Phase II and Phase III Archaeological Database and Inventory
18ST670 L-1
Diagnostic Artifact Data
Features
Summary
Site L-1 (18ST670) is a multicomponent site with Late Archaic and Middle and Late Woodland prehistoric components and 18th-20th century historic components. The site is located in Leonardtown, St. Mary’s County. It is in a fallow soybean/corn field situated on a moderate terrace along the side of an unnamed tributary of McIntosh Creek and adjacent to an active wetland. Soils at the site are of the Evesboro series, which are fine sandy loam, and well-drained soils. The site measures approximately 100 m (328.08’) north-south by 75 m (246’) east-west.
Phase I archival and archeological investigations were conducted during the winter of 1996 ahead of proposed construction of the Tudor Hall Village development on Breton Bay in Leonardtown. The investigations were a condition of approval in response to a request for a wetlands permit from the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. Goals of the investigation were to locate, identify, and delineate all prehistoric and historic cultural resources within the project area, to make preliminary assessments of the potential significance of those resources applying the National Register criteria, to assess the impact of the proposed development activities on the cultural resources situated within the project boundaries, and to formulate management recommendations concerning those resources. Of the 480-acres (194.33 ha) that were part of the proposed development, a total of 271.13-acres (109.77 ha) were subject to Phase I study. Site 18ST670 was located on the western edge of the central portion of the study area.
Archival research indicated that there has been human activity in the project area for thousands of years. Prehistoric activity and occupation in the general vicinity of the site can be dated from archeology back to at least the Early Archaic period (7,500 BC). Middle Archaic materials were found at a nearby site and Late Archaic diagnostics were found in the vicinity, for example on a broad flat terrace overlooking Breton Bay. Although not many in number, a few sites in the general project area contain materials definitively dating to the Early, Middle, and Late Woodland periods.
Documentary research revealed that in 1708, Leonardtown became the new county seat of St. Mary’s. The period of Rural Agrarian Intensification (1680-1815) provided the context for the evaluation of site 18ST670. Throughout the late 17th and early18th centuries Philip Lynes, a wealthy businessman, owned the property encompassing the proposed development area. As a member of the St. Mary’s Council, he was an active proponent of moving St. Mary’s County Court from St. Mary’s City to the head of Breton Bay. An act was passed that provided for the purchase of 50-acres of land belonging to Lynes called “Shepherd’s Old Field”. A county court house was erected on an acre of land and the remaining property was to be divided into 100 lots for the establishment of a town called ‘Seymour Towne’. Seymour Towne failed to develop and in 1728 a new commission was appointed to erect a new town at the location, a town that came to be called Leonard Town after then Maryland Governor Benedict Leonard Calvert. The original 50 acres of the former town were divided into 80 equal lots. In about 1741, Abraham Barnes purchased a parcel of land on Breton Bay, including Shepherd’s Old Field. By 1742, he had acquired all the land that encompassed the current boundaries of Leonardtown and the Tudor Hall development property. Barnes began construction of Tudor Hall in the 1740’s. The current project area, at that time, served as agricultural fields for Barnes’ Tudor Hall Plantation. There were no known structures. Philip Key purchased the property in 1813 and it remained with his family throughout the 19th century. A survey conducted in 1830 depicts a building called the ‘Over Seers House” within the project area. No other structures are indicated until the 20th century. Residential and agricultural complexes are located on the farm encompassed by the project area.
Phase I archeological investigations included pedestrian survey in areas where the slope was more than 15%, surface collection in fields where visibility was greater than 75%, and systematic sub-surface testing in all portions of the woodlot and areas where the slope was less than 15%. The project area was divided into 42 survey areas based on current land use patterns. Current and former agricultural fields and pasture areas were designated by a single alphabetic prefix (Areas A-U). Woodlot areas were designated by use of a double alphabetic prefix (Areas AA-AU). A temporary datum (N1000/E1000) was established for each survey area. Pedestrian survey and surface collection were done on established at 10 m intervals. Shovel tests were excavated at 20 m intervals along transects set at 20 m apart. All soils were screened through ¼” hardware cloth. All artifacts except for clearly modern debris were retained.
Site 18ST670 was situated in the southwestern corner of field Area L. A total of 308 shovel tests were originally excavated within the field with an additional 102 shovel tests dug at 10 m intervals in order to delineate three sites identified within the area. Of those, the site was identified by 11 positive shovel tests and an additional 41 shovel tests were excavated to delineate the site boundaries. Subsurface testing revealed a buried plowzone or a possible remnant B-horizon that may contain cultural features.
Results of the Phase I investigation suggested that the prehistoric material, which was evenly distributed across the site, generally represented an Archaic through Woodland period occupation. The broad range of artifacts indicated that the site could contribute information on prehistoric settlement patterns of Southern Maryland. The historic artifacts tended to cluster in the western portion of the site, and a diffuse brick scatter approximately 60 m in diameter was also noted in the northern portion of the site. The historic artifacts suggested a late 17th through mid-19th century range of occupation.
A total of 75 prehistoric artifacts were retained. There were 46 pieces of debitage and 3 cores. There were 6 biface tools (1 possible Brewerton point, 1 Levanna point, 1 possible Kirk corner notched, 1 contracting stemmed point, 1 drill, and 1 unidentified point fragment). There were 17 pieces of fire-cracked rock. There were 3 other lithic items (hammerstones). Cobbles of quartz and quartzite were locally procured while amounts of chalcedony, chert, jasper, and rhyolite were non-local materials.
A total of 41 historic artifacts were retained during the Phase I survey. There was 1 activity item (a lamp glass fragment). There were 4 architectural items (1 brick fragment and 3 window glass shards). There was 1 clothing item (a porcelain button). There were 29 kitchen related items (11 bottle glass fragments, 2 table glass fragments, 4 whiteware, 2 redware, 1 Slipware, 2 ironstone, 1 Buckley ware, 1 Delftware, 1 other tin-enameled earthenware, 1 unidentified ceramic sherd, 3 milk glass lid liner pieces). There were 3 miscellaneous items (unidentifiable melted glass pieces). There were 2 tobacco items (1 white clay pipe bowl fragment and 1 white clay stem fragment).
A Phase II study commenced at 18ST670 in the summer of 1997. The objectives of the Phase II were to identify the vertical and horizontal boundaries of the site, to identify the cultural affiliation and functional ranges represented by the site, to determine the level of integrity present, to provide an assessment of the potential significance of the site’s eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places, and to make management recommendations for the resource.
Phase II testing consisted of the excavation of 95 shovel tests at 10 m intervals along the previously established grid orientation to supplement information obtained during the Phase I survey. A total of fifteen 1X1 m test units were also dug. Four of the test units were placed near the brick scatter and 7 test units were placed in the area of the apparent early-mid 18th century activity identified during the Phase II shovel testing. Three test units were placed within clusters of prehistoric artifacts and a final test unit was placed on the southwestern corner of the site to investigate an area of aberrant stratigraphy identified during both phases of shovel testing. More than half of the artifacts were recovered from the upper plowzone, just over a quarter were recovered from the third, subplowzone layer and the remainder (less than 10%) were recovered from the second plowzone. No surface or sub-surface cultural features were identified.
The historic component was comprised of two distinct loci: Locus 1 and Locus 2. Locus 1, which was defined by a diffuse scatter of mid-19th through mid-20th century material, was identified in the eastern central portion of the site. Architectural and domestic material was found in association with a 40 X 40 m brick scatter that was located along the western boundary of the locus. Locus 1 was interpreted to most likely be a tenant house with an occupant of modest means. Locus 2, which was defined as a late 17th through mid-18th century, was defined by a moderate density concentration of domestic and architectural debris. It was centered along the southern edge of the site, about 10 m south of Locus 1. The presence of a small amount of plaster or daub and the lack of brick in Locus 2 suggested that there might have been an earthfast structure with a wattle-and-daub chimney. Such structures occur relatively early in the history of St. Mary’s. All artifacts from both loci were found in plow-disturbed contexts.
A total of 274 prehistoric artifacts were recovered during the Phase II investigation. There were 213 pieces of debitage and 7 cores. Four tools were found including 1 amorphous biface, 1 Bare Island point modified for use as a hafted scraper, 1 knife, and 1 preform. There were 41 fragments of fire-cracked rock. There were 4 other lithics (quartzite hammerstones). Quartz and quartzite make up more than 94% of the lithic items, with varieties of rhyolite, chert, chalcedony, and sandstone also present in the assemblage. There were 5 ceramic sherds (2 Mockley and 3 unidentified quartz-tempered sherds). The Bare Island point is typically dated to the Late Archaic period. Mockley ceramics are characteristic of the Middle Woodland period. This fits into the general time range of Late Archaic to the Late Woodland identified by the Phase I lithic assemblage.
A total of 383 historic artifacts were recovered during the Phase II investigation. There were 6 activity items (5 fragments of lamp glass and 1 possible brass latch fragment). There were 103 architectural items (46 brick fragments, 2 pieces of plaster or daub, 14 fragments of window glass, and 21 rosehead nails, 5 cut nails, and 15 unidentified nails). There was 1 clothing item (a glass button). There were 2 furniture items (brass tacks). There were 212 kitchen-related items (49 bottle glass fragments, 11 table glass pieces, 6 North Devon Gravel tempered, 1 Thin North Devon, 1 Sgraffito, 1 British Brown stoneware, 12 Staffordshire Slipware, 11 Buckley, 1 brown salt-glazed stoneware, 9 gray ironstone, 1 white ironstone, 5 whiteware, 3 white salt-glazed stoneware, 1 yellow ware, 2 Westerwald, 1 pearlware, 2 tin enameled earthenware, 1 Nottingham stoneware, 45 unidentified sherds, 1 cast iron pot or stove fragment, 4 animal bone, and 44 oyster shell fragments). There were 16 miscellaneous items (11 melted glass fragments, 4 pieces of coal, and 1 unidentified metal fragment). There was 1 personal item (a mirror fragment). There were 31 tobacco items (18 white clay pipe stem fragments and 13 bowl fragments). There were 11 arms-related items (8 English gunflint flakes or spalls and 3 French gunflint flakes.
Site L-1 (18ST670) is a multicomponent site with Late Archaic through Late Woodland components, a mid-19th through mid-20th century component, and a late 17th through mid-18th century component. The overall prehistoric assemblage was limited and suggested sporadic, short-term occupations indicative of a seasonally occupied hunting or resource procurement location. The historic component from each locus indicated the presence of a structure at each location. Only Locus 2 (late 17th to mid-18th century) of the historic component was suggested to have potential for further research. In particular, it could provide information on research questions related to settlement patterns during the Contact and Settlement Period of St. Mary’s County.
|
