The Oliver’s Crossing Site (18CH850)

The Oliver’s Crossing Site (18CH850) is a mid-to late 18th- through late 19th-century tenant house atop a narrow ridge overlooking Gilbert Lake near Grosstown in Charles County, Maryland. The area of the site has been disturbed by 20th-century logging.

Background research indicates the site area was once part of one of two properties likely owned by Theophilus Dent in the mid-19th century. Dent is believed to have lived on a reasonably large plantation that he had received from his father, Gideon Dent. The small size of the Oliver's Crossing Site and its somewhat remote location from the main thoroughfare makes it unlikely that this property reflects the site of that plantation. It may instead represent one of the smaller land parcels that Dent purchased during 19th-century, known as "Church Over/Turner's Forest" and "Turner's Addition", which Dent is believed to have incorporated into his larger plantation. Dent divested himself of the properties during the mid-1860s and this would account for its subsequent likely abandonment in the mid-late 19th century.

Phase II archaeological testing of the site was conducted in 2015 by Applied Archaeology and History Associates, Inc. (AAHA). They targeted areas that yielded the highest concentration of artifacts during their earlier Phase I shovel testing. An additional 23 STPs were excavated at 2.5-meter intervals within the core area of the site during the Phase II testing. Three test units were also excavated. Phase III work was done by AAHA in 2017, with eighteen 1x1-meter excavation units within the core of the site, documenting limited evidence of intact features associated with a structure. Three post holes (Features 1, 2 and 8) represented three different size posts. In addition to the post holes, two bog iron features were recorded within the site. Feature 6 was a square cluster of flat, articulated bog iron fragments, and Feature 10, a mortared bog iron surface. Features 5 and 7, both linear, shallow stains may represent disturbance associated with bioturbation. Alternatively, Feature 7 may represent a slot fence.

The isolated location of the site on a narrow knoll overlooking two drainages, and set some distance from Oliver’s Shop Road, is not in character with late 18th and 19th-century plantation dwellings in the area. The restricted landform and distance from traveled routes suggests this site served as a tenancy for farmers who leased farmland from the landowner. The few post features and bog iron hearth suggest that a simple post-in-ground structure likely stood on the site. The presence of three different size post holes and a possible bog iron hearth reflect a structure on the property. Brick fragments recovered in greater quantity around the bog iron feature suggest that a brick chimney may have been constructed as part of the hearth. While the dimensions of a structure cannot be determined from the exposed features, the absence of a foundation suggests this structure may have consisted of a simple post in ground dwelling. The recovery of larger quantities of wrought and cut nails reflect an 18th to mid-19th-century period of construction activities.

Unfortunately, 20th-century logging activities have effectively mixed the different period artifacts together prohibiting the definition of any particular trends regarding when buildings were constructed or what particular materials may have been used in a building. The archaeological data points out the lack of other basic necessities within the site as well, such as a well and privy, suggesting the residents utilized an off-site source for potable water and bathrooms.

Overall, the absence of information detailing who lived on the site and who owned the property on which the site was located severely restricted interpreting the economic, social and ethical background of the individual(s) who occupied the site. The small number of mammal bones and larger count of oyster shell suggests that the occupants had limited access to meat and may have relied more heavily on local shellfish, evidence that may suggest a low-income status. The diversity of decorated ceramics suggests the site’s residents likely had access to commercially available ceramics through local merchants and could have purchased individual pieces to create an orderly “matched” set of tableware, within a limited income.

Even before the historic occupation of the site, the setting was utilized by Native Americans. A small collection of quartz and quartzite tools and debitage, both locally available in gravel deposits, were recovered in the displaced topsoil and A-horizon. Based on the absence of early stage reduction debitage, the presence of later stage reduction flakes, and the two biface fragments, these few lithic artifacts are attributed to a short-term episode of tool manufacture and maintenance activity within the upland landform. Unfortunately, the lack of diagnostic artifacts prohibits assigning a time period when this activity occurred within the site.

(Summary was prepared by Patricia Samford from the original site form)