University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 12-1985 Archaeological Testing of the John King Site (9CAM182) and the Cedar Bluff Site (9CAM186) Jeanne A. Ward University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Ward, Jeanne A., "Archaeological Testing of the John King Site (9CAM182) and the Cedar Bluff Site (9CAM186). " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1985. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4181 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Jeanne A. Ward entitled "Archaeological Testing of the John King Site (9CAM182) and the Cedar Bluff Site (9CAM186)." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Charles H. Faulkner, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Benita J. Howell, Jeff Chapman Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Jeanne A. Ward entitled "Archaeological Testing of the John King Site (9CAM182) and the Cedar Bluff Site (9CAM186)." I have examined the final copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Charles H. Faulkner, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Accepted for the Council: Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING OF THE JOHN KING SITE (9CAM182) AND THE CEDAR BLUFF SITE (9CAM186) A Thesis Presented for the Master of Arts Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Jeanne A. Ward December 1985 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many people for the encouragement, support, and brute labor necessary to complete this thesis. The first of these people are my committee, Dr. Charles H. Faulkner, Dr. Je.fferson Chapman, and Dr. Benita Howell. I appreciate their encouragement, comments, and willingness to deal with my shortcomings. The field crew for the project included Stephanie Carver, Linda Dunn, and Phylis Schlyfer, who endured a wet, weary walk through the woods, not to mention hogs, dogs, and poachers who appeared out of nowhere. They had been seasoned by Carolyn Rock. The principle investigator of the Kings Bay Project was Dr. William Hampton Adams. I am indebted to all the investigators who proceeded and came after me. They helped lay the research groundwork in the area. I am indebted to the University of Georgia Office of Undergraduate Admissions and the Institute of Community and Area Development, who allowed me to use their word processing systems, and listened to me talk about this project for months. Rebecca McCarthy and Albert F. Ike edited the first draft and subsequent .revisions. Linda Gilbert did a wonderful job on the graphics included in the text. I gratefully acknowledge my parents' support, both emotional and financial. They stood by me throughout the entire process. I am also indebted to Anne Midgarden, for keeping life in order. And I am most sincerely indebted to Christy Johnson, whose efforts were above and beyond the call of duty or friendship. I give you my "M" or my "A." ii ABSTRACT During the winter of 1983, archaeological testing took place at the John King and Cedar Bluff sites on the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base, Camden County, Georgia. One by two meter units were placed evenly across the area which the site survey had identified as containing representative artifacts from the Late Archaic through early historic settlement. This thesis details the results of this investigation. Research objectives for the Cedar Bluff Site included an investigation of shifting prehistoric cultural boundaries through time and an investigation of spatial differentiation of settlement throughout the Late Archaic occupation and other cultural phases at this and an adjacent site. Research objectives for the John King Site included an investigation of domestic life of the early settlers in the Kings Bay area through archaeological and documentary research and an investigation into the socio-economic status of the occupant of this site through the analysis and comparison of ceramics recovered from here. Investigations at this and other sites in the Kings Bay area show that the prehistoric cultural boundary, traditionally drawn at the Florida/Georgia border, had been repeatedly crossed by prehistoric groups. Several ceramic types previously indentified only in the north Florida or the Savannah River area were identified at Kings Bay and were present at the Cedar Bluff Site. An investigation of spatial differentiation of settlement at the Cedar Bluff Site revealed no conclusive evidence of variation in this area. iii The John King Site was the earliest historic site identified at Kings Bay. A mean ceramic date of 1794.02 was derived using ceramics recovered during testing. Comparison of ceramics from the John King Site with ceramics from the Cannon's Point Plantation (Otto 1975 and 1977) showed a unique pattern of ceramic types indicating a socio-economic status for the occupant of the John King Site at a level between that of a planter and an overseer or slave on a large coastal plantation. Other historic components identified in the area of Cedar Bluff were investigated. One of these was a possible peripheral secondary midden related to the John King Site. Another was a late-19th- or early-20th-century house site. The last was a modern concrete foundation. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 The Kings Bay Project ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••4 II. SITE CHARACTERISTICS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••8 Environmental Overview••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 Site Location •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••11 Vegetation and Soils•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 12 III. RESEARCH COMPENDIUM ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. 13 Prehistory•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 Previous Research ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 24 Prehistoric Site Research Objectives ••••••••••••26 History••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 37 Previous Research ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 64 Historic Site Research Objectives ••••••••••••••• 68 IV. DESCRIPTIVE ARCHAEOLOGY•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 70 Methodology ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 70 Stratigraphy•••••••••••••••••••••••••• �·········73 Features •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 76 Art if acts••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••.••••• 81 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS •••••.•••••••••••• ; •••..•.••• 117 REFERENCES CITED•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 2 VITA•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 144 V LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 3.1 Summary of Cultures Present at Kings Bay Presented by Author........•...............•.................... 28 3.2 Ceramic Chronology in the Kings Bay Locality •.•••••••••• 34 4.1 Stratigraphy in the Cedar Bluff Area •••••••••••••••••••• 75 4.2 Features in the Cedar Bluff Area•••••••••••••••••••••••• 79 4.3 Prehistoric Ceramics from the Cedar Bluff Area•••••••••• 82 4.4 Lithic Distribution in the Cedar Bluff Area •••••••••••••86 4.5 Mean Ceramic Date Calculation for the John King Site•••• 91 4.6 Comparison of Cannon's Point and John King Site Ceramics ...•...................................... 93 4.7 Historic Artifact Group Patterns for the Cedar Bluff Area....•..............................•.... 101 4.8 Historic Ceramics from the Cedar Bluff Area•••••••••••• 112 4.9 Glassware from the Cedar Bluff Area••••••••••••••••.••• 113 4.10 Metal Artifacts from the Cedar Bluff Area .•••••••••••••115 4.11 Fauna! Distribution in the Cedar Bluff Area ••••••••••••116 vi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1.1 The Kings Bay Locality•.•••••••••.••••••••••••••••.••.• .•2 1.2 Sites in the area of Cherry Point•••••••••••••••••••..•.. 3 3.1 Kings Bay circa 1795 showing the house of John King•.••. 57 4.1 Site map: John King and Cedar Bluff sites•••••••..••••• 71 4.2 Excavation units at the John King Site •••••••••••••••••• 72 4.3 North Profiles: Units 7, 16, and 27 •••••.•••••••.••••••• 77 vii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Between January 19 and March 3, 1983, Phase II testing took place at the John King Site (9CAM182) and the Cedar Bluff Site (9CAM186), Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base (hereafter referred to as KBNSB), Camden County, Georgia. KBNSB and its relationship to the surrounding area can be seen in Figure 1.1. Both sites were located on the bank of Mallard Creek. The John King Site was an historic site superimposed upon the mainly prehistoric Cedar Bluff Site and given a separate site designation in the original survey. The relation of these two sites and other sites in the Cherry Point area of KBNSB can be seen in Figure 1. 2. The Cedar Bluff area was tested with evenly spaced 1 x 2 m units with a crew of four. The Cedar Bluff Site ranged from