DOCSLIB.ORG

National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: Staunton River Bridge Fortification Historic District Other names/site number: Fort Hill: Staunton River Battlefield State Park; DHR #041-5276 Name of related multiple property listing: The Civil War in Virginia, 1861–1865: Historic and Archaeological Resources________ (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing ____________________________________________________________________________ 2. Location Street & number: 1035 Fort Hill Trail__________________________________________ City or town: _Randolph___ State: Virginia County: Halifax and Charlotte_____ Not For Publication: x Vicinity: x ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this x nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property x meets ___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: ___national _x_statewide ___local Applicable National Register Criteria: _x_A ___B _x_C ___D Signature of certifying official/Title: Date Virginia Department of Historic Resources___________________________________ State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official: Date Title : State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Staunton River Bridge Fortification Halifax and Charlotte Counties, VA Historic District Name of Property County and State _____________________________________________________________________________ 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible for the National Register removed from the National Register other (explain:) _____________________ ______________________________________________________________________ Signature of the Keeper Date of Action ____________________________________________________________________________ 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply.) Private: Public – Local Public – State x Public – Federal Category of Property (Check only one box.) Building(s) District x Site Structure Object Sections 1–6 page 2 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Staunton River Bridge Fortification Halifax and Charlotte Counties, VA Historic District Name of Property County and State Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing _____0_______ ______0______ buildings _____0_______ ______0______ sites _____3_______ ______2______ structures _____0_______ ______1______ objects _____3_______ ______3______ Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register ____0_____ ____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) DEFENSE: Arms Storage DEFENSE: Fortification DEFENSE: Battle Site Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) LANDSCAPE: Park: State Park__________________ LANDSCAPE: Forest__________________________ RECREATION AND CULTURE: Outdoor Recreation Sections 1–6 page 3 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Staunton River Bridge Fortification Halifax and Charlotte Counties, VA Historic District Name of Property County and State _____________________________________________________________________________ 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) NO STYLE Materials: (enter categories from instructions.) Principal exterior materials of the property: EARTH; STONE; METAL; OTHER (backfill) Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.) ______________________________________________________________________________ Summary Paragraph The 23.25-acre Staunton River Bridge Fortification Historic District consists of prominent Civil War–era features associated with the June 25, 1864, Civil War Battle of Staunton River Bridge that are located within the Staunton River Battlefield State Park in Halifax and Charlotte counties, Virginia. The contributing resources include the piers and abutments of the mid- nineteenth-century railroad bridge, now topped by a 1902 four-span Camelback through truss and reserved for pedestrian use since the 1990s; a Confederate earthen bastion fort and associated infantry trenches immediately east of the bridge on bluffs above the south bank of the river; and a gun emplacement approximately 1,200 feet to the west, also on bluffs above the south bank. The bridge crosses a portion of the Roanoke River known locally as the Staunton River, which extends for 81 miles from Leesville Lake in Virginia to the North Carolina state line. In the vicinity of the park, the Staunton River marks the boundary between the Virginia counties of Halifax (to the south) and Charlotte (to the north). Formerly part of the Southern Railroad (the Richmond and Danville Railroad at the time of the Civil War), the rail corridor and bridge within the southern portion of the park have been converted to a 0.8-mile-long hiking trail. The railroad crossing was a crucial transportation link for Confederate forces in Petersburg (some 90 miles to the northeast) during the 1864–1865 siege and one of the targets of a ten-day Union cavalry raid aimed at disrupting Confederate supply lines by destroying tracks, bridges, and other railroad infrastructure. Rudimentary fortifications at Staunton River Bridge were hastily constructed by reserve troops, local civilians, and enslaved laborers on the eve of the battle, and the bastion fort was augmented to its present configuration immediately afterward. Union assaults on the railroad crossing and attempts to burn the bridge during the battle failed against Confederate infantry behind earthworks (no longer extant) on the north side of the river and fire from six artillery pieces positioned in the surviving fortifications on the south side of the river. Section 7 page 4 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Staunton River Bridge Fortification Halifax and Charlotte Counties, VA Historic District Name of Property County and State _____________________________________________________________________________ Narrative Description Contributing resources of the 23.25-acre Staunton River Bridge Fortification Historic District include two Confederate fortifications and the bridge abutments and piers of an antebellum railroad crossing—the main strategic asset in contention during the Battle of Staunton River Bridge, fought on June 25, 1864. The district lies entirely within the bounds of the southernmost of two discontiguous tracts that comprise Staunton River Battlefield State Park. In turn, the state park encompasses a total of 336.96 acres that are completely contained within a 3,848.66-acre area recommended by the American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) as the National Register boundary for the battlefield. The study area for the battlefield contains an additional 477.86 acres extending from the south end of the battlefield’s recommended National Register boundary, and there are two core areas. The northern core area (171.63 acres), where fighting between Union and Confederate cavalry occurred late in the battle, lies 2.5 miles north of the park. The southern core area, where the most intense combat took place, encompasses 391.15 acres, of which 223.86 acres lie within the southern park tract; the northern park tract lies outside the southern core but within the battlefield. The southern park tract consists of 93.31 acres on the south side of the Staunton River in Halifax
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Galway City Walls Conservation, Management and Interpretation Plan
    GALWAY CITY WALLS CONSERVATION, MANAGEMENT & INTERPRETATION PLAN MARCH 2013 Frontispiece- Woman at Doorway (Hall & Hall) Howley Hayes Architects & CRDS Ltd. were commissioned by Galway City Coun- cil and the Heritage Council to prepare a Conservation, Management & Interpre- tation Plan for the historic town defences. The surveys on which this plan are based were undertaken in Autumn 2012. We would like to thank all those who provided their time and guidance in the preparation of the plan with specialist advice from; Dr. Elizabeth Fitzpatrick, Dr. Kieran O’Conor, Dr. Jacinta Prunty & Mr. Paul Walsh. Cover Illustration- Phillips Map of Galway 1685. CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 UNDERSTANDING THE PLACE 6 3.0 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE 17 4.0 ASSESSMENT & STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 28 5.0 DEFINING ISSUES & VULNERABILITY 31 6.0 CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES 35 7.0 INTERPRETATION & MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES 37 8.0 CONSERVATION STRATEGIES 41 APPENDICES Statutory Protection 55 Bibliography 59 Cartographic Sources 60 Fortification Timeline 61 Endnotes 65 1.0 INTRODUCTION to the east, which today retains only a small population despite the ambitions of the Anglo- Norman founders. In 1484 the city was given its charter, and was largely rebuilt at that time to leave a unique legacy of stone buildings The Place and carvings from the late-medieval period. Galway City is situated on the north-eastern The medieval street pattern has largely been shore of a sheltered bay on the west coast of preserved, although the removal of the walls Ireland. It is located at the mouth of the River during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Corrib, which separates the east and western together with extra-mural developments as the sides of the county.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Union Trading Post National Historic Site Fort Union Trading Post National Historic Site Table of Contents
    National Park Service Cultural Landscapes Inventory 2012 Fort Union Trading Post National Historic Site Fort Union Trading Post National Historic Site Table of Contents Inventory Unit Summary & Site Plan Concurrence Status Geographic Information and Location Map Management Information National Register Information Chronology & Physical History Analysis & Evaluation of Integrity Condition Treatment Bibliography & Supplemental Information Fort Union Trading Post National Historic Site Fort Union Trading Post National Historic Site Inventory Unit Summary & Site Plan Inventory Summary The Cultural Landscapes Inventory Overview: CLI General Information: Purpose and Goals of the CLI The Cultural Landscapes Inventory (CLI), a comprehensive inventory of all cultural landscapes in the national park system, is one of the most ambitious initiatives of the National Park Service (NPS) Park Cultural Landscapes Program. The CLI is an evaluated inventory of all landscapes having historical significance that are listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, or are otherwise managed as cultural resources through a public planning process and in which the NPS has or plans to acquire any legal interest. The CLI identifies and documents each landscape’s location, size, physical development, condition, landscape characteristics, character-defining features, as well as other valuable information useful to park management. Cultural landscapes become approved CLIs when concurrence with the findings is obtained from the park superintendent and all required data fields are entered into a national database. In addition, for landscapes that are not currently listed on the National Register and/or do not have adequate documentation, concurrence is required from the State Historic Preservation Officer or the Keeper of the National Register.
    [Show full text]
  • Henry D. Tiioreau
    84 HENRY D. TIIOREAU ago you could see the top of a pitchpine, of the kind called yellow pine hereabouts, though it is not a distinct species, projecting above the surface in deep water, many rods from the shore.It was even supposed by some that the pond had sunk, and this was one of the primitive forest that formerly stood there.I find that even so long ago as 179Q, in a "Topographical Descrip- tion of the Town of Concord," by one of its citizens, in the Collections of the Massachusetts Historical So- ciety, the author, after speaking of Walden and White Ponds, adds, "In the middle of the latter may be seen, when the water is very low, a tree which appears as if it grew in the place where it now stands, although the roots are fifty feet below the surface of the water; the top of this tree is broken off, and at that place measures four- teen inches in diameter." In the spring of '4I talked with the man who lives nearest the pond in Sudbury, who told me that it was he who got out this tree ten or fifteen years before. As near as he could remember, it stood twelve or fifteen rods from the shore, where the water was thirty or forty feet deep. It was in the winter, and he had been getting out ice in the forenoon, and bad resolved that in the afternoon, with the aid of his neigh- bors, he would take out the old yellow pine. He sawed a channel in the ice to'ard the shore, and hauled it over and along and out on to the ice withoxen; but, before lie had gone far in his work, he was surprised to find that it was wrong end upward, with the stumps of the branches pointing down, and the small end firmly fastened in the sandy bottom.It was about a foot in diameter at the big end, and he had expected to geta good saw-log, but THE PONDS 85 it was so rotten as to be fit only for fuel, if for that.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAINING the HUDSON the Fight for the River in the American Revolution
    CHAINING THE HUDSON The fight for the river in the American Revolution COLN DI Chaining the Hudson Relic of the Great Chain, 1863. Look back into History & you 11 find the Newe improvers in the art of War has allways had the advantage of their Enemys. —Captain Daniel Joy to the Pennsylvania Committee of Safety, January 16, 1776 Preserve the Materials necessary to a particular and clear History of the American Revolution. They will yield uncommon Entertainment to the inquisitive and curious, and at the same time afford the most useful! and important Lessons not only to our own posterity, but to all succeeding Generations. Governor John Hancock to the Massachusetts House of Representatives, September 28, 1781. Chaining the Hudson The Fight for the River in the American Revolution LINCOLN DIAMANT Fordham University Press New York Copyright © 2004 Fordham University Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored ii retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—except for brief quotation: printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher. ISBN 0-8232-2339-6 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Diamant, Lincoln. Chaining the Hudson : the fight for the river in the American Revolution / Lincoln Diamant.—Fordham University Press ed. p. cm. Originally published: New York : Carol Pub. Group, 1994. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8232-2339-6 (pbk.) 1. New York (State)—History—Revolution, 1775-1783—Campaigns. 2. United States—History—Revolution, 1775-1783—Campaigns. 3. Hudson River Valley (N.Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Yeardley's Fort (44Pg65)
    CHAPTER 2 YEARDLEY'S FORT (44PG65) INTRODUCTION In this chapter the fort and administrative center of Flowerdew at 44PG65 are examined in relation to town and fortification planning and the cultural behavior so displayed (Barka 1975, Brain et al. 1976, Carson et al. 1981; Barka 1993; Hodges 1987, 1992a, 1992b, 1993; Deetz 1993). To develop this information, we present the historical data pertaining to town development and documented fortification initiatives as a key part of an overall descriptive grid to exploit the ambiguity of the site phenomena and the historic record. We are not just using historic documents to perform a validation of archaeological hypotheses; rather, we are trying to understand how small-scale variant planning models evolved regionally in a trajectory away from mainstream planning ideals (Beaudry 1988:1). This helps refine our perceptions of this site. The analysis then turns to close examination of design components at the archaeological site that might reveal evidence of competence or "mental template." These are then also factored into a more balanced and meaningful cultural interpretation of the site. 58 59 The site is used to develop baseline explanatory models that are considered in a broader, multi-site context in Chapter 3. Therefore, this section will detail more robust working interpretations that help lay the foundations for the direction of the entire study. In short, learning more about this site as a representative example of an Anglo-Dutch fort/English farmstead teaches us more about many sites struggling with the same practical constraints and planning ideals that Garvan (1951) and Reps (1972) defined.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Jefferson Self-Guided Tour
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Dry Tortugas National Park Florida Fort Jefferson Self-Guided Tour Seth Eastman, 1875 Chart of the Dry Tortugas Background The story of Fort Jefferson lies with the maritime history of the Florida Straits and the excellent harborage afforded by the Dry Tortugas. These two geo- graphic features stand at a nexus of currents, winds, and shipping routes. The Dry Tortugas rest at the western extremity of the massive Florida Reef system, the third largest coral barrier reef in the world. To the south lies the island nation of Cuba. Between the two lies the 106-mile bottleneck of the Florida Straits, through which flows the Florida Current. The shallow waters of the Dry Tortugas represent a strategic refuge for ships transiting these sea- lanes between the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic. It was in 1513 that Don Juan Ponce de Leon discovered the islands of the Dry Tortugas and the Florida Current. The Florida Current is known as the Gulf Current after it merges with the Antilles Current near Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. For mariners in the Gulf of Mexico and the Florida Straights, this 2-to -4 knot current was highly prized for the added speed it provided their vessels. This was especially true for Spanish vessels carrying riches from the New World back to Spain. As maritime traffic increased along this current, the anchorage of the Dry Tortugas became vital as a haven for ships in times of inclement weather and war. After the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, American merchants from the Missis- sippi River began frequenting the Dry Tortugas harbor.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhyming Dictionary
    Merriam-Webster's Rhyming Dictionary Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Springfield, Massachusetts A GENUINE MERRIAM-WEBSTER The name Webster alone is no guarantee of excellence. It is used by a number of publishers and may serve mainly to mislead an unwary buyer. Merriam-Webster™ is the name you should look for when you consider the purchase of dictionaries or other fine reference books. It carries the reputation of a company that has been publishing since 1831 and is your assurance of quality and authority. Copyright © 2002 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Merriam-Webster's rhyming dictionary, p. cm. ISBN 0-87779-632-7 1. English language-Rhyme-Dictionaries. I. Title: Rhyming dictionary. II. Merriam-Webster, Inc. PE1519 .M47 2002 423'.l-dc21 2001052192 All rights reserved. No part of this book covered by the copyrights hereon may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems—without written permission of the publisher. Printed and bound in the United States of America 234RRD/H05040302 Explanatory Notes MERRIAM-WEBSTER's RHYMING DICTIONARY is a listing of words grouped according to the way they rhyme. The words are drawn from Merriam- Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Though many uncommon words can be found here, many highly technical or obscure words have been omitted, as have words whose only meanings are vulgar or offensive. Rhyming sound Words in this book are gathered into entries on the basis of their rhyming sound. The rhyming sound is the last part of the word, from the vowel sound in the last stressed syllable to the end of the word.
    [Show full text]
  • Aut 0 Bi 0 Graphy 0 Fpeterc 0 0 Per 1791-1883
    A U T 0 B I 0 G R A P H Y 0 F P E T E R C 0 0 P E R 1791-1883 (Dictated by him February 20 to April 17,1882) Transcribed from the original shorthand notes By William S. Coloe, Certified Shorthand Reporter of New Jersey Jersey 'City, N.J. April 1948. Digital transcription with OCR software By Keith Yeager, May 2004. NOTE: the page numbers referred to in the index do not translate to the pages of this electronic document, but only to the original transcription. If you wish to search for one of the terms, you can use the text search function. I N D E X Adams, Dr. 133 Air, Navigation of, 36 Alderman, Assistant, New York City 19 103, 104, 111, 155 Allison, Sir Archibald 174 Astor, John Jacob 181 Astor, William B. Baltimore, Land speculation 33, 38 119 -) 128, 204 Baltimore and Ohio Railroad 205 128 Bank of United States 1221 148 Bank, Postal Savings 171 Battery, The 53 Banks and Bankers 122, 145, 148, 173, 194 Bedell, Sarah (wife) 47, 50, 135, 138, 194, 133 Bessemer Medal 121 Blocks, Cement, method of making 201 Bonaparte, Jerome 90 Boyhood 59 531 104P 124, 160 203, 207 Brewery, Father's, Peekskill- 6, 25, 203 British Army, Landing of 139 18 Burr, Aaron 170 54 Cable, Transatlantic 981 99) 106 Camden and Amboy Railroad 69 Campbell, Hugh (granduncle) 10 Campbell, John (grandfather) 109 11, 130 21, 17, 152, 177 Campbell, Thomas (uncle) 15, 178 Canals, Towing boats on 65 Erie 671 1239 124 Panama 108 Canton, Property at 381 126 Iron works 119 Central Park, Reservoir.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing Aspects of Building the Split Baroque Bastion Fort
    Defensive Architecture of the Mediterranean. / Vol VII / Marotta, Spallone (eds.) © 2018 Politecnico di Torino Constructing aspects of building the Split baroque bastion fort Snježana Perojevića aFaculty of Civil Engineering Faculty of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Geodesy - University of Split, Split, Croatia, [email protected] Abstract At the beginning of the 17th century the City of Split was still surrounded by mostly medieval elements of fortifications adapted to the remaining walls and towers of the ancient palace of the Emperor Diocletian. Since the outbreak of the War of Candia in 1645 the City is fortified on several occasions with different types of fortification works to the final bastion fort, built between 1660 and 1668. Building chronology and geometric elements, as well as building and constructing techniques of this bastion fort, can be precisely followed, described and analyzed by studying extensive written and graphic historical materials, and by investigating physical remains of the fort parts. Between numerous documents related to building the bastion ring around the city there are reports of Sopraintedente all'artiglieria Filippo Besseti Verneda, dated from the period between 1663 and 1665. They represent an exceptional source of data on duration and costs of building, on necessary work force, and on building materials and tools. Current paper offers results of the research on geometric elements and profiles of the mentioned bastion fort, building techniques, used materials, work costs and work force members necessary for carrying out such a building venture. Keywords: Split, bastion fort, building techniques, profiles 1. Introduction The City of Split has its origins in the palace of successful trade was taking place, bringing the Roman Emperor Diocletian, built at the Venice considerable profits in the first half of beginning of the 4th century on the eastern coast the 17th century (Perojević, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • A Memoir of the Archaeological Excavation of Fort Prince George, Pickens County, South Carolina Along with Pertinent Historical Documentation Marshall W
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Archaeology and Anthropology, South Carolina Research Manuscript Series Institute of 1998 A Memoir of the Archaeological Excavation of Fort Prince George, Pickens County, South Carolina Along with Pertinent Historical Documentation Marshall W. Williams Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/archanth_books Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Williams, Marshall W., "A Memoir of the Archaeological Excavation of Fort Prince George, Pickens County, South Carolina Along with Pertinent Historical Documentation" (1998). Research Manuscript Series. 202. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/archanth_books/202 This Book is brought to you by the Archaeology and Anthropology, South Carolina Institute of at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Manuscript Series by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Memoir of the Archaeological Excavation of Fort Prince George, Pickens County, South Carolina Along with Pertinent Historical Documentation Keywords Excavations, Duke Power Company, Fort Prince George, Pickens County, South Carolina, Archeology Disciplines Anthropology Publisher The outhS Carolina Institute of Archeology and Anthropology--University of South Carolina Comments In USC online Library catalog at: http://www.sc.edu/library/ This book is available at Scholar Commons: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/archanth_books/202 A Memoir of the Archaeological Excavation of
    [Show full text]
  • Unbewegliche Und Archäologische Denkmale Unter Denkmalschutz
    Oberösterreich unbewegliche und archäologische Denkmale unter Denkmalschutz 21.06.2016 (rechtlich nicht verbindlich) Gemeinde KG Bezeichnung Adresse GdstNr Status Bad-Haller-Straße Adlwang 49001 Adlwang Pfarrhof 6 .21/1 § 2a Kath. Filialkirche, Wallfahrtskirche St. Grünburger Straße Adlwang 49001 Adlwang Blasien 117 .66 § 2a Mesnerhaus, Grünburger Straße Adlwang 49001 Adlwang Blasenhaus 119 .65 § 2a Kath. Pfarrkirche, Wallfahrtskirche Sieben Schmerzen Adlwang 49001 Adlwang Mariä Kirchenplatz 1 .1 § 2a Adlwang 49001 Adlwang Pfarrheim Kirchenplatz 10 .10 § 2a Mandorfer Strasse Adlwang 49001 Adlwang Kapelle hl. Brunnen 19, nahe .15 § 2a Ahorn 47302 Ahorn Ruine Piberstein Piberstein 1 .12 Bescheid Kath. Pfarrkirche hll. Peter und Paul mit Aichkirchen 51101 Aichkirchen Friedhof Aichkirchen .130, 582/1 § 2a Aichkirchen 51101 Aichkirchen Pfarrhof Aichkirchen 1 .136 § 2a Aigen im Kalvarienbergkapelle Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen mit Kreuzweg Aigen 2929/1 Bescheid Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Pfarrhof Hauptstraße 14 1213 § 2a Aigen im Kath. Filialkirche hl. Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Martin Hauptstraße 15 1050 § 2a Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Amtsgebäude Kirchengasse 4 .80 § 2a Kath. Pfarrkirche hl. Aigen im Johannes Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Evangelista Marktplatz 1155/1 § 2a Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Brunnen Marktplatz 2860/1 § 2a Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Mariensäule Marktplatz 2860/1 § 2a Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Bürgerhaus Marktplatz 13, 13a .20/2; .20/1 Bescheid Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Ackerbürgerhaus Marktplatz 25 1119 Bescheid Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Bürgerhaus Marktplatz 6 .65 Bescheid Aigen im Mühlkreis 47001 Aigen Bildstock Schlossergasse 2860/21 § 2a Wasserschloss 23, 24/1, 24/2, 98, .1, .2, .3, .4, .5, Aistersheim 44102 Aistersheim Aistersheim Aistersheim 1, 2, 3 .8/1, .8/2 Bescheid Pfarrhof, ehem.
    [Show full text]
  • Search for the Cittie of Ralegh
    THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA THE COLLECTION OF NORTH CAROLINIANA C970 .1 H29s FOR USE ONLY IN THE NORTH CAROLINA COLLECTION No. A-368 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill http://archive.org/details/searchforcittieoharr ARCHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH SERIES NUMBER SIX SEARCH FOR THE CITTIE OF RALEGH ARCHEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS AT FORT RALEIGH NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SEARCH FOR THE CITTIE OF RALEGH ARCHEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS AT FORT RALEIGH NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE NORTH CAROLINA By Jean Carl Harrington ARCHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH SERIES NUMBER SIX NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, 1962 United States Department of the Interior Stewart L. Udall, Secretary National Park Service Conrad L. Wirth, Director This publication is one of a series of research studies devoted to specialized topics which have been explored in connection with the various areas in the National Park System. It is printed at the Government Printing Office and may be purchasedfrom the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C. Price 60 cents, (paper cover). NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Archeological Research Series No. i Archeology of the Bynum Mounds, Mississippi. No. 2. Archeological Excavations in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, 1950. No. 3 Archeology of the Funeral Mound, Ocmulgee National Monu- ment, Georgia. No. 4 Archeological Excavations at Jamestown, Virginia. No. 5 The Hubbard Site and Other Tri-wall Structures in New Mexico and Colorado. No. 6 Search for the Cittie of Ralegh, Archeological Excavations at Fort Raleigh National Historic Site, North Carolina.
    [Show full text]