Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18QU987 Church Hill Hunt Locus A-1
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
The Church Hill Hunt Locus A-1 Site (18QU987) is a multicomponent site with a prehistoric lithic scatter and the remains of a late 18th to 19th century historic farmstead. It is located in an active agricultural field on a narrow upland ridge overlooking a tributary of Southeast Creek, in Queen Anne’s County. A poorly defined intermittent or seasonal drainage defines the northern toe of the low rise; a second drainage defines the southern toe of the low rise. The crest of the ridge is well drained and plow zone soils are moderately deep. Drainage is moderate along the slope and plow zone soils increase substantially in thickness toward the toe of the rise, indicating moderate erosion or deflation of the ridge crest. Soils in the site area are primarily Sassafras and consist of a brown (10YR 4/3) sandy loam plow zone which varies from 23 cm in thickness on the rise crest to 46 cm in thickness along the northern toe of the rise. The plow zone was underlain by light yellowish brown (2.5Y6/4) sand subsoil except on the crest of the ridge where the subsoil was composed of strong brown (7.5YR4/6) sandy clay. The site measures approximately 80 m by 100m and encompasses 1.5 acres.
The site was identified in 2005 during Phase I/II investigations of approximately 16.9 acres of the proposed Church Hill Hunt Development. The planned development included the construction of residential dwellings, access roads, and supporting infrastructure. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) stated that the Phase I survey could be limited to the northern portions of the project area that are located along a tributary of Southeast Creek, as those areas had the higher potential of yielding significant archeological resources. Goals of the Phase I research were to identify and delineate all archeological resources within the survey area and to make preliminary assessment of the impacts of the proposed project on those resources. The objectives of the Phase II evaluation were to assess the vertical and horizontal boundaries and integrity of Site 18QU987.
Archival research suggested that the location of Site 18QU987 falls within the boundaries of a 45 acre parcel called ‘Lloyds Freshes’, as recorded in the 1798 tax list in the Town Hundred section of Queen Anne’s County. The tract was originally 1,000 acres and was patented to Philemon Loyd in 1679. In the 18th century, the property was owned by several Burgess’. In 1798, Lloyds Freshes was owned by Dr. Thomas Burgess. Burgess did not reside on the property but rather a James Thomas was recorded as the occupant. Tax records from 1798 indicated that there was 1 dwelling and 4 outhouses on the property. The property then went to John Brown, who owned it until his death in 1808. His niece, Sarah Betton, maintained ownership of the land until her death in 1837 and which time the tract was sold and the proceeds divided amongst her children. Family and friends were granted access in perpetuity to a graveyard located on the land. For the next century and a half, the property then went through several owners. At least 3 property owners owned slaves. Tax records from 1896 (when it was known as Williamson’s Farm) included 1 dwelling house, 3 outhouses, and sheds. In 2002, the tract containing the site was purchased by Church Hill Hunt LLC.
The project area was subdivided into 2 study areas (A and B). Site 18QU987 was identified in the northeastern portion of Area A and was called Locus A-1. During Phase I, shovel test pits (STPs) were excavated at 20 m intervals along transects placed 20 m apart. Site boundaries were further delineated by 5 m and 10 m interval STPs. A total of 109 STPs were excavated within Area A; 45 of those STPs were excavated in Locus A-1. The site was defined by a broad refuse scatter of domestic and architectural materials.
During the Phase I evaluation, 4 STPs revealed concentrations of fragmentary brick, or brick rubble, at the base of the plow zone. Characterized as probable pit features, these deposits appeared to represent the upper interface of at least 2 brick-filled pits. Located about 40 m (131 ft) apart, the feature fill consisted of concentrations of brick rubble within a matrix of gray sand. Some brick fragments appeared to have residual sand mortar and plaster skim coats adhering to their surfaces. Large brick fragments were apparent also on the ground surface in the vicinity of the features.
A total of 288 historic artifacts were retained from 18QU987 during the Phase I survey. There were 245 architectural items (231 brick fragments, 8 window glass fragments, 2 cut nails, 1 cut/wrought nail, and 3 indeterminate nails). Two clothing items included 1 Prosser porcelain button and 1 other porcelain button. There were 39 kitchen-related items (4 bottle glass fragments, 31 ceramic sherds - 8 creamware, 4 pearlware, 12 whiteware, 2 red-bodied earthenware, 3 unidentified refined earthenware, 2 buff-bodied stoneware, and 5 oyster shells). The single miscellaneous item was a coal fragment.
Phase II subsurface testing of the site included the excavation of nine 1 m² (3.3x3.3 ft) test units in the locations of cultural features identified during the Phase I survey. A soil probe was used to delineate the architectural (brick) features and to assist in the placement of the test units. Six test units (1, 3, and 5-8), configured in a 2 m (6.6 ft) by 3 m (9.8 ft) block, were placed on the crest of the ridge at the approximate center of the site in order to investigate a brick concentration (Feature 1-01). Test units 2, 4, and 9 were placed on the southern flank of the ridge in order to investigate other identified brick concentrations. The identified features were suggested by the excavators to possibly represent the locations of a dwelling and at least 1 associated outbuilding that were razed and filled during the 20th century.
Feature 1-01 was determined to be a historic cellar. Test units 5-7 located on the southern side of the block were excavated to the base of the cellar. The remaining units were excavated to the base of the plow zone. The cellar appeared to measure at least 6.1 m (20 ft) in dimension and was roughly square. There was some indication of chimney or wall collapse along the western and northern sides of the cellar. A thin layer of compact soil overlaid the dirt floor of the cellar and 2 brick “steps” composed of single courses of dry-laid brick were encountered just above and in the cellar floor. The alignment of Feature 1-01 closely follows the long axis of the ridge. It appeared to the excavators that the cellar was filled in during a single episode, likely associated with the demolition of the brick building that formerly stood at the location. Feature 1-01 yielded 9,876 artifacts, primarily brick and other architectural materials, comprising 68.5% of all artifacts recovered from the site. In addition to the architectural and domestic items recovered from the cellar fill, pieces of kiln furniture were also found. These spools or props were made from pieces of brick clay and had small pedestal surfaces on both ends and a slightly twisted and elongated mid-section. They were used to keep vessels balanced inside the kiln.
Feature 2-01 was interpreted to be the foundation remains of a brick chimney. Delineation of the feature’s horizontal extent indicated that the chimney may have been free standing and that the associated building was of frame construction, possibly resting on brick piers. The chimney would have been located along the northern wall of the structure. Both the fire back and the hearth were laid directly on the subsoil. The bricks used to construct the fire back and hearth were almost exclusively partial bricks that appeared to have been laid randomly or as each partial brick fit within the general construction. No intentional or distinctive bond pattern was evident. Feature 2-01 was left in place and was not excavated.
Two features were encountered in Test Unit 9. The southern half of Feature 9-01 and a portion of associated Feature 9-02 were exposed in the unit. Feature 9-01 was defined as a small concentration of brick rubble and fieldstone fragments. Identified as Feature 2 during the Phase I investigations, it was thought to possibly represent the remains of a foundation pier for a frame building. However, the Phase II investigations indicated that the deposit represented a discard episode rather than having resulted from a collapsed pier, although the possibility of it being a brick foundation pier was not completely abandoned. Feature 9-01 was left in place and was not excavated. Feature 9-02 was defined as a moderately thick historic deposit comprised of decayed brick fragments. It overlaid Feature 2-01 and Feature 9-01. Artifacts recovered from the feature suggested that the deposit represented a single fill event during the early 20th century. As such, Features 2-01 and 9-01 would have been open at least until that period.
Feature 4 was encountered during the Phase I survey but was not examined during the Phase II investigations. The feature was identified as a 1 meter square concentration of fragmentary brick overlain by a thick fill deposit. The fill deposit was thought to most likely be a continuation of Feature 9-02. It was suggested that Feature 4 may was possibly the remains of a brick foundation pier.
A total of 15,051 historic artifacts were recovered during the Phase II study. Activity-related items included 10 fragments of kiln furniture. There were 14,184 architectural items in the assemblage including 11,607 brick fragments, 2,121 pieces of mortar tempered with small pebbles, sand or oyster shell, 202 shards of window glass, 246 nails (2 wrought, 210 cut, 4 wire, 30 unidentified), 1 iron doorknob, 1 screw, 3 metal spikes, and 3 drain tile fragments. A total of 9 clothing items were found including 1 brass cuff-link, 2 brass buttons, 5 Prosser buttons, and 1 copper button. There were 779 kitchen items including 85 bottle glass fragments (only 1 machine made), 4 table glass fragments, 9 glass fragments made by an indeterminate method, 333 ceramic sherds (1 Jackfield, 1 unidentified brown earthenware, 27 creamware, 2 ironstone, 95 pearlware, 21 red-bodied earthenware, 16 white-bodied refined earthenware, 2 Rockingham, 137 whiteware, 2 yellow ware, 13 porcelain, 11 domestic stoneware (1 brown, 10 gray), 5 indeterminate stoneware (2 brown, 1 buff, 1 gray, 1 red), 41 mammal bone fragments, 34 bird bone fragments, 6 fish bones and 1 fish scale, 1 mussel shell, and 265 oyster shells and shell fragments. There were 62 miscellaneous objects including 53 indeterminate metal objects, 1 indeterminate Bakelite object, 4 pieces of coal and 4 fragments of lime. The single personal item was a fragment of a bone pocket knife inlay. Tobacco-related items included 4 ball clay pipe fragments (3 bowl and 1 stem). A rimfire cartridge and an unidentified bullet fragment comprise the arms-related items.
A small assemblage of prehistoric artifacts was also collected from the site. This included 10 pieces of debitage and 2 fire-cracked rock fragments. The prehistoric component was characterized as a low-density lithic scatter suggestive of a limited resource procurement location. All of the artifacts were recovered from within stratigraphic contexts that had been disturbed by historic activities, and therefore, lacked integrity. No prehistoric artifacts were recovered during the Phase I study of the site or within the surrounding archeological survey Areas A and B.
The archeological investigations suggested that the 18th to 19th century historic farmstead component of the Church Hill Hunt Locus A-1 Site (18QU987) possesses the qualities of significance, such as integrity and research potential, as defined by the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Based on the project plans as of 2006, the site was not going to be impacted by the planned development. It was determined that if project plans were altered and the site could not be avoided by the construction of the proposed development, then data recovery would be required for the historic component of Site 18QU987. The prehistoric component of the site was determined to not possess the qualities of significance as defined by the National Register Criteria for Evaluation and no additional investigation was suggested for that component of the site.
|
