20181640 Ver 1_Greenville Pipeline Phase I report_20181129

PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY OF TUCKER’S COVE TRACT
PITT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NC #

Prepared For:
Dramby Environmental Consulting, Inc.
424 Duke of Gloucester Street, Suite 207
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185
[phone]

Prepared By:
Carol Tyrer, Principal Investigator, and Dawn M. Muir-Frost

Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, LLC
453 McLaws Circle, Suite 3
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185
[phone]

September 2018

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

In the Summer of 2018, Dramby Environmental Consulting, Inc (DEC) contracted
Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, LLC (Circa~) to conduct a Phase I cultural
resources survey of the in Pitt County, North Carolina. The purpose of this Phase I
cultural resources survey was to complete an assessment and to identify and record all
historic resources within the project area prior to development of the site. This survey
resulted in the identification of 35 isolated finds, 12 new archaeological sites, and no new
architectural resource.

Thirty-five isolated finds were identified within the project area. By definition, an
isolated find is not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, and
Circa~ recommends that no further archaeological testing within these areas are
warranted.

Site PGN3 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the late-19th with occupation
continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density
of artifacts recovered from a relic plowzone near a road. Circa~ recommends that the
site as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion
D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site,
and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development
projects.

Site PGN5 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1920 with
occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN6 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1930 with
occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN7 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1900 with
occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.
ii

Site PGN8 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1775 with
occupation continuing into the 1820s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the portion of the site within the project area be
given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN10 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1900 with
occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
moderate density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the
site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN11 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1900 with
occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
moderate density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the
site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN13 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1950 with
occupation continuing into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given cl earance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN14 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1900 with
occupation continuing into the 1950s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
moderate density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the
site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN32 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1950 with
occupation continuing into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
iii
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN44 is a domestic artifact scatter that dates from the circa post 1900 with
occupation continuing into the 1960s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a
light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site
located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under
Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at
the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN47 is a domestic artifact that dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation
continuing into the 1960s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density
of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ........................................................................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ v
LIST OF PLATES .............................................................................................................. v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. vi
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 7
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................... 8
Soils................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Soils Identified Within the Project Area ......................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ........................................ 9
Historic Context .............................................................................................................. 9
Native American Sites Context ........................................................................................ 9
Historic Context ............................................................................................................. 14
Property History ............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Previously Recorded Cultural Resources ...................................................................... 15
Archaeological Resource Potential ............................................................................... 15
METHODS AND TECHNIQUES ................................................................................... 16
Research Strategy.......................................................................................................... 16
Methods......................................................................................................................... 18
Archival Research .......................................................................................................... 18
Architectural Field Methods .......................................................................................... 18
Archaeological Field Methods ....................................................................................... 18
Laboratory Methods ....................................................................................................... 18
RESULTS OF SURVEY .................................................................................................. 19
Architectural Resources ................................................................................................ 19
House .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Shed................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Archaeological Resources ............................................................................................. 19
Isolated Finds ................................................................................................................. 19
Archaeological Resources ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 37
Architectural Resources ................................................................................................ 37
CK 430, House Site......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Archaeological Resources ............................................................................................. 37
Site 31CK348 ................................................................................................................. 39
Site 31CK349 .................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Site 31CK350 .................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................. 41

Appendix A: Artifact Inventory
Appendix B: Project Map

v
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Approximate location of project area on USGS Currituck quadrangle. ............. 7
Figure 2. 1993 aerial view of project area, taken from Google Earth.Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Figure 3. 1998 aerial view of project area, taken from Google Earth.Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Figure 4. 2003 aerial view of project area, taken from Google Earth.Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Figure 5. 2008 aerial view of project area, taken from Google Earth.Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Figure 6. 2011 aerial view of project area, taken from Google Earth.Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Figure 7. Current aerial view of project area, taken from Google Earth. ................. Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 8. Project area soil map, from NRCS website. ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 9. Detail of 1709 Lawson Map From Francis L. Hawks' History of North
Carolina from 1663 to 1729, Vol. II. E. J. Hale & Son: 1858.Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Figure 10. Detail of Northern Part of the Map of the Province of North Carolina 1730 by
H. Moll. .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 11. Detail of 1744 Map of Lord Carteret's Grant. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 12. Detail of A Compleat Map of North-Carolina From an Actual Survey, by John
Collett, 1770. ...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 13. Detail of An Accurate Map of North and South Carolina with their Indian
Frontiers, Shewing in a distinct manner all the Mountains, Rivers, Swamps, Marshes,
Bays, Creeks, Harbours, Sandbanks and Soundings on the Coasts; with The Roads and
Indian Paths; as well as The Boundary or Provincial Lines, The Several Townships and
other divisions of the Land In Both the Provinces, 1775. By Henry Mouzon, Jr. .... Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 14. Detail of 1808 Map by John Price & John Strothers ...................................... 14
Figure 15. Detail of S.E. portion of Virginia and N.E. portion of N'th Carolina drawn b.
Serg't Ch. Worret ; & compiled under the direction of Col. T.J. Cram, Chief Top'l Eng'r
Dep't Va. 1860s. ................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 16. Detail of 1921 Map of Currituck County that ran in The Independent Friday,
January 6, 1922; pg. 11. .................................................................................................... 15
Figure 17. Resources within one-mile radius of project area boundaries. ................ Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 18. Tribes and villages 1585/6 in the region. 1. Aquascogoc; 2. Cautaking; 3.
Chawanoke; 4. Chepanoc; 5. Croatoan; ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 19. Tribes and villages, 1657-1795. Some locations are tentative. Dates in
parenthesis indicate documented periods of occupation of villages.Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Figure 20. Map showing location of house site on Currituck quadrangle. ............... Error!
Bookmark not defined.
vi
Figure 21. Map showing location of archaeological sites on Currituck quadrangle. Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 22. Representative shovel test profiles. ................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

LIST OF PLATES

Plate 1. View of House, facade, looking southwest. ......... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 2. View of House, addition, looking southwest. ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 3. View of House, addition, looking southwest. ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 4. View of House, addition, looking norhteast. ....... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 5. View of House, addition, looking northwest. ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 6. View of Shed, looking southeast. ........................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 7. View of Site 1, looking north. .............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Plate 8. View of Sites 2 and 3, looking north. .................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Soils Identified Within the Project Area Boundaries.Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Table 2. Deed Research for Tucker’s Cove Tract. ............ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 3. Resources Within a One-Mile Radius of Project Area Boundaries ................... 15
Table 4. Previously Identified Archaeological Sites Within One Mile of the Project Area.
........................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 5. Summary of identified resources and recommendations ................................... 39

7
INTRODUCTION

In the summer of 2018, Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, LLC (Circa~) conducted
a Phase I cultural resources survey of the 19-mile long pipeline in County, North
Carolina (Figure 1). The tract is approximately 47 acres. The project area is located to
the south of Greensville, North Carolina. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) for
archaeological and architectural resources is the 19-mile long by 50-foot wide project
alignment.

Piedmont Natural Gas (PNG) plans to replace Line 24 which consists of 19 miles of a 12"
transmission pipeline, and PNG plans to abandon approximately 4-miles of the existing
pipeline facilities. PNG also plans to include tie-in's to their existing pipeline's facilities
and installing two valves settings along the route.

Figure 1. Approximate location of project area on USGS quadrangle.

The investigation was carried out in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended) and conducted in accordance with the Secretary
of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation. The report
describes fieldwork results and makes recommendations for further work. A review of
the background information and site files at the North Carolina Department of Natural
and Cultural Resources in Raleigh, North Carolina revealed that there were no
previously-identified resources within the project corridor. In addition, the review of the
8
site files indicated that no Phase I surveys have been completed within the project
corridor. The North Carolina state archaeologist requires all work plans and field
methodologies to be approved by them prior to the initiation of fieldwork. Circa~
completed a work plan and submitted the plan for review. The work plan was accepted
by the state SHPO.

This report contains a description of the project area’s physical and environmental
setting, an outline of meaningful historical contexts for the property, a general research
design that summarizes field methods, previous research in the area, and expected results,
and finally, the survey results are described, the findings reviewed, and recommendations
explained. Field notes, artifacts, and other project records are presently being curated in
Circa~’s office in Williamsburg, Virginia. It is anticipated that all of these materials will
eventually be transferred to the property owner or North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) in Raleigh, North Carolina following the conclusion of the
project.

At Circa~, Carol D. Tyrer served as Project Manager and Principal Investigator for the
project and was assisted in the field by Charlie Rutledge, Matt Carr, Eric Mai, Ann
Booher, Diana Johnson, Shayne Spears, Vincent Cason, and McKenzie Kaiser, field
archaeologists. Dawn M. Muir-Frost served as the Architectural Historian for the project
and completed the architectural survey and historic context. Carol D. Tyrer prepared the
archaeological results and the artifact analysis. The successful completion of the Phase I
survey for the proposed development was made possible by the contribution of many
individuals. In particular, Shearin Dramby with DEC ensured that project information
and maps were always available for the study.

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

The primary reasons for incorporating environmental studies into archaeological projects
are: to learn of possible environmental constraints or lack of constraints; to determine the
presence or absence of critical resources that might have influenced site distribution, etc;
and to discover environmental factors—erosion, deposition, subsidence, and historic land
use patterns—that might influence the integrity of archaeological sites once they have
formed. Keeping these objectives in mind, a brief environmental summary of the project
area is provided below.

Pitt County is in the Middle and Upper Coastal Plain physiographic province of the
Atlantic Coastal Plain. The project alignment runs through a broad, flat interstream area
where marked topographic variations are lacking. Slopes generally are less than 4
percent. The County spans the interstream divide separating the Tar-Pamlico and Neuse
River Basins, and the interstream divide separating the Middle Neuse and Contentnea
subbasins of the Neuse River Basin.

Pitt County is underlaid by unconsolidated beds of sand, clay, and calcar eous sediment.
Inclined south to southeasterly at a rate slightly greater than the land's surface, the beds
thicken as they near the coast and reach their greatest thickness offshore. For the most
9
part, these beds were deposited in sea water as the sea advanced and retreated during the
geologic development of the Atlantic Coastal Plain. To a much lesser extent, streams
deposited layers of sediment which mixed with that deposited on the sea floor. About 750
feet underneath the sedimentary cover underlying Greenville is a basement rock floor
consisting of weathered granite, gneiss, schist, and slate.

The project alignment is located mostly in agricultural fields with fringes of trees along
the edges of the fields, along the roads, and around the wetlands. The majority of the
agricultural land was artificially drained in the early to mid-20th century to create crop
lands. A network of man-made ditches help aid in the drainage of the fields. Elevations
across the project alignment range from 38 to 59 feet above mean sea level (AMSL).

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The following section provides the Native American and historic background information
necessary to assessing the archaeological potential of the proposed project area. Previous
investigations in the general vicinity of the project area are outlined, while specific
documents and resources employed in this survey are discussed.

Historic Context

Native American Sites Context
North Carolina’s Native American cultural chronology, like that of the rest of the Middle
Atlantic region, is divided into three major periods, Paleoindian, Archaic, and Woodland,
with the differences defined largely on changes in subsistence practices, settlement
patterns, and types of material remains found. The three main periods reflect major
changes, while “Early”, “Middle”, and “Late” subperiods reflect less dramatic, though
significant, changes.

Paleoindian Period (Prior to 10,000 B.C.)
Paleoindian occupation in North Carolina, the first human occupation of the region,
began some time before 10,000 B.C. The earliest diagnostic artifacts where there is any
consensus are Clovis projectile points, which are typically fashioned of high-quality
cryptocrystalline materials such as chert, chalcedony, and jasper. Later Paleoindian
points include smaller Clovis-like and Cumberland variants, and small “Mid-Paleo”
points. In the southeastern part of North Carolina, Dalton, Hardaway-Dalton, and
Hardaway side-notched points make up the later end of the Paleoindian period. Also,
diagnostic, though to a lesser extent, are certain types of well-made endscrapers,
sidescrapers, and other formalized tools. Most current views now hold that eastern
Paleoindians were generalized foragers with an emphasis on hunting. Social organization
apparently consisted of relatively small bands that exploited a wide but defined territory.

Isolated projectile point finds and what appear to be small temporary camps represent the
majority of Paleoindian remains in North Carolina. Although some larger and very
notable base camps are present in the state, they are relatively rare and usually associated
with sources of preferred high-quality lithic materials. Two of the most important
10
Paleoindian sites in the eastern United States have been identified in nearby Virginia.
These include the Thunderbird Site in the Shenandoah Valley (Gardner 1974, 1977) and
the Williamson Site in south-central Virginia (McCary 1951, 1975). Both are large base
camps associated with nearby sources of high-grade cryptocrystalline lithic materials. At
the Thunderbird site area and its surrounding environs, researchers have formulated a site
typology to include lithic quarries, quarry-related base camps, quarry reduction stations,
base camp maintenance stations, outlying hunting sites, and isolated point sites (Gardner
1981, 1989).

One of the earliest dated sites in North America, Cactus Hill, lies in the Coastal Plain
along the Nottoway River in nearby Sussex County, Virginia (McAvoy and McAvoy
1997). Although still controversial, Cactus Hill appears to have the potential to become
one of the most well accepted pre-Clovis sites in the western hemisphere.

Within North Carolina, the Hardaway site (31ST4) is the most significant Paleoindian
site identified. This site is situated on the Yadkin River in the Uwharrie Mountains and
forms the base for the Paleoindian and Early Archaic subperiod sequences defined by
Coe (Coe 1964).

There are concentrations of Paleoindian materials in North Carolina and, conversely,
there are areas where sites and isolated finds of this early period are all but absent making
Paleoindian sites far less common than all other periods of Native American prehistory.
The fact that sea level rises during this period inundated much of the North Carolina
coastline further hinders the identification of Paleoindian sites, as it is possible that many
of these sites are now submerged (Phelps 1983). While the chances of finding artifacts
from this early period within the project area are considered low, any well-drained
location, particularly where tributaries converge, is a high potential location for Native
American camps and settlements in general. Therefore, considering the project area is
adjacent to Tulls Bay, with water within the project area, it is possible that a site or
isolated find of this period could be discovered within the project area.

Archaic Period (8,000 B.C. – 1,200 B.C.)
The beginning of the Archaic period generally coincides with the end of the Pleistocene
epoch, marked in this region by a climatic shift from a moist, cool period to a warmer,
dryer climate. Vegetation also changed at this time from a largely boreal forest setting to
a mixed conifer-deciduous forest. In eastern North Carolina, a temperate climate was
established (Dent 1995). Researchers believe that increasing differences in seasonal
availability of resources brought on by post-Pleistocene changes coincide with increasing
emphasis on strategies of seasonally geared mobility.

A band-level social organization involving seasonal movements corresponding to the
seasonal availability of resources and, in some instances, shorter-interval movements is
thought to primarily characterize Archaic populations. Settlement during the Archaic
period probably involved the occupation of relatively large regions by single band -sized
groups, living in base camps during part of the year and dispersing on an as-needed or
11
seasonal basis, creating smaller microband camps, possibly consisting of no more than
single families.

The development of more specialized resource procurement activities as well as the
technology to accomplish these activities also characterizes the Archaic period. These
differences in the material culture are believed to reflect larger, more localized
populations and changes in methods of food procurement and processing.

Corner and side notching became a common characteristic of projectile points at the
beginning of the Archaic period (Early Archaic subperiod), indicating changes in hafting
technology and possibly the invention of the spear-thrower (atlatl). Notched forms
include Palmer and Kirk corner-notched and, in localized areas, various side-notched
forms. A series of bifurcate base forms marked the later end of the Early Archaic
subperiod and the beginning of the Middle Archaic subperiod. The Middle Archaic
subperiod, circa 6,500 B.C. - 3,000 B.C. sees the rise of various stemmed projectile point
forms. In this area of eastern North Carolina, the most common Middle Archaic forms
would be Stanly, Morrow Mountain, and Guilford types, followed by the side-notched
Halifax type at the end of the subperiod and the transition into the Late Archaic subperiod
between circa 3,500 B.C. and 3,000 B.C. Stemmed and notched forms, including various
large, broad-bladed stemmed knives and projectile points (e.g., Savannah River and
variants) dominated the Late Archaic subperiod. These forms generally diminish in size
by the succeeding Early Woodland subperiod. Also found, though more rarely along the
margins of the Great Dismal Swamp (to the northwest of the project area), are stemmed
and notched-stem forms like those generally associated more prominently with areas of
Pennsylvania and adjoining parts of the northeast (Perkiomen).

The Archaic period also marks the beginning of ground stone technology, with the
occurrence of ground atlatl weights and celts. New tool categories developed during the
Archaic period include chipped- and ground-stone celts, ground-stone net sinkers,
pestles, pecked stones, mullers, and axes. Vessels carved from steatite are found on sites
dating to the end of the Late Archaic subperiod.

Marked increases in population density and decreased mobility characterize the Late
Archaic subperiod in eastern North America (circa 4,000 B.C.–1,200 B.C.). Because
population growth necessitated a larger and more predictable food supply, agriculture
probably has its origins in the Middle Atlantic region during this subperiod. Yarnell
(1976), for example, writes that sunflower, sump weed, and possibly goosefoot may have
been cultivated as early as 2,000 B.C. In the lower Little Tennessee River Valley,
remains of squash have been found in Late Archaic Savannah River contexts (circa 2,400
B.C.), with both squash and gourd in slightly later Iddins period contexts (Chapman and
Shea 1988).

Most likely, Middle and Late Archaic subperiods would be the most common types of
Archaic sites found in and around the project area. Middle and Late Archaic campsites
are common in the Coastal Plain, and the project area was viewed as having a moderate
potential for the location of Middle to Late Archaic components representing small
12
group, transient campsites. In most cases, such sites would not likely have National
Register of Historic Places significance unless preserved features and/or unplowed
subsurface deposits existed.

Woodland Period (1,200 B.C. - A.D. 1600)
Ceramic technology, a gradually developing dependence on horticulture, and increased
sedentism characterized the Woodland period. Researchers have designated three
subperiods (Early, Middle, and Late Woodland) based primarily on stylistic and
technological changes in ceramic and projectile point types as well as settlement patterns.

Not all researchers agree on the temporal brackets for the Early and Middle Woodland
subperiods. Some use the southeastern chronology where the Early Woodland subperiod
begins circa 1,000 B.C. and lasts to circa A.D. 200/300. This chronology may be
applicable to the southwestern portion of North Carolina, though not to the Piedmont or
Coastal Plain. Gardner (1982) initially formulated the most widely used temporal
scheme in the Middle Atlantic and the one that is probably most applicable to the project
area noting Early Woodland, circa 1,200 B.C. - 500 B.C.; and Middle Woodland, circa
500 B.C. - A.D. 900. Others elaborated on the scheme based on both artifact styles and,
of perhaps more significance, perceived settlement shifts.

The appearance of ceramics in the archaeological record generally defined the Early
Woodland subperiod, bracketed herein at circa 1,200 B.C. - 500 B.C. The earliest
Woodland ceramic wares, Marcy Creek Plain and variants, are rectangular or oval and
resemble the preceding Late Archaic soapstone vessels. In this area, these ceramics are
rare and appear to be, in part, contemporaneous with similar flat-bottom vessels tempered
with grog, sand, and, in some cases, shell. Variously tempered beaker-shaped vessels, as
well as those having more conventional sub-conical shapes, follow these forms.

Complexity of and emphasis on ceremonial aspects, especially those concerned with the
burial of the dead, are also characteristic of the Early Woodland subperiod across a broad
region of the east. In North Carolina, this emphasis is not seen until about 500 B.C. when
stone and earth burial cairns and cairn clusters occur in the western part of the state;
however, in spite of the mention of such mounds in both oral tradition and in older
publications, most researchers generally accept that this phenomenon did not extend into
the Coastal Plain.

Gardner’s model indicates that, around the overall project area, large and intensively
occupied sites interpreted as sedentary (as opposed to seasonal) large group base camps
are located in the estuarine zone/shoreline with smaller, short-term support camps located
in the estuarine zone and throughout the freshwater tributary network. It is during this
time that shell middens appear, indicating shellfish were an important part of the
subsistence focus at this time (Gardner 1982). The succeeding Middle Woodland
subperiod sees the most intensive use of these resources, and middens of t his subperiod
are generally both larger and more abundant at this time.

13
The appearance of net-marked and corded pottery that is sand-tempered, sand- and
crushed-rock-tempered, and gravel-tempered marked the Middle Woodland subperiod in
this area, defined herein between circa. 500 B.C. and A.D. 900. These types generally
span the subperiod circa 500 B.C. to A.D. 300, and are slightly overlapped in time by,
and replaced with, the shell-tempered Mockley ware from slightly before circa A.D. 200
to about A.D. 900 throughout the region.

By the Late Woodland subperiod (A.D. 900 - 1600), agriculture had assumed a role of
major importance in the Native American subsistence system. The adoption of
agriculture represents a major change in the Native American subsistence economy and
settlement patterns. Expanses of arable land became a dominant settlement factor, and
sites were located on fertile floodplain soils or, in many cases, on higher terraces or
ridges adjacent to them. During this subperiod, shell middens are still used but the large
habitation sites are not necessarily correlated with them. The location of Early to Middle
Woodland shell middens are often re-used, but mainly as short-term foray sites (Gardner
1982).

By the time of initial European exploration, most of the Native American groups in the
Coastal Plain shared a common culture and were subsumed within an emerging
paramount chiefdom under the domain of one paramount chief, Powhatan. Some groups
were direct components of the chiefdom, while others, usually those most distant, were at
least allied in some manner with the paramount group (Rountree 1989).

Diagnostic artifacts of the Late Woodland subperiod include several triangular projectile
point styles that originated during the later part of the Middle Woodland subperiod.
These styles decreased in size through time, and eventually culminated in the very small
and often serrated triangles typically found on the most recent Late Woodland and early
contact period villages. Late Woodland subperiod ceramics in this area include shell-
tempered Townsend and Roanoke Simple Stamped types, along with plain-surfaced,
shell-tempered variants. By the time of European contact, the most common pottery type
in the area appears to have been Roanoke Simple Stamped and plain variants.

Settlements dating to this time consist of both villages and small hamlets. Some villages
were highly nucleated, while others were internally dispersed over a wide area. Some
were completely fortified by circular or oval palisades, while others contained a fortified
core area and outlying houses, indicating a rise in intergroup conflict. The more
dispersed villages and hamlets were scattered over a wide area with indications of
internally fluid settlement within a loosely defined town or village territory.

Drawings and journals of early European explorers describing Indian villages indicate
that houses were constructed of an oval, rectangular, or circular framework of flexible
green sapling poles set in the ground, lashed together, and covered with thatch or bark
mats. Burial sites of the period were situated in individual pits or in ossuaries. Such
historical accounts are consistent with data obtained from archaeological excavations of
Late Woodland to early historic village sites (Hodges and Hodges 1994).

14
With the development of a more sedentary settlement-subsistence system culminating in
the Late Woodland subperiod, permanent habitation sites gradually replaced base camp
habitation sites more characteristic of those of the previous foragers and hunter-gatherers.
Various supporting camps and activity areas were established in the day-to-day
procurement of food and other resources (i.e., short-term hunting and foraging camps,
quarries, butchering locations, and re-tooling locations). Locations used partially or
largely for ceremonial purposes were also present, usually in association with habitation
sites.

The large base camps, hamlets, and villages are typically located on bluffs, terraces, or
high floodplains adjacent to rivers or major tributaries. Small seasonal camps and non-
seasonally based satellite camps supporting nearby sedentary villages and hamlets are
located along smaller streams in the interior. Limited concentrations and sparse scatters
of lithics and ceramics typically characterize these campsites. As indicated earlier,
shellfish-gathering sites and shell middens suggest ephemeral re-use of the earlier
middens.

Historic Context
The first European exploration of the area now known as Currituck occurred in 1584 as
Sir Walter Raleigh received a patent from the British Crown and set out to explore the
New World. He would obtain two other patents in 1585 and 1587 for the same area. The
first two voyages were largely exploratory, but the third included women and children
who were to populate a permanent English colony on Roanoke Island. A year later,
Captain Vincente Gonzales and Juan Menendez-Marques visited the area (McCartney,
1997). These men, Spaniards under the direction of the Florida government, set out to
find Sir Walter Raleigh’s colonists. They sailed up the west shore of the Chesapeake Bay
and then traced the west coast of the Eastern Shore of Virginia and part of North
Carolina. Although the men did not find the Roanoke colony, they did open the area for
other colonists to follow. Soon after, another group of Spanish explorers landed and
claimed Currituck Beach for Spain (Snowden 1995). However, Knotts Island became the
first area permanently settled by tobacco farmers moving south from Virginia.

In 1663, King Charles II, under the Carolina Charter, granted eight men a vast tract
known as Carolina. These Lord Proprietors would go on to set up a government
establishing the inhabited part of their tract as the County of Albemarle by 1668. That
same year, the men divided the County into precincts including Currituck, Pasquotank,
Perquimans, and Chowan (Snowden 1995). Although a land grant established the line
dividing Virginia and North Carolina, by 1665, the line had moved 35 miles to the north
giving North Carolina control over the earliest settlers already occupying lands on the
Albemarle Sound.

Communication and transportation throughout these early settlements relied heavily on
water and the area quickly became dependent on the waterways as avenues for commerce
(Jordan, 1974). Although farms did populate the area during the 1700s, the County
continued to function as a minor trade center throughout the 18th century.

15

Although the Civil War devastated North Carolina killing thousands of male residents
and damaging cities and transportation corridors, the County recovered quickly due in
part to their agriculture and duck hunting industries (Snowden 1995). However, no
towns or municipalities developed and the areas continued to remain sparsely populated.

During the latter half of the 20th century tourism began to replace agricultural, hunting,
and fishing as the primary industry in the County. Today, the area continues to flourish
as a small area with tourists coming to the region.

Previously-Recorded Cultural Resources
Circa~ performed an archival search for the project alignment using the North Carolina
Office of State Archaeology records on June 12, 2018. This research was completed to
determine if historic resources exist within the project area boundaries. The search
identified one archaeological resource and no architectural resources within a one-mile
radius of the project area boundaries. Table 3 lists all of the resources within one mile of
the project area boundaries. Figure 17 shows the approximate project area boundaries
(yellow outlined area) and resources within close proximity. No resources were
identified with the project area boundaries.

Table 3. Resources Within a One-Mile Radius of Project Area Boundaries
Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation
Archaeological Resources
31PT47 Archaic Short-term habitation site Phase I survey
6/1987
None made

Archaeological Resource Potential
One previously-recorded Native American archaeological site is located within one mile
of the project area (Table 4, see Figure 17). This site dates to the Archaic period. This
site is classified as a short-term habitation site. Lithic artifacts recovered from this site
include primary debitage, secondary debitage, bifaces, and hafted bifaces/projectile
points. No Native American ceramic artifacts were noted as being recovered from this
site. This site is located in Roanoke sandy loam soils and is situated approximately seven
feet AMSL on a floodplain within a cultivated area with row crops.

Given the project area’s close proximity to the streams and wetlands, the possibility of
finding Native American resources is considered moderate to high. Although only one
previously-identified Native American archaeological site was located within a mile of
the project area, the project area conditions are ideal for small transient Native American
campsites. Given this information, it is possible that a Native American site, most likely
a temporary camp or lithic scatter could be found within the project area boundaries.
These sites would most likely date to the general Native American period or Woodland
period and would range in size from under one acre to less than five acres.

Further, given the project area’s environment and surroundings and the fact that no
historic archaeological resources were identified within a mile of the project area, the
possibility of finding historic archaeological resources is considered low to moderate.
16
However, it is possible that an historic archaeological site, most likely a domestic site,
could be found within the project area boundaries. However, given the fact that no
historic archaeological resources have been found within a mile of the project area, it is
difficult to determine any specifics of a possible site.

METHODS AND TECHNIQUES

Research Strategy
The survey was designed to identify all cultural resources present in the project area and
to obtain sufficient information to make recommendations about the further research
potential of each resource based on potential eligibility to the National Register of
Historic Places. To accomplish this, both documentary research and archaeological field
testing was performed at a level in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards (Department of the Interior 1983, 48 FR 44720-44723), as well as North
Carolina SHPO guidelines for Phase I archaeological surveys. Moreover, the field survey
was conducted in compliance with statutes regarding the impact of undertakings on
historic properties as summarized by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (36
CFR 800 [1986 and amended 2000]). To meet Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
standards, a Phase I archaeological survey must be conducted in “a reasonable and good
faith effort to identify historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking” (36
CFR 800.4). The Phase I survey was performed and documented at a level that meets or
exceeds these standards.

A cultural resource is gauged to be significant if at least one of four National Register of
Historic Places criteria can be applied to it:
A. Associated with significant events in the broad patterns of national history;
B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;
C. Representative of a type, period, or method of construction, or the work of
a master; and
D. Capable of yielding important information about the past.

Typically, Criterion D applies to archaeological sites. In order to be capable of yielding
important information about the past, generally a site must possess artifacts, soil strata,
structural remains, or other cultural features that make it possible to test historical
hypotheses, corroborate and amplify currently available information, or reconstruct the
sequence of the local archaeological record.

17
Table 4. Previously-Identified Archaeological Sites Within One Mile of the Project Area.
Site
Number
Site
Chronology
Site Type Native American Lithic
Artifacts
Native American
Ceramic Artifacts
Site Size

Soil Type Additional Site Information
31PT47 Archaic

Short-term
habitation site
Primary debitage,
secondary debitage,
bifaces, hafted
bifaces/projectile points
None listed 11 -25 square meters Roanoke sandy
loam
Site is situated
approximately 7 feet AMSL
on a floodplain in a
cultivated area with row
crops

18
Methods

Archival Research
Circa~ will review historic maps and historical records and examine cartographic and
historic works that are housed at the Library of Congress, city directories, census data,
slave records, North Carolina site forms and reports, and the County. Data accumulated
during previous research on Native American and historic sites throughout the region will
also examined. This background research will aid in predicting the presence or absence
of sites and to characterize the location and types of sites that could be found within the
project area. In addition, Circa~ will speak with local residents who have accumulated
historical documents and knowledge on the early residents in the County.

The review of previously-identified Native American site locational data can reveal
trends in setting, soils, and elevations to identify similar landscapes and landforms to aid
in the prediction of unrecorded Native American resources within the project area.

The review of previously-identified historic site locational data (including standing
structures) can reveal trends in setting, soils, and elevations to identify similar landscapes
and landforms to aid in the prediction of unrecorded historic resources within the project
area. In addition, the review of historic maps can aid in the identification of sites and the
recreation of historic land use (i.e. forested areas and agricultural areas changes over
time).

Architectural Field Methods
Field survey of all historic structures within the alignment was conducted according to
North Carolina SHPO’s survey procedures. A North Carolina SHPO site form was
completed for each structure or complex 50 years of age or older, and photographs of the
exterior taken.

Archaeological Field Methods
Prior to subsurface testing, the entire project area was visually inspected via pedestrian
survey and all aboveground evidence of cultural activity noted and recorded. Shovel
tests, approximately 1.50-foot in diameter, were excavated at 50-foot intervals within the
project area. In addition, shovel test intervals were reduced to 25-foot intervals around
positives and isolated positive shovel tests. Waterlogged areas, or portions of the project
area with slopes in excess of 15%, were carefully examined for cultural material, but
were not subjected to subsurface testing. All shovel tests were excavated according to
natural levels to sterile subsoil, and all soils screened through ¼-inch wire mesh. Profiles
were recorded for representative shovel tests and soil color recorded in accordance with
the Munsell classification system. All positive shovel tests were recorded on standard
field forms and all cultural material retained.

Laboratory Methods
Once removed from the field, all archaeological data and specimens were transported to
Circa~'s laboratory for processing and analysis. Prior to washing, artifacts from a given
provenience were first emptied into a screened basket and sorted. Items determined to be
19
unstable will be either dry brushed or in some cases not washed and re-bagged with the
appropriate provenience information. These items may include unstable organic objects,
such as wood or other plant material, leather, bone, fabric, metal requiring immediate
conservation, and overglaze painted delftware, and other soft-bodied ceramics such as
some local wares. Stable objects will be washed with a soft brush and edges of ceramics
and glass will be thoroughly cleaned to aid in the identification of body type and
mending. Items will be then placed by provenience on a drying rack.

In a given provenience, artifacts were sorted first by material and checked for mends.
Stylistic attributes were described with current terminology and recorded by count into a
database for analysis. Non-diagnostic artifacts with like attributes will be grouped
together - i.e., clear, amber, etc. bottle body glass fragments, unrecognizable nail
fragments, corroded metal fragments, and aqua window glass. Diagnostic artifacts were
sorted and grouped together based on type or ware and/or vessel or function.

RESULTS OF SURVEY

The purpose of the field survey is to provide specific information concerning the location,
nature, and distribution of archaeological resources within the permit areas. Circa~ uses
two types of designations for the grouping of archaeological resources: isolated finds and
sites. An isolated find is defined when a limited number of artifacts are recovered from
the ground surface or from shovel testing. This event may be either a casual or single-
episode discard such as a projectile point or a bottle break or may be a small collection of
artifacts related to various periods, such as a projectile point from the Woodland period
and a bottle fragment from the 20th century. A location is a grouping of modern artifacts
usually associated with a mid to late 20th century standing structure. An archaeological
site is defined as a grouping of artifacts that date to specific periods and that reveal the
location of human activity and land use.

Architectural Resources
There were no architectural resources located within the project alignment.

Archaeological Resources
One thousand fifteen-hundred and twenty shovel tests were laid out on a single transect
grid across the project alignment. The shovel test plan skipped shovel tests due to their
location in wetlands, slope or embankment, or disturbed areas along roads. The majority
of the project alignment is in open agricultural fields with a portion forested around the
edges of the fields and roads, and around the wetlands. Portions of the project alignment
that crossed over agricultural fields were recently plowed and planted and ground surface
visibility was 100%. The survey efforts identified 35 isolated finds and 12 archaeological
sites. Plates

Isolated Finds

Site PGN1**
20
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field just to
the east of Nash Joyner Road. This positive shovel test, 14, consisted of one clear bottle
glass base fragment. The fragment is from a container that dates circa post 1950. Four
radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative.
No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PNG2**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone from the edge of an active
agricultural field. This positive shovel test, 110, consisted of one whiteware body sherd.
The sherd exhibited a blue band on the exterior and was potted in America circa post
1930. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all were
negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN4**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field just to
the north of an agricultural drainage ditch. This positive shovel test, 282, consisted of
one aqua and one clear bottle glass fragments. The fragments are from containers that
dates circa post 1950. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south,
and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN9**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field just to
the south of a housing development. This positive shovel test, 463, consisted of one
green and white swirl glass marble. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east,
west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this
isolated find.

Site PNG12**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone from the edge of an active
agricultural field. This positive shovel test, 478 and 479, consisted of one clear bottle
glass fragment and one whiteware body sherd. The sherd exhibited a glaze and body
typical of ware potted in America circa post 1940. Eight radial shovel tests were
excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN15**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field just to
the south of a housing development. This positive shovel test, 527, consisted of two
machine-made brick fragments. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east,
west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this
isolated find.

Site PNG16**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 602, consisted of one stoneware body sherd. The sherd exhibited a
gray salt glaze on the exterior and was potted in America circa post 1870. Four radial
21
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN17**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field just to
the south of a housing development. This positive shovel test, 613, consisted of one
machine-made brick fragment. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west,
south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated
find.

Site PGN18**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 694, consisted of one clear bottle glass fragment. The fragment is
from a container that dates circa post 1970. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to
the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for
this isolated find.

Site PGN19**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 700, consisted of one iron hinge fragment. Four radial shovel tests
were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN20**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 720, consisted of one clear bottle glass fragment and one machine-
made brick fragment. The glass fragment is from a container that dates circa post 1970.
Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were
negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PNG21**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 740, consisted of one undecorated whiteware body sherd. The sherd
exhibited the shape, body, and glaze typical of ware potted in America circa post 1900.
Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all were
negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PNG22**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 760, consisted of one undecorated china body sherd. The sherd
exhibited the shape, body, and glaze typical of ware potted in America circa post 1880.
Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all were
negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN23**
22
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 849, consisted of one 45 bullet fragment. Four radial shovel tests
were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Site PNG24**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 884, consisted of one pearlware rim sherd. The sherd exhibited the a
molded and hand-painted blue shell edge design and was potted in England circa post
1795. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all were
negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN25**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 862, consisted of one charred wood fragment. Four radial shovel
tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further
work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN26**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 891, consisted of one wire nail fragment. Four radial shovel tests
were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN27**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, , consisted of one amber bottle glass fragment. The fragment is from
a container that dates circa post 1950. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east,
west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this
isolated find.

Site PGN28**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 960, consisted of two clear bottle glass fragments. The fragments are
from a container that dates circa post 1960. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to
the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for
this isolated find.

Site PGN29**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 965, consisted of one clear bottle glass fragment and one drain tile
fragment. The glass fragment is from a container that dates circa post 1970. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN30**
23
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1001, consisted of one clear table glass and one opaque white
tableware glass fragment and two drain tile fragments. The two glass fragments date circa
post 1950. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all
were negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN31**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1006, consisted of two indeterminate iron fragments. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN33**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1039, consisted of one machine-made brick fragment. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN34**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1049, consisted of one machine-made brick fragment. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN35**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1096, consisted of one wire nail fragment. Four radial shovel tests
were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN36**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1105, consisted of 11 wire nail fragments and one reddish orange
machine-made brick fragment. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west,
south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated
find.

Site PGN37**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field just to
the south of a housing development. This positive shovel test, 1115, consisted of one
machine-made brick fragment. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west,
south, and north; all were negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated
find.

Site PGN38**
24
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1122, consisted of one wire nail fragment. Four radial shovel tests
were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN39**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1134, consisted of one machine-made brick fragment. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.\

Site PGN40**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1147, consisted of one machine-made brick fragment. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN41**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1154, consisted of one machine-made brick fragment. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PNG43**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1245, consisted of one undecorated whiteware and one stoneware
sherds. The whiteware sherd exhibited the shape, body, and glaze typical of ware potted
in America circa post 1930. The stoneware sherd exhibited a dark brown Albany-glazed
interior with a white Bristol-glazed exterior. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to
the east, west, north, and south; all were negative. No further work is recommended for
this isolated find.

Site PNG44**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1260, consisted of one undecorated whiteware body sherd and one
aqua bottle glass body fragment. The sherd exhibited the shape, body, and glaze typical
of ware potted in America circa post 1940. The bottle glass fragment also dates to this
timeframe. Four radial shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, north, and south; all
were negative. No further work is recommended for this isolated find.

Site PGN45**
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1390, consisted of one machine-made brick fragment. Four radial
shovel tests were excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No
further work is recommended for this isolated find.

25
Site PGN46
One isolated find was recovered from the plowzone of an active agricultural field. This
positive shovel test, 1489, consisted of one quartzite core. Four radial shovel tests were
excavated to the east, west, south, and north; all were negative. No further work is
recommended for this isolated find.

Archaeological Resources

Site PGN3
The site is located roughly 50 feet north of Pocosin Road within a softwood and
hardwood forest. Elevation is 71 feet AMSL and the landform is flat.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 100 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 12
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid and four 25-foot radial shovel tests. Of these,
no shovel tests were positive. The site borders were defined by double-negative shovel
tests to the north and south and by the surface scatter to the north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a relic plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has
developed naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming
such as lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a
plowed turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4)
sandy loam relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.68 feet to 0.95 feet thick. Plow
scars were evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-
horizon, consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Twenty-four artifacts were recovered from the ground surface.
Of the 24 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and
22 or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of 14 ceramic sherds, 12 glass
fragments, and two reddish brown machine-made brick fragments. The ceramic sherds
included 12 undecorated whiteware sherds, one gray salt glaze stoneware sherd, and one
Albany-glazed stoneware sherd. The whiteware sherds exhibited a glaze and body
typical of ware potted in America circa post 1900. The two stoneware sherds exhibited a
glaze and body typical of ware potted circa post 1880. The 12 glass fragments included
one clear bottle glass fragment, two aqua canning jar fragments, one clear pressed-glass
decorative glass fragment, three solarized amethyst pressed glass decorative fragments,
and one aqua window glass fragment. The aqua and clear bottle and canning jar glass
26
fragments date circa post 1900. The solarized amethyst glass fragment dates circa post
1880 to 1918.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the late-19th with occupation continuing into the
1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a relic plowzone near a road. Circa~ recommends that the site as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D .
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN5
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the west of a softwood and
hardwood forest by a wetland. Elevation is 54 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the
east towards the wetlands.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 200 feet north to south by 120 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 21
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid and four 25-foot radial shovel tests. Of these,
no shovel tests were positive. The site borders were defined by the surface scatter and
double-negative shovel tests to the north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typ ically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.64 feet to 0.91 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Fifty-three artifacts were recovered from the ground surface.
Of the 53 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and
53 or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of 46 glass fragments, four wire nail
fragments, two reddish brown machine-made brick fragments, and one coal fragment.
The 46 glass fragments included one amber, three aqua, and 40 clear bottle glass
fragments, one clear hurricane lamp globe fragment, and one aqua window glass
fragment. The amber, aqua, and clear bottle glass fragments date circa post 1920.

27
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN6
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the east of a softwood and
hardwood forest by a wetland and a drainage ditch. Elevation is 48 feet AMSL and the
landform drains to the west towards the wetlands and drainage ditch.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 100 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 19
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.64 feet to 0.91 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Thirteen artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of
the 13 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and 22
or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of one ceramic sherd, 11 glass
fragments, and one reddish orange drain tile fragment. The ceramic sherd included one
undecorated whiteware sherd. The whiteware sherd exhibited a glaze and body typical of
ware potted in America circa post 1940 and was identified as a plate. The 11 glass
fragments included two amber, one aqua, and seven clear bottle glass fragments and one
orange luster-flashed tableware glass fragment. The amber, aqua, and clear bottle glass
fragments date circa post 1940. The orange-flashed tableware glass fragment dates circa
post 1930.

28
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1930 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN7
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the west of a drainage ditch.
Elevation is 48 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the west towards the drainage
ditch.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 19
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.64 feet to 0.91 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Eleven artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of
the 11 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and 11
or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of three ceramic sherds, five glass
fragments, and three machine-made brick fragments. The ceramic sherds included two
undecorated whiteware sherds and one stoneware sherd. The whiteware sherd exhibited a
glaze and body typical of ware potted in America circa post 1940 and was identified as a
plate. One whiteware sherd exhibited a buff glaze and was identified as a bowl potted in
America circa post 1930. The stoneware sherd exhibited a white Bristol-glazed exterior
and a dark brown Albany glaze on the interior. This sherd was potted in America circa
post 1900. The sherd was too small to identify the vessel shape. The five glass
fragments included one aqua and one clear bottle glass fragments, two aqua canning jar
29
fragments, and one opaque white canning jar lid liner fragment. The aqua and clear
bottle glass fragments and the aqua canning jar fragments date circa post 1930.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN8
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the west of a NC-11 South.
Elevation is 59 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the west towards the road.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 300 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 32
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.66 feet to 0.90 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Five artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of the
five artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and five
or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of four ceramic sherds and one reddish
brown handmade brick fragment. The ceramic sherds included two undecorated
creamware sherds and two undecorated pearlware sherds. The creamware sherds
exhibited a glaze and body typical of ware potted in England circa 1775-1820. The
sherds were too small to identify the vessel shapes. The pearlware sherds exhibited a
glaze and body typical of ware potted in England circa post 1779. The sherds were too
small to identify the vessel shapes.
30

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1775 with occupation continuing
into the 1820s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the portion of the site within the project area be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN10
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the west of a NC 11-South.
Elevation is 58 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the west towards the drainage
ditch.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 300 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 31
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.65 feet to 0.90 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Thirty-one artifacts were recovered from the ground surface.
Of the 31 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and
31 or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of seven ceramic sherds, 19 glass
fragments, one iron cotter pin, and three machine-made brick fragments. The ceramic
sherds included six undecorated whiteware sherds and one stoneware sherd. The
whiteware sherds exhibited a glaze and body typical of ware potted in America circa post
1930. Three of the sherds were too small to identify the vessel shapes. One sherd was
identified as a cup and two sherds were identified as a single bowl. The stoneware sherd
exhibited a dark brown Albany glaze on the interior and exterior. This sherd was potted
31
in America circa post 1900 and was identified as a bowl. The 19 glass fragments
included one amber, eight clear, one cobalt blue, and one solarized amethyst bottle glass
fragments, three aqua canning jar fragments, three opaque white canning jar lid liner
fragments, one opaque white Pond’s jar fragment, and one jadeite Fire-King tableware
fragment. The amber and clear bottle glass fragments and the aqua canning jar fragments
date circa post 1930. The solarized amethyst glass dates circa late 1880s to 1918.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of
artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D .
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN11
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the east of Reddy Branch Road.
Elevation is 58 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the west towards the road drainage
ditch.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 23
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.64 feet to 0.90 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Fifty artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of the
50 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and 50 or
100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of one ceramic sherd, 21 glass fragments,
three 4” long cut nails, one 1 ½” long wire nail, one 3” long wire nail, two indeterminate
32
iron fragments, 16 machine-made brick fragments, one charred wood fragment, one coal
fragment, and two plastic fragments. The ceramic sherd included one undecorated
whiteware sherd. The whiteware sherd exhibited a glaze and body typical of ware potted
in America circa post 1940. The sherd was too small to identify the vessel shape. The
21 glass fragments included three amber, one aqua, three clear, one olive green, and two
solarized amethyst bottle glass fragments, and 10aqua window glass fragments. The
amber, aqua, and clear bottle glass fragments date circa post 1930. The olive-green bottle
glass dates circa post 1820. The solarized amethyst glass dates circa late 1880s to 1918.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of
artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN13
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the south of a housing
development. Elevation is 59 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the south.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 23
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.62 feet to 0.91 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Thirteen artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of
the 13 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and 13
or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of three ceramic sherds, one glass
33
fragment, and three machine-made brick fragments. The ceramic sherds included two
undecorated whiteware sherds and one whiteware sherd decorated with blue and white
design on the exterior with a solid blue glaze on the interior. The two undecorated
whiteware sherds exhibited a glaze and body typical of ware potted in America circa post
1950. These sherds were too small to identify the vessel shape. The decorated
whiteware sherd was identified as a bowl manufactured in America circa post 1950. The
one glass fragment included one aqua bottle glass fragment that dates circa post 1950.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1950 with occupation continuing
into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN14
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the east of Reddy Branch Road.
Elevation is 59 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the west towards the road drainage
ditch.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 21
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.63 feet to 0.92 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Fourteen artifacts were recovered from the ground surface.
Of the 14 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and
14 or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of four ceramic sherds, 10 glass
34
fragments, and five machine-made brick fragments. The ceramic sherds included one
undecorated whiteware sherd. Three of the whiteware sherds exhibited a glaze and body
typical of ware potted in America circa post 1900. Two sherds were too small to identify
the vessel shape, and one sherd was identified as a plate. One sherd was identified with a
black transfer-print design on the interior and dates circa post 1900. The 10 glass
fragments included eight clear bottle glass fragments and one opaque white glass
fragment. The clear bottle glass fragments date circa post 1950.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1950s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of
artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN32
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the south of an entrance road .
Elevation is 59 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the south.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 22
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.63 feet to 0.92 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Thirteen artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of
the 13 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and 13
or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of four ceramic sherds, six glass
fragments, one 45-caliber brass shell casing, and two machine-made brick fragments.
35
The ceramic sherds included four undecorated whiteware sherds. The sherds exhibited a
glaze and body typical of ware potted in America circa post 1950. The sherds were too
small to identify the vessel shapes. The six glass fragments included one aqua, one bright
green and four clear bottle glass fragments. The aqua, bright green, clear bottle glass
fragments date circa post 1950.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1950 with occupation continuing
into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN44
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the south of an entrance road.
Elevation is 58 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the south.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 22
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.67 feet to 0.91 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Thirteen artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of
the 20 artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and 20
or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of four ceramic sherds, five glass
fragments, one 3” long wire nail, five machine-made brick fragments, four charred wood
fragments, and one clam shell fragment. The ceramic sherds included three undecorated
whiteware sherds. The sherds exhibited a glaze and body typical of ware potted in
36
America circa post 1930. One of the sherds was too small to identify the vessel shapes,
one was identified as a cup and one was identified as a plate. The five glass fragments
included one aqua and three solarized amethyst bottle glass fragments. The aqua bottle
glass fragments date circa post 1930. The solarized bottle glass fragments date circa post
late 1880s to 1918.

This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1960s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN47
The site is located in an active agricultural field just to the south of an entrance road .
Elevation is 58 feet AMSL and the landform drains to the south.

The site was recorded by a surface scatter and Phase I shovel testing on a 50-foot grid.
The Phase I shovel tests indicated artifacts concentrated within an area measuring
approximately 100 feet north to south by 150 feet east to west. Circa~ excavated 22
shovel tests in this area on the 50-foot grid. Of these, no shovel tests were positive. The
site borders were defined by the surface scatter and double-negative shovel tests to the
north, south, east, and west.

Figure 28 illustrates representative shovel test profiles. With only minor variation in
thickness and expression of horizons, there is typically little difference between profiles
recorded in the shovel tests excavated across the site. The strata represent differences in
color and, in some cases, textures, and are mainly the product of post-depositional color
enhancement and other effects of soil formation that is continually taking place in these
more-or-less stabilized alluvial deposits.

Stratum A is a plowed sandy loam topsoil or “A” horizon. This horizon has developed
naturally from the accumulation of organic materials, additives from farming such as
lime, manure, etc., and the activities of plants, animals, insects, bacteria, etc. in a plowed
turbulent environment. Stratum A consisted of a grayish brown (10YR 4/4) sandy loam
relic plowzone and ranged in depth from 0.67 feet to 0.91 feet thick. Plow scars were
evident in the base of some of the shovel tests. Stratum B, subsoil or C-horizon,
consisted of sterile reddish brown (10YR 5/8) clay.

The A horizon was the primary location of artifacts and contained a single,
contemporaneous deposit. Eight artifacts were recovered from the ground surface. Of
the eight artifacts recovered, none or 0% date to the Native American use of the land and
20 or 100% are historic. Historic artifacts consisted of four glass fragments, one 3” long
wire nail, and two machine-made brick fragments. The four glass fragments included
two clear and one solarized amethyst bottle glass fragments, and one aqua window glass
37
fragment. The clear bottle glass fragments date circa post 1960. The solarized bottle
glass fragments date circa post late 1880s to 1918.

This site dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation continuing into the 1960s. The
surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a
plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further
archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the
site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Architectural Resources
No architectural resources were identified within the project alignment.

Archaeological Resources
Thirty-five isolated finds were identified within the project area. By definition, an
isolated find is not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, and
Circa~ recommends that no further archaeological testing within these areas are
warranted.

The Phase I survey identified 11 archaeological sites within the project alignment.

Site PGN3
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the late-19th with occupation continuing into the
1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a relic plowzone near a road. Circa~ recommends that the site as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN5
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN6
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1930 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.
38

Site PGN7
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN8
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1775 with occupation continuing
into the 1820s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the portion of the site within the project area be given clearance for any potential
development projects.

Site PGN10
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of
artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN11
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of
artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN13
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1950 with occupation continuing
into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN14
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1950s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of
artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not
39
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it
is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN32
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1950 with occupation continuing
into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN44
This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing
into the 1960s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts
recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no
further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended
that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Site PGN47
This site dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation continuing into the 1960s. The
surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a
plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further
archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the
site be given clearance for any potential development projects.

Table 5. Summary of identified resources and recommendations
Site Type National Register
Eligibility
Recommendation
IF-PGN1 Isolated find, c. post 1950 No No further work
IF-PGN2 Isolated find, c. post 1930 No No further work
IF-PGN4 Isolated find, c. post 1950 No No further work
IF-PGN9 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN12 Isolated find, c. 1940 No No further work
IF-PGN15 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN16 Isolated find, c. 1870 No No further work
IF-PGN17 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN18 Isolated find, 1970 No No further work
IF-PGN19 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN20 Isolated find, c. 1970 No No further work
IF-PGN21 Isolated find, c. 1900 No No further work
IF-PGN22 Isolated find, c. 1880 No No further work
IF-PGN23 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN24 Isolated find, c. post 1795 No No further work
IF-PGN25 Isolated find No No further work
IF-PGN26 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN27 Isolated find, c. 1950 No No further work
40
Site Type National Register
Eligibility
Recommendation
IF-PGN28 Isolated find, c. 1960 No No further work
IF-PGN29 Isolated find, c. 1970 No No further work
IF-PGN30 Isolated find, c. 1950 No No further work
IF-PGN31 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN33 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN34 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN35 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN36 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN37 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN38 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN39 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN40 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN41 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN43 Isolated find, c. 1930 No No further work
IF-PGN44 Isolated find, c. 1940 No No further work
IF-PGN45 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work
IF-PGN46 Isolated find, Native American No No further work
PGN3 Domestic, c. post 1880 No No further work
PGN5 Domestic, c. post 1920 No No further work
PGN6 Domestic, c. post 1930 No No further work
PGN7 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work
PGN8 Domestic, c. post 1775 No No further work
PGN10 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work
PGN11 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work
PGN13 Domestic, c. post 1970 No No further work
PGN14 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work
PGN32 Domestic, c. post 1950 No No further work
PGN44 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work
PGN47 Domestic, c. post 1920 No No further work

41
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
1986 “36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties.” Regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation Governing the Section 106 Review Process.

Anonymous
1744 Map of Lord Carteret’s Grant.

1921 “Map of Currituck County,” as run in The Independent Friday, January 6, 1922; pg.
11.

Brown, Alexander Crosby
1981 A History of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal.

Chapman, Jefferson, and Andrea Brewer Shea
1988 “The Archaeobotanical Record: Early Archaic Period to Contact in the Lower
Little Tennessee River Valley.” Tennessee Anthropologist VI (1).

Coe, Joffre L.
1964 “The Formative Cultures of the Carolina Piedmont,” Transactions of the
American Philosophical Society, 54(5).

Collett, John
1770 A Compleat Map of North-Carolina From an Actual Survey.

Cram, T. J.
1860s S.E. portion of Virginia and N.E. portion of N'th Carolina.

Pitt County, North Carolina
No date Deed, wills, inventories, surveyors’ records, plat books, tax assessors’ books,
land tax records, personal property tax records.

No date County History available online at www.co.currituck.nc.us/county-history

Dent, Richard J., Jr
1995 Chesapeake Prehistory: Old Traditions, New Directions.

Department of the Interior, National Park Service
1983 Archaeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and
Guidelines. Federal Register 48:44716-44762.

Gardner, William M.
1974 “The Flint Run Paleoindian Complex: A Preliminary Report 1971 -1973 Seasons.”
Occasional Publication No. 1, Archeology Laboratory

42
1977 “Flint Run Paleoindian Complex, its Implication for Eastern North American
Prehistory.” In “Amerinds and Their Paleoenvironment in Northeastern North
America.” edited by W. S. Mewman and B. Salwen, Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences.

1981 “Paleoindian Settlement Pattern and Site Distribution in the Middle Atlantic.”
Anthropological Careers, edited by R. H. Landmine, L. A. Bennett, A. Brooks,
and P. P. Chock.

1982 “Early and Middle Woodland in the Middle Atlantic: An Overview.” In
Practicing Environmental Archaeology: Methods and Interpretations, edited by
Roger W. Moeller, American Indian Archaeological Institute Occasional Paper
No. 3.

1989 “An Examination of Cultural Change in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene
(circa 9200 to 6800 B. C.).” In “Paleoindian Research in Virginia: A Synthesis.”
edited by J. Mark Wittkofski and Theodore R. Reinhart, Special Publication No.
19 of the Archeological Society of Virginia.

Gray and Pape, Inc.
2009 A Cultural Resources Reconnaissance (Phase 1A) Survey of City Park Site A, City
Park Site B and Hickory Middle School Site for the Dismal Swamp Ecosystem
Restoration Project in Chesapeake, Virginia.

Hawks, Francis L.
1709 History of North Carolina From 1663 to 1729, Vol. II.

Hodges, Mary Ellen N., and Charles T. Hodges, editors
1994 Paspahegh Archaeology: Data Recovery Investigations of Site 44JC308 at The
Governor’s Land at Two Rivers, James City County, Virginia.

Jordan, James M. and Frederick S. Jordon.
1974 Virginia Beach A Pictorial History.

McAvoy, Joseph M., and Lynn D. McAvoy
1997 “Archaeological Investigations of Site 44SX202, Cactus Hill, Sussex County,
Virginia.” Research Report Series No. 8, Virginia Department of Historic
Resources.

McCartney, Martha.
1997 James City County Keystone of the Commonwealth.

McCary, Ben C.
1951 “A Workshop of Early Man in Dinwiddie County, Virginia.” American Antiquity
17(1).

43
1975 “The Williamson Paleoindian Site, Dinwiddie County, Virginia.” The Chesopiean
13(3-4).

Moll, H.
1730 Northern Part of the Map of the Province of North Carolina.

Mouzon, Jr., Henry
1775 An Accurate Map of North and South Carolina with their Indian Frontiers,
Shewing in a distinct manner all the Mountains, Rivers, Swamps, Marshes, Bays,
Creeks, Harbours, Sandbanks and Soundings on the Coasts; with The Roads and
Indian Paths; as well as The Boundary or Provincial Lines, The Several
Townships and other divisions of the Land In Both the Provinces,

National Park Service
1990 National Register of Historic Places Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National
Register of Historic Places Criteria for Evaluation.

Natural Resources Conservation Service
2015 Online soils data. Available online at http://soils.usda.gov/.

North Carolina Office of State Archaeology
1994 Archaeological Site Form Handbook.

Phelps, David Sutton
1983 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Selected Portions of Gates, Camden,
and Currituck Counties.

Prince, John and John Strothers
1808 Untitled map.

Rountree, Helen C.
1989 The Termination and Dispersal of the Nottoway Indians of Virginia. Virginia
Magazine of History and Biography 95:195-200.

Snowden, Barbara
1995 “The History of Currituck County,” Currituck Times.

Yarnell, Richard A.
1976 “Early Plant Husbandry in Eastern North America.” In Cultural Change and
Continuity: Essays in Honor of James Bennett Griffin, edited by Charles E.
Cleland.

APPENDIX A:
ARTIFACT INVENTORY

ARTIFACT INVENTORY

Site: 31CK348 Phase I

Recorder: C. Tyrer April 21, 2015

Provenance Quantity Description

ST 3-6 1 Native American pottery body sherd,
medium sand temper with some grit
inclusions, knotted net impressed exterior,
smoothed interior

ST 4-8 1 Native American pottery body sherd,
medium sand temper with some grit
inclusions, indeterminate exterior and
interior
2 Brick fragments, reddish brown, handmade

ST 5-7 3 Native American pottery body sherds,
medium sand temper with some grit
inclusions, indeterminate exterior and
interior

ST 5-8 1 Native American pottery rim sherd, medium
sand temper with some grit inclusions,
knotted net impressed exterior, scrapped
interior

ST 5-9 1 Native American pottery body sherd,
medium sand temper with some grit
inclusions, indeterminate Exterior and
interior

ST 5-10 2 Native American pottery body sherds,
medium sand temper with some grit
inclusions, indeterminate exterior and
interior

ST 6-8 1 Native American pottery body sherd,
medium sand temper with some grit
inclusions, indeterminate exterior and
interior

ARTIFACT INVENTORY

Site: 31CK349 Phase I

Recorder: C. Tyrer April 21, 2015

Provenance Quantity Description

0404982/4039442 1 Whiteware body sherd, c. post 1900
Surface

0404981/4039477 1 Brick fragment, reddish brown, handmade
Surface 1 Brick fragments, reddish brown, machine
made

0404953/4039457 1 Brick fragment, reddish brown, handmade
Surface

0404983/4039450 1 Brick fragment, reddish brown, handmade
Surface

0404982/4039445 1 Creamware body sherd, c. 1775-1820
Surface

0404953/4037540 1 Projectile point, siliceous slate
Surface 1 Bottle glass body fragment, clear
1 Brick fragment, reddish brown, handmade
1 Bottle glass body fragment, olive green

ARTIFACT INVENTORY

Site: 31CK350 Phase I

Recorder: C. Tyrer April 21, 2015

Provenance Quantity Description

0405070/4039267 1 Whiteware rim sherd, c. post 1900
Surface 1 China body sherd, c. post 1900
1 Stoneware body sherd, tan body with a tan
salt glaze on interior and exterior
2 Brick fragments, reddish brown, handmade

0404902/4039473 1 Whiteware body sherd, blue willow design
Surface on the interior
1 Brick fragment, reddish brown, handmade

0404875/4039452 1 Brick fragment, red, machine made
Surface

0404872/4039481 1 Whiteware body sherd
Surface 1 Brick fragment, reddish brown, handmade

0404842/4039471 1 Whiteware body sherd
Surface

044818/4039488 1 Flake, quartzite, secondary
Surface 1 Coarse earthenware slipware body sherd,
brick red body with a slip design on interior
1 Stoneware body sherd, gray body with a
gray salt glaze on interior and exterior, blue
cobalt blue design on exterior, Rhenish

0404847/4039486 1 Creamware body sherd, c 1775-1820
Surface 1 Creamware handle sherd, c. 1775-1820

APPENDIX B:
PROJECT MAP