Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18CH379 Area A-1/A-2, Site S A-B
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
Site 18CH379 (Area A-1/A-2, Sites A, B, and S) is located northeast of the town of Indian Head in Charles County, Maryland. The site incorporates 3 loci (A, B, and S) that mark the locations of 3 individual house sites and associated domestic and agricultural landscape features. Locus A is located on the north edge of the terrace on a finger ridge, approximately 100 m west of Locus S. The dominant feature of Locus A is the Thomas Brown Log Dwelling, a standing log house with several frame additions. The log dwelling is a small, two-storey structure terminating in a side-gabled roof sheathed in corrugated metal. The structure consists of a log structure at the first floor level and a wood-frame section at the upper level. Horizontal wood sheathing was installed on the exterior, thus disguising the two construction techniques. An exterior brick chimney is centered on the east gable end. Other structures include the collapsed remains of2 small pole barns, and an extant small animal pen (possibly a chicken coop). Additional surface features include a trash-filled sinkhole (possibly a former well), and a well. A number of older trees at the locus have barbed wire and other hardware embedded in them. The yard area of Locus A measures approximately 70 X 80 m.
Locus B is located on the southern edge of the terrace, approximately 300 m southeast of Locus A. Locus B measures approximately 70 X 85 m. Surface features include a pile of bricks (3 X 3.5 m) that may be a ruined chimney, a shallow sinkhole depression (3 m in diameter) that may be a filled well, and a nearby road trace. Vegetation on the site includes a patch of day lilies and an apple tree.
Locus S of Site 18CH379 measures approximately 80 X 140 m and occupies a finger ridge at the northern end of the terrace. The remains of what appears to be a small pole barn with a corrugated metal roof are still extant and located at the northern end of the site. In addition, there are an approximately 2 X 2 m sinkhole (possible well), and two brick falls (possible chimneys) in the central portion of the locus. Each brick fall begins with a 50 X 50 cm articulated brick section/footing set into the ground. Another brick footing was identified approximately 4.7 m from the southernmost brick fall. Vegetation at this locus included older trees with embedded fencing wire and fruit trees. These loci are connected in 1930s aerial photographs and quad maps by a series of open fields or pastures and a network of roads and fencelines. Soils at Loci A and S are Beltsville silt loams, while the soils at Locus B belong to both the Exum and Beltsville series.
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 at Locus A, a total of 10 shovel test pits (STPs) were excavated at 20 m intervals within the yard area of the log structure, 5 of which yielded 17 historic artifacts. These included window glass (1), bottle glass (5), porcelain (1), common wire and unidentified nails (6), and several unidentified metal objects (4). At Locus B, 28 historic artifacts, consisting of domestic kitchen items and architectural materials were recovered from 6 of the 9 Phase I shovel tests in Locus B. The STPs were excavated at 20 m intervals. Historic artifacts included kitchen items (9 whiteware sherds, 1 ironstone sherd, 3 blown-in-mold bottle glass fragments, 2 unidentified bottle glass fragments, and a milk glass lid liner), architectural remains (1 cut nails, 1 handwrought Rosehead nail, 1 unidentified nail, 6 window glass fragments, 1 brick, and 1 hinge), and an unidentified cast iron object. At locus S, 13 shovel tests spaced 20 m apart yielded 159 historic artifacts including 2 activity items (pieces of lamp glass), architectural remains (1 cut nail, 15 wire nails, 7 unidentified nails, 1 bolt, 2 pieces of window glass, 1 piece of caulk/putty, 6 fragments of brick, and 3 brass keyholes), clothing artifacts (a brass button), kitchen-related artifacts (9 porcelain sherds, 19 whiteware sherds, 2 yelloware sherds, an industrial stoneware fragment, 4 blown-in-mold bottle fragments, 59 machine-made bottle fragments, 17 other bottle/container glass fragments, and 6 pieces of table glass), an arms object (gun part), and miscellaneous objects (1 unidentified metal and 1 unidentified glass). The majority of artifacts in all three loci were recovered within the first and second strata.
Based on the Phase I survey, Site 18CH379 was characterized as a multi-component historic resource with three individual house site loci tied together by a network of roads and landscape features. The stratigraphic context of the majority of artifacts recovered during the Phase I survey suggested the potential for resource integrity. Thus, the site was recommended for Phase II testing.
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 began with archival study. Archival investigations identified three parcels sold by Eugene Hyland Brawner in the late 19th century to African-American families.
Locus A corresponds to a 25 acre parcel sold to Thomas Brown for $202.00 in December 1877 by Eugene and Margaret Brawner. The 1880 Agricultural Census for Charles County lists Thomas Brown as the owner of 10 acres of improved land and 15 acres of unimproved land. In addition to raising livestock, Brown cultivated 5 acres of wheat and one acre of tobacco. At that time, Brown was a 38 year old African-American married to Emma, with 7 children under the age of 15. Thomas Brown’s 25 acre farm was valued at $500.00 in 1880. According to the census, only 75 blacks in Charles County owned land (representing only 3% of the black families in the county). By 1910, that number had increased to 41%. The Thomas Brown family retained their property for over 50 years until 1929 when it was sold at public auction. James W. Brown, an African-American in his mid-fifties, acquired the 25 acre parcel for $30.00. James also owned an adjacent 15-acre parcel that he purchased from Eugene Brawner in 1894. James Brown only held onto the property for three years, at which time it transferred to Burley, Marie, and Carrilean Brown (of no known relation to James). This parcel remained with this family until 1981, but was not occupied after about 1955.
A comprehensive architectural analysis of the log structure on Parcel A (the only standing dwelling at 18CH379) was conducted as part of the Phase II analysis. That analysis is too detailed to repeat here, but is provided in the full site report. The size and construction is also compared to other log construction and African-American housing from the period.
Locus S corresponds to the parcel of Columbus Smith. In March of 1894, Smith purchased a 20 acre parcel for $100.00 from Eugene Brawner. The property was contiguous to the Thomas Brown and James Brown parcels. Since Smith also appeared in the 1880 Agricultural Census as a land owner, it is likely that this land transaction occurred at least 15 years before it was officially recorded. This census records Columbus Smith as having 21 unimproved acres, with a few cattle and swine. The agricultural census does not indicate that Columbus Smith was engaged in farming or that he was African American. However, Smith died in June 1906, leaving his property and “the buildings thereupon erected” to his “dear and trusted friend” Virginia Johnson, an African-American. Virginia Johnson was 54 years old when she acquired the property. She owned the property for 22 years. While the parcel was in her possession, the land contained both a dwelling and a barn. Johnson sold the property to Nellie Gwynn, another African-American, for a price of $10.00 on March 20, 1928. By the time of this transaction, the property size had been reduced from 20 to 15 acres. Nellie Gwyn and her heirs held title to the property for 65 years until it was sold in 1993. While it is uncertain how long the land was lived on, there is a record of buildings existing on the property through the 1940s.
Locus B may be a tenant farm. Census records suggest that African-American tenant farmers worked leased land in the vicinity that belonged to the Brawners. The 1880 agricultural census lists a man named Henry Key on the same page as the aforementioned black land owners. Key is shown as renting a farm for a fixed sum of money. The farm had 30 acres improved and 20 acres unimproved land. In 1880, Key was an African-American, age 65, with a wife and 5 children. The 1900 general schedule shows an Alfred Branson as a tenant of Eugene Brawner. Branson was also African-American, age 75, with a wife and grandson. Key does not appear in the 1900 census and Branson does not appear in the 1880 census.
Although there is no concrete evidence that Thomas Brown or Columbus Smith were Eugene Brawner’s former slaves, there was a history of slaveholding in the Brawner family. White landowners generally sold land only to African-Americans who were familiar to them, such as former slaves or field hands. In general, land sold to blacks at the end of the 19th century was comprised of small parcels of the least desirable land. These parcels also were the furthest removed from the plantation house. The land often was sold at moderate prices, providing a strategy on the part of white farmers to retain black laborers to work their tobacco fields. It is quite possible that Thomas Brown and Columbus Smith, both occupying property at the edge of Eugene Brawner’s farm, were earning a wage as farm laborers for Brawner. Due to the need for income to make payments and pay taxes on their land, it was not unusual for landowning blacks in the late 19th century to have two sources of income, such as income from a working farm, as well as wages earned as a laborer. The arrangement of these contiguous parcels is indicative of black communities that were established following emancipation.
Phase II archeological evaluation at each locus included a systematic shovel testing of the site in order to define more carefully 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. At locus A, a total of 45 shovel tests were excavated. At locus B, a total of 33 shovel tests were located. And at Locus S, a total of 61 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, 4 locations at Locus A, 4 locations at Locus B, and 5 locations at Locus S were subjected to formal test unit investigations. These locations fell within the areas of densest artifact concentration. At Locus A, the test unit locations also were designed to cover areas on each side of the Thomas Brown log dwelling so that differences in midden deposition might be detected. At Locus B two test units were placed on opposite sides of the brick pile in order to attempt to locate features related to the ruined structure. A third was placed on a slight rise of earth adjacent to the sinkhole in order to investigate the possibility of deposits sealed under overburden created by the excavation of the sinkhole. At Locus S, two units were placed on opposite sides of the brick falls in order to identify the possibility of features associated with structural remains. The 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.
Of the 45 STPs excavated during the initial stage of the Phase II evaluation in Locus A, 6 contained prehistoric artifacts and 6 contained prehistoric and historic artifacts. Additionally, three of the 4 test units produced prehistoric artifacts. A total of 41 prehistoric objects were recovered, all of which were derived from lithic materials. The entire Phase II prehistoric assemblage from Locus A includes 2 non-diagnostic bifaces, 2 cores, 1 utilized flake, 1 slightly retouched flake, 17 flakes (7 secondary and 10 without cortex), 8 pieces of block/shatter, and 10 pieces of fire-cracked rock.
The horizontal distribution of prehistoric materials at Locus A constitutes a wide low density scatter. Small clusters of material lie south, west, and just to the north of the Thomas Brown dwelling. The artifact quantities are so low that little horizontal patterning can be detected with accuracy. The vertical context of the prehistoric artifacts is mainly within the A2 horizon, suggesting some degree of vertical integrity. However, the low density of materials and absence of diagnostic artifacts mean that the prehistoric component possesses minimal research potential beyond the characterization possible in the Phase II investigation. Locus A can best be characterized (prehistorically) as a limited activity transitory camp geared towards the secondary reduction of materials derived from and worked at first probably at the nearby drainage to the east. The presence of the unfinished bifaces suggests some limited later stage reduction activities.
Of the 45 STPs excavated during the initial stage of the Phase II evaluation in Locus A, 25 produced historic artifacts, and 6 produced prehistoric and historic artifacts. The shovel tests produced 102 historic artifacts, while the test units produced 243. The entire Phase II historic artifact assemblage from Locus A included 82 activity items, 125 architecture-related artifacts, 6 furniture-related, 4 clothing, 97 kitchen objects, 2 personal items, 7 arms artifacts, and 22 miscellaneous objects. Detailed descriptions of each artifact group are not provided in the full site report, but the kitchen assemblage included at least 42 container glass fragments, 3 milk glass lid liner fragments, 3 sherds of porcelain, 14 whiteware fragments, and 1 piece of ironstone. The architectural assemblage included 84 wire nails and 8 machine cut nails. Activity items include at least 3 fragment of barbed wire and one of the personal items was a Lincoln copper cent piece.
With the exception of some stenciled whiteware sherds, all of the diagnostic historic artifacts fit well with the late 19th-mid 20th century date for site occupation suggested by archival research on Locus A. The whiteware sherds are probably heirloom dishes. The highest density of historic materials came from the areas to the east, north, and west of the Thomas Brown dwelling, especially the northern area. The material is typical of sheet middens from the period. No chronological distinction can be made between the midden deposits on various sides of the log structure. The historic artifacts are slightly more numerous in the A2 horizon than in the A1 layer. Researchers contended that the A1 was the actual living surface and that artifact penetration into the upper A2 horizon was the result of root activity and historic construction activities. The lack of discrete activity areas and chronological distinction either horizontally or vertically suggests limited research potential for the historic component of the site.
Of the 33 STPs excavated during the initial stage of the Phase II evaluation in Locus B, 2 produced prehistoric artifacts, and 5 produced prehistoric and historic artifacts. All four formal test units produced additional prehistoric artifacts. The shovel tests yielded a total of 8 prehistoric artifacts, while the test units produced 70. The entire Phase II prehistoric assemblage included 1 pre-blank biface fragment, 1 core, a retouched quartzite cobble tool, 2 utilized flakes, 15 flakes (4 primary, 4 secondary, 7 without cortex), 7 pieces of block/shatter, 33 pieces of fire-cracked rock, and 18 non-diagnostic body sherds.
The prehistoric occupational phase is concentrated in the southeast and south-central portions of the site. More diffuse prehistoric scatter extends into the central portion of the site. The vertical context of the prehistoric artifacts is entirely mixed with historic materials. In one test unit, prehistoric materials were even recovered above a historic feature. It is clear that no vertical integrity persists for the prehistoric occupation of the site. Based on the small number of sherds and the light scatter of lithic artifacts, the locus can best be characterized as a Woodland limited activity transitory camp geared towards the primary reduction of lithic materials.
Of the 33 STPs excavated during the initial stage of the Phase II evaluation in Locus B, 20 produced historic artifacts, and 5 produced prehistoric and historic artifacts. All four formal test units produced additional historic artifacts. A total of 1,340 historic artifacts were recovered. The entire Phase II historic artifact assemblage from Locus B included 294 activity items, 638 architecture-related artifacts, 1 furniture-related, 3 clothing, 344 kitchen objects, 10 personal items, 3 arms artifacts, and 47 miscellaneous objects. Detailed descriptions of each artifact group are not provided in the full site report, but the architectural assemblage included at least 2 handwrought nails, 70 cut nails, and 110 wire nails. The kitchen assemblage included 3 Jackfield sherds, 9 creamware, 16 pearlware, 1 Westerwald sherd, 4 annular whiteware, 106 other whiteware, 2 ironstone, 2 porcelain, 1 Rockingham, 9 annular yelloware, 10 domestic stoneware, 7 non machine-made bottle glass fragments, 56 machine-made bottle glass fragments, 7 mold-blown bottle glass fragments, a piece of miscellaneous bottle glass, 3 pieces of pressed table glass, and a milk glass lid liner.
The range of diagnostic artifacts suggests that the site was continuously occupied from the 18th century into the 20th century. This hypothesis is reinforced by the extensive disturbance to natural soil stratigraphy at the site, a feature consistent with long term historic occupation. The late 19th to 20th century materials cover the entire expanse of the site. The 19th century artifacts also have a wide distribution. However, the 18th to early 19th century materials exhibit a more confined horizontal distribution. These artifacts are concentrated in the southeastern portion of the site, with a sparse scatter extending to the northwest. Architectural materials were scattered throughout the site, but are most numerous in the vicinity of the aforementioned sinkhole and brick pile, and in the southeastern corner of the site. It appears that structures were most likely located in these areas. This supposition was confirmed near the brick pile by a 10 cm thick layer of destruction debris , composed mainly of deteriorated brick and mortar, just below the topsoil. Kitchen related artifacts were distributed widely and probably represent sheet midden deposition. No chronological distinction can be made between the midden deposits.
Generally, no vertical separation is possible between the historic components. However, in two instances there appears to persist some degree of localized component separation. In one test unit a historic feature, probably relating to the later phases of occupation, was identified at 7 cmbs. It consisted of a paving created through the reuse of brick fragments. Broken bricks were fitted tightly together, without mortar, by placing the bricks directly into the soil, apparently with an underlying bed of gravel fill. The purpose of the feature appears to be some sort of walkway or flooring. Further indication of localized vertical integrity was encountered in a test unit in the vicinity of the sinkhole. The first stratum in this unit represents a topsoil containing 19th to 20th century artifacts. The next stratum appears to represent disturbed overburden from the excavation of the nearby hole, thereby accounting for a slight rise of earth around the sinkhole depression. This layer yielded a mix of 18th-20th century materials and a prehistoric artifact. The next stratum appears to be the more typical silt loam A horizon encountered throughout the rest of the locus. Here and below, the artifacts are, with the exception of one shard of machine-made bottle glass, not necessarily datable later than the 19th century. Perhaps the feature was excavated in the late 19th century, with overburden covering an earlier midden deposit. The feature itself, which may be a filled well or privy, may provide further stratified deposits.
The similarities between the site in its latest form and nearby Loci A and S suggest that, like those areas, Locus B may have been occupied by an African-American farmer in the late 19th and 20th centuries. Unlike those loci, however, no historic documentation has been identified that indicates the property passed out of Brawner family ownership at that time, and it is likely that occupation at Locus B was a tenancy rather than an ownership. The late 19th to early 20th century occupation of the site may relate to the African American tenant farmer, Henry Kay, mentioned in the 1880 agricultural census with land owners Thomas Brown, James Brown, and Columbus Smith, or to Alfred Branson, an African American tenant of Eugene Brawner in 1900. The 18th century occupation somewhat evident (though heavily disturbed) at Locus B may be one of the two house locations mentioned in early land patents that were apparent squatter occupations. Like 18CH377 (see synopsis report), Locus B could represent a squatter occupation from the time between 1688 and 1730 when the land was in escheat. And like 18CH377, may reflect the residence of assimilating Native Americans. Such a supposition would certainly account for the presence of “prehistoric” ceramics at the site and some of the mixture of “prehistoric” and “historic” artifacts.
Of the 61 shovel tests excavated during the initial stage of the Phase II evaluation at Locus S, 2 contained prehistoric artifacts, and 16 contained prehistoric and historic artifacts. All 5 formal test units produced additional prehistoric artifacts. A total of 31 prehistoric artifacts were recovered from the Phase II shovel tests, and 39 from the test units. This included only lithic artifacts. Prehistoric artifacts from Locus S included 3 cores, 37 flakes (8 primary, 14 secondary, 15 non-cortical), 11 pieces of block/shatter, 1 utilized flake, and 18 piece of fire-cracked rock.
The prehistoric component at the site is diffuse. It extends over an approximately 50 X 60 m area in the central portion of the site. A small number of prehistoric artifacts were recovered to the south of this area as well. The highest quantities of prehistoric artifacts lie in the vicinity of the historic house site, marked by a partially filled hole and brick falls. The highest vertical concentration of prehistoric artifacts is within the A2 horizon. This material is over twice as numerous as that in the A1 horizon. Below the A2, there is a dramatic decline in artifact quantities. Historic disturbances and bioturbation have mixed the prehistoric deposit with historic materials, thereby diminishing integrity of the prehistoric component. The low levels of prehistoric material indicate limited activity at the site, with the site probably serving as a locus for early stage lithic reduction of cobbles from nearby drainages. The presence of concentrations of fire-cracked rock suggest some encampment activities. Consequently the site is best characterized as a limited activity transitory camp geared for early stage lithic reduction.
Of the 61 shovel tests excavated during the initial stage of the Phase II evaluation at Locus S, 23 yielded historic artifacts, and 16 contained historic and prehistoric artifacts. All 5 formal test units produced additional historic artifacts. The shovel tests produced 703 historic artifacts, while the test units produced 2,823 historic artifacts. Of these, 154 were activity related, 883 were architectural, 19 were furniture items, 24 were clothing objects, 2,120 were kitchen related, 8 were personal items, 5 were arms items, and 313 were miscellaneous objects. Detailed descriptions of each artifact group are not provided in the full site report, but the architectural assemblage included at least 24 machine cut nails and 393 wire nails. Kitchen-related artifacts include 3 pieces of porcelain, 1 shell-edged whiteware sherd, 172 other whiteware sherds, 2 domestic gray stoneware sherds, 16 pieces of table glass, 1,495 machine-made bottle glass fragments, 15 other glass container fragments, and 2 pieces of milk glass lid liner.
This range of artifacts fits very well with the results of archival research for the Columbus Smith property (see above). It is clear that Smith acquired the property from E. Hyland Brawner by the 1880 census, and that there was ongoing activity at the site well into the 20th century. The highest density of historic artifacts is concentrated in 2 locations. The first lies in the central portion of the site, near the chimney falls (and likely in the immediate vicinity of a former house), and the second lies in the northern portion of the site, just south of the pole barn ruin. Functionally, the architectural material is most concentrated in the central area where it outnumbers kitchen material. Kitchen material predominates over architectural material elsewhere and probably represents sheet refuse. An unusually high concentration of bottle glass in the northern artifact cluster suggests that this is a bottle dump. No chronological distinction can be made between or within any of these artifact clusters.
Within natural stratigraphy, the highest vertical concentration of historic artifacts lies within the topsoil or A1 horizon. Less than half as many artifacts were recovered from the A2 horizon. This is followed by an even more dramatic decline in numbers in the B1 horizon. Better vertical separation of material may be found in the filled hole, if it represents a filled well or privy. A measure of vertical integrity was encountered in a test unit in the central area, where 2 historic features were identified. One feature consisted of a small cluster of 4 bricks within a destruction fill deposit. These bricks were not articulated and probably only represent a concentration of rubble. A concretion of melted glass, melted metal, and burnt brick was located at the opposite side of the unit from the brick cluster. This mass was indicative of a fiery end to the structure at Locus S. The other feature was located in the southern portion of the same unit and consisted of an historic pit cut into the natural A2 horizon, beginning at 11 cmbs. The pit itself was 8 cm deep and measured 25 cm north-south by 40 cm east-west. The pit was filled with ash, mortar, charcoal, nail fragments, brick fragments, and a shell button. Artifacts from the pit were chronologically similar to the materials from the destruction fill above.
The prehistoric components at all three loci of 18CH379 possess a degree of vertical integrity. However, each lacks the artifact density to accurately discern horizontally discrete activity areas, and each lacks the diagnostic artifacts required to place the facets of the occupation within a temporal horizon. Therefore none of the 3 prehistoric components possesses the potential to address significant research questions in Maryland prehistory.
All 3 loci appear to possess sufficient horizontal integrity in historic deposits to differentiate activity areas. At Loci B and S, enough localized vertical integrity exists that these activity zones may be placed within a discrete temporal framework. Thus the archeological deposits at these loci may be able to address significant research questions. While such vertical integrity was not detected in the historic deposits at Locus A, the state of preservation of the standing Thomas Brown log dwelling is such that it retains significant potential for better understanding the vernacular architectural traditions utilized by African-American land owners of the period.
As a multiple property complex, Site 18CH379 is primarily significant for its association with the agricultural transition that occurred in Charles County and southern Maryland following the Civil War. In particular, because of its intact road network, fencelines, culturally modified vegetation, and structural remains, dating both prior to and later than 1937, the site (as a whole) presents an opportunity to study the evolution of an historical landscape. In addition, the site can provide information documenting the transition from slavery to tenant farming and land ownership among African-American families. The site can shed significant light into the rural activities of Charles County’s black residents in the late 19th century and first half of the 20th century and can provide an insight into the differences between tenancy and land ownership.
|
