Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18CH378 Area A-1, Site L
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
Site 18CH378 (Area A-1, Site L) is located on a finger ridge northeast of the town of Indian Head in Charles County, Maryland. The site has both prehistoric and historic components. The prehistoric site, which is a large artifact scatter, is located mainly on the ridge, with two smaller scattered loci to the west and south. Two principal historic loci are located in the north central and southern portions of the site. Two impressive open growth red oak trees dating from the late 19th century occupy the northern edge of the ridge adjacent to structural debris. Domesticate plants include cherry trees and day lilies. The general forest cover in this area, an old growth American beech forest with open understory, is rather unique within this general area. The main portion of Site 18CH378 measures approximately 65 X 175 m. Associated loci occupy an area measuring approximately 30 X 60 m and 35 X 50 m. Soils at the site are Beltsville silt loams.
Structural remains consist of a pile of brick and stone architectural debris, probably a ruined chimney, that is visible on the ground surface near the tip of the ridge. The base of the pile consists of the remains of an articulated foundation featuring three courses of unhewn and roughly hewn field stones. The foundation appears to have been square, measuring 1.83 m east to west along its better preserved northern face, and probably 1.83 m north to south, although the state of preservation makes the southern edge of the foundation difficult to delineate.
The site was originally investigated as part of a large Phase I survey in 1994 prior to the onset of site preparation and construction for the Chapman’s Landing development. The development included the construction of extensive office and retail space, town houses, single-family houses, and a 200-acre golf course. In addition, roads, sewer lines, utilities, and other improvements would lead to significant impacts in the project area. Numerous archeological sites (both prehistoric and historic) were identified as a part of the 1994 study.
During the Phase I survey, a total of 51 shovel test pits (STPs) were excavated across the site. Fourteen initial STPs at 20 m intervals contained prehistoric artifacts, 2 STPs contained historic artifacts, and 4 STPs contained both historic and prehistoric artifacts. A total of 50 lithic flakes, 1 fragment of lithic block/shatter, and one core were recovered during initial shovel testing. Twenty-one supplemental shovel tests were excavated at 10 m intervals around the original positive shovel tests. Seven of these shovel tests contained prehistoric artifacts and 2 shovel tests contained both prehistoric and historic artifacts. Two broken bifaces, 35 lithic flakes, and 1 hammerstone were recovered from these additional shovel tests. Quartzite accounted for just over 56% of the flakes, the core, and the 2 bifaces; quartz formed over 28% of the flakes. Prehistoric artifacts were recovered from both the first and second soil strata. No artifacts were recovered below a depth of 32 cmbs.
The historic artifact assemblage from Phase I work at 18CH378 consisted of 10 undecorated whiteware sherds (6 of which mended to form part of a plate), 1 yellow ware sherd, 1 Buckley-like domestic brown stoneware sherd, 3 unidentified ceramic sherds, 4 shards of bottle glass (1 non-machine made, 2 mold blown, and 1 solarized glass stopper), and a single fragment of brick that was sampled from the surface debris. Nine of the whiteware sherds, all of the unidentified ceramic sherds, and the brick fragment had been burned. These historic artifacts were found primarily within the first soil stratum, which extended as deep as 17 cmbs in some shovel tests.
The stratigraphic context of the majority of prehistoric artifacts recovered during the Phase I survey suggested the potential for archeological integrity. The presence of large quantities of non-cortical quartzite and quartz flakes, an unidentified projectile point/knife, and large quantities of artifacts suggested that Site 18CH378 may represent a habitation site. The absence of ceramic sherds at the site was suggestive of an Archaic date. A determination of the degree of prehistoric resource integrity, as well as chronological and functional differentiation of the deposits was viewed as crucial to the understanding of the site and the preparation of management recommendations. The presence of mostly 19th to 20th century historic artifacts, mainly clustered about a probable chimney ruin, suggested the potential for the site to address several historic research issues. Research focused on the identification of land use patterns, which were viewed as crucial to the understanding of the behavior of the occupants. Such an identification required interpretation of the soil stratigraphy, topography, landscape characteristics, and extant vegetation. Thus, the site was recommended for Phase II evaluation.
Researchers returned to the site later that year to conduct Phase II testing in an effort to better characterize site use and to place it in a regional framework. Phase II evaluation included a systematic shovel testing of the site in order to more carefully define the horizontal and vertical distribution of different quantities and categories of artifacts. Shovel tests measured approximately 30 cm in diameter, and were excavated to a minimum depth of 40 cmbs or 10 cm into sterile subsoil, except where ground conditions prevented complete excavation. These were placed at 10 meter intervals. Soils were removed by natural strata and screened through hardware cloth. One area was further shovel tested at 5 m intervals in order to investigate a concentration of 18th century historic artifacts. This area was located in the southern portion of the site, and yielded architectural material suggestive of a possible structure location. A total of 122 shovel tests were excavated.
Based upon the numerical concentrations and types of artifacts recovered during the Phase II intensive shovel testing, as well as data gathered from the Phase I investigation, 17 locations were subjected to formal test unit investigations. These locations fell within the areas of densest artifact concentration. The 17 test units measured 1 X 1 m, and were excavated to a minimum of 10 cm into sterile subsoil or to a minimum of 5 cm into fragipan in non-agrading soil deposits. Soils were removed by arbitrary 10 cm levels following natural stratigraphy and were screened through hardware cloth.
A total of 3,806 prehistoric artifacts were recovered during Phase II investigation at Site 18CH378. This assemblage includes 1 slate Clagett-like point, a quartzite Cresap or Savannah River point base, a quartz Bare Island, 16 non-diagnostic bifaces, 40 cores, 25 utilized flakes, 23 retouched flakes, 3,063 flakes, 5 pieces of block/shatter, 3 hammerstones, 2 abraders (counted as ground stone), 603 pieces of fire-cracked rock, and 1 fire-blackened quartz cobble (counted as FCR). The horizontal distribution of prehistoric material at 18CH378 indicates two areas of high concentration of prehistoric activity. These include one in the central portion of the site (where 4 test units were located), and one somewhat further north (where 2 units were located). In addition, there were more moderate concentrations of prehistoric activity in the southern and extreme northern portions of the site. Elsewhere, the level of prehistoric activity generally was considerably lower. Within these concentrations, a few patterns can be detected based upon percentages of types of artifacts within each test unit assemblage. Flake tools were more common in the central high concentration and northern moderate concentration of artifacts. Cores were most common in the northern portion of the site, but were few in overall numbers compared to the other artifact types in that area. Bifaces were proportionately infrequent throughout the site, never numbering more than two per test unit. In addition to the proportions of artifact types relative to one another, flake weights and cortical percentages varied widely throughout the site.
The four prehistoric concentrations at the site generally seem to have been loci of a wide range of activities, including reduction, final manufacture and maintenance, and lithics applications tasks. Earlier stage reduction appears to have been most concentrated along the northern edge of the site, while lithics applications activities seem most frequent in the central and northern portions of the site. Flake tools associated with cutting and slicing tasks appear to have been restricted to the central high concentration area. The relatively large number of utilized/retouched flakes indicates the presence of a lithic applications industry at the site, incorporating a wide range of tasks, including cutting and scraping activities. Some very small utilized flakes probably constitute microliths used in compound tools. The high density of fire-cracked rock at the site is indicative of cooking/heating activities typical of a camp.
In the vast majority of test units, the main vertical artifact concentration was in the typical Stratum II (or A2) horizon between 4 and 43 cmbs. This was followed by a dramatic decline in artifact quantity in Stratum III (or the B horizon). Although this pattern was not observed in a minority of test units, the general uniformity of vertical distribution across the site suggest that, despite evidence of erosion and deflation, the site retains a limited degree of vertical integrity, except in places of probable historic disturbance. In one instance, a test unit at the southern end of the site, a postmold feature was identified. It is unclear whether this feature is associated with the prehistoric or late eighteenth century historic occupations in that portion of the site (see below). The presence of higher quantities of historic materials, and the very low level of prehistoric activity in that portion of the site may favor an association with the historic occupation. However, this cannot be verified until the structure shape (if additional postmolds are even in the vicinity) is fully exposed. If it turns out to be a prehistoric feature, this could be taken as striking confirmation of vertical integrity for the prehistoric component.
The variety of tasks represented at the site, taken together with comparisons to assemblages at similar sites, suggest that the prehistoric deposits at 18CH378 represent a Late Archaic multiple activity/extractive site and base camp.
A total of 780 historic artifacts were recovered from Site 18CH378. A complete description of the assemblage is not provided in the full site report, but it appears to have consisted of 11 activity items, 181 architectural objects, a furniture item, 521 kitchen-related artifacts, 5 clothing objects, 10 personal items, and 51 miscellaneous artifacts. At least one of the activity items was a metal eyelet or rivet. The architectural assemblage included at least 2 hand-wrought rosehead nails, 61 machine cut nails, and 2 wire nails. And described artifacts from the kitchen assemblage include a Buckley sherd, Jackfield sherd, a tin-enameled earthenware sherd, 2 annular whiteware sherds, 1 British Brown stoneware sherd, 21 creamware sherds, 29 pearlware sherds, 81 whiteware sherds, a plain yelloware and 2 Rockingham sherds, 4 stoneware sherds, 29 gray ironstone sherds, part of a milk glass lid liner, 38 machine-made bottle glass fragments, and 7 other bottle glass fragments. The only personal item fully described in the report is a 1/8 part of a 1721 Spanish silver coin.
The horizontal distribution of historic artifacts indicates two concentrations of historic activity, one in the northern portion of the site, in the vicinity of the chimney ruin, and one in the southern portion of the site (where 5 test units were located). Two chronological groups of diagnostic artifacts within the assemblage (one dating from the late 18th-early 19th century and a larger one dating to the late 19th-early 20th century) fit almost perfectly with the two distinct artifact concentrations encountered. With the exception of one plain pearlware sherd recovered at the northern end of the site, and one wire nail and one whiteware sherd in the southern portion, the late 19th-early 20th century group is confined to the concentration in the vicinity of the chimney ruin, while the late 18th-ealry 19th century group is confined to the southern cluster. Therefore, it appears that there were two chronologically and spatially distinct historic occupations at the site.
Overall, the highest vertical concentration of historic materials, excluding artifacts clearly recovered from historically modified deposits, lies within the A1 horizon. However, the majority of the artifacts in the southern concentration were more exclusively confined to the A2 horizon. Thus, it would appear that the late 18th-early 19th century and late 19th-early 20th century assemblages are not only horizontally separate but vertically distinct, with the earlier occupation being atop the prehistoric living surface.
In functionally characterizing the two historic occupations, it is clear that the earlier phase reflects a smaller and less intensive occupation than the later phase. The materials associated with the late 18th to early 19th century component include mainly kitchen-related and architectural artifacts. The presence of numerous brick and nail fragments indicate that the earlier occupation probably included a structure or structures as well as light sheet midden scatter. The shovel testing interval of 5 m within the late 18th century occupation demonstrated that the distribution of architectural materials is more horizontally confined than that of the kitchen materials. The southernmost architectural artifact cluster is associated with the aforementioned postmold feature (see prehistoric discussion). It is unclear if this feature is prehistoric or 18th to early 19th century in origin. Shovel tests around this feature produced the lowest quantities of prehistoric artifacts across the site, and the nearest formal test units are the only two at the site to produce more historic than prehistoric materials. These two factors increase the plausibility of associating the postmold with the historic occupation. Only wider exposure, producing further postmolds and yielding the structure shape, can solve definitively the problem of temporal/cultural affiliation of the structure.
Archival research indicates that Site 18CH378 falls within the Wheeler’s Choice/Moore’s Rest patent. The 1783 tax assessment for the district indicates that, by the late 18th century, 300 acres of Moore’s Rest had at least 3 owners, Cleon Moore, Thomas Smallwood, and Bayne Smallwood. The assessment indicates the presence of dwelling houses on the two 100 acre tracts owned by the Smallwoods. The earlier historic deposit at Site 18CH378 probably corresponds to one of these dwellings. The extant records seem to indicate that the owners of the tracts (the Moore’s and Smallwoods) did not reside on the property and, thus, the deposit may be a tenant or squatter occupation. A John McAttu is recorded as having worked and improved a portion of the property, but his relationship to the landowners is unknown. The late 19th to early 20th century occupation in the northern portion of the site may relate either to the African-American tenant farmer, Henry Key, mentioned in an 1880 agricultural census on the same page as nearby land owners Thomas Brown, James Brown, and Columbus Smith, or to another African-American, Alfred Branson, shown in the 1900 general schedule as a tenant of Eugene Brawner. Brawner owned the tract by this period. Unfortunately, current archival data are insufficient to conclusively associate the site with either farmer.
Within the prehistoric component at 18CH378, there is sufficient horizontal integrity to differentiate distinct activity areas. The apparent temporal confinement of the site to the general Late Archaic period (based on the recovered diagnostic points) permits the delineation of related activity areas even in the absence of intact features and the evidence for soil deflation. Thus, the site has tremendous research potential for answering questions related to the use of Late Archaic base camps and the activities taking place at such sites.
The two historic occupations at the site retain horizontal integrity, and possibly vertical integrity. The late 19th-early 20th century northern component is chronologically and functionally similar to the assemblages at nearby Site 18CH379 (see synopsis report). Unlike that site, however, it lacks archival data definitively identifying its ethnic affiliation. Therefore, it appears that despite some integrity, this component can provide less information concerning late 19th to early 20th century agricultural operations, either with respect to African-Americans, or other ethnic groups, than can the three similar assemblages at Site 18CH379. Thus, the northern historic artifact concentration is unlikely to provide additional significant information.
The late 18th-early 19th century southern component also possesses indications of integrity sufficient to produce significant information concerning land use during that period. The presence of architectural artifact concentrations and possibly a historic postmold suggests that intact structural features are present. Such features, taken together with the light scatter of kitchen-related and other debris, can yield insight into architectural design and spatial activity patterns. Moreover, archival research and the archeological character of the remains suggest that the land was in tenancy at the time of occupation. Consequently, the architectural and midden deposits can shed light into late 18th and early 19th century tenant farming in southern Maryland.
|
