PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE NORTH CAMPUS PARCEL OF THE ST. ELIZABETHS HOSPITAL EAST CAMPUS

Prepared For:

General Services Administration National Capital Region 301 7th Street SW Washington, D.C. 20407

January 2010

PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE NORTH CAMPUS PARCEL OF THE ST. ELIZABETHS HOSPITAL EAST CAMPUS

Prepared For:

General Services Administration National Capital Region 301 7th Street SW Washington, D.C. 20407

Prepared By:

Paul P. Kreisa, PhD, RPA and Jacqueline M. McDowell, MA

Paul P. Kreisa, PhD, RPA Principal Investigator

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 6110 Frost Place Laurel, Maryland 20707

In Cooperation With:

Jones Lang LaSalle 2000 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20006

January 2010

Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

The General Services Administration is considering the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus in Washington, D.C., for the potential construction of federal agency office space and associated parking. At present, several potential alternatives for the use of the North Campus parcel are being considered. Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. was contracted by the General Services Administration National Capital Region to conduct an initial assessment of the impact of this proposed federally-sponsored undertaking upon archaeological resources. The initial assessment included historical and archaeological background research, a field visit to the North Campus parcel, the creation of a model of archaeological site potential, and recommendations for additional identification-level investigations.

Based on this research, the North Campus parcel has a moderate to high probability for the presence of archaeological resources. There appears to be a moderate to high potential for Historic period resources, dating to the period before and after the federal acquisition of the property, and a moderate potential for Prehistoric Native American resources, in the western one-half of the North Campus parcel. The eastern one-half of the property has largely been impacted by the use of the area as a fly-ash landfill. However, a small area along the eastern boundary of the North Campus parcel appears not to have been disturbed by land-fill related activities. This area has a moderate to high potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American resources. Based on the potential to retain prehistoric Native American and Historic period archaeological resources, a Phase I archaeological survey of those portions of the property not adversely impacted by previous land usages is recommended.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. i Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. ii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ...... i

LIST OF FIGURES ...... v

LIST OF TABLES ...... vii

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Proposed Undertaking ...... 1 1.2 North Campus Parcel Description ...... 1 1.3 General Settig...... 3

2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS ...... 9 2.1 Background Research ...... 9 2.2 Survey Methods ...... 9 2.3 Area of Potential Effects ...... 9

3.0 PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC CONTEXTS ...... 11 3.1 Prehistoric Context...... 11 3.2 Historic Context ...... 21

4.0 SURVEYED ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...... 35 4.1 Previous Archaeological Investigations ...... 35 4.2 Archaeological Resources ...... 41

5.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT ...... 45 5.1 Prehistoric Native American Site Potential ...... 45 5.2 Historic Period Archaeological Site Potential ...... 46 5.3 Recommendations ...... 47

6.0 CONCLUSIONS...... 49

7.0 REFERENCES CITED ...... 51

APPENDIX A: QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL ...... 61

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. iii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. iv Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page

1. Alexandria and Anacostia 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles with St. Elizabeths Hospital North Campus parcel depicted ...... 2 2. North Camus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus ...... 3 3. 2005 aerial photograph with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 4 4. Map of East Campus buildings mentioned in text ...... 5 5. Maryland and Washington, D.C., physiographic provinces ...... 6 6. Mapped soils within the North Campus parcel ...... 7 7. Regional prehistoric chronology of the Washington, D.C., area ...... 12 8. Smith map of 1624 depicting Nacotchtank ...... 20 9. Hienton (1972) map of colonial Maryland land patents with St. Elizabeths patent depicted ...... 23 10. 1861 Boschke map with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 25 11. 1865 map of the Defenses of Washington with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 26 12. 1873 Eastman map with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 28 13. 1878 Hopkins map with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 29 14. 1898 15-minute USGS quadrangle with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 30 15. 1903 Baist map with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 31 16. 1927 Sanborn Fire Insurance map with the North Campus depicted ...... 32 17. 1945 Anacostia 15-minute USGS quadrangle with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 33 18. 1960 Sanborn Fire Insurance map with the North Campus parcel depicted ...... 34

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. v Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. vi Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

LIST OF TABLES Table Page

1. Archaeological sites within 1 mile of St. Elizabeths Hospital North Campus parcel ...... 42

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. vii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. viii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Phase IA Archaeological Assessment has been prepared to evaluate the effects of the proposed construction of office space and associated parking for federal agencies within the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. Currently, several options, differing in the number and size of buildings and parking facilities, and their placement within the North Campus parcel, are under consideration. This report constitutes part of broader environmental studies for the project being conducted by the National Capital Region of the General Services Administration. The approach used for this Phase IA archaeological site assessment was based on guidelines provided in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic Preservation (Federal Register 1983) and the Washington, D.C., Historic Preservation Office, Office of Planning Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia (District of Columbia Office of Planning 1998, as amended).

1.1 Proposed Undertaking

As part of the St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus Master Planning process, GSA is considering as an alternative to lease space from the Washington, D.C ., Government which is planning the construction of office and retail space as well as parking within the North Campus parcel of the St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. Several options, differing in the number and size of buildings and parking facilities, and their placement within the North Campus parcel, are under consideration.

1.2 North Campus Parcel Description

The proposed project site is located within the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C. The project site, known as the North Campus parcel, consists of an irregularly-shaped parcel that is located in the Anacostia neighborhood of Washington, D.C. (Figure 1). The irregular parcel has approximate maximal dimensions of 375 m (1,230 feet) north-south by 400 m (1,315 feet) east-west, and comprises a total area of approximately 23 acres (Figure 2). The parcel is located along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue to the west, the District of Columbia Unified Communications Center is to the north, the newly-constructed District of Columbia St. Elizabeths Hospital is to the east, and the remainder of the historic St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus is to the south (Figure 3). St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus is immediately to the west of Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue.

The East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital is a secure, fenced, and gated facility. Figure 4 depicts the current standing structures present within the North Campus. The building numbers cited on that map are used here. The North Campus parcel begins to the south of Cottage 7 (Building 80) and continues southward to the Blackburn Laboratory (Building 88). It is constrained to the west by a fence along Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and continues east to the east of the Temporary Homeless Shelter (Building 81A). Sycamore Drive forms a major north- south roadway within the North Campus parcel, while Magnolia Street connects the campus to Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue. There are eight major buildings currently present on the North Campus parcel. Four of these buildings are along Magnolia Street.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 1 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 1. Alexandria and Anacostia 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles with St. Elizabeths Hospital North Campus parcel depicted.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 2 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 2. North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus.

These consist of the Garage (Building 81), the Horse Barn (Building 83), Cottage 8 (Building 79), and Cottage 10 (Building 85). The Dix Pavilion (Building 120) fronts Sycamore Drive, while to the east of the Pavilion is the Temporary Homeless Shelter (Building 81A). The final two buildings currently within the North Campus parcel are to the south of the Dix Pavilion. These consist of Gatehouse 3 (Building 87) and the Blackburn Laboratory (Building 88). Each of these buildings is associated with access drives and parking lots. Small outbuildings are also present in the vicinity of a number of these structures.

1.3 General Setting

The St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus is located in the Western Shore Uplands region of the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province (Figure 5). According to the Preliminary Geologic Map of the District of Columbia, the St. Elizabeths East Campus contains unconsolidated materials, mainly sediments of the Coastal Plain. Specifically, the unconsolidated materials at the site include river terrace deposits, Potomac Group, and possibly alluvium and artificial fill (Froelich

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 3 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 3. 2005 Aerial photograph with the North Campus parcel outlined.

and Hack 1975). The Potomac Group has a thickness of 0 feet to 800 feet (0 m to 244 m) and contains interbedded quartzose gravels; protoquartzitic to orthoquartzitic argillaceous sands; and white, dark gray and multicolored silts and clays. The sediments of the Coastal Plain were deposited in the Cretaceous period. Unconsolidated and/or semiunconsolidated sediments have been deposited on the top of crystalline rock of the adjacent Piedmont Physiographic Province, creating an eastward thickening wedge.

The topography of the East Campus is characterized by a flat plateau at approximately 150 feet above mean sea level. The site has steep slopes and a ravine on the east side of the plateau that descends to a tributary of Stickfoot Branch (Figure 1). Currently, the eastern portion

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 4 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 4. Map of East Campus buildings mentioned in text.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 5 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

St. Elizabeths Hospital

Figure 5. Maryland and Washington, D.C., physiographic provinces (from Maryland Geological Survey 2001).

of the facility is forested (Figure 3). The western portion of the North Campus parcel houses hospital facilities. This area includes a number of buildings and associated parking lots, roads, and grass-covered lawns. Numerous specimen trees are also located in this area. The western portion of the North Campus parcel covers flat upland ridge formation.

The East Campus is located within an area of the Urban Land-Beltsville-Chillum soil association (Smith 1976). The Urban Land-Beltsville-Chillum association consists of urban land with deep, nearly level to steep soils that are underlain by sandy or gravelly deposits, typically on broad ridge tops in the uplands (Smith 1976).

Five different soil types are present within the North Campus (Figure 6). These include Udorthents, a fill type that is present east of the Dix Pavillion (Building 120), Urban Land, around the Dix Pavillion (Building 120), Matapeake-Urban Land Complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes, encompassing a large area along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, Beltsville-Urban Land Complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes, consisting of a small area in the south of the parcel, and Chillum-Urban Land Complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, comprising the ridge slope located in the eastern portion of the North Campus parcel. The definition of each indicates that these soil types may have been altered by grading (Smith 1976). Recent research suggests that site burial in

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 6 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 6. Mapped soils within the North Campus parcel.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 7 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel upland settings is a possibility if silt-based soil types have been derived from late Pleistocene loess are present, such as may be present within the North Campus parcel.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 8 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS

The methods used to conduct this Phase IA archaeological assessment of the proposed development within the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus include background research and a field visit to the proposed location. These methods are described in greater detail below and the area of potential effects for archaeological resources is defined.

2.1 Background Research

The identification of the potential for archaeological resources in and within the vicinity of the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths East Campus began with background and archival research. The initial literature search consisted of a review of existing surveys and identified archaeological sites. This determined the level of previous identification studies and the nature of archaeological sites within the vicinity of the North Campus parcel. Deeds were consulted at the District of Columbia Recorder of Deeds Office and federal census population schedules were examined on-line at the Ancestry.com web site (The Generations Network 2008). The agricultural schedules were examined at the National Archives. Background research entailed discussions with individuals and organizations knowledgeable about local history and resources. District of Columbia and St. Elizabeths Hospital histories and historic maps were consulted. Contract reports documenting the results of previous archaeological investigations conducted in the vicinity of the North Campus parcel were also reviewed as part of the background research conducted for this project, as were the District of Columbia archaeological site files. The District archaeological site files were reviewed to determine whether any archaeological sites in or near the subject property had previously been registered with the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office.

2.2 Survey Methods

No field survey activities, other than visual inspection, were conducted at this phase of investigations to determine the presence of archaeological resources within the North Campus parcel. Activities were restricted to a review of reports on archaeological surveys and sites located near the proposed facility location. Several historic maps dating between 1861 and 1960 and various histories of St. Elizabeths Hospital were also consulted. Based on these activities, a model of archaeological site potential within the North Campus parcel has been created, and is discussed in greater detail in Section 4 of this report.

2.3 Area of Potential Effects

The Area of Potential Effects (APE) with respect to archaeological resources is defined as the physical APE. The physical APE is the boundary of the property being developed for the GSA that will include the footprint of the buildings, associated parking facilities, and areas where infrastructure (such as utilities) improvements could create ground disturbances. The North Campus parcel consists of approximately 23 acres. This physical footprint is illustrated in Figures 1 through 3.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 9 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 10 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

3.0 PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC CONTEXTS

This section presents a general outline of prehistoric and historic cultural development in the Mid-Atlantic region in general, and more specifically in the Anacostia neighborhood of Washington, D. C. It is based on specific studies that form the sequence of regional prehistory and history that is presented below. The section includes a prehistoric context that has been derived from earlier research. Following is a history of the St. Elizabeths Hospital area and the institution itself. These overviews provide an interpretive framework for defining the types of archaeological sites and remains that could potentially be present within the North Campus parcel.

3.1 Prehistoric Context

Given the unique nature of Washington, D.C., (a relatively small but highly urbanized area), the prehistoric context presented below relies on evidence from the archaeological record of nearby Mid-Atlantic states, an early overview by Humphrey and Chambers (1985), and more recent overviews included in Fiedel et al. (2008) and Knepper et al. (2006). Both the Maryland Historical Trust (Maryland Historical Trust 2005) and the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (Raber 1985; see also Carr and Adavasio 2002; Raber and Cowin 2003; Raber et al. 1998) have published prehistoric contexts for their states. The Council of Virginia Archaeologists has published a four-volume set that synthesizes the prehistory of that state (Reinhart and Hodges 1990, 1991, 1992; Wittkofski and Reinhart 1989), and Potter (1993) has published an interpretation of late prehistoric-contact period Native American cultures along the Potomac River. These overviews, and other more specific studies, form the basis for the sequence of regional prehistory that is presented below (Figure 7).

Paleoindian Period (12,000 – 9000 BC). The Paleoindian period exhibits a pattern of cultural adaptation based on environmental conditions that marked the shift from the Late Pleistocene to the Early Holocene epoch (Figure 7). During this period of glacial retreat, the climate was probably three to eight degrees colder than at present, and vegetation consisted of spruce, pine, fir, and alder (Brush 1986:149; LeeDecker and Holt 1991:72). By the end of this period vegetation patterns appear to have been comprised of a mosaic of microhabitats, with mixed deciduous gallery forests near rivers, mixed coniferous forests and grasslands in foothill and valley floor settings, and coniferous forests on high ridges (Custer 1984; Kavanagh 1982).

Paleoindian settlements consisted of small hunting camps that often were associated with sources of high-quality lithic raw materials. Gardner (1983, 1989) has identified six different functional categories for Paleoindian sites in the nearby Shenandoah Valley: lithic quarries, reduction stations, quarry-related base camps, base camp maintenance stations, hunting stations, and isolated point find spots. Custer (1984) contends that these site types may be applicable to the wider Mid- Atlantic region as a whole. Acquisition of high-quality lithics served as a focal point for this system with hunting as its subsistence base, which focused on large game such as moose, elk, and deer (Kavanagh 1982). In contrast, the Shawnee-Minisink site provides evidence that other foodstuffs were exploited as well. The remains of fish, edible seeds, and plants were found in Paleoindian deposits at that site (McNett 1985).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 11 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 7. Regional prehistoric chronology of the Washington, D.C., area.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 12 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

In the archaeological record, early Paleoindian sites are usually characterized by the presence of large, fluted, lanceolate-shaped projectile points such as Clovis, while later Paleoindian components are identified with projectile point types such as Dalton and Hardaway (Justice 1987). Preferred lithic materials for these projectile points were high-quality cryptocrystalline stones such as jasper and chert. Clovis points have been found throughout North America, from the West Coast to the East Coast, and as far north as Nova Scotia.

Paleoindian materials are rare along the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. In 1988, Turner (1989:80) indicated that fewer than five Paleoindian projectile points per county have been found in the Virginia counties that border the Potomac River. The continuing Virginia Paleoindian fluted point survey documented nine additional points in Fairfax County, six in Loudon County, and one in Prince William County, between 1988 and 2004 (PIDBA 2009). The Smithsonian Institution collections, many obtained during the late nineteenth century when the area was more agricultural, include three Paleoindian projectile points from along the Anacostia River (Humphrey and Chambers 1985:8). Also of note, a Clovis point was recently found near the Aquasco district in south-central Prince George’s County (Gibb 2006). One reason for the paucity of Paleoindian projectile points and sites along these rivers may be the rise in water levels, in part due to the melting of the glaciers and the subsequent inundation of low-lying areas. While site burial has long been recognized in floodplain and terrace contexts, more recently site burial in upland formations has been demonstrated to have occurred (Wagner et al. 2008).

Early Archaic Period (9000 – 6500 BC). The Pre-Boreal/Boreal climatic episode, dating from 8500 to 6700 BC, for the most part corresponds to the Early Archaic period (Figure 7). Glacial recession continued and deciduous forests expanded, possibly leading to a greater proliferation of game species during this period. This climatic period, and the cultural period as well, in many ways marks a transition from late Pleistocene to Holocene patterns. Summer temperatures became warmer while the winters continued to be wetter than at present. This resulted in an expansion of coniferous and deciduous trees at the expense of grasslands. The distribution of forests consisted of pine and hemlock on slopes, mixed coniferous-deciduous forests in valley floors, and hydrophytic gallery forests along rivers (Carbone 1976; Kavanagh 1982:9). Kavanagh (1982:9) suggests that while little faunal evidence is available for this period, the environment most likely supported bear, deer, elk, and a variety of small game that was adapted to a northern climate. Evidence for this view comes from the Cactus Hill site (44SX202) faunal assemblage, which contains species that are still common in the region today (Whyte 1995). After 7000 BC the spread of deciduous woodlands into upland areas, which had previously been predominantly spruce, hemlock, and pine forests, opened new habitats to be exploited by both animals and humans (Custer 1990).

Some researchers have emphasized that the Early Archaic period in the Mid-Atlantic region evidences continuity in lifeways from the Paleoindian period, with the exception of changes in projectile point styles. The most distinctive cultural characteristic of the Early Archaic period was the appearance of notched projectile points, most notably the Kirk varieties (Justice 1987). Other point types associated with the initial portion of the Early Archaic period include Kessel, Taylor, and Big Sandy, all side-notched types, although the Palmer Side-Notched type may be more common in the District (Fiedel et al. 2008:9). The expansion of projectile point styles may be associated with the diversification of the Early Archaic period subsistence base. There was

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 13 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel also a continuation in the use of high-quality lithic materials until the end of this period when quartz and quartzite began to be more frequently used. Archeological investigations in the Patuxent River drainage show that the majority of Kirk points found are made of rhyolite. This indicates that people either traveled long distances to obtain preferred lithic raw materials or that long-range trade networks had been established by this time (Steponaitis 1980:68).

Several archeological sites in the District have yielded Early Archaic projectile points, although intact deposits dating to this period have not been found. McNett (1972:33) and Barse (2002) both identify Kirk Corner-Notched projectile points, at the Potomac Avenue site (51NW22) and Fletcher’s Boathouse site (51NW13), respectively. Both sites are located on floodplain formations of the Potomac River. Fiedel et al. (2008:9) also suggest that some of the projectile points illustrated by Holmes (1897) also date to the Early Archaic period.

Middle Archaic Period (6500 – 3000 BC). The beginning of the Middle Archaic period coincides with the Atlantic climatic episode, a warm, humid period associated with a gradual rise in sea level that led to the development of inland swamps (Barse and Beauregard 1994:9) (Figure 7). It was a time marked by increased summer droughts, sea level rise, grassland expansion into the Eastern Woodlands, and the appearance of new plant species (Carbone 1976:106; Hantman 1990:138). By 5000 BC there was the onset of a cooling trend. Gardner (1982) suggests that these climatic changes resulted in a zonally patterned floral and faunal species distribution across the region, leading to an increased emphasis on seasonal availability of resources.

The greater variety of plant resources allowed for an increase in general foraging as a supplement to hunting (Kavanagh 1982:50). Middle Archaic sites in Maryland tend to be clustered along tributaries of rivers and not in the estuarine sections of drainages (Steponaitis 1980). Settlements consisted of small base camps located in or near inland swamps that were convenient to seasonally available subsistence resources, as well as smaller temporary upland hunting camps. Researchers have noted that few components dating to the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods are present at Middle Archaic period sites. Gardner (1989:34) suggests that the immediate local ecology of the Paleoindian and Early Archaic sites became increasingly less suited to the needs of Native American groups as climate and vegetation changed during the Middle Archaic period.

Tool types which were common in Paleoindian and Early Archaic lithic assemblages, including unifacial tools and formal end scrapers, decreased in number during the Middle Archaic period (Egloff and McAvoy 1990:64). The bifurcate tradition of projectile points, including the LeCroy, St. Albans, and Kanawha types, began at this time, and ground-stone tools (axes, adzes, mauls, grinding stones, and nutting stones) also became widely utilized as subsistence and settlement patterns changed. Other projectile points dating to this period include the Stanly Stemmed/Neville, Morrow Mountain I and II, Guilford, and Piscataway types (Justice 1987). The Piscataway type is found late in this time period and at its earliest dates to the transition from the Middle Archaic to the Late Archaic period (Kavanagh 1982:50). The use of high- quality lithic material for tools was not as common during this period as it was during the preceeding periods (Fiedel et al. 2008:10).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 14 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

A few sites in the District have yielded diagnostic projectile points dating to the Middle Archaic period, but similar to the Early Archaic period, intact deposits are rare. McNett (1972:33) identifies several projectile points dating to this period from 51NW22, including a LeCroy Bifurcate Base point and an unidentified serrated point found at the site by a local collector. Inashima (1985) reports several projectile points from 51NW80 as dating to the Early Archaic and Late Archaic periods, although Fiedel et al. (2008:24) suggest that these points are better classified as Middle Archaic types. All of these sites are located along the Potomac River in northwest Washington, D.C. Closer to the Shepherd Parkway, Berger & Associates (1986) identifies Brewerton and Halifax points from the Howard Road site (51SE34) as dating to the Middle Archaic period, although other researchers would identify the point types as Late Archaic. Fiedel et al. (2008:11) also suggest that the bifurcate base points illustrated by Holmes (1897) date to this period and that other illustrated points are examples of the Morrow Mountain and Guilford types.

Late Archaic Period (3000 – 1000 BC). The environment during the Late Archaic period is characterized by a warmer and drier climate, a continued rise in sea level, the expansion of oak- hickory forests onto valley floors and hillsides, and the reappearance of grasslands (Carbone 1976:189) (Figure 7). As well, the distribution of faunal species characteristic of the early Historic period was established at this time. Seasonal hunting and foraging continued, but exploitation of riverine resources rapidly became an important part of the subsistence base. Several settlement trends are associated with these changes, including an intensified occupation of the uplands, the initial establishment of large semisedentary base camps along rivers and streams, and an overall increase in the number of sites dating to this period.

During the Late Archaic period the Mid-Atlantic region was exposed to cultural influences originating from both the Southeast and Northeast. Some of the projectile point types dating to this period include Otter Creek, Vosburg, and Brewerton variants belonging to the Laurentian tradition of the Northeast, and the Lackawaxen and Bare Island types (locally Holmes) belonging to the Piedmont tradition of the Southeast. Halifax Side-Notched and Vernon points also date to the initial portion of the Late Archaic period. As mentioned above, the use of the Piscataway type, first made at the end of the Middle Archaic period, continued into the initial portion of the Late Archaic period. During the later part of the Late Archaic period, sometimes referred to as the Terminal Late Archaic or Terminal Archaic period (ca. 2000 – 1000 BC), the Broadspear tradition began (Figure 7) (Fiedel et al. 2008:11). This tradition is characterized by projectile point types such as Savannah River and Susquehanna Broadspear. The Broadspear tradition was followed by the Fishtail tradition (Kavanagh 1982). Besides the formal chipped-stone tools used during the Late Archaic period, there appears to have been an increase in the production of expedient tools made from flakes and crude cores (Klein and Klatka 1991:98). Throughout this period, quartz and quartzite were the most frequently used lithics, although rhyolite and argillite were also occasionally used in stone-tool manufacture.

The archeological record in the District documents an increase in site numbers for the Late Archaic period in contrast to the Early Archaic and Middle Archaic periods. A number of sites in the Rock Creek/Potomac River area of northwest Washington, D.C., have significant Late Archaic period components. One of the earliest recognized sites is 51NW1, the Piney Branch Quarry site first identified by William Holmes. Reanalysis of points collected by Holmes

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 15 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel identified a series of Susquehanna Broadspear points made of rhyolite (Fiedel et al. 2008). In the same region, Fiedel et al. (2008) located small but intensively occupied base camps along Maddox Branch that contain Late Archaic period components. Site 51NW158 is perhaps the best example, having yielded a number of Halifax, Lamoka, Holmes, and Savannah River points. Quartz and quartzite dominate the debitage assemblage, although rhyolite is also well- represented. Inashima (1985) also identified a Vernon and Holmes or Bare Island point, suggesting the presence of a Late Archaic component, at 51NW79. Closer to the Potomac River, McNett (1972:33) identified a series of small side-notched and square-stemmed points, as well as Piscataway points, as evidence for a Late Archaic period occupation at 51NW22. Finally, Fletcher’s Boathouse (51NW13), at the confluence of Rock Creek and the Potomac River, yielded Lamoka, Wading River, Savannah River, and Susquehanna Broadspear points, but no intact deposits dating to this period (Barse 2002).

Closer to St. Elizabeths Hospital, two sites have been identified as having late Archaic period components. A single untyped projectile point was identified as Late Archaic from the Jenkins Farm site (51SE4) (LeeDecker and Holt 1994). More substantial is the number of Late Archaic period points found at the Howard Road site (51SE34) (Berger & Associates1986). The Howard Road site is interpreted to be a large base camp that was repeatedly occupied. Projectile points associated with this component include Halifax, Vernon, Crispin Broadspear, Lackawaxen, and Brewerton. In addition, investigators identified a biface finishing area as dating to the Late Archaic period at this site. Cobble reduction and tool manufacture were important activities, with late-stage manufacturing debris more common than early-stage decortication debris, although early-stage manufacture is well-represented by 35 cores and numerous biface blanks and performs at this site.

Early Woodland Period (1000 – 500 BC). The Early Woodland period generally coincides with the Sub-Boreal climatic episode, an episode that approximates modern conditions although attenuated cycles of climatic change have been identified (Carbone 1976) (Figure 7). Johnson and Peebles (1983) and Brush (1986) indicate that by this time period, forest composition was essentially similar to that of the modern period although differences in the frequency of species may have been present. Similarly, Eshelman and Grady (1986) suggest that a modern array of faunal species were present in the region by this time.

Ceramic manufacture and increased sedentism traditionally mark the beginning of the Early Woodland period. The earliest types of ceramics found along the nearby Coastal Plain of Maryland are the steatite-tempered Marcey Creek and Selden Island wares, which are associated with fishtail-type points, including Orient and Dry Creek (Figure 7). The Marcey Creek and Selden Island wares were replaced by the sand- or crushed-quartz-tempered Accokeek wares (Figure 7). These ceramics are associated with Calvert and Rossville point types (Wesler et al. 1981:183).

Early Woodland settlement patterns were riverine-based and often located at the junction of freshwater and brackish streams. Smaller camps were established seasonally in areas where there was high potential for the exploitation of numerous and differing resources. Gardner (1982:60) has proposed that the settlement-subsistence system of this period included a series of base camps where populations aggregated to exploit seasonal resources. Groups occupying the base

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 16 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel camps harvested anadromous fish in the spring and early summer and exploited estuarine resources in the fall and early winter. Barber (1991) argues for an increase in sedentism during this period, in part as a result of the stabilization of sea level that in turn created additional stable environments. These newly formed environmental zones could be exploited by Native American groups.

A number of sites with Early Woodland period components have been investigated in the District. Once again, a number of these sites are located in the Rock Creek/Potomac River locality. Inashima (1985) reports the recovery of Accokeek ceramics at 51NW79 while Fiedel et al. (2008) note the presence of this ceramic type at sites 51NW51 and 51NW158 in Rock Creek Park. Site 51NW158, a large base camp along Maddox Branch, also yielded Marcey Creek and Seldon Island ceramics. The Peter House (51NW103) and Whitehust West (51NW117W) sites, located in the Whitehurst Freeway vicinity, yielded Accokeek ceramics and a number of Early Woodland projectile point types (Knepper et al. 2006). Along the Potomac River, Orient Fishtail points were found at the Fletcher’s Boathouse site (Barse 2002) while Susquehanna Broadspear and Drybrook-like points were identified in a collection from the Potomac Avenue site (McNett 1972:33). No intact Early Woodland deposits were found at any of these sites. The Howard Road site (51SE34) in the Anacostia neighborhood also yielded Accokeek ceramics and an Orient Fishtail projectile point, but no intact deposits dating to this period were encountered (Berger & Associates 1986).

Middle Woodland Period (500 BC – AD 1000). A diversification of ceramic vessel sizes, forms, and styles of surface decoration characterizes the Middle Woodland period. The major ceramic type in the region was the shell-tempered Mockley type (characteristic of the Mockley phase), which evolved from the sand-tempered Popes Creek type (Barse and Beauregard 1994:14) (Figure 7). Projectile point types associated with the Mockley phase are Fox Creek, Rossville, Selby Bay (knives), and Jack’s Reef. The presence of non-local rhyolite, argillite, and jasper lithics at a few sites suggests that localized exchange networks may have operated between the Coastal Plain and areas in both western Maryland and at the New Jersey fall line (Barse and Beauregard 1994:15). Evidently, the Potomac River valley was largely peripheral to the cultural influences of the Adena and Hopewell manifestations of the Ohio River valley to the west, although limited trade did take place (Humphrey and Chambers 1985:18). Evidence for Adena influence has been found as close to the Potomac River region as the Delmarva Peninsula (Custer 1989).

At this time, base-camp settlements located at freshwater/brackish water junctions, a common location for Early Woodland period camps, were abandoned in favor of broad floodplain sites where maximal resource exploitation of tidal and non-tidal aquatic resources was possible (Davis et al. 1997). Site size also increased during this period, and the larger Middle Woodland sites have been known to include pit storage features and shell middens. There is no substantial evidence of agriculture during this time.

More substantial artifact assemblages, and sites with intact deposits, have been found in the District dating to the Middle Woodland period. Once again, several of the most important sites are located in the Rock Creek/Potomac River locality. Sites 51NW158 and 51NW171, located along Maddox Branch and interpreted as base camps, have yielded Mockley and Albemarle

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 17 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel ceramics and Selby Bay projectile points (Fiedel et al. 2008). Moving toward the Potomac River, one of the earliest of such sites recognized is the Potomac Avenue site (51NW22) (McNett 1972). The American University excavations uncovered a line of post molds and two small pit features which McNett (1972) interprets as a wall of a large structure and associated pit features dating to the Middle Woodland period. While no diagnostic artifacts were found in the post molds or pits, the preponderance of Middle Woodland artifacts at this site led the investigators to date the features to that time period (McNett 1972:34). Ceramics from the site include Popes Creek and Accokeek types. McNett (1972:34) suggests the site was a small fishing camp.

The nearby Fletcher’s Boathouse site excavations yielded nine large circular pits, several smaller pits, and post molds, along with ceramics, lithics, and fire-cracked rock (Barse 2002). While the site yielded artifacts suggesting its occupation from the Early Archaic through the Middle Woodland periods, the features and most temporally diagnostic artifacts are attributed to the Middle Woodland period. The Middle Woodland ceramics include Albemarle, Popes Creek, and Mockley wares that represent the remains of four different jar forms, and Selby Bay, Rossville, Yadkin, and Piscataway projectile points. Lithic debris is dominated by late- stage reduction flakes, and quartz and quartzite are the most common materials used, although rhyolite was also recovered. The large pits, about 8 feet in diameter and 5 feet deep, are refuse-filled storage pits. Two radiocarbon dates place the Middle Woodland occupation of 51NW13 at 100 BC. Barse (2002) suggests that this site represents repeated occupations by small Middle Woodland groups.

Also in the Rock Creek/Potomac River locality, Middle Woodland artifacts were found at the Peter House and Whitehurst West sites (Knepper et al. 2006). Mockley and Popes Creek ceramics and projectile points dating to the Middle Woodland period were found at the two sites. Two radiocarbon assays dating to the Middle Woodland period were also obtained from somewhat mixed deposits at the Peter House site (Knepper et al. 2006). Excavated during the same Whitehurst Freeway project, the nearby Ramp3 site has yielded perhaps the single-most important Middle Woodland feature in the District (Knepper et al. 2006). An intact Middle Woodland oval pit feature located at that site contained a cremation burial and a large number of grave goods, including Popes Creek ceramics. A radiocarbon assay securely dates the feature to the Middle Woodland period. The remains were of a female aged 40 years, and the grave goods included an elaborate incised antler comb, antler discs, perforated sharks teeth, groundstone pendants, a wooden bead, and a phallic effigy. Knepper et al. (2006) suggest that the artifacts and burial have similarities with those of the Kipp Island phase of New York and Ontario. The artifacts found with the Ramp3 burial are interpreted to indicate external influences on Middle Woodland populations in the Coastal Plain region, although whether these influences are due to diffusion or population movement is not known. The authors favor a movement of proto- Algonquian speakers from the north into the Middle Atlantic region during the Middle Woodland period.

Closer to St. Elizabeths Hospital, Berger & Associates (1986) document what appears to be a large Middle Woodland occupation at the Howard Road site (51SE34). The Howard Road site is interpreted to be a large base camp that was repeatedly occupied. The Middle Woodland period component is represented by Mockley and Popes Creek ceramics and Selby Bay projectile points. However, no intact deposits dating to this period were identified at this site.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 18 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Late Woodland Period (AD 900 – 1600). The single most important, and common, element across much of eastern North America during the Late Woodland period was the adoption of agriculturally based subsistence systems (Anderson and Mainfort 2002). In the Mid-Atlantic region, the establishment of a system of stable agriculture during the Late Woodland period led to the development of sedentary floodplain village communities, some of which were fortified by palisades (Turner 1992). Kavanagh (1983) notes four major changes that occurred during the Late Woodland period in the Monocacy River valley: the appearance of large, permanent or semipermanent villages made possible by the cultivation of maize, beans, and squash; the presence of ceramics at numerous sites, including open camps and habitations; an intensification of riverine orientation through time; and a shift towards the use of local lithic resources, implying a breakdown in procurement networks. Hunting, gathering, and fishing were still practiced, but to a lesser extent than before. Predominant Coastal Plain ceramics of the period include the fabric-impressed Townsend series and the cord-marked Potomac Creek series (Figure 7). Ceramic decoration and embellishment appear to be very important at this time. Triangular projectile points are also associated with the Late Woodland period.

After AD 1500 there was an increase in social and political activity among native tribes in Maryland and Virginia, and it has been suggested that an alliance of coastal plain Algonquian groups had formed prior to European contact (Potter 1993:151) (Figure 7). There has been considerable debate among researchers as to the nature of Late Woodland social organization in this region prior to AD 1500. For instance, Turner (1992) characterizes the socio-political organization of groups settled on the Coastal Plain as being ranked, while Hantman and Klein (1992) indicate that at least for the Piedmont region, archaeologists have interpreted Late Woodland societies as ranging from egalitarian, to temporary hierarchies, to chiefdoms. With the transition to the Contact period, many of these issues are resolved.

Similar to the Middle Woodland period, a number of Late Woodland sites that contain intact deposits have been recently identified in the District. Once again, a number of these sites are located in the Rock Creek/Potomac River locality. All three sites investigated by Knepper et al. (2006) for the Whitehurst Freeway project yielded Late Woodland artifacts. Fire-cracked rock features associated with Townsend series ceramics were found at both the Peter House and Whitehurst West sites. Small amounts of Potomac Creek ceramics and Levanna and triangular points were also recovered from these features. One fire-cracked-rock feature at Peter House yielded a radiocarbon assay that dates to the late Woodland period. At all three of the Whitehurst Freeway sites, the upper mixed midden-like levels were also dominated by Late Woodland artifacts. Fiedel et al. (2008) also located Late Woodland period artifacts at 51NW158, a base camp site along Maddox Branch. Materials from this site include Keyser, Potomac Creek, and Rappahannock Incised ceramics and Levanna projectile points. A Late Woodland period component was also identified at the Howard Road site in the Anacostia neighborhood (Berger & Associates 1986). Potomac Creek ceramics and triangular projectile points were found at this large base camp site, although no intact Late Woodland deposits were identified.

Contact Period (AD 1600 – ca. 1650). At the beginning of the seventeenth century, the lower Anacostia River area was populated by the Necostins, a tribe visited by English colonists from Jamestown beginning in 1608. Fortunately, the colonists provided many details on the

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 19 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel settlements and culture they encountered. The area now known as Anacostia was described in 1608 as having houses scattered among agricultural fields along the eastern bank of the Anacostia River (Figure 8). Also present was a palisaded village called Nacotchtank. Nacotchtank was the residence of the chief of the Necostins and was also said to contain religious structures. The Necostin settlement system appears to be typical of the southern coastal portion of the Mid-Atlantic region; Potter (1993) has documented similar settlement patterns among the Contact period groups along the Virginia Coastal Plain.

Figure 8. Smith map of 1624 depicting Nacotchtank (located by arrow; Papenfuse and Coale 2003) (west at top of map).

Increasingly, the relationship between the English and Necostins became based on trade, with trade in beaver pelts especially important. Evidently, Nacotchtank was a major center where hundreds would congregate, as trade was in part based on control by the Necostins of beaver pelts from the area. In 1622, a party of colonists from Jamestown, in alliance with other nearby tribes, plundered and burned Nacotchtank. An attempted return to Nacotchtank in 1623 by the Jamestown colonists, ostensibly to trade, was thwarted when the party was ambushed. Henry Fleet, a colonist taken prisoner during the 1623 conflict, was held captive for five years. After

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 20 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel escaping, Fleet returned to Nacotchtank in 1632, marking the last mention of this village. Fiedel et al. (2008:19) suggest that the Necostin merged with the Piscataway by 1694, as evidenced by the mention of the presence of an Anacostin king with Piscataway leaders during a council held at St. Mary’s City.

To date the Necostin palisaded village of Nacotchtank has not been found. A site that is most likely similar to Nacotchtank is the Moyaone site that was excavated during the 1940s (Stephenson et al. 1963). Investigations at this site yielded an outline of a circular palisade that had been rebuilt a number of times. At its largest, the palisade was 400 feet in diameter, enclosing an area of less than 3 acres. Within the palisade walls were up to 30 dwellings, although the exact number occupied at any one time is difficult to determine due to the numerous episodes of structure abandonment and rebuilding noted by the archaeologists. Similarly, the locations of the houses scattered among the agricultural fields mentioned by the Jamestown colonists have not been positively identified although numerous sites with Contact period artifacts have been located along the Anacostia River.

Not mentioned in relation to the Nacotchtank village by the Jamestown colonists is the use of ossuaries. Ossuaries, or communal graves in which the periodic re-interment of bundle burials took place, are associated with the late prehistoric time period (Late Woodland to Contact period) and have been documented in many parts of the Mid-Atlantic region (Boyd and Boyd 1992; Curry 1999; Feest 1978; Hantman and Gold 2002; Herbert 2002). Two have been located and excavated at Bolling AFB, containing 63 and 70 individuals, respectively, although no European trade goods were found at these sites (Stewart and Wedel 1937). These ossuaries are thought to be typically located within 1 km of a major village (Curry 1999). If correct, and if the ossuaries do date to the Contact period, Nacotchtank would most likely be located within Bolling AFB. In contrast, others have suggested that this village is located north of the Sousa Bridge (Engineering-Science 1989a). That would place Nacotchtank approximately 4 miles northeast of the Shepherd Parkway. Needless to say, the exact location of this Contact period village has yet to be identified and fully accepted by researchers.

3.2 Historic Context

The histories of Maryland, Washington, D.C., and St. Elizabeths Hospital have been covered in numerous publications, information from which has been incorporated into this archaeological site assessment. The most comprehensive account of the development of the hospital is the historical overview provided in the St. Elizabeths Hospital Historic Resources Management Plan (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a), compiled for St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus.

St. Elizabeths Hospital and adjoining areas were originally part of Maryland until 1790, when the State ceded 69 square miles of territory to form the District of Columbia. Well before that event, during the seventeenth century, the first permanent European settlement in the proprietary colony of Maryland was at St. Mary’s City. Throughout the seventeenth century settlement spread northward from St. Mary’s City along the Potomac River. Settlement was overwhelmingly agrarian in nature and was organized around large landholdings (Bryan 1914:14). This manorial- style system was based on land grants of tracts of 1,000 acres or more made to influential

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 21 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel planters. The first and most important crop in Maryland was tobacco, which was shipped to European markets for sale and consumption.

The St. Elizabeths area provides an example of this process. The East Campus was originally part of a tract, known as St. Elizabeths, patented to John Charman IV in 1666 (Figure 9). Charman had first come to North America in 1648 as an indentured servant. He advanced his social standing, in part by transporting individuals from England to Maryland. Of the 600 acres patented to Charman, 400 acres were specifically granted to him for transporting seven individuals from England to Maryland. It is not known whether Charman actually ever inhabited or made any improvements on his patent.

Following the original patent, St. Elizabeths changed hands a number of times through the early 1700s. Charman sold the property in 1670 to Colonel Benjamin Rozer, an influential and important local merchant, for 5,000 pounds of tobacco. Rozer subsequently sold St. Elizabeths in 1674 to Richard Beck for 12,000 pounds of tobacco, while Beck in turn sold the property back to Rozer in 1676 for 10,000 pounds of tobacco. Colonel Rozer’s son Notely inherited St. Elizabeths upon the death of his father in 1681. A 1700 survey of an adjacent land parcel suggests Beck might have been tenanting St. Elizabeths during this period. The survey refers to the property as ―Beck’s Land.‖ Documents dated to 1703 indicate that Notely Rozer leased 300 acres of St. Elizabeths to Thomas Fletchall for 500 pounds of tobacco with the stipulation that Fletchall plant an orchard of 200 apple trees.

By the early 1700s most of the land along the Potomac River had been surveyed and patented, but actual settlement remained sparse. Several small hamlets coalesced and developed into larger settlements and commercial centers, including Bladensburg and Georgetown in Maryland and Alexandria in Virginia (Georgetown later became part of the District of Columbia). These settlements became important ports for the shipment of tobacco.

After Notely Rozer’s death in 1727, Captain Walter Hoxon obtained the property in a lottery to satisfy debts against Rozer’s estate. Upon the death of Captain Hoxon, his son, Hyde Hoxon, inherited St. Elizabeths. In 1754 Hyde Hoxon died and his son, Walter Hoxon, became the new owner of St. Elizabeths. Walter Hoxon held the property through the Revolutionary War until his death in 1783.

The relative isolation of the region was reflected during the Revolutionary War, when little importance was placed on this area by either the British or Americans. After the Revolutionary War, George Washington provided the main impetus in focusing the Federal government’s attention on the Potomac River region. For nearly a decade, Congress debated the location of a permanent site for the Federal government. Washington recommended ―…a bowl-like depression at the base of the Cumberland Mountains, heavily forested, barely populated, and forked by the junction of two rivers – the Potomac …. and the Anacostia‖ (Lewis 1976:5). On July 16, 1790, Congress established the Potomac region as the new Federal capital, and Maryland ceded 69 square miles of land for this purpose, including the St. Elizabeths tract and adjacent areas.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 22 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 9. Hienton (1972) map of colonial Maryland land patents, with St. Elizabeths patent depicted (north at top of map).

A 1790 map made by John Frederick Augustus Priggs (1790) and 1798 tax records provide details on the years immediately after the Revolutionary War and the death of Walter Hoxon. While the 1790 map depicts no structures in the St. Elizabeths area, the 1798 tax records indicate that a house consisting of 4,800 square feet was present, along with two outbuildings, on the St. Elizabeths property. It is not known whether this structure was located within the North Campus parcel. The tax records value the property at $7,176 and list it as in the possession of Thomas Middleton. Evidently, Middleton rented the property from the Hoxon family, as Stanislaus Hoxon acquired the St. Elizabeths property in 1799.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 23 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Stanislaus Hoxon sold St. Elizabeths in 1802 to John Barry. The original transfer recorded the property as 710 acres, but a subsequent survey indicated that it totaled 749 acres. John Barry held this property until his death in 1820, when it was sold to pay estate debts, to Robert Barry. In 1837 the St. Elizabeths property was divided into two parcels, with David Barry receiving that portion which includes St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. David Barry in turn sold the property to James G. Coombs. A map dating to this period (Coote 1839) does not depict any structures in the vicinity of the North Campus parcel. No deed was identified in which James G. Coombs sold his St. Elizabeth’s property to another individual, and the chain-of-title becomes unclear at this point until the end of the 1860s.

It was during the 1840s and early 1850s that Dorothea Dix began to prompt the Federal government to build a model hospital for the insane in the Washington, D.C., area. In 1852 Congress appropriated $100,000 for this purpose, and the St. Elizabeths area was chosen as the site. Dix persuaded Thomas Blagden to sell a 185-acre tract (the West Campus) to the Federal government in 1852 for $27,000. With the property purchased, groundbreaking began on the hospital in 1852, and the first patients were admitted in 1855. Initially, the institution was known as the Government Hospital for the Insane. It became more commonly known as St. Elizabeths Hospital during the Civil War, and it is referred to by that name throughout this assessment report. A number of the hospital buildings were constructed at St. Elizabeths between 1855 and 1861. The earliest map that depicts the newly constructed institute is the 1855 Thomas Ustick Walter plan map of the grounds, but it does not depict structures in the area that was to become the East Campus.

At about this same time the Anacostia area first began its transition into a subdivision of Washington, D.C. (Beauchamp n.d.). Previously, James Barry had purchased much of the area to the northeast of St. Elizabeths in 1791, giving it the name of Barry Farm. Beginning in the 1820s, many of the other large landholders around St. Elizabeths began to subdivide and sell their property, both to speculators and to small farmers supplying foodstuffs to the Washington, D.C., market. In 1854, a 240-acre plot located to the northeast of Barry Farm was subdivided into residential lots. Called Uniontown, developers were attempting to draw workers from the Navy Shipyard, located across the Anacostia River and to the north, but land speculation hindered the development. By the beginning of the Civil War, the area around St. Elizabeths was comprised of a mix of smallholding farmers, subdivided residential lots held by speculators, and the beginnings of the Anacostia neighborhood.

Two maps made just prior to the Civil War, dated 1860 and 1861, illustrate the evolution of St. Elizabeths during the early years of the property. The 1860 Charles Nichols map and the 1861 A. Boschke map differ in a few minor details. The 1860 map depicts the main hospital but provide no details of the area to be included within the East Campus. The 1861 Boschke map, in contrast, does provide the first indication of the use of the East Campus area prior to its purchase and incorporation into St. Elizabeths Hospital (Figure 10). Minimally five structures are depicted within the East Campus area. One structure is to the south of the North Campus parcel, while a second structure is within the south half of the North Campus parcel. A group of structures, identified as being on the T. Williams parcel, appears to be located to the north of the North Parcel.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 24 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 10. 1861 Boschke map with the North Campus parcel depicted (northeast at top of map).

The coming of the Civil War initiated a number of changes in the operation of St. Elizabeths Hospital. Portions of the site were used as a depot for cavalry horses and a marine company was encamped on the hospital grounds. Adjacent to the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital was Fort Snyder (Figure 11). Fort Snyder was a moderate-sized fort with a 630 foot perimeter that was designed to hold eight artillery pieces (Cooling and Owen 1988).As the war continued, a number of the buildings were used to treat the wounded, and an artificial limb manufactory was established on site. As the wounded soldiers feared the stigma attached to being treated in the Government Hospital for the Insane, the name St. Elizabeths Hospital began to be used. A cemetery was established on the west slope of the West Campus for the interment of the deceased.

After the Civil War both the Anacostia neighborhood and St. Elizabeths Hospital began to change. The Freedman’s Bureau purchased the Barry Farm property adjacent to St. Elizabeths Hospital and subdivided the land into one-acre plots (Beauchamp n.d.). These plots were sold to freed slaves and within two years 500 families owned property. The Uniontown area to the northeast developed at a slower rate. By 1871, only 80 families were residing in that part of the Anacostia neighborhood. Still, the area grew relatively slowly, so that by the 1920s the Anacostia neighborhood was still semi-rural.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 25 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 11. 1865 map of the Defenses of Washington with the North Campus parcel depicted (Davis et al. 2003: Plate 89) (north at top of map).

While the chain-of-title for the East Campus is unclear for this parcel from the 1840s to the late 1860s, it is known that in 1869 Alexander and Mary Shepherd and Charles Nichols sold the part of St. Elizabeths, including the North Campus parcel, to the federal government (District of Columbia, Recorder of Deeds Office, Deed Book 604:189). The deed transferring St. Elizabeths from the Shepherds and Nichols did not specify how they acquired the property. Alexander Shepherd was identified as a head of household in the 1860 and 1870 population schedules of the census in the District of Columbia where he was described as a gas fitter and plumber/steamfitter, respectively (U.S. Census Bureau 1860, 1870a). The 1870 census indicates he owned real estate valued at 250,000 dollars. Alexander Shepherd also was identified in the agricultural schedule of 1870 with a 213-acre farm, but this probably was not St. Elizabeths since he had sold that property in 1869 (U.S. Census Bureau 1870b). It is unlikely, then, that Shepherd resided at the St. Elizabeths property. It is more likely that one or more tenants were present at the farm; however, no deeds of lease were found at the Recorder of Deeds Office to verify this assumption. Alexander Shepherd, commonly known as ―Boss‖ Shepherd, was elected as a councilman when he was 26, became a member of the Levy Court in 1867, and was made head of the Citizens’ Reform Association in 1870 (Proctor et al. 1930:130–131). As head of the Board of Public Works during the Territorial Period, he was responsible for major infrastructural

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 26 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel improvements, although at great cost. After the Panic of 1873, he was appointed the last Territorial Governor of the District (Proctor et al. 1930:139).

By the 1870s St. Elizabeths Hospital had reached capacity, a condition which necessitated the construction of additional buildings, although this is not readily evident in the 1873 Frank Eastman map of the hospital (Figure 12). That map depicts the main hospital building and a number of smaller, nearby hospital buildings. Also new is the construction of a line of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad at the base of the bluffs along the Anacostia River. By the time of this map, the Government Hospital for the Insane had acquired additional tracts of land. One parcel, discussed in the previous paragraph, stood across Nichols Avenue from the original tract and comprised what is now St. Elizabeths East Campus. Then known as the Shepherd Farm, this ca. 175-acre tract had been acquired in 1869 (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:44). The acquisition of this tract allowed hospital planners to shift the agricultural areas then located on the West Campus to the newly acquired farm (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:44). Subsequently, this transfer opened up formerly agricultural areas on the West Campus to the construction of additional hospital buildings.

The 1873 Eastman map may depict three structures in the vicinity of the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths East Campus (Figure 12). One is along Nichols Avenue near the head of a ravine, likely placing this structure just to the north of the North Campus parcel. A second structure is located on a broad upland ridge and may also be just north of the North Campus parcel. Another possible structure appears to be present within the south half of the North Campus parcel along Nichols Avenue. The 1878 Hopkins map of the area better illustrates the structures present within the vicinity of the North Campus parcel (Figure 13).

It appears that six structures are within or near the boundaries of the North Campus parcel. The three structures depicted on the 1861 Boschke map as belonging to T. Williams remain, along with an additional structure, and these appear to be north of the North Campus parcel. Two structures are located along Nichols Avenue within the south half of the North Campus parcel. One of these structures may have been illustrated on the 1861 Boschke map.

While the federal government purchased the East Campus property in 1869, intensive development of the site did not begin until the twentieth century (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:1). Devrouax & Purnell (1993b:27) indicate that planning for the construction of hospital buildings began as early as 1900-1901, but that the actual construction was associated with Superintendant William Alanson White, who was appointed to the post in 1903 (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:42). The 1898 USGS 15-minute quadrangle of the area confirms this sequence of events (Figure 14). Two (perhaps three) structures are located to the north of the North Campus parcel at this time, while an additional two are depicted within the south half of the North Campus parcel. The placement and number of structures on the 1898 map are essentially similar to that as depicted on the 1878 Hopkins map. These structures were likely associated with the agricultural use of the East Campus area at this time.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 27 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 12. 1873 Eastman map with the North Campus parcel depicted (northwest at top of map).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 28 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 13. 1878 Hopkins map with the North Campus parcel depicted (northeast at top of map).

While the history of construction and land use has been extensively researched for the West Campus, that for the East Campus has not been investigated in the same detail. Much of the discussion presented here is based on previous research conducted for the West Campus and a review of historic maps. The West Campus historic structures management plan indicates that the initial hospital structures constructed on the East Campus consisted of two cottages for farm laborers and two buildings for ―disturbed, destructive, and untidy males‖ (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:73). However, it became apparent during the last decade of the nineteenth century that the West Campus was both overcrowded and had few areas on which additional facilities could be constructed. When Congress appropriated $13 million for the construction of 22 buildings at St. Elizabeths Hospital to alleviate the overcrowding, the intensified use of the East Campus became essential (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:25). Known as the Richardson expansion for then- Superintendent Richardson, four patient buildings were opened on the East Campus in 1904 (Devrouax & Purnell 1993a:27; O’Donnell et al. 2005:IV.8). Evidently, agriculturally related buildings had been constructed on the East Campus prior to that date, including the construction of the stable in 1902 (O’Donnell et al. 2005:IV.8). After ca. 1900, most new construction at St. Elizabeths shifted to the East Campus (Devrouax & Purnell:78).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 29 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 14. 1898 15-minute USGS quadrangle with North Campus parcel depicted (north at top of map).

This shift in construction patterns can be seen in a 1903 Baist map and a 1927 Sanborn map (Figures 15 and 16). The 1903 map depicts the four patient buildings to the south and a cluster of what are most likely agricultural buildings and the stable to the north within or near the North Campus project area. By 1927 to the south of the North Campus parcel, a large collection of structures, including laboratories, training shops, and several patient-related buildings, among others, had been constructed. Of this group, only the Blackburn Laboratory, which still stands, is located within the North Campus parcel. To the north within the North Campus parcel is the Garage (Building 81) that still stands and was constructed in 1921, a Horse Barn (Building 83), which still stands, a larger H-shaped structure, no longer present, and three small cottage-sized structures along Nichols Avenue, also likely no longer present (see Figure 4). O’Donnell et al. (2005:IV.8) indicated that seven buildings had been constructed on the East Campus shortly after 1916, and these structures are likely depicted on the 1927 Sanborn map (Figure 16). Other structures, such as the Canteen, represent buildings relocated from the West Campus (O’Donnell et al. 2005:IV.8).

The 1945 Anacostia 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle depicts the continued growth in number of hospital structures within the North Campus parcel (Figure 17). Within the North Campus project area, minimally three small structures are located along Nichols Avenue and three larger

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 30 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 15. 1903 Baist map with North Campus depicted (top of map to north).

structures are present to the east within the North Campus parcel. The small structures along the roadway may be the small cottage-like buildings depicted on the 1927 Sanborn map. One larger building is the Garage (Building 81), while another is the Horse Barn (Building 83) (see Figure 4). The H-shaped building, the third large structure, is also present, as is the Blackburn Laboratory at the south boundary of the parcel. The placement and number of structures on the 1945 map are essentially similar to that depicted on the 1927 Sanborn map.

Overholser (1956:22) indicates that the next period of substantial construction within the East Campus began after World War II. A Sanborn map that depicts all changes between 1927 and 1960 can be used to trace the post-World War II development at the East Campus (Figure 18). The number of buildings present in the area to the south of the North Campus parcel was significantly expanded, while relatively fewer changes took place within the North Campus parcel itself. Most notably, the H-shaped structure depicted on the 1927 Sanborn and 1945 quadrangle maps is absent, having been replaced by the Dix Pavilion (Building 120), which was constructed in 1954 (see Figure 4). Also absent from the Sanborn map are the three cottage-like structures that had been present along Nichols Avenue.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 31 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 16. 1927 Sanborn Fire Insurance map with the North Campus parcel depicted (northwest at top of map).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 32 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 17. 1945 Anacostia 15-minute USGS quadrangle with the North Campus parcel depicted (north at top of map).

In 1987, the Federal Government transferred the East Campus (consisting of 173 acres with 41 buildings) to the District of Columbia. The District has operated the hospital on the East Campus since that time. In the 1990s all patient uses were moved to the East Campus and the use of the West Campus buildings was discontinued. The 1960 structure configuration remains, to a large extent, the same to this day. The Garage (Building 81), Horse Barn (Building 83), and Dix Pavilion (Building 120) all remain (see Figure 4). A temporary homeless shelter has been added (Building 81A), as have two small cottages (see Figure 4). These cottages were moved to the North Campus parcel as part of the mitigation of adverse effects associated with the recently constructed Unified Communications Center.

The Anacostia neighborhood has also continued to change during the second half of the twentieth century. During this time the population of Anacostia increased, leading to the demolition of much of the Barry Farm community for public housing (Beauchamp n.d.). The Suitland Parkway and other transportation routes were constructed, fragmenting the community and cutting it off from the Anacostia River. Today, portions of Anacostia are undergoing redevelopment.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 33 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Figure 18. 1960 Sanborn Fire Insurance map with the North Campus parcel depicted (northwest at top of map).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 34 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

4.0 SURVEYED ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Previously conducted archaeological investigations as well as the characteristics of known archaeological sites were reviewed as part of this assessment study in an attempt to create a model of archaeological site sensitivity for the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus (see Section 5). A 1-mile radius around the North Campus parcel was reviewed. Information on both the previously conducted investigations as well as the known archaeological sites was obtained from the DC HPO.

4.1 Previous Archaeological Investigations

Archaeologists have noted that interest in the archaeology of the District of Columbia area has a long history, but one that has to some extent been thwarted by urban growth (e.g., Humphrey and Chambers 1985). During the late nineteenth century avocational archaeologists collecting artifacts in fields along the east bank of the Anacostia River from Giesboro Point to Bennings donated over 5,000 artifacts to the Smithsonian Institution (Devrouax & Purnell 1993b) (see Crowell 2000 for more on these collectors and the collections made in the District of Columbia). Halsell et al. (n.d.) indicate that the many artifacts being found in plowed fields around the District of Columbia area at that time helped to stimulate the founding of the Anthropological Society of Washington.

About the same time, William Henry Holmes, curator of the U.S. National Museum (now the Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution) conducted extensive research in the area, including the identification of many sites along the Potomac River. In 1897 Holmes published ―Stone Implements of the Potomac-Chesapeake Tidewater Province‖, a seminal work that summarized over 10 years of survey, excavation, and research on sites in the Washington, D.C., area (Humphrey and Chambers 1985). Another early contributor was S. V. Proudfit (1889) who conducted a survey of various Potomac River drainages, resulting in the location of numerous sites along the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. Proudfit (1889) suggested that the Contact period Native American village of Nacotchtank was located on the east bank of the Anacostia River, due east of the Capitol Building, and he reported concentrations of stone tools and pottery in that area. In contrast, Holmes et al. (1891) suggested that Nacotchtank was located on the east bank of the Anacostia River opposite the U.S. Navy Yard.

Relatively few archeological investigations were undertaken in the District of Columbia between circa 1900 and 1960 (Devrouax & Purnell 1993b). However, of those few undertaken, several notable projects did build upon the base of nineteenth-century research. Of most importance to the current study area is the investigation of two late prehistoric Native American ossuaries (mass graves) excavated by T. Dale Stewart and Waldo Wedel in 1936 (Stewart and Wedel 1937). The ossuaries are thought to be associated with the contact period Nacotchtank village, located along the east shore of the Anacostia River. Both ossuaries are located at Bolling Field and were discovered during an enlargement of that facility. Bolling Field lies approximately 1 mile to the southwest of St. Elizabeths Hospital. Later, during the 1960s, the National Science Foundation funded the Potomac River Archeological Survey (Humphrey and Chambers 1985). This project resulted in the delineation of an outline of the prehistory of this area.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 35 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

The 1970s heralded the initiation of archeological projects conducted to comply with newly enacted historic preservation legislation. The understanding of the prehistory of Washington, D.C., and the surrounding states has been greatly enriched by the results of these projects. Hume (1975) conducted one of the earliest cultural resource management projects in the Anacostia area. The force main project area was located along the east shore of the Anacostia River from the Maryland border south to Poplar Point, and resulted in the investigation of numerous sites. A limited archeological survey of portions of St. Elizabeths Hospital was conducted during the late 1970s as part of the development of a Master Plan for the facility. Unfortunately, the survey was poorly documented, and methods used and areas investigated are today unknown (Devrouax & Purnell Architects-Planners, P.C. 1993b).

Of the projects conducted in the vicinity of St. Elizabeths Hospital, a number have yielded evidence for the prehistoric occupation of the Anacostia River area. The earlier of the two, the investigations at Howard Road/Barry Farm were conducted prior to the construction of the Anacostia Metro Station (Berger & Associates 1986). Excavations consisted of shovel test pits and 1-x-1-m test units placed within 13 lots of the former Barry Farm subdivision. This subdivision was created after the Civil War when the Freedmen’s Bureau acquired the 375-acre Barry Farm property. Subsequently, 1-acre parcels were sold to freed slaves. Investigations identified up to 2 m of fill in locations along an infilled creek that overlay historic and prehistoric archeological deposits. Prehistoric artifacts were confined to a former plow zone—no features or intact deposits were identified, although two activity areas were defined. One such area was a cobble quarry and core reduction area, while the other was a biface reduction and finishing area dated to the Late Archaic period. Overall, the lithics and ceramics recovered from the project area indicate that the site, registered as 51SE34, was occupied from the Middle Archaic through the Contact period. Berger & Associates (1986) suggest that the site represents a base camp where occupations shifted over time. Activities associated with this site include lithic quarrying and tool manufacture and food gathering, preparation, and processing. The Historic period occupation is represented by a sheet midden associated with the domestic structure present on each of the lots. Most artifacts recovered dated to the twentieth century and not the initial post- Civil War period. The material represents domestic occupations and frequent cycles of construction, renovation or repair, and demolition. Berger (1986) also indicates that the artifacts are suggestive of a high degree of self-sufficiency, including reuse of materials, gardening, and animal husbandry.

Subsequently, the Jenkins Farm site (51SE4) was investigated prior to the construction of the Congress Heights Metro Station (LeeDecker and Holt 1994). This site is located adjacent to the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital on Alabama Avenue and near the Civil War Fort Snyder. Field investigations included close-interval shovel test pits and 1-x-1-m test units, and both prehistoric and historic artifacts were recovered and features identified. The prehistoric artifacts, totaling 600, are somewhat scattered across the property, although the material appears more concentrated in the vicinity of a ravine and drainage and associated small spring or wetland. Not surprisingly, the historic artifacts cluster around a structure foundation. Most prehistoric artifacts were recovered from a plow zone. Material includes unidentified Woodland period ceramics and a Vernon projectile point dating to the Late Archaic period. Lithic debris is mainly quartz and quartzite, with lesser amounts of rhyolite, argillite, chert, and jasper. The one prehistoric feature is a post mold that lacked temporally diagnostic artifacts. LeeDecker and Holt (1994) suggest

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 36 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel the prehistoric component at 51SE4 represents a camp repeatedly visited during prehistory. The Historic period component includes a sheet midden and structural features. LeeDecker and Holt (1994) indicate that the site is typical of the small farms established in the area during the early nineteenth century, while also documenting a transformation of the property during the 1870s. These two projects, both in close proximity to the Shepherd Parkway, among others conducted in Washington, D.C., indicate that despite urbanization, intact prehistoric and historic archeological deposits often remain.

Three other projects in northwest Washington, D.C., suggest the potential for significant archeological resources in urban areas and even when capped by large deposits of fill. Data recovery efforts were conducted at the Fletcher’s Boathouse site (51NW13) (Barse 2002) and at three locations within the Whitehurst Freeway project area (Knepper et al. 2006). In contrast, Fieldel et al. (2008) demonstrate that significant site type and locational information can be recovered from Phase I survey efforts in urban park settings. The first project mentioned, the Fletcher’s Boathouse site data recovery excavations, was conducted at the location of a proposed handicapped access ramp in the C&O Canal Historic Park along the Potomac River (Barse 2002). Prehistoric Native American artifacts were located in the ramp vicinity, and a block of test units, covering the ramp area, was excavated. Nine large circular pits, several smaller pits, and post molds, along with ceramics, lithics, and fire-cracked rock, were found during the excavations under two to four feet of fill. While the site yielded artifacts suggesting its occupation from the Early Archaic through the Middle Woodland periods, the features and most temporally diagnostic artifacts are attributed to the Middle Woodland period. The Middle Woodland ceramics include the Albemarle, Popes Creek, and Mockley wares that represent the remains of four different jar forms, and Selby Bay, Rossville, Yadkin, and Piscataway projectile points. Lithic debris is dominated by late- stage reduction flakes, and quartz and quartzite are the most common materials used, although rhyolite was also recovered. The large pits, about 8 feet in diameter and 5 feet deep, are refuse-filled storage pits. Two radiocarbon dates place the Middle Woodland occupation of 51NW13 at 100 BC. Barse (2002) suggests that this site represents repeated occupations by small Middle Woodland groups. Earlier occupations are represented by projectile points, and the nature of these is less certain.

The second data recovery project documents the results of excavations at three sites at the locations of proposed improvements to the Whitehurst Freeway (Knepper et al. 2006). All three sites, Peter House (51NW103), Ramp3 (51NW117), and Whitehurst West (51NW117W), were located on terrace formations along the east bank of Rock Creek near its confluence with the Potomac River. Prehistoric deposits were found beneath 30 cm to 4 m of fill. Upon removal of the fill, 1-x-1-m test units were excavated to sample the prehistoric deposits. Deposits at each site included midden-like fill and separate features. The midden-like fill included a mix of ceramics, lithics, bone, and charcoal. Detailed analysis of the vertical stratigraphy of diagnostic artifacts indicated that the midden-like deposits showed substantial mixture. The two features located at Peter House were both fire-cracked-rock concentrations with ceramics. One feature had Potomac Creek and Townsend ceramics, while the other contained Townsend ceramics and Levanna and triangular projectile points. Aside from these diagnostic artifacts a radiocarbon date suggests the occupation of this site during the twelfth century AD. Two Middle Woodland radiocarbon dates were obtained from charcoal recovered from the midden-like deposits at the Peter House site. A similar fire-cracked-rock feature was found at the Whitehust West site.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 37 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Radiocarbon dates and associated Townsend ceramics indicate that this feature also dates to the Late Woodland period. The last of the three sites investigated, Ramp3, yielded the most interesting feature located during this project. While Ramp3 contained a sheet midden in which Late Woodland artifacts were dominant, an oval feature containing a cremation burial and numerous grave goods was also present. This feature, located below the sheet midden, was associated with Popes Creek ceramics and yielded a Middle Woodland radiocarbon date.

Lastly, a recent survey of portions of Rock Creek Park indicates that the less developed areas within the District have the potential for the presence of archeological sites. The survey of portions of the park, reported by Fiedel et al. (2008), provide valuable information on the location and nature of sites in uplands and along small streams. Fiedel et al. (2008) document this four-year project conducted for the National Park Service that, among other tasks, surveyed to varying degrees of intensity 1,280 acres of upland and stream floodplain formations. The field investigations included the excavation of 1,000 shovel test pits across the 1,280 acres and the pedestrian survey of forested upland areas where surface visibility was adequate. The survey resulted in the identification of 51 archeological sites—40 newly identified sites and 11 previously registered sites. Several site types were defined, including quarries, small lithic scatters representing short-term occupations, lithic scatters on upland ridges with dense concentrations of material, thought to be seasonal camps or workshops, and longer-term or more continuously occupied sites located on small stream floodplain formations. These sites are thought to be some type of base camp. Historic period sites included Colonial tenant sites, sites associated with Fort Stevens, and African-American and other post-Civil War tenant sites. The results of this survey indicate that archeological sites can be located by pedestrian survey in upland settings where visibility is adequate, that small lithic scatters are common, that base camps may be located along small streams, and that cobble quarries may be present along drainages and ravines, including sloped areas typically not surveyed.

A few other archeological survey projects have been conducted near St. Elizabeths Hospital. Perhaps most relevant is the South Capitol Street corridor roadway improvements project that resulted in Phase IA and IB studies conducted in the area between the Anacostia River and Firth- Sterling Avenue (Parsons Brinkerhoff 2006, 2007). The Phase IA study suggested that the areas in the vicinity of Stickfoot Branch and along the former bank of the Anacostia River had high potential for the presence of archeological sites. Subsequent Phase IB survey investigations found the area to be disturbed and covered by fill. Other projects have been conducted at a number of standing historic structures, including the Frederick Douglas National Historic Site, in city parks (e.g., LeeDecker and Friedlander 1984), and at current military and related facilities, such as Bolling Air Force Base (e.g., Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence 1996). No archeological sites were defined as a result of these investigations (DC HPO archeological site file check conducted April 2009).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 38 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Previous Archaeological Investigations at St. Elizabeths Hospital. No known archaeological investigations have been conducted within the North Campus parcel of the St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. Devrouax & Purnell (1993b) indicate that American University conducted an archeological survey of portions of St. Elizabeths Hospital during the late 1970s in conjunction with the development of a Master Plan for the facility. Unfortunately, documentation of the project is lacking. Little information is available concerning the methods used, areas surveyed, or results of the investigations. As such, this early survey effort conducted at St. Elizabeths Hospital fails to provide any useful information.

Balicki et al. (2002) conducted a Phase IA investigation that reviewed the area on which the New Hospital has been constructed, which is to the east of St. Elizabeths Hospital. The authors concluded that the area had a low potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological sites and recommended that no additional investigations be conducted. Immediately north of St. Elizabeths Hospital, URS (2001) documented a Phase IB survey conducted at the location of the District’s Unified Communications Center constructed on the East Campus. A shovel-test-pit survey of 1 acre was conducted as most of the 5-acre parcel was covered by fly ash fill. The area covered by fly ash was considered disturbed and not further investigated. While numerous artifacts were recovered, investigators determined all were from disturbed contexts. No sites were defined, and no additional investigations were recommended.

Hunter Research, Inc. (HRI) conducted a Phase I archeological site survey of portions of St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus in 2004–2005 (Burrow et al. 2005). The Phase I field investigations were guided by a review of previous archeological research undertaken at St. Elizabeths Hospital and in the surrounding area, an examination of historic maps in an attempt to identify the location of previously demolished structures, and models of archeological site location based on land formation and distance from the Anacostia River. A walkover of the project area was conducted, after which more than 360 shovel tests were excavated. In addition, two areas were investigated by the use of a metal detector. The results of investigations included the location of a twentieth-century trash disposal area (51SE49) and a prehistoric site (51SE48) (Burrow et al. 2005), at which additional investigations were conducted (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). Based on the results of the Phase II investigations, 51SE49 is eligible for listing in the NRHP (Kreisa and McDowell 2008).

Subsequent to the HRI investigations at the West Campus, Greenhorne & O’Mara (G&O) conducted an intensive Phase I survey across much of the West Campus and Phase II NRHP evaluation excavations at two locations. The intensive Phase I survey targeted several areas that had not been investigated during previous archaeological survey projects or were locations of pre-hospital and early hospital structures within the West Campus (Kreisa et al. 2008). During that project, 15 survey tracts were investigated at St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus. A total of 1,472 shovel tests was excavated, and 520 of these tests yielded artifacts. Artifacts ranged from prehistoric Native American tool manufacturing debris to eighteenth- and nineteenth- century domestic artifacts, late nineteenth- and twentieth-century structural materials, and other artifacts associated with the construction and use of the area as a hospital facility. While a large number of artifacts were found throughout the survey tracts, no dense concentrations of material indicative of midden deposits were located. Instead, much of the material appears to be relatively light but continuous scatters of structural debris and other artifacts most likely displaced from

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 39 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel their point of origin and spread during structure demolition. As such, no archaeological sites are defined in any of the survey tracts.

However, two features in survey tracts C and H, associated with early Hospital structures, were found (Kreisa et al. 2008). These features consist of a portion of a stone foundation located in the vicinity of the gardener’s house in Area C and a brick foundation located in the vicinity of the Oakes Building in Area H. Additional investigations to better understand the nature of these features and determine whether either is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, were recommended (Kreisa et al. 2008). Two other areas were recommended for investigation (Kreisa et al. 2008). Portions of survey tracts J and K were covered by asphalt parking lots. Both of these areas are possible locations of deposits associated with ca. 1850s civilian residences.

G&O also conducted Phase II NRHP evaluations at the Point site (51SE058), a mixed prehistoric Native American and historic eighteenth-century site, and the Powerhouse Ravine site (51SE049), an early twentieth-century historic site associated with St. Elizabeths Hospital (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). Based on the investigations, discussed below, neither site was found to be eligible for listing in the NRHP.

Field crews from G&O conducted the Phase II NRHP evaluation of 51SE049 between September and October 2006. The field investigations included a controlled surface (grid unit) collection, the excavation of ten shovel tests and eight 1-x-1-m test units, and the compilation of a site plan (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). The excavations resulted in the recovery of 207 artifacts that date to both the Prehistoric and Historic periods. It is not certain to which specific period the two prehistoric artifacts date. The dating of the historic component is much more certain. Artifacts, principally bottles and ceramics, date the historic occupation to the early twentieth century, perhaps between ca. 1920 and 1960. The historic component at 51SE049 represents the refuse from a nearby institutional structure. The nearest medically-related structure to 51SE049 is Building J, which was constructed in 1901. Buildings J, K, and L were sited near the Toner Group of infirmary buildings and cottages that housed 45–60 patients. These structures functioned as detached hospital wards for chronic patients needing medical care. Both Buildings J and K were detached hospital wards for chronic white female patients and were used as convalescent facilities. While it is likely that the material recovered during the investigations at the Powerhouse Ravine site is associated with Building J, none of the artifacts provide a definitive link. The artifacts include dinnerware, presumably for serving patients or staff (plates, cups and bowls), personal items (shoe parts, cosmetics bottle, and buttons), also presumably from patients or staff, and medicinal and beverage bottles, which may provide the most direct link to the occupants of Building J. Other items, such as liquor and beer bottles, may postdate the Hospital period. All of these artifacts have been found in an essentially surficial deposit.

Field crews from G&O conducted the Phase II NRHP evaluation of the Point site (51SE048) between July and August 2006. The field investigations included the excavation of 175 shovel tests and 20 1-x-1-m test units and the compilation of a site plan (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). The excavations resulted in the recovery of 323 artifacts that date to both the Prehistoric and Historic periods. It is not certain to which specific period the prehistoric artifacts date. The lack of ceramics at the site may indicate that it was occupied at some point during the Archaic period

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 40 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

(ca. 9000 to 1000 BC), although it is possible that the site represents an aceramic Woodland period occupation. The dating of the historic component is much more certain. Artifacts, principally ceramics, date the historic occupation from the ca. late eighteenth through nineteenth centuries. Archival research suggests that the historic component represents the domestic occupation of one or more tenants prior to the purchase of the property by the federal government. The historic artifacts also include a number that date to the Hospital era.

4.2 Archaeological Resources

Archeological site file checks were conducted for a 1-mile radius around the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus to identify all previously reported sites within or near the project area. The site files of the Washington, D.C., Historic Preservation Office of the Office of Planning were reviewed. This review resulted in the identification of nine recorded archaeological sites and two unrecorded archaeological features located within the 1-mile radius of the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. St. Elizabeths Hospital is a National Historic Landmark, and the area corresponding to the boundaries of the Landmark has been designated as archaeological site 51SE46.

Of the nine other sites present within a 1-mile radius of the project area, four have prehistoric or contact-era Native American components, three have Historic period components, and three have both prehistoric Native American and Historic period components. Of the seven sites with prehistoric or contact-era Native American occupations, five are located on floodplain formations of the Anacostia River while the other two are on upland ridges that overlook the floodplain of the Anacostia River or unnamed drainages. One site (51SE004) was occupied during the Late Archaic and Woodland periods, and two sites (51SE011 and 51SE012) were occupied during the contact era (the early 1600s). Excavations at the final site with a prehistoric Native American occupation (51SE034, the Howard Road site) yielded evidence of Archaic through Woodland period components, as well as Historic period occupations. Almost 71 percent of the prehistoric ceramics found at this location date to the Late Woodland period, while 19 percent are Middle Woodland (Berger & Associates 1986).

The physiographic setting of many of the Native American sites located along the Anacostia River is in agreement with the descriptions of Necostin settlement made by the early English colonists. The colonists described a dispersed pattern of houses and agricultural fields along the river. It is possible that the many Contact period sites, described as camps in the site files, are the remains of these scattered Necostin houses. However, it is also possible that these sites had a long history of occupation. Much less is known about the prehistoric occupation in upland settings near the project area. However, the several of the sites discussed here illustrate the prehistoric Native American use of the uplands in the vicinity of the project area.

Numerous Euroamerican Historic period sites have also been recorded in the vicinity of St. Elizabeths Hospital (Table 1). The site file review indicated that five recorded sites have Historic period occupations. Four sites, the Howard Road site (51SE034), the Jenkins Farm site (51SE004), the Powerhouse Ravine site (51SE049), and the Point site (51SE048) are closest to the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. The Howard Road site is located to the northeast of the project area. The investigations were conducted prior to the

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 41 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Table 1. Archaeological sites within 1 mile of St. Elizabeths Hospital North Campus parcel.

Site Site Type Temporal Period Landform NRHP Status

51SE004 Farmstead Late Archaic; Woodland; 19th century Upland ridge Eligible

51SE011 Camp Contact Period Floodplain Not evaluated

51SE012 Camp Unknown prehistoric/Contact Period Floodplain Unknown

51SE024 Undetermined Unknown prehistoric Floodplain Not evaluated

51SE034 Village/Residential neighborhood Archaic, Woodland/19th-20th century Floodplain Eligible

51SE036 Residence 19th-20th century Upland ridge Unevaluated

51SE048 Lithic scatter/Tenant house Unknown prehistoric/18th-19th century Upland ridge Not eligible

51SE049 Institutional 19th-20th century Side slope Eligible

51SW002 Lithic scatter Unknown prehistoric Floodplain Not evaluated

Area C Institutional 19th-20th century Side slope Not evaluated

Area H Institutional 19th-20th century Upland ridge Not evaluated Note: St. Elizabeths Hospital has been designated archaeological site 51SE046.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 42 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel construction of a Metro station in the former Barry Farm section of the Anacostia neighborhood. The Barry Farm was purchased by the Freedmen’s Bureau after the Civil War and became a residential and commercial district for freed slaves. Excavations yielded thousands of artifacts from midden and feature contexts that date from the late nineteenth to the twentieth century (Berger & Associates 1986). It appears that even with the ground disturbance associated with the twentieth-century urbanization of the Anacostia neighborhood, archeological deposits associated with its historic past remain. The Jenkins Farm site (51SE004) is the sole farmstead recorded near St. Elizabeths Hospital (Berger & Associates 1994). The Jenkins Farm site dates to the nineteenth century and is located along Alabama Avenue, to the east of the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital. The Wade site (51SE036) is a urban residential site that is associated with the early urbanization of the Anacostia neighborhood. The residence was constructed by Moses Smith during the early 1880s in the Barry Farm community, an urban neighborhood established by the Freedman’s Bureau after the Civil War for former slaves (Engineering- Science 1989). The Point site (51SE048) was located on the West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). This site appears to be the remains of a late eighteenth- to early nineteenth-century residence. Finally, Site 51SE049, the Powerhouse Ravine site, was also located on the West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). This site is a refuse disposal area associated with a nearby residential dormitory for patients that dates to the early twentieth century. Historic period sites found to date, in contrast to the Native American sites, tend to be located in uplands. Four of five sites are located in upland landforms, with the fifth site being located in the floodplain of the Anacostia River.

Two other unrecorded historic features are located on the West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital (Kreisa et al. 2008). One feature consists of the remains of a brick foundation that may be part of the now demolished Oakes hospital building while the other appears to be a stone foundation that may be part of the now demolished gardener’s residence that was present on the hospital grounds at the inception of the institution in 1855. Additional investigations have been recommended at both locations (Kreisa et al. 2008), and both will be registered as archaeological sites with DCHPO when the additional investigations are conducted.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 43 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 44 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

5.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

The research conducted for this assessment of archaeological site potential at the North Campus parcel of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus indicated that the project area had not been previously surveyed for the presence of archaeological sites, and that no known archaeological sites are located within the parcel. Background research was subsequently conducted in an attempt to determine whether prehistoric Native American and Historic period archaeological sites could be present in the North Campus parcel. The physiographic location and characteristics of prehistoric Native American sites located within a 1-mile radius of the North Campus parcel were analyzed in an attempt to determine whether prehistoric Native American archaeological sites could be present. For Historic period sites, a land-use history of St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus was assembled while a series of historic maps from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was reviewed to determine whether Historic period archaeological sites, such as the remains of structures, could be present in the North Campus parcel. Based on these analyses and reviews, it appears that the North Campus parcel has a moderate probability for the presence of prehistoric Native American archaeological sites but a moderate to high probability for pre-Hospital and Hospital-era historic archaeological sites. The reasoning for these conclusions is presented below.

5.1 Prehistoric Native American Site Potential

As discussed in Section 3.1, location of prehistoric Native American archaeological sites in the District of Columbia, and the adjacent counties of Maryland and Virginia, appears to be strongly dependent upon the presence of waterways. Prehistoric Native American archaeological sites have been found in flood plain and terrace settings adjacent to rivers, streams, and their tributaries, as well as in upland settings that overlook these waterways. However, the number and size of prehistoric Native American archaeological sites, as well as the density of artifacts found at the sites, appears to decrease with distance from waterways. Investigators have suggested that within the uplands, prehistoric Native American archaeological sites are more likely to be found within the initial 100 m to 150 m distant from the waterway or floodplain formation. The review of prehistoric Native American archaeological sites presented in Section 4.2 located with a 1-mile radius of the North Campus parcel appears to support these models. All of the nearby sites are located either on the floodplain of the Anacostia River or along the edge of the uplands overlooking the Anacostia River.

While the North Campus parcel does not border the Anacostia River or its floodplain, the eastern portion of the parcel does include areas that border a tributary of Stickfoot Branch. Typically, the upland ridge formation within 100 m to 150 m of the unnamed drainage would be identified as having a moderate to high potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American archaeological sites. Flatter areas on side slopes and any floodplain or terrace formations along this unnamed drainage may also have a moderate to high potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American archaeological sites.

It appears that the portion of the North Campus parcel associated with the unnamed drainage has been impacted by previous land usage. Ciarletta (1991) indicates that a ca. 20-acre portion of the East Campus was used as a landfill between 1982 and 1989. An average of 40 feet of fly ash,

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 45 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel milled asphalt, and compost from a sewage treatment plant was deposited in the landfill. It appears this fill has been deposited on most if not all areas to the east of the Horse Barn (Building 83) and the Temporary Homeless Shelter (Building 81A). In contrast, those areas that have not been buried by the landfill are located between 100 m and 150 m to the west of the unnamed drainage of the Anacostia River. Such areas away from a waterway would tend to have a moderate potential for prehistoric Native American archaeological sites, based on their distance, between 100 m and 150 m, from the unnamed drainage of the Anacostia River.

5.2 Historic Period Archaeological Site Potential

Section 3.2 provided an overview of the land-use history of the East Campus, and included a review of historic maps in an attempt to determine the number and location of structure remains that could be present within the North Campus parcel. The St. Elizabeths patent could have been occupied during the late seventeenth century, but was more likely first occupied by a series of tenants during the eighteenth century. By the late eighteenth century, the patent began to be subdivided, and smallholdings were formed in the North Campus parcel. The smallholdings continued to be present through the mid-nineteenth century, at which point the land was purchased by the federal government. Prior to its purchase by the federal government, the smallholdings represented a number of farms, the most important of which for the North Campus parcel was that of Alexander Shepherd. Shepherd apparently did not live on the East Campus farm, but more likely rented the property to a tenant. Structures associated with the farm appear to be depicted on the 1861 Boschke map of the area. Subsequent to the sale of the Shepherd farm to the federal government, the land that was eventually to become known as the East Campus continued to be used for farming through the initial years of the twentieth century. The use of the East Campus as a farm ended during the twentieth century, when numerous hospital- related buildings were constructed. By the late twentieth century, approximately 20 acres of the campus was also being used as a land fill.

The historic maps consulted for the North Campus parcel mirror the changes in land-use discussed above. The first map to depict any structures in the North Campus parcel dates to 1861 and depicts a residence within the parcel along Nichols Avenue, as well as structures to the north and south of the parcel. It is likely that these structures represent the locations of farmsteads or tenants. This distribution of structures continues essentially unchanged through the remainder of the nineteenth century. However, after 1869, these structures would have been associated with St. Elizabeths Hospital. After 1900, numerous hospital-related structures were constructed within the East Campus, including a few in the North Campus parcel. These include a Horse Barn, Garage, and unidentified H-shaped building, as well as three smaller cottage-like buildings along Nichols Avenue. Subsequently, the H-shaped building was razed, and the Dix Pavilion and the Temporary Homeless Shelter were constructed.

A placement of the location of the structures depicted on historic maps as potentially being located within the North Campus parcel suggests that most of these areas are currently grass- covered lawns or parking lots. Areas with the highest potential to retain the remains of structures depicted on historic maps include the area between Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and a series of parking lots to the west of Sycamore Drive. This area may retain the remains of pre-Hospital civilian structures and Hospital-era structures associated with the use of the East Campus for

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 46 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel agricultural pursuits prior to ca. 1900. The area to the north of the Dix Pavilion could also retain the remains of the H-shaped building that appears to have been razed shortly after World War II. Additional non-structural remains associated with these structures could also be present within the North Campus parcel. Such remains could include refuse deposits, the remains of small agricultural and hospital-related outbuildings, wells, cisterns, privies, and cellars, among others. Such remains are more likely to be present in the western half of the North Campus parcel. Any pre-1980s refuse disposal into the ravine to the east, especially if originally a surface deposit, especially if originally a surface deposit has likely been impacted by the use of that area as a land fill.

5.3 Recommendations

Based on the moderate to high potential for Historic period sites and the moderate to low potential for prehistoric Native American sites in the western half of the North Campus parcel, a Phase I archaeological field investigation is recommended. Such an investigation should be designed to excavate shovel test pits at systematic intervals across lawn-covered areas within the western half of the North Campus parcel. Based on the results of the Phase I field investigations, additional investigations within the parking lots may be required. All excavated soils should be screened through ¼-inch hardware mesh and all artifacts recovered for analysis. A draft report of investigations with recommendations for any additional work, if appropriate, should be prepared and submitted to GSA and DC HPO for review and comment.

Based on Ciarletta (1991), it appears that the landform in the eastern half of the North Campus parcel is now under landfill. Plotting of the boundaries of the North Campus parcel onto a map that depicts the location of the landfill suggests that a small portion at the far eastern end of the property may not be covered by landfill. This should be field checked to determine its accuracy and if the area is not covered by landfill, a Phase I archaeological field investigation, similar to that described in the previous paragraph is recommended. At present, it is unknown whether the area covered by the fly ash will be disturbed by construction activities, or whether such activities will disturb potentially intact soils below the level of the fly ash. As the fly ash is up to 40 feet deep, traditional archaeological survey methods are impractical. It is recommended that if construction will take place within the 20-acre parcel of the North Campus covered by fly ash and will impact soils below those deposits, GSA have an archaeologist monitor the area for the presence of archaeological materials after completion of the fly ash removal.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 47 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 48 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

6.0 CONCLUSIONS

This Phase IA Archaeological Assessment has been prepared to evaluate the effects of proposed construction of office space and parking facilities alternatives within the North Campus parcel of the St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. The parcel under consideration is located in the Anacostia neighborhood of Washington, D.C., to the east of Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and north of Alabama Avenue. This assessment considered the potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American and Historic period archaeological sites (inclusive of pre-Hospital civilian sites and Hospital-era sites). Research included reviewing the land-use history of the East Campus, a number of historic maps to determine the nature and location of structures within the North Campus parcel, the characteristics of known archaeological sites located within a 1- mile radius of the North Campus parcel, and archaeological projects previously conducted within a 1-mile radius of the North Campus parcel. Also consulted were documents that detailed the characteristics of soil conditions within the North Campus parcel.

This research determined that no archaeological investigations had been conducted within the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital and provided information on areas within the North Campus parcel that have the highest potential for the presence of unrecorded prehistoric Native American and Historic period archaeological sites. Within the general St. Elizabeths Hospital area, prehistoric Native American archaeological sites are typically located on floodplain or terrace formations of a river or stream or on adjacent uplands overlooking such formations. The eastern portion of the North Campus parcel includes an unnamed drainage of the Anacostia River. Such a location would typically have a high potential for the presence of unrecorded prehistoric Native American sites. However, it appears that much of eastern half of the North Campus parcel has been buried by a landfill. It appears that only a small area along the eastern boundary of the North Campus parcel has not been buried. Areas to the west, along Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, have a lower potential for the presence of unrecorded prehistoric Native American archaeological sites due to their greater distance from the drainage.

A series of maps dating from 1861 through 1960 also provides information on areas within the North Campus parcel that have the highest potential for the presence of unrecorded Historic period archaeological sites. The highest potential for the presence of unrecorded structural remains is located along Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and to the north of the Dix Pavilion (Building 120). However, the entire western half of the North Campus parcel also has a moderate to high potential for deposits of Historic period artifacts and features, such as wells, cisterns, refuse deposits, and the remains of farm outbuildings.

Based on these findings, a Phase I archaeological investigation of the North Campus parcel is recommended. Such an investigation should consist of the excavation of shovel tests and the screening of the excavated fill at systematic intervals across the lawn-covered areas in the western half of the North Campus parcel. A similar survey is suggested for a small portion along the eastern boundary of the North Campus parcel. For those areas covered by significant deposits of fly ash, monitoring of the removal of those deposits should be conducted if the proposed construction activities would have the potential to impact intact buried soils.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 49 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 50 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

7.0 REFERENCES CITED

Anderson, David G., and Robert C. Mainfort, Jr. 2002 An Introduction to Woodland Archaeology in the Southeast. In The Woodland Southeast, edited by David G. Anderson and Robert C. Mainfort, Jr., pp. 1–19. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence 1996 Cultural Resources Management Plan, Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, D.C. Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Environmental Conservation and Planning Directory, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas.

Balicki, Joseph, Lynn Jones, and Bryan Corle 2002 St. Elizabeths New Hospital and Campus Consolidation, Washington, D.C. John Milner Associates, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia.

Barber, Michael B. 1991 Evolving Subsistence Patterns and Future Directions: The Late Archaic and Early Woodland Periods. In Late Archaic and Early Woodland Research in Virginia, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 253–258. Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.

Barse, P. William 2002 An Archeological Survey, Inventory, and Evaluation Study, and Data Recovery for the Fletcher’s Boathouse Site (51NW13), C&O Canal National Historic Park, Washington, DC. URS Corporation, Florence, New Jersey.

Barse, P. William, and Alan D. Beauregard 1994 Phase III Data Recovery at the Clifton Site (18CH358). Final report prepared for the Maryland Department of Transportation by KCI Technologies, Inc., Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.

Beauchamp, Tanya Edwards n.d. Anacostia Historic District, Washington, D.C. The Georgetown Heritage Trust, the Historical Society of Washington, D.C., and the Washington, D.C., Historic Preservation Office.

Berger & Associates, Inc. 1986 Archaeological, Architectural and Historical Investigations at the Howard Road Historic District, Washington, D.C. Louis Berger & Associates, Inc., Orange, New Jersey. 1994 Archaeological and Historical Investigations of the Jenkins Farm Site (51SE4), District of Columbia, Outer Branch Avenue Segment, Green Line (F) Route, Washington Area Regional Metrorail System. Louis Berger & Associates, Inc., Orange, New Jersey.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 51 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Boschke, A. 1861 Topographical Map of the District of Columbia Surveyed in the 1856, 57, 58 & 59 Years. D. McClelland, Blanchard & Mohun, Washington, D.C.

Boyd, Donna C., and C. Clifford Boyd, Jr. 1992 Late Woodland Mortuary Variability in Virginia. In Middle and Late Woodland Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 249–275. Special Publication No. 29. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond.

Brush, Grace 1986 Geology and Paleoecology of Chesapeake Bay: A Long-Term Monitoring Tool For Management. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 76(3): 146–160.

Bryan, Wilhelmus Bogart 1914 A History of the National Capital from its Foundation through the Period of the Adoption of the Organic Act. 2 volumes. MacMillan Company, New York.

Burrow, Ian, Damon Tvaryanas, William Liebeknecht, and Nadine Sergejeff 2005 Combined Phase I Archaeological Survey Building/Landscape and Archaeological Assessment Plan: St. Elizabeths Hospital – West Campus, 2700 Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, SE, District of Columbia. Hunter Research, Inc., Trenton, New Jersey.

Carr, Kurt, and James Adavasio 2002 Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania. Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology No. 2. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Carbone, Victor 1976 Environment and Prehistory in the Shenandoah Valley. Ph.D. dissertation, The Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.

Ciarletta, Linda 1991 Site Inspection of Saint Elizabeths Hospital. NUS Corporation. Report submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Cooling, Benjamin F., III, and Walton H. Owen, II 1988 Mr. Lincoln’s Forts: A Guide to the Civil War Defenses of Washington. White Mane, Shippensburg, Pennsylvania.

Coote, C. 1839 Survey of Part of the St. Elizabeths Tract. Records of St. Elizabeths Hospital, Record Group 418. National Archives, College Park, Maryland.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 52 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Crowell, Elizabeth 2000 Walking in the Shadows of Archaeologists Past: Researching Museum Collections and Associated Records to Elucidate Past Lifeways. North American Archaeologist 21(2)97–106.

Curry, Dennis C. 1999 Feast of the Dead: Aboriginal Ossuaries in Maryland. Maryland Historical Trust Press, Crownsville.

Custer, Jay F. 1984 Delaware Prehistoric Archaeology: An Ecological Approach. University of Delaware Press, Newark. 1989 Prehistoric Cultures of the Delmarva Peninsula: An Archaeological Study. University of Delaware Press, Newark. 1990 Early and Middle Archaic Cultures of Virginia: Culture Change and Continuity. In Early and Middle Archaic Research in Virginia, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 1–60. Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.

Davis, Major George B., Leslie J. Perry, and Joseph W. Kirkley 2003 The Official Military Atlas of the Civil War. Barnes and Noble Books, New York.

Davis, T., D. Whelan, K. Grandine, C. Capozzola, N. Sheehan, and S. Mallory 1997 Phase I Archeological and Phase II Architectural Investigations for the Villages at Piscataway, Prince George’s County, Maryland. Final report prepared for Greenvest, L.C. by R. Christopher Goodwin & Associates, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.

Devrouax & Purnell 1993a St. Elizabeths Hospital Historic Resources Management Plan. Devrouax & Purnell Architects–Planners P.C., Washington, D.C. 1993b St. Elizabeths Hospital Archaeological Management Plan. Devrouax & Purnell Architects–Planners P.C., Washington, D.C.

District of Columbia Office of Planning 1998 Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia. Electronic document, http://planning.dc.gov/planning/cwp/view,A,1284,Q,570594.asp, accessed February 2006.

Eastman, F. S. 1873 Topographical Map of the Site and Lands of the Government Hospital for the Insane near Washington, D.C. Records of St. Elizabeths Hospital, Record Group 418. National Archives, College Park, Maryland.

Egloff, Keith T., and Joseph M. McAvoy 1990 Chronology of Virginia’s Early and Middle Archaic Periods. In Early and Middle Archaic Research in Virginia, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 61–80. Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 53 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Engineering–Science, Inc. 1989a Anacostia Park from a Historical and Archaeological Perspective. Ms. on file, Washington, D.C. Historic Preservation Office. 1989b Technical Report on Excavations at 2720 Wade Road, Washington, D.C. Report on file, Historic Preservation Office, Office of Planning, District of Columbia.

Eshelman, Ralph, and Frederick Grady 1986 Quaternary Vertebrate Localities of Virginia and Their Avian and Mammalian Fauna. In Quaternary of Virginia, edited by Jerry N. McDonald and Samuel O. Bird, pp. 43– 70. Publication No. 75. Virginia Division of Mineral Resources, Charlottesville.

Federal Register 1983 Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Vol. 48, No. 190.

Feest, Christian F. 1978 Virginia Algonquians. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 253–270. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Fiedel, Stuart, John Bedell, Charles LeeDecker, Jason Shellenhamer, and Eric Griffitts 2008 ―Bold, Rocky, and Picturesque‖: Archeological Overview and Assessment and Archaeological Identification and Evaluation Study of Rock Creek Park, District of Columbia. Volume II. The Louis Berger Group, Inc., Washington, D.C.

Froelich, A. J., and J. T. Hack 1975 Preliminary Geologic Map, District of Columbia. Report No. 75–537. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.

Gardner, William M. 1982 Early and Middle Woodland in the Middle Atlantic: An Overview. In Practicing Environmental Archaeology: Methods and Interpretations, edited by Roger W. Moeller, pp. 53–86. Occasional Paper No. 3. American Indian Archeological Institute, Washington, Connecticut. 1983 Stop Me if You’ve Heard This One Before: The Flint Run Paleo-Indian Complex Revisited. Archaeology of Eastern North America 11:49–64. 1989 An Examination of Cultural Change in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene (circa 9200 to 6800 B.C.). In Paleoindian Research in Virginia, edited by J. Mark Wittkofski and Theodore R. Reinhart, pp. 5–52. Dietz Press. Richmond, Virginia.

The Generations Network 2008 Ancestry.com, U.S. Census Records. Electronic document, http://www.ancestry.com/ default.aspx, accessed June 2008.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 54 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Gibb, James G. 2006 A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Stanwick Farm, Aquasco, Prince George’s County, Maryland, Phase II Investigations of 18PR704, and Phase II/III Investigations of 18PR703. Andrew Garte & Associates, Shady Side, Maryland.

Halsell, Diane E., Elizabeth A. Crowell, Sulah Lee Milligan, and the Historical Society of Washington, D.C. n.d. Archaeology in the District of Columbia. Washington, D.C., Historic Preservation Office.

Hantman, Jeffrey L. 1990 Virginia in a North American Perspective. In Early and Middle Archaic Research in Virginia, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 133–154. Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.

Hantman, Jeffrey L., and Debra L. Gold 2002 The Woodland in the Middle Atlantic: Ranking and Dynamic Political Stability. In The Woodland Southeast, edited by David G. Anderson and Robert C. Mainfort, Jr., pp. 270–291. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Hantman, Jeffrey L., and Michael J. Klein 1992 Middle and Late Woodland Archaeology in Piedmont Virginia. In Middle and Late Woodland Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 137–164. Special Publication No. 29. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond.

Herbert, Joseph M. 2002 A Woodland Period Prehistory of Coastal North Carolina. In The Woodland Southeast, edited by David G. Anderson and Robert C. Mainfort, Jr., pp. 292–317. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Hienton, Louise Joyner 1972 Prince George’s Heritage: Sidelights on the Early History of Prince George’s County, Maryland, from 1696–1800. The Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore.

Holmes, William H. 1897 Stone Implements of the Potomac-Chesapeake Tidewater Province. In Fifteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1893-94:13-152. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Holmes, William H., William Dinwiddie, and Gerard Fowke 1891 Archaeological Survey of the Tidewater Maryland and Virginia Area. Manuscript No. 2125. National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 55 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Hopkins, G. M. 1878 Atlas of Fifteen Miles Around Washington Including the County of Prince George, Maryland. G. M. Hopkins, Philadelphia.

Hume, Gary 1975 Archaeological Assessment: 108” Anacostia Force Main and Proposal for Mitigation of Site 18PR126. Report submitted to the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission and the Office of Cooperative Activities, National Capital Parks. On file, Washington, D.C., Historic Preservation Office of the Office of Planning.

Humphrey, Robert L., and Mary Elizabeth Chambers 1985 Ancient Washington – American Indian Cultures of the Potomac. GW Washington Studies No. 6. George Washington University, Washington, D.C.

Inashima, Paul Y. 1985 An Archeological Investigation of Thirty-One Erosion Control and Bank Stabilization Sites along Rock Creek and its Tributaries. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Denver Service Center, Denver, Colorado.

Johnson, Gerald, and Pamela Peebles 1983 Geological, Sedimentological and Palynological Studies and the Archaeology of the Henrico Regional Wastewater Treatment System. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Archaeological Society of Virginia, Roanoke.

Justice, Noel D. 1987 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Midcontinental and Eastern United States: A Modern Survey and Reference. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Kavanagh, Maureen 1982 Archeological Resources of the Monocacy River Region. File Report No. 164. Maryland Geological Survey, Division of Archaeology, Baltimore. 1983 Prehistoric Occupation of the Monocacy River Region. In Piedmont Archeology, edited by J.M. Wittofski and L. E. Browning, pp. 40-54. Special Publication No. 10. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond.

Knepper, Dennis, John M. Rutherford, Daniel R. Hayes, Carter Shields, and Christopher L. Bowen 2006 The Archaeology of an Urban Landscape, the Whitehurst Freeway Archaeological Project Volume I: Prehistoric Sites. Parsons, Washington, D.C., and Versar, Inc., Springfield, Virginia.

Klein, Michael J., and Thomas Klatka 1991 Late Archaic and Early Woodland Demography and Settlement Patterns. In Late Archaic and Early Woodland Research in Virginia, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 139–184. Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 56 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Kreisa, Paul P., Jacqueline M. McDowell, and Rebecca Kermes 2008 Phase I Archaeological Survey of Portions of the St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus,Washington, D.C. Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc., Laurel, Maryland.

Kreisa, Paul P., and Jacqueline M. McDowell 2008 Phase II NRHP Evaluation of Two Archaeological Sites, St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus,Washington, D.C. Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc., Laurel, Maryland.

LeeDecker, Charles H., and Amy Friedlander 1984 Preliminary Archeological Assessment of Fourteen Department of Recreation Properties in the Anacostia Section, District of Columbia. Louis Berger & Associates, Washington, D.C.

LeeDecker, Charles H., and Cheryl A. Holt 1991 Archaic Occupations at the Indian Creek V Site (18PR94), Prince George’s County, Maryland. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 7:67–90. 1994 Archeological and Historical Investigation of the Jenkins Farm Site (51SE4). Volume I. Louis Berger & Associates, Inc., Washington, D.C.

Lewis, David C. 1976 District of Columbia: A Bicentennial History. W.W. Norton, New York.

Maryland Historical Trust 2005 The Maryland Preservation Plan. Maryland Historical Trust Press, Crownsville.

McNett, Charles. W. 1972 The Potomac Avenue Site in Wasjington, D.C. Maryland Archeology 8(2):23-35.

McNett, Charles. W., editor 1985 Shawnee–Minisink: A Stratified Paleoindian Archaic Site in the Upper Delaware Valley of Pennsylvania. Academic Press, New York.

Nichols, Charles 1860 Topographical Plan of the Grounds of the Government Hospital for the Insane. J. Bien, New York, New York.

O’Donnell, Patricia M., Peter Viteretto, Gregory DeVries, Tamara Orlow, and Thomas Helmkamp 2005 St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus Landscape Assessment Plan. Ms. On file, General Services Administration, National Capital Region, Washington, D.C.

Overholser, Winfred 1956 Centennial Papers: Saint Elizabeths Hospital 1855-1955. Waverly Press, Inc., Baltimore, Maryland.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 57 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Parsons Brinckerhoff 2006 Phase I(a) Archeological Assessment of Proposed Improvements to South Capitol Street Corridor – Washington, D.C. Parsons Brinckerhoff, Washington, D.C. 2007 South Capitol Street Phase I(b) Archeological Survey Technical Report. Parsons Brinckerhoff, Washington, D.C.

Potter, Stephen 1993 Commoners, Tribute, and Chiefs: The Development of Algonquian Culture in the Potomac Valley. The University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Priggs, John Frederick Augustus 1790 A Map of the Eastern Branch of the Potomac River. Records of St. Elizabeths Hospital, Record Group 418. National Archives, College Park, Maryland.

Proctor, John C., Edwin M. Williams, and Frank P. Black (editors) 1930 Washington Past and Present: A History. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, New York.

Proudfit, S.V. 1889 Ancient Village Sites and Aboriginal Workshops in the District of Columbia. American Anthropologist 2:241–246.

Raber, Paul 1985 A Comprehensive State Plan for the Conservation of Archaeological Resources, Volume II. Historic Preservation Planning Series, Number 1. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Raber, Paul A., and Verna L. Cowin 2003 Foragers and Farmers of the Early and Middle Woodland Periods in Pennsylvania. Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology No. 3. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Raber, Paul A., Patricia E. Miller, and Sarah M. Neusius 1998 The Archaic Period in Pennsylvania: Hunter-Gatherers of the Early and Middle Holocene Period. Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology No. 1. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg.

Reinhart, Theodore R., and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, editors 1990 Early and Middle Archaic Research In Virginia: A Synthesis. Special Publication No. 22. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond. 1991 Late Archaic and Early Woodland Research in Virginia: A Synthesis. Special Publication No. 23. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond. 1992 Middle and Late Woodland Research in Virginia: A Synthesis. Special Publication No. 29. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 58 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Sanborn Map Company 1927 Fire Insurance Map of Washington, D.C. Sanborn Map Company, New York. 1960 Fire Insurance Map of Washington, D.C. Sanborn Map Company, New York.

Smith, Horace 1976 Soil Survey of District of Columbia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.

Stephenson, Robert L., Alice L.L. Ferguson, and Henry G. Ferguson 1963 The Accokeek Creek Site: A Middle Atlantic Seaboard Culture Sequence. Anthropological Papers No. 20. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Steponaitis, Laurie Cameron 1980 A Survey of Artifact Collections from the Patuxent River Drainage, Maryland. Monograph Series No. 1. Maryland Historical Trust, Annapolis.

Stewart, T. Dale, and Waldo R. Wedel 1937 The Finding of Two Ossuaries on the Site of the Indian Village of Nacotchtank. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 27:213–219.

Turner, E. Randolph III 1989 Paleoindian Settlement Patterns and Population Distribution in Virginia. In Paleoindian Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by J. Mark Wittkofski and Theodore R. Reinhart, pp. 71–93. Special Publication No. 19. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond. 1992 The Virginia Coastal Plain during the Late Woodland Period. In Middle and Late Woodland Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges, pp. 97–136. Special Publication No. 29. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond.

U.S. Census Bureau 1860 Federal Census, Population Schedule, Washington, D.C. Microfilm. U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. . 1870a Federal Census, Population Schedule, Washington, D.C. Microfilm. U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. . 1870b Federal Census, Agricultural Schedule, Washington, D.C. Microfilm. U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. .

URS Corporation 2001 Phase I Archeological Survey of the Proposed Unified Communications Center on St. Elizabeth’s [sic] Hospital Property, Washington, D.C. URS Corporation, Gaithersburg, Maryland.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 59 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Wagner, Daniel P., Darrin L. Lowery, Joseph A.M. Gingerich, and John S. Wah 2008 Soil and Landscape Modifications during the Younger Dryas Chronozone and the Demise of Clovis: Evidence from Cactus Hill, the Delmarva Peninsula, and Shawnee Minisink. Paper presented at "A Symposium to Honor the Work of William M. Gardner," September 26-28, Shepardstown, Virginia.

Walter, T. U. 1855 Government Hospital for the Insane. Records of St. Elizabeths Hospital, Record Group 418. National Archives, College Park, Maryland.

Wesler, K., D. Pogue, A. Luckenbach, G. Fine, P. Sternheimer, and E.G. Furgurson 1981 The Maryland Department of Transportation Archaeological Resources Survey, Volume 2: Western Shore. Manuscript Series No. 6. Maryland Historical Trust, Annapolis.

Whyte, Thomas R. 1995 Early Through Late Archaic Period Archeofaunal Remains From the Cactus Hill Site (44SX202), Sussex County, Virginia. Paper presented at the 1995 Middle Atlantic Archaeological Conference, Ocean City, Maryland.

Wittkofski, J. Mark, and Theodore R. Reinhart, editors 1989 Paleoindian Research in Virginia: A Synthesis. Special Publication No. 19. Archaeological Society of Virginia, Richmond.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 60 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

APPENDIX A:

QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 61 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 62 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Principal Investigator Paul P. Kreisa, Ph.D., RPA, earned his Master’s degree in Anthropology from Northern Illinois University and his Doctoral degree in Anthropology from the University of Illinois. Dr. Kreisa has over 26 years of experience in archaeological field work, research, and cultural resource management in the Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast regions of the United States.

Background Research Jacqueline M. McDowell, MA, earned her Master’s degree in Anthropology from Northern Illinois University. She has more than 23 years of experience in archaeological field work and cultural resource management in the Midwest and in historic and genealogical research in Illinois, Kentucky, Kansas, Wisconsin, Missouri, Maryland, and Virginia.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 63 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment North Campus Parcel

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 64