King's Reach (18CV83)

King’s Reach (18CV83) is the site of a late 17th-century plantation in Calvert County, Maryland. The site is located on the Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum (JPPM) property near St. Leonard in Calvert County, Maryland.

Documentary evidence suggests 18CV83 may have been the homestead of Richard Smith Jr. from the late 17th century until 1711. Richard Smith, Jr. was the son of the first Attorney General of Maryland, Richard Smith, Sr. The elder Richard Smith acquired the 750 acre “St. Leonards” tract (on which the site is located) from Governor William Stone in 1663. Richard Smith Sr. is believed to have established his household at nearby site 18CV92 sometime shortly after acquiring the land. Richard Smith, Jr. may have established his own household to the north of his father’s home, and lived there until he was able to build a more substantial structure. He is thought to have built the manor house at 18CV91 in 1711, shortly before his death in 1715.

The site was first identified during the course of a Phase I archaeological survey in 1981. The April 1981 fieldwork entailed a controlled surface collection. Site 18CV83 was first identified as a brick and artifact scatter. The controlled surface collections at 18CV83 in 1981 recovered an excellent sample of artifacts dating from the late 17th century. The site was interpreted as the probable location of a post-in-ground structure, perhaps with a brick fireplace.

Following acquisition of the JPPM by the State of Maryland, King’s Reach was selected as the first site to be excavated by archaeologists in 1984. A systematic surface collection was undertaken to allow for definition of site boundaries and artifact concentrations. Subsurface investigation then began and lasted for two summers, with additional excavations in 1987. One hundred and sixteen 2 x 2 meter units were excavated in the site core, while 28 were systematically distributed in the outlying area. An extensive complex of subsurface features was exposed in the plantation core. All features were recorded, and selected ones were excavated. In addition, soil chemical samples were systematically taken from the plow zone across the site, and tests were run on phosphates, calcium, and potassium.

The excavations revealed two earthfast buildings with a connecting foreyard. The one-story main dwelling measured 30 X 20 ft., divided into a parlor and kitchen with a sleeping loft above. A wood-framed, mud-lined hood and chimney was set on a brick hearth in the kitchen. A 10 ft. wide shed extended along the rear of the structure, while a 5 X 7 ft. shed was attached to the north gable. There were eleven cellars below the wooden floor of the structure. Two cellars appear to have had specialized functions: a root cellar in front of the hearth and a dairy cooling pit in the small shed. The remaining cellars appear to represent successive generations of general storage pits. One doorway led from the kitchen to the foreyard, while a second led outside from the rear-set shed.

The second structure in the core, measuring 20 X 10 ft., was possibly a quarter for servants or slaves. A chimneyless hearth was on the west side of the building a single 8 square foot cellar served as general storage. One doorway led into the foreyard toward the main house, and a second was placed on the east gable. Two generations of ditch-set fences joined this building and the main dwelling to form the foreyard.

Mapped patterns of artifact distributions indicate that 3 areas were used to dispose of food refuse: the south yard, the abandoned cellar holes, and in the enclosed yard between the main house and quarter. A comparison of food remains recovered from the main house, compared to those recovered from the quarter suggests that occupants of the former had a better quality diet with more meat. Despite the fairly modest size and layout of the main house, it appears to have been inhabited by fairly wealthy individuals. The household apparently invested a notable portion of its wealth in portable goods, as indicated by the numerous costly artifacts recovered. Such items include highly refined pottery, fine table glass, pewter objects, decorative book clasps, etc.

The diagnostic materials recovered at King’s Reach suggest that it was occupied from about 1690 to 1715. A total of 66,371 artifacts were recovered during the investigations at 18CV83. These included architectural, kitchen, and furniture objects, personal items, tools, arms, horse furniture, and food remains. One hundred and fifty-three ceramic vessels were identified from the site. A total of 4,322 glass artifacts were found, consisting mostly of wine and case bottle fragments.

Very little information is available concerning the prehistoric component at 18CV83, however it has been described as a possible ‘base camp’. At least 1 Kirk corner-notched point, 1 Levanna point, 1 unidentified side-notched point, 5 Accokeek cord-marked sherds, 2 Rappahannock fabric-impressed sherds, 1 Townsend Corded Horizontal sherd, 1 Potomac Creek cord-impressed sherd, and 1 Potomac Creek plain sherd have been recovered.

The King’s Reach dwelling appears to have been abandoned around 1711, when Richard Smith Jr.’s family moved to a new residence on the property (18CV91). Although Smith was fairly well-to-do, he apparently lived in an impermanent earthfast dwelling at King’s Reach. The artifacts, striking in quantity and variety, suggests Smith invested his wealth in portable household goods. In 1711, as the tobacco economy was strengthening, Smith abandoned King’s Reach for a larger house representative of his status as a wealthy planter.

The King’s Reach site complex is representative of the mid-size tobacco plantations that dominated the Chesapeake region during the late 17th and early 18th centuries, a period when the tobacco economy was in prolonged depression. The assemblage from the main house, 18CV83, can be used to address issues ranging from standards of living during the tobacco economy depression to the organization of plantation homelots at the end of the 17th century. The collection can also provide evidence of material conditions for servants and slaves as the transformation to a slave economy was underway. Plow zone materials reveal the use of domestic space on the plantation.

(Edited from Archaeological Collections in Maryland)