DOCSLIB.ORG

In Richmond County, Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In Richmond County, Virginia Dickinson College Dickinson Scholar Faculty and Staff Publications By Year Faculty and Staff Publications 2009 C14 Age Control on a Rappahannock Native American Site on Totuskey Creek (44RD0206) in Richmond County, Virginia Marcus M. Key, Jr. Dickinson College Steven Vaughn Todd H. Davis William Parr Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.dickinson.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, and the History Commons Recommended Citation Key, Marcus M., Jr., Steven Vaughn, Todd H. Davis, and William Parr. "C14 Age Control on a Rappahannock Native American Site on Totuskey Creek (44RD0206) in Richmond County, Virginia." Quarterly Bulletin of the Archeological Society of Virginia 64, no 4 (2009): 163-176. This article is brought to you for free and open access by Dickinson Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. C14 age control on a Rappahannock Native American site on Totuskey Creek (44RD0206) in Richmond County, Virginia by Marcus M. Key, Jr. Department of Geology, Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pennsylvania Steven Vaughn, Warsaw, Virginia Todd H. Davis, Lancaster, Virginia William Parr, Tappahannock, Virginia ABSTRACT The Rappahannock tribe is a sub-tribe of the The discovery of well-preserved bone material in a Powhatan Chiefdom, which is part of the larger Native American site allowed C14 dating of the Algonquian linguistic group (Swanton 1952; associated artifacts. The primary goal of this report Maccord 1996). There is limited historical is to determine the absolute age of the bone documentation of the Rappahannock tribe before fragment, and the secondary goal is to compare contact with the Jamestown English. In 1608 John this result with the ages of the artifacts based on Smith traveled up the Rappahannock River, which the typological approach using the associated resulted in his 1612 map showing the distribution prehistoric ceramic and stone artifacts. The site is of Native American settlements in the area (Figure along Totuskey Creek in Richmond County in the 1). From 1608-1649, the Rappahannocks were area traditionally mapped as part of the spread over an area 30 km by 20 km (20 mi by 13 Rappahannock tribal area at contact in 1607 and mi) along the northeast shore of the Rappahannock across the creek from their 1653 relocation site. River from the headwaters of Totuskey Creek The bone was identified as a jaw fragment from a upstream to Cat Point Creek (Figure 2). Due to the raccoon. It was found along with ceramic (clay influx of settlers desiring land along the navigable pipe and pottery fragments) and stone artifacts estuaries after 1649, the Rappahannock tribe was (points and drills). The pottery was dated from the forced inland. In 1651 they sold their waterfront Late Woodland Period to the Proto-Historic property to the English Settler, Colonel Moore Period. The points were dated from the Late Fauntleroy (Rountree 1990: 118). Legislation in 14 Archaic Period to the Proto-Historic Period. C 1653 restricted the tribe to an area 8 km by 5 km dating of the bone gave a comparable age of 1000- (5 mi by 3 mi) on the north side of Totuskey 1160 A.D. which places it in the Late Woodland Creek, east of Little Totuskey Creek and Garland's Period which is also the median age of all the Mills pond (McCartney 1988) where they lived dating methods. until 1674 (Figure 2). Cromwell and Miller (1989), working at the Hipkins Site (44RD30) downstream INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY OF THE of the Totuskey Creek Site studied in this project, RAPPAHANNOCK TRIBE concluded that English settlement began in the Quantifying the age of archeological materials is upper reaches of Totuskey Creek by 1664. The one of geoarchaeology's primary goals (Rapp and Rappahannock tribe was displaced again in 1674 Hill 2006). New quantitative dating techniques are to a site across the Rappahannock River, 4-5 km always being developed (e.g., Wilson et al. 2009), (2-3 mi) northwest of the current town of but the most commonly used archeological Tappahannock (Figure 2) where they lived until 14 radiometric dating technique is C (lnashima14 1684 when they were moved upriver to Portobago 2008). The value of dating techniques, such as C , Bay in King George County until 1704. By 1705 is that they provide absolute age constraints to just a few families remained in Essex County relative ages from the traditional typological (McCary 1950; Beverly 1968; Maccord 1976, approach using pottery sherds and projectile 1989; Feest 1978; Harper 1992). The points. This combined approach using C14 along Rappahannock tribe is still extant (Speck 1925; with the typology of pottery sherds and projectile Speck et al. 1946; Rappahannock Tribe 2006) and points is applied to a Rappahannock tribe site in was officially recognized in 1983 by the General Virginia. Assembly of Virginia (Virginia Acts of Assembly 1983, HJR 54). 163 The Totuskey Creek site is located on Totuskey Creek (Sanford and Klein 1994). In 1658 colonial Creek upstream from two of the 16 villages of the expansion forced them to move their main village, Rappahannock tribe: Menaskunt on the northwest which became known as Morattico Indian Town, side of the mouth of the creek and Auhomesk on to the east bank of Totuskey Creek until they once the southeast side (Maccord 1976). Feest (1978), again moved on by 1672 (Pullins 1992; Potter Potter (1993), and Haile (1996) all interpreted 1993; Rountree 1996). Sanford and Klein (1994) Smith's 1612 map to suggest that the Native suggested the Moratico/Moraughtacund tribe Americans of Totuskey Creek were under the simply came to be called Totuskey by the colonists influence of the Rappahannock tribe (Figures 3-5). only when they moved their main village to In addition, Ryland (1976) stated that Totuskey Totuskey Creek. Creek itself is named after a local 17th century Rappahannock chief, Totoskoi. According to STUDY SITE Rountree (1990: 118), the Rappahannock tribe The Virginia Department of Historic Resources actually consisted of two separate tribes, the site number for the Totuskey Creek Site is Rappahannock Creek tribe based on Cat Point 44RD0206. It is located 2.8 km (1.8 mi) southeast Creek and the Totosha or Tanks Rappahannocks of Indian Field on the Haynesville 7.5' U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangle. is based on the east side of Totuskey Creek and also It known as the Totuskey tribe. located 8 km (5 mi) up Totuskey Creek from its mouth at the Rappahannock River. This distance Holland (1988) described the Totuskey tribe as a has undoubtedly changed since the time of separate tribe in between the Rappahannock tribe occupation as soil erosion due to historic to the northwest and the Moratico/Moraughtacund agricultural practices has caused siltation, whereas tribe to the southeast as suggested by Feest (1978) waves, tides, storm surges, groundwater flow, and and Potter (1993)(Figures 3-4). Holland's (1988) relative sea-level rise have caused widespread interpretation is derived from his reconstruction of erosion around the Chesapeake Bay (Rosen 1980). Native American pathways in the Northern Neck The site is situated 3 m (10 ft) above the current based on his reading of geographic landmarks in water level in Totuskey Creek with unobstructed land patents recorded in courthouse records. He views up and down stream. argues that the main branch of Totuskey Creek upstream of Little Totuskey Creek was variously METHODS called Cross Creek and Matchycomico or The site was initially identified by surface Matchacomaco Creek in courthouse records exposures as well as in-situ cliff exposures along (Figure 6). From this, he argued for the existence the bank of Totuskey Creek. An excavation site of another 'king's house' (i.e., district chief's was selected based on the density of surface village) on par with Moratico/Moraughtacund and artifacts exposed. It was tested by 20-30 shovel Toppahannock/Toppahanock (Figures 1 and 3-5). tests, and an area 3 m (10 ft) by 6 m (20 ft) was He termed it Totuskey Village, and if Holland is completely excavated to depth of 30 cm (1 ft). In 2 2 correct, it was located only 1,100 m (3,600 ft) addition, 0.5-1.0 m (5-10 ft ) pits were excavated 7,; southwest of the Totuskey Creek Site (Figure 6). down to 60-90 cm (2-3 ft) along the creek bank. .t.• 1 There are no Virginia Department of Historic The majority of the oyster shells as well as .I Resources sites matching Holland's (1988) ceramic and stone artifacts came from 30-45 cm . ij hypothesized location of Totuskey Village, but (12-18 in) below the surface. A jaw fragment ' there are for his Indian Fields shown in Figure 6. (Figure 7A) was found at a depth of 35 cm (14 in). Others have argued that the southeast side of Totuskey Creek was occupied by the An X-ray of the jaw fragment (Figure 7B) Moratico/Moraughtacund tribe. According to this. indicates that the roots of the two molars are the interpretation, their main village was near the wrong size and shape for humans. The occlusal Corotoman River further down the Northern Neck, surfaces are well worn (Figure 7C) indicating a but their area of control extended to Totuskey long history of chewing tough food. The curved 164 upper surface of the fragment preserves the orbit The prehistoric ceramic artifacts (mostly pottery) (eye socket). The infraorbital foramen (hole for were dated using published local-regional facial nerves) is preserved (Figure 7A), indicating typologies. The pottery wares were mainly the fragment comes from the upper left maxilla distinguished by their temper and surface (upper jaw).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds
    Defining the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for The Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds Prepared By: Scott M. Strickland Virginia R. Busby Julia A. King With Contributions From: Francis Gray • Diana Harley • Mervin Savoy • Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland Mark Tayac • Piscataway Indian Nation Joan Watson • Piscataway Conoy Confederacy and Subtribes Rico Newman • Barry Wilson • Choptico Band of Piscataway Indians Hope Butler • Cedarville Band of Piscataway Indians Prepared For: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Annapolis, Maryland St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland November 2015 ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this project was to identify and represent the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for the Nanjemoy and Mattawoman creek watersheds on the north shore of the Potomac River in Charles and Prince George’s counties, Maryland. The project was undertaken as an initiative of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay office, which supports and manages the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail. One of the goals of the Captain John Smith Trail is to interpret Native life in the Middle Atlantic in the early years of colonization by Europeans. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept, developed as an important tool for identifying Native landscapes, has been incorporated into the Smith Trail’s Comprehensive Management Plan in an effort to identify Native communities along the trail as they existed in the early17th century and as they exist today. Identifying ICLs along the Smith Trail serves land and cultural conservation, education, historic preservation, and economic development goals. Identifying ICLs empowers descendant indigenous communities to participate fully in achieving these goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Bladensburg Prehistoric Background
    Environmental Background and Native American Context for Bladensburg and the Anacostia River Carol A. Ebright (April 2011) Environmental Setting Bladensburg lies along the east bank of the Anacostia River at the confluence of the Northeast Branch and Northwest Branch of this stream. Formerly known as the East Branch of the Potomac River, the Anacostia River is the northernmost tidal tributary of the Potomac River. The Anacostia River has incised a pronounced valley into the Glen Burnie Rolling Uplands, within the embayed section of the Western Shore Coastal Plain physiographic province (Reger and Cleaves 2008). Quaternary and Tertiary stream terraces, and adjoining uplands provided well drained living surfaces for humans during prehistoric and historic times. The uplands rise as much as 300 feet above the water. The Anacostia River drainage system flows southwestward, roughly parallel to the Fall Line, entering the Potomac River on the east side of Washington, within the District of Columbia boundaries (Figure 1). Thin Coastal Plain strata meet the Piedmont bedrock at the Fall Line, approximately at Rock Creek in the District of Columbia, but thicken to more than 1,000 feet on the east side of the Anacostia River (Froelich and Hack 1975). Terraces of Quaternary age are well-developed in the Bladensburg vicinity (Glaser 2003), occurring under Kenilworth Avenue and Baltimore Avenue. The main stem of the Anacostia River lies in the Coastal Plain, but its Northwest Branch headwaters penetrate the inter-fingered boundary of the Piedmont province, and provided ready access to the lithic resources of the heavily metamorphosed interior foothills to the west.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Indians; Powhatan, Pocahontas, and European Contact
    Virginia Indians; Powhatan, Pocahontas, and European Contact HistoryConnects is made possible by the Hugh V. White Jr. Outreach Education Fund Table of Contents Virginia Indians; Powhatan, Pocahontas, and European Contact Teacher Guide Introduction/Program Description ............................................................. 3 Lesson Plan ................................................................................................. 4-7 Historical Background................................................................................ 8-9 Activities: Pre Lesson Activity: The Historical Record............................................ 10-12 During Lesson Activity: Vocab Sheet........................................................... 13 Post Lesson Activity: Pocahontas................................................................. 14 Suggested Review Questions......................................................................... 15 Student Worksheets Word Search.................................................................................................. 16 Algonquian Language Worksheet........................................................... 17-18 Selected Images/Sources Map of Virginia............................................................................................. 20 Images of Pocahontas............................................................................... 21-23 2 Introduction Thank you for showing interest in a HistoryConnects program from the Virginia Historical Society. We are really excited
    [Show full text]
  • How Cultural Factors Hastened the Population Decline of the Powhatan Indians
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2008 How Cultural Factors Hastened the Population Decline of the Powhatan Indians Julia Ruth Beckley Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd Part of the History Commons © The Author Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/1553 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © Julia Ruth Beckley, 2008 All Rights Reserved HOW CULTURAL FACTORS HASTENED THE POPULATION DECLINE OF THE POWHATAN INDIANS (1607-1699) A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History at Virginia Commonwealth University. by JULIA RUTH BECKLEY Master of Arts in History, Virginia Commonwealth University, 2008 Bachelor of Arts in History, Christopher Newport University, 2003 Director: DR. SARAH MEACHAM PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY Director: DR. JOHN KNEEBONE PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY Director: DR. JOSHUA ECKHARDT PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH, DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia May 2008 Table of Contents Page Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1 2 ENGLISH CULTURAL FACTORS THAT
    [Show full text]
  • Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections Vol
    SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 96, NO. 4, PL. 1 tiutniiimniimwiuiiii Trade Beads Found at Leedstown, Natural Size SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLUME 96. NUMBER 4 INDIAN SITES BELOW THE FALLS OF THE RAPPAHANNOCK, VIRGINIA (With 21 Plates) BY DAVID I. BUSHNELL, JR. (Publication 3441) CITY OF WASHINGTON PUBLISHED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION SEPTEMBER 15, 1937 ^t)t Boxb (jBaliimore (prttfe DAI.TIMORE. MD., C. S. A. CONTENTS Page Introduction I Discovery of the Rappahannock 2 Acts relating to the Indians passed by the General Assembly during the second half of the seventeenth century 4 Movement of tribes indicated by names on the Augustine Herrman map, 1673 10 Sites of ancient settlements 15 Pissaseck 16 Pottery 21 Soapstone 25 Cache of trade beads 27 Discovery of the beads 30 Kerahocak 35 Nandtanghtacund 36 Portobago Village, 1686 39 Material from site of Nandtanghtacund 42 Pottery 43 Soapstone 50 Above Port Tobago Bay 51 Left bank of the Rappahannock above Port Tobago Bay 52 At mouth of Millbank Creek 55 Checopissowa 56 Taliaferro Mount 57 " Doogs Indian " 58 Opposite the mouth of Hough Creek 60 Cuttatawomen 60 Sockbeck 62 Conclusions suggested by certain specimens 63 . ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES Page 1. Trade beads found at Leedstown (Frontispiece) 2. North over the Rappahannock showing Leedstown and the site of Pissaseck 18 3. Specimens from site of Pissaseck 18 4. Specimens from site of Pissaseck 18 5. Specimens from site of Pissaseck 18 6. Specimens from site of Pissaseck 26 7. Specimens from site of Pissaseck 26 8. Specimens from site of Pissaseck 26 9. I. Specimens from site of Pissaseck.
    [Show full text]
  • For Sale | 1,410± Acres Powhatan County, Va
    FOR SALE | 1,410± ACRES HOBSON TRACT POWHATAN COUNTY, VA POWHATAN, VA 23139 Price: $2,200,000 Winchester 15 301 Leesburg 495 LATITUDE & LONGITUDE Washington Arlington Front Royal 66 Chantilly Falls Church “37.494734, -78.026835” Fairfax Alexandria Springeld 13 Manassas 113 Warrenton Dale City Waldorf 33 81 Shenandoah 301 Culpeper 17 Harrisonburg Staord 50 29 Fredericksburg King George Staunton 15 Spotsylvania Waynesboro Charlottesville 1 Chinoteague 220 95 Features 64 360 Lexington 64 Accomac Short Pump 295 Mechanicsville 13 288 Richmond 17 3± MILES of frontage on Appomattox River. 60 New Kent 81 Lynchburg Farmville Hopewell from Richmond. 460 Williamsburg <45 MINUTES Roanoke 360 Colonial Heights Blacksburg Petersburg 64 460 Newprt News EXCELLENT DEER AND TURKEY HUNTING. 15 Hampton Wytheville Chatham 258 85 Virginia 220 95 Beach BEAVER SWAMPS along river have provided great 360 Norfolk 29 460 Portsmouth Emporia Suolk Chesapeake duck hunting. Martinsville South Boston South Hill 58 Danville 58 ACCESS FROM BRACKETTS BEND ROAD via deeded 50’ easement or from Hwy 13 via Prescriptive easement. EXCELLENT INTERNAL ACCESS throughout property. 6± MILES OF INTERNAL ROADS. SIGNIFICANT MERCHANTABLE timber value in mature hardwoods. CONTACT BROKER FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS. Contacts Randy Cosby 804-433-1819 MAIN OFFICE ADDRESS: 4198 Cox Road, Suite 200 | Glen Allen, VA 23060 [email protected] MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 71150 | Richmond, VA 23255 T 804-326-LAND (5263) | F 804-346-5901 COMMONWEALTHLAND.COM Joe Buhrman 804-433-1811 Commonwealth Land represents the Owner of this property. Information contained herein, is deemed reliable but not guaranteed. [email protected] Hobson Tract Powhatan County, Virginia, AC +/- Randy Cosby 804-433-1819 [email protected] Joe Buhrman 804-433-1811 [email protected] Old Pipeline River / Creek Primary Road Road / Trail Pond / Tank Boundary Buckingham The information contained herein was obtained from sources Bailey Foster deemed to be reliable.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape
    Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape Prepared by: Scott M. Strickland Julia A. King Martha McCartney with contributions from: The Pamunkey Indian Tribe The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Prepared for: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay & Colonial National Historical Park The Chesapeake Conservancy Annapolis, Maryland The Pamunkey Indian Tribe Pamunkey Reservation, King William, Virginia The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe Adamstown, King William, Virginia The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Mattaponi Reservation, King William, Virginia St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland October 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of its management of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail, the National Park Service (NPS) commissioned this project in an effort to identify and represent the York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape. The work was undertaken by St. Mary’s College of Maryland in close coordination with NPS. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept represents “the context of the American Indian peoples in the Chesapeake Bay and their interaction with the landscape.” Identifying ICLs is important for raising public awareness about the many tribal communities that have lived in the Chesapeake Bay region for thousands of years and continue to live in their ancestral homeland. ICLs are important for land conservation, public access to, and preservation of the Chesapeake Bay. The three tribes, including the state- and Federally-recognized Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes and the state-recognized Mattaponi tribe, who are today centered in their ancestral homeland in the Pamunkey and Mattaponi river watersheds, were engaged as part of this project. The Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes participated in meetings and driving tours.
    [Show full text]
  • The Powhatan Native Americans: a Historical Narrative
    The Powhatan Native Americans—A Historical Narrative Jenny Huebner Social Studies Curriculum & Instruction 4/9/08 http://jmhueb.people.wm.edu/ 1 Jenny Huebner Historical narrative Introduction Native Americans, as their name implies were the first people to inhabit what is now the United States. They peopled North America long before the arrival of Christopher Columbus in 1492, and their origins have been contested in many myths alluding to the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel and Atlantis. The Native American tribes were not unified, and their languages numbered over 300. One language family, Algonquian, was shared by the Powhatan. The Powhatan were a group of approximately 30 tribes that inhabited the Tidewater area of Virginia and Maryland in the late 16th and early 17th century. Their history is unique in that they were in existence for approximately 80 years. Around 1570, a chief known as Wahunsonacock united these tribes by force, but they disbanded circa 1650. The arrival of English settlers, which occurred in 1607, in addition to Chief Powhatan’s death in 1618, may have contributed to the disbanding the Powhatan tribes (Feest 1990). Although Native American tribes were abundant in the past, yet had no common organizational structure, they came to share a common pattern of mistreatment from the Europeans who interacted with and dwelt among them. The Spanish came to America in the mid-16th century in search of a passage to China. Instead, they met various Algonquians with whom they traded and eventually came to view as a source of labor. In later years, French fur trappers saw the Native Americans simply as a way to acquire pelts, and missionaries viewed Native Americans as a source of potential converts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Powhatan of Tsenacomoco
    The Powhatan of Tsenacomoco The Powhatan of Tsenacomoco By Erin Sawyer When the English docked their ships on the shore of North America in 1607, they set forth to build a small settlement named “Jamestown” after King James I. The larger territory around Jamestown, “Virginia,” had already been named by earlier settlers in honor of their English queen. However, these titles were not what the Powhatan Indians, who had lived in this area for thousands of years, considered home. For them, “Virginia” was “Tsenacomoco,” the homeland they had shared with other Native American tribes for generations. This map shows Virginia and West Virginia in 1881. Before colonists arrived, Native American tribes like the Powhatan inhabited these lands for centuries. 1 | P a g e The Powhatan of Tsenacomoco Life for the Powhatan Indians differed greatly from the English settlers’ lives. It comes as no surprise that the two groups had trouble understanding each other when the English arrived in 1607. The Powhatan were a mighty group who lived among the beautiful, stately trees and rich forests of modern-day Virginia. The Powhatan men spent their time hunting, fishing, and building traps for food, while the women were in charge of most of the farming and gathering. Once an area of land had been farmed, the Powhatan moved to a new location with their families. For the Powhatan, and many neighboring tribes, it was understood that unused farmland remained under the control of the original tribe. Therefore, the Powhatan owned much land, even when it wasn’t being used or occupied.
    [Show full text]
  • The Potomac Creek Site (44St2) Revisited
    THE POTOMAC CREEK SITE (44ST2) REVISITED \ \ '-' STRUCTURE @@ OSSUARY 0BASTION 84 DITCH , .. ., ........ PALISADE 0- 40 meters Research Report Series No. 10 Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2801 Kensington Avenue Richmond, Virginia 23221 THE POTOMAC CREEK SITE (44ST2) REVISITED Virginia Department of Historic Resources Research Report Series No. 10 Prepared by: William and Mary Center for Archaeological Research Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary Williamsburg, Virginia 23 187-8795 Project Director Dennis B. Blanton Authors Dennis B. Blanton Stevan C. Pullins Veronica L. Deitrick with contributions from: Gwenyth Duncan William C. Johnson Lisa Kealhofer Justine K. McKnight This volume is dedicated in memory of Thomas Dale Stewart (1 90 1-1 997) ABSTRACT Under agreement with tlie Virginia Department of Historic Resources (DHR), the William and Mary Center for Archaeological Research (WMCAR) completed a second stage of data recovery in a portion of tlie Potomac Creek Site (44ST2) in Stafford County, Virginia. The fieldwork for this effort was completed in November and December, 1996. It followed completion of the first stage by Cultural Resources, Inc. which consisted of sampling and removal of plowzone to identify cultural features. The WMCAR work resulted in systematic sampling of each cultural feature identified. These include sections of a perimeter ditch, four palisade post lines, nine palisade trench lines, five pit features, and one structure. Radiocarbon dates establish occupation between AD 1300 and 1550. A model is presented of village evolution that accounts for an initial immigrant group and eventual adjustments to local conditions, including chiefdom-level organization. Patterns of subsistence are documented along with material culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Preservation and Partners: a History of Piscataway Park
    Preservation and Partners: A History of Piscataway Park Janet A. McDonnell, PhD December 2020 Resource Stewardship and Science, National Capital Area, National Park Service and Organization of American Historians EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the early republic period of American history, President George Washington was the most renowned resident of the Potomac River valley. His sprawling Mount Vernon estate sat on a hill directly across the Potomac River from the 17th century Marshall Hall estate in Maryland. There is ample evidence that Washington and his guests enjoyed and very much appreciated the stunning view. Many years later preserving this view would become the major impetus for establishing what we know today as Piscataway Park (PISC), a few miles south of Washington, DC. These lands along the Maryland shore of Potomac River were actively cultivated during George Washington’s time, and the existing park setting, which includes agricultural lands and open spaces interspersed with forests and wetlands, closely approximates that historic scene. The National Park Service’s (NPS) primary goal and responsibility in managing the park has been, and continues to be, preserving this historic scene of open fields and wooded areas and ensuring that it does not authorize any landscape alterations except those that would restore previously undisturbed sites, reduce visual intrusions, or maintain open fields. The NPS continues to take into account the slope and orientation of the terrain and the tree cover when considering the location of any new facilities. Piscataway Park and its associated lands are for the most part held under scenic easements and constitute a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) historic district made up of nearly 5,000 acres of meadow, woodland, and wetland, along six miles of the Potomac River shoreline from the head of Piscataway Creek to the historic Marshall Hall in Maryland’s Prince George’s and Charles counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Living with the Indians Introduction
    LIVING WITH THE INDIANS Introduction Archaeologists believe the American Indians were the first people to arrive in North America, perhaps having migrated from Asia more than 16,000 years ago. During this Paleo time period, these Indians rapidly spread throughout America and were the first people to live in Virginia. During the Woodland period, which began around 1200 B.C., Indian culture reached its high- est level of complexity. By the late 16th century, Indian people in Coastal Plain Virginia, united under the leadership of Wahunsonacock, had organized themselves into approximately 32 tribes. Wahunsonacock was the paramount or supreme chief, having held the title “Powhatan.” Not a personal name, the Powhatan title was used by English settlers to identify both the leader of the tribes and the people of the paramount chiefdom he ruled. Although the Powhatan people lived in separate towns and tribes, each led by its own chief, their language, social structure, religious beliefs and cultural traditions were shared. By the time the first English settlers set foot in “Tsena- commacah, or “densely inhabited land,” the Powhatan Indians had developed a complex culture with a centralized political system. Living With the Indians is a story of the Powhatan people who lived in early 17th-century Virginia— their social, political, economic structures and everyday life ways. It is the story of individuals, cultural interactions, events and consequences that frequently challenged the survival of the Pow- hatan people. It is the story of how a unique culture, through strong kinship networks and tradition, has endured and maintained tribal identities in Virginia right up to the present day.
    [Show full text]