This Week In Pennsylvania Archaeology

By George - It’s a Coin! The Impact of King George on Archaeology

2020-11-24T10:01:00.005-05:00

Archaeologists use many tools in determining the age or date for an archaeological feature (ground disturbance such as wells, privies, storage pits etc.) during the investigation of an archaeological site. Dating methods include C-14 dates, manufacturing marks on artifacts, soil stratigraphy and typologies developed by archaeologists from assembled data and artifact analysis. For American Colonial sites, what better resource for determining the date of a feature than a coin; unless of course they are one of the many counterfeit coins either imported or produced in the colonies.

The early colonists arriving in North America continued to use the British currency rates of pound, shilling and pence. A shortage of small coinage in England in the 17^th century saw the beginning of the use of copper coins with tinplating to replace the more costly silver coins. Copper coins without the tin- plating were soon being produced by English tradesmen without license from Parliament. They produced coinage with their own names and markings, prompting the adoption of official copper coinage in halfpennies and farthings. King Charles II established monetary increments for coinage and the practice of portraying the monarchy on the coins, the first copper coin was issued in 1672. The reverse side was reserved for Britannia, the symbol of British strength dating to the Roman conquest in 43 AD and the Latin name for Britain.

King George I coin, Fort Hunter (36Da159) - (From the collections of the State Museum of Pennsylvania)

The 18^th century saw the reign of George -I, II and III. King George I ruled England from 1714-1727 following the death of his mother Princess Anne. His son, George II reigned from 1727-1760; he died before the end of the Seven Years’ War or the French and Indian War as it was known in the Americas. Following the death of his grandfather, George III ruled from 1760 to 1820, a period which included the end of the Seven Years’ War, the American Revolution and the War of 1812. Official British coinage issued during this period all bore portraits of each of these men.


	George II, 1729-1739 (Young face), Fort Hunter (36Da159) - (From the collections of the State Museum of Pennsylvania)

Small copper currency was in high demand in the colonies and a severe shortage of coins had led to the issuing of paper notes by individual colonies in the 18^th century. This paper money was printed to finance loans and enabled commerce without a reliance on British coins but was eventually banned by Parliament. The overvaluation of British coins and the supply shortage led to a surge in the production of counterfeit coins in England. Counterfeiters would melt the coppers and mix in other metals such as lead, tin and zinc to produce the same size coin but at a lower cost, thus making a profit. Cast counterfeit coins were so prolific in England that by 1753 it was estimated that about half the circulating copper was counterfeit. The large numbers of regal English coppers, sent legally to the colonies, were quickly followed by the counterfeit ones. Commerce was flooded with these counterfeit issues which were accepted by a generally uncritical public whose only concern was that they receive full value for their copper coinage. (Coinage of the American Confederation Period, Mossman, Philip L. Coinage of the Americas Conference at the American Numismatic Society, New York, 1995).

Philadelphia, August 23d, 1757, Minutes of the Provincial Council

The Pennsylvania Gazette of November 1753 issued a warning regarding the influx of counterfeit English Halfpence “great quantities of which we understand are lately imported”. The copper coins of King George II were last issued in 1754, no copper coins were issued by the Royal Mint until 1770 and were George III coins at that time. This long period without new coinage meant that this earlier coinage, if discovered at an archaeological site should be well worn from heavy use. Cleaning and conservation of coins recovered at Fort Hunter during our investigations is necessary to conduct further research as to their date of issue and potential identification as counterfeit currency. Counterfeiters were producing coins with the portraits of George facing the opposite direction, missing dates, wrong dates and of varying weights. Anti-counterfeiting laws were enacted but the abundance of counterfeit monies in circulation and being imported made it difficult to control. This continued until the American Revolution when the shortage of copper led to the melting of counterfeit coins and a devaluation of British currency.


	Counterfeit George II, 1757 Fort Morris (36Cu202) - (From the collections of the State Museum of Pennsylvania)

As indicated above, identifying these counterfeit coins could be difficult due to the “crafty” workmanship. Despite efforts to control these counterfeits, they remained in circulation for extended periods and if dates were included, they often were worn and difficult to read. Archaeologists are dealing with coins that have been exposed to acids in the soil and other factors that impact preservation, often defying identification. In the case of the George coins research of issue dates, weight and size is crucial to identifying the real coins vs. the counterfeits. The British Museum has assembled much of this data and, with the aid of digitization of collections, we are able to conduct comparative research. The following compiled dates reflects the range of years that the Royal Mint issued coinage for the three George’s.

Halfpenny Coins

George I; issue dates

1717-1718 type 1 1719-1724 type 2

George II

1729-1739 (young face) 1740-1754 (old face)

George III

1770-1775

Coinage from Camp Security (36Yo46) - (From the collections of the State Museum of Pennsylvania)

The recovery of King George coins on our archeological sites include Native American village sites such as Conestoga Town (36La52) 1690-1763 , French & Indian War sites to include Fort Morris (36Cu202) and Fort Hunter (36Da159), Ephrata Cloister (36La981) a celibate community begun in 1732 and Camp Security (36Yo46) a Revolutionary War Prison Camp. These coins have all contributed to our understanding of the sites on which they were recovered and yes, even those counterfeit coins contribute to the archaeological record and reveal another facet of our past.

We hope you’ve enjoyed learning about these coins and invite you to visit some of our previous blogs which share images and information of these and other coins.

References

Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania (Colony) Provincial council. Minutes. United States: J. Severns, 1851.

Noel Hume, Ivor. A guide to artifacts of colonial America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated, 2001.

https://coins.nd.edu/; British Coinage Circulating in the Colonies

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Fort Hunter in Quarantine

2020-06-09T17:43:00.002-04:00

In these difficult and strange times, the State Museum of Pennsylvania’s archaeologists have been continuing to do our best to find ways to remain productive from home in order to continue to preserve and share Pennsylvania’s archaeology. One of the important tasks we do each year is to process the artifacts and data collected from our annual Fort Hunter (36Da159) excavations. We have been investigating this multi-component site located just north of Harrisburg in Dauphin County for thirteen years in September and early October as part of our Archaeology Month activities. Our main research interests have been life on the “frontier” during the mid-1700s and especially the French and Indian War period supply fort at this location. With the help of our loyal volunteers, we have been working on this task since we returned in the office after our work in the field back in October.

Fieldwork for the 2019 season was completed nearly eight months ago and the final processing of the artifacts for curation in the State Museum of Pennsylvania’s archaeology lab was completed just before the start of our Covid-19 quarantine. We recovered 6,688 artifacts at Fort Hunter this year with 218 dating from the 18^th century. Features 172, 173 and 192 from the N60W45 unit produced a high percentage of the 18^th century artifacts. It is these features that our previous blog identifies as possible remains from the French and Indian War period fort or an even earlier structure (check out: http://twipa.blogspot.com/2019/11/have-we-found-fort-at-fort-hunter.html). These features reflect a hole that was dug into the ground during the 1700s that may represent part of the fortifications or a cellar from a mid-18^th century building. Many of the interesting and possibly fort related artifacts found within these features include several pieces of scratch blue and tin-glazed ceramic fragments, glass emerald cuff-links, lead shot, and glass trade beads.

Artifacts recovered from Feature 173, including a crucible fragment (top left), scratch blue white salt-glazed stoneware, glass cuff buttons, large tin-glazed base fragment, brass buckle fragment (bottom left), lead shot, white trade beads and a flint strike-a-lite.

With the artifacts processed, the statistical artifact information collected and the data collected in the field, different kinds of maps are created to help us understand the overall site and how different excavation areas compare to one another. Knowing the relationship of artifacts and features on the site provides the foundation that archaeologists use to develop explanations for how past humans lived on and used the landscape. In order for archaeologists to do this, we must map the location of all artifact and features both horizontally and vertically. Recording the location of where artifacts, features and structures are located is so important because once removed from the ground there is no way for us to put artifacts and features back in their exact place again.

Artifacts in situ in the field: lead shot (left) and white glass trade beads (right).

In order to preserve this locational information, sites such as Fort Hunter, are excavated based on a grid set from a datum (a known fixed point). This allows archaeologists to go back to a site and re-establish the grid, whether it is from year to year or fifty years from now. With good documentation and a re-established grid, archaeologists can determine what areas had been previously excavated at any archaeological site. The grid also provides the horizontal locational information of artifacts and features that have been removed from that area. At Fort Hunter, our grid is in 5 by 5 foot squares each of which are referred to as a unit. We identify our units using the northing and easting (for example N90E10) of the most southwest corner of a square. This designation allows us to easily reference that unit and track all of the data associated with that area.

Map used to show units that we have opened over the years.

Creating and updating the various maps we use each year is very important in providing us a more complete understanding of what is happening in our excavations. We create maps that show the outlines of each of the features, which illustrates to us where different features and activities are located in relation to one another. We also create artifact distribution maps, which visually display how many artifacts of a certain type were recovered from each unit. With maps like these we are not only creating additional records of artifact and feature locations, but we are also providing ourselves a graphic indication of what was happening on the landscape at different periods of time. These maps also help guide our decisions on what units are providing significant information for helping us find the Fort Hunter fortifications and therefore aid us in deciding where to excavate. Finally, maps also provide a great illustration for the public on how we interpret an archaeological site.

Feature map identifying the locations of the features uncovered within each unit.


		Prehistoric artifact distribution map.

One of the most useful maps we make each year is the 18th century artifact distribution map. This map illustrates where we uncovered higher amounts of 18th century artifacts, which could indicate the likelihood of French and Indian War period structures or activities. Since the beginning of quarantine, I have worked on creating and updating all of these maps and we are especially excited to see the high concentrations of 18^th century material coming from unit N60W45 and the adjacent units. Though we remain home for everyone’s safety, we hope we can expand our excavations in this area at Fort Hunter this fall in order to learn more about the activities present in these features and units.

18th century artifact distribution map.

We hope you have enjoyed learning about how we use archaeological data to create various types of maps and how we use those maps to better understand an archaeological site and past cultural behavior. Archaeology is a destructive science, which requires documentation of all of the excavation methods and processes that occurred in the investigation. These maps are an essential part of the documentation of the site analysis and insures the preservation of the archaeological record for any given site.

We hope you are all remaining safe and healthy as we continue to telework and remain quarantined. Our various projects are focused on preserving Pennsylvania’s past for its future. We are continuing to respond to your questions and to answer them via email. Thank you for continuing to follow our activities through our blog and we hope to see you all in the future.

For additional information on our 2019 excavations check out:

Sebestyen, Kimberly M. and Kurt W. Carr

2020 2019 Excavations at the Fort Hunter Site (36Da159): Have we Finally Found the Fort? Pennsylvania Archaeologist 90(1):53-62.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Have We Found the Fort at Fort Hunter?

2019-11-08T14:25:00.003-05:00

Another season of excavation at Fort Hunter is finished, but this turned out to be quite an exciting year! Thousands of 18th century artifacts have been found over the last decade of work at the site, but this year brought the first evidence of a possible structural feature relating to the fort or even to a period associated with the first European inhabitants of this area.

Excavation was renewed in three test units opened in 2018 near the porch at the northwest corner of the mansion. Many 18th century artifacts were recovered from this area last year and we found an unusual, thick layer of charcoal that we called Feature 172. (A feature is evidence of a human activity that is left in the ground, such as a garbage pit or fire hearth.) A second feature, Feature 173, was a dark stain that had been found in Unit N60 W45 in 2018. This feature also produced primarily 18th century artifacts and was thought to have been completely excavated in 2018. At the beginning of the 2019 season, the goal was to complete excavation of the remaining prehistoric soils (called the B-horizon) in these units and to move on to another part of the site in a continued search for the fort.

Overhead view of excavations near the porch at the northwest corner of the mansion house (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

2019 Opening photo, showing the B-horizon (orange-tan), sewer pipe trench, and top of Feature 173 (dark stain to left and right of the exposed sewer pipe) (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

The archaeologists began removing the B-horizon in levels; however, it soon became obvious that these levels, which should only have produced prehistoric Indian artifacts, were instead producing a mixture of prehistoric and historic artifacts. A reassessment of the situation led to the conclusion that this soil had been disturbed, and it was renamed Feature 192. Although it was thought that Feature 173 had been completely excavated last year from along the east wall, removal of the Feature 192 soils revealed that Feature 173 was still visible and even appeared to be growing larger and spreading west along the floor of the unit. Large rocks, bone fragments, chunks of charcoal, and historic ceramics began to emerge.

Top of Feature 173 exposed in N60 W45. Note bone fragments and ceramics (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

Many interesting historic artifacts were uncovered in Feature 173, including mid-18th century ceramics, musket balls, cut animal bones, a horseshoe, copper fragments, straight pins, and a clasp knife. Tiny fish bones, flakes of spalled-off ceramic glaze, and a number of white seed beads (of the type that would have been traded with the Indians) were recovered straight off the feature floor. These objects were so small they would have fallen through the screening material and been lost before anyone knew they were there. Two dozen beads were eventually recovered from the feature.

Three white seed beads on the floor of Feature 173 (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

In another part of the feature, a swipe of the trowel cut across the top of what at first appeared to be a small mound of pebbles lying in the dirt. Closer inspection revealed that the pebbles were actually a pile of small caliber lead shot! From their position lying in a pile, it is likely they were once enclosed by a leather bag or shot pouch, which would have rotted away and left the lead contents intact.

Pile of lead shot lying in the floor of the feature (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

At this point, the time allotted for our field work was up. However, due to the excitement over our finds we decided to stick it out another week and attempt to complete the excavation of Feature 173 in Unit N60 W45. By this time, the feature had resolved itself into a square shape with a possible corner in the northeast corner of the unit. Three additional layers of rock and soil were removed from the unit and Feature 173 was beginning to appear in Unit N60 W50, just to the west of N60 W45. Very large pieces of charcoal were found throughout the feature, some of which were collected as samples, and two large pieces of furnace slag from metalsmithing were recovered.

Unit N60 W45 showing Feature 173 possible structure corner (darker soil in floor) (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

The most interesting finds of the season were made that last week (at least according to this archaeologist!). A large fragment of a Delft bowl base was recovered from the second level of the feature, as well as a strike-a-lite, more trade beads, a thimble with pins, and a beautiful pair of pewter and green glass cuff buttons. I must admit that my mind screamed "Emeralds!" when I first caught sight of them. But just as amazing is that they are still connected by a tiny brass loop after 250 years in the ground.

Pewter and green glass cuff buttons (Photo: The State Museum of Pennsylvania)

Unfortunately, due to time restraints we had to pack up and leave the site before getting to the bottom of Feature 173. It is still unclear exactly what this feature represents since we did not get it completely finished. One theory is that it may be part of the defensive ditch that was described as encircling the blockhouse. Another more likely possibility is that it is a cellar of a structure, either related to the fort or to an earlier period.

The presence of furnace slag, metal objects, large amounts of charcoal, crucible fragments, and a whetstone also point toward the possibility of a blacksmithing operation somewhere in the area. Research indicates the presence of both a blacksmith and gunsmith on the property in the 18th century, but the location of the operation is not known. The small amount of burnt soil and slag and metal do not seem to indicate this is the primary location of a smithy, but who knows what next year will bring.

It's going to be very difficult to wait an entire 11 months to get back out to the site. Next year, we hope to uncover the entirety of Feature 173 in the surrounding units to determine its size and shape. Hopefully even more amazing finds will be made, and we can get an answer to the function and age of this feature. Meanwhile, there is still work to complete in the lab, including having the charcoal samples and slag analyzed and possibly x-raying of rusty iron items. This analysis may be able to give us more information on the types of wood being burnt and chemical composition of the slag, as well as letting us see the objects beneath the rust to aide in accurately identifying these artifacts.

For additional information on blacksmithing and early trade at Fort Hunter, please see our blog from May 11, 2018 ("To Be Ore Not To Be: Crucibles are the Answer") or November 20, 2015 ("New Perspectives on an Old Subject: Trade and Native American Relations at Fort Hunter").

The end of October and the end of our field season at Fort Hunter also marks the end of Archaeology Month in Pennsylvania. We hope you had an opportunity to visit an archaeology program in your community to learn about our rich heritage in Pennsylvania. If you didn't have an opportunity to do so, there is still time! The annual Workshops in Archaeology Program is Saturday at The State Museum of Pennsylvania. Registration is available at the door and our presenters are excited to share their knowledge and research of the Monongahela culture. This series of lectures provides an overview of the Monongahela culture, highlighting changes that occurred over time and discussion of their disappearance from the archaeological record. We hope you can join us November 9th, 2019 - registration desk opens at 8:30 am.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Falling Through History

2019-10-11T16:41:00.001-04:00

This week’s guest blog is provided by Mifflin County High School student, Granuaile Moyer and offers a teen’s perspective of our investigation. Granuaile spent a week with us this year at Fort Hunter and is excited to share her experiences with others.

Granualie Moyer

Recently I was able to participate in an archaeological excavation with The State Museum of Pennsylvania. I’m fortunate that my mother is an archaeologist and curator at the museum. They have been conducting archaeological excavations at Fort Hunter since 2006. They are only able to be in the field for one month, the other eleven months they are busy being curators taking care of other people’s artifacts from excavations. For one month of the year though, they are busy searching for structural evidence of the French and Indian War fort that gives Fort Hunter its name.

Map from 1763 indicating Fort Hunter

The land was first settled in 1725 by Benjamin Chambers, who later founded Chambersburg. During the French and Indian War (1755-1763), the British built a small supply fort at the rivers bend. After the war was over, the fort was left to rot. Captain Archibald McAllister, who fought with general George Washington in the Revolutionary war, settled on the land. He built a small farmhouse in 1787, which is believed to have been built on the foundations of the fort blockhouse. He later expanded the farm, he built a sawmill, country store, blacksmith shop, artisan’s shops, school, distillery, and tavern.

1860s McAllister

The next owner, Daniel Boas, bought the house in 1870, then left it to his daughter and son-in-law, also known as the Reily’s. The Reily’s built the last and biggest addition to the house in the late 1800s. The Reily’s ran a successful dairy farm for 50 years. Since they never had any children, they had many pets, such as dogs and cats. They also had some extravagant pets, like peacocks, a parrot, and a Macaque monkey.

Daniel Boas

They later left the farm to their nieces and nephews, one of which being Margaret Meigs. Margaret recognized the historical value of the land and set out to make it a museum. In 1956, she along with her family set up the Fort Hunter Foundation. With their hard work and dedication, they were able to restore the land and create an educational program. Now the land is owned by Dauphin County, and you are able to tour the estate to learn more about its great history, or to just simply enjoy the scenery.

Fort Hunter

The Section of Archaeology for the State Museum of Pennsylvania has been working at Fort Hunter Park since 2006. They are looking for the remains of the French and Indian War fort, Fort Hunter. They have not found any structural evidence of the fort yet, however they have found other evidence such as a cannon ball, musket balls and gun parts among other things. They have also found the old farm well, which was connected to the milk house by a small pipe. The

pipe allowed cold water to run through the walls of the milk house keeping their food cool. They also found a unique octagonal smokehouse that was built by Mr. McAllister. There was a pet cemetery left from the burials of the Reily’s many beloved pets. They have also found numerous prehistoric artifacts, such as projectile points, prehistoric pottery (cordmarked or plain in decoration), and a prehistoric grooved stone axe dating back 4,000 years. These artifacts give evidence of at least 9,000 years of human occupation of the landscape we now call Fort Hunter.

Even as a small child I was intrigued by archaeology, my mother saw my interest and allowed me to come with her to watch her work. I was six years old the first time I visited an excavation, and I’ve been fortunate enough to be able to visit and participate every year since then. In the beginning I just observed how precisely they would take the layers of soil down. It was not until I was nine years old that I was able to get into a unit. This was the year that they discovered the pet cemetery behind the milk house. I was in the unit with my mother helping her write the bags, take measurements and draw the unit.

Archaeological excavation is a destructive science, the soils can never be put back the way you found them, so it is very important to know where artifacts are discovered. A grid is laid out over the site so north south coordinates are assigned to every unit and measurements are taken both horizontally and vertically to know where each artifact is recovered from.

Assisting with measurements

In the following years I learned how to screen the dirt, and how carefully you have to do it or else artifacts might fall through the screen. I also learned how to use a trowel and how to carefully take down a soil level. The first time I was able to get in a unit and dig I was fourteen. While I was digging I found a prehistoric grooved axe, in situ, which means “in its original placement” and that is extremely rare. This year I was able to screen all the dirt and I found many artifacts, like flake chipping debris, pottery and glass, among other things.

Screening

I am so thankful that I had the opportunity to develop these skills at such a young age, and I hope that I am able to further my skills and knowledge in this field.

News interview

This is Archaeology Month in Pennsylvania and a great opportunity to seek out programs in your community that explore the cultural heritage of your region. The archaeology at Fort Hunter is an opportunity for us to engage with the public and provides an outlet for students to learn about the archaeological process. Excavations have ended for 2019 but with the discovery of many 18^th century artifacts this year, we have already begun preparing for next year. Stay tuned this winter as we research the many artifacts recovered this year and share some of our discoveries on our blog.

We also invite you to attend our annual Workshops in Archaeology program on November 9^th, 2019. This day long venue is a continuum in our exploration of tribes who inhabited Pennsylvania from pre-historic through the 18^th century. Building on our program last year that explored the Susquehannock Indians, this years’ theme of Monongahela Indians promises to be as informative and interesting as last year. Discussion of maize agriculture, disease and conflict amongst tribes and European colonists are just two of the subjects scheduled for discussion. Registration is available on-line or by check through the Pennsylvania Heritage Foundation.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

The First Three Weeks of the 2019 Field Season at Fort Hunter

2019-09-27T15:01:00.000-04:00

As is our tradition since 2006, The State Museum of Pennsylvania is conducting archaeology at the Fort Hunter archaeological site five miles north of the state Capitol. The focus of our research is the French and Indian War occupation (F&I - 1756-1763 aka the Seven Years War; the first global conflict as the French and English struggled for control of colonies on several continents). Beginning with the Frontier Forts and Trails initiative under the Works Projects Administration (WPA) in the 1930’s, the Museum has a long history of French and Indian War investigations including forts Augusta, LeBoeuf, Presque Isle and Loudoun.

Initially, we were interested in the soldier’s life on the frontier. However, the site turned out to be multicomponent with significant prehistoric components dating back at least 9000 years. In addition, post French and Indian War occupations representing the growth of a plantation dating between 1787 and 1860 followed by a Victorian mansion complex.

Fort Hunter was built in the fall or winter of 1756 in response to Indian raids in the region. After Braddock’s defeat near present day Pittsburgh, the British decided to establish a defensive line of forts in the Susquehanna valley with the main fort being Fort Augusta, sixty miles to the north, at present day Sunbury. Fort Hunter served as a supply fort for Fort Augusta. One of our problems since starting this investigation is the lack of historic documentation. There are general maps of its location placing it on the south side of Fishing Creek and descriptions of the fort having a commanding view of the Susquehanna river, but no details on the size or configuration of Fort Hunter. There are several references to a block house; an unfinished fort; the need to replace the stockade; the need to deepen the defensive ditch around the stockade; officer’s quarters and a hospital, but nothing on size or orientation. Based on folklore, Fort Hunter mansion was built over the block house, so in 2006 we excavated trenches around the Mansion with the goal of intercepting the surrounding stockade or the defensive ditch.

Surprisingly, those early investigations in the back yard of the Mansion encountered a high density of mid-18th century pottery (dishes), gun flints and musket balls along with a bake oven in the style typically used by the British army. We have been expanding our excavations in the back yard ever since. We also conducted extensive trenching in the front yard but, unfortunately, we have not found the stockade or defensive ditch. On the positive side, we have found a layer of soil (identified as a buried A horizon) that represents the ground surface at the time of the French and Indian War and we have continued tracing this across the site.

This year’s excavations at Fort Hunter has continued our work at the north end of the mansion. Our excavations immediately adjacent to the east side of the mansion in 2017 produced 18th century artifacts and features but the results were confusing and inconclusive. We have continued around the house opening units to the north in 2018. The buried A horizon that we have been following has become more distinct and thicker, but in 2018, a clear picture did not emerge.

A view of this year’s excavations at the north end of the mansion.

Our first few days of the 2019 season involved removing the back fill from last year’s units. We shoveled out seven 5’X 5’ units, about 6 tons of dirt, in two days of sweltering heat. We continued to follow the buried A adjacent to the north wall foundation of the mansion. This
contains prehistoric artifacts, and 18th and 19th century artifacts. However, we have found a thickened part of the buried A that only contains mid-18th century artifacts, possibly from the French and Indian War occupation.

Artifacts from the disturbed B horizon.

Below this, what first appeared to be the undisturbed tan B horizon now seems to be disturbed based on the presence of scratch blue, delft and porcelain ceramics, iron objects, glass seed beads, brass straight pins, a musket ball and dietary bone. The unit is not finished, but these artifacts were found at a depth of over two feet into the disturbed B horizon along with a large number of flakes and projectile points never found at high frequencies at this depth. In plan view, only one side of this feature has been identified and the difference between the disturbed and undisturbed B is very clear. Our interpretation is that this soil was excavated during the mid-18th century and replaced during the same period but with other soil from the B horizon. This may represent the defensive ditch surrounding the fort or some other structure from the fort period. We were beginning to suspect that the fort never really had a stockade or defensive ditch, but this feature may be our first indication of a fortification.

A view of the thickened buried A horizon in the background and the normal thickness of the buried A in the foreground.

This season we also investigated an area across Front Street about 400 feet from the mansion. Historic references note additional structures such as officer’s quarters, a hospital and enlisted men’s quarters and we have always wondered where they are. A drone survey using infrared photography identified lineal anomalies across the road, so we decided to investigate them. We began with a 4” bucket auger but were refused by rock within a foot of the surface. We opened four units and encountered approximately three feet of cobbles and pebbles that we thought might be fill. Just to be sure, we utilized a backhoe and excavated down six feet exposing the same profile. In conclusion, we are not sure what caused the anomalies but without exposing a much larger area, we don’t think they are cultural.

Backhoe excavations east of Front street.

A second goal of the Fort Hunter project is to engage the pubic in the importance of archaeology to our understanding of both the historic and prehistoric past and its contribution to planning for the future. Over the past thirteen years we have averaged between 3000 and 6000 visitors per year. Local high school students have volunteered and college students from Franklin and Marshall, Dickinson, Shippensburg, Harrisburg Area Community College and this year Wilson College have been able to introduce their students to basic archaeological field methods. As part of our public outreach program, a new exhibit opened in early September on the second floor of The State Museum of Pennsylvania, in the Anthropology and Archaeology gallery which features our investigation of Fort Hunter and its rich cultural heritage.

The 2019 field season is coming to a close on October 4th and the work of processing and cataloging the many artifacts recovered will begin. This process allows us to further analyze the artifacts and soil layers in which they were recovered. This important analysis is valuable in documenting the activities of the former occupants of the site. Finally, none of our work could have been accomplished without the support of Fort Hunter Mansion and Park and we sincerely appreciate their cooperation.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Upcoming Events Featuring Pennsylvania Archaeology

2019-08-30T13:47:00.000-04:00

Autumn is around the corner and the Section of Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania is gearing up for another busy season. This post includes a listing of upcoming events featuring Pennsylvania archaeology.

Kipona, August 31-September 2, 2019

This three-day festival, celebrating the Susquehanna River, takes place along the banks of the river and on City Island in Harrisburg. Pennsylvania’s archaeology will be featured in a booth staffed by professional archaeologists and volunteers from The State Museum of Pennsylvania. Here, visitors will be able to see artifacts dating back thousands of years, take a “ride” in our dugout canoe, hold replica tools used to make the dugout canoe, learn about Pennsylvania’s past and find information on upcoming archaeology events in Harrisburg.

Sitting in the dugout canoe has become an annual tradition for many kids and families (image: PHMC)

The Archaeology booth and dugout canoe will be located near the Pow Wow on City Island, along the back side of the baseball stadium.

This map shows the location of The State Museum’s Archaeology booth at the 2019 Kipona Festival.

Archaeology at Fort Hunter, September 9-October 4, 2019

Since 2006, The State Museum of Pennsylvania’s Section of Archaeology has conducted excavations at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park. The primary goal of the excavation is to look for evidence of the French and Indian War era fort for which the park is named. The fort that stood at this location dates to the 1750s.

In addition to conducting excavations, Pennsylvania archaeology brochures, posters and information about the museum are also made available to visitors (image: PHMC)

Throughout the years, excavations have revealed a rich and varied past at Fort Hunter. Artifacts collected during excavations at Fort Hunter have included items dating to the prehistoric period and the 18^th, 19^th and 20^th centuries. These relics of the past in combination with thorough research have help to clarify the many transformations that have taken place at the site of the current mansion and the surrounding grounds.

Artifacts recovered from Fort Hunter pictured here include prehistoric points, gun side plate, Minié ball, button, smoking pipe and dog licenses. (image: PHMC)

Weather permitting, excavations will be open to visitors from 9:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Monday thru Friday and on Sunday, September 15 for Fort Hunter Day.

2019 Annual Workshops in Archaeology, November 9, 2019

The Archaeology Section of the State Museum of Pennsylvania in Harrisburg invites you to attend our annual Workshops in Archaeology program on Saturday, November 9, 2019.

Artifacts and reproduction points will accompany a demonstration by expert flint knapper Steve Nissly. (image: PHMC)

Last year’s popular theme exploring the Susquehannock Indians of central Pennsylvania will be continued with an examination of western Pennsylvania’s Monongahela Indians. We have invited a panel of experts to share their knowledge and research with us on this extensively investigated, but still mysterious culture. The Monongahela were the dominant Indian culture in southwestern Pennsylvania, Ohio and northern West Virginia around 1000 AD, but by 1635 they vanish from the archaeological record.

This year’s Workshops in Archaeology will explore the many aspects of this culture including their pottery, diet, health, village patterns and social organization.

Professionals will be on hand to assist attendees with artifact identification and recording archaeological sites. (image: PHMC)

Throughout the day, there will be demonstrations by professional flint knapper Steve Nissley, and experts will be on hand from Pennsylvania’s State Historic Preservation Office to assist attendees with artifact identification and recording archaeological sites.

Please join The State Museum’s Section of Archaeology in celebration of our rich archaeological heritage this fall. Harrisburg’s Kipona Festival and Pow Wow, the Archaeological investigation at Fort Hunter, and Workshops in Archaeology present valuable opportunities to meet State Museum archaeologists and learn more about how we can preserve our past for our future.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Fort Hunter Wrap-up and Archaeology Month Events

2018-10-12T14:33:00.000-04:00

3rd in the 'berg at Fort Hunter 2018

The State Museum of Pennsylvania’s Section of Archaeology wrapped up its annual public archaeology excavation this past Friday, October the 5th. Despite this year’s overall soggy season, the program continues to be successful in providing an opportunity for the public to observe an archaeological dig up close, and to learn more about the historic and prehistoric inhabitants that called what is now Fort Hunter Mansion and Park home.

These students are shovel-ready!

Middle school and High school students, college undergraduates as well as home-schooled individuals were introduced to modern survey methods used to establish the site’s grid coordinate system, excavation techniques using traditional hand tools such as spade shovels and mason’s trowels, and the basics of artifact identification while screening soil.

Learning what to look for in the screen

Casual visitors to the park, not wishing to get their hands dirty, were treated to a detailed history of the property as known from the historical record and, how we have come to understand the site archaeologically.

Attentive crowd during Fort Hunter Day

Avid followers of TWIPA will recall that our last post contained somewhat of a cliff-hanger concerning a linear feature that had been identified in two excavation units adjacent to the rear of the 1860’s addition to the mansion. Tantalizing fragments of French and Indian War period ceramics such as delft tin-glazed earthenware and scratch blue salt-glazed stoneware, and a few pieces of lead swan shot stoked imaginations that the feature might be associated with the fort’s stockade, or perhaps a ditch dug around the fort to enhance its defenses. Such a recommendation had been noted in the historical record in the form a letter:

PA Archives, Vol. III, page 488 – G. Price to Gov. Denny, Fort Hunter, ye 22^nd July, 1758

“I was left in the Garrison of Fort Hunter, and received Orders from Gen^l Forbes to repair it, and sent and Engineer to inspect into the condition, who found necessary to Stockade it, for which purpose I was to get the Country People; and accordingly apply’d to the several Justices of the Peace for the Townships of Paxton and Donegal, which latter I never had any answer from, but was inform’d by Parson Elder, of Paxton, whose word is the same w^th that of the Justices, as they act in conjunction in such affairs that till harvest be over the Country People can do nothing; therefore thought propper to acquaint you of this, as a duty incumbent, also that I am relieved, and that should be the work of the fort be Pospon’d till harvest be over, ‘twill be yet three weeks before they begin.

P.S. – the Stockades are cut.”

Continued excavation of the suspect feature ultimately revealed itself to be the trench for a clay sewer pipe, likely dating to the second quarter of the 20^th century with the arrival of modern plumbing to the mansion. A pipe dream indeed, much to the crew’s dismay. One silver lining of the deflating discovery late in the dig, is that it at least spares us the next eleven months of speculation about the feature’s origin.

trench feature visible in cross-section and clay sewer pipe

With the field season quickly drawing to a close, final levels were completed in the excavation block and then each profile, or wall, of the individual units was photographed and carefully hand mapped on graph paper to scale in order to record their stratigraphic sequence.

measuring and mapping profiles in unit with pvc drain pipe

The site was then “put to bed” by lining the walls and floors of each unit in the excavation block with heavy black plastic and weighted down with stone. The Fort Hunter ground crew has it all backfilled for the safety of the park visitors during the rest of the year.

overview of 2018 excavation block, looking West

The saying goes “you just can’t find good help these days”. In our case we have found good help, in the form of our dedicated volunteers. We can’t emphasize enough, the amount of work completed would not have been possible, nor as enjoyable without you, and we thank all of you for your enthusiasm and hard work!

Looking forward to more Archaeology Month events happening soon, Meadowcroft Rockshelter and Historic Village is hosting Archaeology Day tomorrow, Oct. 13^th from 11AM to 5PM. Be sure to check their website for details.

Thursday, October 25^th from 10AM to 1PM the Independence National Historic Park in Philadelphia will host a workshop on historic ceramic identification and its importance to archaeologists. More information can be found by clicking here.

And finally, just two weeks away, The State Museum of Pennsylvania will host the 2018 Annual Workshops in Archaeology series on Saturday, October 27 from 8:30AM to 6PM. This year’s topic, the culture history of the Susquehannock Indians from an archaeological context, will be explored in detail by nine 30-minute presentations throughout the day followed by a question and discussion forum, and concluding with light refreshments. Additional programming includes a flint knapping demonstration, artifact identification, and instruction on recording sites with the State Historic Preservation Office’s Cultural Resource Geographic Information System.

Early registration discount ends Oct. 19^th. Program abstracts and registration form can be found here.

We hope to see you there!

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Rain drops keep falling on my head, but that doesn’t mean we won’t continue at Fort Hunter

2018-09-28T15:22:00.000-04:00

The 2018 field season at Fort Hunter Mansion & Park is coming to a close soon and it has been a wet one! Last year we marveled at not having a single rain day, this year is quite the opposite. It has been a terrific year for visitors, the press, social media and just general interest in our excavation. Fort Hunter Day was one of those rare beautiful days when everyone was eager to get outside and enjoy the sunshine as demonstrated by the more than 3,000 visitors at the site. We welcome everyone to visit and observe our excavation but especially, to ask questions.

Some of our visitors have been following us and our progress every September and early October since 2006 so they know the routine. Others are visiting for the first time and are new to the archaeological process. Most of our visitors stand off to the side, a little unsure whether to come closer. Once they see that we’re just harmless, crazy archaeologists, the exchanges between visitors and staff demonstrate that there is an increasing interest in archaeology and our heritage in central Pennsylvania.

As with any job, once you have done something for a while you take for granted the process and begin to overlook some of the minutia of the task. You complete the process without really thinking about how or why you do things a certain way. For an individual who has never visited an archaeological site or had an opportunity to observe the process, it can be confusing and perhaps a bit overwhelming. This is the challenge of public archaeology; make it understandable and relative to the general public. So, some of the questions that our visitors ask may seem insignificant to us but are obviously important to their understanding of archaeology. This blog will address some of the questions we’ve received and hopefully some of our followers have had these or similar questions of their own that will be answered.

PHMC archaeologist Janet Johnson speaks with visitors to the site during Fort Hunter Day.

(Photo: PHMC, Section of Archaeology)

Probably the most common question- what are you looking for?

Our immediate response is something to the effect of “We’re archaeologists with The State Museum of Pennsylvania and are looking for evidence of the French & Indian War period fort that stood here between 1755 and 1763.” It’s true we began this project in 2006 with hopes of finding a stockade trench and a blockhouse described in historic documents. However, while this was and is our ideal, the search goes far beyond the French and Indian War period. Fort Hunter Mansion and Park has been used for thousands of years and we are literally peeling back the soil to discover the lives of the Indians, colonists, industrialist, farmer and businessman who left their trace.

Why are you digging here?

The initial area of excavation was prompted by ground penetrating radar that indicated areas of ground disturbance that seemed most promising. The discovery of a feature interpreted as the bake oven in 2006 was facilitated by that technology. Subsequent investigations were based on soil changes and trenching that provided a window into activity areas for which we later explored. Our investigation is also guided by the archaeological evidence recovered in previous excavations, the artifacts and features. Artifacts are the tangible evidence of the past- their presence in undisturbed soils, as identified stratigraphically, is priceless. So when asked, “Why don’t you dig down on the bank, closer to the river and Fishing Creek?” the answer is all about the stratigraphy and that undisturbed soil.

As stated earlier, lots of people have lived on this piece of ground and all of them have dug in the dirt, had campfires, disturbed soils and left their “mark” or presence on the landscape. It is all this activity that is challenging to sort through and identify the intact soils and the undisturbed stratigraphy. This year, we have uncovered an undisturbed living floor that dates to the Woodland period, 1000- 2900 years ago. Significant not only for its integrity as an intact soil package but also for the picture of the past provided. Envision Indians sitting around a campfire cooking fish or game recently caught while they sharpen their projectile points (arrowheads) and polish a stone axe. Our evidence of this picture comes in the form of lithic flakes, fire-cracked rock, broken pottery and a stone axe- tangible evidence of the past.

This drawing depicts indigenous people sitting by a camp fire.

(Drawing: Jonathan Frazier)

Another frequently asked question “What are those colored pins in the ground- the red and blue things?” The soil markers designate stratigraphy- soil layers- within our excavation unit. Red pins define natural soil changes while the blue pins designate incremental soil levels of .25/10ths or 3 inches. Archaeology is a destructive process and it is only through careful excavation that we can examine the soils and identify anomalies we refer to as features. Features are activities that leave evidence in the soil- a cooking hearth is a feature identified by charcoal flecks and fire cracked and reddened rocks.

The red pins define a natural soil change in the wall of this excavation unit

(photo: PHMC, Section of Archaeology)

What happens to the dirt that you dig out?

Dirt is screened through quarter inch mesh to identify artifacts that may have not been recovered during excavation. This process can be time consuming but is so very important to ensure that we don’t overlook artifacts or indicators of activities. The backdirt piles (sifted soil piles under the screen) are eventually used by the grounds crew at Fort Hunter to fill in the excavation units.

Staff and volunteers screen dirt through 1/4" wire mesh at Fort Hunter.

(Photo: PHMC, Section of Archaeology)

What happens when you stop digging for this year?

The units (5x5 square) that we have opened are covered over with a heavy black plastic. The grounds crew at Fort Hunter will use soil from the back dirt pile to fill in the open units and the black plastic is a marker for us should we wish to return to a unit the following year.

Where do the artifacts go?

The artifacts go to the archaeology lab of the State Museum for processing which involves washing, labeling, and identification. Research and analysis of all the artifacts is conducted over the winter and spring prior to permanent curation. Conservation treatment is preserved on the most fragile or corroded of the artifacts. Specialized treatment aids in the preservation of these artifacts and ensures stability for many years to come.

What do you do if it rains?

This record-breaking year of wet weather has taken a toll on excavations and a frequent question has to do with how we deal with bad weather. We are able to continue excavations if the rain is light, but any periods longer than a few minutes create a muddy mess that is more likely to damage features. We screen the soil in our buckets, bag any artifacts and cover the units with plastic to preserve the exposed floor. The next day we bail out water from the top of the plastic and then carefully remove the plastic to see if we were successful in our endeavors to save the units from damage.

Water from overnight rain sits atop the black plastic used to cover excavation units.

(Photo: PHMC, Section of Archaeology)

What have you found? What’s the most interesting thing you’ve found here?

We have found many artifacts that represent the activities of Fort Hunter and several of them provide interesting stories of the residents of this site. No one object tells the story of Fort Hunter so there is not an easy answer as to the most interesting or important artifact. This year’s recovery of a stone axe will be a highlight since these are rare discoveries during excavation. The volume of musket balls and swan shot are of particular interest and further analysis will look for density of these materials this year as compared to other years and locations.

A full grooved stone axe recovered during 2018 excavations at Fort Hunter.

(Photo: Don Giles)

This historic reference to supplies issued in December of 1755 references Swan Shot and the delivery of twenty-five pounds to the site. There are spent (used) and unused shot present in the excavations adjacent to the summer kitchen at the rear of the mansion.

“Decem^r 9 [1755], By Thomas Forster Esq^r & Thos McKee, at Hunter’s Fort, 12 ½ lb. Powder and 25 lb Swan Shot

An intriguing feature has appeared in the excavation block that has created a lot of questions and speculation by our team. A linear ditch or trench approximately a foot wide was exposed that runs through at least two of the units. The depth of this feature is being investigated and careful screening of the artifacts conducted. Unfortunately no artifacts have been recovered in this feature that provide a solid date of its construction or indicate its purpose. Reference to the ditch at Hunter’s is made in the following;

PA Archives, Vol. III, page 442 – Engineer Rich’d Dudgeon to Gov. Denny, Carlisle , 7^th July, 1758

“Pursuant to an Order Received from Gen^l Forbes, the 5^th Inst., I have been to Inspect the State of Fort Hunter, & am of Opinion that Stockading of it, & Opening & Deepning the Ditch, according to the Scheme left with the Commanding Officer there, will be Gen^ls Order, is to see the Work Executed, by imploying the Country People. But as it’s apprehended he may meet with difficultys in calling this assistance, I am desired by the Gen^l to signify this to you.”

Further investigation of the linear feature is necessary to understand it’s use and time period of construction, but for now we are happy to explore the possibility that this may be a portion of the ditch referenced above.

The lighter colored soil running across the units near the top of the photo indicates a yet unexplored linear feature. (Photo: PHMC, Section of Archaeology)

We only have a week left for the 2018 field season; our last day is October 5^th. With a forecast of a dry weekend we can only hope that the trend will continue into next week and we’ll be able to explore these questions and others before the plastic goes on and we let the site rest until next September. We hope you will find the time to visit us and observe the process of discovering the archaeological heritage of Fort Hunter Mansion & Park, Dauphin County. We encourage you to continue to check the blog for updates on the analysis of the artifacts and data throughout the winter months as we explore the story of this important site.

One last question that visitors ask- What are your jobs or tasks when you go back to the office?

The analysis and processing of the artifacts is only a portion of our jobs as we curate over 9 million artifacts from across the Commonwealth. We also conduct a major outreach program at the Pennsylvania Farm Show in January. There is an exhibit to design, brochure to develop and print and labels to prepare for artifacts on display during this event. Our most immediate attention will focus on preparing for the Workshops in Archaeology program on October 27^th. This one day event will focus on the Susquehannock Indians who lived along the river and interacted with Captain John Smith in the Chesapeake Bay in 1608. The story of their tribe as seen from an archaeological perspective and through their artifacts is fascinating. We invite you to check out the registration information and program information for 2018 Workshops in Archaeology.

It’s not raining today and we have school groups scheduled so it’s time to dig! Hopefully you’ll stop by to see our progress and ask a few of your own questions.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

2018 Fort Hunter Excavations

2018-08-31T16:12:00.000-04:00

It’s that time of year again! No, not time for everything pumpkin spice. It’s time to gear up for the annual archaeological dig at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park, just north of Harrisburg. For the last 11 years, the Section of Archaeology of the State Museum of Pennsylvania has explored the Fort Hunter property in search of remains of the French and Indian War fort that once was located there. We have found many clues to the presence of the fort, including a cannonball, numerous military items, and a possible bake oven; but, not the fort itself. However, we know from research that the fort was in existence for only seven to eight years out of the nearly 300 years of historic occupation of this site and we have uncovered artifacts that tell us much about the other residents of this property. Not to mention the thousands of years of occupation by Native Americans. Many of the TWIPA blog posts have dealt with the various Fort Hunter finds and you can access these by typing Fort Hunter into the “Search” box on the blog page.

The 2017 dig season focused on fully uncovering the stone foundation of what we believe to be a smokehouse from the early 1800s and reopening the block excavation behind the kitchen addition of the Mansion house that we investigated in 2016. The foundations of the smokehouse, an octagonal structure in which meats were smoked to preserve them, were carefully excavated to try to determine how it was constructed and to recover any artifacts that might have been associated with it to aid in its interpretation. As the foundation stones were removed, samples of rock and soil in the bottom of the smokehouse were taken to conduct further analyses. Following the mapping and removal of all the stones, this area was backfilled.

Area of the smokehouse foundation partially removed

Come out and see what we find! This is an opportunity to learn about this important historic site and embrace our Commonwealth’s heritage. Artifacts will be on display and archaeologists will be on hand Monday-Friday, 9am-4:30pm (weather permitting) to answer questions about the site and how field archaeology is conducted. In addition to weekdays, excavation will take place on Fort Hunter Day on Sunday, September 16,2018. Excavations will close for the year on October 5, 2018.

Excavations of the foundation revealed clues to its construction, including how the builder’s trench was dug and how the stones were fitted together without mortar to form a strong base for the wooden superstructure. Some stones that were removed even appeared to have been shaped with steel tools so that they fit together better, creating a stronger foundation.

Smokehouse foundation, partially removed, showing the builder’s trench

Stones removed from the smokehouse foundation that were shaped with tools to fit tightly together

The block excavation in the rear of the kitchen addition had been filled in following the 2016 excavations but was reopened last year because of the discovery of some interesting artifacts from the 1700s. Although 2017 excavations in this area did not end up producing much in the way of fort-related artifacts, some exciting finds were made. A ground surface believed to be the original surface during prehistoric time periods was found roughly 2 feet below the current ground level. This surface, called a buried A-horizon (a dark-colored, heavily organic soil), was covered by years of natural and manmade (fill) buildup. This A-horizon yielded several hundred native-made artifacts including pottery, stone weights for fish nets, projectile points (arrowheads), part of a native-made clay pipe stem, and chipping debris from making stone tools.

Excavations in the side yard behind the Mansion’s kitchen addition

In addition, other aspects of the shape, size, and composition of the side yard were discovered. While this doesn’t sound very exciting, these factors can help the archaeologists reconstruct the landscape over time. For instance, we know that portions of the property along both the Susquehanna River and Fishing Creek were affected by flooding over the years, especially by Hurricane Agnes in 1972. This flooding caused portions of the yard to slump into the river and destroyed some of the small outbuildings. Could it have taken portions of the fort too? We can also see where someone tried to shore up the bank along the creek side of the yard with a fill of rocks, concrete, slag, and garbage at some point and then attempted to shore it up again in later years. The more recent fill layer included a wrapper from a local bread company, foil food packaging, and plastic garbage as well as light bulbs, bricks, painting supplies, linoleum fragments, and even a pair of boots! It was surmised that, following Hurricane Agnes repairs to the house were necessary and when the work was completed, the debris was thrown in the yard along the washed-out bank.

Edge of yard above Fishing Creek showing distinct fill layers. Note the upper fill layer of bricks and garbage and the lower layer of concrete, rock, and slag.

This year’s excavations begin on September 5 and will again focus on the area of the side yard behind the kitchen addition. We will uncover some of our blocks from 2017 and will expand them south toward the back (south) foundation of the Mansion. This back addition was built in the 1870s during the Boas/Reily family occupation of the house. Based on oral tradition, the house is generally believed to have been built over top of the fort’s blockhouse, so the archaeologists will try to get as close to the house as they can. By doing this, we hope to find remains of the fort or palisade, as well as to determine construction techniques of the house foundation and recover additional artifacts related to both. In addition, the Native American occupation level appears to continue south and we hope to recover additional artifacts and discover features related to this occupation.

Excavation filled at the end of 2017 season and area at rear of the house to be excavated in 2018

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Fort Hunter: Where we are at now

2017-12-08T11:13:00.000-05:00

Here we are, the Workshops in Archaeology and Thanksgiving are over and the Pennsylvania State Farm Show and Christmas season have begun. As we prepare our exhibit for the Farm Show in January 2018, the lab archaeologists and ever valued volunteers, have been hard at work processing the artifacts found at Fort Hunter this past field season. Today we are going to take a brief look at what happens to the artifacts once they come into the lab from the field and where we are in that process with this year’s artifacts.

As mentioned previously in this blog, a general rule of thumb for the time it will take to fully process artifacts in the lab is approximately seven days of lab work for each day of field work, depending on the quantity and types of artifacts found. With the help of our volunteers this time is cut down a bit, but it is still a lot of work and a long process.

The initial steps for processing any collection in the lab is to organize and record the provenience information from field bags through the preparation of a digital field bag inventory. The field bags are then organized by unit and level allowing for easy processing later on.

View of the field bag inventory

Field bags organized by unit and level in bins ready to be laid out for washing.

Once this is completed, the artifacts are laid out by bag on trays and the process of cleaning the artifacts through washing, dry brushing, or other conservation techniques begins. As can be seen above, we have already emptied a few bins of field bags and the image below shows some of the artifacts out and ready to be washed.

Artifacts laid out on trays to be washed

Artifacts being cleaned, washing on the left, dry brushing on the right

As the artifacts are cleaned and air dried, the next step in the process begins, labeling. Artifacts are labeled with the site number, in the case of Fort Hunter the site number is 36Da159, and the catalog number, which identifies the location where the artifact was found. Catalog numbers are determined based on the provenience information recorded from the field bags.

Clean artifacts (fire-cracked rock) being labeled

Once the artifacts are properly labeled, they are identified and bagged by type within each catalog number and then inventoried in a digital format, to make for easy lookup for research or exhibit creation.

Artifacts being identified and bagged for final curation

Due to the great effort of our volunteers, it is possible to work on multiple steps of this process at one time. This allows us to process the artifacts in an efficient and effective manner. (For more information on how artifacts are processed in the state museum archaeology lab check out our previous blog, Behind the Scenes at The State Museum—Processing the Fort Hunter Collection: What happens after the field work is done?)

Currently in the archaeology lab, we have completed the initial organization and recordation of proveniences as well as the identification of catalog numbers for each provenience. Washing, labeling and identifying/bagging are currently occurring in the lab every day.

This year we are taking our processing one step further by attempting to mend, or put back together, prehistoric pottery fragments to see if we can identify one or more vessels. This has proven difficult as there are many very tiny pieces of pottery and many of the larger pieces do not fit back together, but some progress has been made as can be seen in the pictures below.

Staff archaeologist attempting to mend pottery fragments

As we process the artifacts, it becomes more clear what types of artifacts are present in the collection and this year we seem to have an abundance of prehistoric artifacts such as stone waste flakes and tools, pottery and bone. This said, there are also numerous historic artifacts. Though very few of them date to the fort period they still help tell the story of the landscape. These artifacts include buttons, musket balls, butchered bone, nails of varying types and other architectural materials, historic ceramics and glass; as well as more modern artifacts such as plastic and Styrofoam.

Here is a glimpse at some of the more notable artifacts we have uncovered from this year thus far:

Prehistoric artifacts:

Shell bead, possibly with incised markings on the top and bottom surfaces

Rim and neck sherds of Owasco cordmarked pottery type, dating to c. 1200 to 1300 AD (Ritchie 1965).

Additional rim, neck and body sherds from the Owasco tradition.

Unknown pottery type, vessel body fragments mended back together.

Vessel body sherd from an exterior and interior cord marked vessel, also mended together

Incised rim sherd fragment of a Shenks Ferry Tradition vessel.

Projectile points: top row: Madison type triangle point dates to the late Late Woodland Period (AD. 1450 - 1600.), second row down Rossville-like point type, dates to the Middle Woodland Period (1,000 BP. – 2,100 BP.) third row down: Lehigh/ Koens-Crispin point type, dates to the early Transitional Period (4,350 BP. – 4,850 BP.), bottom row right: the large broadspear/ knife, dates to the Transitional/Late Archaic Period (4,350 BP. – 6,850 BP.) bottom left: this point which could fall within Late Archaic through the Middle Woodland periods.

(Custer 2001, PHMC 2015, Ritchie 1971)

Historic period artifacts:

Tin glazed earthenware (left) and scratch blue salt glazed stoneware (right). Both fall within the French and Indian War time period, though all were found in mixed contexts.

Musket Balls of varying sizes and date ranges.

Gun Flint

Brass and pewter buttons dating around the late 18^th and 19^th centuries.

As usual, the fort at Fort Hunter remains elusive, but each year we find little hints of its existence through artifacts. We continue to learn more and more about the landscape and how human occupation has impacted the land through the thousands of years of use that we have been able to identify through our excavations. We hope you have enjoyed this update on what is happening to the artifacts found at Fort Hunter during the 2017 field season and we wish you all a wonderful and safe holiday season!

References:

Custer, Jay F.

2001 Classification Guide for Arrowheads and Spearpoints of Eastern Pennsylvania and the Central Middle Atlantic. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission

2015 Pennsylvania Archaeology: Time Periods. Electronic document, http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/portal/communities/archaeology/native-american/time-periods.html.

Ritchie, William A.

1965 The Archaeology of New York State. The Natural History Press, Garden City, New York

1971 A Typology and Nomenclature for New York Projectile Points. University of the State of New York, State Education Dept. Albany, New York. Originally published 1961, Bulletin No. 384, New York State Museum and Science Service.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Fort Hunter Wrap Up

2017-10-13T16:03:00.000-04:00

Fort Hunter Day 2017

In the remaining two weeks of fieldwork at Fort Hunter since our last post, our crew continued to excavate in their respective areas to the east and west of the milk house behind the mansion. Never a day went by without the archaeologists answering questions from the curious and inquisitive visitors to the park. How do you know where to dig? What are you finding? Did you have to go to school for that?

In the vicinity of the smokehouse foundation, artifacts were few and far between, suggesting that undisturbed soils with the potential to contain historic, and more optimistically fort period artifacts, had been all but exhausted through previous years’ work in this area. Careful troweling of the remaining soil did yield a handful of glazed redware sherds, very small fragments of tin-glazed earthenware and scratch blue salt-glazed stoneware. With disassembly of the smokehouse foundation completed and samples of visually distinct stones set aside for thin sectioning and sourcing analysis, the excavation block east of the milk house has closed and is ready to be backfilled.

East block closing shot

Notable discoveries in the excavation units to the west of the milk house were predominantly prehistoric in age and included native pottery sherds, a few Late Archaic projectile points and a wide scattering of fire cracked rock.

Late Archaic projectile points (the asymmetry of the top specimen suggest it may have functioned as a knife)

Most of these artifacts were found in a thin band of soil roughly 2 feet below the ground that was once the original land surface, referred to as a buried A horizon, and the first several inches of soil directly underlying it, the subsoil, also called the B horizon.

West trench excavation of buried A horizon (photo credit: Don Giles)

A few fragments of the pottery recovered are sections of the rim of a vessel. Often decorated with varying patterns of incised lines and/or geometric shapes rim sherds are typically the most diagnostic portion of pre-contact ceramics. Seen below, the cord-marked horizontal and oblique lines on this sherd are indicative of the Owasco ceramic tradition which dates to c. 1000 to 1300 AD (Ritchie 1965). The ultimate in 3D jigsaw puzzles, there may be enough fragments to reconstruct upwards of half of this early fired clay container.

close up of cord marked rim sherd

One unique find this season is what appears to be a medial fragment, or middle section, of the stem portion of a native ceramic smoking pipe. The fragment is also split lengthwise, providing an interesting cross-section of the bore hole through the stem. The clay pipe fragment also exhibits shell tempering which is a characteristic of ceramics from the Late Woodland Period.

interior view of pipe stem fragment

Despite its underwhelming context of recovery (modern utility trench fill) this artifact retains some significance in that of the tens of thousands of artifacts collected over the course of 11 field seasons, this is the only one in the assemblage to represent prehistoric tobacco use. In whole form, the pipe may have looked similar to this example below from the Strickler site.

complete ceramic pipe from the Strickler site

What does any of that have to do with the French and Indian War one might ask. Admittedly, not much, with one important exception, that it does drive home the point that this area was a strategic position on the landscape for not just hundreds, but thousands of years. There were, however, a few artifacts recovered this season that do seem to hint at echoes from the fort period.

musket balls

gun flint

late 18th and 19th C. brass and pewter buttons

tin glaze earthenware (left), and scratch blue salt glazed stoneware (right)

These types of artifacts are intriguing, as they bare the signature of the fort period, and of the time before and shortly after, but unfortunately, due in part to the high level or earth moving activities in this particular section of the property, none were found in discrete contexts free from 19^th and 20^th Century material.

Susquehanna River looking upstream towards the Dauphin Narrows

It’s been said before, and it’s worth repeating, our volunteers are awesome! They are pleasant to be around, helpful with any number of tasks, and sometimes bring food to share. The amount of work accomplished this season simply would not have happened were it not for our dedicated volunteers. A tip of the hat also goes to Dauphin County Parks and Recreation for their continuing cooperation and support. THANK YOU, to all who contributed in our efforts to uncover the past!

And a final reminder the Workshops in Archaeology program is just a short two weeks away:

The Archaeology Section of The State Museum of Pennsylvania invites you to attend the annual Workshops in Archaeology on Saturday, October28, 2017. This program is designed to provide the public with an overview of archaeological discoveries and research being conducted in the region. Papers presented at these sessions will focus on Ethnicity in the Archaeological Record as it can be identified at farmsteads, industrial sites, religious sites and other locations in Pennsylvania. By recognizing cultural markers of preceding populations in Pennsylvania, archaeologists are better equipped to under-stand the fluid cultural landscape of our country.

References:

Ritchie, William A.

(1965) The Archaeology of New York State

The Natural History Press, Garden City, New York

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Meet The State Museum Archaeologists at Kipona, Fort Hunter, and the 2017 Annual Workshops

2017-09-01T15:37:00.001-04:00

Kipona Festival and Pow Wow on City Island

Saturday-Monday,

September 2^nd-4^th

10am-6pm

This Labor Day weekend, State Museum archaeologists and volunteers will be out in the community to answer questions about the archaeology of City Island, prehistoric Native American lifeways, and our mission as stewards of Pennsylvania’s past. You will have the opportunity to learn more about experimental archaeology too. As in previous years, our booth is located on the west, back side of the Senators Stadium on City Island. Look for the Archaeology banner flag.

Setting up on City Island for the big event.

The exhibit will highlight the over 8,000-year-old archaeological record of Pennsylvania Indians visiting and living on City Island. You can also take a journey back in time by sitting in our 20-foot replica dugout canoe, and handle some of the woodworking stone tools, called adzes, we made and used to carve out the dugout. The design and function of our replica tools was loosely based on a cache of 4,000 year-old celt and axe blades, discovered during archaeological excavations on City Island in the 1990s. The cache will be on display along with other representative artifacts recovered from earlier investigations.

How many archaeologists does it take to move an 800 lb. dugout canoe? Answer- 8.

Come visit us and learn more about the long cultural history of City Island and experience the music and dance of contemporary Native American cultures at the Pow Wow. Don’t miss your chance to enjoy a beautiful day on the “kipona” or “sparkling water” of the Susquehanna river and be part of a century old Harrisburg city festival that dates back to September 4^th, 1916.

The Museum is also open on Saturday, September 2^nd (9-5pm) and Sunday (noon-5pm). Stop by our booth and take advantage of the free Planetarium tickets we will have on hand before your visit to the Museum. Shows run Saturdays on the hour from 11am to 2pm and at 1 and 2pm on Sundays. On-the-street parking is free Sundays in Harrisburg.

If you’re not able to venture out, you can also catch repeat showings of The State Museum’s Nature Lab and Learn at Lunch programming on PCN, today through Sunday. Archaeology focused show times are highlighted below.

Friday, September 1
9:30 AM	Leadership of William Penn
10:00 AM	Researching PA Civil War Veterans
10:40 AM	Studying Pre-History Through Artifacts
11:00 AM	Stone Toolmaking
12:00 PM	Dinosaurs of the Eastern U.S.
12:45 PM	When Mammoths Roamed Pennsylvania
1:20 PM	Pennsylvania Snakes
1:45 PM	Evolution of Snakes
2:25 PM	Bats
3:20 PM	Turtles and Tortoises
3:45 PM	Pennsylvania Birds
4:35 PM	Leadership of William Penn
5:05 PM	Researching PA Civil War Veterans
11:00 PM	Studying Pre-History Through Artifacts
11:20 PM	Stone Toolmaking

Saturday, September 2
12:20 AM	Dinosaurs of the Eastern U.S.
1:05 AM	When Mammoths Roamed Pennsylvania
1:40 AM	Pennsylvania Snakes
2:05 AM	Evolution of Snakes
2:45 AM	Bats
3:40 AM	Turtles and Tortoises
4:05 AM	Pennsylvania Birds
4:50 AM	Leadership of William Penn
5:20 AM	Researching PA Civil War Veterans
2:30 PM	Studying Pre-History Through Artifacts
2:50 PM	Stone Toolmaking
3:50 PM	Dinosaurs of the Eastern U.S.
4:35 PM	When Mammoths Roamed Pennsylvania
5:10 PM	Pennsylvania Birds
6:30 PM	Pennsylvania Snakes
6:55 PM	Evolution of Snakes
7:35 PM	Turtles and Tortoises

Sunday, September 3
12:00 AM	Leadership of William Penn
12:30 AM	Researching PA Civil War Veterans
1:10 AM	Studying Pre-History Through Artifacts
1:30 AM	Stone Toolmaking
2:30 AM	Dinosaurs of the Eastern U.S.
3:15 AM	When Mammoths Roamed Pennsylvania
3:50 AM	Pennsylvania Snakes
4:15 AM	Evolution of Snakes
4:55 AM	Bats
5:50 AM	Turtles and Tortoises
6:15 AM	Pennsylvania Birds

Fort Hunter 2017 Field Season

September 11^th-October 6th

Mondays-Fridays (9am-4pm)

Backyard visitors interested in seeing archaeologists in action at Fort Hunter Mansion & Park are welcome starting Monday, September 11^ththrough Friday, October 6^th. This field season we will continue to excavate the smokehouse builders’ trench and sample it’s interior, as well as follow higher density 18^th century soil layers found in previous seasons in the mansion’s backyard.

Around the smokehouse, it is our goal to complete the builders’ trench excavation and further test the chemical composition of the soil inside the structure. It was observed last year that the interior soils were hydrophobic (water expelling or resistant) during and after rain storms. Rain water would drain, almost roll off the floor’s surface, rather than penetrate or absorb and moisten the soil. This was in stark contrast to the soil matrix on the rest of the site that showed the typical absorbent properties of a silt loam and remained wet for a long period when uncovered and exposed to the sun. One hypothesis is that dripping phospholipids released as rendered fats from smoking meats may have seeped into the dirt floor of the smokehouse and altered its chemical composition, making it water resistant. Another hypothesis may be that the sustained dry-heat used in the curing process was a primary factor that altered the soil. We sampled small portions of the hydrophobic floor surface last year and would like to increase our sample size this year to further test these competing or possibly complimentary hypotheses.

The Smokehouse during 2016 field season. Note the dry soil inside the partially excavated circular stonewall compared to the wet soils surrounding this feature. Photographer Credit: Don Giles

At the same time, we will continue to chase the elusive 18^th century component behind the mansion in hopes to discover evidence of the French and Indian Period fort. This has been the primary focus of our initial research goals since Archaeology Month excavations began in 2006 at Fort Hunter. A 20 x 30’ block excavation will be opened behind the Mansion that will encompass a 2.5’ x 35’ trench excavation that was initially investigated in 2008. While this earlier investigative trench documented several modern disturbances of utility, sewer, and water lines running from the existing house through the backyard, there were several lenses of intact 18^th century deposits we hope to further explore this year.

Overview of the 2008 trench excavation behind the mansion.

Outlined in red in the map below are areas we will focus on this year. More intensely colored blue areas represent higher densities of datable 18^th century artifacts recovered in previous year excavations.

Map Credit: Callista Holmes

If you are unable to join us during the week, don’t forget the excavation is also open on Sunday, September 17^th 10am-5pm as part of the Fort Hunter Day festival. It’s a family friendly event that also includes mansion tours, arts and craft booths, fair food and fun activities for all ages to enjoy.

2017 Annual Workshops in Archaeology

Ethnicity in the Archaeological Record

October 28, 2017

9am-5pm

Announcing Registration is now open!

For more information, download to print the Workshops flier and take advantage of early registration discounts for this year’s program with mail-in submissions on or before October 20^th. Pre-registration fliers are also available at our upcoming events and walk-in registrants are welcome on the day.

Please join us and celebrate our rich archaeological heritage this fall. The three day Kipona Festival and Pow Wow, our Archaeology Month investigation at Fort Hunter, and Workshops in Archaeology are fun and informative events where you can meet State Museum archaeologists and learn more about how we can all preserve our past for our future.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

LiDAR Aids Archaeologists in Documenting Fort Hunter

2016-12-02T14:32:00.000-05:00

During this year’s excavation at Fort Hunter (2016), the State Museum of Pennsylvania was fortunate enough to have a survey crew from PennDOT perform LiDAR scans of the milk house structure and surrounding excavation units. Partnering across agencies provided an opportunity for PennDOT to establish a new bench mark for highway use and for archaeologists to utilize modern technology not available within the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission.

What is LiDAR?

LiDAR, a form of 3D scanning, is a method for creating a 3D model of an object, structure or environment. A LiDAR scanner (seen in the image below) bounces millions of points of light off of objects in its path, measuring distance and position. By collecting data on millions of points, a three dimensional point cloud is created which can be processed into a 3D model. PennDOT uses LiDAR to create highly accurate renderings that can be used in the management of Pennsylvania’s roads and bridges. Our excavations at Fort Hunter were scanned using Terrestrial LiDAR. This form of LiDAR, involves setting up the LiDAR scanner in several stationary positions around the site or structure to be scanned. Aerial LiDAR has aided in the discovery of long forgotten archaeological sites obscured by jungle overgrowth. These two types of LiDAR differ not only in their scanning method, but also in the resolution and applications of the data they produce. Terrestrial LiDAR provides more accurate and detailed models of smaller areas than aerial LiDAR, which makes it an especially useful tool in examining features at Fort Hunter.

PennDOT surveyors prepare the terrestrial LiDAR scanner adjacent to the milk house. Image: PHMC/Melanie Mayhew

At Fort Hunter, the survey crew used terrestrial LiDAR to create detailed and precise 3D maps of structures and our excavations. The scans of Fort Hunter are comprised of over an estimated 100 million points. Our main objective was to capture information about the milk house and smoke house features, but additional data was also captured.

LiDAR scan of Fort Hunter, note the black areas are where the laser’s path was blocked from reaching the structure. Note the milk house in the lower right corner of the image. Image: PennDOT/Photogrammetry & Surveys Section

As you can imagine, it is impossible to capture all of the three dimensional data at an archaeological site using photographs and hand drawn maps. Terrestrial LiDAR creates a map with far more detail and precision than can be created by hand. The processed LiDAR scans that resulted from this endeavor can be rotated 360 degrees, viewed under multiple filters, and a video can even be made to appear as if you are moving through the scanned site. Millimeter-accurate measurements can be made between any points in the model.

This rendering of the milk house at Fort Hunter can be used to take measurements, create images, videos or 3D printed models. Image: PennDOT/Photogrammetry & Surveys Section

How will these scans be used?

The digital data created by the LiDAR scans will become part of the site’s collected documentation, and it has the ability to greatly enhance the archaeological record without using additional shelf space. In the image below, you can see a circular stone foundation of what is believed to be an octagonal smoke house adjacent to the structure we refer to as the milk house. The survey crew was able to scan both the interior and exterior of the milk house, creating a 3D replica of the structure as it exists today. Because archaeology is a destructive process, and because it is generally not practical to leave excavations open indefinitely, LiDAR scans provide an excellent opportunity to digitally recreate a structure or three dimensional feature long after fieldwork has concluded.

Two images of the smokehouse’s foundation produced from PennDOT’s LiDAR scan at Fort Hunter. The scans can be viewed from any angle and filters can be applied to change the appearance of the images. Image: PennDOT/Photogrammetry & Surveys Section

The images and data from these scans will provide enhanced interpretive material for future exhibits, and carry forward our goal of educating the public about Pennsylvania’s archaeology.

The State Museum of Pennsylvania’s Section of Archaeology would like to extend a big Thank You to PennDOT’s Photogrammetry & Surveys Section for lending their time and talents to provide us with this data.

Please visit our gallery of Anthropology and Archaeology on the second floor of The State Museum of Pennsylvania where you can view additional artifacts representing our archaeological heritage. Look for an updated exhibit on our investigation at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park in the spring of 2017.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Thimbles through Time, Space and Life

2016-11-18T14:42:00.000-05:00

The Fort Hunter field season has wrapped up and now artifact processing is in full swing. As we clean and process the artifacts we are able to see more clearly what is present in the collection. It is important to examine the types of artifacts present in a collection as they help tell the story of the landscape and its use. In order for archaeologists to develop an accurate timeline for sites, several methods are used including stratigraphy, radiocarbon dating, dendrochronology, and artifact typologies based on datable artifacts.

This year at Fort Hunter, we found the most complete example of a thimble to date. Thimbles may not be the first artifact type you think of when contemplating the kinds of artifacts that can help date a site, but in fact thimbles have a long and well documented history, though not widely published.

There is documentation of leather thimbles as early as the medieval period in Europe. Bone, horn and wooden thimbles have also all been found on early archaeological sites (Hill 1995). The earliest metal thimbles in England appear in AD 1350 (Hill 1995). At this time thimbles were being made and decorated by hand, using various techniques including hammering, stamping and pressing. Like many other objects, later period thimbles were produced via mechanical methods of casting. During the 17^th century some of these machine made thimbles were made through a slightly different process, making them from two pieces by attaching the separately made crown to the body. This process of manufacture is another clue to dating them.

Various forms of thimbles through time: 14^th century (left), 2-piece 17^th century (center), 19^th century pronounced rim (right) (from UK Detector Finds Database 2005).

Just as the process for making thimbles changed, so did the form or shape and design on thimbles. It wasn’t until the fifteenth century that thimbles became taller and similar to their current form, while previously they were a short shallow cup-like shape (Hill 1995, UK Detector Finds Database 2005). The height of the thimble sides as well as the height of the dome varied between manufacturers as well as through time. Designs on thimbles also changed, beginning with hand punched “pits” or indentations in the medieval period and later changing to mechanically indented or knurled indentations (Hill 1995, UK Detector Finds Database 2005). The indentations or designs are most often small round indentations or can also be a waffle pattern. These varying patterns on the body or crown of a thimble can also indicate its age. Finally, the rim of a thimble can be indicative of a specific time period as some rims were left flat, whiles others were rolled.

18^th Century thimble found at Fort Hunter (36Da159) during 2016 State Museum of Pennsylvania field season.

With this brief understanding of why thimbles are considered datable, we can now look at the thimble found this year at Fort Hunter. As can be seen in the image, the Fort Hunter thimble is a one piece cast thimble with knurled indentations and the waffle-patterned crown. Based on historical research this form and design is often called a “Lofting” type of thimble, named for John Lofting a Dutch thimble maker, who produced large quantities of thimbles for export from England (UK Detector Finds Database 2005). It is believed that the Fort Hunter thimble represents the final development in the “lofting” form, which was quickly copied and exported by other European manufacturers throughout the 18^th century.

Lofting thimbles found at Fort Loudon

Other types of thimbles found at Fort Loudon: 2-piece 17^th century (left), 19^th century crown with concentric design (right)

Top of other types of thimbles found at Fort Loudon: 2-piece 17^th century (left), 19^th century crown with concentric design (right)

Another important aspect of having good datable artifacts on a site is that comparative analyses can be done between sites. In order for archaeologists to develop the most accurate picture of past life, how artifact and site types were used and to determine whether sites are contemporaneous, comparisons are made using as many examples of specific artifact and site types as possible. For example, there have been thimbles found at other French and Indian War period forts in Pennsylvania, such as the five 18^th century Lofting thimbles, one 17^th century two-piece thimble and one 19^th century thimble with a concentric crown design found at Fort Loudon. Other examples of thimbles from Pennsylvania forts include two 18^th century Lofting type thimbles from Fort Augusta and Fort Morris each. Fort Morris also has an example of a 17^th century two-piece thimble. Having this information allows archaeologists to see that there are similarities in the form, decoration and ages of this artifact type which not only helps date these sites, but may also lead to further conclusions about who in these forts were using the thimbles: was it soldiers, a designated tailor or women (Gale 2007)? These are just some of the questions that can be explored by further analyzing the thimbles.

18^th century Lofting thimbles from Fort Augusta

Thimbles found at Fort Morris: 18^th century Lofting thimbles (right and left), 2-piece 17^th century (center) (image from Warfel 2010).

So, through using previous archaeological evidence as well as the historic record these little artifacts have proven to be an important tool in helping archaeologists understand the period of occupation and activities for many sites. As a common domestic object, thimbles can help date a site or a component of a site through the artifact typology, as our Fort Hunter thimble helps us develop a better understanding of the landscape around the Fort Hunter Mansion.

References:

Gale, R. R.

2007 "A Soldier-Like Way": The Material Culture of the British Infantry 1751-

1768. Track of the Wolf, Elk River, Minnesota.

Hill, Erica

1995 Thimbles and Thimble Rings from the circum-Caribbean Region, 1500-1800: Chronology and Identification. Historical Archaeology 29(1):84-92.

Hume, Ivor Noel

1969 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. republished by University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

UK Detector Finds Database

2005 Thimbles. http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/thimble.html.

Warfel, Steven

2010 The Discovery of Fort Morris: A Report on 2009 Archaeological Investigations at the 333 East Burd Street Site, Shippensburg, PA.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Excavation continues at Fort Hunter

2016-09-23T13:56:00.000-04:00

This week in Pennsylvania Archaeology we review the foundation of an early smoke house uncovered by the archaeological excavations currently being conducted at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park by the Section of Archaeology of The State Museum of Pennsylvania. The structure was built by Colonel Archibald McAllister in the early 19^th century on his plantation along North Front Street in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Col. McAllister started his plantation at the site of a French and Indian War fort in about 1787 by building a large stone house at the junction of Fishing Creek and the Susquehanna River. He was a very successful entrepreneur with his farming activities, eventually his operations included a grist and saw mill, a blacksmith shop and a tavern.

The smoke house was described in the agricultural newspaper Cultivator by Daniel Chandler in 1835 based on his visit to the farm in 1828. He described Col. McAllister as “a gentlemen of science and refined observation”. Chandler was especially impressed with his household conveniences notably the milk house, smoke house and clothes line, describing each in detail. The smoke house “was a wooden octagon building ….. perfectly tight except the door-way”. Chandler noted that the smoke house was unique in that it was elevated off the ground by a foot or more and that “no fire was admitted into the building” therefore reducing the chances of the building catching fire. The smoke for curing the meats was introduced into the building by a tube from a stove in an adjacent room. Typically, in a conventional smokehouse the smoke is generated by a brick fireplace in the center of the earthen floor or by an iron stove in the building. It was noted that McAllister’s arrangement provided a perfectly dry building allowing him to store his meats in the smokehouse until they were consumed.

The smokehouse foundation is not an artifact in the traditional sense, but is an archaeological feature, a technical term that applies to objects such as post molds, foundations, walk ways, roads and other remains that cannot be removed from the site. This treasure is the rocks which form the foundation of a structure – as in this case the base for the smokehouse. The archaeological footprint of Col. McAllister’s innovative smoke house design consists of a circular stone foundation 12 feet in diameter allowing for the unique octagonal building. The connecting room for the stove can be seen in the picture as an “L” shaped alignment of rocks to the right of the main foundation.

Excavations at Fort Hunter will continue weekdays 9am - 4pm, through October 7th.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

In the Public’s Eye - Out and About with Archaeology

2016-09-15T15:37:00.001-04:00

The Section of Archaeology of The State Museum of Pennsylvania has been out and about with public programs the past few weeks and has returned to our excavation site at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park, Harrisburg. Archaeologists understand the value of sharing research and discoveries with the public in order to engage them in our preservation efforts. This becomes all the more evident when we are at large events like Harrisburg’s Kipona festival, Indian Steps Native American festival and Fort Hunter. The public is hungry for information about the past and so enthusiastic to learn about our archaeological heritage. Thank you! Your interest and enthusiasm makes going out on weekends and evenings worthwhile and enjoyable.

Look for the new banshee flag at our next event

As mentioned above, we have returned to Fort Hunter where we’ve been engaged with school groups- from elementary thru college age, bus tours and the Mansion’s regular visitors. Everyone is surprised by the amount of detail and paperwork necessary to record our excavations. From the most basic information such as site number (36Da159) to the measured elevation below datum of features- it is this precise scientific process that allows us to examine the results and evaluate the activities of the site occupants.

School students peering into our shaker screen

Our focus this year is concentrated on the area east of the milk house, inside the milk house and adjacent to the porch. Despite some record breaking temps we have plugged away at re-opening units along the porch and expanding upon this area with two additional units-yeah F & M students! Excavation of several features within the east block interpreted as a smoke house has produced few artifacts. We are currently investigating two postmolds and additional stains to determine if they might follow the pattern.

Setting up our grid in the East block

Inside the milk house we are examining an area in the northwest corner of the building. Gravel fill noted though unexplained until now was removed in an effort to determine if this is a builder’s trench associated with the well adjacent to the milk house. This section has been void of artifacts, but is frequented by a regular visitor fondly (or not so fondly?) referred to as “Rocky”. The regular appearance of shed snake skins is an indicator that there may be more than one “Rocky” visiting our site.

"Rocky" hanging out in the milk house

The units adjacent to the porch are continuing to produce a mix of 18^th, 19^th and 20th-century materials. Sorting out multiple occupations and ground disturbances to interpret the activity and time period in which they occur is always a challenge in archaeology. Our lab volunteers will assist with sorting, washing, labeling of the artifacts so they can be examined later this fall. Historic records indicate that this area was heavily utilized and the variety of artifacts and numerous soil disturbances supports these documents.

Visitors to Fort Hunter from the Archaeological Conservancy

Speaking of out and about- come join us this Sunday, September 18th at Fort Hunter Days to learn more about the investigation and this rich archaeological site. Archaeologists will be on site from 10:00 to 4:00, weather permitting.

Snapping turtles came out to visit after our last rain event!

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Upcoming Events - Fall 2016

2016-08-26T15:37:00.000-04:00

Labor Day weekend is traditionally considered the end of summer since it is time to go back to school, days are getting shorter and tans are beginning to fade. It also marks the beginning of a season full of public programming for the Section of Archaeology at the State Museum of Pennsylvania.

Section of Archaeology Display at 2014 Kipona Festival

Kipona – September 3-5, 2016

Our kick-off event is Harrisburg City’s Kipona Festival on City Island celebrating the Susquehanna River. Our booth will be located on City Island, west of the baseball field. Look for the tall ARCHAEOLOGY banner with The State Museum of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission logos. Always popular is the replica 20 foot dugout canoe. Stop by, have a seat in the canoe and learn about the prehistory of the Harrisburg area. Artifacts recovered from excavations on City Island in the 1990’s will be on display along with a few of the stone tools used to make the dugout. Staff and volunteers from the Section will be present during the event to answer questions and offer insight into how people lived thousands of year ago. Brochures and other literature highlighting Pennsylvania archaeology will also be available.

Archaeological Excavations at Fort Hunter – September 7-October 7, 2016

Every fall since 2006 the Archaeology Section of The State Museum of Pennsylvania has led a month-long excavation at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park in Harrisburg, PA. On September 7^th, the search for the French and Indian War-period fort will resume. Prior excavations have documented thousands of years of human occupation at this spot overlooking the Susquehanna River that has served as a Native American campsite, a Colonial grist mill and trade location, a fort, and a Victorian-era farm. While previous years have been unsuccessful in locating the stockade or other fort structures, a new year brings new opportunities and expectations that this year’s excavations will prove successful.

One of the goals this year is to further investigate a circular stone foundation that appears to represent an octagon-shaped smoke house built by property owner Archibald McAllister in the early 1800s. Rather than building the fire inside the structure (a fire hazard), a stove was housed in a small attachment to the octagon. Investigations in this feature will hopefully confirm documentary research and add to our understanding of this early entrepreneur of Harrisburg efforts to build a successful business in the early nineteenth century.

Stone Foundation of the Possible Smoke House at Fort Hunter

A second goal is to investigate the area immediately off the side porch of the original 1786 stone house. Folklore surrounding the location of the Fort Hunter blockhouse is that it now lies under this structure. Artifacts associated with Native Americans and military objects were found last year, so excavations will continue in this location in hopes of finding fort-related remains.

Come out and see what we find! Archaeologists will be on hand Monday-Friday, 9am-4pm to answer questions about the site and the archaeological process. In addition to weekdays, excavation will take place on Fort Hunter Day, to be held Sunday, September 18,2016. Excavations will close for the year on October 7, 2016.

Workshops in Archaeology –October 29, 2016

The Archaeology Section of The State Museum of Pennsylvania invites you to attend the annual Workshops in Archaeology on Saturday, October 29, 2016. This annual program is designed to provide the general public with an overview of archaeological discoveries across the Commonwealth. This year’s theme is Understanding Symbols from the Past: Objects, Landscapes and Native American Beliefs

What is the meaning behind petroglyphs, effigy mounds, beadwork, and images on pottery and smoking pipes? This year a series of presentations will focus on Indian symbolism in artifacts and on the cultural landscape. Anthropologists have long examined symbols created by past cultures as a way of interpreting and understanding social, political or individual expression. These take the form of abstract designs and depictions of animal, human and supernatural figures, frequently in stone and clay. The arrangement of earthworks and mounds also had meaning to people in the past.

Some of these symbols had religious connotations. Others represented clans or depicted supernatural beings that required appeasement. Although rarely found at archaeological sites, symbols on baskets or beadwork on clothing are also expressions of religious and cultural beliefs. They are reflections of how people perceived and organized their world. Symbolic artifacts recovered from the archaeological record provide a unique resource for examining past cultural behavior. The presenters will examine the archaeological evidence of symbolism in Native American cultures and offer insights into their interpretations.

In addition to the presentations, attendees can share their archaeological discoveries with staff from the State Historic Preservation Office who will provide assistance with identifying artifacts and recording archaeological sites, essential tasks for protecting and preserving our archaeological heritage. An additional offering includes a demonstration by a master flintknapper who will make stone tools using Native American techniques. A reception at the close of the sessions will provide an opportunity for the attendees to meet with the presenters and staff in the Anthropology and Archaeology Gallery of The State Museum.

The program and registration form will soon be available from our website. If registered before October 21, the cost is $25 for the general public or $15 for students and $15 for members of the Heritage Society, SPA, or PAC. The cost of registration at the door is $35.

Finally, October is Archaeology Month in Pennsylvania. The Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology will have programming throughout the Commonwealth that is open to the public as well as these opportunities offered through the State Museum. We hope to see you at one of our many upcoming events!

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Behind the Scenes at The State Museum – Mapping the archaeological record at Fort Hunter

2015-12-18T15:46:00.000-05:00

To continue our discussion about Fort Hunter data collection, processing and usage we will take a look at one of the most important factors in understanding and preserving an archaeological site. This factor, as is commonly stated in the real estate industry is, “location, location, location”. In order for archaeologists to understand the landscape of an archaeological site we must know where everything is in location to one another both horizontally and vertically. The reason it is so important to record the location of artifacts, features and structures, is that once they are removed from the ground there is no way put them back in their exact place again. In addition, maps depicting the exact location of different types of artifacts are necessary to identify artifact patterning and activity areas. The excavation methods employed by trained archaeologists insure that the entire archaeological record of a site is properly recorded during excavation as archaeology is a destructive science.

In order to preserve this locational information, sites such as Fort Hunter, are excavated based on a grid set from our datum (a known fixed point). This allows archaeologists to go back to a site, whether it is from year to year or twenty years from now, and re-establish the grid. With good documentation and a re-established grid, archaeologists can determine what areas had been previously excavated. The grid also provides the horizontal locational information of artifacts and features that have been removed from that area. At Fort Hunter our grid is in 5 by 5 foot square increments, which is termed as a unit. We name our units using the northing and easting (for example N90E10) of the southwest corner of a square. This designation allows us to easily reference that unit and keep track of the artifacts or features.

Overview of Fort Hunter excavations with stakes and string line indicating the grid, Fort Hunter 2007

Once a grid is established, we begin excavating units in levels in either arbitrary levels of a predetermined measurement (for example 3 inches or 5 centimeters etc.) or based on soil layers, which are indicated by changes in soil color and texture. The layers are often given an alpha designation based on the soil type. Identifying the same types of soil throughout the grid allows us to see how the soil layers slope and change over the landscape. These anomalies can indicate different geologic/climatic processes as well as point to the activities of people on the landscape. Within these natural layers, we then excavate in arbitrary levels. These levels and layers are measured below the set datum elevation, which provides the vertical location information of the artifacts found within that level.

As mentioned in our last blog, “…unique catalog numbers are assigned to each provenience.” The provenience mentioned here is the locational identity of the artifacts based on the horizontal and vertical measurements discussed above. It is with the locational information and the well-developed catalog that we are able to know how the artifacts and features are related to one another.

Now that we have explained how we use the grid, we can look at how we layout the grid, take measurements and how we manipulate the data in the lab. The basic idea of establishing a grid is to create accurate 90 degree angle squares and in order to do this archaeologists use a transit, tape measures and some basic geometry. A transit is an instrument that sights straight lines and different angles. The transit is also used with a stadia rod to measure the depth of a level.

Staff member using transit, just beginning to set up grid, Fort Hunter 2010

Today we use a newer technology called a total station. A total station is an electronic transit which can also sight straight lines and angles as well as use a laser and prism to collect precise horizontal and vertical measurements of a point on our grid. Using the Top Con Data Collector (handheld attachment to the total station), we are able to easily store and look up point information while in the field and also download and convert the data into a spreadsheet format.

Staff member using Top Con total station, Fort Hunter 2014

Staff member holding prism to take measurements using total station, Fort Hunter 2014

Example of collected data in spreadsheet format

With the data collected, we are able to then create useful maps, which allow us to analyze the relationship between features, structures and artifacts. It is also possible to use unit and artifact data to create distribution maps. Common programs used to create such maps include Golden Software’s Surfer and Autodesk’s AutoCAD.

Example of a feature map, showing relationship of several different features

Example of an artifact distribution map

Example of a profile map

With today’s technology, and the detailed information we collect, there are many different mapping options including those above as well as the ability of creating 3-D images. Knowing the relationship of artifacts and features on the landscape provides the foundation that archaeologists use to develop explanations for how past humans were living on and using the landscape. Creating these maps provides a useful visual comparison of how features, artifacts and structures are placed on the landscape. Finally, maps also provide a great way to interpret an archaeological site and how we present different ideas of the past to others.

We wanted to take a moment to remember a longtime volunteer, Sheila Dunn. Sheila was a dedicated volunteer who put a lot of time and effort into collecting data and creating Fort Hunter maps for us. Using her training and past experience in watershed surveys she was always ready and willing to help out in any way and put in great effort to create some of our first maps of the Fort Hunter excavations. Thank you, Sheila.

Sheila Dunn

We hope to see you all in the new year at the 100^th anniversary of the Pennsylvania Farm Show running from January 9-January 16, 2016. Look for us in a new location this year directly off of the Maclay Street entrance near the children’s carousel. From all of us in the Section of Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania - Have a happy and safe holiday!

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Behind the Scenes at The State Museum—Processing the Fort Hunter Collection What happens after the field work is done?

2015-12-04T16:08:00.000-05:00

Our last blog about Fort Hunter highlighted the ongoing archival research staff archaeologists’ conduct to inform how we interpret the results of each year’s excavation which aids in directing our plans for future investigations. Over the next few postings we are going to continue to discuss what happens with Fort Hunter artifacts and excavation documents between field seasons.

For every day of investigation at a well-defined archaeological site, roughly seven days are required to fully process and conserve the artifacts and archive the associated field documentation. This is a general rule of thumb that many professional archaeologist use to estimate time in preparing budgets for archaeological investigations. The laboratory time needed varies to a degree depending on quantities and types of artifacts, the extent of field records, and the numbers of people working with the collection, but on average the ratio of 1:7—length of field season to laboratory processing time—holds true.

Artifacts laid out on trays to clean and label, Fort Hunter 2015

The 2015 Fort Hunter field season was conducted for a span of 25 days, with over 12,000 artifacts recovered, 133 proveniences documented (excavation unit levels dug and subsurface features identified, etc.), and 470 digital photographs taken. Based on the ratio of 1:7, the estimated time for a single person to fully process the collection would be around 175 days or about seven months working five days a week. This estimate projects an April completion date of the following year to fully inventory, curate and archive collected artifacts and documents for any given fall season. Luckily we have two staff members in the archaeology lab and a rotation of several dedicated volunteers who greatly assist with the cleaning and labeling of artifacts. Working together we are able to generally complete the lab processing of Fort Hunter annual collections by early January, while juggling other projects and responsibilities.

Volunteer rinsing historic artifacts washed with a Sonicor industrial cleaner

As with any collection that is processed in the lab, the initial steps are to organize and record the provenience information from field bags through the preparation of a digital inventory; and stabilize the artifacts through washing, dry brushing or other conservation techniques as needed.

Excerpt from 2015 Bag Inventory

The bag inventory is then used to assign unique catalog numbers to all proveniences represented in the artifact collection. Cleaned artifacts that are at least a square inch in diameter and are material types that can be safely treated with a reversible acryloid basecoat (e.g. - most historic and prehistoric ceramics; prehistoric stone tools; historic glass and brick) are labeled with their site number— a trinomial abbreviation developed by the Smithsonian which includes the state, county, and site information—and their designated catalog number in archival ink. Labels are then sealed with a clear topcoat to ensure longevity for long-term curation.

Staff Member basecoating terracotta pots and redware pottery sherds, Fort Hunter 2015

Fort Hunter’s site number is (36Da159). When ordered alphabetically, Pennsylvania falls 36^th within the 50 States; Da is the abbreviation for Dauphin County; and Fort Hunter is the 159^th site recorded in the Commonwealth’s archaeological site survey file in this county. (Click the provided link for more information about the Pennsylvania Archaeological site survey (PASS) for Dauphin County.)

Volunteer labeling medicine bottle from tray of glass artifacts, Fort Hunter 2015

It may seem excessive to label the copious amounts of bottle glass, brick and other materials that are recovered from Fort Hunter every year, but it is well worth the time investment. The most valuable aspect of each artifact recovered is where it was located in relation to other artifacts and features on the site. This is often referred to as an artifact’s context, and is what ultimately allows archaeologist to interpret past human behaviors. Labeling artifacts with this coding system allows us to quickly know where they were recovered from, and is a safe guard against losing this information when objects are frequently pulled out of storage for further analysis.

Excerpt of Final Artifact Inventory, Fort Hunter 2014

The final steps in the artifact curation process are to add a description of each artifact or group of like artifacts into the digital inventory by catalog number, and bag and box them carefully to insure their preservation for long-term curation. This is all done in a systematic manner so that any given artifact can be easily accessed and utilized by future researchers. Maintaining a complete inventory and well organized collection for Fort Hunter year to year is particularly important because we continue to learn new information with each field season. Our interpretations continue to expand and refine as we delve further into the historic record through archival research and as our field investigations contribute further insights into material culture practices that both validate the existing historic record and broaden its scope of perspective.

Staff Member pulling artifacts from collections storage to compare findings from a previous Fort Hunter investigation year

The State Museum’s Section of Archaeology is the principal repository for archaeological collections in Pennsylvania and maintains over 7 million artifacts and associated documents. Fort Hunter field documentation and digital photographs are also archived in the Section’s county files and on a secure server with backup contact sheets and logs. These documents are constantly referenced to draft reports and articles; to create maps; to relay information in public and professional forums through presentations, exhibits, blog postings and other media outlets; and to plan further investigations. Each piece, from the artifacts recovered to field records and photographic documentation, fits together to reconstruct the story of Fort Hunter’s past. When the field work is done, we rely on sound conservation practices and accurate digital records to preserve access to Pennsylvania’s rich archaeological record for generations to come.

Staff Member searching county files for project documents

Our next blog will delve deeper into an important aspect of reconstructing and preserving archaeological contexts at Fort Hunter through digital mapping.

Special thanks to all the 2015 volunteers and interns that have greatly contributed to Archaeology Month programs this fall and post-excavation processing of the Fort Hunter collection. Thank you for preserving our past for our future—Andi B.; Jerry B.; Mary C.; Toni and Andy D.; Phil F.; Erin, Kaela and Keara F.; John G.; Keenan H.; Jonathan K.; Ruth K.; Linda L.; Brad M.; Seth M.; Fred M.; Paul R.; Wendy S.; Chriss S.; Wes S.; Clydene, Stephanie and Steve S.; Andy S.; Merikay W.

If you are interested in learning more about archaeology methods and Pennsylvania Prehistory check out First Pennsylvanians: The Archaeology of Native Americans in Pennsylvania available for purchase online and at The State Museum gift shop.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

New Perspectives on an Old Subject: Trade and Native American Relations at Fort Hunter

2015-11-20T15:42:00.000-05:00

Although the subject of Fort Hunter has been covered a number of times in the TWIPA blog, research conducted over the past year indicates that there was more going on in the area of Fort Hunter than was previously known. Prior to becoming the French and Indian War post of Fort Hunter, this area was known as “Chambers’ Mill” or “Chambers at Paxtang”, named for its early occupants, brothers Robert, Joseph, James, and Benjamin Chambers. Eventually, the brothers moved across the Susquehanna River except Joseph who operated a grist mill as well as possibly a gunsmith/blacksmith shop on the property.

1755 Evans Map Showing the Location of Chambers’ Mill North of the Kittatinny Mountain

Chambers’ Mill appears to have become a widely-known location utilized as a gathering place starting soon after the Chambers’ initial settlement. In 1744, the murder of several white men, including the trader John Armstrong, by the Indians occasioned a meeting of John Harris and other locals “at the House of Joseph Chambers in Paxton” who “there Consulted to go to Samokin [Shamokin], To Consult with the Delaware King & Secalima [Shikellamy] & their Council”.

Again in 1744, a council for the Lancaster Treaty brought a large number of the Six Nations natives to the area to consult with the governments of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. Conrad Weiser met these Indians and brought them through Paxtang on their way to Lancaster City. On June 16^th, 19^th, and 20^th he purchased supplies at Chambers’ and from Simon Girty, Sr., an unlicensed trader who is known to have traded at Chamber’s Mill. Weiser’s journal indicated that he purchased “three hundredweight of flour from Joseph Chambers and five Shillings worth of Bread and Milk of Simon girty” as well as a steer, rum, and tobacco to feed and entertain the Indians.

In the summer of 1747, Weiser, passing through the area on his way north, “found Shickelimy at the house of Joseph Chambers, in Paxton, with two of his sons and a man of note from the Canickquon Country.” Weiser “stayed two days and two nights at Joseph Chambers with the said Indians, discoursed with them, and I entertained in the best manner I could”. Other noted visitors to Chambers’ Mill in the 1740s included the Indian missionaries David Brainerd, Anton Schmidt, and Bishop John Christopher Frederick Cammerhoff.

Other than foodstuffs, alcohol, and tobacco, it is unclear what was being traded at Chambers’ Mill but it is likely that Joseph and his son James were also conducting trade. Following James’ death in 1763, an inventory of his belongings listed tomahawks, brass kettles, cloth and thread, matchcoats, Indian shirts, handkerchiefs, “2 Silver Hair plates” and “2400 Black Wompum” indicating the likelihood that he was engaging in trading activities with the natives. In 1764, a letter written from Fort Hunter to James Burd references Dennis McCormick’s desire to “dispose of all y^e Hyds” that McCormick has at the fort. This indicates that animal skins were possibly being traded for goods here.

A number of other trade locations were available in the vicinity of Chambers during this period. John Harris at Harris’ Ferry (later Harrisburg) and John Carson were located just to the south, while the Armstrong’s and Thomas McKee had trade posts to the north along the river. Whether it was to trade, to bring grain to the mill, to attend a council, or to visit the smithy for gun repairs, it is clear that something was drawing the natives to visit Chambers’ Mill. On his 1748 trip to Shamokin, Bishop Cammerhoff notes that he and his companion overtook two Indians in the woods “who lived fifty miles above Shamokin” who were “returning from Chamber’s Mill”, indicating the distances that some went to get to the mill location.

It is likely that Samuel Hunter, for whom the fort was known, was also trading with Indians at the property. A trade license was issued to Hunter for the year 1766 that gave him “Licence to trade with the Nations or Tribes of Indians, with whom his Majefty is connected, and who live under his protection…” A licensed trader was required to give bond of £100 at a quarter session of county court, allowing him to set up a legal trade at government forts or posts. Although 1766 was the only year a license is known to exist for Hunter it is possible he was trading with Indians at Fort Hunter during the war.

1766 Trade License for Samuel Hunter (PHMC Archives)

Although no definitive account of the types of goods being traded at Chambers’ Mill has yet been discovered, a number of artifacts recovered from the site indicate the possibility of a link to native visitations. Eighteenth century glass trade beads and cut scrap brass, prized by the Indians for ornamentation, have been found during excavations. In 2015, four glass trade beads were recovered from newly-opened test units on the east side of the back porch, as were fragments of brass and brass ornaments.

Trade Beads Recovered from 2015 Excavations at Fort Hunter (Photo: PHMC Collections)

Glass Beads and Scrap Brass from Fort Hunter Excavations (Photo: PHMC Collections)

Gun parts recovered from the site could be associated with military activities at the fort but may also reflect pre-war use of the smithy and could represent native weapons brought in for repair. This could be one reason that Indians were traveling long distances to visit the site, as the Moravian smithy at Fort Augusta was not constructed until the winter of 1747-48. Other items that have been found at the Fort Hunter excavations, such as knives, combs, scissors, buttons, straight pins, and mirrors could represent trade goods as easily as objects associated with the military occupation or even household goods of the Chambers or Hunter families.

More documentary research and comparison of the collection will need to be undertaken in order to detail the nature of the objects recovered from Fort Hunter. A more careful inspection of the entire collection may reveal that objects thought to have been associated with the fort occupation are possibly instead related to trade activities. Through such work it is hoped that a better understanding of the early trade and Indian relations at this site will emerge.

References:

Cammerhoff, Bishop John Christopher Frederick and John W. Jordan 1905 “Bishop J.C.F. Cammerhoff’s Narrative of a Journey to Shamokin, Penna., in the Winter of 1748”. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 160-179.

Evans, Lewis

1755 A General Map of the Middle British Colonies in America. Evans: London.

Fort Hunter Archives

2015 Private collection of photos and documents at Fort Hunter Park.

McCormick, Dennis

1764 Letter Dennis McCormick to James Burd, Fort Hunter 28^th Nov. 1764. American Philosophical Society, Burd-Shippen Collection, I-Correspondence, Box 4

Shirai, Yoko

1985 The Indian Trade in Colonial Pennsylvania, 1730-1768. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. UMI Dissertation Services.

Runk, J.M. & Company

1896 Commemorative Biographical Encyclopedia of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. Chambersburg: J.M. Runk & Company.

Rupp, I. Daniel

1846 The History and Topography of Dauphin, Cumberland, Franklin, Bedford, Adams, and Perry Counties. Lancaster: Gilbert Hills.

Wallace, Paul A.

1996 Conrad Weiser, 1696-1760, Friend of Colonist and Mohawk. Lewisburg: Wennawoods Publishing.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Summary of the 2015 field season at Fort Hunter

2015-10-09T16:44:00.000-04:00

At the beginning of the 2015 field season, we had 3 goals for the Fort Hunter excavation: investigate the icehouse to verify its function; to clean up and clarify the foundation east of the icehouse believed to be the octagon shaped smoke house; and to open new excavation units by the mansion to seek out any evidence of the block house beyond the foot print of the mansion.

Screening with a little help from our friends

As usual, our investigation plans for this year were greater than our staff and loyal volunteers could handle although we made a valiant try. Our screens were humming, producing over 12,000 artifacts but the opening of new units or features was not as extensive as we had planned. In the block east of the milk house (see below), we were able to expose the complete foundation of the building we think is the octagon shaped smoke house referenced in an 1828 account, unfortunately most of the other features in this excavation block were not tested. We discovered that the south and east walls of the stone foundation were in much better condition than the north wall which appeared to have been disturbed or “robbed”.

The octagon smoke house with a circular foundation and the attached structure containing the stove to introduce the smoke.

We troweled around Feature 110, situated in the middle of the circular foundation and found a charcoal/organic stain covered with a mix of topsoil and subsoil (“A” & “B” horizons). It appears that the dark stain was in the bottom of a hole and covered with fill. The smoke for this octagon shaped smoke house was reportedly introduced from a stove outside of the building. This charcoal stain may be the remains of a square shaped smoke house that preceded the octagon in which the smoke was generated from inside. A partial excavation of this feature last year produced a few possible 18^th century artifacts and will require careful study next year.

West side of milk house illustrating the exposed foundation

Our investigation of the structure formally known as the “icehouse” and now labeled as the milk house was significantly more rewarding. Our first indication that it was not an icehouse came early in the season while excavating the deeply stratified prehistoric horizons west of this structure. These investigations revealed that the foundation was less than six feet deep which did not agree with the historic account that describes the icehouse as over 15 feet deep.

Jim Herbstritt working inside the milk house

Following the removal of the wooden floor boards and exposing a tightly paved brick floor, followed by auguring beneath the brick, it turns out the brick was laid on a thin disturbed soil layer followed by the natural soil profile of Pleistocene sands and cobbles. In addition, a closer look at a recessed hole in the west wall revealed that it had been patched from the outside with cement – probably placed there when the building was upgraded in the 1970’s.

Auguring inside the milk house

In our re-analysis of the building’s function, it’s placement over the edge of the well foundation is significant. It is hypothesized that water was pumped from the well, through the hole in the west wall and into wooden containers that held cans of milk, cider or other liquids to be cooled. These were periodically emptied and the running water drained out the back of the building.

The interior drain in the milk house

Finally, we removed several rows of brick from the floor along the west wall of the milk house and exposed the interior builder’s trench and a disturbance in the southwest corner. The well is situated just outside this corner and the excavation of this disturbance may date the well, date the milk house and elucidate the functional relationship between these two structures. Dating these structures is extremely important for reconstructing the arrangement of buildings and their functions during the early McAllister occupation. Next year, we will probably excavate the entire builder’s trench and, if necessary, the disturbed soil under the brick floor to recover a datable assemblage of artifacts. Currently, we only have an 1828 reference to the well, milk house and octagon shaped smoke house. However, we believe the well is the oldest of these structures and probably was one of the first structures built by McAllister or possibly Mr. Hunter at an even earlier date.

The drain on the exterior of the north wall

Mary Clyne developing a scale drawing of the west wall

Now that the milk house has been completely exposed on the interior and the bottom of the exterior exposed on two sides, our intern from Elizabethtown College, Mary Clyne, is completing scale drawings of the walls and floor. These will be digitalized to accurately document the structure and hopefully clarify how it functioned.

Mary Clyne working inside the milk house

Porch Trench

The Excavation along the porch brought us back to the 18th century occupation and the investigation of frontier life in Pennsylvania. Four (5x5 ft.) units were placed along the brick porch of the McAllister mansion. The first soil layer was the typical 19^th and 20^th century “A” horizon that we identify as Strat 1 and is found across the site in this area of the yard. Below this soil, a lighter brown “A” horizon was uncovered that we have labeled Strat 2. These two soil strata were identified during our first season at Fort Hunter and they are found south of the milk house and for the most part are absent in the excavation units east and west of the milk house. Strat 2 lies directly above the “B” horizon that is designated Strat 3. Although 19^th century and non-diagnostic artifacts such as rusted metal, nails and bone dominated the collection, more 18^th century artifacts were recovered from these units than all 15 units opened west of the milk house. The list includes gunflints of French and English flint, musket balls, tin-glazed earthenware, brass scrap and most interestingly, several early 18^th century glass trade beads. There are references in the historic record that Mr. Hunter was trading with the Indians and these artifacts hwlp support the historic account.

We were unable to complete the porch trench and did not reach the “B” horizon subsoil although a transitional “A”/”B” zone was exposed. Most of Strat 2 is deeper in the porch trench than elsewhere and it may represent a large depression or hole in the 18^th century surface. Next year, we will continue in this unit and expand it to the north and east.

Both historic and prehistoric archaeology tests hypotheses and explanations of past cultural behavior. In addition, historic archaeology is a process for testing and verifying the historic record. To a degree, it is a more objective examination of history than documents alone. This season, we were able to correct the historic record and develop a more accurate description of the McAllister functional arrangement of buildings. As usual, we resolved some issues but discovered new ones.

To summarize, next year we will continue working inside the milk house to date this structure and better understand its relationship to the well. We will expand our excavation along the porch as this area contains a high density of 18^th century artifacts that may relate to the fort site or either the Hunter or McAllister occupations. We will also further define the features around the smoke house.

We are starting to get a better picture of the cultural landscape of Fort Hunter. Mr. Hunter and Mr. McAllister were true entrepreneur and we are beginning to uncover the early projects that made them and their families successful.

Finally, our other goal at Fort Hunter is to show the public how field archaeology is conducted. Towards that end we interacted with over 2700 visitors this season.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Ringing in the New Year with Sleigh Bells!

2015-01-02T15:16:00.001-05:00

To help us ring in the New Year and in the nostalgic spirit of a snowy holiday season this week in archaeology will focus on a common artifact found in Pennsylvania homesteads and stables from the colonial period through the early 20^th century—“S” is for sleigh bell.

Ornamental crotal or rumbler bells with engraved petal motifs were manufactured in British foundries as early as the 1500s. During the colonial period, mold-cast crotals with similar motifs were imported in large quantities to the Americas. They adorned animal tack, carriages and sleighs of European settlers; and were traded to Native Americans who re-incorporated bells into their own cultural practices, using crotals for personal ornamentation. By the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries, petal bell crotals became commonly known as sleigh or jingle bells, names popularized in Victorian-era Christmas carols still sung today.

A crotal or rumbler bell is distinguished from an open mouthed bell by its lack of an attached clapper. It is considered a rattle, rather than a true bell for this reason. Sound is produced by the inclusion of a loose pebble or iron jinglet encased in the bell’s round body. The sound travels out of the bell through the throat, a slot or series of slit openings on the bottom half of the body. The shank is located on the opposite side of the bell and is used to attach the crotal to a leather or cloth mount.

Three petal-decorated and one undecorated mold-cast sleigh bells with slanted, u-shaped shanks, 17th - 18th centuries, Conestoga Town (36La52), The State Museum of Pennsylvania

Five of six sleigh bell crotals were recovered from PHMC excavations at Conestoga Town (36La52), a Susquehannock village site of the period from 1690-1740 (Kent, 2001; 207-208; 386). Based on their archaeological contexts, these bells are likely of British manufacture sometime in the late-17^th to early-18^th century and exhibit a slanted u-shaped shank typical of the period. While local metal smiths are likely to have produced crotals prior to the mid-1750s, the first commercially established foundries in the American colonies casting sleigh bells on a large scale were not operating until the latter half of the 18^th century. Two sleigh bells from Conestoga Town exhibit a W.K. or M.K. makers’ mark which may link them to the Knight foundry (1518-1709) of Reading, England. The bell pictured below is engraved with the initials G.W. or W.G.; a common mark associated with Aldbourne, Wiltshire foundries of the 17^th and 18^th centuries (Hume, 1969). The W.G. maker’s mark cannot be ascribed to a specific bell maker until the late-18^th century, William Gwynn. However, it is present on many examples of earlier dated crotals produced in the Wiltshire region prior to the establishment of the Gwynn foundry (1770-1813). (Link to Blunt for more information about the history of crotals and British foundries).

Seventeenth-eighteenth century sleigh bell, petal-decorated on upper and lower hemispherers, G.W. or W.G. maker's mark, Conestoga Town (36La52), the State Museum of Pennsylvania, on exhibit.

Hume (1969) believes the Wells foundry also of Aldbourne, was operating as early as 1694 and may have produced bells with a G.W. maker’s mark before the proprietorship of Richard Wells and sons (1755-1825). The R.W. engraving is a widely accepted diagnostic mark of the late 18^th century Wells foundry, famous for producing sleigh bells in the largest array of sizes of any manufacturer in England. Sleigh bells with these marks have been found in archaeological contexts in Williamsburg, Virginia among other late 18^th century colonial contexts.

The petal bell is also the most common design for sleigh bells dating from the 18^th and 19^th centuries. The first American manufactured sleigh bells were produced in East Hampton, Connecticut by Captain William Barton and his descendants. Pictured below is an early example of a petal bell designed crotal most likely produced by a member of the Barton clan (circa 1740s-1845).

American manufactured sleigh bell, 2 ¼” dia., 18^th-19^th century, Fort Hunter (36Da159), The State Museum of Pennsylvania.

The bell was found behind the icehouse during 2013 PHMC excavations at Fort Hunter. Diagnostic characteristics include the petal engraved motif, the “B” marker’s mark present next to a single throat that terminates in circular ends, and the presence of two mold holes on either side of a cast u-shaped shank. This bell most likely belonged to the McAllister family who owned the property from the mid-1780s to the late 1800s. The presence of this American-made artifact among other household goods reinforces the political and economic transitions that occurred during and after the revolutionary war, as American craftsman began to fill the demand for fine-crafted goods formerly met by British import markets.

Nineteenth-twentieth century sleigh bells, left-1 1/4" dia.,right-2" dia.,manufacture unknown, Westmoreland County, Robert Oshnock Collection, The State Museum of Pennsylvania.

The sleigh bells from Westmoreland County pictured above also have a u-shaped shank like the bell found at Fort Hunter; however, the presence of four mold holes circling the shaft is likely evidence of post-1850 manufacturing techniques. There is a faint petal design and number “8” engraved on the larger crotal from the Milk site (36Wm540), indicating a 2” diameter size. The smaller bell, a general county find, displays a petal motif and also lacks a maker’s mark.

The State Museum, Section of Archaeology wishes you a happy and healthy holiday season! Please visit our exhibit booth at the Pennsylvania State Farm Show, January 10^th-17^th. The exhibit will feature artifacts and information focused around cultural change and adaptation to the environment since our earliest occupation in Pennsylvania about 16,000 years ago. Our booth is in the Main Hall in the Northeast section of the area, directly across from the Bureau for Historic Preservation and their Historic Markers scavenger hunt. You can’t miss us, just look for the only 20 foot long replica of a Native American dugout canoe!

References:

BBC

2014 The British Museum. A History of the World: Crotal Bells. Electronic document.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/nictdQS0TayEgPCH-vq3FA

Blunt, Rod.

2005 UK Detector Finds Database: Crotal Bells. Electronic document.
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/crotal-bells.html

Classic Bells Ltd.

2002 Electronic document. www.classicbells.com

Cotter, John L. and J. Paul Hudson

1957 New Discoveries at Jamestown. National Park Service.

Hume, Ivor Noël

1969 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Kent, Barry C.

2001 Susquehanna’s Indians. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission.

Spouse, Deborah A.

1988 A Guide to Excavated Colonial and Revolutionaly War Artifacts. Heritage Trails.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Summary of Major Features Tested during the 2014 Season at Fort Hunter

2014-10-24T16:00:00.001-04:00

Two weeks ago, the blog highlighted some of the more interesting artifacts recovered this season. Our focus this week is on several interesting features that have revealed more of the story of life during the 18^th and 19^th centuries in central Pennsylvania. According to my favorite archaeology text book by David Hurst Thomas and Robert Kelly, a feature is the nonportable evidence of technology; usually fire hearths, architectural elements, artifact clusters, garbage pits, soil stains, and so on. They are artifacts but they usually cannot be removed from the ground and can only be described. Fort Hunter was occupied by Europeans for nearly 300 years and contains a very large quantity of artifacts. Unfortunately, the majority of these cannot be dated unless found in features with other diagnostic objects – that is artifacts that can be chronologically placed to a specific and limited time period. Below we will review the more interesting and significant features encountered this season - some were datable and some were not.

(East wall of foundation)

Feature 22/55 is a rock foundation that we first encountered in 2009 but misidentified as a French drain. As we expanded the area north of the well, it became clear that this feature was a building foundation. It consists of a mixture of mostly rounded cobbles but also some dressed diabase. Many of the cobbles were large, 12” – 18” in diameter. In this part of the site, it is possible to identify the original ground surface present at the time of European contact and the foundation seems to be resting on this surface. At the same level as the foundation or just below it, we uncovered numerous fire-cracked-rocks which were part of a Native American hearth feature to the east. It does not appear that a builder’s trench was dug for this foundation but rather the foundation was simply placed on the ground surface. The east wall of this structure is at least 15 feet long. As we expanded the block north, we carefully excavated around and beneath the rocks but did not find any artifacts that would suggest a date for when the foundation was constructed. Since it rests on the original ground surface, it could be early.

(Northeast corner of foundation)

This year we reached the back corner and were hoping to solve this problem. The back or north wall makes a right angle turn to the west. Unfortunately, the back wall ended within two feet where it had been cut by a waste water ditch or where a large section of the bank eroded away during the hurricane Agnes flood of 1972. To our dismay, what appeared to be postmolds turned out to be rodent disturbances and the artifacts found in them could have dated anytime during the 19^th century. In the future, we will investigate the area to the west of the erosion ditch and hopefully, uncover the west wall of the foundation.

(Feature 24/48 with Andrea standing on the iron pipe in the bottom leading to the well)

Another feature that attracted our attention this season was Feature 24/48. This was a large hole dug adjacent to the well but it also extends to the north for approximately ten feet. It was first identified in plan-view in 2009 as a large circular stain adjacent to the well. Our excavation eventually extended to a depth of 6.6 feet and an iron pipe was found at the bottom that apparently was part of a pumping system for the well. Based on historic photos from the 1890’s, there was a windmill approximately ten feet to the west and it is assumed that it pumped water out from the well. This feature was not completely excavated because part of it extended into the west wall. During last winter, the adjacent unit to the north slumped and exposed more of the feature. While troweling the wall this year, we recovered the U.S. Navy button dating to approximately 1809.

(Navy button probably part of the uniform worn by Thomas Gates McAllister, son of Archibald McAllister, who served in the U. S. Navy from 1805 to 1807.)

After the slump was cleared, approximately 15 inches of the feature was exposed in the floor and considering the date on the button, this required our attention. The button and several pieces of Middle Woodland pottery were the earliest artifacts found, however the majority were post 1850 in age and not particularly chronologically diagnostic. This portion of the feature was over seven feet in depth and revealed a mostly decayed log situated upright with an iron bar extending perpendicular through it. Most of the log had decayed but part was covered in creosote and therefore was preserved. Initially we speculated that the log was a wooden pipe that had been inserted into the ground. However, the iron bar suggested another scenario. Since the pipe connecting the windmill and the well are in the same excavation pit, we are now thinking that this log was part of this construction activity. In this scenario, the log was placed into the hand dug pit upright and the soil was filled in around it to secure it in-place. The log functioned as a “dead man” to which cables were attached to secure an adjacent structure; in this case most likely the windmill. We are reasonably sure that the windmill and pipe were part of the improvements made by the Boas family when they purchased the property in the 1870s. Therefore both structures probably date to that time. This does not help us much when interpreting the 18^th century occupation but it does establish the construction chronology in this area of the site.

(Profile of Feature 24/48 illustrating “dead man” on the left)

Feature 77/90 is located at the back or north end of the icehouse. Originally, these were considered two separate features but after further excavation, they connected. The Feature 77 section is an 18” by 24” rectangular opening in the icehouse wall with a lining of motar on the bottom. The opening extends approximately two feet below the present ground surface and is approximately 6” below the current wooden floor of the icehouse. The opening does not extend inside the structure but is blocked by a dried laid brick wall. It is associated with a dark stain outside the wall that extended approximately 12’’below the plastered surface. Middle to late 19^th century artifacts were recovered from both the opening in the wall and the dark stain area outside the wall.

(Opening in icehouse wall. Brick in back of the opening)

The Feature 90 section started out as a poorly defined stain extending north of the opening in the wall approximately 8 feet. It did not really take shape until the stain had been excavated to a depth of 8”. Rough cut wooden sides were exposed at this point with several long spikes protruding vertically from the sides. The spikes suggest that wood was attached to the top. It appears to have been a rectangular box extending from near the icehouse wall, north, possibly funneling water over the cliff that drops 36 feet to Fishing Creek. Depending on which records are accurate, the icehouse is either 15 or over 20 feet deep with stairs leading to the bottom. The records describe the ice as being stored on the bottom floor but, if the ice is stored on the bottom, why is there a drain at the top? Possibly the historic records are not accurate and the icehouse is not constructed deep into the ground and this feature acted as a drain for the melting ice. We have considered augering into the floor of the icehouse to determine its depth. However, augering inside a building would be very difficult since there is less than eight feet of roof clearance.

(Feature 90 with wood and nails visible on the left side)

The most productive feature we excavated this season in terms of 18^th century artifacts was Feature 62. This was first identified in 2011. It appeared as a dark linear stain under the topsoil that produced a French gunflint and scratch blue salt glaze stoneware. This year, we recovered significantly more stoneware along with tin glaze earthenware. A preliminary analysis suggests these represent pieces of three or four vessels of scratch blue and at least two vessels of tin glaze earthenware. Unfortunately, these were found with 19^th century artifacts. The stain was associated with a line of mostly dressed rocks but some rounded cobbles. It extended approximately 15 feet along the top of the slope leading down to the edge of the cliff overlooking Fishing Creek. The 18^th century artifacts were generally confined to a six foot long section but, it seems to have been part of a dumping area that was used well into the 19^th century. Several pieces of the stoneware and the earthenware have been mended and it will be interesting to see if there are any re-fits from other parts of the site. For example, the area around the bake oven produced a considerable quantity of similar stoneware and they also might cross-mend. Feature 62 produced more 18^th century pottery than we have recovered in many years at Fort Hunter, unfortunately all of it was from a mixed context.

(the alignment of rocks to the left of the rock foundation in the center is Feature 62)

As is frequently the case, one of the most intriguing features was uncovered the last two weeks of the excavation. This is a circular rock foundation, 12 feet in diameter. Many of the rocks are large cobbles similar to Feature 22/55 but there is also a mixture of smaller cobbles and dressed pieces of diabase. However, in this case, there is a significant builder’s trench that is about 18 inches deep. The rocks do not appear to be aligned for a foundation but seem to have been disturbed. Possibly, the foundation was partially removed (robbed) to be used in some other structure. There also seems to be a small open ended rectangular structure on its north side. Artifacts are not common but most date to the 18^th century. These include scratch blue stoneware, gunflint, musket ball and the near complete lock from a Brown Bess musket. Along with these early artifacts, the low density of artifacts also suggests that this is an early feature. Once Captain McAllister arrived in 1786, his artifacts became very common. Therefore, the low density of artifacts in this feature suggests a pre-McAllister structure. However, Feature 99 cuts through another feature that seems more recent, suggesting the foundation may not be as old as we think. The inside of the circle is disturbed but not to any depth so it is not a large well or cistern. We have discussed the possibly that it was one of the fort’s bastions or its powder magazine. However, a re-examination of historic records discovered that in 1798, there was an octagon shaped smokehouse in the back yard. It was elevated off the ground and smoke was produced via a stove on the outside of the structure – probably the rectangular structure to the north of the circle. However, the wooden smoke house was possibly constructed on top of a fort related structure. Clearly more excavation is required in and around the rectangular attachment and the features in the center of the rock circle. This feature will be a focus of our activity in the fall of 2015.

(Circular foundation, builders trench in profile and attached rectangular structure to the north)

Although, this season produced a relatively high frequency of 18^th century artifacts, some of which may be fort related, with the exception of the hillside dump, all of these features could date to Archibald McAllister’s occupation rather than the French and Indian War fort. The features have also given us direction for excavation in the future. Practically all of these features are examples of the mystery and frustration involved in archaeological field projects. We spend considerable time in the excavation of features but their function and age frequently remain problematic.

References:

Thomas, David Hurst and Robert Kelly

2007 Archaeology Down to Earth. Thomson Wadsworth Publishing, Australia.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

“N” is for No Fort Found Yet, A Summary of the 2014 Fort Hunter Excavations

2014-10-10T14:08:00.000-04:00

As we wrap up our time in the field at Fort Hunter Mansion and Park, we have found limited structural evidence of the French and Indian War era fort. Though we have not found structural evidence of the fort, we have found a number of artifacts, some that date to the French and Indian War period and some that do not.

One of our more exciting finds this year is the “lock” mechanism of a Brown Bess musket. Brown Bess muskets were in service of the British Army from the early 1700’s to the early 1800’s. At the beginning of the war, which began in 1757, it is said that there were approximately 80 soldiers at the fort, but this changed dramatically when it was discovered that the majority of the war would be fought in the Ohio River Valley. Due to this realization the use of the fort became primarily for supply. At this time the fort was manned by much fewer men, approximately 30, who were a militia made up of local farmers and residents. These militia men would have provided their own weapons, which may have included a Brown Bess gun. This suggests that the gun part, which seems to have been discarded after breaking, could have been used by one of the Fort Hunter French and Indian war era men.

excavated musket lock with modern replica for comparison

Other military-related artifacts found this year include two musket balls and a French gun flint. Though we cannot be sure these objects are from the French and Indian War era, it is possible. Since the fort was manned primarily by a militia and they would have provided their own weapons, the different sizes of muskets balls and various types of gun flints found throughout the years of excavation at Fort Hunter can be explained. These militia men would not have all had the exact same weapons as an army would have had.

french flint and musket ball

Another interesting artifact that was found this year and in our excavations in past years is a datable ceramic called Scratch blue. Scratch blue is an English salt-glazed stoneware that was created by incising deep lines in the ceramic body and filling it with cobalt blue oxide before firing leaving thin blue lines in generally floral motifs after firing. This type of ceramic has a very narrow production date range of 1744-1775. This date range includes the French and Indian War period, suggesting that these ceramics may have been used by the soldiers or militia men of the fort. Of course, most of the artifacts, including the Scratch blue stoneware, the gun flints, and the musket balls could have been used by the occupants of the Fort Hunter land during much of the 18th and 19th century.

Scratch blue decorated salt-glazed stoneware

As mentioned in previous blogs, the use of the land surrounding and including the Fort Hunter Mansion and Park extends far back in time. Just this year we have found a number of flakes left behind by prehistoric Native Americans. In our last week in the field one of our interns, Tessa Burns, was lucky enough to find an intact datable prehistoric artifact. This artifact is an Otter Creek projectile point. Just last year we found another Otter Creek point and this year’s find reinforces the idea of a long history of land-use here because Otter Creek points date between 5800 and 6600 BP.

Otter Creek projectile point

So here we are, another field season complete and, though we still have not found the fort at Fort Hunter, we have continued to add to our knowledge of the long history of the land-use at the Fort Hunter Mansion and Park. Thank you to all of our volunteers for dedicating their time and efforts in helping us in the field and thank you also to all those who took the time to stop by and listen and learn about archaeology and what we have been doing at Fort Hunter for the past 8 years.

References:

Noel Hume, Ivor
1976 A Guide to Colonial Artifacts of America Alfred A. Knopf, New York

Antill, P
2006 Baker Rifle. Electronic Document, http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapon_brown_bess.html.

Ryan, D. Michael
Brown Bess – Musket Misconception. Electronic Document, http://www.concordma.com/magazine/janfeb02/brownbessmusket.html.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Interpreting the Archaeological Record at Fort Hunter

2013-09-27T17:15:00.001-04:00

Is this a road, a ditch a redoubt or something else?

Recent archaeology conducted on the side yard at Fort Hunter Mansion has left us puzzled and searching for answers as to the feature we had previously discovered. Since beginning the investigation of the French and Indian War occupation at Fort Hunter, several excavation units have been opened east of the mansion towards the front of the house (hereafter denoted as the front yard) this on the highway side of the mansion. Our followers will recall the discovery of a feature in the fall of 2010 that we thought might be a possible road. The compressed cobble layer appeared to have a series of ruts that ran through the cobble, much like wagon wheels.

Volunteer Wes troweling the feature uncovered this spring

Several trenches had been excavated in this area subsequent to the initial discovery, but they provided little interpretive value to this original feature. Test trenches installed in March 2013 allowed us to open up a larger area than hand troweling permitted. This provided an opportunity to look at the soil stratigraphy of this section of the property and hopefully expose more of the “road” feature. These trenches produced stratigraphy that provided further evidence for a road or ditch feature. Trenching exposed an oval shaped basin, approximately one to three feet deep, 40 feet wide (east–west) and 170 feet long (north-south). Defined by a layer of dark soil that slopes down in profile around its edge, the basin is approximately two feet deep in the center and lies on top of a gray sandy hardpan material. The deepest section of the basin measured less than 18 feet wide and is approximately 160 feet long. The gray hardpan exhibits iron staining and in most places a ¼ inch thick layer of iron concretion marks the top of this soil. The gray color frequently represents a soil that was formed in a low oxygen environment such as under water and the iron deposits are also compatible with a surface that was frequently covered with water. Sections of this gray hardpan are layered or paved with pebbles, possibly to stabilize the roadbed.

Excavations in the spring had left us with additional questions and areas to investigate. After reestablishing ourselves on the site, we reopened our trench from this spring in order to expand upon this area. We enlisted our backhoe operator, Corry Harner, to assist us with removing our backfilled soils and taking off the modern fill layers identified in our previous investigation. This will allow us to examine a larger area than time would permit with traditional flat shoveling and hand excavation.

Our compressed cobble layer continues across several of the units we have opened in the front yard. There appear to be narrow ruts filled with cobble, again indicating an improvement necessary due to water standing in these ruts. Remember this is a supply fort for Fort Halifax and Fort Augusta. We know from inventories at Fort Augusta that there was small cannon, gunpowder, musket balls, guns along with food and provisions for between 300 and 400 men stationed at the fort. Inventories of supplies at Fort Hunter are much lighter, but did list the following in November of 1756; the garrison consists of two sergeants and 34 privet men, amunition included 4 ½ lbs of powder and 28 of lead and the provisions consisted of 1,000 pounds of flour and 2,000 of beef.

excavated rut

Faintly visible ditch or road feature continues into the adjacent units

Historical archaeology examines an array of documents which often serve as clues in understanding the activities of a site. At Fort Hunter we have examined maps, journal entries, and photographs of not only this site, but other French & Indian War period sites hoping for details that were previously overlooked. Publications heavily referenced include Forts on the Pennsylvania Frontier, 1753-1758 by William A. Hunter and The French & Indian War in Pennsylvania 173-1763, Louis M. Waddell and Bruce D. Bomberger. The following quotes provide some of the accounts of conditions at Fort Hunter between 1756 and 1758.

Instructions from Governor Morris to Captain McKee in January 1756 - As soon as your company is completed & mustered you are to march to a place called Hunter’s Mill upon the Susquehanna and Either compleat the fort already begun there or build another at such other convenient place as James Gilbreth Esq. shall adivise, who is requested to go with you for that purpose; and in case it should be thought necessary to erect a new fort you are to build it in the form and dimensions herewith given you.”

A report in August, 1757 of conditions states; “tho the fort or blockhouse at Hunter’s is not tenable, being hastily erected, and not finished, yet the Situation was the best upon the river for every service as well as for the protection of the frontiers.”

An entry from July 1758; Engineer Rich’d Dudgeon “ I am of the opinion that Stockading of it & Opening & Deepning the Ditch, according to the Scheme left with the Commanding Officer there, will be sufficient to protect it against any Indian Attack.”

The officer in charge at Hunter’s wrote a few days later to Governor Denny indicating he was ordered to “repair it” but that the locals would not help until after harvest in 3 weeks- he closes with –p.s. the stockades are cut.

The review in 1758 requiring an “opening and deepening of the ditch” was a common complaint among British officers who had taken over control of Pennsylvania’s small provincial forts. Many of these were erected hastily in 1756 & 1757 as the result of Indian raids in the area. The construction of these “forts” varied from houses with gun ports cut into the basement wall to traditional forts with stockade walls. There often was not a uniform manner of construction and the officers charged with construction were inexperienced. Very little documentation exists of the construction of these forts, with the exception of Fort Halifax and Fort Augusta. These forts were constructed under the direction of Colonel William Clapham, an officer from Massachusetts experienced in fort construction.

Plan of construction for Fort Augusta- largest of the Provincial forts

Bastions were not typical for small Provincial forts, but were installed at larger British forts

Variety of construction of fort walls

Archaeology conducted at Fort Augusta as early as 1938, recovered evidence of the officer’s quarters and stockade. Preserved posts, still in their upright positions were uncovered, erected in the same manner as described by Shippen in July 1756, shortly after Clapham’s arrival. Subsequent archaeology by the PHMC has uncovered evidence of the earthen wall, powder magazine and an additional portion of the stockade. Comparisons between the fort construction at Fort Augusta and Fort Hunter have been of little benefit since their functions were significantly different. Fort Augusta was constructed to house up to 400 men; Fort Hunter never housed more than ninety. The location of both on high terraces overlooking the Susquehanna River, appear to be one of their only similarities.

We will continue to map and excavate this road/ditch feature and evaluate the artifacts recovered from within to determine an age for construction. Hopefully, a potential stockade post discovered this week will be the first of many- confirming the location of the stockade.

Note the possible postmold circled in red at foreground

Excavation has continued on the north side of the ice house and the dog burials are being removed. We will bring those to the lab for cleaning and examination, hoping to identify the species and confirm them as dogs owned by the Reilys.

Removing the dog burials, with special assistance.

We continue to have a steady stream of volunteers who have provided us with amazing assistance during sometimes difficult conditions. The weather this year has been stellar which makes it much easier to keep the volunteers happy!

New Deal Archaeology in Pennsylvania- Free Admission from 11:30 -1:30

October is Archaeology Month in Pennsylvania and we have a steady stream of events scheduled for the month. Our first event is this Friday, October 4^th with a Learn at Lunchtime event at The State Museum. Dr. Bernard Means and curator Janet R. Johnson will provide a presentation on New Deal Archaeology in Pennsylvania from 12:15 to 1:00 in the Galaxy Room. Their research into archaeology conducted under federal relief programs initiated by Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression, provides a fascinating approach to archaeology, curation and historical research. Shovel Ready, Archaeology and Roosevelt’s New Deal for America, 2013, will be available for purchase and signing by these presenters. This free program will also offer an opportunity to visit the museum from 11:30 to 1:30.

Sunday, October 6^th is Indian Festival Day at Fort Hunter- come out for our last weekend at the fort. The excavation closes for the season on October 11^th, so if you haven’t stopped up to see us yet, please come out for this educational and fun family event. The program runs from 12-4 at Fort Hunter Mansion & Park.

For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .