Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18CH381 Area A-3/B-2, Site D
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
Site 18CH381 (Area A-3/B-2, Site D) is a multi-component prehistoric site which appears to have served as a short-term camp during the Middle Archaic and as a base camp during the Late Woodland. There is also evidence of a light, mid-18th century artifact scatter at the site. The site is located northeast of the town of Indian Head in Charles County, Maryland. It occupies the edge of a flat ridge and extends onto terraces just above the floodplain of a second order tributary of Mattawoman Creek. It is bordered to the east by a large drainage and to the west by a gradual slope extending to the southwest. It measures approximately 80 X 140 m. The general vegetation signature for the area is a tulip poplar/oak association, although the vegetation at 18CH381 consists mostly of Virginia pine with some tulip poplar. Undergrowth ranges from light in the western portion to dense in the eastern portion of the site near the drainage. Soils at the site are Evesboro loamy sands.
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 7 shovel test pits (STPs) were excavated across the site at 20 meter intervals. These yielded 15 lithic flakes, 4 fragments of block/shatter, 3 fragments of fire-cracked rock, 1 hammerstone, and 1 rim sherd of Moyaone ware. Two lithic flakes were also recovered during surface reconnaissance. Lithic materials recovered included quartz, quartzite, and chert. Prehistoric artifacts were recovered from depths of up to 96 cmbs. One shovel test excavated within the boundaries of the site also yielded a single fragment of machine-made bottle glass, and a second yielded a molded clay tobacco pipe bowl fragment and a small piece of brick. The stratigraphic context of the majority of artifacts recovered during the Phase I survey suggested the potential for resource integrity. A determination of the degree of resource integrity, as well as chronological and functional differentiation of the deposits were viewed as crucial to the understanding of the site and the preparation of cultural resource management recommendations. Thus, Phase II testing was recommended for 18CH381.
Researchers returned to the site later that year to conduct the Phase II work. Phase II evaluation included 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. A total of 57 shovel tests were excavated. Thirty-seven of the STPs produced prehistoric artifacts.
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, formal test units were placed throughout the site. A total of 11 test units were excavated, generally in the areas of densest artifact concentration. The 11 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. Cultural material was recovered from each unit.
A total of 125 prehistoric artifacts were recovered from the Phase II shovel tests. All 11 formal test units yielded artifacts, producing an additional 815 prehistoric artifacts. The entire assemblage is composed of 2 apparent Neville points, 3 bifaces, 18 cores, 1 uniface, 507 unmodified flakes (25 primary, 174 secondary, 305 non-cortical, and 3 biface thinning flakes), 85 pieces of block/shatter, 16 utilized flakes, 5 hammerstones, 149 pieces of fire-cracked rock, 148 ceramic sherds, a piece of oyster shell, a chunk of hematite, and 4 charcoal fragments. The recovery of ceramics was limited to the upper 40 cm, normally within the AO and probable Ap horizons, but occasionally in the upper C1 horizon. None of the sherds predate the Late Woodland period. A total of 39 can be classified as Potomac Creek, including 32 body sherds, 4 rim sherds, 1 possible rim sherd and 2 possible base sherds. Ten can be classified as Moyaone body sherds. One shell-tempered, probably cordmarked body sherd can be classified as Townsend ware. The remaining 98 sherds could not be identified definitively, although many possibly are Moyaone or Potomac Creek wares. Five are rim sherds, 2 are bases, and the rest are body sherds or unidentifiable spalls.
Although no typical evidence of plowing was detected at the site, Stratum II (Ap horizon) was found to be sufficiently mixed as to suggest that it was disturbed by cultivation. Slope wash also may have impacted the integrity of Stratum II. In addition, an earlier cultivation zone was detected below Stratum II in the central portion of the site. Soil disturbance also includes bioturbation, particularly the activity of numerous roots in the A and upper portion of the C horizons. Two of the 11 test units exhibited clear evidence of two vertical artifact concentrations: one at 13-26 cmbs (within the probable Ap horizon) that featured lithic and ceramic artifacts, and the other at 51-73 cmbs (within the C1 horizon or within the lowest portion of the possible earlier plowzone) that featured only lithic artifacts. Two other test units exhibited only 1 vertical artifact concentration, at 33-53 and 19-52 cmbs, respectively, within the C1 horizon or the lower portion of the probable Ap horizon. It is not entirely clear how artifact concentrations in these two units relate to the upper and lower clusters found elsewhere. The remaining six test units either exhibited one vertical artifact peak, within the probable Ap horizon, that contained both lithic and ceramic artifacts or contained artifact quantities too negligible to detect any peak at all. The upper component appears to be widespread across the site, while the lower component is more localized.
Diagnostic artifacts clearly connect the upper component with the Late Woodland period. However, the lower peak in the two test units with a double component did not yield any diagnostic artifacts. Two rounded stemmed points resembling Middle Archaic Neville variants were recovered in another test unit, within a stratigraphic context akin to that of the lower component. However, this context also exhibited a single artifact peak, the upper portion of which yielded ceramics. Therefore, the relationship of the lower component to the two points remains unclear.
The vertical concentrations of artifacts, especially the presence of discrete ceramic and acermic components, seemingly associated with differing chronological markers, suggests a degree of vertical integrity at the site. However, the upper artifact concentration appears to have been disturbed by cultivation, slope wash, and bioturbation. The lower component does not appear to have been significantly impacted by cultivation, but the absence of hearth features within this component is problematic for the issue of integrity. Significant quantities of fire-cracked rock were encountered and in the absence of evidence for occupation intensive or recurrent enough to account for ancient human disturbance of such features, it seems more likely that the lack of articulated features at 18CH381 may be linked to soil deflation.
There is evidence for general horizontal patterning at the site. Horizontal distribution of the artifacts is uneven within three areas of the site, with artifact density highest in the eastern and central portions of the site, and quite low within the western portion of the site. All artifact types are more prevalent within the eastern and central areas than within the western area. The most significant difference is the complete lack of ceramics in the western area. In addition, bifaces are almost completely restricted to a single test unit in the area of densest artifact concentration. Within the eastern and central areas of the site, artifacts appear isolated into spatially discrete clusters, with higher activity zones abutted by zones of considerably lower density. These distributions are suggestive of confined activity areas. In addition to distinctions in intensity of activity, preliminary functional differences can be discerned within the two vertical components. The earlier component possesses a higher proportion of debitage within its assemblages than the later one. This difference may be indicative of the decreasing importance of lithic tool manufacturing in the Late Woodland period.
A total of 18 historic artifacts were retained during the Phase II testing at 18CH381. The historic assemblage consists of 12 brick fragments (including 2 glazed brick fragments), 1 creamware sherd, 2 Staffordshire sherds, 1 oyster shell, 1 lead slug, and 1 piece of copper. Additional brick fragments were discarded. The decorative copper piece is small and flat with a circular (drilled?) hole. It may be a pendant, and is possibly a contact period trade item. Modern material, including bottle glass and metal, were observed on the surface, but were not collected. The low level of historic material and the diffuse character of architectural debris indicates that the historic component at 18CH381 is probably nothing more than a low level field scatter. The location of historic materials within soils probably impacted by cultivation and/or slope wash suggests that the deposit lacks vertical integrity. The historic deposit is likely incapable of addressing significant research questions in Maryland history and should not be considered a significant resource.
Within the prehistoric components at Site 18CH381, there may be sufficient horizontal integrity to isolate distinct activity areas. There is sufficient vertical integrity to define two distinct occupational phases within portions of the site. However, the vertical integrity within each component is in doubt. The upper component is situated within a zone of probable cultivation and slope wash disturbance. The lower component lacks evidence for intact features, perhaps as a result of deflation. Later diagnostic artifacts clearly permit the establishment of a temporal context for the upper component, but the connection between earlier diagnostic materials and the lower component is ambiguous. Questionable integrity within the two prehistoric components, and the lack of clear chronological control for the lower component appears to preclude the possibility of the site addressing substantive research questions, even with additional work. The site should not be considered a significant resource.
|
