Page 166 - Maryland Historical Trust - Archaeology Colonial MD

figure 26
Wrought nail from 18PR346.
figure 27
European flint fragment at 18PR346.
Colony in 1651 when Cecil Calvert included the Mattapanians in the establishment of the reserva- tion at Choptico. It may have been the intention of the government to remove the Mattapanian to Choptico since then. Bear in mind that intense colonization by the English in the Patuxent came later than in the Potomac. The Patuxent was sub- ject to frequent raids by the Susquehannock, as evident from a Jesuit letter from 1642. The let- ter describes the loss of men (servants or tenants) and goods at their Mattapany mission, which was located much further south at the mouth of the river in what is now St. Mary’s County.67
Why then include the Mattapanian in a call for a reservation where “they may neither injure the English nor the English them,” if not as a move to remove and displace them to free up land for English settlement? The Calverts and their allies stood to personally benefit from the removal of the Mattapanian from the area. By 1658 there were still Native people present at the fort on Mataponi Creek, so Philip Calvert could not as easily have established a man- or there, instead choosing to establish Mount Calvert further upriver. This could have acted as a vise on the Mattapanian, establishing English settlements to their north and south at around the same time. By 1664, the removal of the Mat- tapanian was complete, which allowed Thomas Brooke, a friend of the Calverts, to acquire the land.
The site of the Mattapanian fort has not yet been surveyed, but its location is known if the 1703 deed description is accurate in its place- ment. A nearby site (18PR346) was investigat- ed in 2015 by St. Mary’s College of Maryland, which had previously been identified by Mary Barse through a surface survey in 1987.68 The site was identified as a Middle and Late Woodland period resource procurement site. The 2015 sur- vey sought to see if there were any 17th-century artifacts at the site that could tie it to the fort period.69 Like the Nottingham South site, the majority of the identifiable Native-made ceram- ics from the site consisted of Townsend wares. Other minority wares that also date into the 17th century include Potomac Creek, Moyaone, Yeocomico, and Sullivan Cove wares.
Though inconclusive, the site did yield a handful of artifacts of European origin including five nails, only one of which was definitively iden- tified as a wrought nail and a single fragment of European flint debitage. While nails and flint are
164
Mount Calvert as depicted on Herman’s map are in the vicinity of Lands Creek, now called Hall’s Creek. This area is located approximately three miles south of Mataponi Creek. This distance is significant given that, in 1663, the Maryland government passed legislation declaring that no European could settle within three miles of an In- dian settlement.65 We know that this law was not enforced, however, when it came to the Choptico reservation.
The first patent in this area three miles to the south of Mataponi Creek was for a tract called “Marsham’s Rest,” consisting of 750 acres pat- ented to Richard Marsham in 1664.66 Marsham’s first wife at the time, Catherine, may have been Catherine Brent, the daughter of Governor Giles Brent and Mary Kittamaquund (daughter of the Piscataway tayac), though there is some question about this. Marsham also had a direct connection to the Calverts, as he later married Anne Calvert, the daughter of the former Governor, Leonard Calvert. Anne had also previously been married to Baker Brooke (brother of Thomas Brooke) and Henry Brent.
The patenting of land immediately around the Mattapanian settlement shortly after their last appearance in the colonial records is suggestive. The planned removal of the Mattapanian appears to be connected directly and indirectly by associa- tion to the Calvert government and their allies. It was Philip Calvert who served as Secretary of the