Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18CH351 Vulture
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The Vulture Site (18CH351) consists of archeological remains, possibly related to a mid 18th-early 19th century dwelling, on Swan Point in Charles County. The site is situated on a bench above the floodplain between Weir Creek and the Potomac River. The terrain on which the site lies is flat and hugs the shore of the river. Covering the site area is a mature mixed forest consisting of red oak, cedar, and American holly. Some of the oak specimens (at the time of the site’s documentation) were at least 80 years old. Soils at the site are Piccowaxen loams.
The history of ownership of the land containing the Vulture Site begins with a land grant of 2,000 acres to James Neale (or Neal). James Neale was born in England in 1615. He named the land “Wollaston Manor” after property in England. He and his wife had five children and Neale was a prominent individual in Maryland politics.
In 1643, Neale and four other individuals were charged with treason for aiding Richard Ingle, a ship’s captain. Richard Ingle was a key participant in the Protestant Rebellion in Maryland (known locally as the Ingle and Claiborne Rebellion), during which the city of St. Mary’s (then the capital of Maryland) was attacked and several wealthy Catholic prisoners were taken. Later, Ingle attacked ships, claiming to have a letter of marque: a document issued by the British government which permitted the looting of ships on behalf of the crown. Most in Maryland regarded Ingle as little better than a pirate. James Neale was accused of helping Ingle in an attempted escape, once order was restored by Governor Leonard Calvert. Ingle was later tried and executed for treason.
Neale later regained the trust of the crown and the colony and spent several years abroad, principally in Spain and Portugal, as an agent for his Majesty the King and the Duke of York. While Neale was absent, he left his plantation in the hands of his father-in-law, Benjamin Gill. During this time, he was declared in arrears of rent by eight years, as well as in-debt to various persons for 13,823 pounds of tobacco. Mr. Benjamin Gill paid the fine and the court fees, amounting to another 500 pounds tobacco.
On 7 March, 1659, Neale returned to Maryland with his wife and children and requested to return to his estate located there. This was granted by the Council of Maryland that same year and he was also given permission to enter into trade and to use the ports. His children (born in Spain) are often referred to in history books as having the distinction of being the first naturalized citizens of the United States.
In 1662, James Neale was in court with a case against the carpenter who built his house. The suit alleged that the carpenter was careless of the cost of materials and ignored, “(the) preciousness of nails (which) is shown in the accusation against the carpenter that he threw away the bent ones”.
The area of Charles County where Wollaston Manor was located is known variously as Cobbs Neck or Cobb’s Point. The district in which it was located is referred to as the Allen’s Fresh District, the Harris Lot District, or the Fifth District of Charles County. Wollaston Manor appears to be the name given to the entire land grant as well as the original dwelling of James Neale.
Captain James Neale’s initial grant was, “2,000 acres on the West side of the Wicomico River” in 1642. This land was divided many times among his descendants. "Captain” James Neale, Sr. married Ann Gill, daughter of Benjamin Gill. They had five children, including Anthony (1659-1723) and James, Jr. (1664-1727). When Captain James died in 1684, his son Anthony inherited Wollaston Manor. When Anthony died in 1723, a portion of Wollaston Manor passed to his brother James, Jr. He left Wollaston to his son James, the Third (1689-1730). The will of James Neale. Jr., in 1727 stated: left, “all my Manor of Wooleston to my eldest son James Neale Jr. [the Third]”. When James the Third died in 1730, he left “All Rights to Wollaston Manor and land reserving half the land for [his] wife Jane” to his son James (the Fourth). James the Fourth died in 1730 as well, without issue.
Raphael, son of Anthony Neale, received the majority of Wollaston upon his father’s death. Raphael (1683-1743) married Mary Brooke, and they had 5 daughters. When Raphael Neale died in the mid-18th century, it was decided by his heirs that the land would be surveyed and divided equally. A representative of each of Raphael’s children then drew lots to see which parcel they would receive. A plat map from 1755 reveals the approximate boundaries of the 6 parcels into which Wollaston Manor was divided. Site 18CH351 appears to fall within the 183 acre parcel listed as “Tract 5” in the 1755 plat, which was devised to Basil Brooke, the husband of Henrietta Neale (Raphael’s 2nd oldest daughter).
The livelihood of the area from the time it was settled was generally agriculture and those trades which supported it, such as mills, blacksmithing and shipping. Horse and mule breeding were understandably important endeavors to the residents, as these were the principal means of transportation and power for farm equipment. Local papers often listed when particular stallions would be available to stud and the results of horse races were frequently reported. Many residents served in the local and state government as required. Slavery was common, as in most states where tobacco was the principal crop.
The Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 had no physical impact on the Wollaston Manor area. In 1775, monies were collected “for the relief of the soldiers of the Town of Boston”. During the Civil War, Federal troops had a training camp near Allen’s Fresh and used the printing presses of the Port Tobacco Times to print a camp newspaper. On at least one occasion, this led citizens to start the rumor that the newspaper offices had been “captured” by federal troops, a rumor the editor of the paper was quick to dispel in the next issue. Maryland had many Southern sympathizers and the presence of Federal Troops may not have been welcome in the area. By all accounts, the troops behaved themselves with only a few incidents of drunkenness or disorderly conduct reported in the paper.
Tract 5 (Basil Brooke and Henrietta Neales’ inheritance) is referred to in subsequent records as “Swann Point”. The parcel was divided multiple times and portions were combined with other parcels over the 19th century. Reconstructing the chain of title becomes impossible due to errors made in the numbering of parcels in subsequent transactions. What is clearly documented, however, is that no structures are depicted in this portion of the Wollaston Manor on the original 1755 plat of its division. This parcel would eventually come into the possession of the Lancaster family which owned much of the area in the 19th century. By the mid 20th century, much of the original Wollaston Manor property would be acquired by the Maryland Realty Investment Trust and subsequently sold to the US Steel Corporation in December of 1969. It was eventually developed into a nine-hole golf course and in the 1980s the course was expanded and residential and commercial development of the area began in earnest.
Site 18CH351 was initially identified during a reconnaissance survey in the early 1990s when landscape features (fence lines and large yard-grown hardwood trees surrounding an area covered with thick brambles) were discovered. A depression with nearby brick fragments was also found. Subsurface investigation consisted of the excavation of 8 shovel tests at 15.24 m intervals. Two STPs encountered a layer of concentrated brick and artifacts below the plowzone, at about 30.5 cm (1 ft) below the surface. The thick layer of mortar and brick rubble recorded in one of these stps may represent demolition debris from a nearby structure. Artifacts recovered from the STPs included 6 white salt-glazed stoneware sherds, 1 black transfer-print white salt-glazed stoneware sherd, 3 creamware, 2 pearlware, 1 blue-edged pearlware, 1 Buckley earthenware sherd, and a Staffordshire slipware sherd. According to the ceramic types recovered, a wealthy family occupied the site area between the mid 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. The site size was estimated to be roughly 122 X 137 m (400 X 450 ft). Again, the 1755 survey plat of Swan Point presented no evidence to indicate that an early dwelling was present. Early 20th century USGS quad maps depict a structure north of the site area, but no dwellings or other structures at 18CH351. The site may represent a house and associated outbuildings constructed by Basil and Henrietta (Neale) Brooke soon after they obtained the property from "Raphael Neale's Estate Division." Although the site has been plowed since abandonment, brick rubble, oyster shell, and artifacts were recovered from layers below the plowzone in several STPs.
In 2007 Phase II testing was carried out at 8 sites on two properties slated for residential and commercial development in Charles County, one of which included the Swan Point property and 18CH351. The archeological evaluations were connected with the application for a wetland permit through the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Maryland Department of Environment. Site evaluations were therefore required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended).
In order to relocate the site, a shovel test grid spaced at 15.24 m (50 ft) increments was superimposed and excavated. Based on the distribution of artifacts, this grid was narrowed to 7.62 m (25 ft) and 3.81 m (12.5 ft) increments. In total, 177 shovel tests were excavated within the grid and the data were used in the strategic positioning of test units. All STPs were excavated manually using spade shovels and trowels. The shovel tests were also excavated stratigraphically in order to maintain vertical control over the artifacts recovered. The soils removed from each excavated shovel test were dry-screened in the field using hardware cloth. A soil profile was prepared (on a standardized form) for each shovel test location excavated. The profile served to document soil characteristics, strata depths, and artifacts recovered per stratum. Soils were described by texture using standard techniques and nomenclature.
Following the shovel testing to identify artifact “hot spots” or potential features, seven 91 X 91 cm (3 X 3 ft) test units were excavated. Test units were excavated manually using flat shovels and trowels. These units were also excavated stratigraphically in order to maintain control over the vertical provenience of artifacts recovered. Selected strata in excess of 5-7.6 cm (2-3 in) were further excavated by arbitrary level. Unless specified, all excavated soils were dry-screened in the field using hardware cloth. In some test units exploratory windows were excavated within test units (following the same procedures) to obtain further information. A standard report form was completed for each excavated stratum or arbitrary level within a stratum per test unit. As with shovel testing, soil characteristics, stratum depths, and recovered cultural materials were documented on these forms. Included in the documentation of test unit soils was the preparation of a hand-drawn soil profile which presented a more accurate view of the stratigraphy encountered. Only one profile was prepared for each test unit excavated and generally involved the wall with the clearest stratigraphy. This wall was also documented through black and white photography.
No cultural or natural features were identified during the 2007 Phase II fieldwork at 18CH351. In total, 1,841 artifacts were recovered from the shovel tests and test units at the site. By broad temporal affiliation and quantity, the artifact collection included the following: 1,834 historic items and 7 prehistoric items. The prehistoric assemblage included a rhyolite biface, a utilized flake, 2 flakes, 2 pieces of shatter, and a possible hammerstone. Although the material recovery was minor, it was concluded that the site contained a prehistoric component of unknown temporal affiliation that likely functioned as a small resource procurement base camp.
The Phase II historic artifact assemblage consisted of 2 activity items (a piece of lamp glass and a brass fitting), 863 architectural artifacts (754 pieces of brick, 8 mortar fragments, 41 pieces of window glass, 2 cut nails, 36 handwrought nails, and 22 unidentified nails), 1 clothing item (a copper alloy button), 958 kitchen-related artifacts (195 ceramic sherds, 52 pieces of container glass, 25 animal bones/teeth, and 686 pieces of shell), 1 white ball clay tobacco pipe stem, 2 arms objects (a French gunflint and a chert gunflint flake), and 7 miscellaneous objects (6 pieces of iron and a fragment of lead). Among the ceramic sherds were 2 Buckley, 1 Astbury, 1 Jackfield, 9 tin-enameled earthenware, 2 Staffordshire, 2 course earthenware, 12 other earthenware, 38 creamware, 23 pearlware, 14 early porcelain, 2 whiteware, 34 redware, 2 Nottingham stoneware, 31 white salt-glazed stoneware, 2 English Brown stoneware, 8 Rhenish stoneware, and 12 other stonewares.
Upon examining the overall historic artifact collection, it was concluded that Site 18CH351 once functioned as a rural domestic occupation or residence. According to the diagnostics materials, the site was occupied between the mid 18th and early 19th century. The site occupants are thought to have had a middle-to-high socio-economic status based on the ceramic assemblage data. The site may have been occupied by Basil Brooks, who married into the Neale family, and/or members of the Lancaster family who owned the property by the 19th century.
After examination of the research and the fieldwork results, it was concluded that Site 18CH351 had value in terms of its antiquity, but lacked archeological value with a lack of good stratigraphic integrity, poor artifact preservation, and absence of intact cultural features and buried artifact deposits. It was determined that proposed development in the vicinity of 18CH351 would not adversely impact any significant archeological resources.
|
