Site 5-1 (18FR731)

The 5-1 Site (18FR731) is a small cluster of late 18th to early 19th century artifacts in the Urbana area of Frederick County. The site might represent the location of a former tenant house, slave quarter, or outbuilding. The site is situated on an upland knoll overlooking a small stream to the north. The uplands are cut by small drainage heads that fall sharply into the streams, which flow towards Peter Pan Run. At the time of the site’s discovery, it was a fallow agricultural field. The bottomlands and agricultural fencelines surrounding the site area were forested with sycamore, tulip poplar, box elder, red maple, and black cherry. Soils at the site are Manor and Linganore channery and gravelly loams, in some places steeply sloped and eroded.

Examination of historic deeds, wills, and maps places the European settlement in the vicinity of 18FR731 from 1769 to 1783. According to this research, the site probably was a farm that included parts of three tracts patented during that period. Thomas Burgey (probably Burgee) patented the 139 acre tract “Slip in Easy” in 1769. John Worthington patented 2,690 acres as “Resurvey on Daniels Small Tract” in 1770, and Joseph Beall patented 1,480 acres as “Many Makes One” in 1783.

These three tracts are referenced in a 1965 deed conveying a larger 364.84 acre parcel on which the site now lies. The buyer in this 1965 deed, Stephen Lee Seligson, sold the property a year later to a realty and investment company, beginning the parcel’s phase of ownership by developers. This phase culminated in the 1996 purchase of the parcel by Monocacy Land Company, LLC.

Tracing ownership backward, Seligson bought the property from Charles P. and Letitia B. Staley, who bought it in 1951 from Nathan J. and Emma N. England. Nathan J. England obtained the property in the 1890s through his mother, Mary Ellen England. An equity court distributed her farm among her children, including portions of Slip In Easy and Makes Many One. Nathan received her farm through the equity court’s distribution and the conveyance of parts of the farm to him by his siblings’ descendants. Deed research also indicates the descendants of one of Mary Ellen England’s sisters, Rebecca Smith, sold him a farm called Centerville, which included portions of the three tracts. Centerville Farm and its location on these three tracts are referenced in the 1965 deed conveying the present day parcel to Stephen Lee Seligson.

In 1877, Mary Ellen England and her sisters received land form their mother, Eleanor Hendry that included part of The Resurvey on Daniels Small Tract. This land was conveyed to Eleanor Hendry by her own mother, Jane Burgee, in 1841. In this deed, Burgee specified that although Hendry’s husband, Charles, occupied the land, Eleanor owned it. This occupancy might be the reason Charles Hendry is listed on an 1858 map and an 1873 map as owning the property approximately located at the site of 18FR731.

Jane Burgee obtained her part of The Resurvey of Daniels Small Tract from her husband, Singleton Burgee, when he granted her his entire estate in his will, dated August 24, 1838. Singleton Burgee bought this 185.5 acre parcel in 1835 from a man referred to as Thomas Worthington of John, of Anne Arundel County. This Worthington probably was a descendant of the John Worthington who patented the entire Resurvey on Daniels Small Tract in 1770.

Regarding the other two tracts, Many Makes One and Slip In Easy, deed research does not conclusively link 18FR731 to the settlers who registered the patents. However, records indicate a link is likely. Frederick County patent records held by the Maryland State Archives show only one tract with each of those names. The patent owner for Many Makes One, Joseph Beall, probably was an ancestor of G.W. Beall, who lived a mile north of Eleanor Hendry according to the 1858 and 1873 maps, and probably inherited part of the original tract. Another owner of part of the tract, William B. Dorsey, also lived near the Hendrys. Their proximity to the Hendrys indicates the Hendry farm probably included part of Many Makes One. There are also links to Slip In Easy. The patent holder, Thomas Burgey (Burgee), was the father of Singleton Burgee, who along with his brother received his father’s land in 1832. Singleton Burgee passed his entire estate to his wife, Jane Burgee, who later passed her entire estate to his wife, Jane Burgee, who later passed her land to her daughter Eleanor Hendry. According to the 1858 map, Jane Burgee, too, lived about a mile away from the Hendrys.

The site was first identified in 1997 during the course of a Phase I survey carried out prior to the construction of a housing development and infrastructure improvements in the Urbana area. Development plans included emplacement of infrastructure and housing units; including both single family and town house units. The work was undertaken in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and pursuant to Article 83B, Sections 5-617 and 5-618 of the Annotated Code of Maryland.

The Phase I survey covered a 3 acre area and involved surface collection and shovel test pitting. Surface collection was carried out in 10 m lanes. To test subsurface deposits, the area was retested with 35 shovel test pits (STPs) at 10 m intervals excavated into the subsoil. All soils were screened through hardware cloth. A total of 14 historic artifacts were recovered. These included 2 brick fragments, 1 wrought nail, 1 pearlware sherd, 4 redware sherds, 1 Buckley earthenware sherd, 2 early white salt-glazed stoneware sherds, 1 English brown salt-glazed stoneware sherd, 1 dark green sand-tipped pontil, and 1 non-machine-made bottle glass fragment. Overall, the artifacts suggest an 18th century date for the site. It was thought that the site might represent an outbuilding, tenancy, or slave-related activity area. Based on these findings, Phase II testing was recommended.

Phase II work was carried out at 18FR731 in 2003 as part of the Villages of Urbana Planned Unit Development. The Phase II field investigations included: (1) plowing/disking and surface collection of the site area, (2) excavation of shovel tests to determine the depth of the plowzone, and (3) mechanized stripping of the plowzone in selected areas to determine the presence/absence of sub-surface features.

The freshly plowed site, which measured approximately 120 X 120 m square was measured and marked with a Cartesian grid to assign provenience coordinates to recovered artifacts. Pin flags were labeled with coordinates and placed every 10 m along the x and y axis of the grid originating from the datum in the southwest corner of the site area. This created 140 distinct 10 X 10 m blocks, each of which were collected for a 5 minute time period. This resulted in a 100% surface sampling of the site. Counts and weights of artifacts recovered from individual blocks were mapped and charted. Artifact distribution was plotted and an iso-frequency map of brick distribution was created. These maps were used to decide placement of mechanized backhoe trenches.

A total of 18 shovel test pits were excavated at staggered 30 m intervals across the site area to gauge the depth of the plowzone and A horizon deposits. Due to the shallow nature of the soil profile and the intensive agricultural activity on-site, it was believed that any features associated with the occupation of the site would have expression only below the A horizon at the subsoil interface. All of the STPs measured at least 35 cm in diameter and were excavated to a minimum depth of 40 cm, or 10 cm into sterile subsoil where applicable. All soils were screened through hardware mesh. Shovel test were excavated in natural stratigraphic levels. The information concerning the provenience of the shovel test, the stratigraphic profile, and the quantity and type of artifacts recovered was recorded on standardized forms. Shovel test locations were recorded on project maps.

A total of 4 backhoe trenches (292 linear meters) were excavated using the STP data to guide the depth of excavations. The backhoe was equipped with a 60 cm wide flat bladed bucket, and was operated by an experienced operator. Excavations were continually monitored by professional archeologists. A-horizon soils were removed mechanically down to the interface of subsoil. At that depth, the base of the trench was cleaned by hand to look for features. Backhoe piles were examined for the presence of artifacts. All trench excavations were recorded on standardized forms and segments of the profile of the walls of the trench were documented in drawings and photographs.

A total of 197 artifacts (4 artifacts were discarded in the field) were recovered from Site 18FR731. These were primarily brick fragments. A small cluster of late 18th century to early 19th century artifacts was located in the northwest corner of the site, on a slope down to the tributary of Peter Pan Run. No evidence for subsurface features or additional artifact deposits associated with this early occupation was found on the site. The single feature identified was located in an area that contained more modern artifacts. It consisted of a square, very shallow soil stain (approximately 65 X 65 cm) which contained no artifacts. The square shape suggests some sort of construction or architectural feature, but the lack of artifacts helped to obscure the feature’s function. Additional testing in the area of this feature failed to reveal additional features or associated deposits.

The Phase II assemblage consisted of 159 brick fragments, 25 ceramic sherds, and 13 miscellaneous objects. Among the ceramic assemblage were 1 pearlware sherd, 3 ironstone sherds, 2 fragments of white salt-glazed stoneware, and 1 sherd of German Frechen stoneware.

The Phase II archeological evaluation demonstrated that, although there is a late 18th century to early 19th century presence on Site 18FR731, the site lacks the integrity necessary to address research issues related to this occupation. The shovel testing and backhoe trenching conducted at the site indicated that the century or more of farming in this location has removed any evidence of subsurface features that may have been present. This indicates that 18FR731 no longer has the archeological integrity necessary to provide the temporal and spatial context for site interpretation.

(Edited from the Maryland Historical Trust Synthesis Project)