LiDAR Aids Archaeologists in Documenting Fort Hunter

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 .

Jefferson County Revisited

Back on the alphabetical trail this week through Pennsylvania Archaeology and we arrive at the letter “J”. With options like jasper and Jack’s Reef points discussed in earlier posts, “J” becomes a bit more difficult to find a match for.  Revisiting Jefferson County might not be the most creative solution but it does provide an opportunity to look at a recent cultural resources management project or CRM. Cultural Resource Management is a review process that aids in the protection and management of our cultural heritage under state and federal guidelines. This may include archaeological resources, but also addresses historic buildings. Cultural resources are finite and non-renewable resources that once destroyed cannot be returned to their original state.

Summerville Bridge project area, facing WNW

Jefferson County is home to Summerville, a small village situated along the northern and southern banks of Redbank Creek, a meandering tributary that forms the border between neighboring Clarion and Armstrong Counties and eventually meets the Allegheny River further west.

Historic aerial photo of Summerville, bridge is slightly below the center of photo, Redbank Creek flowing right to left

As seen in the historic aerial photo above, Summerville’s only bridge linking the northern and southern sections of town spans the creek at a perpendicular angle. PennDoT proposes to replace the bridge, “on a new alignment skewed across the creek . . . in order to improve the horizontal and vertical geometry and eliminate two 90 degree turns to the north of the existing bridge.”(Raber, Heberling and Vento 2012)

 Due to receiving federal funds, PennDoT undertakings are required, among other things, to make a good faith effort in identifying cultural resources, evaluating their significance, and if necessary, mitigate any adverse effects their projects may have on important archaeological sites. In 2011, Heberling Associates, Inc. was contracted by PennDoT to conduct a phase I archaeological survey of the bridge replacement project’s area of potential effect, or APE.

field crew huddles around the geomorphologist in a test unit, bridge visible in background

 Referencing the Bureau for Historic Preservation’s Cultural Resource Geographic Information System (CRGIS), no fewer than eight previously recorded archaeological sites have been identified in the vicinity of Summerville, suggesting a high probability of a site within the project area. Directly abutting the existing bridge a steep slope, recent erosional activity of Redbank Creek and modern demolition work eliminated the need for subsurface testing in three of the four quadrants of the project area. However, in the southeast quad geomorphological analysis indicated the potential for intact cultural remains in Holocene age soils.

west wall profile of test unit #2

Four 1 x 1 meter test units in the southeast quad of the project area were hand excavated to sterile soils. Thirteen pieces of Onondaga and Upper Mercer chert debitage were recovered from A horizon (topsoil) contexts across each of the four units, one of which exhibits slight utilization wear on opposite margins. No other prehistoric tools were found and none of the lithics could be assigned to a particular time period.

Upper Mercer and Onondaga chert flake and flake fragments from the Summerville Bridge site (36Je178)

utilized flake from 36Je178, showing minor use wear on left and right margins

 Several dozen historic artifacts were also recovered including earthenware and stoneware ceramics, vessel glass, a kaolin pipe stem fragment, and miscellaneous architectural materials. Two heavily corroded U.S. one cent pieces were found in stratum 2 of Unit 3. Although the obverse of both are so worn the dates are obliterated, enough of the reverse remains to identify one as a “wheat” penny, produced from 1909-1958, and the other as an “Indian Head” penny, minted from 1858-1909 (Yeoman 2001).

architectural materials: (top, left to right) brick, window glass, well preserved cut nail (bottom) heavily corroded cut nails

top, left to right: kaolin pipe stem fragment, aqua colored bottle glass fragments, glass button with iron eye, US wheat penny, US "Indian Head" penny. bottom, left to right: glazed red earthenware, stoneware crock rim and body sherds, hand-painted white earthenware ceramics

The cultural review process requires resources to meet certain criteria http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm  in order to meet eligibility standards.  The light density and non-diagnostic nature of the prehistoric finds, and the historic artifacts’ lack of spacial integrity or association to important people or events, renders the Summerville Bridge site (36Je178) not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places, and no additional archaeological testing has been recommended prior to the construction of the new bridge.

Summerville Bridge, looking North

While not an exceptional archaeological site yielding new, interesting finds that will turn Pennsylvania Archaeology on its head, the Summerville bridge replacement project serves as an example of the numerous transportation projects throughout the state where PennDoT has (after the artifacts and associated documentation have been submitted to the State Museum of Pennsylvania, of course!) done its due diligence in helping to preserve the past for the future. These cultural resource management projects have provided archaeologists with an opportunity to look at archaeological resources all across the Commonwealth. Well documented and carefully prepared reports have provided us with a much improved picture of our archaeological heritage thanks to these investigations.
 

References:

Raber, Paul A.; Scott D. Heberling; Frank J. Vento
(2012) Phase I Archaeological Survey S.R. 3007 Section 550; Summerville Bridge Replacement Summerville Borough, Jefferson County, Pennsylvania

Yeoman, R.S.
(2001) A Guide Book of United States Coins, 54th Ed. St. Martin's Press, New York

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

Dyottville Glassworks

Dyottville Glass Works (36Ph37) excavation, facing South

Welcome back! We trust all our readers have recovered from their tryptophan induced stupors of last week’s annual tribute to gastronomic excess. To burn off those extra helpings of stuffing we all enjoyed, some of the staff from The State Museum of PA's Section of Archaeology and the Bureau for Historic Preservation participated Monday in a field visit to an archaeological site along the Philadelphia waterfront, currently underway as part of a PennDoT project to improve a portion of Interstate 95.

View of  Dyottville Glass Works (36Ph37) facing Northwest, I-95 in background

Down by the river (please excuse the Chris Farley reference) and a stone’s throw away from whizzing interstate traffic, a team of archaeologists from URS Corporation, lead by Doug Mooney, have uncovered the remains of an important part of our nation’s emerging industrial might of the 19th Century, the Dyottville Glass manufacturing complex along the Delaware River.

sample of glass bottle fragments and other glass objects recovered during excavation

“Dr. Thomas Dyott arrived in Philadelphia from England in the 1790s. Starting out as a manufacturer of patent medicines, he eventually acquired a glass factory near Kensington.” (Cotter, Roberts and Parrington pg. 451). While the glassworks would continue production throughout the 19th century, Dr. Dyotts involvement was comparatively short-lived. “The factory was closed down in 1839 when its proprietor was found guilty of fraudulent insolvency and jailed. It reopened under new management three years later.” (Cotter, Roberts and Parrington pg. 452).

fragments of glass walking canes from Dyottville

Not surprisingly due to its proximity to the Delaware River, prehistoric artifacts such as triangular projectile points and fragments of native-made pottery dating to the Late Woodland period were discovered at the site underneath the multiple layers of historic occupation.

During the visit, it was noted that with a great deal of attention being focused on archaeological investigations that have taken place near Center City (in association with Independence Hall, the National Constitution Center, and President Washington’s house, etc.), residents of the somewhat removed Kensington and Fishtown neighborhoods of the city have taken a measure of pride in a piece of their own heritage discovered just a few blocks from their doorsteps. Yo!

Click here for an article that Hayden Mitman wrote for the Northeast Times about an artifact exhibit at the Kensington CAPA High School, and here for a more in-depth overview of Dyottville by Ian Charlton of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania for Philaplace.org.

Thanks go to Doug Mooney, George Cress and Stephen Tull of URS Corp. and Cathy Spohn, PennDoT District 6 Archaeologist, for coordinating what proved to be an interesting and informative visit to an archaeological site in a dense urban-industrial setting on an unusually balmy late November afternoon.

Reference:

(1992) Cotter, John L.; Daniel G. Roberts; Michael Parrington

The Buried Past: An Archaeological History of Philadelphia. University Press, Philadelphia

 

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

Compliance Archaeology

We’re busy folks here at TWIPA and we’d like to think we do it all, but we know that’s not the case. With our field season at Fort Hunter finalized and all the pomp and circumstance of Archaeology Month celebrations dispensed and comfortably in the rear view mirror, the staff of the State Museum Section of Archaeology can return to the business of managing and curating the archaeological collection of the Commonwealth for its citizens, now approaching 5 million individual artifacts. What are these artifacts, where did they come from, why are they sent to the State Museum of PA?


These are some of the typical questions we hear from people not familiar with the state of archaeology as its practiced today in Pennsylvania and across the nation. It is a difficult task to fully explain the context in which the majority of archaeology these days takes place in the span of a 700 word or so blog post, but it is important stuff so we’re taking a stab at it anyway. We’ve touched on this topic in several previous posts so if you have the time we encourage you to do a little “digging” through the TWIPA archives.

Most archaeology today is conducted prior to some type of development; roads, bridges, housing subdivisions, dams, prisons, railroads, post offices, courthouses, pipelines – you get the idea. All of these projects have the potential to disturb or destroy archaeological sites. Fortunately, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 created a framework as part of any federal undertaking by which sites can be identified, evaluated, and if warranted, destructive activities mitigated. In a nutshell NHPA acknowledges that it is in the best interest and to the benefit of the American people (current and future generations) that significant cultural resources, historic and prehistoric, be documented and preserved where possible. It also recognizes that federal agencies have a responsibility to take into account adverse effects their development projects may have on these significant cultural resources. If this is beginning to sound like contorted legal mumbo jumbo, we apologize, but that’s what it is.


While the artifacts themselves are the property of the landowner on whose land the site was excavated, in Section 106 projects the information recovered, the data (the field forms and notes, artifact inventories, photo documentation and reports) is owned by all of us, as we the taxpayers are ultimately footing the bill for not only the development but also the preservation efforts.


More often than not, the landowner understands the artifacts have more scientific value than they do monetarily, and generously donates them to the State Museum where they are incorporated into a comprehensive database and made available to researchers the world over for a wide variety of scholarly studies, as loans to local historical societies, and of course permanent and temporary exhibits both large and small in the Anthropology and Archaeology Gallery of the State Museum, as well as other historic sites administered by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission.


One common criticism directed towards archaeologists is that results from these excavations are not shared with the public often enough or in a timely manner. Doing our bit to dispel this shortcoming, we’ve contacted some good people at PennDoT, and they were all too happy to pass along a link to popular publications here , resulting from transportation projects. The page is a little buried, then click "kids page" and then click "highways to archaelogy".


This week we’re highlighting a few of the unsung heroes of Cultural Resource Management (or CRM for those readers who don’t have enough acronyms in their life) the archaeological foot soldiers in the trenches, literally, doing battle with deadlines on compressed time tables, emaciated budgets and inclement weather – just to name a few typical obstacles. While we can’t claim these woes, or any others for that matter, are bedeviling this particular project, its recent appearance in the news seemed to make it a timely and appropriate example of Pennsylvania CRM archaeology. Currently underway is a road re-alignment near the borough of Macungie in Lehigh County, and people are curious and asking questions, and that makes it the perfect opportunity for the archaeology community to engage the public and hammer home the message that archaeology is good for them.



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

Celebrating Independence Day

It seemed appropriate to continue with the Philadelphia theme as this weekend we celebrate Independence Day. In 1976 while our nation was celebrating its bicentennial a group of archaeologists excavated a section of old Philadelphia treading in the footsteps of our forefathers. The area was once known as the city’s printing section; housing Benjamin Franklin’s first printing office and where he launched the countries first monthly magazine The General Magazine and Historical Chronicle for all the British Plantations in America.

The excavations were undertaken by Penn DOT due to the construction of an access ramp for traffic between the Penns Landing Development and Market Street over a section of Interstate 95. It included the demolition of structures from Market Street to Church Street and between Front and Second Street, a total of 34 properties. The firm of Abraham Levy Architect, under the direction of Herbert Levy and Charles Hunter, was hired to conduct archaeological salvage prior to demolition. The artifacts recovered from this excavation are varied and prolific spanning the time of Philadelphia’s existence, from its informal founding in 1682 to the structures and debris current to the time of excavation, 1976.

It was in the basements of these structures, under floor boards, brick pavers and concrete that “stains” or features emerged. Many of these features were found to be either privies or wells that had been filled over time with domestic trash; including ceramics, glass stemware and bottles, butchered faunal remains and personal items like smoking pipes, coins and buttons. Using the diagnostic artifacts archaeologists were able to date the wells and the layers within them.

One such well, located at 121-123 (old #37-39) Market Street and sealed about 1760 contained an assemblage of artifacts that ranged from pipe stems to wine glasses, a copper William III half penny (1694-1702) and the remains of over 160 separate ceramic vessels. The ceramics from this feature included a group of slip decorated earthenware. Thanks to the research of Dr. David Orr the origins of these slipware vessels were traced to Staffordshire England; but even more remarkably he was able to establish a link between them and their creator, Samuel Malkin (1688-1741). In his article Samuel Malkin in Philadelphia: a Remarkable Slipware Assemblage, published in the journal Ceramics in America, 2003; Dr. Orr describes Malkin’s unique style of “relief-decorated and press-molded earthenware”. A closer look at Samuel Malkin’s Sun Plate can be had by visiting the second floor Archaeology Gallery of The Pennsylvania State Museum.

Unfortunately due to time and budget constraints at the time of excavation as well as the volume of material recovered only a portion of the artifacts from this Market Street Collection have ever been analyzed. They fall into the category of incredible potential, awaiting a researcher like Dr. David Orr to look a little closer in an effort to put together another puzzle piece of our nation’s amazing heritage.

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

Archaeology Day at the State Capitol

On October 26, 2009, from 10:00 until 2:00, archaeologists from around the Commonwealth will gather in the East Rotunda of the Capitol to celebrate Archaeology Month. This event will be sponsored by the Pennsylvania Archaeological Council (PAC), the Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology, Inc (SPA), the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC). These organizations will provide a variety of exhibits on Pennsylvania archaeology. The theme is “Save the Past for the Future”. The goal is to focus the public’s attention on the significance of archaeological resources in the Commonwealth and to advocate for their preservation so that they may be appreciated and enjoyed by future generations.

To quote from the SPA web site on the value of archaeology:
“Men, women, and children have lived in the Commonwealth for nearly 14,000 years. Yet only a small portion of that time is documented on paper. Archaeological evidence often represents the only surviving record of Pennsylvania’s prehistory and can provide new information about where, when and how these people lived in the past”

We might add that this information can also be used to improve our own future.

At noon, there will be a ceremony for the John Stuchell Fisher Award. This is given in recognition to local, state and national officials who contribute to the promotion and understanding of archaeology in Pennsylvania. This year’s recipient is Mark Platts, President of the Susquehanna Gateway Heritage Area. He is receiving this award for efforts in preserving archaeological resources in Lancaster and York counties. Of special significance is his successful initiative to preserve the last two villages occupied by the Susquehannock tribe in the 17th century prior to their demise in the region. Steve Warfel, former Senior Curator of Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania will comment on the significance of this work. The speakers will begin at 12:00.

Archaeologists from the Section of Archaeology of The State Museum and the Bureau for Historic Preservation will represent the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission. The Section of Archaeology serves as the primary repository for archaeological collections and holds over four million archaeological specimens in trust for the citizens of Pennsylvania. They are also responsible for the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology in the State Museum which provides a comprehensive tour of Pennsylvania archaeology from the Paleoindian period through the 19th century. On display at the Capitol will be a spectacular array of artifacts from sites in York County reflecting the Susquehannocks involvement in European trade.

Of particular interest to the younger generation, the Pennsylvania Archaeological Council and Indiana University of Pennsylvania will put on a demonstration in the early afternoon on Native American technology. For nearly 14,000 years, people lived in Pennsylvania without factories, automobiles or convenience stores. They used a relatively simple technological system to get their food, to make their clothing and obtain all of their material needs. Tying and attaching things with string and rope was a very common activity and essential to their lives. Everything from bow strings to fishing nets was necessary but where did they get the yards and yards of cordage to make these items? Cordage in Native American cultures was like duck tape is to our culture. The children visiting the exhibit will be invited to try their hands at making cordage and using a prehistoric drill. Think of all of the holes that need to be drilled into items to make them functional. This event will begin at 12:30.

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation also has an active archaeology program. As part of their environmental stewardship program, they endeavor to protect archaeological sites that may be affected by their construction projects. For decades they have been conducting archaeological investigations prior to construction and they have recovered significant information on past cultures in Pennsylvania. They have developed a publication series and examples will be available, including their most recent publication on the archaeology conducted along the route 11/15 corridor.

The Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology will have an exhibit describing the variety of activities they conduct around the Commonwealth to enhance and protect archaeological sites and artifacts. The local chapter, Conejohela Chapter 28, will have an exhibit presenting their involvement in preserving the Susquehannock sites in the lower Susquehanna Valley.

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

The Trouble with Historians and Archaeologists: Auditing the Frankstown Branch Bridge Replacement

This week's guest blog comes from Ryan Updike, summer intern for PennDoT's Bureau for Environmental Quality and Design. Ryan is a graduate student at Virginia Tech and will complete both an MA in History and an MA in Education next spring. He’s a native of York County.

One important point hit me during my time spent auditing the Frankstown Branch Bridge replacement over the Juniata River in Blair County: wow, historians should really collaborate with archaeologists more often! The results of such a strategic partnership could yield so much more in the way of research and scholarship on resources and features both above and below ground as well as strengthen the bonds between two different camps in Cultural Resource Management.

Block 2, crew shot

Even the smallest archaeological find can yield rewarding information for a historian. The Phase I and Phase II Archaeological Surveys on this bridge project south of Hollidaysburg on Rt. 36 only dug up 107 artifacts that ranged from historic pottery to prehistoric chert flakes to chert tools. Just like historians, archaeologists rely on the evidence they find, and they then interpret whatever evidence that is found. At the Frankstown Branch site the artifacts showcased a small prehistoric task group or nuclear family group that subsisted by practicing a hunter/gatherer system. The site also contained entirely local resources and features, which bent the analysis toward the site being used by a small band from a local community.

Test Unit 2, west profile

The analysis on the social aspects of the site constituted important as well as usable information to any social historian investigating native cultures. This is the interesting point. This very small fraction of archaeological information can shed light on social habits that historians might set their sights on when investigating local prehistoric communities and their social makeup.
The trouble with historians and archaeologists is they forget what they have in common. When it comes to interpreting the past, historians and archaeologists are slaves to what they find. We are governed by it. If together we work to combine the soiled and written evidence, perhaps we can arrive at a clearer concept of the past. This new vantage point can then serve as a springboard for better management of our resources regardless of location in reference to the ground.

Shovel Test excavation

Lastly, this historian must thank the Section of Archaeology at the Pennsylvania State Museum for the opportunity to work with them. Thanks, Janet, Andrea, Liz, Dave and Dr. Carr.

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

Summer 2009 Internship Section of Archaeology

My name is Thomas Wambach and I am an Anthropology/Archaeology major at Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP), about to enter my junior year. This summer, I participated in an internship with the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC), Archaeology Section located in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. I received this internship via the Diversity Internship Program, whose goal is to increase staff cultural diversity in Pennsylvania’s museums and cultural organizations. As I am of Haitian American ancestry, I found the program to be captivating as well as a worthwhile experience. It certainly has increased my knowledge of archaeology outside the classroom by helping me learn in a professional environment, under a well qualified mentor in my field.

As an intern in the Archaeology Section, I accomplished a number of personal and professional goals, and worked on a variety of different tasks and projects. My main project of focus during the internship was the processing of a collection of artifacts from an archaeological site in Clinton County, Pennsylvania known as the West Water Street Site (36 CN 175), located in Lock Haven, and excavated in 1992 by students from the University of Delaware. This was a stratified prehistoric site spanning nearly the entire time span of human occupation of the Susquehanna Valley. The artifacts I worked with dated to the Pre-Middle Archaic, Middle Archaic, and Late Woodland periods of human occupation in Pennsylvania. The first project task involved using printed records of the site’s artifacts, provided by the University of Delaware, to reenter data on artifacts spanning the first section of archaeological excavation at the West Water Street Site into an electronic database. An electronic database was unavailable from the University of Delaware for various reasons.

Once this section of the database was reentered and using a printed spreadsheet of the artifacts’ locations, I began to pull artifacts, by catalog number, from their original “pizza box” shaped cardboard boxes in one of the collection holding rooms occupied by the Section of Archaeology so that I could re-house these artifacts. That is to say, I pulled artifacts with catalog numbers 1200, 1400, 1500 etc, and re-housed them with their correct provenience information in larger acid free cardboard boxes. This encompassed a majority of the work I accomplished with the West Water Street Project, and represented a continuation of work performed by previous interns in the Section of Archaeology. The project was initially difficult, because many of the artifacts were scattered among a multitude of boxes in no particular order. Hence, finding the correct artifact was not only tedious, but also presented the possibility that certain artifacts might be missing from their original box. Overall, I estimate that more than four hundred bone, stone, ceramic, and FCR (fire cracked rock) artifacts were pulled and re-housed during my time here.


My time with the Section of Archaeology, however, was not simply limited to this activity. I also attended intern seminars held every Friday by Penn DOT’s Bureau of Design, Cultural Resources Section’s own Mr. Joe Baker. These seminars were organized and designed in a manner similar to a class lecture and discussion course to teach interns valuable lessons on historical preservation in Pennsylvania and the rest of the country, especially by introducing the rules and regulation of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Other additional duties included the re-housing of artifacts outside my specific major project activity, and checking climate controls (temperature and humidity) in all artifact collection rooms. During the latter activity, I discovered that dehumidifiers are fickle little machines! I also briefly participated in field work at an archaeological site near Millersville, which was a good way for me to review the excavation and field training skills I’d learned during the summer of 2008 during IUP’s field school course. Moreover, from time to time, I assisted staff in maintaining the museum exhibits and galleries in the State Museum and Archives areas. This activity allowed me to visit the museum, that I had frequented as a child. I also attended an archaeology conference that took place in Harrisburg and I learned, first hand, how the museum receives new artifacts from public and private institutions, as well as donors from across the Commonwealth.

My summer internship also provided me the opportunity to show off my skills as an artist by drawing a reconstructed stone core artifact for one of my colleagues. I certainly hope the sketch proves useful in the future. I also took part in field trips to other museums in the state and to sites under protection by the National Register of Historic Places to evaluate their techniques of reaching the public as well as in artifact and site preservation, all the while comparing my observations with those services provided by the State Museum. In addition, I took part in a small public outreach activity by answering a letter sent by someone who had special interest in local archaeology. I provided the client with resourceful online and book sources so that his research could be completed. Despite the fact that the client was writing from prison, the effort demonstrates that archaeology is for everyone, and that we [archaeologists] are humble public servants.

Most importantly, I established contacts and friendships with the staff here in the PHMC, which I hope will help me in the future. My time here was very educational, fun, and an otherwise memorable experience that I will value greatly. I recommend contacting, interning, or communicating with the PHMC to anyone who is studying archaeology, like me, or to those who are interested in archaeology and/or prehistoric and historical preservation. It certainly proved to be an integral and priceless education and experience for me!
Thank you to all my friends and staff from the PHMC!

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

Wayne County Emergency Bridge Replacement Project

This week's guest blogger Lyn Nardello, a rising senior at Franklin & Marshall College. Lyn is an American Studies major with an interest in preservation planning. This summer she's interning with the Pennsylvania's Historical and Museum Commission in the Bureau for Historic Preservation to develop and approach to effectively link community-based preservation planning with transportation planning.

When severe flooding in the summer of 2006 washed out four bridges in Luzerne and Wayne counties, these bridges were given emergency priority for replacement. The APE, or area of potential effect, of one of the bridges—a concrete bridge that crosses over the West Branch of the Lackawaxen River in Wayne County—included a total area of .93 acres. Buildings in the area include a circa 1850 house, which lies just outside of the APE, a circa 1850 bank barn, circa 1920 abandoned poultry shed, and a circa 1950 barn. Historic properties such as this are oftentimes rich in cultural resources, and despite the fact that a relatively small part of the site lies within the APE and was determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, extensive background research and site surveys were conducted on the property in accordance with federal and state laws intended to safeguard important cultural resources.

Background research revealed the long and interesting history of the house and farm on the Eldred Site. A deed shows the area was originally surveyed by a man named Thomas Craig around 1811, but the farm was established in the mid-19th century by Judge Nathaniel Baily Eldred. A native of New York State, Eldred made quite a life for himself in Pennsylvania where he was elected to State Legislature and served for four years between 1822 and 1827. He was subsequently appointed to several important positions: Commissioner of the Milford & Owego Turnpike; president judge of the Eighteenth Judicial District and later of the Sixth Judicial District; and naval officer in the Philadelphia Customs House. He served a term as Canal Commissioner and was a member of the Board of Commissioners overseeing navigation of the Delaware River. He declined a nomination to the Supreme Court in 1851. Additionally, a township in Jefferson County was named in his honor.

Upon retiring and settling fulltime at his dwelling in Bethany Borough, Eldred and his wife conveyed the Eldred Farm to a man named Justus Sears who then sold it to German immigrant George Fogel by 1860. Fogel ran the 130-acre general farm on the site for a short time before assigning the property to Joseph Gerher. Over the next several years the property was assigned to William W. Sherwood and then to Henry Greiner, a Civil War veteran who had lived the life of a farmer before enlisting in Company H of the Fifty-Second Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry in 1861. He participated in 1862 battles at Lee’s Mills in April; Seven Pines and Fair Oaks in May, Bottom Ridge and White Oaks Swamp in June, and Carter’s Hill in July. After the war Greiner owned and operated the Eldred Farm with his wife and two daughters for seventeen years before conveying it to James P. O’Neill and his wife Mary, but these new owners maintained their residence in Mount Pleasant Township and conveyed the Eldred property to a Pennsylvania-born farmer named Phillip H. Kennedy, Sr. shortly thereafter. Kennedy died in 1918, and in 1920 his wife conveyed the property to Henry Mead who ran it as a dairy farm until his death in 1961. The Eldred property is now in the hands of Henry’s son, Clyde E. Mead and family.

The area investigated near the 1850 house yielded few artifacts documenting activities at this mid-19th-century property. Items recovered from the Eldred Site included vessel glass, cut and wire nails, milk glass lid liners, a horseshoe nail, lamp chimney glass, whiteware ceramics, a zinc jar lid fragment, and window glass. One historic site was recorded in the Pennsylvania Archaeology Site Survey files, 36Wy150, Eldred Site.

Archaeologists concluded that there was no sign that significant cultural resources would be affected by the construction of the new bridge and no further investigations were conducted. While this particular site did not yield significant historic artifacts, it serves as important evidence of Pennsylvania’s commitment to identifying and preserving its cultural resources. For more information, visit PAarchaeology.state.pa.us or the Hall of Anthropology and Archaeology at The State Museum of Pennsylvania .

Carley Brook Bridge Replacement Project

Our blogger this week is Wes Stauffer an intern for the Cultural Resources Section of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. Wes worked for a day in the Section of Archaeology observing our processes and auditing a Cultural Resource Management collection for compliance to our Curation Guidelines.

Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, federal projects require planning and cooperation, in addition to hard work. This proved true when the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation determined that the Bates Road/Weidner Road Bridge over Carley Brook, near Honesdale in Wayne County, needed to be replaced. Built in 1916, it had fallen into a state of disrepair over time. To insure that no important cultural sites were destroyed by the construction of a new bridge, a site survey preceded any site work.

Ideally, background research as well as on-site surveys will locate any important historic and archaeological sites in the area of probable effect (or the area to be impacted by the footprint of a new construction project). Such surveys prove especially important along waterways. Waterways provide food and transportation routes today just as they did for our predecessors. Relatively level, well-drained soils adjacent to water travel routes, as well as the fertile soil in adjoining floodplains, provided prime locations for Native American camps and settlements.

At the Carley Brook site, research and archaeological investigation uncovered a portion of the former Staengle property. Leonard Staengle built a house on the property around 1889, as well as a barn and a butcher shop. Staengle cleared the land and established a small farming operation to supplement his butchering business. Various occupants utilized the property through to present day.

Archaeologists excavated no prehistoric artifacts from the area of probable effect. Approximately 85% of the 302 historic artifacts unearthed reflect kitchen or architectural usage. Research determined that the artifacts reveal an occupation period between the 1890s-1920s, however they were uncovered in a mixed or disturbed context. Furthermore, no building foundations were located. Archaeologists concluded that a former refuse dump lies within the area to be impacted by the construction of a new bridge.

With their research completed and archaeological evidence analyzed, archaeologists felt confident that construction of the new bridge over Carley Brook could proceed without negatively impacting any important cultural resources. All artifacts, donated to the Bureau of the State Museum of Pennsylvania, have been inventoried and archived where future researchers can study them and other artifacts like them.

Cultural resources management, integral to projects such as the Bridge Replacement project over Carley Brook in Wayne County, preserves our heritage and gives residents of Pennsylvania a better understanding of our state’s past communities as well as those individuals who lived and worked within them.

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