Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18PR323 PD #4
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The PD #4 Site (18PR323) is an apparent Middle and Late Woodland extractive camp with an associated shell midden. It is located within the Patuxent River Natural Resources Management Area in southern Prince George’s County, Maryland. The site is situated along a moderate-sized flat bench or terrace that parallels the west bank of the brackish Patuxent River. The eastern edge of the site is partially lost due to the collapse of the bank, precluding a determination of the original site extent. The southern boundary of the site is demarcated by a steep-sided drainage ravine. To the west, the site is bordered by an older, higher terrace bluff. The terrace on which the site was found continues north.
The underlying geologic formation consists of the Pleistocene-aged Patuxent River Terrace Deposits composed of inter-bedded sand, gravel, and minor silt-clay. Surface soils are composed of the well-drained Collington fine sandy loams and Matapeake silt loams. Recent vegetation regimes included thick grass cover providing some protection to the terraces and floodplain from erosion. Marsh grass and rushes grow at the mouth of the tidal tributaries. Typical fauna of the region consists of white-tailed deer, fox, squirrel, and raccoon, numerous waterfowl and shore birds, and a variety of amphibians and reptiles.
The site was first identified during a reconnaissance archeological survey of the middle portion of the Patuxent River conducted by the Maryland Geological Survey in early 1988. This study was part of a larger preliminary planning study involving several properties (4,000 acres total) under the control of the Department of Natural Resources. The site was found because of the presence of two shell pits which were visible along the eroding bank. One of these pits contained Late Woodland period ceramics. These two pits were designated Feature 1 and Feature 2. Limited further investigation was undertaken, but the site boundaries were not determined. The site was interpreted as a small base camp dating to the Late Woodland time period.
Researchers returned to Site 18PR323 in June of 1988 to conduct more extensive Phase II testing. The archeological investigation was performed to assess potential impacts to the site expected as a result of shoreline erosion control projects in the Natural Resources Management Area. Proposed construction plans within the area of 18PR323 included trimming and stabilization of the bank escarpments between the 2 ravines forming the north and south boundaries of the site, selective tree removal, and the planting of grass and forest buffer strips. Of critical importance during the Phase II examinations was the excavation of the two aboriginal refuse pits, determining if deposits were intact, and establishment of the site boundaries.
To assess stratigraphy and horizontal distribution of artifacts, a line of 50 cm by 50 cm shovel test pits (STPs) spaced every 5 meters was excavated from the higher cultivated terrace above the site east to the lower terrace edge overlooking the Patuxent. A second line of 50 cm X 50 cm STPs was excavated across the middle of the lower terrace running north and south between the two drainage ravines. A total of 13 STPs was excavated.
A 2 X 2 meter block unit was excavated over the refuse pit designated Feature 1 (the one containing Late Woodland ceramics) in order to sample any “living floor” artifacts as full scale excavation of Feature 1 was undertaken. Three 1 meter by 2 meter trenches were excavated at the bank edge to assess the presence of additional features. Additional 1 m X 1 m excavation units were excavated to assess site function and chronological representation. All of the subsurface units were excavated by arbitrary levels within natural stratigraphic horizons. All units were located on a grid established for the site area with grid nodes spaced at 5 meter intervals. Altogether, a total of 22 square meters was excavated via the larger units.
Four features were documented during the course of fieldwork at 18PR323. Two of these were the shell pits identified during Phase I work (Features 1 and 2). Feature 3 was another shallow pit that intruded into the subsoil, while Feature 4 refers to a small hearth ( a loose cluster of fire-cracked rock).
Prehistoric lithic artifacts encountered during Phase II testing at 18PR323 included 2 points, 2 bifaces, 13 cores, 1 utilized flake, 556 other flakes, 20 spalls, 12 fragments of shatter, 2 hammerstones, 2 cobbles, 17 pebbles (11 broken), 12 heat-treated pieces of chert, and 2 possibly curated fossils. In addition, 225 fragments of fire-cracked rock were also encountered. One of the points appears to be of the Selby Bay variety. The other point is fragmentary, but is thought to be a Perkiomen Broadspear. Quartzite was the primary lithic raw material, followed by silicified sandstone, quartz, chert, and rhyolite. A number of the cores were made of silicified sandstone derived from fossilized oyster casts. Prehistoric ceramics included 33 Riggins sherds (2 rims), 5 Potomac Creek sherds (1 rim), 3 Townsend sherds, 1 Mockley rimsherd, 2 quartz-tempered sherds, 35 shell-tempered sherds, and a possible daub fragment. The remaining prehistoric artifacts were 24 fragments of oyster shell, a mammalian longbone, and at least 1 turtle bone. Three fragments of “ironstone” were also recovered, but the full site report does not make clear whether these objects were geologic or were sherds of the historic pottery commonly called “ironstone”. They have been counted as the latter in the table above.
Excavations conducted at 18PR323 revealed a small, deeply buried, multi-component cluster of occupations. The area in which these occupations were found to occur was restricted, measuring approximately 35 meters north-south and 30 meters east-west. This gives a site dimension of 1050 square meters. The portion of the site most densely populated with artifacts was found to be deeply buried beneath 50 to 60 cm of colluvium, a deposit of soil that has washed down from the higher terrace to the west of the site. Deposition of this layer undoubtedly was initiated during the 17th-18th centuries after European cultivation of the region fostered extensive soil erosion of upland terrace knolls.
The range of occupation was extensive despite the small area of the site and low density of artifacts. The earliest occupation dates to the terminal Late Archaic, as represented by the Perkiomen Broadspear recovered from an isolated context. A second, unknown component represented by Feature 4 may also date to the Late Archaic period or, perhaps, to the Early Woodland period. However, no diagnostic materials were recovered in association with this feature to place it in time. Its stratigraphic position, however, does suggest that it is earlier than the Middle and Late Woodland occupations present at the site. These latter occupations include a Middle Woodland Mockley component and 3 Late Woodland components identified, respectively, by Townsend, Riggins, and Potomac Creek Wares.
None of the components present at 18PR323 can be considered substantial, base camp-type occupations. All were likely specialized extractive encampments, with the emphasis on the procurement and processing of one or more limited sets of resources. Some of these activities have to be inferred, while others can be demonstrated with the data recovered. Some activities (e.g. procurement of local lithic resources) may have been incidental to subsistence related tasks carried out at the site.
The isolated broadspear may simply be a stray lost in the course of a hunting foray emanating from a small camp elsewhere. The data in hand obtained from 18PR323 does not unequivocally support the presence of a terminal Late Archaic component at the site. Whether or not Feature 4 and a possibly related assemblage of quartz debitage is associated with such an occupation or dates to a later period remains to be demonstrated.|
The data available for inferring the function of the Mockley phase component is also limited. The presence of the Selby Bay point certainly reflects hunting activities. The small ceramic assemblage may imply the processing of either plant or animal foods. Unfortunately, no features were encountered associated with this component that would place inferences about site function on a firmer basis.
Evidence concerning site function for two of the three Late Woodland components is more informative. The two shell pits of the Townsend component clearly reflect the exploitation of estuarine resources such as oysters and an unknown species of turtle. In addition, a fragment of a mammalian long bone, probably deer, recovered from a disturbed portion of the Feature 1 fill, reflects hunting activities. The pits may have functioned as roasting facilities for the processing of these resources. Feature 3, which is assumed to be part of the small Potomac Creek component, similarly contained several oyster shells, and may have served as a small roasting pit to process them. Although no features were found that could be associated with the Riggins component, it is likely that it represented the same kind of occupation as the Townsend and Potomac Creek components. The exploitation of the silicified sandstone derived from fossilized oyster casts by personnel from the Townsend component is regarded as an incidental feature to the main site function of exploiting estuarine subsistence resources.
There is a strong possibility that the Townsend, Riggins, and Potomac Creek components are coeval, and represent a single group occupation of the site at a late point in the prehistoric to proto-historic period. Since all three wares occur in discrete, close but non-overlapping areas of the site, they may reflect the loci of three “ethnically disparate” but associated family groups. A terminal prehistoric or proto-historic chronological level is inferred based on the presence of polished Townsend wares, which have been dated to the latter part of the 16th century at contact sites in the area. The co-occurrence of these pottery types may represent the establishment of marriage exchange relationships between Potomac Valley and Coastal Plain groups.
Consultation with the shoreline erosion project engineers and managers was ongoing during the archeological investigation, and resulted in modification to project plans which avoided most potential impacts to the archeological site. These modifications included the elimination of an on-site borrow pit and associated storm water management facilities, and the movement of topsoil and debris stockpile areas, and construction roads to other areas where no archeological resources were present.
Based on the presence of intact features, diagnostic artifacts, and the apparent preservation of multiple occupations beneath thick soil deposits, the site should be considered to have excellent integrity. The site has the potential to answer significant research questions relating to Maryland prehistory and perhaps the contact period. Additional work is warranted, should an opportunity present itself.
|
