Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18HA167 Hickory
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The Hickory Site (18HA167) is a multicomponent site with a moderately dense Late Archaic/Early Woodland base camp occupation, and a late 18th to early 19th century historic artifact scatter intermixed with debris from a nearby early 20th century canning factory and a recreation area. The site occupies a ridgetop and low terraces on the bank of a tributary of Hickory Branch, in central Harford County. Woodlots bound the site on the north, east, and west, and the stream forms the southern site boundary. Portions of the site have been disturbed by logging (except in the southwestern section of the site), farming, road construction, and erosion but some areas remained relatively undisturbed. The site measures about 120 x 300 meters or 8.9 acres. Soil series mapped for the site include the Aldino series which are well to moderately drained, and the Watchung series which are poorly drained soils occupying upland flats.
The town of Hickory developed during the last quarter of the 18th century and first appeared on a map in 1795. It was located along a road that linked the western portion of Harford County with roads leading to the Susquehanna River and Havre de Grace to the east. Between 1822 and 1839, George Rider assembled a 135-acre property at Hickory. Of that, 70 acres known as “Johnson’s Range” was probably in the location of Site 18HA167. Prior to Rider’s acquisition, Johnson’s Range was previously purchased in 1811 by Samuel James from Thomas Johnson, for whom the land was originally surveyed in the 18th century. Rider was listed in the 1850 census as a hotel keeper and by 1858 he operated the Hickory Tavern. Hickory had a post office at least by 1831, and by 1858 Hickory had a church, a store, 11 residences, an inn, and a tavern. On the 1858 map, Rider’s residence/tavern/inn was located north of the site, on the north side of Conowingo Road. Rider’s son apparently farmed the acreage south of Conowingo Road, close to the site location, but did not live on that property.
Site 18HA167 was first identified in 1987 during a Phase I archeological survey of the proposed Hickory Bypass, U.S. Route 1 and Maryland 23 Extended. The goal of the survey was to determine whether potentially significant archeological resources existed within the proposed Route 1 right-of-way (ROW). The project area was divided into 13 parcels on the basis of topography, vegetation cover, and patterns of residential or commercial development. Parcels 1 through 8 were part of the proposed Route 1 alignment. Site 18HA167 was encountered in Parcel 6. During the survey, 37 shovel test pits (STPs) were non-systematically excavated.
A total of 86 prehistoric artifacts were recovered from the site. The assemblage consisted of 79 pieces of debitage (44 quartz, 15 unidentified metavolcanic rock (possibly a schist or greenstone), 12 jasper, 3 chert, 1 chalcedony, 4 rhyolite) and 2 jasper cores. Tools included 1 metavolcanic biface and 1 quartz unifacial scraper. The biface and several flakes of the same material were recovered from a single STP. Three steatite bowl fragments (2 rims and 1 body sherd) were recovered from the low terraces along the stream in the southernmost portion of the site. Their presence suggested a Late Archaic/Early Woodland base camp occupation. All of the lithic materials identified at the site were locally available with the exception of rhyolite, which can be found elsewhere in Maryland. The character of the assemblage indicated that tool maintenance and limited manufacture were activities conducted at the site.
There were 2 historic features identified at the site that may have been constructed for picnics in recent times. Feature 1 was a mortared stone hearth and Feature 2 was a circular alignment of bricks. Traces of a possible farm road were also reportedly on the site. The historic artifact assemblage (n=101) consisted of 86 activity items (all tin can fragment related to the cannery factory), 2 architectural items (1 piece of window glass, 1 cut nail), 2 kitchen-related items (1 modern bottle glass fragment, 1 red earthenware sherd), and 11 miscellaneous items (1 piece of coal, 4 pieces of unidentified metal, 6 copper fragments). In general, the artifacts were widely dispersed across the site. The tin can fragments were all recovered from a single STP in the southwestern section of the site, the same STP from which the metavolcanic biface and flakes were recovered. The historic artifacts appeared to be primarily associated with the nearby canning factory refuse pond, the gravel access roads, or a modern hearth/picnic area, but the redware and cut nail suggested 19th century refuse. Two bone fragments were also recovered from the site. Although it was not possible to definitively determine if they derived from a prehistoric or historic context, it seems most likely that they are related to the historic activity/deposit at the site. Therefore, they are included in the historic artifacts table above as 2 miscellaneous kitchen items.
The majority of the prehistoric artifacts were located on the crest of the ridge and the slope north of the confluence of Northeast Branch, and from an unnamed stream in the southwestern quarter of the site area. Artifacts were found in a possible B horizon in several STPs in the relatively undisturbed central and southwestern portions of the site. This suggested the presence of intact cultural horizons. Therefore, it was determined that the prehistoric component had the potential quality of significance and integrity necessary for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Approximately 80% of the prehistoric component and 100% of the historic component at the site was to have been impacted by the proposed construction so Phase II evaluation was recommended.
Phase II archeological testing at 18HA167 was undertaken in the fall of 1995 when the site was scheduled to be impacted by the proposed Hickory Bypass between U.S. Route 1 and Maryland 23 Extended. The project plans called for construction of a highway south of then current Route 1 which was to impact about 30% of the site. The goal of the investigations was to determine the function and age of activity areas present at the site in order assess the research potential of each component and of the site as a whole. Other goals were to assess general site stratigraphy, to identify features, and to define areas of artifact concentrations. In addition to the prehistoric component, it was determined that the historic component had the potential to address specific research questions and as a result, extensive archival research was carried out that focused on information related to the 19th century in that portion of Harford County, and the archeological evaluation was expanded to include the historic component. Specific research related to the historic component of the site included collecting data on the late 18th and early 19th century owners of the site, assessing the historic use of the site area and identifying specific activity loci if possible, and how the historic component generally related to rural lifeways of the time.
Field methods involved the excavation of 259 STPs and 18 test units. Eight planned STPs were not excavated due to disturbances. STPs were dug every 20 m along transects 20 m apart. Soils were removed by natural strata and screened through 0.635 cm (1/4”) hardware cloth. All pre-modern materials were retained. The placement of test units was determined by Phase I and II STP results; units were located in areas of artifact concentrations. A 1-liter soil sample was collected from feature fill. All excavated soil was screened through 0.635 cm (1/4”) hardware cloth and all pre-modern materials were retained.
As a result of the STP excavations, 2 prehistoric loci were identified at the site. Locus A, focused in the southern half of the site, consisted of a lithic debitage scatter on the western crest and the southern slope of the ridge. Following excavation, a steatite concentration on the crest of the ridge in the (north)western section of the site was determined to be natural in origin. Although the material was recovered from several STPs and test units at the site, no evidence of prehistoric utilization of the steatite was noted during the Phase II investigations. It appeared that the steatite formation had been impacted by historic plowing and surface weathering which gave it the appearance of waste material from vessel manufacture. A total of 1,471 pieces of steatite were collected from the site but ultimately not retained. Several other lithics, including flakes and projectile point fragments, were collected from those units and STPs in the area of the steatite concentration. The steatite bowl fragments retrieved during the Phase II study derived from the southern end of Locus A, approximately 75-80 m south of the bedrock concentration. Five 1x1 m test units were excavated in Locus A (TUs 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 15), and four 1x1 m test units (TUs 2, 8, 11, 12, and 14) were excavated in the steatite concentration.
A historic artifact scatter (Locus B) was encountered in the central portion of the site near a gravel access road. The low density scatter of domestic and architectural materials was generally confined to an area that measured 90 x 100 m. Two 1x1 m test units (TUs 8 and 18) and one 4 m² block (TUs 5, 13, 16, and 17) were excavated in Locus B. A feature (Feature 1) containing historic debris was identified in the northern section of Locus B within 4 test units (TUs 5, 13, 16, and 17). It consisted of a dense concentration of medium to large pieces of bedrock within a natural depression/erosion ditch. The stones were unmodified, weathered, angular and sub-angular, with occasional decayed blocky quartz. Soils within the feature fill were a loose, silty, medium sand. The feature measured up to 49 cm in depth and was slightly concave in shape with irregular walls and base. The position of artifacts within the matrix of fieldstones indicated that the pile was intentionally deposited, probably as part of field clearance for agricultural activity. The artifacts likely represented supplementary fill within the depression. In all probability, infilling the depression with natural fieldstones and sediments was accomplished in order to allow cultivation of the terrace area. A 9 cm diameter soils stain comprised of decayed metal was identified at the base of Feature 1 within TU 5; it was designated Feature 2. Feature 2 yielded 20 fragments of metal that were possibly at one time a can lid or thin pipe.
During the examination of Feature 1, a second, discrete prehistoric lithic concentration was found intermingled with the historic assemblage. The majority of Locus B was located in the center of the proposed realignment and portions of the prehistoric scatter extended into the southern end of the ROW.
A total of 790 prehistoric artifacts were recovered during the Phase II investigations at Site 18HA167. There were 711 pieces of debitage (327 quartz, 157 quartzite, 97 rhyolite, 85 chert, 35 jasper, 7 amphibolite, 1 chalcedony, 1 ironstone), 4 blade-like flakes (unidentified material), 16 cores (10 quartz, 6 quartzite), and 1 tested quartz cobble. Ten of the cores were recovered from the lower terraces in Locus A and the remaining 6 were recovered from the Feature 1 fill in Locus B. The main difference noted between the lithic concentrations identified at the site was the higher percentage of quartzite recovered from Locus B (53.25% of the Locus B assemblage) compared to the low percentage of quartzite recovered from Locus A (5.58% of the Locus A assemblage). In addition, the prehistoric assemblage from Feature 1 was relatively dense, possibly reflecting redeposited material, which seemed to support the theory that the fill in Feature 1 was not derived from an on-site source but rather came from somewhere off-site. Several tools were also recovered from the site including 3 staged bifaces, 1 biface blank, and 1 amorphous biface fragment (4 quartz, 1 quartzite), and 18 utilized and 7 retouched flakes (13 quartz, 9 quartzite, 2 rhyolite, 1 chert). There were 7 projectile points/knives and fragments including Late Archaic rhyolite Bare Island (1) and quartz Brewerton corner-notched (1) points, 1 quartz stemmed fragment resembling Late Archaic types, 1 jasper Bradley Spike dated to the terminal Late Archaic/Early Woodland period, 1 jasper point tip with serrated edges, 1 chalcedony unidentifiable point fragment, and 1 robust jasper knife. Other lithic artifacts included 2 quartz hammerstones and 2 unidentified stone objects. A total of 17 fire-cracked rock fragments were also collected from the site.
Based on the assemblage, lithic activities at the site appeared to have focused on tool maintenance and limited expedient tool production. Analysis of the vertical distribution of artifacts revealed that over 90% of the materials derived from Ao and Ap contexts, except for the assemblage from Locus B which was primarily confined to Feature 1 and the plowzone immediately above it. Analysis of the horizontal distribution of artifacts revealed clusters of reduction areas within Locus A. Unfortunately, there was no way of determining if the clusters represented distinct activity areas related to the production of specific artifacts types or if they reflected a temporal range of utilization/occupation of the site. The densest concentration of lithic materials in Locus A appeared to have been in TUs 3 and 15, on the mid-terrace topographic setting about 50 m north of the creek.
A total of 1,326 historic artifacts were recovered from Site 18HA167 during the Phase II investigations, with all but 4 deriving from the Ao and Ap horizons. The highest concentration of artifacts occurred within the southeastern portion of Locus B. There were 3 activity items (pieces of lamp glass). A total of 323 architectural items were retained including 6 brick fragments, 5 rosehead nails, 4 cut nails, 57 unidentifiable nails, 230 window glass shards, 7 pieces of roofing slate, 5 miscellaneous hardware objects, 1 hinge, 5 possible pieces of daub, and 3 construction tacks. There were 3 clothing items, all brass buttons. Kitchen-related artifacts (n=942) included 193 pieces of bottle glass, 45 fragments of table glass, 706 ceramic sherds (147 pearlware, 1 domestic brown salt-glazed stoneware, 28 domestic gray stoneware, 4 early porcelain, 4 late porcelain, 21 Jackfield, 9 creamware, 1 Whieldon, 392 glazed and unglazed redware, 3 glazed slipware, 91 whiteware, and 5 unidentified stoneware), 1 large piece of cast iron and 1 large iron hook, both possibly from a cooking pot, 2 calcified bone fragments, 1 pig tooth, and 4 shell fragments. Several miscellaneous items (n=44) were also recorded including 42 unidentified metal fragments (20 from Feature 2) and 2 leather fragments.
The historic assemblage was a generally well-defined scatter concentrated within and to the immediate west of Feature 1. The artifacts dated primarily from the late 18th through the middle 19th centuries with a mean ceramic date of ca. 1819. It was postulated that the artifacts within the scatter were representative of a single deposit episode or limited multiple depositions that occurred over a short period of time, probably in the early stages of the agricultural development of the land.
The Hickory Site (18HA167) is a multicomponent site with a moderately dense Late Archaic/Early Woodland base camp occupation, and a late 18th to early 19th century historic artifact scatter associated with an early farm road and agricultural activities, intermixed with 20th century debris associated with recreational activities and a nearby early 20th century canning factory. Two loci were identified at the site: a prehistoric concentration located in the southern portion of the site (Locus A) and a historic concentration located in the north-central portion of the site (Locus B), which also contained a small prehistoric cluster. A natural depression in Locus B infilled with fieldstone and redeposited soil was recorded as Feature 1. Remains of a metal object located below the stone fill were recorded as Feature 2. The vast majority of the prehistoric component was confined to the plowzone and lacked vertical integrity as a result of historic plowing and subsequent deflation. Similarly, the historic component was confined to the plowzone. The cultural materials recovered from the plowzone and Feature 1 were in secondary and mixed contexts. Overall, the site lacked sufficient integrity to be included on the National Register of Historic Places. Therefore, no further work is recommended at the site.
|
