Page 104 - Maryland Historical Trust - Archaeology Colonial MD

102
(the “crumhorn”) was found at Swan Cove, while a second unique pipe was recovered from the Bur- le Site a half mile away bearing Drue’s distinctive decorative marks (see figure 11). In fact, the exact tool used to decorate the Robert Burle pipe frag- ments was recovered at Swan Cove.
In one aspect, Drue’s products can be seen as a major cautionary tale for modern archaeologi- cal interpretation, in that he was producing white belly bowl pipes that are virtually indistinguish- able from European products, but was using local clays. Archaeological collections can no longer be divided into European and local products sim- ply on the basis of color. Given the importance to regional pipe studies, Swan Cove is the most archaeologically important of the Providence sites excavated to-date.10
The Tanyard
The Tanyard (18AN823) was surveyed by Thomas Thurston in 1664 and patented in 1666. There are again, however, some artifactual indications that an earlier dwelling might have existed at the locality. Material culture evidence indicates that an occu- pation by Henry Lewis and his family continued into the early eighteenth century, either at this site or very nearby.
The primary area of this site appears to have been at least partially destroyed by housing con- struction. Unlike the six previously described Providence sites, neither the Tanyard (nor Meeting House Site — see below) were formally excavat- ed by the Lost Towns Project. Both were initially located through small shovel test pits which, obvi- ously, produced relatively few artifacts. As a con- sequence, nothing is known about the structure at the Tanyard other than the fact that the building appears to have had a sub-floor cellar of unknown depth and dimensions. Simple confirmation of the Tanyard’s locality does enhance the picture of a cottage industry associated with the Providence settlement.
The Meeting House Site
The location of the one public building at Prov- idence — the Meeting House — can be estab- lished through documentary research with some specificity. Unfortunately, the physical location has been heavily impacted through the construc- tion of a golf cart facility for the Naval Academy Golf Course. However, a small number of random shovel test pits conducted on the wooded slopes
around the facility uncovered nails and daub which does appear to confirm the site’s location. Obvi- ously this would be a highly significant place to study, but whether any intact architectural evidence survives the modern impacts of construction is highly questionable.
The Landscape of Providence
The basic goals of the Lost Towns Project inves- tigations at Providence were simple. The first was simply to relocate the sites associated with the Pu- ritan settlement near modern-day Annapolis. The other goals involved an attempt to understand the architecture and material culture associated with these early sites.11 The humble earthfast dwellings that first defined the Providence settlement had long been forgotten until the archaeologist’s trow- els and shovels brought them to light once again. In interpreting these sites and pondering their significance it must be emphasized that the Puri- tans were basically just moving from existing set- tlements in Virginia. They were not inexperienced newcomers from Europe “learning from scratch” how to cope in the Chesapeake environment.12
In at least two known cases (Broadneck and Homewood’s Lot) the settlers appear to have initially built sill on the ground structures. Leavy Neck may also be representative of this construc- tion type. Presumably these were expedient build- ings that could be quickly built, and were intended for eventual replacement by more permanent post in the ground buildings. In the case of Home- wood’s Lot, this replacement appears to have taken place within about a decade.
At the Burle Site (and others) there is no evidence of any more temporary type structure preceding the large buildings utilizing earthfast structural posts. Ironically, the inherent nature of this construction makes this building type “imper- manent” itself. Unless replaced, the wooden posts supporting the building would fall victim to rot and insects within a two to three decade timeframe. Neither the basic post-in-ground construction nor the floor plans seen at Providence made the Puri- tans in any way distinctive from others in the re- gion. They had undoubtedly become schooled in the most effective construction types for the Ches- apeake during their period in Virginia. What was distinctive, however, was the amount of Dutch ar- chitectural embellishment that was utilized within these structures. The hard Dutch yellow “klinker” brick was used throughout the region due to its