at the site are Annapolis fine sandy loams and Monmouth soils.
The major historic occupation at 18AN998 is likely associated with members of the Stewart and Lee families, who owned and occupied the area in the 18th and 19th centuries, or (more likely) their tenants. Englishman George Puddington was the first landowner in the area. He first immigrated to Northampton County, Virginia around 1640 and in 1649/1650 he and his family moved to the South River in Anne Arundel County, Maryland. On September 20th, 1663 Puddington was granted 700 acres of land called “Puddington’s Harbor” (including the site location), for transporting three indentured servants to Maryland in 1650. Puddington died in 1674 and left the property to Edward Burgess, who is believed to be a relative or close friend.
Edward Burgess divided Puddington’s Harbor into several tracts, conveyed by different means, until several (including 18AN998) were re-consolidated into the possession of Charles Stewart by 1783. The 1783 Tax assessment of Rhodes River hundred indicates that Charles Stewart’s plantation called “Puddington Harbor” was 277 ½ acres in size and was valued at 555 pounds. Other items valued by the tax assessment include 5 slaves under eight years of age, three between eight and fourteen years of age, and six slaves above fourteen years of age. At this time, the white population consisted of only two or three individuals. Other property owned by Charles Stewart included 9 horses, 20 black cattle, and 50 sheep. The total value of Charles Stewart’s plantation was 1,234 pounds, 6 shillings, and 8 pence.
Stewart’s will, dated February 17th, 1781, divided all of his property between his sons Mordecai and Charles Stewart II. He conveyed “Poplar Neck”, and “Mitchels Addition” to his son Mordecai, while he gave his remaining land and dwelling plantation to his son Charles II. Presumably the land given to Charles II was Puddington’s Harbor. The first Federal Census in 1790 identified the plantation of Charles Stewart and provides information as to the household composition. The date of Charles I’s death is not known, however, it seems likely that Charles Stewart II is the individual referred to in the census. His plantation had four white householders, one “other” free white person and three slaves.
The best information regarding the type of structures on the tract comes from the 1798 Federal Direct Tax, which listed “one brick two storey dwelling house 36 by 28 feet, negro quarter 24 by 16 feet, meat house 16 by 12 feet, and a milk house 12 by 6 feet all made of wood”. The house and the outbuildings were all contained on a two acre parcel, and were valued at $550.00.
Charles Stewart II died ca. 1816 without a will. In 1817 Samuel Harrison, his wife Mary, and John Nelson Stewart filed a complaint against the heirs of Charles Stewart II. Jonathan Waters was appointed as guardian for the Children of Charles Stewart II who were minors below the age of 21. A decree by the Chancery Court on January 18, 1817, appointed Samuel Harrison, of John, as trustee to sell Stewart’s real estate. Most of the property (including the site) was purchased by Stephen Lee between 1817 and 1826.
Little is known of the Lee’s early ownership of the property. Shortly after having purchased the property, Stephen Lee, made his last will and testament in June 1827. In his will, Stephen Lee gave all of his real and personal property to his wife Elizabeth Lee, until her death or remarriage. In either eventuality the property was then to be conveyed to their son Stephen Lewis Lee, who was born in 1805.
Stephen Lee died ca. 1833. The inventory of his personal estate included livestock such as horses, cattle, oxen, pigs, and sheep. Crops which Stephen Lee possessed at the time of his death included 30 hogsheads of tobacco worth $900, corn worth $150, clover hay worth $100, as well as small amounts of oats and rye. To work his farm, Stephen Lee had sixteen slaves who probably operated most of the numerous pieces of farm equipment that he owned. Though he owned a significant amount of personal property, it may have been spread over two separate farms. A separate inventory, from his “property on the farm South River Neck”, contains a much smaller amount of personal property than is listed in the other portion of his inventory. This makes it difficult to tell whether his principal dwelling was at Puddington’s Harbor or another location.
In 1833, Stephen Lewis Lee (the son), married Caroline Elizabeth Stockett Duncan, the daughter of William Duncan. In 1850, Stephen L. Lee was recorded in the Federal Census record with his wife Caroline, and four children named William, Thomas, Augustus, and Virginia. In 1850, he was a farmer who was able to work his large tract of land using the labor of 20 slaves. The loss of those slaves following the Civil War may have placed the Lee farm in financial difficulty. The 1860 Census records that Lee was a farmer whose real estate was worth a total of $18,000 and personal property valued at $12,000. Stephen L. Lee’s son William appears to have been married and living in a separate household by 1860.
Stephen L. Lee may have lived in the house described in the 1798 Federal Direct Tax, or in a house elsewhere on the property. An 1847 map (including the area of the site) shows only two houses in the area, only one of which is close to the site. This appears to be situated a short distance from the site, on the other side of a historic road. The site itself appears to be planted in an orchard. A house belonging to Stephen L. Lee is shown on an 1860 map of the county, and appears to be located southeast of the site, close to the headwaters of Warehouse Creek.
Stephen L. Lee died December 15, 1870 “largely indebted unto divers persons”. As a result of his debts a commission was created to survey and divide his real estate. In addition to his residence on Puddington’s Harbor, Lee owned a number of other parcels. All of his real estate “clear of all cumbrances” was valued at $13,290, with his dwelling plantation being valued at $9,590.
Stephen L. Lee’s wife, Caroline E. Lee, managed to retain control over the dwelling plantation by mortgaging the Lee properties to John Inglehardt. Caroline E. Lee left a will dated 1884, making her approximately sixty-four years old at the time of her death. The provisions of her will divided the dwelling plantation “among my said children in as nearly equal portions…which shall be held and retained under the Trusts of this will until the majority of the youngest children of each said devisees, and until the death of the devisees”.
The final deed of partition was dated May 19, 1891 divided the property amongst the Lee children, with the 99.6 acres of land containing the site area going to Henry A. Lee. Upon his death the land passed to his wife, Cora M. Lee, and their children. On October 25, 1916, Evie J. Hardy, child of Henry A. Lee, her husband, and Cora A. Lee conveyed their interest in a parcel of undetermined size to William H. Lee and Robert E. Lee, who were also children of Henry A. Lee. On February 15, 1917 Mabel E. Curtin child of Henry A. Lee, her husband, and Gladys M. Meir formerly Gladys M. Lee, conveyed their interest in the property to Robert E. Lee and William H. Lee. The land would remain in the Lee family until modern times.
The site was first examined archeologically in 1995 during the course of a Phase I survey and subsequent Phase II testing program conducted by the Maryland State Highway Administration. The work was carried out due to the impending construction of a truck turnaround and access road along Maryland Route 2. The road construction was federally-funded. Thus, all Phase I and II archeological work was completed on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration in order to comply with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended, the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1966 as amended, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and the Maryland Historic Trust Act of 1985, as amended. The Phase II investigations also fell under the requirements of Anne Arundel County Article 26, Title 3-109.
Phase I work in the vicinity of 18AN998 entailed the survey of two 18 m wide potential corridors for the proposed Access road. Most of the area had surface visibility near 50% as it a fallow field previously planted in corn. Pedestrian survey was conducted along transects 3 m apart for 15 meters on either side of the corridor centerline. Surface artifacts were flagged and piece-plotted from several stations. Due to ongoing plowing and imminent pesticide and herbicide spraying, the horizontal limits of the artifact concentrations were not determined outside the proposed right-of-way corridors. Recent road litter was not collected adjacent to modern roads. Shell was not collected due to the prevalence of fossil shell, easily confused with “recent” shell potentially representing prehistoric and historic dietary remains or fertilizer.
The surface collection led directly to the discovery of 18AN998. The artifact density, content, and clustering of historic artifact types clearly indicated that the assemblage consisted of more than simple field scatter. After encountering the site, SHA researchers conducted an identical survey the following year within an alternative access road corridor (known as Option M) in an attempt to determine if the site could be avoided. Surface visibility was fairly consistent with that of the preceding year, with the lowest visibility being in the southern portion of the project area. Efforts were made to not recollect areas of the field examined the previous year to avoid artificially inflating surface artifact densities or biasing distribution maps. This additional surface survey indicated that the site extended into the Option M corridor and could not be avoided.
Thirty-six shovel test pits (STPs) were excavated at 20 m intervals across the identified artifact concentration. STPs were 40 cm in diameter and were stratigraphically excavated into sterile subsoils. Depths ranged from 47 to 97 cm. All soil was screened through hardware cloth and soil profiles were recorded for each shovel test. All cultural material was collected by stratigraphic layer.
Based on the recovery of substantial historic artifacts, Phase II testing was carried out in 1996. Phase II work began with additional surface collection outside of the areas of the two corridors. As before, these outlying and intervening areas were walked along transects spaced 3 m apart, and artifacts were flagged and piece-plotted. A metal detector was also used in this phase to locate concentrations of ferrous objects assumed to represent mostly nails, to maximize the chances of test units intercepting sub-plowzone structural features. Although much of the field was systematically examined by walking transects at 3 m intervals and flagging approximately 1000 “hits”, no concentrated clustering was obvious. Flagged “hits” showed a general correspondence with the highest densities of other piece-plotted artifacts although with a somewhat wider horizontal distribution. These “hits” were not recovered, nor were they piece-plotted, since their identity was uncertain, and there were numerous other sources of ferrous objects ranging from agricultural machinery, to road litter, to a reputed airplane crash in one portion of the field. Several test units were, however, placed in small clusters of flagged “hits” in the site area.
Twenty 1 X 1 m test units were excavated during the Phase II testing at 18AN998. These were distributed with the intent of determining the integrity and significance of the site, and to examine specific proposed areas of impact on the site margins. Units on the site margins were located in areas of moderate to low surface artifact density and/or clusters of flagged metal detector “hits”. Several of these test units were combined to form larger 1 X 2 m units in order to investigate soil anomalies and possible features. All soils were screened through hardware mesh. The plowzone was removed as a single layer. Units were excavated into sterile subsoil, and at least one wall of each unit was profiled and photographed. In several units, the subsoil layer was excavated several days after the plowzone was removed, to see if limited weathering would improve contrasts at soil horizon interfaces and help identify possible features.
Historic artifacts encountered during the Phase I and II research at 18AN998 include 1,210 architectural artifacts, 341 kitchen-related artifacts, 24 tobacco pipe fragments, 1 gunflint, and 695 miscellaneous objects. The architectural artifacts were 1,067 pieces of brick, 10 pieces of mortar, 58 pieces of possible window glass, and 75 nails. Kitchen items were 285 ceramic sherds (1 Delftware, 58 creamware, 56 pearlware, 54 whiteware, 13 porcelain, 10 ironstone, 11 refined earthenware, 6 yelloware, 47 redware, 2 coarse earthenware, 27 miscellaneous stoneware), 54 pieces of vessel glass (36 dark green bottle glass and 18 other vessel glass), and 2 animal bones. The tobacco-related items were 13 kaolin pipe stems and 11 kaolin pipe bowl fragments. Miscellaneous historic artifacts included 9 unidentified pieces of glass, 8 pieces of metal, and 678 fragments of shell (though to be non-food related).
In addition to the historic items listed above, forty-four prehistoric artifacts were recovered. These materials were quite scattered across the site and consisted entirely of lithic artifacts. The prehistoric assemblage consisted of 4 rhyolite projectile points, 3 quartz projectile points, 1 quartzite projectile point, a quartz uniface, 3 chert flakes, 2 rhyolite flakes, 8 quartz flakes, 6 quartz cores, 1 quartzite core, 4 quartz chunks, 4 hammerstones, 2 manuports, and 5 pieces of fire-cracked rock. Typeable points include a “fishtail” point stem, a Piscataway point, a Selby Bay, and a possible Sylvan side-notched point. The small assemblage, diversity of lithic materials, the low debitage to tool ratio, and the high number of cores relative to flakes strongly indicate curated tool maintenance and expedient flake tool production, associated with activities other than stone tool manufacture. Projectile points, whether used as projectiles or knives, imply hunting or butchering. The low artifact density, and limited range of tool types present, argue for repeated, very short-term, single activity use of the site by small groups or individual Native Americans over several thousand years (from the Late Archaic through Middle Wodland). No habitation sites appear to be present.
Artifacts such as overglaze hand-painted Chinese porcelain, creamware, edge=painted pearlwares, cabled, and slip-banded pearlwares, early transfer-printed whitewares, wrought and cut nails, and dark olive green bottle glass fragments provide strong evidence for occupation during the late 18th through the mid 19th centuries. Other ceramic wares such as salt-glazed stoneware, lead-glazed redware, plain whiteware, plain porcelain, and ironstone are consistent with the period. The mean ceramic date calculated for the Lee assemblage is 1818. The sample of kaolin pipe fragments recovered yielded an anomalous early mean date of 1670, and could represent previous use of the area prior to the erection of a structure, sampling error, or a general breakdown of the accuracy of pipestem dating in later periods.
While the stratigraphy across the site varied in the different test units excavated at 18AN998, subplowzone integrity was ultimately demonstrated by the location of two postmolds in two of the units and deep artifact deposits in one of the STPs. Furthermore, preliminary artifact distribution analysis indicated that meaningful artifact patterning exists on the site.
Piece-plotting of artifacts revealed a concentration of brick and window glass that appears to mark a former structure location. Historic maps and atlases show no evidence of former structures at this location, probably because detailed maps for this part of Anne Arundel County only became available in 1847. However, the 1798 Federal Direct Tax listing for the Charles Stewart parcel, which once encompassed the area, listed a brick dwelling house, and wooden slave quarter, wooden meat house, and wooden milk house on a two acre parcel somewhere within the larger holding. It is possible that the Lee site corresponds with Charles Stewart’s residence, or one of Stewart’s tenants. Similarly, after the sale of the property to the Lees in 1817, the structure may have been occupied by the Lees or one of their tenants.
If the brick on the site in fact corresponds to the location of the Stewart and Lee residences, recycling or deliberate removal of brick after abandonment may account for a relatively low total mass for brick recovered during archeological investigations. Alternatively, the site could represent a tenant farmer’s residence, in which case it was likely an earthfast dwelling, with the brick representing a chimney base. This is tentatively indicated on the Lee site by the distribution of window glass, which includes both areas of high brick densities and an apparent void. The presence of only one wooden slave quarter in 1790 may indicate that a tenant was a more likely occupant, since Charles Stewart II owned 14 slaves in 1783, and the Lees owned 16 slaves in the mid 1830s. In 1790, however, Charles Stewart II owned only three slaves. It was not uncommon for landless tenants to own slaves at this time in the Chesapeake. The ceramic assemblage, with emphasis on expensive porcelain teaware, and then transfer-printed teaware, suggests a middle to upper class economic standing, and could be typical of either a landowner or successful tenant.
Second, the core area of the site includes the highest densities of several ceramic and other artifact types, including non-fossil oyster shell. Emanating from this core area are two overlapping but temporally discrete artifact scatters. The earlier scatter, characterized by creamware, porcelain, and redware extends eastward. The later scatter, composed of pearlware, whiteware, and ironstone, extends northward. This change in discard patterns may be correlated with the 1817 change in ownership from Charles Stewart to Stephen Lee.
The recovery of kaolin pipe stems, cut nails, and slip-banded whiteware from sub-plowzone contexts in shovel tests in the immediate vicinity, and the postmolds found in two of the test units suggest that additional associated features are likely to be present. Although the original living surface has been plowed, additional features such as postholes, builder’s trenches, wells, privies, etc. would have been excavated into the subsoil by the original inhabitants and can be expected to have survived.
The Lee site was considered to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places based on its historic component. Through documentary evidence, archeological fieldwork, and comparisons with other Anne Arundel County sites of similar and contrasting functions and time periods, the Lee site can yield important information relating to the main period of rural agrarian intensification in Maryland (1650-1815), and the agricultural-industrial transition (1815-1870).
The Lee site has a limited period of occupation, ranging from about 1780 to before 1847. With the exception of agricultural use, the site has undergone little disturbance that affects the coherence of the artifact assemblage, or which would distort information about the site plan and use during its occupation. Intrusive artifacts consist largely of 20th century trash, easily distinguished from the artifacts of the earlier occupation. Undisturbed rural sites of this nature are now rare in Anne Arundel County as development expands. Temporally restricted sites are rarer still and often have greater potential to yield accurate reconstruction of events and lifeways, than long-term sites disturbed by intensive overlapping occupations.
Preliminary archival research demonstrates that a wealth of documentary data exist that can be used to provide ancillary and complimentary information about the early occupation of the site by the Stewarts, Lees, or their tenants. Additional documentary resources and informant data may be available and further background research is warranted.
Subplowzone site integrity was demonstrated by the excavation of intact features. Likewise, surface collection demonstrated that meaningful artifact patterning exists on the site, with two temporally distinct trash disposal patterns present. Other subplowzone features are likely to occur that may help elucidate the nature of the main residence on the site and help determine its occupants (landowner, tenant, etc.). Remote sensing could help in the locating of additional features. Based on these findings, the site should be considered a significant archeological resource. Ultimately it was determined that one of the 2 proposed highway improvement corridors would only impact the very margins of the Lee site. The other proposed corridor would have significantly impacted the “core” of the site. The former option was chosen for the highway and, consequently, the core of the Lee Site remains preserved for future research.
|
