Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18PR665 Oak Creek G
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The Oak Creek G Site (18PR665) is the apparent remains of an early to mid 18th century tenant house north of Upper Marlboro in Prince George’s County. The site is situated on an upland flat, adjacent to a small tree-lined stream. A slight topographic rise sits adjacent to the site area. At the time of the site’s discovery, the location was a former agricultural field overgrown with tall weeds. Soils at the site are primarily Shrewsbury loams.
Site 18PR665 is situated just over 1,100 meters southwest of the historic Bowieville Mansion (MIHP# PG-74A-18), the manor house of the 19th century Bowie family plantation. The builder of Bowieville was Mary Mackall Bowie, daughter of Maryland Governor Robert Bowie. Mary M. Bowie was born in 1776, was married twice, and was also widowed twice. She was first married to Turner Wootton from 1794 until his death in 1796. Together they had one son, William Turner Wootton. She then married her cousin, Thomas Contee Bowie, in 1800. He died thirteen years later in 1813. Mary M. Bowie and Thomas Contee Bowie had several children together.
In 1815, Governor Robert Bowie was awarded the deed for 329 acres he bought from a Thomas Buchanan in 1807. Buchanan was the trustee appointed by the Prince George’s Circuit Court in the Chancery cause over the estate of one Dr. Robert Pottinger. The land was described as, “All that dwelling plantation of the said Robert Pottinger containing 275 acres and 54 acres vacant land”. It is not known where on this plantation Dr. Pottinger resided. It may have been in the vicinity of 18PR665 or it was possibly on a different portion of the estate acquired by someone else. In 1818, Governor Bowie devised the 275 acres to his daughter Mary M. Bowie.
The same year Mary M. Bowie inherited Dr. Pottinger’s land from her father she bought the adjacent property from her son, William Turner Wootton. This conveyance consisted of 510.25 acres out of various tracts that William had inherited from the paternal side of his family. By combining the tracts she received from her father and son, Mary M. Bowie created an 853 acre plantation she called “Bowieville”. Soon after consolidating the properties, she began construction of an extravagant mansion on that portion of the land she bought from her son. Little is known about whether the various parcels that made up Bowieville were actually occupied by their various owners, with the exception of Dr. Pottinger. It is likely that tenant farmers lived on some of the parcels.
The Bowieville plantation did not remain in operation for long, for Mary M. Bowie died unexpectedly in 1826. The plantation was left to her children and husband, Thomas Contee Bowie. The 1828 tax list for Collington and Western Branch Hundreds in Prince George's County lists the heirs of Mary M. Bowie as having possession of a total of 849 acres.
Mary M. Bowie’s son, Robert Bowie of Cedar Hill, was hard pressed to settle his mother’s accounts, forcing him to sell much of her personal property. This property included numerous slaves living on the plantation. Robert Bowie also became indebted to many neighbors and family members by trying to buy his sister’s portions of Bowieville, forcing him to mortgage the property several times. In 1836, Robert Bowie was forced to sell portions of his real estate holdings in order to raise enough funds to meet his debts. In 1846, a Chancery Court cause was brought against him by Upton and Brooke Beall. Exhibits summoned in the cause included a confirmation survey by Robert Young on a 115 acre tract of Bowieville conveyed to Robert C. Brooke by Robert Bowie in 1836. The result of the Chancery cause was a court decree requiring the sale of the remainder of the Bowieville plantation.
In 1849, William J. Berry and his wife, Sarah E. Berry, purchased “Bowieville” from Thomas L. Alexander, Trustee, appointed in the Chancery cause. William J. Berry was a prominent property owner in the area. His land holdings included the neighboring Chelsea plantation. In his 1866 will, William J. Berry bequeathed the Bowieville plantation (where William was living at the time of his death) to his son Jeremiah Berry. Before his father’s death, Jeremiah Berry married Catherine Boggs of Georgetown. In 1876, as a means of securing the mansion and land in his wife’s name, Jeremiah Berry conveyed 350 acres to Ellen M. Boggs, who in turn immediately conveyed it as a gift to her daughter, Catherine Boggs Berry. Jeremiah Berry also conveyed 8 acres to the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad in 1878 and 93 acres to James R. Herbert in 1879.
In 1907, Catherine (or Katherine) Berry conveyed 44 acres of “Bowieville”, known as “Church Lot”, to Irving L. Carrick. The remainder of this property was retained by Catherine Boggs Berry until 1927, when she bequeathed it to her youngest daughter, Mary (Berry) Lawrence. Soon after receiving Bowieville, Mary B. Lawrence sold another 105 acres to Irving L. Carrick. In 1933, Mary B. Lawrence sold a 216 acre tract, known as “the back farm of Bowieville” to Dr. Arthur Keene Meloy. She died later in 1933, at which time she bequeathed the remaining 220 acres of her property to her cousin, Francis Fairfax Roberts. Francis F. Roberts only held the property for five years before conveying it to Harold O. Knapp and his wife, Mary Page Knapp in 1935. The Knapps are believed to have occupied the site until sometime in the 1960s.
By the late 20th century, many of the portions of the Bowieville tract that had been sold off during the 19th and early 20th century were being re-assembled into a development tract. Eventually, a 925 acre parcel (including the site location) was assembled and plans were proposed to construct a combined golf course and residential development on much of the former Bowieville plantation lands. Survey of the 925 acre Oak Creek Club property began in 1999, due to the developers’ application for various required permits. Specific to Site 18PR665, Phase I work in the vicinity did not begin until 2004, when the property developers sought a wetland permit through the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Maryland Department of the Environment, which ultimately triggered Section 106 review of the country club plans and an eventual Phase II examination of the site.
Phase I work in 2004 entailed the excavation of nearly 3,500 shovel test pits placed at 15.2 m (50 ft) intervals, seven of which led to the discovery of 18PR665. The 7 positive shovel tests defined a domestic occupation scattered over an area roughly 61 X 76 m (200 X 250 ft) in extent. Phase I shovel test profiles at the site consisted of two strata. The first stratum was determined to be a plowzone. Of the 30 artifacts recovered, 16 were surface collected, 11 were found in the first stratum, and 3 were recovered from the second stratum. The assemblage consisted of 1 white salt-glazed stoneware sherd, 1 pearlware sherd, 1 whiteware sherd, brown-glazed earthenware, buff-bodied stoneware, 8 tobacco pipe fragments, brick fragments, olive bottle glass, coal, oyster shell, and an unidentified lithic.
Material recovery appeared to be confined mostly to an upper disturbed plowzone layer and no intact cultural features were found. However, based on the artifact recovery, it was determined that the site likely represented a small 18th century domestic occupation. Because of the resource’s antiquity, it was recommended that 18PR665 undergo Phase II testing.
Phase II work was carried out at 18PR665 later in 2004. Phase II work entailed the excavation of over 125 STPs spaced apart at 9.1 and 4.6 m (30 and 15 ft) intervals. STPs were excavated manually, using spade shovels and trowels. The STPs were also excavated stratigraphically in order to maintain vertical control over the artifacts recovered. The soils removed were dry-screened in the field using hardware cloth. Cultural materials recovered during the screening process were retained for analysis and bagged according to provenience (i.e. by site number, STP coordinate, and stratigraphic or feature designation). The resulting material recovery was plotted on a field map in order to display the distribution of artifacts. A soil profile was also prepared on a standardized form for each STP to document soil characteristics, strata depths, and artifacts recovered per stratum. Soils were described by texture and color using standard methods and nomenclature.
Slightly over half of these STPs produced positive artifact recoveries. Based on these positive STP locations, Site 18PR665 was estimated to have a dimension of 106.7 m (350 ft) north-south and 54.9 m (180 ft) east-west. The southern half of the tested area contained the densest concentration of historic materials. Based on the nature and density of artifacts recovered over the site area, nine test units were excavated. Seven of these units were excavated in the southern artifact concentration.
Test units were 91 cm square and were excavated manually, using flat shovels and trowels. These units were also excavated stratigraphically in order to maintain control over the vertical provenience of artifacts recovered. Selected strata in excess of 7.62 cm (3 in) were further excavated by arbitrary levels, which generally ranged in thickness from 5.08 to 10.16 cm (2 to 4 in). All excavated, non-feature soils were dry-screened in the field using hardware mesh. In the case of deeply excavated units (where safety became a concern), exploratory windows were initiated in validating the presence of subsoil. A standard report form was completed for each excavated stratum or arbitrary level within a stratum per test unit. As with shovel testing, soil characteristics, stratum depths and recovered cultural materials were documented on these forms. Included in the documentation of test unit soils was the preparation of a hand-drawn soil profile, which presented a more accurate view of the stratigraphy encountered. Only one profile was prepared for each test unit excavated and generally involved the wall with the clearest and most representative stratigraphy. Black and white photography was also used to document profiles.
Special excavation and documentation procedures were followed when possible cultural features were thought to have been identified within test units. Within reason, the overall goal was to expose the horizontal and vertical extent of these features. During the handling of potential features, a thorough documentation process was employed and included plan view hand-drawn sketches followed by photographs. In a few instances, soil samples were retained for possible examination in the laboratory. These samples were to be water-screened through 1/16 inch hardware mesh if a feature designation was made.
In total, 2,357 artifacts were recovered from the site during Phase II excavations. In total, seven prehistoric, 2,345 historic, and 5 modern materials were recovered. The site area was likely occupied between 1700 and 1780, given the lack or near absence of creamware, pearlware, and whiteware. In general, the site appears to represent a small, short-term, domestic occupation. Those occupying the site area were likely subsistence-level yeoman or tenant farmers. Based on faunal remains, hunting may have been used to help support the occupants’ diets.
The artifact recovery was confined to organic strata overlying subsoil. These strata were classified as plowzones, possible buried plowzones, and/or buried midden-like organic layers. Although several dark stains were identified and originally classified as cultural features, through further excavation they were determined to be rather superficial and represent the remains of old plowscars or rodent burrows, and/or slight topographic depressions.
The Phase II assemblage consisted of 2 activity item (including a metal bolt), 1,392 architectural artifacts (840 pieces of brick, 377 handwrought nails, 166 unidentifiable nails, mortar and window glass), 2 clothing artifacts (pewter buttons), 556 kitchen-related artifacts (including 75 ceramic sherds, 115 pieces of container glass, a butter knife, 27 pieces of oyster shell, and 337 animal bone/teeth fragments), 5 arms objects (gunflints and spalls), 227 kaolin pipe fragments, 167 miscellaneous objects (5 modern objects, 8 pieces of coal, and 154 unidentified items), and 7 prehistoric artifacts. The ceramic assemblage consisted of English delftware (22 sherds), North Devon (2), Nottingham (1), Staffordshire slipware (5), redware (7), whiteware (1), miscellaneous earthenware (11), Fulham stoneware (3), Westerwald stoneware (2), white salt-glazed stoneware (2), and miscellaneous stoneware (19).
In general, the artifacts recovered from Site 18PR665 represented a wide time range. However, the majority of artifacts were affiliated with the early to mid 18th century. Notably lacking from the site was a significant assemblage of creamware, implying that occupation preceded its introduction in the 1760s. This occupation would have pre-dated the Bowie family’s ownership of the property and the construction of the Bowieville manor house. At this early era, the property was likely occupied by a middle class planter or seated by a tenant farmer. However, the research potential of this site was lowered by a mostly fair-to-poor level of stratigraphic integrity and the absence of intact cultural features and buried artifact deposits. The possible razing of historic structures, an extensive history of agricultural plowing, and natural erosional and depositional processes dramatically impacted the yards connected with the residence at 18PR665. Due to disturbance, the site was determined not to be a significant archeological resource.
|
