PHASE IA ARCHEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE SHEPHERD PARKWAY INTERCHANGE/ACCESS ROAD ALTERNATIVE FOR THE ST. ELIZABETHS WEST CAMPUS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, WASHINGTON, D.C.

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

November 2009

PHASE IA ARCHEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE SHEPHERD PARKWAY INTERCHANGE/ACCESS ROAD ALTERNATIVE FOR THE ST. ELIZABETHS WEST CAMPUS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, WASHINGTON, D.C.

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 1801 K Street NW Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20006

November 2009

Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

PUBLIC REPORT SUMMARY

As part of its planning process and to comply with federal regulations such as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, the General Services Administration conducted a Phase IA archeological assessment of a portion of the Shepherd Parkway, which is owned by the National Park Service. The survey was done in connection with the proposed redevelopment of the West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital for the Department of Homeland Security. The proposed redevelopment includes improvements to the existing transportation network to allow access to the West Campus for the anticipated increased work force. This report addresses one proposed alternative, which consists of improvements to the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway (I-295) interchange and construction of a controlled access road to the West Campus. Selection of this alternative will involve construction of road facilities within approximately 10.4 acres of the larger National Park Service Shepherd Parkway property located to the east of the Anacostia Freeway.

Research indicates that portions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel are likely to contain archeological resources. This is partly because the subject property is close to the Anacostia River and Native American archeological sites have been found on similar landforms in the area. There is also a high potential for archeological sites dating to and after the Civil War. Civil War sites are likely associated with the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman, and those dating after the Civil War are likely associated with tenants of the former Giesborough Manor plantation.

The Shepherd Parkway covers 205 acres and is managed by the National Park Service National Capital Parks-East. The Shepherd Parkway is land that was set aside to build a road to be called the Fort Circle Drive, but was never constructed. The current proposed area of road construction covers a 10.4-acre parcel that extends south of St. Elizabeths West Campus and along the eastern side of the Anacostia Freeway (I-295).

The area that includes the Shepherd Parkway parcel originally was part of three patents: Penncotts Invention, South Kirby, and Giesborough. Penncotts Invention was patented by James Pencott, South Kirby by Thomas Wentworth, and Giesborough by Thomas Dent. During the 1700s Giesborough and what had been Pencotts Invention were acquired by the Addison family. The Addisons were prominent in the region, and the son of Colonel Thomas Addison, also named Thomas, served as an officer in the English army for a number of years. Upon his return to Giesborough in 1764, he was granted a 1,613-acre patent for Giesborough Manor. This property contained the original 850-acre patent as well as surrounding land that included Discovery (originally Pencotts Invention) and other properties, including vacant land, which most likely included South Kirby.

By 1808, most of the property was sold to Dr. John Shaaff, who died in 1819 and left Giesborough Manor to his wife and children. In 1833, George Washington Young acquired 624 acres of Giesborough, including the Shepherd Parkway parcel, from the heirs of John Schaaf. Young divided the property into upper and lower halves, giving the lower half of the estate to his brother Ignatius Fenwick Young. George W. Young was a wealthy plantation

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. iii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway owner, but the Civil War would have a major impact on his estates, including Giesborough, where a major Union Cavalry depot was established in 1863. When the war ended, Young tried to sell the property but was unsuccessful. Young died in 1867 and his widow in 1878, and the property was gradually sold off by their heirs.

Prior to the current effort, no archeological investigations had been undertaken within the Shepherd Parkway parcel, and no sites, either Native American or historic, had been recorded. However, a review of historic maps and photographs showed that Civil War and later sites were likely present. Civil War era sites associated with the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman could be present. The highest potential for unrecorded structural remains is located around and south of Malcolm X Avenue. Several structures, possibly tenant houses, appear to be within or near the southern portion of the parcel. Post-World War II aerial photographs show a small housing complex north of Malcolm X Avenue. The proximity of this housing complex to Bolling Air Force Base suggests that it could have housed base personnel during the war. A 1957 aerial photograph indicates that the structures had been removed, and by 1963, a cloverleaf interchange had been constructed over the area.

Based on this research, areas with low and moderate to high potential for sites were identified, and field methods were identified for each area. It is recommended that areas with moderate to high potential be investigated by shovel test pits excavated at 10-m intervals, and areas with low potential be visually examined at 5-m intervals. Additionally, geomorphological investigations are recommended to see if the landforms contain deeply buried archeological resources. Finally, if found, a metal detection survey should be conducted at the location of a potential Civil War gum emplacement.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. iv Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc., under contract to Jones Lang LaSalle of Washington, D.C., themselves under contract to the U.S. General Services Administration, conducted a Phase IA archeological assessment of a portion of the Shepherd Parkway National Park Service property in Washington, D.C. between April and July 2009. The U.S. General Services Administration is preparing to implement portions of a master plan for the redevelopment of the St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus to house facilities associated with the Department of Homeland Security. The project will involve the development of up to 4.5 million gross square feet plus parking to accommodate up to 14,000 federal employees. Associated with the proposed redevelopment are improvements to the existing transportation network. The transportation enhancements will allow access to the West Campus for the anticipated increased work force. One alternative, which is the subject of this Phase IA report, consists of improvements to the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway (I-295) interchange and construction of a controlled access road to the West Campus. Selection of this alternative would involve construction of road facilities within the National Park Service Shepherd Parkway property to the east of the Anacostia Freeway.

Based on this research, portions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel have a high probability for the presence of archeological resources. Given the proximity of the subject property to the Anacostia River, and the presence of identified prehistoric archeological sites on similar landforms, this area has a moderate to high potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American resources. There also appears to be a high potential for Historic period resources dating to the Civil War and postbellum periods. Potential resources associated with the Shepherd Parkway parcel also include antebellum resources associated with the Giesborough Manor plantation. Civil War-era resources are likely associated with the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman, while postbellum resources are likely associated with tenants of the former Giesborough Manor plantation. Based on the potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological resources, a Phase I archeological survey of those portions of the property not adversely impacted by previous land usages is recommended.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. v Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. vi Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PUBLIC REPORT SUMMARY ...... iii MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ...... v TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vii LIST OF FIGURES ...... ix LIST OF TABLES ...... xi

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Proposed Undertaking ...... 1 1.2 Shepherd Parkway Parcel Description ...... 6 1.3 Geology and Soils ...... 7 1.4 Report Organization ...... 11

2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS ...... 13 2.1 Background Research ...... 13 2.2 Survey Methods ...... 13 2.3 Area of Potential Effects ...... 14

3.0 PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC CONTEXTS ...... 15 3.1 Prehistoric Context...... 15 3.2 Historic Context ...... 25 3.3 Summary ...... 40

4.0 SURVEYED ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...... 43 4.1 Previous Archeological Investigations ...... 43 4.2 Archeological Resources ...... 49

5.0 ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT ...... 53 5.1 Visual Inspection Walkover Results ...... 53 5.2 Prehistoric Native American Site Potential ...... 54 5.3 Historic Period Archeological Site Potential ...... 55

6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 57 6.1 Summary ...... 57 6.2 Recommendations ...... 60

7.0 REFERENCES ...... 63

APPENDIX A. Qualifications ...... 75

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. vii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. viii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Alexandria and Anacostia 7.5-minute USGS tquadrangles with the Shepherd Parkway parcel depicted ...... 2 Figure 2. Location of the Shepherd Parkway parcel ...... 3 Figure 3. Section 4(f) document depicting the Shepherd Parkway parcel with the area of impact highlighted ...... 4 Figure 4. Washington, D.C. physiographic provinces ...... 8 Figure 5. 2005 aerial photograph of the Shepherd Parkway parcel ...... 9 Figure 6. Mapped soils within the Shepherd Parkway parcel ...... 10 Figure 7. Regional prehistoric chronology of the Washington, D.C. area ...... 16 Figure 8. Smith map of 1624 depicting Nacotchtank ...... 24 Figure 9. Hienton (1972) map of colonial Maryland land patents with the Shepherd Parkway parcel depicted ...... 26 Figure 10. 1861 Boschke map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed ...... 29 Figure 11. 1864 photograph of Camp Stoneman ...... 31 Figure 12. 1865 map of the Defenses of Washington with the Shepherd Parkway parcel outlined ...... 32 Figure 13. Barnard comilation map ...... 33 Figure 14. 1878 Hopkins map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed ...... 34 Figure 15. 1888 topographic map with the Shepherd Parkway parcelsuperimposed ...... 36 Figure 16. 1903 Baist insurance map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed ...... 37 Figure 17. 1907 Baist insurance map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed ...... 37 Figure 18. 1921 Baist insurance map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed ...... 38 Figure 19. Alexandria 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle with the Shephers Parkway parcel superimposed...... 39 Figure 20. 1949 aerial photograph of the center of the Shepherd Parkway parcel ...... 40 Figure 21. 1957 (top) and 1963 (bottom) aerial photographs of the center of the Shepherd Parkway parcel ...... 41 Figure 22. Prehistoric Native American site potential and recommended investigation strategy ...... 58 Figure 23. Historic Period site potential ...... 59

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. ix Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. x Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Archeological sites within 0.75 mile of the Shepherd Parkway parcel ...... 50

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. xi Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. xii Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Phase IA Archeological Assessment has been prepared to evaluate the effects of the proposed construction of potential improvements to the existing transportation network at the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway (I-295) interchange and an associated access road to enhance access to the St. Elizabeths West Campus and accommodate an anticipated increase in total work force numbers (Figures 1 and 2). The General Services Administration, National Capital Region (GSA NCR) is preparing to implement portions of a master plan for the redevelopment of St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus to house facilities associated with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The project will involve the development of up to 4.5 million gross square feet plus parking that will accommodate up to 14,000 federal employees. Currently, several options, differing in the type of interchange and access road configuration, are under consideration. However, all alternatives would involve construction of road facilities within a portion of the National Park Service (NPS) Shepherd Parkway property to the east of the Anacostia Freeway (Figures 1 and 2).

This report constitutes part of broader environmental studies for the project that are being conducted by the National Capital Region of GSA. The approach used for this Phase IA archeological assessment was based on guidelines provided in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeological and Historic Preservation (Federal Register 1983), Section 106 Archaeology Guidance from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP 2009), and the Washington, D.C. Historic Preservation Office, Office of Planning Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia (DC HPO 1998, as amended).

1.1 Proposed Undertaking

Volume II of the Environmental Impact Statement for the DHS Headquarters Consolidation at St. Elizabeths (GSA 2008) provides a description of the proposed Malcolm X Avenue- Anacostia Freeway (I-295) interchange and access road alternatives. Four alternatives have been proposed, differing in terms of types of interchange and access road configurations. Regardless of interchange or access road configuration, the area of impact would be confined to that area of the NPS Shepherd Parkway property highlighted in Figure 3. The following descriptions of the four alternatives are taken from Volume II, Transportation Improvements, of the Environmental Impact Statement for the DHS Headquarters Consolidation at St. Elizabeths (GSA 2008). Detailed plans for each alternative can be found in that document.

1.11 Alternative I-1

Under this alternative an access road from St. Elizabeths West Campus would parallel I-295 and cross onto Shepherd Parkway. Approximately 750 feet north of Malcolm X Avenue, the road would turn east to intersect with Malcolm X Avenue. Between the proposed gated entrance and Malcolm X Avenue, an east retaining wall would rise from 5 to 12 ½ feet, and a west retaining wall would vary from 8 to 12 ½ feet. South of Malcolm X Avenue intersection, an east retaining wall would reach a maximum height of 38 ½ feet, and a west retaining wall would reach a maximum height of 32 feet.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 1 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 1. Alexandria and Anacostia 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles with the Shepherd Parkway parcel depicted.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 2 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 2. Location of the Shepherd Parkway parcel.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 3 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 3. Section 4(f) document depicting the Shepherd Parkway parcel with the area of impact highlighted.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 4 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Under Alternative I-1, the Malcolm X/I-295 interchange would be modified, and the cloverleaf loop that connects northbound I-295 to westbound Malcolm X Avenue would be closed. A flyover on-ramp would diverge from the access road approximately 1,800 feet north of Malcolm X Avenue and would connect to southbound I-295. The ramp would cross over both northbound and southbound I-295 and merge with the latter south of Malcolm X Avenue. The total length of the flyover ramp and merge lane would be approximately 2,900 feet. The height of the flyover would have a minimum 15-foot clearance under the structure and may reach 20 feet at the top.

A new off-ramp would provide access to Malcolm X Avenue from northbound I-295. This ramp would begin approximately 2,000 feet south of Malcolm X Avenue, remaining close to the interstate before turning east approximately 750 feet south of Malcolm X Avenue. The southbound I-295 bridge span over Malcolm X Avenue would be widened in order to accommodate the flyover merging lane.

1.12 Alternative I-2

Alternative I-2 is similar to Alternative I-1 with three exceptions:

the retaining walls between the new gated entrance and Malcolm X Avenue would be higher; additional construction would take place in association with access to Malcolm X Avenue; and there would be no flyover ramp.

Alternative I-2 would close the cloverleaf loop that connects northbound I-295 to westbound Malcolm X Avenue. As in Alternative I-1, a new off-ramp beginning approximately 2,000 feet south of Malcolm X Avenue would provide access to Malcolm X Avenue from northbound I-295. Alternative I-2 would include an on-ramp from westbound Malcolm X Avenue to I-295 north.

1.13 Alternative I-3

Alternative I-3 is also similar to Alternative I-1 with two exceptions:

the retaining walls between the new gated entrance and Malcolm X Avenue would be higher; and additional construction would take place in association with access to Malcolm X Avenue.

In Alternative I-3, a median would be constructed along Malcolm X Avenue east and west of the intersection with the proposed access road. This new Malcolm X Avenue median would extend westward to the Bolling Air Force Base (AFB) entrance, requiring the lengthening of the two I-295 bridges over Malcolm X Avenue. New off- and on-ramps connecting

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 5 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway southbound I-295 to and from Malcolm X Avenue are also planned in what would be the median between I-295 and South Capitol Street. These two diamond ramps would provide direct access between I-295 southbound and Malcolm X Avenue.

1.14 Alternative I-4

Plans for this alternative are similar to the other alternatives. Differences exist in the height of the retaining walls in the northern portion of Shepherd Parkway and in the connection of Malcolm X Avenue with north-south traffic arteries.

A new single point urban interchange at I-295 and Malcolm X Avenue would require a new signalized intersection between Malcolm X Avenue and the ramps to and from I-295. The on- and off-ramps connecting Malcolm X Avenue to northbound I-295 would require closing the two existing cloverleaf loops. The on-ramp from Malcolm X Avenue would enter northbound I-295 approximately 1,600 feet north of Malcolm X Avenue. The off-ramp connecting I-295 northbound to Malcolm X Avenue would begin approximately 1,800 feet south of Malcolm X Avenue.

1.2 Shepherd Parkway Parcel Description

The Shepherd Parkway totals 205 acres and is managed by the National Park Service National Capital Parks-East. That portion of the Shepherd Parkway under consideration in this Phase 1A assessment report totals 10.4 acres and extends south of St. Elizabeths West Campus and along the eastern side of the Anacostia Freeway (I-295). The Shepherd Parkway is not a road but is part of the Fort Circle Parks, a series of parklands which contain Civil War earthworks. The Shepherd Parkway is land that was set aside by the United States to build a road to be called the Fort Circle Drive. The road was never constructed, and the Fort Circle Parks were divided between three Washington, D.C.-area NPS units: George Washington Memorial Parkway, Rock Creek Park, and National Capital Parks-East. Within the Phase IA assessment study area, the Shepherd Parkway contains many steep slopes (greater than 15 percent) and does not have recreational amenities or a designated entrance. No standing structures are present within the subject parcel.

The proposed transportation improvements for the St. Elizabeths West Campus redevelopment project are located within a portion of the Shepherd Parkway NPS property (Figure 1). The subject property consists of an irregularly shaped parcel that is located in the Anacostia-Congress Heights neighborhood and immediately to the east of Bolling AFB (Figure 2). The northern terminus of the subject parcel coincides with the south boundary of St. Elizabeths West Campus and is bounded to the west by the Anacostia Freeway. The east and south boundaries are confined within the Shepherd Parkway property. The total length of the potential impact area is approximately 4,365 feet (1,330 m) north-south, with the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange present in the southern one third of this area. Much of the area of potential impact north of Malcolm X Avenue is a linear parcel that is approximately 260 feet (79 m) wide. This parcel broadens to the east along the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway to 921 feet (281 m). South of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange the area of potential impact is triangular in shape, being 921 feet (281

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 6 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway m) at its widest point and ending at the Anacostia Freeway approximately 1,710 feet (521 m) south of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange. A Section 4(f) evaluation of this property indicates that approximately 4.4 acres would be utilized for permanent transportation improvements while an additional 6.0 acres are needed for temporary construction and drainage improvements (US DOT 2008:25). The total area of impact is 10.4 acres of the 205 acres designated as the NPS Shepherd Parkway unit.

Shepherd Parkway north of Malcolm X Avenue is dominated by steep slopes, many 15 percent or greater, between the Anacostia Freeway to the west and Congress Heights to the east (Figure 1). Several small ravines cross the steeply sloped landform from the ridge crest on the east toward the Anacostia Freeway. Most of these ravines are oriented either toward the northwest or southwest. A few flatter landforms, small in size, are also present north of Malcolm X Avenue. Ridge spurs and ridge edges that overlook the Anacostia River are present along the eastern boundary of the parcel (Figure 1). Narrow benches, of unknown origin, are present approximately midway along the ridge slope. Also present are flat areas at the base of the ridge slope along the Anacostia Freeway (Figure 1). These appear to represent floodplain or terrace formations of the Anacostia River. The entire area north of Malcolm X Avenue is forested with varying degrees of undergrowth.

Shepherd Parkway south of Malcolm X Avenue is also forested with varying degrees of undergrowth. This parcel is not dominated by steep side slopes as is the parcel to the north of Malcolm X Avenue (Figure 1). Several large flat areas, associated in part with drainages, are present throughout this parcel along the Anacostia Freeway and to the south of Malcolm X Avenue (Figure 1). These areas appear to represent floodplain or terrace formations of the Anacostia River. Steep slopes are restricted to the center and south of the parcel. In at least two instances, flat ridge spurs are also present along the eastern edge of the parcel (Figure 1).

1.3 Geology and Soils

The Shepherd Parkway parcel is located in the Western Shore Uplands region of the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province (Figure 4). According to the Preliminary Geologic Map of the District of Columbia, the parcel 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 and Tilton 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 Shepherd Parkway parcel is characterized by a gentle to steep slope that lies between the generally low in elevation and flat floodplain of the Anacostia River to the west and the increased elevation of upland ridges to the east. The Shepherd Parkway parcel consists of slopes that rise from a flat base along the Anacostia Freeway, where

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 7 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

St. Elizabeths Ss ShepherdHospital Parkway

Figure 4. Washington, D.C. physiographic provinces (Maryland Geological Survey 2001).

surface eleveation is less than 100 feet above mean sea level along the freeway to 150 feet above mean sea level at the upland bluff edge to the east. Historic maps indicate that Malcolm X Avenue is located within a ravine and associated drainage. Currently, the entire subject property is forested (Figure 5).

The Shepherd Parkway parcel is located within an area of the Udorthents soil association (Smith 1976). The Udorthents association consists of urban land with deep to moderately deep, nearly level to steep and well-drained soils that consist of cuts, fills, or otherwise disturbed land (Smith 1976).

Numerous soil types have been mapped for the Shepherd Parkway parcel (Figure 6). Three soil types, Christiana silt loam, Muirkirk Variant Complex, and Croom very gravelly sandy loam, have been mapped for the area to the north of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange. Christiana silt loam soils have an A horizon that is 10 cm thick and consists of dark brown (10YR3/3) silt loam. The B horizon transitions from yellowish brown (10YR5/6) heavy silt loam to red (2.5YR5/6) silty clay at 25 cm below ground surface (Smith 1976:85). Muirkirk Variant Complex soils typically have an initial layer of dark yellowish brown loamy sand to 13 cm below surface followed by yellowish brown loamy sand to 28 cm below surface. Subsoil is strong brown sandy loam that transitions to red clay (Smith 1976:37). Croom very gravelly sandy loam has a dark brown very gravelly sandy loam surface layer to 5 cm below surface followed by yellowish brown very gravelly loam to

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 8 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 5. 2005 aerial photograph of the Shepherd Parkway parcel (oriented with north to top of aerial photograph).

30 cm below surface. Subsoil is described as yellowish brown to yellowish red very gravelly sandy loam that transitions to strong brown very gravelly sandy clay loam (Smith 1976:20).

Five soil types, Muirkirk Variant Complex, Croom very gravelly sandy loam, Woodstown sandy loam, Sassafras sandy loam, and Iuka sandy loam, have been mapped for the area to the south of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange. Woodstown sandy loam soils include a surface layer of brown or dark brown sandy loam to 20 cm below

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 9 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 6. Mapped soils within the Shepherd Parkway parcel.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 10 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway surface followed by yellowish brown sandy loam to 30 cm below surface. Subsoil is described as yellowish brown sandy clay loam (Smith 1976:58). Sassafras sandy loam has dark grayish brown sandy loam to 13 cm below surface followed by brown sandy loam to 23 cm below surface. The subsoil consists of strong brown sandy loam that transitions to yellowish red light sandy clay loam (Smith 1976:39). Iuka sandy loam has a layer of dark grayish brown sandy loam to 25 cm below surface that is followed by yellowish brown sandy loam subsoil (Smith 1976:27). Additionally, small areas of Udorthents soils, soils typically associated with cuts or fills, are present both north and south of Malcolm X Avenue. Lastly, the soil map reproduced as Figure 6 depicts the presence of two quarries to the east of the Shepherd Parkway parcel. The presence of such historic quarries, as well as the gravelly composition of the soils in this area, suggests that prehistoric Native Americans would have had access to a ready supply of quartz and quartzite cobbles for use in making tools.

1.4 Report Organization

Following this Introduction, the report is presented in six additional sections: Assessment Methods; Prehistoric and Historic Contexts; Surveyed Archeological Resources; Archeological Resource Sensitivity Assessment; and Summary and Recommendations. References Cited complete the body of the report. The qualifications of key personnel are presented in Appendix A.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 11 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 12 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS

The methods used to conduct this Phase IA archeological assessment of the potential transportation improvements to be constructed within the Shepherd Parkway parcel include background research and field visits to the property. These methods are described in greater detail below and the area of potential effects for archeological resources is defined.

2.1 Background Research

The identification of the potential for archeological resources in and within the vicinity of the Shepherd Parkway parcel began with background and archival research. The initial literature search consisted of a review of existing surveys and identified archeological sites. This determined the level of previous identification studies and the nature of archeological sites within the vicinity of the subject parcel. Deeds were consulted at the District of Columbia Recorder of Deeds Office and on-line at the MDLandRec.Net (2009) website. Federal census population and slave schedules were examined at the Ancestry.com web site (The Generations Network 2009). 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, Civil War fortifications, Bolling AFB, and Shepherd Parkway histories and historic maps were consulted. Contract reports documenting the results of previous archeological investigations conducted in the vicinity of Shepherd Parkway were also reviewed as part of the background research conducted for this project, as were the District of Columbia archeological site files. The District archeological site files were reviewed to determine whether any archeological sites in or near the subject property had previously been registered with the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office.

2.2 Survey Methodology

No field survey activities, other than two visual inspection walkovers of the area of potential effects, were conducted at this phase of investigations. All other activities were restricted to a review of reports on archeological surveys and sites located near the proposed facility location and archival or background research. The archival/background research included determining a chain-of-title for the subject parcel, examining census records, and reviewing secondary sources on histories of federal landholdings located in the vicinity of the Shepherd Parkway. In addition, several historic maps dating between 1861 and 1945 and various histories of Civil War fortifications were consulted. Based on these activities, a model of archeological site potential within the Shepherd Parkway parcel has been created and is discussed in greater detail in Section 4 of this report.

The visual inspection walkovers of the Shepherd Parkway property were conducted on 24 June and 1 July, 2009. Prior to the walkovers, a work plan was developed and submitted to the NPS. The submittal of the visual inspection walkover work plan resulted in the issuance by NPS of a Special Use Permit to GSA NCR (Permit # NCR NACE 9500 903). The visual inspection walkovers were intended to familiarize project personnel with the physical characteristics of the subject property and to provide key review agency personnel an opportunity to both inspect the subject property and to provide comments and identify

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 13 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway concerns regarding the archeological potential of the property to GSA NCR representatives. A summary overview of the two visual inspection walkovers is provided in Section 5.1.

2.3 Area of Potential Effects

The Area of Potential Effects (APE) with respect to archeological resources is defined as the physical APE. The physical APE is the boundary of the property potentially being developed for GSA that will include an access road, interchange, retaining walls, drainage improvements, and temporary construction staging areas. The Section 4(f) document indicates that this area totals 10.4 acres of the larger Shepherd Parkway NPS unit (US DOT 2008). This physical footprint is illustrated in Figure 3.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 14 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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-Congress Heights neighborhood of the District. It is based on specific studies that form the sequence of regional prehistory and history that is presented below. Following is a history of the Shepherd Parkway parcel and its immediate vicinity. These overviews provide an interpretive framework for defining the types of archeological sites and remains that could potentially be present within the subject 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 archeological 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 Archeologists 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) suggests 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. 15 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 7. Regional prehistoric chronology of the District of Columbia area.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 16 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

In the archeological 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 17 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway expansion of projectile point styles may be associated with the diversification of the Early Archaic period subsistence base. There was 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 18 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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).

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 (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 semi-sedentary 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.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 19 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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 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 the Shepherd Parkway, 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 1986). 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 was 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).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 20 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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 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 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.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 21 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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 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.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 22 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Closer to the Shepherd Parkway, Berger (1986) documents 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.

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, archeologists 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 23 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway neighborhood (Berger 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 Necotsins, a tribe visited by English colonists from Jamestown beginning in 1608. Fortunately, the colonists provided many details on the 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 Necotsins and was also said to contain religious structures. The Necotsin 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.

Increasingly, the relationship between the English and Necotsins 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 Necotsins of beaver

Figure 8. Smith map of 1624 depicting Nacotchtank (located by arrow; Papenfuse and Coale 2003) (oriented with north to top of map).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 24 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway 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 escaping, Fleet returned to Nacotchtank in 1632, marking the last mention of this village. Fiedel et al. (2008:19) suggest that the Necotsin 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 Necotsin 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 archeologists. 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 and the District of Columbia have been covered in numerous publications, information from which has been incorporated into this Phase IA study for the Shepherd Parkway. Two previously written documents provide the basis for this historic overview. These are the cultural resources management plan that was prepared for Bolling AFB (Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence [AFCEE] 1996) and the historic resources management plan prepared for St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus (Devrouax & Purnell Architects-Planners, P.C. 1993a). Of importance for the Civil War era are publications on the defensive fortifications that surrounded Washington, D.C. (Cooling and Owen 1988; U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service [NPS] 2007).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 25 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Colonial Maryland to 1790. The Shepherd Parkway parcel 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 planters. The first and most important crop in Maryland was tobacco, which was shipped to European markets for sale and consumption.

The area that includes the Shepherd Parkway parcel originally was part of three patents located in Charles County (Figure 9). These were Penncotts Invention, South Kirby, and Gisbrough (later Giesborough). Penncotts Invention was patented by James Pencott (also spelled Pancoast) on 10 June 1687 (Maryland State Archives [MSA] Patent Record 22:306). South Kirby was patented by Thomas Wentworth on 5 June 1663 (MSA Patent Record 11:238). Gisbrough was patented by Thomas Dent on 5 May 1663 (MSA Patent Record 5:46).

N

Figure 9. Hienton (1972) map of colonial Maryland land patents with the Shepherd Parkway parcel depicted.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 26 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

James Pencott apparently drowned in the Potomac River after returning from a trip to see family in New Jersey and left no will or heirs. The property reverted to the proprietorship and was escheated in 1734. It was repatented to Lewis Wilcoxen as Discovery who sold it in 1738 to Thomas Addison (Proffatt 1910).

No deeds were identified in Charles County in which Thomas Wentworth transferred ownership of South Kirby, and the index to deeds from this period for Prince George’s County is illegible for surnames beginning with the letter W. Nor were deeds identified in the Prince George’s County index in which a member of the Addison family purchased the property from Thomas Wentworth. However, the later patent for Giesborough Manor (described below) indicates that this property must have come to the Addison family at some point before 1764.

Although owned by Thomas Dent, Giesborough was not his main residence. Dent lived near St. Mary’s City and was prominent in the affairs of that place, serving as High Sheriff and Commissary for the Militia. It is therefore likely that Dent leased the land within the Giesborough patent to tenants. Tenancy on the large, manorial-style grants often consisted of long-term leases at nominal rents (Kulikoff 1986:134). Leases may have been as long as three lives, but the tenant had to improve the land by the construction of buildings and planting orchards. Once the land was developed and the lease expired, landlords often raised rents to beyond the means of many tenants (Kulikoff 1986:134). Kulikoff (1986) indicates that it was common for owners of plantations along the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers to rent portions of their property to tenants.

Giesborough originally was established as a tobacco plantation, with other crops introduced as the soil became exhausted (AFCEE 1996). In his will of 1676,Thomas Dent devised the Giesborough property equally to his sons Peter and George, dividing the property into Lower and Upper Giesborough. Peter Dent also lived in southern Maryland, and in 1686 he sold Upper Giesborough to John Addison, his stepfather, who apparently built a manor house on the property in 1688. George Dent resided at Lower Giesborough and devised the property to his brother William following his death after 1695 (AFCEE 1996). In 1696, these properties would become part of Prince George’s County when it was formed from parts of Charles and Calvert Counties. In 1715, the two Giesborough properties again became a single parcel when Peter Dent, son of William Dent, conveyed Lower Giesborough to Colonel Thomas Addison. Thomas Addison already had acquired Upper Giesborough from his father, John Addison.

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.

During this period Giesborough and what had been Pencotts Invention remained in the Addison family, and it is likely they also owned the land originally patented as South Kirby. The Addisons were prominent in the region, and the son of Colonel Thomas Addison, also

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 27 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway named Thomas, served as an officer in the English army for a number of years. Upon his return to Giesborough in 1764, he was granted a 1,613-acre patent for Giesborough Manor. This property contained the original 850-acre patent as well as surrounding land that included Discovery (originally Pencotts Invention) and other properties, including vacant land, which most likely included South Kirby. Upon his death in 1770, Major Thomas Addison left the Giesborough Manor property to his nephew, Thomas Addison of Oxon Hill Manor. When the younger Thomas Addison died in 1774, the property went to his 5-year-old son John Addison. The will stipulated that the land should be leased to George Lee until John came of age (AFCEE 1996).

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 16 July 1790, Congress established the Potomac region as the new Federal capital, and Maryland ceded 69 square miles of land for this purpose, including Giesborough Manor.

At this time the Giesborough Manor property was still in the hands of John Addison. The 1800 federal census listed him as a head of household with 15 slaves in that part of the District of Columbia that had formerly been part of Prince George’s County (U.S. Census Bureau 1800). By 1808, however, he had sold most of the property to his brother-in-law, Dr. John Shaaff. Shaaff died in 1819 and left Giesborough Manor to his wife and children (AFCEE 1996).

District of Columbia, 1790–1861. The area around Giesborough Manor remained agricultural during the early days of the District of Columbia, and this area to the south and east of the Anacostia River (Eastern Branch) was not included in the original plats for the city. A ready market was found for agricultural produce, however, in the growing capital (AFCEE 1996). As settlement increased along the Anacostia River, warehouses and docks sprang up along the shores, which provided the most convenient route for the planters and traders in the area to bring their tobacco for shipping to other ports. It is possible that a landing or wharf could have been constructed at Gieborough Manor during this period to take the plantation’s tobacco crop to market although there is no evidence for it. By the outbreak of the Civil War, tobacco production was declining in the area, and the Anacostia River was becoming less navigable due to siltation (AFCEE 1996).

In 1833, George Washington Young acquired 624 acres of Gisborough, inclusive of the Shepherd Parkway parcel, from the heirs of John Schaaf. Young enlarged the existing brick manor house on the property and again divided the property into upper and lower halves, giving the lower half of the estate to his brother Ignatius Fenwick Young (AFCEE 1996). This lower part of the estate lies outside the Shepherd Parkway project area. The 1830 federal census shows George W. Young already was a resident of the District of Columbia (U.S.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 28 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Census Bureau 1830). He was listed twice on consecutive lines in the 1840 census (U.S. Census Bureau 1840). The first line enumerates his family on the first page concerning free men and women, and no one is listed on the second line. The second page, however, which details information about slaves and occupations, appears to be missing from the microfilmed images. A small portion that was included with the filming of the first page of the schedule shows that there would have been a description of slaves on both lines. Eight slaves under 10 were listed on the first line for Young, and seven of that age on the second. In the 1850 census, Young again was enumerated in the District of Columbia with his family (U.S. Census Bureau 1850a).

The extent of George W. Young’s wealth easily can be seen in the 1850 census. The 1850 slave schedules show he owned 91 slaves. These consisted of 43 males ranging in age from 3 months to 60 years and 48 females from 1–73 years in age (U.S. Census Bureau 1850b). These slaves would have worked on Young’s property, including Giesborough Manor. The 1850 agricultural schedules show that Young owned 700 acres of improved land and 500 acres of unimproved land, most of which, if not all, was likely timber. At least a portion of Young’s timber appears to be depicted on the 1861 Boschke map to the south of St. Elizabeths Hospital (Figure 10). The cash value of the farm was said to be $50,000. Young had a variety of livestock that included sheep (100), milch cows (60), swine (60), horses (10),

N

Figure 10. 1861 Boschke map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 29 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway oxen (18), and asses and mules (7). His crops consisted of corn (3,000 bushels), wheat (2,000 bushels) Irish potatoes (500 bushels), oats (400 bushels), and rye (300 bushels). His farm also produced 400 lbs of wool (U.S. Census Bureau 1850c).

The 1860 census indicates that George W. Young’s real estate was valued at $90,000 and his personal property at $30,000 (U.S. Census Bureau 1860a). Undoubtedly, much of this personal estate was in the form of slaves; the slave schedules indicate he owned 57 slaves comprised of 37 males from 1 month to 70 years and 20 women from 1 to 45 years in age (U.S. Census Bureau 1860b). His land holdings were the same as in 1850, but the cash value of the farm increased to $70,000, and he had further diversified his agricultural production. His livestock consisted of other cattle (20), swine (16), sheep (15), milch cows (12), horses (12, and oxen (12). His crop production included corn (7,000 bushels), wheat (2,000 bushels), rye (600 bushels), Irish potatoes (600 bushels), oats (300 bushels), sweet potatoes (300 bushels), hay (120 tons), and peas and beans (160 bushels). The farm products also included butter (300 lbs) (U.S. Census Bureau 1860c).

During this period, Dorothea Dix began to prompt the Federal government to build a model hospital for the insane in the Washington, D.C. area. The site chosen was the St. Elizabeths tract, located immediately north of Giesborough Manor, and groundbreaking began on the hospital in 1852. At about this same time the Anacostia area first began its transition into a subdivision of Washington, D.C. (Beauchamp n.d.). Beginning in the 1790s with James Barry, many of the large landholders around St. Elizabeths Hospital 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, aside from Giesborough Manor, was comprised of a mix of smallholding farmers, subdivided residential lots held by speculators, and the beginnings of the Anacostia neighborhood. The 1861 Boschke map of the area shows the agricultural nature of Giesborough Manor, including the large wooded tract at the northern part of the property (Figure 9). The 1861 Boschke map depicts the Giesborough plantation manor house located at Giesborough Point and numerous other structures that could be agricultural outbuildings or slave or tenant quarters, none of which appear within the Shepherd Parkway parcel area. Topographically, the north half of the Shepherd Parkway parcel is depicted as consisting of steep upland ridge slopes and is forested. The south half appears to consist of gentler slopes and floodplain or terrace formations of the Anacostia River. The lack of forest cover in this part of the subject parcel may indicate that it was being used as an agricultural field.

Civil War, 1861–1865. The Civil War had a major impact on the agricultural property known as Giesborough Manor (AFCEE 1996; Cooling and Owen 1988; NPS 2007). As the capital of the union, it was necessary to protect the District from Confederate attack, and the city also became one of the most important mobilization areas for men and materiel being sent to the various theaters (AFCEE 1996; NPS 2007). As part of the city defenses, Forts Carroll and Greble were erected on the high ground above Giesborough Manor, and in 1863 the

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 30 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway government established a major cavalry depot on the property. Although Young offered to sell the property to the federal government for $100,000, the offer was refused, and the property was rented for $6,000 per year (AFCEE 1996). Young’s manor house was used as the headquarters for the depot headquarters. The ―dismount‖ camp that was associated with the cavalry depot was called Camp Stoneman after the chief of the Cavalry Bureau. Corrals and stables were built on the property, which could reportedly hold 30,000 horses, although records do not document that this many were there at any one time. Apparently, 170,654 horses were processed from the facility during its period of operation (Hutchinson 1977, cited in AFCEE 1996).

Several photographs exist of Camp Stoneman and the Cavalry Depot, including one that depicts an overview of the encampments associated with this facility (Figure 11). The photograph reproduced for this report appears to have been taken on a gentle side slope of an upland ridge with the view to the north toward the confluence of the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. The forested upland ridge located on the Giesborough Manor property, located to the south of St, Elizabeths Hospital and depicted on the 1861 Boschke map, appears in the upper right hand corner of this photograph. This suggests that the photogragh was taken south of the Shepherd Parkway parcel looking to the north to northwest, and it likely includes a view of some if not all of the subject parcel. Just to the south of the forested tract is a tent encampment. These tents appear to be in the general vicinity of the south half of the Shepherd Parkway parcel.

Figure 11. 1864 photograph of Camp Stoneman. (Note: forested area and slopes in foreground appear to be in the vicinity of Shepherd Parkway (http://www.hmdb.org/PhotoFullSize.asp?PhotoID=30986).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 31 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Fort Carroll was established on an upland ridge to the east of Giesborough Manor on property owned by Ignatius Fenwick Young. It was built in part to protect the cavalry depot and in part to prevent attacks on the Washington Arsenal and Navy Yard. Battery Carroll was an outwork associated with the fort that lay to its south. Neither the fort nor the battery is located in the Shepherd Parkway parcel (NPS 2007; Payette 2009). The fort’s perimeter measured 340 yards, and parts of seven regiments were based there during the war. In 1864 the fort had 17 guns, howitzers, Parrotts, and mortars. The defensive works were supplemented by hospital and administrative facilities that also arose in the fort (Cooling and Owen 1988). Two maps from the period show the cavalry depot on George W. Young’s property and the surrounding forts in the area (Figures 12 and 13). The wooded tract on Young’s Giesborough property, depicted in both the 1861 Boschke map and appearing in the 1864 Camp Stoneman photograph, was used for military construction in the area, including that of Fort Greble (NPS 2007). While no buildings or earthworks associated with Fort Carroll proper were built on the Shepherd Parkway parcel, it is possible that defensive positions or gun emplacements associated with the fort could be present, especially on the upland slope that overlooked Camp Stoneman. Also in the vicinity of the Shepherd Parkway, and adjacent to the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital, was Fort Snyder (Figure 12). Fort Snyder was a moderate-sized fort with a 630 foot perimeter that was designed to hold eight artillery pieces (Cooling and Owen 1988).

N

Figure 12. 1865 map of the Defenses of Washington, with Shepherd Parkway parcel outlined (Davis et al. 2003: Plate 89).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 32 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

N

Figure 13. Barnard compilation map (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi- bin/query/h?ammem/gmd:@field(NUMBER+@band(g3851s+cw0676000)).

Postbellum Era, 1866–20th century. After the Civil War the Anacostia area began to change. The Freedman’s Bureau purchased the Barry Farm property adjacent to and north of St. Elizabeths Hospital and subdivided the land into 1-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 semirural.

When the Civil War ended, the government gradually dismantled the cavalry depot and dismount camp at Giesborough Manor, and the property was returned to George W. Young. Young attempted to sell the property in 1866 and posted an advertisement in the 6 March 1866 issue of The Intelligencer (cited in AFCEE 1996):

…six hundred and twenty-five (625) acres…with a river front of mile and-a-half; the greater part bottom land, and acknowledged to be the finest soil for gardening in the vicinity of Washington. At present there are upon the place immense improvements erected by Government [sic]…which will afford great facilities for founding at once a town that would prove to Washington what Brooklyn is to New York.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 33 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

The property remained unsold at the time of his death in 1867. Before his death, Young had attempted to receive additional compensation from the government for use of his property and timber during the war, and his heirs continued the attempt but were ultimately unsuccessful (Government Printing Office 1876). It is unclear from the 1870 census how much property remained in the family’s hands. Although Henrietta Young was listed as a head of household in the population schedule, no real estate value was entered in the census for her or anyone in her household (U.S. Census Bureau 1870a). Although a Joseph Smith was listed as a farmer in her household, he was not listed in the agricultural census that year. There was an entry for a Joseph Young, but his property was likely located south of the project area, as seen on the 1878 Hopkins maps (Figure 14).

George W. Young’s widow, Henrietta Young, died in 1878, and the property was gradually sold off by the heirs. The 1878 Hopkins map (Figure 14) still shows G. W. Young in the area, but numerous other individuals are depicted as owning residences on or in the vicinity of the former Giesborough Manor plantation. G. W. Young owns several residences to the north, but Joseph Young is now listed at the location of the manor house on Giesborough Point. H. B. Denman owns at least two residences near the property center while H. Ewing also owns two residences to the south. Two additional structures, whose owner is not identified, are depicted to the north of the G. W. Young residences. At least one of these unnamed structures may be in the vicinity of the Shepherd Parkway parcel, as may be an additional

N

Figure 14. 1878 Hopkins map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 34 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway structure owned by G. W. Young. Given that all owners depicted in this area are associated with multiple residences, it is likely that these represent the homes of tenants. It should also be noted that the Point Lookout Branch of the Baltimore and Ohio (B&O) Railroad had been constructed through the Giesborough manor property. A depot, Shepherd Station, had also been established.

The area remained rural and agricultural during this period, and the area of Upper Giesborough became a river resort known variously as Giesborough Park, Capital View, City View, and Buena Vista (Wells 1993, cited in AFCEE 1996). The 1888 topographic map shows no structures in the Shepherd Parkway project area, but a significant amount of woodland remained, even after the government’s extensive use of it during the Civil War (Figure 15). This map provides an especially detailed view of the topography and physical conditions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel area just prior to the extensive development of the surrounding countryside during the twentieth century. As can be seen in Figure 14, a small portion of the northern terminus of the subject parcel is located on a floodplain or terrace formation of the Anacostia River, while most of the northern two-thirds of the parcel is situated on a side slope of a forested upland ridge. One unidentified feature is potentially located along the eastern edge of the Shepherd Parkway parcel on the upland ridge slope. During the 24 June, 2009 visual inspection walkover, Dr. Stephen Potter, NPS archeologist, indicated that the feature depicted on the map was likely a gun emplacement constructed during the Civil War to defend the nearby U.S. Cavalry Depot (Dr. Stephen Potter, personal communication, June 24, 2009). Such emplacements would have been constructed but not manned at all times. Rather, guns and troops would be dispatched to such locations in the event of an enemy incursion. The 1888 topographic map indicates that the southern one- third of the subject parcel crosses floodplain or terrace formations of the Anacostia River. A structure is depicted in the vicinity of the southern terminus of the subject parcel.

Even though the Shepherd Parkway parcel of Giesborough Manor was never extensively developed, it is apparent that Young’s successors had visions of the area being developed. Review of insurance maps from the early twentieth century shows that the land changed hands a number of times after Young’s death and that it was sold off in smaller parcels to owners such as G. J. Suefferle, Henrietta Brent, and Mary Denman and then later held by Nathaniel Gaines and the Richard Wilson estate (Figures 16–18). These Baist insurance maps indicate that the Giesborough Manor property had indeed been subdivided, and that plans for the development of what was to become Congress Heights had included much of the subject parcel during the early twentieth century. That such development proved difficult is evidenced by the continual change in ownership and lack of construction through 1921 that is reflected on the maps. Platted lots and roads, which were never constructed, appear on these three maps. One item to note is that one or two standing structures are depicted within the general vicinity of the southern terminus of the Shepherd Parkway parcel on the 1903 Baist map (Figure 16).

Towards the end of the nineteenth century, interest grew in preserving the forts associated with the defense of the District during the Civil War. It was suggested that the land connecting the forts should be acquired by the government to create a park and parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 35 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

N

Figure 15. 1888 topographic map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed (http://historicalcharts.noaa.gov/historicals/historical_zoom.asp).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 36 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

N

Figure 16. 1903 Baist Insurance map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed.

N

Figure 17. 1907 Baist Insurance map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 37 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

N

Figure 18. 1921 Baist Insurance map with the Shepherd Parkway parcel superimposed.

system that would ring the City of Washington, D.C. This proposed plan, known as the Forts Drive or Fort Circle Parks, was endorsed in the McMillan (Senate Park) Commission plan of 1900s and supported by planning agencies for several decades. The parkway was never constructed, but various portions of the land comprising the current Shepherd Parkway were acquired by the federal government between 1920 and 1940. The NPS assumed responsibility for the property in 1933 and retains jurisdiction over it (NPS 2007).

The final map reviewed for this Phase IA archeological assessment of the Shepherd Parkway parcel is the 1945 7.5-minute USGS Anacostia quadrangle (Figure 19). This map depicts several major changes that occurred in the Anacostia neighborhood between the 1920s and 1945 that continue to characterize this area to the present. Four such changes are most relevant to the current assessment. First, the Congress Heights neighborhood had been constructed but was limited to the upland ridge that overlooks the Shepherd Parkway parcel and the floodplain of the Anacostia River. Second, at the base of this upland ridge, a four- lane highway, a precursor to the Anacostia Freeway, had been built. According to NPS histories, the Anacostia Freeway utilized much of the land purchased for construction of the Shepherd Parkway (NPS 2007). The initial work on the Anacostia Freeway began in 1957 and the roadway was opened to traffic in 1964. Third, the Shepherd Parkway NPS parkland, and the current subject parcel, became confined to an area between the freeway to the west and Congress Heights to the east. And finally, the floodplain to the west had been

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 38 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

N

Figure 19. 1945 Anacostia 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle with the Shepherd Parkway parcel sumperimposed.

transformed into what is now known as Bolling AFB. Construction of Bolling AFB included the filling of the Anacostia River to the north of Giesborough Point and west of the north half of the Shepherd Parkway parcel prior to 1945. No structures are depicted as being within or near the subject parcel on the 1945 map.

While no additional maps were reviewed, several post-World War II aerial photographs are available. Aerial photographs dating from 1949 to 1963 have been reviewed. During this period, most of the Shepherd Parkway parcel was forested. One exception to this statement is that a 1949 aerial photograph depicts a small housing complex adjacent to and north of Malcolm X Avenue (Figure 20). The proximity of this housing complex to Bolling Air Force Base suggests that it could have housed base personnel during the war. A 1957 aerial photograph indicates that the structures had been removed (Figure 21, top), and by 1963, a cloverleaf interchange had been constructed over the area (Figure 21, bottom). The subject parcel remains essentially unchanged from the 1963 aerial photograph.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 39 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 20. 1949 aerial photograph of the center of the Shepherd Parkway parcel (oriented with north to top of aerial photograph).

3.3 Summary

The prehistoric and historic contexts for the Shepherd Parkway parcel presented in this section suggest that the surrounding area has a high potential for the presence of archeological resources. For prehistoric Native American archeological sites, major waterways, such as the Anacostia River, have been shown to be the focus of settlement, especially, but not limited to, the Woodland and Contact periods. The subject parcel includes terrace and floodplain formations, especially south of Malcolm X Avenue. These areas have a high potential for the presence of as yet unidentified prehistoric Native American sites. For the Historic period, the Colonial era and antebellum Giesborough Manor plantation was a locus of agricultural activity and evidently housed a sizable population, including numerous enslaved persons. No historic documents or maps were located that describe or depict the location of structures or other activity areas associated with this period of occupation. However, such resources are available for the Civil War and postbellum periods. Civil War resources identify the area as part of the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman, and an

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 40 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 21. 1957 (top) and 1963 (bottom) aerial photographs of the center of the Shepherd Parkway parcel (both oriented with east to top of photograph).

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 41 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

1864 photograph may depict encampments within or near the subject parcel. Associated with the camp and depot were defensive gun emplacements, one of which appears to have been located within the Shepherd Parkway parcel. Late nineteenth- to early twentieth-century maps also depict structures, likely tenant residences, either within or near the subject property. Based on the proximity of the depicted structure locations and the Civil War photograph of Camp Stoneman, the Shepherd Parkway parcel has a high potential for as yet unidentified Historic period archeological resources.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 42 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

4.0 SURVEYED ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Previously conducted archeological investigations as well as the characteristics of known archeological sites were reviewed as part of this assessment study in an attempt to create a model of archeological site sensitivity for the Shepherd Parkway parcel (see Section 5). A 0.75-mile radius around the Shepherd Parkway parcel was reviewed. Information on both the previously conducted investigations as well as the known archeological sites was obtained from the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office (DC HPO) in April 2009.

4.1 Previous Archeological Investigations

Archeologists have noted that interest in the archeology 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 archeologists collecting artifacts in fields along the east bank of the Anacostia River from Giesboro Point to Bennings donated more than 5,000 artifacts to the Smithsonian Institution (Devrouax & Purnell Architects-Planners, P.C. 1993b). Halsell et al. (n.d.) indicate that the many artifacts being found in plowed fields around the Washington, D.C., area at that time helped to stimulate the founding of the Anthropological Society of Washington.

At about the same time, William Henry Holmes, curator of the U.S. National Museum (now the National 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 more than 10 years of survey, excavation, and research on sites in the District of Columbia 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 identification 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 Washington, D.C., between circa 1900 and 1960 (Devrouax & Purnell Architects-Planners, P.C. 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 within the southern portion of Bolling AFB, an area consisting of intact Anacostia River floodplain formation, in contrast to the northern portion of the installation which is situated on fill. The ossuaries were discovered during construction. Bolling AFB is immediately to the west of the Shepherd Parkway parcel. Later,

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 43 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway 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.

McNett (1972) reports on the results of an excavation conducted by American University during the early 1970s. At that time William Gardener was engaged in a research-oriented survey along the Potomac River in northwest Washington, when artifacts were noted in a garden along Potomac Avenue (McNett 1972:23). Ten 1-x-1 m test units were excavated, locating a line of post molds and two possible pit features. No artifacts were associated with the features although material was found in the plow zone and a private collection from the site was examined. Registered as the Potomac Avenue site (51NW22), Albemarle and Potomac Creek ceramics, projectile points, lithic debris, and fire-cracked rock were recovered (McNett 1972:30-32). The features are interpreted to be one wall of a large structure, most likely dating to the Middle Woodland period based on the presence of the ceramics. A local collector also had projectile points dating to the Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, and Early Woodland periods. The site is interpreted to be a small fishing camp along the Potomac River (McNett 1972:33-34). The 1970s also heralded the initiation of archeological projects conducted to comply with newly enacted historic preservation legislation. The understanding of the prehistory of the District of Columbia 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 the Shepherd Parkway, two have yielded substantial 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 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 (1986) suggests 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 44 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway 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 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 roack, 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 45 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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. 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 46 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway cobble quarries may be present along drainages and ravines, including sloped areas typically not surveyed.

Closer to the Shepherd Parkway parcel, 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 subjected to a metal- detection survey. The results of investigations included the location of a twentieth-century trash disposal area (51SE049) and a prehistoric site (51SE048) (Burrow et al. 2005) at which additional investigations were conducted (Kreisa and McDowell 2008).

Subsequent to the HRI investigations at the West Campus, 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 archeological 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 and 1,472 shovel tests were excavated, of which 520 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 their point of origin and spread during structure demolition.

Two features in survey tracts C and H, associated with early Hospital structures, were found during the G&O survey (Kreisa et al. 2008). These features consist of a portion of a stone foundation or wall located in the vicinity of a mid-nineteenth-century gardener’s house in Area C and a brick foundation located in the vicinity of the late nineteenth-century 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 NRHP 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 and are possible locations of deposits associated with ca. 1850s civilian residences. Finally, areas adjacent to the original St. Elizabeths building, known as the Center Building, yielded artifacts associated with the initial occupation of the Hospital era. These areas have also been recommended for Phase II NRHP evaluation.

G&O also conducted Phase II NRHP evaluations at the Point site (51SE048), 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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 47 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Hospital (Kreisa and McDowell 2008). The Phase II NRHP evaluation field investigations of 51SE049 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 to mid-twentieth century, 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. Based on the results of investigations, Kreisa and McDowell (2008) recommended that this site be considered eligible for listing in the NRHP.

The Phase II NRHP evaluation field investigations of the Point site (51SE048) 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 (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 to the late eighteenth through nineteenth centuries. Ceramics recovered from this site include eighteenth to early nineteenth century wares such as Buckley-type, tin-glazed, Astbury-type, Jackfield-type, and manganese mottled earthenware, as well as creamware and pearlware. Nineteenth- to twentieth-century ceramics include whiteware, ironstone, and semiporcelain. Other artifacts, such as dark green bottle glass, hand-wrought nails, and pipe stems, all dating to the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, were also found. 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 post-1850 Hospital era. Based on the results of investigations, Kreisa and McDowell (2008) recommended that this site was not eligible for listing in the NRHP.

Phase IA archeological investigations have been conducted for portions of the St. Elizabeths Hospital East Campus. Balicki et al. (2002) reviewed the area on which the New Hospital has been constructed. The authors concluded that the area had a low potential for the

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 48 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway presence of prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological sites and recommended that no additional investigations be conducted. Finally, URS (2001) documents a Phase IB survey conducted at the location of the District’s United 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. While numerous artifacts were recovered, investigators determined all were from disturbed contexts. No sites were defined, and no additional investigations were recommended.

Kreisa and McDowell (2008) conducted a Phase IA investigation for the North parcel of the East Campus. Based on this research, the North parcel was found to have a moderate to high probability for the presence of archeological 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 landfill-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 archeological resources, a Phase IB archeological survey of those portions of the property not adversely impacted by previous land usages was recommended.

A few other archeological survey projects have been conducted near the Shepherd Parkway project area. 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., AFCEE 1996). No archeological sites were defined as a result of these investigations (DC HPO archeological site file check conducted April 2009).

4.2 Archeological Resources

As mentioned, an archeological site file check was conducted for a 0.75-mile radius around the Shepherd Parkway parcel to identify all previously reported sites within or near the project area. The site files of the DC HPO of the Office of Planning were reviewed. This review resulted in the identification of nine recorded archeological sites located within the 0.75-mile radius (Table 1). No archeological sites have been previously identified within the Shepherd Parkway parcel.

Of the nine sites present within a 0.75-mile radius of the project area, five have prehistoric or contact era Native American components, three have Historic period components, and two

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 49 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Table 1. Archeological sites within 0.75 mile of the Shepherd Parkway parcel.

Site Site Type Temporal Period Landform NRHP Status

51SW002 Lithic scatter Unknown prehistoric Floodplain Not evaluated 51SW003 Camp Contact Period Floodplain Not evaluated 51SW004 Camp Contact Period Floodplain Not evaluated 51SW005 Ossuary Late prehistoric Floodplain Not evaluated 51SE002 Undetermined Unknown prehistoric Floodplain Not evaluated Archaic, Woodland/ 51SE004 Jenkins Farm Upland ridge Eligible 19th-20th century 51SE036 Residence 19th-20th century Upland ridge Not evaluated 51SE046 St. Elizabeths Hospital 19th-20th century Upland ridge Eligible Unknown prehistoric/ 51SE048 Lithic scatter/Tenant house Upland ridge Not eligible 18th-19th century 51SE049 Institutional 19th-20th century Side slope Eligible

sites have both prehistoric Native American and Historic period components (Table 1). Of the seven components with prehistoric or contact era Native American occupations, five are located on floodplain formations of the Anacostia River while two are on upland ridge formations that overlook the floodplain of the Anacostia River or unnamed draianges. One site (51SW005) is identified as being occupied during the late prehistoric era, two (51SW003 and 51SW004) were occupied during the contact era (the early 1600s), and the final site (51SE004) has poorly dated Archaic and Woodland period components.

The physiographic setting of many of the Native American sites located along the Anacostia River is similar to that of the Necotsin settlements as described by the early English colonists in the early 1600s. 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 Necotsin 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.

A number of Euroamerican Historic period sites have also been recorded in the vicinity of the Shepherd Parkway parcel (Table 1). The site file review indicated that five recorded sites have Historic period occupations. Three are residential sites and two are institutional sites associated with St. Elizabeths Hospital. The Wade site (51SE036) and the Jenkins Farm site (51SE004) are residential sites associated with the early urbanization of the Anacostia neighborhood. Jenkins Farm also is associated with the initial occupation of the area by smallholding farm families. The Wade 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, Inc. 1989b). 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. Site 51SE049, the Powerhouse Ravine site, was also located

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 50 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway 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 to mid-twentieth century. The final site, 51SE046, encompasses the entire St. Elizabeths Hospital National Historic Landmark property. This National Historic Landmark property lies outside of the archaeological area of potential effects for the Shepherd parkway parcel. Information on the history of St. Elizabeths Hospital can be found in Kreisa and McDowell (2008) and the sources cited in that document. Section 4.1 has reviewed the results of archaeological investigations conducted within St. Elizabeths Hospital.

Historic period sites found to date, in contrast to the Native American sites, tend to be located in upland settings. The difference in site locations between prehistoric and historic sites could be due to a number of factors. Such factors could include the location of survey tracts, the tendancy by archaeologists not to register Historic period artifact concentrations as sites, and landfilling and other disturbances on floodplain landforms in the Anacostia neighborhood- Bolling AFB area.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 51 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 52 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

5.0 ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

The research conducted for this assessment of archeological site potential at the Shepherd Parkway parcel indicated that the project area had not been previously surveyed for the presence of archeological sites, and that no known archeological sites are located within the parcel. Background research and visual inspection walkovers were subsequently conducted in an attempt to determine whether prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological sites were likely to be present in the Shepherd Parkway parcel. The physiographic location and characteristics of prehistoric Native American sites located within a 0.75-mile radius of the Shepherd Parkway parcel were analyzed in an attempt to determine whether similar archeological sites could be present in the subject parcel based on the presence of similar landforms. For Historic period sites, a land-use history of the subject parcel was assembled and a series of historic maps from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was reviewed to determine whether Historic period archeological sites, such as the remains of structures, could be present. Based on these analyses and reviews, it appears that portions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel have a high probability for the presence of prehistoric Native American archeological sites and a high probability for Civil War era and postbellum archeological sites. The reasoning for these conclusions is presented below.

5.1 Visual Inspection Walkover Results

Two visual inspection walkovers of the Shepherd Parkway parcel were conducted upon the issuance of a Special Use Permit to GSA NCR by NPS. The walkovers were intended to familiarize project personnel with the physical characteristics of the Shepherd Parkway parcel as well as provide key review agency personnel an opportunity to inspect the subject property and provide comments and concerns regarding the archeological potential of the project area to GSA representatives. The first walkover took place on 24 June 2009 and included representatives of the National Park Service, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Highway Administration, the National Capital Planning Commission, and the General Services Administration, as well as Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc. project archeologists.

As land managers of the Shepherd Parkway property, NPS archeologists and representatives focused this initial walkover on the northern portion of the subject property, or that area north of Malcolm X Avenue. Dr. Stephen Potter, NPS archeologist, identified two areas of concern. The first are ridge spurs and slope benches located within the generally steeply sloped northern portion of the Shepherd Parkway. During the walkover, several ridge spurs or benches were identified, with the spurs present along the eastern property boundary and the benches present at various locations along the ridge slope. These landforms were identified as being of concern as potential locations of prehistoric Native American sites. Second, Dr. Potter noted the presence of a gun emplacement dating to the Civil War depicted on the 1888 topographic map (see Figure 14). The walkover participants attempted to locate the earthwork but the dense vegetation present at the time precluded the visual identification of surface remains of this structure.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 53 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

The second visual inspection walkover was conducted on 1 July 2009 and consisted of Dr. Ruth Trocolli, DC HPO archeologist, and Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc. project archeologists. Dr. Trocolli was able to provide UTM coordinates of the Civil War gun emplacement depicted on the 1888 topographic map. With these coordinates, a GPS unit was used in an attempt to locate the Civil War emplacement. However, the tree cover proved too dense, blocking the satellite signals to the GPS unit. A similar attempt can be made during Fall when leaves will be absent from the trees. A walkover of the area north of Malcolm X Avenue was then conducted. During this walkover the presence of small areas of flat floodplain or terrace formations was noted along the Anacostia Freeway. One such area is along the northern boundary of the Shepherd Parkway parcel adjacent to the St. Elizabeths West Campus property while a second is situated at the base of a ravine in the southern half of the Parkway. The area south of Malcolm X Avenue was then visually inspected. This area was noted to be significantly less steeply sloped than the area north of Malcolm X Avenue and that floodplain or terrace landforms appear to be more common. Ridge spur areas are also present along the eastern boundary of the parcel south of Malcolm X Avenue.

Based on the results of the visual inspection walkovers, the various landforms present, the comments received from walkover participants, and the results of research discussed in Sections 1, 3, and 4 of this report, the potential for the presence of archeological sites in the Shepherd Parkway parcel can be estimated. The potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological sites in the subject parcel is detailed below.

5.2 Prehistoric Native American Site Potential

As discussed in Section 3.1, the location of prehistoric Native American archeological sites in the Washington, D.C. area, as well as the adjacent counties of Maryland and Virginia, appears to be strongly dependent upon the presence of waterways. Prehistoric Native American archeological sites have been found in floodplain 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 archeological 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 archeological sites are more likely to be found within the initial 100 m to 150 m from the waterway or floodplain formation. The review of prehistoric Native American archeological sites presented in Section 4.2 located with a 0.75-mile radius of the Shepherd Parkway 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.

The Shepherd Parkway parcel is at least partially located within the floodplain of the Anacostia River. Small portions of the subject parcel north of Malcolm X Avenue, and larger tracts to the south of the avenue, appear to include areas of terrace formation based on a review of nineteenth-century topographic maps, current soil survey maps, and the visual inspection walkovers. These floodplain and terrace areas within the Shepherd Parkway parcel have a high potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American sites. The flatter

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 54 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway areas with slopes of 8 percent or less are more common within the subject parcel to the south of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange. It is also possible that moderately sloped areas represent former floodplain and terrace areas that have been covered by fill or by colluvial deposition. As discussed in Section 4, archeological investigations along the Anacostia River have demonstrated that fill can cap and protect archeological sites. Therefore, the presence of fill within the subject parcel does not necessarily indicate prior disturbance to an extent that would compromise archeological site integrity.

Much of the Shepherd Parkway parcel is situated along a side slope of an upland ridge that has slopes of 8 percent or greater. In many jurisdictions, areas with slopes of greater than 15 percent are thought to have a low probability for the presence of prehistoric Native American archeological sites. Significant portions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel have been mapped as having slopes of 15 percent or greater, and landforms with such slopes are especially common to the north of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange. The relationship between prehistoric Native American settlement and slopes greater than 15 percent has not been evaluated for the Anacostia River area. Because this relationship between slope and the presence (or absence) of prehistoric Native American sites has yet to be established for this area, the likelihood of such sites on steeply sloped areas (15 percent or greater slopes) is unknown. However, the presence of historic quarries near the project area could indicate that steeply sloped areas could contain sources of lithic materials for prehistoric Native Americans, such as quartz and quartzite cobbles. Such quarries were identified by William Holmes in the vicinity of Rock Creek (Fiedel et al. 2008). Therefore, the entire Shepherd Parkway parcel would appear to have an unknown to high probability for the presence of prehistoric Native American archeological sites.

5.3 Historic Period Archeological Site Potential

Section 3.2 provided an overview of the land-use history of the Shepherd Parkway parcel that included a review of historic maps in an attempt to identify whether structure remains could be present within the subject parcel. The Giesborough patent could have been occupied during the late seventeenth century by a series of tenants, and while the Giesborough Manor plantation was sold a number of times, it appears to have remained intact until after the Civil War. During the Civil War much of the plantation was used as the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman. Subsequent to the war, the plantation was subdivided and eventually a portion was sold to the federal government as part of the Fort Circle Drive or Shepherd Parkway. Prior to its purchase by the federal government, the former plantation appears to have been farmed by tenants. The historic maps consulted for the Shepherd Parkway parcel mirror the changes in land-use described here.

A review of historic maps and photographs presented in Section 3.2 can be used to estimate the likelihood of Historic period archeological sites within the Shepherd Parkway parcel. Little information on structure location is available for the period prior to the Civil War. During the Civil War, the subject parcel was part of the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman. The 1864 photograph of Camp Stoneman (see Figure 11) appears to be centered just to the west of the subject parcel. This would suggest that the remains of field encampments could be present on flat to gently sloped portions of the subject parcel, such as

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 55 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway is more common to the south of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange. It is also possible that the upland ridge slopes to the north of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange were used to locate defensive positions overlooking Camp Stoneman. One such position is depicted on an 1888 topographic map (Figure 15). During the postbellum period it appears that several residential structures are located within or near the northern and southern portions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel. These structures, depicted on the 1878 and 1903 maps (see Figures 14 and 16), are likely the residences of tenant farmers. Based on this overview, the Shepherd Parkway parcel appears to have a moderate to high potential for Historic period archeological sites.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 56 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This Phase IA Archeological Assessment has been prepared to evaluate the effects of proposed construction of an access road and interchange within the NPS Shepherd Parkway property associated with the redevelopment of St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus. The parcel under consideration is located in the Anacostia-Congress Heights neighborhood of Washington, D.C. to the east of the Anacostia Freeway and is bisected by Malcolm X Avenue. This assessment considered the potential presence of prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological sites (inclusive of colonial and antebellum civilian sites, Civil War-era military sites, and postbellum civilian sites). Research included reviewing the land-use history of the Shepherd Parkway parcel and a number of historic maps to determine the nature and location of structures within the subject parcel, and determining the characteristics and landforms of known archeological sites located within a 0.75-mile radius of the subject parcel. Also reviewed were the results of archeological projects previously conducted within a 0.75-mile radius of the subject parcel and documents that detailed the characteristics of soil types mapped within the Shepherd Parkway parcel. Finally, two visual inspection walkovers of the Shepherd Parkway parcel were conducted to familiarize project personnel with the physical characteristics of the subject property and to provide the consulting parties with an opportunity to both inspect the subject property and to provide key review agency personnel with an opportunity to identify concerns regarding the archeological potential of the property to GSA NCR representatives.

6.1 Summary

This research determined that no archeological investigations have been conducted and no archeological sites have been located within the Shepherd Parkway parcel. The research and visual inspection walkovers also provided information on areas and landforms within the parcel that have the highest potential for the presence of unrecorded prehistoric Native American and Historic period archeological sites (Figures 22 and 23). Within the general Shepherd Parkway parcel area, prehistoric Native American archeological sites are typically located on floodplain or terrace formations of a river or stream or on adjacent uplands overlooking such formations. These formations, highlighted in Figure 22, represent the area identified as having a high potential for prehistoric Native American archeological sites and the suggested field investigation techniques. Areas not highlighted in Figure 22 represent areas of low potential for prehistoric Native American sites.

The southernmost portion of the Shepherd Parkway parcel appears to be located on a terrace formation of the Anacostia River. Such a terrace-like formation is depicted on the 1861 Boschke (Figure 14) and 1888 topographic map of the area (Figure 15). Terrace formations in this area have been shown to have a high potential for the presence of unrecorded prehistoric Native American sites. Areas to the north and east, encompassing an upland ridge slope, have typically been viewed as having a lower potential for the presence of unrecorded prehistoric Native American archeological sites due to the increased slope angle. However, this assumption has not been systematically investigated for areas along the Anacostia River. The presence of flat ridge spurs along the eastern boundary of the subject parcel, and bench- like formations along the ridge slope, were noted during the visual inspection walkovers.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 57 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 22. Prehistoric Native American site potential.

Such formations, especially when overlooking waterways such as the Anacostia River, have a high potential for prehistoric Native American archeological sites. Therefore, with regards to prehistoric Native American sites, flatter areas and soil types associated with terrace, floodplain, ridge spur, and ridge bench formations, have a high potential for the presence of prehistoric Native American sites. Landforms covered by fill could also retain intact prehistoric Native American sites as such occurrences appear to be common along the Anacostia River.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 58 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Figure 23. Historic Period site potential.

Turning to the Historic period, a series of maps dating from 1861 through 1945 provides information on areas within the Shepherd Parkway parcel that have the highest potential for the presence of unrecorded Historic period archeological sites. The lack of maps or descriptions of structure locations during the Colonial and antebellum periods renders defining the probability of presence of such resources within the subject parcel difficult. It is known that the Giesborough Manor plantation was the location of many enslaved persons, a manor house, and presumably associated buildings. However, the lack of information

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 59 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway concerning structure or activity area locations for this period makes the probability for the presence of Colonial and antebellum resources unknown.

Much of the parcel has a potential for the presence of Civil War era sites associated with the U.S. Cavalry Depot and Camp Stoneman (Figure 23). An 1864 photograph (Figure 11) appears to depict numerous encampments in the general subject parcel area, and it is likely that defensive positions were established overlooking the cavalry depot on the upland slopes that comprise the northern half of the Shepherd Parkway parcel. For instance, the 1888 topographic map depicts a gun emplacement that is located along the eastern edge of the Shepherd Parkway parcel (Figure 15). The highest potential for the presence of unrecorded postbellum structural remains is located in the vicinity of and south of the Malcolm X Avenue-Anacostia Freeway interchange (Figure 23). Several structures, possibly associated with postbellum tenant houses, appear to be within or near this southern portion of the Shepherd Parkway parcel. Another tenant structure is within or adjacent to the northwest corner of the Shepherd Parkway parcel. Therefore, regarding Civil War era and postbellum archeological resources, the subject parcel has a high potential for archeological sites dating to these two periods.

6.2 Recommendations

Based on these findings, a Phase I archeological investigation of the Shepherd Parkway parcel, consisting of five tasks, is recommended. These tasks are:

1) Identify landforms that could represent floodplain, terrace, or ridge bench formations, including those covered by fill. A number of these landforms are depicted in Figure 19. It is recommended that a geoarcheologist assess the potential of these landforms for the presence of buried deposits to identify appropriate excavation depths. Site burial in upland settings is also a possibility if silt-based soil types have been derived from late Pleistocene loess. Following the geoarcheological investigations, these areas should be investigated for the presence of archeological sites based on the results and recommendations of the geoarcheological investigations. 2) In areas not identified as terrace, floodplain, ridge spur, or ridge bench formations, and with slopes of 15 percent or less, an archeological shovel test pit survey employing transects spaced at 10 m intervals should be conducted. All soils from the shovel test pits should be screened through ¼-inch hardware mesh to aid in the recovery of artifacts. 3) A pedestrian survey of all areas identified in Figure 22 as having a low site potential, generally areas with slopes of greater than 15 percent, should be conducted. The purpose of the walkover survey is to identify surface features possibly associated with Civil War defensive positions on the side slopes of the upland ridge located within the northern two-thirds of the subject parcel. A walkover survey can also be used to identify additional small, flat benches that could have been occupied either by Native Americans or during the Historic period, inclusive of quartz/quartzite cobble quarries. If found, a shovel test pit survey of these landforms should be conducted.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 60 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

4) A metal detection survey, using the UTM coordinates of the gun emplacement supplied by DC HPO, should be conducted. Upon location, a sufficient area should be investigated to ensure that any outlying features or artifacts are not overlooked. 5) Based on geoarcheological recommendations, a metal detection survey of portions of the Shepherd Parkway parcel that have a potential association with Camp Stoneman be conducted. It is suggested that such a survey would include landforms with slopes of 15 percent or less that have not been buried by fill. It is likely that burial by fill would render a metal detection survey unproductive.

All field and laboratory investigations, and documents reporting the results of investigations, should conform to the guidelines provided in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic Preservation (Federal Register 1983), Section 106 Archaeology Guidance from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP 2009), and the Washington, D.C. Historic Preservation Office, Office of Planning Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia (DC HPO 1998, as amended).

Finally, all archeological activities conducted within the Shepherd Parkway parcel require an ARPA permit to be issued by the NPS prior to the initiation of field investigations, and, under terms of the St. Elizabeths Redevelopment Programmatic Agreement, a work plan for all investigations is to be created and submitted to DC HPO and NPS for review and comment. G&O submitted a Phase IB archeological site identification work plan that implements the five recommendations detailed above to NPS and DC HPO for review and comment during July-August 2009. Concurrently, G&O applied for an ARPA permit to NPS. The ARPA permit was issued to G&O on 5 August 2009.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 61 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 62 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

7.0 REFERENCES CITED

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) 2009 Section 106 Archaeology Guidance. Electronic document, http://www.achp.gov/archguide, accessed November 2009.

Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) 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.

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.

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. [Brochure]

Berger & Associates, Inc. 1986 Archaeological, Architectural and Historical Investigations at the Howard Road Historic District, Washington, D.C. Volume I. Louis Berger & Associates, Inc., Orange, New Jersey.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 63 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 64 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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, 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.

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.

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

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.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 65 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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 Hack, John Tilton 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.

General Services Administration (GSA) 2008 DHS Headquarters Consolidation at St. Elizabeths: Final Environmental Impact Statement. 4 volumes. General Services Administration National Capital Region, Washington, D.C.

The Generations Network 2009 Ancestry.com, U.S. Census Records. Electronic document, http://www.ancestry. com/default.aspx, accessed April 2009.

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.

Government Printing Office 1876 Executive Documents, House of Representatives, 1875–’76. First Session of the Forty-fourth Congress. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 66 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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. [Brochure]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 67 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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.

Hutchinson, Louise D. 1977 The Anacostia Story: 1608–1930. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Inashima, Paul Y. 1985 An Archeological Investigation of Thirty-One Erosion Control and Bank Stabalization Sitesalong 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.

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.

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.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 68 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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.

Kulikoff, Allan 1986 Tobacco and Slaves: The Development of Southern Cultures in the Chesapeake, 1680-1800. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

LeeDecker, Charles H., and Amy Freidlander 1984 Preliminary Archaeological 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 Archaeological 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 Geological Survey 2001 Physiographic Provinces and their Subdivisions. Electronic document, http://www.mgs.md.gov/esic/brochures/mdgeology.html, accessed April 2009.

McNett, Charles W. 1972 The Potomac Avenue Site in Washington, C.C. Maryland Archeology 8:23-35.

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

MDLandRec.Net 2009 MDLandRec.Net: A Digital Image Retrieval System for Land Records in Maryland. Electronic document, http://www.mdlandrec.net, accessed April 2009.

Papenfuse, Edward C., and Joseph M. Coale III 2003 The Maryland State Archives Atlas of Historical Maps of Maryland, 1608-1908. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 69 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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

Payette, Pete 2009 Civil War Defenses of Washington. American Forts Network, electronic document http://www.northamericanforts.com/East/dc.html, accessed 22 April 2009.

PIDBA 2009 The Paleoindian Database of the Americas. Electronic document, http://pidba.utk.edu/virginia.htm, accessed November 2009.

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

Proffatt, John 1910 The American Decisions. Vol. II. Bancroft-Whitney, San Francisco, and The Lawyers Co-op, Rochester, 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.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 70 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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.

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.

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

U.S. Census Bureau 1800 Federal Census, Population Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1830 Federal Census, Population Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 71 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

1840 Federal Census, Population Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1850a Federal Census, Population Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1850b Federal Census, Slave Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1850c Federal Census, Agricultural Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. 1860a Federal Census, Population Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1860b Federal Census, Slave Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1860c Federal Census, Agricultural Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. 1870a Federal Census, Slave Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C. Electronic version accessed at http://www.ancestry.com. 1870b Federal Census, Agricultural Schedule, District of Columbia. Microfilm, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS) 2007 Civil War Defenses of Washington: Battery Carroll and Fort Greble. Electronic document, http://www.npw.gov/cwdw/historyculture/battery-carroll-and-fort- greble.htm, accessed 22 April 2009.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) 2008 Section 4(f) Evaluation: Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation at St. Elizabeths Hospital, Washington, DC. Malcolm X/I-295 Interchange Modification and Access Road to the West Campus. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, Washington, DC.

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.

Wells, S. K. 1993 Bolling Field. Air Force District of Washington, Bolling AFB, Washington, D.C.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 72 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

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. 73 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 74 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

APPENDIX A:

QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 75 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 76 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Principal Investigator Dr. Paul Kreisa (PhD, University of Illinois, 1990) is the Mid-Atlantic region archaeological services group leader for Greenhorne and O’Mara, Inc. In his four years with Greenhorne and O’Mara, Dr. Kreisa has directed the investigation of several Antebellum plantation sites, conducted numerous survey and evaluation projects for public and private sector clients in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and Washington, D.C., and has created a Postbellum archaeological context for Prince George’s County. With over 30 years experience at all levels of archaeological consulting, Dr. Kreisa has directed numerous archaeological Phase I survey, Phase II evaluation, and Phase III mitigation investigations at Historic and prehistoric Native American sites in the Mid-Atlantic, Mid-South, Southeast, Midwest, and Great Plains regions. Clients have included DoD facilities, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers districts, GSA, NPS, state transportation agencies, local governments, and private developers. He has experience in completing Section 106 and NEPA documentation and complying with state and local regulations. Previously a member of the Wisconsin SHPO staff, Kreisa is now President-Elect of the Council for Maryland Archaeology, the organization of professional archaeologists in Maryland.

Background Research Jacqueline M. McDowell (MA, Northern Illinois University, 1986) is an independent consultant providing historical and archaeological research services. For the past four years she has provided these research services for cultural resources projects in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Washington, D.C. She has extensive experience in conducting archival research, including deed and census, with primary and secondary sources for the preparation of historic contexts and background sections for projects. McDowell has more than 20 years field and research experience in all phases of archaeological research and reporting not only in the Mid-Atlantic but also in the Midwest. This experience includes both prehistoric Native American and historic Euroamerican sites. She is the author of numerous reports for clients that have included DoD and GSA as well as state agencies and private developers that have been prepared for Section 106 and state-level historic preservation legislation.

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 77 Phase IA Archaeological Assessment Shepherd Parkway

Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. 78