950 Cmr: Department of the State Secretary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COMBINED REPORT INTENSIVE (LOCATIONAL) SURVEY OF SEVEN IMPACT AREAS FOR RUNWAY 6-24 EXTENSION, WETLAND REPLICATION/RESTORATION, AND TURTLE HABITAT ENHANCEMENT AND SITE EXAMINATION OF LOCI 7, 8, 9 AND 10 IMPROVEMENTS TO GEORGE D. HARLOW FIELD/MARSHFIELD MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MARSHFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS MHC # RC. 8315 Prepared for Gale Associates, Inc. 15 Constitution Drive Bedford, NH 03110 By Archaeological and Historical Services, Inc. 569 Middle Turnpike P.O. Box 543 Storrs, CT 06268 Authors: Brian Jones, Ph.D. Ross Harper, Ph.D. Mary G. Harper February 2013 ABSTRACT Seven areas, totaling ca. 26 acres, within areas of the ancient Native American Site 19- PL-426. Previous Reconnaissance and Intensive (Locational) surveys conducted by University of Massachusetts Archaeological Services identified intact loci associated with the site. 454 shovel test pits were excavated at ten-meter intervals identifying four new Native American archaeological loci, numbered 7 through 10. An additional 202 shovel test pits were placed at five-meter intervals, as were 9 1x1-meter excavation units, within the identified loci. The testing produced 3911 lithics, 84 faunal materials and 242 historic artifacts. Thirty diagnostic projectile points date from the Early Archaic through Late Woodland periods. Identified projectile point types include Bifurcate-based, Neville, Stark, possible Merrimack, Wading River, Rossville and possible Madison, in addition to untyped Small Stemmed forms. The most abundant of these types likely date to the Early Woodland period. Three of the four loci have the potential to provide additional important information about Native American lifeways. Two historic components were also identified within Locus 9. A concentration of household-related artifacts, such as ceramics dated to ca. 1750-1775, suggest a house stood nearby. A small possible Settlement/Colonial-period hunting camp is suggested by European flint, a cut brass button and red earthenware. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………………..…i LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………….…….... v MANAGEMENT SUMMARY …………………………………………………….......….. x I. INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF WORK ………………………….………… 1 A. Introduction ………………………………………………………………….… 1 B. Scope of Work ………………………………………………………………...….. 2 II. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY OF PHASE 1 AND 2 SURVEYS ……………………………………………………………………………..4 A. Phase 1/Intensive (Locational) Survey ……………………………………………. 4 B. Phase 2/Site Examination ……………………………………………………………. 5 III. ENVIRONMENTAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT ……………………………. 8 A. Environmental Context Overview ……………………………………………. 8 B. Pre-Contact Native American Context Overview……………………………………. 8 C. Contact and Post-Contact Historic Context Overview ……………………………. 9 D. Results of Prior Studies at George D. Harlow Field ………………………...… 10 IV. RESULTS OF THE INTENSIVE (LOCATIONAL) SURVEY …………...……… 12 A. Walkover Survey …………………………………………………………….…….. 12 B. Subsurface Testing Overview …………………………………………...……… 14 C. Summary of Results by APE ……………………………………………….….. 17 D. Summary, Assessment and Interpretation of the Archaeological Loci Identified in Intensive (Locational) Survey ……………………………………………….….. 28 V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE INTENSIVE SURVEY .…… ……………………………………………………………………..32 A. Locus 7 (APE 7) ……………………………………………………………...…… 32 B. Locus 8 (APE 4) ……………………………………………………………...…… 33 C. Locus 9 (APE 1) …………………………………………………………………... 33 D. Locus 10 (APE 1) ……………………………………………………………….….. 34 E. Finds Not Associated with Loci Identified in Intensive (Locational) Testing ...… 34 VI. PHASE 2/SITE EXAMINATION OVERVIEW …………………………………... 36 A. Introduction …………………………………………………………………... 36 B. Research Questions …………………………………………………………... 36 VII. RESULTS OF THE PHASE 2/SITE EXAMINATION SURVEY AT LOCUS 7 …... 38 ii A. Introduction …………………………………………………………………... 38 B. Results – Locus 7 ………………………………………………………………...… 38 C. Summary - Locus 7 …………………………………………………………... 39 VIII. RESULTS OF PHASE 2/SITE EXAMINATION AT LOCUS 8 ………………...… 41 A. Introduction ………………………………………………………………...… 41 B. Results – Locus 8 …………………………………………………………………... 41 C. Artifact Density and Distribution at Locus 8 ………………………………...… 45 D. Locus 8 Chronology …………………………………………………………... 46 E. Other Stone Tools at Locus 8 ……………………………………………...…… 48 F. Summary – Locus 8 ………………………………………………………...… 50 G. Recommendations – Locus 8 ………………………………………………...… 52 IX. RESULTS OF THE PHASE 2/SITE EXAMINATION SURVEY AT LOCUS 9 …... 55 A. Introduction ………………………………………………………………..…. 55 B. Results – Locus 9 ……………………………………………………………………55 C. Summary – Locus 9 …………………………………………………………... 72 D. Recommendations – Locus 9 ……………………………………………….….. 74 X. RESULTS OF THE PHASE 2/SITE EXAMINATION SURVEY AT LOCUS 10 .….. 76 A. Introduction ………...………………………………………………………… 76 B. Locus 10 Lithic Artifact Distribution ……………...…………………………… 78 C. Locus 10 Chronology …………………………………………………………... 79 D. Conclusion – Locus 10 …………………………………………………………... 81 E. Recommendations – Locus 10 …………………………………………………... 82 XI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 SURVEYS ……………………………………………………………………..……. 83 A. Locus 7 …………………………………………………………………………... 83 B. Locus 8 …………………………………………………………………...……… 84 C. Locus 9 ……………………………………………………………………..……. 84 D. Locus 10 ……………………………………………………………………...…….85 XII. REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………... 86 APPENDIX I Figures …………………………………………………………………………... 94 APPENDIX II Phase 1 Survey Artifact Inventory Catalogue Project-Wide ……..…………………... 171 APPENDIX III Phase 1 Survey Artifact Inventory Catalogues by Loci and Field Scatter Finds ..…198 APPENDIX IV Phase 2 Survey Artifact Inventory Catalogues by Locus ………...……………….. 240 iii APPENDIX V Phase 1/Phase 2 Survey Artifact Inventory Catalogue for Mars2 ….……………… 357 APPENDIX VI Phase 1/Phase 2 Survey Artifact Inventory Catalogue for Mars3 …………………. 363 APPENDIX VII MHC Site Inventory Forms …………………………………………………….…… 368 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Location of the Project Area on USGS Duxbury Quadrangle, 1:24000 (data layers from MassGIS). Figure 2: Design Plan elucidating proposed runway expansions, as well as two wetland replication areas (A and B) and four designated turtle habitat enhancement areas (A, B, C & D). Figure 3: APEs 1 through 7 within the Marshfield Airport project area projected on aerial photograph. Figure 4: UMAS loci within the Marshfield Airport project area projected on aerial photograph. Figure 5: Location and results of UMAS intensive (locational) survey in original project plans with new APE areas highlighted. Figure 6: Overview of AHS Phase 1/Intensive (Locational) STPs on recent project plans. Figure 7: AHS Phase 1/Intensive (Locational) STP locations and results within APE 1, APE 2 and APE 5. Figure 8: AHS Phase 1/Intensive (Locational) STP locations and results within APE 2 and APE 6. Figure 9: Sample STP profiles from APE 1, Locus 9. Figure 10: Sample STP profiles from APE 1, Locus 10. Figure 11: Projectile points recovered during the Intensive (Locational) Survey of Marshfield Airport Site 19-PL-426. Figure 12: Possible groundstone tool fragment and nutting stone fragment from Intensive (Locational) Survey. Figure 13: Sample STP profiles from APE 2. Figure 14: AHS Phase 1/Intensive (Locational) STP locations and results within APE 3 and APE 7. Figure 15: Sample STP profiles from APE 3. Figure 16: AHS Phase 1/Intensive (Locational) STP locations and results within APE 4. Figure 17: Sample STP profiles from APE 4, Locus 8. v Figure 18: Sample STP profiles from APE 5. Figure 19: Sample STP profiles from APE 6. Figure 20: Sample STP profiles from APE 7, Locus 7. Figure 21 Archaeological loci identified during the intensive (locational) survey. Figure 22: Location of Locus 7 and associated STPs within APE 7 (Turtle Habitat Enhancement Area D). Figure 23: Location of Locus 8 in APE 4 (Turtle Habitat Enhancement Area A). Figure 24: Location of Locus 9 within APE 1 (Runway 6-24 extension area). Figure 25: Location of Locus 10 within APE 1 (Runway 6-24 extension area). Figure 26: Results of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 archaeological testing of Locus 7 within APE 7/Turtle Habitat Enhancement Area D. Figure 27: Examples of typical soil profiles within Locus 7. Figure 28: Locus 7 profile view of excavated 1x1-meter unit N10W1. Figure 29: Site Examination STP locations at Locus 8 with Intensive Survey STPs and 1x1- meter excavation units at N10E34 and S5E19 also shown. Figure 30: Examples of typical soil profiles within Locus 8. Figure 31: Locus 8 profile view of excavated 1x1-meter unit S5E9, south wall. Figure 32: Locus 8 profile view of excavated 1x1-meter unit N10E34, north wall. Figure 33: Historic artifact distribution within Locus 8. Figure 34: Lithic artifact density within Locus 8 based on STP data. Figure 35: Rhyolite artifact density within Locus 8. Figure 36: Quartz artifact density within Locus 8. Figure 37: Diagnostic artifacts recovered from Locus 8. vi Figure 38: Early Woodland Rossville-like forms and other tapered-stemmed points from Locus 8. Figure 39: Quartz projectile point fragments from Locus 8. Figure 40: Early and Middle Archaic points from Locus 8. Figure 41: Early Archaic Gulf of Maine Archaic Tradition micro-core and associated quartz scraper from Locus 8. Figure 42: Locations of additional stone tools and fragments found within Locus 8. Figure 43: Estimated relative sea-level change in southeastern Massachusetts. Figure 44: Offshore bathymetry of southeastern Massachusetts. Figure 45: Recommended areas of focused Phase 3 Data Recovery excavation if site avoidance is not possible