BARC BEP Site 1 (18PR1184)

Site 1 is a multicomponent site that includes Late Archaic as well as nineteenth-century deposits. The historic component consists of a low-density predominantly nineteenth-century historic artifact scatter affiliated with a nearby, but as-yet unidentified, rural domestic occupation located outside of the project area. The prehistoric component consists of a Late Archaic resource procurement camp where lithic tool production/maintenance and food preparation were the most archaeologically visible activities. It is likely that Late Archaic populations repeatedly visited 18PR1184 as a satellite camp tethered to a larger base camp in the vicinity, possibly 18PR94, a Late Archaic base camp located approximately 1.42 miles to the southwest along Indian Creek. No archaeological features were encountered despite evidence to suggest potential hearths, pits, and other feature types.

This site was initially recorded in July of 2020 by AECOM during a Phase I survey of the 19-acre entrance road at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing Facility at Beltsville Agricultural Research Center. AECOM performed Phase I testing in July of 2020, with the excavation of shovel test pits on a 7.5-m grid to delineate the site. In August of 2020, AECOM dug 8 1x1m excavation units in two loci of higher artifact concentrations, including concentrations of fire-cracked rock.

The historic component of Site 1 represents a low-density scatter of artifacts. Given the low historic artifact counts dating for the full span of the nineteenth century, it appears that the site's historic component does not include a residential epicenter, but instead represents a marginal scatter on the periphery of an as-yet unidentified historic occupation. According to the historic map review, no nineteenth-century dwellings were illustrated in this area, with the closest known historic dwelling (300 m west) being Walnut Grange, an 1805 mansion occupied by the Hall family for much of the nineteenth century. This distance is clearly too great for Walnut Grange to reasonably be considered the origin of the site's historic artifacts. Instead, the site’s historic component is likely attributable to an unidentified, historically unmapped occupation within the immediate vicinity. Negative shovel tests east, south, and west of the site demonstrate that the center of domestic activities and the location of the dwelling itself were likely to the north.

In total, the Phase I and Phase II investigations of 18PR1184 resulted in the recovery of 519 prehistoric artifacts, including 330 debitage, 169 FCR, 13 tools, six cores/tested materials, and one indeterminate artifact. In total, 67% (n=349) of the artifacts came from plowzone or fill, while 33% percent (n=170) came from underlying strata.

Both phases of work support a likely Late Archaic affiliation of the site. The Phase I recovered one Brewerton Eared Notched projectile point, one Piscataway projectile point, and the tip of an unidentified projectile point, while the Phase II recovered a possible Brewerton Eared preform, and an untyped contracting stem projectile point. Neither phase of work recovered prehistoric ceramic sherds. Given the lack of ceramic sherds and the predominant temporal affiliation of Brewerton Eared and Piscataway projectile points, the use of 18PR1184 is almost certainly confined to the Late Archaic.

The Phase I and Phase II investigations documented FCR in two site loci, the main locus in the center of the site and a secondary locus in the northeastern corner of the site. The spatial analysis shows that the most intensive occupation of the site occurred in its center, within an area approximately 74 x 74 ft) in size. A secondary area of occupation occurred in the northwestern corner of the site, within an area less than 74 x 49 ft in size. The two site loci are quite small, with the largest measuring approximately 0.12 ac in size, and the smaller measuring approximately 0.08 ac in size, areas that would likely reflect use by a small group of people numbering no more than 10. Lithic reduction and food preparation do not appear to have been spatially segregated activities, but rather occurred alongside one another. The small size of the two site loci and the lack of spatially segregated activity areas supports the temporary, expedient nature of the camp given that more intensive occupations often segregate lithic reduction and its scatter of sharp, hazardous debris from other activity areas. If 18PR1184 was only occupied briefly/intermittently by small groups of people, organizing activities in this way may have been of less concern. Tools from the Phase I and Phase II are concentrated in the main locus in the center of the site, where 11 of the 13 tools were recovered.

(Written by Patricia Samford)