Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Zabohonski Minor Sub, FI
STAGE IA AND IB ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK DATE: April, 1992 LEAD AGENCY: APPLICANT: Southold Town Planning Board Annette Zabohonski Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island, Southold, New York 11971 New York 06390 Contact Person: Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Telephone: (516) 765-1938 PREPARED BY: LOCATION: Clover Archaeological Services, Inc. The project parcel is 225 Main Street, Suite 202 located east of Crescent Northport, New York 11768 Avenue in Fishers Island, Telephone: (516) 754-5044 Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant � 6 t D SOUND NG 8o R . TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. NATURAL SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III. THE ARCHIVAL SEARCH RELATED TO THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEWYORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 A. SITE LOCATION IN THE AREA OF THE ZABOHONSKI PARCEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1. PREHISTORIC SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2 . HISTORIC PERIOD SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 B. HISTORICAL PERIOD: NATIVE AMERICANS IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND FISHERS ISLAND AND THEIR LANDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 C. THE SETTLEMENT HISTORY OF FISHERS ISLAND AND THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL . . . . . . 37 IV. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 A. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 B. THE SURFACE SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 C. THE SUBSURFACE TESTING PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 D. DESCRIPTION OF SOILS AND RESULTS OF THE SUBSURFACE TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 E. ARTIFACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 V. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R-1 MAPS CONSULTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R-10 ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE: 1. Site Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2 . Topographic Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 . Geological Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4 . Soil Map of Suffolk County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Archaeologically Sensitive Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6. The 1935 Ferguson Map of Prehistoric Sites on Fishers Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7 . The 1614 Block Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 8. The 1635 Blaeu Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 9. The 1675 Roggeveen Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 10. The 1675 Seller Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 11. The 1689 John Thornton Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 12 . The 1734 New England Coastal Pilot Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 13 . The 1779 Fadden Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 14. The 1829 Burr Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 15. The 1838 Coastal Survey Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 16. The 1842 Mather and Smith Geological Map . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 17. The 1858 Chace Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 18. The 1873 Beers Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 19. The 1896 Belcher Hyde Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 20. The 1901 Colton Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 21. Map Showing North Hill Gun Emplacement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 22. 1940 Location Map of North Hill Battery . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 23. 1940s Map of Location of Elements of Coastal Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 24 . 1950 U.S. Army Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 25. 1970 U.S.G.S. Topographic Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 26. Map of Site Showing Location of Test Holes . . . . . . . . . . 129 I. INTRODUCTION. This report presents the results of an archaeological and archival investigation of the Zabohonski Minor Subdivision, Fishers Island, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. The purpose of this Stage IA and IB Survey is to determine the prehistoric and historic sensitivity of the parcel through a review of archival, cartographic, and other published references, as well as by conducting a surface field reconnaissance and subsurface testing program on the site. The study is divided into two main sections: 1) the archival search; and 2) the archaeological, or field investigation. The archival search describes the existing setting of the site; reviews the prehistoric and historic sensitivity of Fishers Island, New York; presents the results of the research of the site location, public archives, maps, and other sources. The section on the archaeological investigation discusses the general methodology employed on the surface field reconnaissance and subsurface testing; the results of the surface survey and subsurface testing; and finally, provides conclusions based on the archival and archaeological surveys. 1 II. NATURAL SETTING. The Zabohonski Minor Subdivision is a 5.9 acre parcel located on Fishers Island Sound east of Crescent Avenue in Fishers Island, Town of Southold (Figure 1) . The northern, western and southern boundaries of the site border Crescent Avenue. The eastern boundary of the parcel borders lots in private ownership. The parcel is located east of North Hill, and is characterized by moderately to gently sloping topography (Figure 2) . The southeastern portion of the parcel has been altered by recent dumping and World War II bulldozing near the site of four 3 inch guns of the United States Army coastal artillery (Figure 22) . The highest point, in the southern portion of the site measures 30 feet in elevation above mean sea level (MSL) . The lowest point, on the surface of the freshwater wetland in the central portion of the parcel, measures 10 feet above MSL. Thus, the total relief is approximately 20 feet. The vegetation found on the site consists of successional mixed deciduous upland forest and ground cover. Freshwater wetlands adjacent to a stream cover the central portion of the Zabohonski Minor Subdivision parcel. The geological deposits underlying the site (Figure 3) are glacial moraine sediments from the Woodfordian substage of the 2 Wisconsonian glaciation, dated 21,000-18,000 years ago (Fuller, 1914 ; Sirkin, 1982 and 1986) . Fishers Island is a portion of the moraine that "surfaces to the east along the Rhode Island coast as the Charlestown moraine, and to the west on Long Island as the Orient moraine" (Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988; Sirkin, 1986) . Three soil types are found on the parcel, according to the classification of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's soil survey of Suffolk County, New York (Figure 4; based on USDA, 1975: Map Sheet 1) . Riverhead sandy loam on 8 to 15 percent slopes (RdC) is found on the northern portion of the parcel. This soil is often as much as 15 percent gravel by volume (USDA, 1975: 83) . RdC has a representative Riverhead series soil profile, with a 30 cm thick brown to dark brown topsoil A horizon (10YR 4/3 in the Munsell Soil Color classification used by the USDA) , overlying a 50 cm thick strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) to yellowish-brown (10YR 5/4) subsoil (USDA, 1975: 81) . Muck (Mu) made up of poorly drained organic soils between marshes and better drained soils is found on the central portion of the parcel (Figure 4) . This wetlands soil was not disturbed during subsurface testing of the Zabohonski Parcel in 1992 as it will not be impacted by proposed construction. Three areas of Haven loam on 2 to 6 percent slopes (HaB) are found in the southern, eastern and northeastern portions of the parcel. Haven loams are deep, well-drained, medium-textured 3 soils well-suited to crops. HaB soil is commonly found on moraines along shallow, intermittent drainage channels. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture soil survey of Suffolk County, "most areas in the western part of the county are used for housing developments" (USDA, 1975: 72) . 4 8-ft I.F.M(AaP/ssNIN tff��LOJ�DON CO. 0 WOO am mm GOOO MYSTIC TOWN SUFFOLK CO NEW Y0JVK i0—uGi6L-D—T6WN lean In KI...Appla 0,,Opfm DuMFLING "*LATIMER REEF SOUTH DUMPLING S 0 U N D FLAT HUMMOCI( Cla Paint Brooks Punt yS NWIN RtLl cmocomoumr WICOPESSET yry IS. Haw "t Pt 116. t.1 ITJ AS 0 F-i F cop— P, y �d OWRECK IS. H rl P-d e..ytPe d op e 0 0 F F-d 0, ul et F B L 0 C K I IS L A N D S 0 U N D Z. ro R nos$purit 51 52 53 54 55 (Hagstrom, 1989) Site is indicated by arrow. FIGURE 2 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP I I tr r * .. � .!l' * ;�� - .S• .�"y Heke Newt +r••, i\ x'21 )I P.1nt • F S 0 U' T H © , West Harbor / Stony �/�`�+i Beach shers + i * P� "tel i (y +fir Island Hay 34, -1 rr I,aL•i Harbor,,' I •ny��C, n* m',• Silver Ee!cove U S COAST GUARD .\65 `' - ` f 801f `�'".\ STATION-. r l',4'•• ATER \ uA , *fr+► r ��I �"i"" Wn 1 % _ r \ ry \ * 1Elizabedl Fieldvwlda/MM ISLAND r� SOU D Point W&28 N +t, .�\�> i • iNfM10N—OtOLOO1CAL SURVEY MUTON.YUIO#MfA.I M 72 + r 2 540 000 FEET (N.Y.) 150 151='E ROAD CLASSIFICATION Primary highway, Light-duty road. hard or hard surface improved surface Secondary highway, hard surface Unimproved road Interstate Route OU S. Route State Route CONNECTICUT OUAORANGLE LOCAMN NEW LONDON, CONN.—N. Y. 41072-C1-TF-024 (U.S .G.S . , 1984) N Site is indicated by arrow. 0 2000 Ft. L � 6 SLOCK to. PLUM Is. O"Iff"T PT. s6t)fjo GARDINER$ 18. ISL.ANO MONTAUK LIOTV NICK ....... RIVERHEAD VAST HAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON 0 t1 0 09 14ALF HOLLOW HILLS MASTIC MANETTO HILLS ...... OCEAN ATLANTIC ROCKAWAY H 0 20 Moraine krn Location map showing linear pattern of moraines. HH' marks the Harbor Hill Moraine and RR' the Ronkonkoma Moraine of Fuller ( 1914). Site is indicated by arrow. (Sirkin, 1982) FIGURE 4 SOIL MAP RdC HaB Mu m N HaB O 100 Ft. (USDA, 1975) HaB Haven loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes. Mu Muck RdC Riverhead sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes. 8 III. ARCHIVAL SEARCH RELATED TO THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL. A. SITE LOCATION IN THE AREA OF THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL. 1. PREHISTORIC SITES. Prehistoric archaeological sites and unstratified finds are known from Fishers Island (Ferguson, 1935; Briggs, n.d. ; Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988) , but artifacts have not been reported from the Zabohonski parcel. However, the area is considered to be archaeologically sensitive (Figure 5) , and a review of the Suffolk County Archaeological Association Inventory (SCAAI) as well as other sources (Ferguson, 1935) evidenced at least four sites or finds of prehistoric artifacts within one mile of the Zabohonski parcel (Figure 6) : 1) The North Hill site (Ferguson, 1935: 10) is a shell heap located on or near the Zabohonski parcel on Ferguson's map of prehistoric sites on Fishers Island (Figure 6) . This site was noted, but not excavated, in the 1920s and 1930s. 2) Flounder Inn North and South. This Late Woodland period site located a few hundred feet north of the Zabohonski parcel on the north side of Crescent Avenue has been recently 9 excavated by Robert Funk and John E. Pfeiffer and radiocarbon dated to 1050 A.D. (conversation with Charles B. Ferguson, April 4, 1992) . 3) The Hawks Nest Point site. A shell midden with numerous pits was excavated by Henry L. Ferguson, who recovered clam, scallop, oyster and mussel shells, fish and deer bones, fish hooks and a piece of moose antler that may have been used as a flaking tool, in addition to a slate ornament, a celt, hammerstones, net sinkers, stone scrapers, bone awls, points and pottery (Ferguson, 1935: 6-7) . Fragments of a steatite dish, together with many projectile points and chips were also found on the surface of the high ground above the shell midden deposits on Hawks Nest Point (Ferguson, 1935: 12) . Recent excavations by Robert Funk of the New York State Museum and John E. Pfeiffer have also unearthed important features and finds from the Hawks Nest Point site, which is the largest shell midden on Fishers Island. The Hawks Nest Point site is located on a sheltered south-facing slope overlooking the west shore of West Harbor. A Late Woodland Levanna Point, a roughed-out triangular biface, waste flake debitage from flaking local quartz pebbles, and Late Woodland (Windsor Brushed and Sebonac stamped) pottery were identified, as well as bones from food debris including porpoise, Canada geese, geese, heron, white-winged scooter, sea duck and fish (Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988) . A large cow bone from the shell zone in one test trench 10 (Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988: 75) indicates either extensive post-contact disturbance, or evidence of the well-documented Narragansett proclivity for poaching European cattle and livestock during the 1640s and 1650s (Gardiner, 1660; Ferguson, 1925: 16-17) . Storage of foodstuffs and occupation of relatively extended duration was also indicated by large pits found on the site (Ferguson, 1935; Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988) . According to John Winthrop, Jr. , who purchased Fishers Island and would have had the opportunity of observing the activities of his Indian tenants and servants both there and on the mainland, pits were an important feature of Native American farming. Once the corn was harvested, "The Natives commonly thresh it out as they gather it, and dry it well upon Matts in the Sun, and then bestow in holes in the Ground (which are their Barnes) well lined with withered Grass, and with Matts, and then covered with the like and over that covered with Earth, and so it keepes very well till they use it" (Winthrop, 1662 letter to the Royal Society, London, catalogued as B1. v, 199, published in Mood, 1937) . By allowing delayed consumption, pits also allowed food producers to evade contributions levied by dominant chiefs (Barker, 1992 : 65) and withold resources needed for seasons of scarcity. Pit storage of food also allowed farmers to preserve the surplus needed for planting the next season, or even for 11 trading for another commodity (Barker, 1992 : 65; Gast and Sigaut, 1979-1981) . As one 17th century source on early Algonquian ethnography noted, people hid their corn, copper, hoes, hatchets, and ornaments in caches for later use (Strachey, 1612 , quoted in Rountree, 1989: 175) . 4) The Sharp Site/Bay View/Mansion Site (Figure 6:B) . Important Middle Woodland features dated by radiocarbon to approximately 400 A.D. were found on this multicomponent shell midden, which also yielded Late Archaic/Transitional soapstone vessel fragments (Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988: 83-89 ; Ferguson, 1935: 9-10) . The Suffolk County Archaeological Association site sensitivity map (Figure 5) shows the Zabohonski property to be in an area of "intensive aboriginal habitation" . With an increasing number of documented archaeological sites, it has become possible to construct models explaining the movements of prehistoric peoples. Wyatt suspects a pattern of "centrally based wandering" from villages located on tidal bays to temporary camps near inland ponds for winter deer hunting and fishing (Wyatt, 1977; Strong, 1983: 11) . Kettle holes, springs and small streams such as the one on the northern boundary of the Zabohonski property, provided fresh water. During the 1600s, when an unpolluted source of drinking water was wanted, Native Americans also constructed wells by sinking a hollowed 12 out tree trunk into the earth near wetlands to reach the water table a short depth beneath ground surface (Ales, 1979: 16) . Throughout much of New England and the coastal areas of northeastern America, prehistoric groups exploited marine resources during seasons when nearshore hunting for sea mammals and fish from dugout canoes was possible. Long Island and coastal New York was one of the classic centers of this pattern of subsistence. Seasonality of prehistoric peoples on Long Island (Ritchie, 1980: 3 ; Kaeser, 1974 : 287) is certainly suggested by more recent patterns in historic times (Wyatt, 1977 ; Hayes, 1983: 331; Horton, 1744) . The discovery of seal bones in recent excavations on Fishers Island indicates significant winter occupation of the island during prehistoric times, as seals migrate into Fishers Island Sound in the winter (John Pfeiffer cited in Bonner, 1990) . The significance of the seal population off the shore of Fishers Island may also have attracted the attention of Dutch traders in the early 1600s. As Ceci pointed out, a series of Xs were used to mark sites of economic importance off the shore of Fishers Island on the 1614 Block map (Figure 7) . "If Block meant the X to show dangerous rocks or shoals, he would have had to mark hundreds of such symbols the length of the New Netherlands coast" (Ceci, 1990a: 230, note 14) . However, Ceci is unlikely to be correct in inferring that these are points where wampum would have been 13 available (Ceci, 1990a: 55) . On the 1614 Block map, there are no Xs in the Peconic Bay area where primary areas of wampum production were located and exploited by the Dutch (Figure 7) , and anchorages off rock shoals in an area affected by strong tides would not be the optimum places from which to conduct shipboard trade. The three Xs immediately north of Fishers Island on Block's map correspond to the location of three clusters of rocks exposed at low tide: West Clump, Middle Clump and East Clump where seals are found during the winter (photograph in the Hartford Courant 4.4. 1992, p. 1) . Seals between New London and Fishers Island that would correspond to the Xs below the Thames River estuary were also noted by Joshua Hempstead in the winter of 1740-1741 when New London harbor was frozen solid so that "people Cross on the Ice below the fortt" (Hempstead, 1711-1758: 373) , and Fishers Island Sound was frozen over so that Fishers Island was united to the mainland by a solid bed of ice (Hine, 1912 : 193) . On January 8, 1741, Hempstead noted in a damaged entry to his diary that the ice remained solid "as far as we can See" and that there was "very Little to be Seen in the Sound [apart from] a few breathing holes generally [ ] up to fishers Island" (Hempstead, 1711-1758: 373) . The rocks off Fishers Island are still important wintering grounds for seals, which were seen there in significant numbers in the winter of 1991-1992, and winter seal fur was one of the most important 14 early North American exports to Europe. The distribution of Xs near Fishers Island on the Block map thus corresponds to the range of the seal wintering grounds in southeastern Connecticut and coastal New York in the early 1600s and is an early historical ecological document of considerable significance. Thus, Fishers Island and the area of the Zabohonski parcel could have provided fresh water, fish, and wildlife for seasonal exploitation by prehistoric inhabitants. 15 FIGURE 5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVE AREAS MAP i. Zr. V F: 11 1i11 �_11 � I �11 (1 ��•f VI i I Suffolk County Archaeological Cultural Resources Inventory, 1978 Association ' Areas of intensive aboriginal habitation Site is indicated by arrow. I t '� Areas of generalized aboriginal activity Areas of low activity or insufficient data 16 1 ARCIIEOLOGICAL EXPLORATION OF FISHERS ISLAND t WINTMRO NEW YORK o o t, ° °GAIL Or YARDS � toA tStray burlap I• [Can o tal She#heaps v R[sLRVATION S . 1p MIDDLE O W Ln FARM , Q ® � H NORTH Nlll JHAWKS NEST P01� � O(' / fjy MANs10N BRICK YARD New Westuly Q m QB * ��4 0 t London West Z Mystic Mystic I T D Bay PENT U ® N ►EQUOT ^ 1 Harbor "EDGE C °FORT lDni[ n 0� N an � oullrcc t taTsl� �•� atchNill Is�' ° F�ttPl�-� • s: F scslc or mm, FIGURE 7 1614 BLOCK MAP stl•..•�r t� vast, ''.l�.r r'/V,l 1 ,•, .�, fool C7 o IL KIM ' tr�)r `'S: jU'�!' C1i �':•G�.:r r ; -1 iJ► •�• 'r /i r N C o } I '. ryfll� O ��t(l,"r1,11� ,� • l'• v •.+ �,,oj _ �♦r1 r� lip O •. L ..;`i ' \•' • •�°'!�j. �tl' '..•'.• 1 �a•�• 1, Q,� • ` y ala ..r. :•:` � .- •rJ o Vr, :j 'L:•:•.« •r yt• ,' • iter: ' int+`, O fry ai✓ •+ :..« • i' .�;' •i. • 1 ,�. r; _' t•' •',t� �. ��;, t 'fir I .• s• t •'��_ �a. ..• � yid: ��: •• ',.'• :•';: �., EARLIEST CHART SHOWING FISHERS ISLAND ' N MADE BY ADMIRAL BLOCK IN 1614 ' Site is indicated by arrow. I 18 1 2 . HISTORIC PERIOD SITES The historic period development of Fishers Island and North Hill on the Zabohonski parcel can be followed in maps of the area (Figure 7 - Figure 25) . There is no construction on or adjacent to the Zabohonski parcel shown on these maps until the construction of the Second World War artillery emplacement on North Hill in 1940-1941 (Figures 21-23) . Two significant historic period sites occur on or within a mile of the Zabohonski parcel: 1) The site of the 1646 Winthrop Manor, near the western shore of West Harbor, southeast of the Zabohonski parcel ` (Ferguson, 1935) . Although it has not been previously noted, John Winthrop, Jr. 's house would have been located near the protected anchorage of West Harbor shown on the 1675 Seller map, published while Winthrop was still alive (Figure 10) . This house was looted and abandoned in 1690, rebuilt during the early 1700s, and burned during the Revolutionary War. Its exact site is no longer known, but it is believed to have been in an area impacted by later construction (Ferguson, 1925) . To date ' (February-March, 1992) , no systematic subsurface shovel probe testing has been undertaken to identify the site of the Winthrop Manor and its outbuildings, or the degree of later disturbance. I 19 J I 2) In 1940, in preparation for World War II, a BC - CRF Coastal Artillery Battery of the U.S. Army 1st Corps was constructed on North Hill (Figures 21-23) . A fortified cement pillbox observation point and two gun emplacements are preserved on the northwest escarpment of North Hill. Four 3" guns were also set up southeast of the Zabohonski parcel (Figure 22) . I i I 1 20 I I B. HISTORICAL PERIOD: NATIVE AMERICANS IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND FISHERS ISLAND AND THEIR LANDS At the time of arrival of the first European settlers in eastern Long Island there were several different groups of Algonquian Indians living in the area (Ales, 1979 ; Ritchie, 1953) . Algonquian-speaking Indians inhabited New England and the eastern half of Long Island at this time; Delaware-speaking groups were found in New Jersey and western Long Island. At the time of contact, Fishers Island was visited by [ Mohican, Pequot and Narragansett people. The Pequot played a f major role on Fishers Island, and on Block's 1614 map of coastal ` New York and New England (Figure 7) , the mainland coast ` immediately north of the island is labelled "Pequats" . This map I also shows the "Morhicans" in the area of New London west of the Thames River. On Block's map, "Nahicans" are noted on the South Fork of Long Island in the Montauk area of East Hampton (Figure ' 7) . The use of "Nahicans" to indicate the inhabitants of southeastern Long Island may represent an early linguistic observation sometimes obscured in later discussions of colonial period "tribal" boundaries used in European land acquisition. In 1614, Dutch traders using Block's map would need to know what languages to use, and Mohegan-Pequot-Montauk made up a distinct I 21 1 dialect of Algonquian, quite different from the Connecticut-Unquachog-Shinnecock dialect formerly spoken further west (Teeter, 1976: 506-507) . The differences between these two dialects was so great that Thomas Jefferson noted that native speakers of Montauk and Shinnecock "can barely understand each other" (Jefferson, 1791 reprinted in Levine, 1980: 17-18) . Thus early 17th century Dutch traders used to dealing with the Delaware around the mouth of the Hudson would have been well jadvised to become familiar with the Mohican-Pequot-Montauk Algonquian vocabulary before entering into business arrangements in southeastern Connecticut, easternmost Long Island and Fishers Island. Mohican suzerainity over Fishers Island was also asserted by representatives of the Mohican sachem, Uncas even after John Winthrop, Jr. had assumed ownership. When the Winthrop family first came to live on Fishers Island in 1646-1647, "The only Ialarm in the Winthrop family that winter was caused by the Mohegans. Nowequa, the brother of Uncas descended on the ' island, destroyed a canoe, and alarmed the Winthrop family. For this and other insolent acts and threatening behavior by the same band, Uncas was forced to pay one hundred fathoms of ' wampum" (Hine, 1912: 182) . Further west, the area of Long Island occupied by the Town of Southold was formerly inhabited by the Corchaug, whose lands extended from Orient Point westwards to Wading River. Within 1 22 1 I the Corchaug there was at least one smaller subgroup, the Yenicock, whose name was used by the early European settlers as the general name for Southold until 1644 (Ales, 1979: 22 ; Case, et.al. , 1876: 10; Flint, 1896: 234) . The Corchaug in turn were part of the larger Montauk Confederation, which included the Corchaug, Manhasset, Shinnecock, and Montauk and then expanded- to xpandedto take in groups further west on Long Island (Ales, 1979) . I The usefulness of the division of coastal New York and New England into different, geographically static Native American tribes has been called into question (Stone, 1989) ; doubts have been raised as to the validity of the term `tribe' in Suffolk l County altogether. It is unclear whether names of `tribes' are ` really separate tribes, groups living in specific geographic ` locations, or closely related populations who moved their settlements periodically. Seventeenth century Native American sources described the sachems of eastern Long Island as "brothers" (Gardiner, 1660) . The term "brother" was used not only for blood relations, but also for adopted kin, friends, and ' visiting diplomats. The group fought together as a unit and often acted together when negotiating with the Europeans, although individual sachems also signed some land deeds alone ' (Ales, 1979: 22-23) . Thus, the territorial borders illustrated on the 1614-1635 Dutch maps in Figures 7-8 and later maps of the Native American groups along the coast of New York and New England in the early I 23 J I 1600s (Beauchamp, 1899; Ritchie, 1953) probably do not coincide with the local Native Americans' understanding of their landscape. In short, these borders do not reflect indigenous concepts of territory but rather the Europeans' need to `order' the landscape to facilitate land acquisition (Ceci, 1979: 10; ` Strong, 1983 ; Stone 1989) . The Algonquian concept of their land may be glimpsed in some of the names encountered by the Europeans on contact; these names were often derived from words in the Algonquian language used to describe the geography or significance of the places people lived (Tooker, 1911; Stone, 1989: 163) . Corchaug and Cutchogue, for example, are both derived from kehche, meaning chief, pre-eminent, or principal, with the locative ending -auke or -ock. Thus, Cutchogue means "the greatest or principal place" and referred to Fort Cutchogue (or Corchaug) , 1 the palisaded enclosure where the sachem lived and where women and children took refuge in times of danger (Tooker, 1911: 56-58) . The meaning of Munnawtawkit, the Algonquian name for Fishers Island, is derived from the same root as the word for Montauk, and refers to a place (-awk) overlooking hunting and ' fishing grounds (Ferguson, 1925: 1; Caulkins, 1852 : 123) . The Corchaug, who inhabited the area of Southold, ' encountered Dutch and English explorers before actual settlement took place. Winthrop, who made a trip to Long Island in 1633, I 24 I I probably visited them. James Farrett, acting as the agent of the Earl of Sterling to acquire titles for Indian lands, would have contacted the Corchaug in his sailing journey of 1639-1640 (Tooker, 1911: 57) . Land acquisition, however, was complicated by the differing views of Europeans and Native Americans concerning land ownership. To the Europeans, a title deed was necessary, and to I acquire this, the rightful owners of the land had to be ascertained. However, to the Native Americans, land did not belong to an individual but to the group. It could not be given away, although it could be loaned or shared (Stone, 1989: 162; Ales, 1979: 21) . The Native Americans themselves sometimes disagreed over who had the right to act on behalf of whom in land transactions. For example, the deed of May 16, 1648 in which Hashamomock, Oysterponds, and Plum Island were sold to the Europeans was signed by Mammawetough, sachem of the Corchaug. ' In the deed, Mammawetough acknowledges that another sachem, namely Vxcoopesson disputed his right to the land. However, ' Mammawetough declared himself the rightful proprietor of the land in question with "sole right" to "give, grant, sell and dispose" . He also promised to satisfy Vxcoopesson so that he would confirm the sale (quoted in Pelletreau, Vol. II, 1903: 414) . ' Prehistoric and early historic Native American land ownership often involved overlapping uses of the same parcel at 25 I I different seasons or for different purposes. The conflicting Pequot, Narragansett and Mohican claims to Fishers Island indicated by historical sources during the 1600s show that John Winthrop's purchase of the island in 1644, probably from the Pequots, was not immediately recognized by neighboring Indian groups. Although these groups were careful not to offend English sensitivities, the assertion of what they perceived as their own continuing rights to Fishers Island indicates that valuable resources there had been formerly shared among all three groups, Mohican, Pequot and Narragansett. Taking of seals, as well as fishing, farming and hunting is indicated by previous archaeological evidence from Fishers Island (Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988; Bonner, 1990; Ferguson, 1935) . These resources appear to have been shared, as the island was too small and too accessible to support a permanent population 1 large enough to be able to defend itself, survive epidemics with social structures intact, or deny access to anyone with a boat and a desire to visit. The vandalizing of one of Winthrop's boats in the winter of 1646-1647 (Hine, 1912: 182 ; Ferguson, 1925: 15) may perhaps indicate that winter fishing and sealing and denying a potential competitor access to them were important 1 resources to the Mohicans. Similarly, after Winthrop had moved to Nameaug/New London, the delivery of a moose skin taken near Fishers Island to the Narragansett sachem led to Roger Williams' request that John 26 1 I i Winthrop assert his ownership of Fishers Island. Williams reported that the sachem who had received it from a hunter who in this way acknowledged the Narragansett sachem's authority over the natural resources of Fishers Island, "prays you not to lose your right, but send for a skin of a moose, which was killed upon one of your hummocks by Fishers Island lately and carried to Wequashcuck, as the lord" (letter of Roger Williams relaying the Narragansett request: Winthrop Papers 1863: 278) . By accepting delivery of the moose skin Wequashcuck forwarded, John Winthrop, Jr. reinforced his standing and ownership of Fishers Island. During the 1600s among coastal ' Algonquian tribes from the Chesapeake Bay to the St. Lawrence River, the sachem traditionally owned the skins of all deer and animals killed in his territory (Rountree, 1989: 38 ; Bock, 1966: 5) . For example, during a roughly contemporary dispute over ' Native American land boundaries between Indians from Southold and Southampton in late May, 1666, "the said Indians (after long debate) Ioyntly answered, that the young eagles that were taken in their nests, and the deere that were drowned or killed in the water, It was the Indians customs to carry the said eagles & the skins of the Deere to those Sachems or Indians that were the true owners of the land" (Thomas Topping, 1666, quoted in Pelletereau, 1874: 157) . ' The problem of Narragansett claims to Fishers Island remained unresolved until the suppression of the Narragansetts 27 1 I i in 1675. Earlier, in November, 1654, there was a report circulating that the Narragansett had killed two hundred of Mr. Winthrop's prized goats on Fishers Island (Ferguson, 1925: 16) . During the early 1700s, Indian hunting continued on Fishers Island, although it was by then regarded as and punished as poaching. According to his diary, on November 28, 1734, Joshua Hempstead "was at Court al day untill near Night I was at Madm Winthrops assisting to get Something from a white man & an Indian taken in killing Deer at fishers Island. they Compounded to give 4 pounds to Madm & 50s to havens (i.e. , the Havens family) for Charge. the White man is Jere Jencks of Westerly & the Ind Tom a Servt to Ben Billings" (Hempstead, 1711-1758/1902 : 282) . Ben Billings owned a sloop, and perhaps other boats that his servant could have used to get to Fishers Island. The two ' poachers were punished for their felony by paying a substantial fine, equivalent to more than a month's wages, to Mrs. Winthrop and to the family of the Winthrops' former tenant on Fishers ' Island, George Havens, who had died the previous March. On another occasion, Mrs. Winthrop gave Joshua Hempstead a deerskin. The origin of this skin is not stated. It is possible that Indians such as those still resident on Fishers Island who came across deer killed by accident or dying of natural causes acknowledged the Winthrop's authority by sending the skin to the deer's owner. 28 I I When the settlers arrived northeastern Suffolk County had been intensively occupied by Native Americans for a long period. At least 45 Indian village sites are known on the North Fork of Long Island (Booth, 1949:54) . The first Corchaug settlement mentioned in records relating to Southold is that of "five wigwams" mentioned in the deed of August 15, 1640, in which ' Richard Jackson made the first known purchase of land from the Indians in the Southold area. The settlement of "five wigwams" was located between present-day Greenport and Southold village, either at the head of Pipe's Creek or on Hashamomock Neck (Pelletreau, Vol. II, 1903 : 404; Tooker, 1911: 95) . ' The most important Corchaug site was at present-day Cutchogue on Corchaug Neck and Fort Neck. One neck of land ' comprised the village, and the other was a palisade built on an earthwork embankment. The palisaded quadrangle measured 64 by ' 48.8 meters and enclosed three quarters of an acre (Solecki, 1950; Craven, 1906: 32 ; Ceci, 1977: 297) . This fort and those of the Corchaug allies-- the Manhasset, Shinnecock, and ' Montauk-- were so situated that information could be passed quickly from one group to another by means of smoke signals (Tooker, 1911: 57) . Fort Corchaug also became a center for wampum manufacture (Solecki, 1950) . With the arrival of the Europeans, wampum, ' which could be transferred for or backed by beaver, became the economic base where coin money was in short supply. Those areas 1 29 1 i i that were the richest habitats for whelks thus became production centers where an individual worker could make three or four dozen wampum beads a day (Ceci, 1979: 9-10) . Thousands of Ipieces of shell debris were recovered from Fort Corchaug (Ceci, 1977: 297-298) . Native Americans obtained carbohydrate and some protein for their diet from cultivation of such native plants as corn and squash. In 1763, some of the old men in Southold recalled plowing land for the Indians' cornfields on Indian Neck 60 years before (Whitaker and Craven, 1931: 137) . Their iron plowshares would have tilled the soil much more efficiently than the Native ' American stone hoes and digging sticks. The Native American women also gathered wild plants such as tuckahoe tubers (Indian turnip or Jack-in-the-Pulpit) , which they found in damp woods and swamps (Tooker, 1911: 261) , areas similar to the marshy area ' in the Muck (Mu) found near the stream running through the center of the Zabohonski parcel (Figure 4 ; USDA, 1975) . The Native Americans obtained protein from fish and shellfish, with oysters predominating among the shells found in the shell heaps in Southold and Fishers Island (Booth, 1949: 55; Ferguson, 1935) . Deer also provided protein, as well as skin needed for ' clothing (Gramly, 1977) and antler. To increase the feed for deer, the Native Americans throughout Long Island and coastal ' New York and New England burned portions of woodland in controlled fires (Wood, 1824; Youngs, 1907: 19; Cronon, 1983) . 30 ' as b dug-out canoe. When the Pe Transport y g w quots who ' murdered an English trader on board his boat in 1637 near Fishers Island saw another English boat approaching, they fled in a canoe loaded with goods (Ferguson, 1925) . Sealing and ' winter fishing in the waters around Fishers Island also required boats. The Native Americans had few rights after European colonization. In 1644, an Indian delegation representing the four eastern tribes of Long Island requested from the United Colonies of New England a certificate outlining Indian relations with the English and assuring English protection against unjust ' grievances. The Indians promised that, in return, they would not injure the English or Dutch, nor would they bribe other tribes to harm the Europeans. They would deliver up any Indians who committed offences and would avoid involvement in the ' quarrels of others. Rather than giving specific assurances ' against injustice, the Colonies of New England merely promised that the Indians could "enjoy full peace without disturbances from the English or any in friendship with them" (Ales, 1979: 38-39) . It may have been during negotiations with this delegation ' in 1644 that John Winthrop, Jr. acquired title to Fishers Island and New London from sachems who were experienced in selling their own and others' land to the English. According to Southold Records, 1649 and 1657 were years 1 31 ' relations between the European settlers of Southold of uneasy 1 p and the Corchaug. The Europeans viewed the Indian dogs as a threat to their livestock, and a missing beef would be presumed ' to be the work of Indians (Case, et al. , 1876: 14; Youngs, 1907 : 19) . One or two murders of Europeans were attributed to the Indians, and the Town of Southold appealed to New Haven for help ' and protection (Thompson, 1918: 232-233 ; Bayles, 1874: 363) . Generally, however, there are few references to trouble with Indians in the Southold Records (Chapman, 1965: 9) . The Europeans protected their own interests. Many towns on Long Island banned the sale of guns and their accoutrements to the Indians (Howell, 1887: 171) . In Southold, the area between Hashamomock and Plum Gut was reserved as a pasture for ' cattle and hogs. It was lawful for a white person to bring in any Indian found with a gun, bows and arrows, or dogs in this area (Case, et al. , 1876: 14) . As Native Americans were restricted in their hunting and in the territory they could use, the newly arrived Europeans ' brought the Indians into the colonial economy, thus making them dependent on it (Stone, 1989: 165; Ceci, 1990a) . This can be observed in the archaeological record from the Town of Southold, ' both on Long Island and on Fishers Island. A late 17th century burial site in Laurel, for example, illustrates the extent to ' which European goods had replaced Native American artifacts. Just west of Brushes' Creek was an unmarked grave containing a 32 ' flexed skeleton blue glass beads a European earthenware pot, a ' brass spoon, and a round bowl. Three more graves were found in the area with glass beads, trade pipes, and brass spoons ' (Latham, 1965: 76) . All of these objects represent trade and ' the pervasive influence of contact with Europeans in coastal New York. In Indian burials and other sites on Fishers Island excavated by Henry Ferguson, a used lead bullet as well as a ' tool and an ornament made from brass kettles were found (Ferguson, 1935: 22-23) . Recent fieldwork at the Turtle Pond ' site by John Pfeiffer yielded contact period copper, brass and beads in addition to Native American pottery and stone tools (Henry L. Ferguson Museum, 1991. Newsletter 7/1: 2) . ' The English of Southold also used Native American skill and labor. In the mid to late 1600's, for example, the Southold ! Town Treasurer paid the Indians 20 shillings for every old wolf ' killed and ten shillings for every young wolf (Case, et al. , 1876: 8) . Native American labor was also used for the ' construction of the Benjamin House in Southold village (Viemeister, 1974: 34) . In 1662, Captain John Youngs reported ! to the New England Commissioners on his efforts to acquire ! Indian children for the English settlers to raise as servants or apprentices. ' In some instances, Indians were slaves and could be inherited as property (Ales, 1979: 77, 93; Youngs, 1907: 19) . 33 ' F r example,o in Fitz-John Winthrop's will written in March, p P , ' 1702, he left his daughter fifty head of cattle, some new furniture and household goods, an uncollected debt from Connecticut, as well as "the negro girl named Rose & the two Indian girls named Sue and Dinah" (Winthrop Papers, 1889: 415) . Although enslaving Native Americans was prohibited by Governor Andros of New York in 1679 (Stone, 1989: 164-165) , Native American slaves including the descendents of people ' enslaved after the Pequot and Narragansett Wars were still owned by New London and Long Island families throughout the early 1700s. The entry for March 3, 1749 in the diary of Joshua ' Hempstead records the death of "old Indian Mary who was a Captive in the Narraganset war in 1675" (Hempstead, 1711-1758/1902 : 515) . The absence of a family name indicates the low status of this survivor of the Narragansett War, although it was also an adaptation of a Native American usage ' that did not always provide multiple names for individual people. ' The Winthrop family also used Indian labor to look after the game and livestock in their manor on Fishers Island and defend it from marauding privateers. According to Fitz-John ' Winthrop's deputy, Gurdon Saltonstall, writing during an early phase of the French and Indian wars on July 17, 1690, "This night there came over from Fishers Island a small number of Indians, who give an account of a skirmish that they had with a 34 f ' small number of the French. They have brought over a scalp with ' them and say they have left one dead there whose scalp they had not time to take" (Winthrop Papers, 1889: 4, quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 40) . ' After New York assumed jurisdiction over Long Island in 1664, general laws were issued to govern Native American ' behavior and the settlers' relations with the Native Americans. The Indians were not allowed "to pawaw or perform worship to the ' devil" (an interpretation of any religious ceremony not Christian) . There was to be no superior sachem on Long Island; ' the Indian tribes were to govern themselves, keep the peace, do ' no damage, and enter into no alliance without the governor's approval (Ales, 1979: 75) . Licenses were issued to specific people to trade with the Indians. William Wells of Southold, for example, obtained a license to trade with the Indians "in any liquours or other commodities they shall have occasion of ' for their Releife" (Ales, 1979: 76) . The governor forbade purchase of Indian land without his ' consent (Ales, 1979: 75) . In the case of Southold, this consent was granted in the patent issued by the governor to the town: 11 . . . if it shall so happen that any part or parcell of the said ' lands within the bounds and limits afore described be not already purchased by the Indyans, it may bee purchased (as ' occasion) according to Law" (quoted in Pelletreau, Vol. II, 1903 : 416-417) . 35 ' A centurylater, the Corchau along with other Native g g ' American groups in eastern Long Island appealed to the Attorney General to discover what lands belonged to them, as they were ' being crowded out by the white men and had no written records to ' prove what they owned. Although the Attorney General professed sympathy, he could find no land that could still be claimed by ' the Corchaug (Ales, 1979: 98-99) . Similarly, the continued assertion of Native American ' rights to Fishers Island took the form of poaching during the ' early 1700s (Hempstead, 1711-1758/1902: 282) . t 1 t 1 36 s C. THE SETTLEMENT HISTORY OF FISHERS ISLAND AND THE IZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL. ' Fishers Island first entered recorded history during the voyage of Adrian Block in 1614, who mapped the island and ' recorded with Xs the tidally exposed rock shoals near the island where seals winter (Figure 7) . The 17th century Dutch ' geographer, De Laet, who had access to Block's logs and charts, describes Mystic River or Pawcatuck River, and then comments ' that "A small island lies to the south west by south from this triver, as the coast runs; near the west end of it a north west by west moon causes low water" (quoted in Caulkins, 1852: 21-22 ; and Ferguson, 1925: 4) . According to local tradition on Fishers Island, "At the ' time of its discovery the island was a noted fishing ground of ' the Pequots, the most powerful tribe in eastern Connecticut. While this tribe was in the height of power, it was a great ' resort for them during the summer season, when they feasted on the fish and clams which abounded in its waters. Tradition also says that the island was well wooded, and the woods were stocked with deer and other wild animals" (Hine, 1912: 179) . However Fishers Island does not seem to have had a permanent Native IAmerican population during the 1614-1675 period, as contemporary maps do not indicate Native American villages or groups resident I 37 I i i on the island (Figures 7-9) . ' In 1637, anticipating the destruction of their mainland cornfields by the English, the Pequot attempted to establish ' back-up food supplies by opening new cornfields on Long Island, Fishers Island, and other islands nearby (McBride, 1990: 102) . According to a letter of Roger Williams, "The Pequots are scarce ' of provisions and therefore (as usually now especially) they are in some numbers come down to the Sea Side and 2 islands by name tMunnawtawkit [Fishers Island] and Manittuwond especially to take ' Sturgeon and other fish as allso to make new fields of corne in case the English should destroy their fields at home" (letter quoted in McBride, 1990: 102-103) . Roger Williams' letter emphasized the importance of fishing ' on Fishers Island, then known as Munnawtawkit (Ferguson, 1925: 1) . The island was too small to support a significant permanent ' population, but as it lies only two miles from the mainland of ' Connecticut at the narrowest point of Long Island Sound, it was easily reached by people from the mainland (Ferguson, 1925: 1) . The presence of glacially crushed soil on Fishers Island was also an advantage for early cultivators. In New London ' County on the Connecticut mainland according to a descendent of Ione of the first families of New London, "An underlying base of rock, is everywhere ambitious to intrude into light, and often Iappears in huge masses heaped together, or broken, and tossed about in wild disorder. Places often occur, where the surface I 38 is actually bristled with rocks, and as a general fact, the ' country is uneven and the soil hard to cultivate. A large amount of physical energy must be expended before the way is prepared for ordinary tillage and the improvements of taste" i (Caulkins, 1852: 42) . Thus John Winthrop's choice of Fishers Island as a place of residence may have reflected the ' availability of already existing cleared Indian fields where cultivation could begin immediately. The incident that triggered the Pequot war began off the coast of Fishers Island, when a small ship belonging to an English trader, John Oldham, was seized by Pequots. As a ' contemporary account describes the incident, "John Gallop with one man more, and two boys, coming from Conn and intending to put in at Long Island, as he came from thence, being at the mouth of the harbor was forced by a sudden change of the wind to ' bear up for Block or Fisher's Island, where as they were sailing ' along, they met with a Pinace, which they found to be J. Oldham's who had been sent to trade with the Pequods (to make ' trial of their pretended friendship after the murder of Captain Stone) they hailed the vessel, but had no answer, although they saw the deck full of Indians (14 in all) and a little before ' that had seen a canoe go from the vessel full of Indians likewise, and goods, whereupon they suspected they had killed ' John Oldham" , which was soon found to be the case (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 5) . 39 t 1 The swift and brutal response to this incident led to the ' defeat of the Pequots in 1637, with many massacred and enslaved (Hauptman and Wherry, 1990) . Shortly after the defeat of the Pequots, John Winthrop, Jr. set about acquiring a clear title to ' Fishers Island. He first applied to the General Court of Massachusetts, where his father was governor, and received a grant of Fishers Island on October 7, 1640, "reserving the right of Connecticut, if it should be decided to be theirs" (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 12) . He then applied to Hartford for confirmation of his grant, which he received the following April. The Hartford grant provided conditional approval, and gave permission to set up a fort or fish processing industry on Fishers Island. It is significant that in 1640 Winthrop already envisioned using the strategic defensive potential of Fishers Island. According to the Hartford records of April 9, 1641 "Uppon Mr Winthrops motion to the Courte for Fyshers Island, It is the mynd of the Courte, that so fayre as it hinders not the publick good of the Country, either for fortifieing for defence, ' or setting uppe a trade of fisheing or salt & such like, he shall have liberty to prceed therein" (Colonial Records of Connecticut, vol. 1, p. 64, quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 13 and ' Caulkins, 1852 : 40) . The reference to salt is also significant. Salt was needed ' to preserve meat, which in the days before refrigeration was available had to be immediately cut up and salted in barrels 40 before it spoiled. As John Winthrop, Jr. noted in a letter of ' 1660, livestock had become so plentiful in New England that settlers were easily able to supply "all sorts of fresh & isalted meate for their familyes" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 65) . ' These barrels of salted beef and pork were then available for eating later as needed, and could also be shipped to Barbadoes ' and the West Indies where sugar was the major agricultural commodity, and food had to be imported. ' The surplus of agricultural products soon became the ' mainstay of New England's economy. As Winthrop noted in 1660, "Now the country doth send out great store of biscott, flower, ' peas, beife, porke, butter & other provisions to the supply of Barbados, Newfoundland and other places" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : ' 65) . The shortage of salt in coastal Connecticut remained a problem throughout the period of the Winthrops' residence in ' Fishers Island. In May, 1647, Winthrop's brother, Adam, wrote that he had "sent a hogshead of salt by Captane Smith, which he ' will deliver at Fishers Island. I thowght you might have some need off it" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 222) . An experimental ' overland cattle drive from New London to Boston in the fall of 1648 nearly ended in disaster, due to the difficult wilderness terrain and Indian poaching (Black, 1966: 144) . Thirty years ' later, in the winter of 1674/1675, a shortage of salt meant that Winthrop feared he would again have to drive his Connecticut 41 livestock to the Boston market (Black, 1966: 338) , with the animals losing weight and incurring expense on the way as well as supplying Indian raiders with a food supply on the eve of the Narragansett War. John Winthrop, Jr. did not immediately settle on Fishers Island. He was in England between 1641-1643, returning with ' workmen to establish iron works at Lynn and Braintree. By the spring of 1644 he had begun building and farming on Fishers Island (Caulkins, 1852: 41) . 1644 was also the year that Winthrop purchased the island from some of its Native American owners, according to the 1668 patent which he later received from Governor Nicholls of New York (Caulkins, 1852 : 40; Hine, 1912 : 180) . ' The site of John Winthrop, Jr. 's 1644 house on Fishers Island is not known, although it was the first house to be built in the area between the Connecticut River and Providence, Rhode ' Island. According to one unnamed source cited in 1925 by Henry Ferguson, Winthrop"s house "was sheltered on the north and west iby the banks and woods encircling a bay in which it nestled, and the air above it was softened by the warming influence of the surrounding ocean" (Ferguson, 1925: 13) . Although this could ' apply to a number of places on Fishers Island, Ferguson believed that Winthrop's house was probably sited close to the edge of West Harbor, "most likely near the present Mansion House" (Ferguson, 1925: 14) . In a 1675 map of Fishers Island prepared 42 by an English geographer, Seller, West Harbor is shown, indicating that this anchorage was used by shipping visiting Fishers Island at this time (Figure 10; map discussed in Allen, 1991) . It is also interesting that Winthrop, with his wife, their two eldest children, Fitz-John and Margaret, and the children's uncle, Deane Winthrop, chose to move to Fishers Island to spend the winter and early spring of 1646-1647 (Ferguson, 1925: 14) , as this was the time of year the island had been used for fishing and sealing before the Europeans came (Williams, 1637 cited in McBride, 1990: 102 ; Pfeiffer cited in Bonner, 1990) . ' However the Winthrop family's stay on the island was brief. There is a letter of November, 1646 from the elder Winthrop ' addressed "To my very good son, Mr Jo. Winthrop at Fishers Island, n'r Pequot River" (Ferguson, 1925: 14) . The last letter addressed to John Winthrop, Jr. at Fishers Island is dated May, 1647. After this date, his fathers' letters were addressed to him at "Nameauge upon Pequot River" (New London) . Little happened in 1646-1647 during the winter the Winthrops spent on Fishers Island. Despite his brother delivering salt to preserve fish the next spring, there is no ' record of any rich catch or great profit. However there was some trouble with a group led by a disgruntled Mohican neighbor. As Ferguson describes it, "Nowequa, a brother of Uncas, visited the island and destroyed a canoe. Winthrop, to punish them for 43 r threatening behavior, forced Uncas to a one this and their g , pay hundred fathoms of wampum" (Ferguson, 1925: 15) . Uncas had little control over his brother's behavior, and in a letter of ' Feb. 10, 1647 Winthrop himself noted that they controlled ' opposing factions within the Mohegans (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 39) . Nevertheless, paying the fine allowed Uncas to maintain his position as the Mohegan leader. The fine for Uncas' brother's misbehavior proved to be more profitable than the fishing, and Winthrop saw to it that future years were spent on the mainland, the defensive benefits of 1 Fishers Island having proved to be as negligible as its chances ' of replacing the Outer Banks as a great fishing ground. However Winthrop was able to establish his ownership of Fishers Island and neighboring islands, including North and South Dumpling and the Hummock. On January 1, 1649 Roger Williams wrote that it was important for Winthrop to assert his ' right to game that some of the local Indians thought belonged to a Narragansett sachem: "He prayes you not to loose your right, but send for a skin of a moose which was killed upon one of your hummocks by Fishers Iland lately, & caried to Wequashcuck, as the lord" (Winthrop Papers, 1863: 278) . The confusion may have arisen because following the Pequot War of 1637, the Pequots of southeastern Connecticut had been nominally awarded to the Narragansetts and were under the authority of a Pequot/Niantic sachem named Wequash, who lived in southwestern Rhode Island 44 (McBride, 1990: 105) . Winthrop's diplomatic skills were clearly in evidence in his negotiations over deer skins from animals killed in the water near Fishers Island in February, 1647. Hunters had to surrender the skins of animals they killed to their sachem, who had full authority over all natural resources in Algonquian coastal economies as they had developed in the centuries following European contact (Rountree, 1989; Barker, 1992) . Deerskins were valuable trading commodities as well as being essential to make Indian clothing and moccasins (Gramly, 1977) . If Winthrop accepted the skins, he ran the risk of offending the authorities in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York in addition to his powerful Mohegan and Narragansett neighbors. Thus he left the final disposition of the skins up to a committee where he could see that his views would prevail without offending anyone by asserting them outright. As Winthrop described the episode in a February 10, 1647 letter to the Governor of Connecticut in Hartford, "Some Neantique Indians killed some deere in the water not farr from our plantation. They sent me word they knew not what to doe with the skins, for they did not belong to themselves. Whereupon I sent 2 Englishmen to demand them to be kept till the comissioners mett, who should determine whether the right did belong to the English or to any other" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 39) . 45 This episode may have been related to the display of pique by Uncas' brother that cost the Mohegans so dearly that winter. In the February, 1647 letter, Winthrop writes that the mediation is acceptable to Uncas, but that Uncas was under pressure from his brother to claim the deerskins (and thereby assert Mohegan rights to Fishers Island) . Winthrop also suggested that this inter-Mohegan conflict could lead to tensions for leadership within the Mohegans that would have been to the detriment of Uncas and the English interests he supported. As Winthrop continues, "Wherof I certified Uncas by (illegible name] , who was heere; and find Uncus would like it well, because his brother would chalenge some right to them from him" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 39) . Beginning in the late 1640s, Fishers Island began to be used as one of the earliest experimental agricultural stations and model livestock farms to be instituted in North America. The first horses ever seen in Connecticut are reputed to have been brought to Fishers Island by Winthrop, and his sons continued to raise horses there for years afterwards. The major livestock raised there were sheep and goats, which progressed peacefully despite a report that 200 goats were slaughtered on Fishers Island in November 1654 (Ferguson, 1925: 16-17) when one Narragansett faction chose to carry out its annual fall hunt at the Winthrops' expense. The importance of the livestock on Fishers Island was 46 underlined when John Winthrop, Jr. received a patent for ownership of Fishers Island from the Duke of York's governor, Richard Nicolls in 1668. He received confirmation of the possession of Fishers Island as "an Intire Enfranchised Township Mannor & Place of itself" together with "all the Sands Soyles Woodz Meadows Pastures Lakes Waters Creeks Fishing Hawking Hunting & Fowling and all other Profitts Commodityes Emolumits & Hereditamits to the said Island" (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 18-19; see also Thompson, 1918: II, 249) . In return Winthrop was to pay one lamb to the New York governor annually on May 1. This lamb continued to be delivered until 1680, when Governor Andros wrote to Winthrop's son "to repeate & acknowledge the receipt by him of the lambe you paid him (as authorized) for acknowledgment of the tenure of Fishers Island and is in full to this time" (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 19) . Governor Andros appears to have been fond of Suffolk County lamb, as the quit rent required in the Town of Southold's 1676 patent was also "one fatt Lamb" (quoted in Pelletreau, 1903: 417) . Finding a profitable use for Fishers Island besides raising livestock remained a problem for the Winthrops. A March, 1671 letter from Wait Winthrop to his father, John Winthrop, Jr. notes that "Mr Wharton tels me he has received a letter from France about some that are coming this spring to make rosin, and was inquireing whether Fishers Island might not be a convenient place for them to set up theire trade" (Winthrop 47 Papers, 1882: 384) . Nothing further is heard of this venture. After the Dutch recaptured New York in 1673, they unsuccessfully attempted to assert authority in Southold, but were kept at bay by a successful defense of Southold led by Fitz-John Winthrop, a veteran of Cromwell's army. When the British regained control of New York in 1674, Southold declared itself part of Connecticut (Case et al. , 1876: 15-16; Thompson, 1918: 239 ; Whitaker and Craven, 1931: 122-125) . As a result, in 1676, the New York General Court of Assize threatened to confiscate Southold's "titles, rights and privileges to the land" unless they accepted a patent (Thompson, 1918: 241) . With such a threat, the town finally accepted a patent from the governor of New York. The borders of the town as set out in the patent were Wading Creek on the west, Plum Island on the east, the Sound on the north, and on the south, the river which divides Southampton from Southold (Thompson, 1918:242) . The Winthrop family's manor of Fishers Island was also included in New York by Andros, and came under the administration of the Town of Southold (Ferguson, 1925; Hine, 1912) . Fishers Island was a substantial financial burden on the Winthrops for the first 40 years they owned it. In 1669 John Winthrop, Jr. was even in correspondence with his friends about selling Fishers Island. In December, 1669, William Roswell wrote to him from New Haven "You were pleased some time since to inform me that you have some inclination to dispose of Fishers 48 Island. One Capt. Anthony Lane, a gentleman in the Barbadoes hath written unto me concerning it, desiring to know whether it is to be sold" (quoted in Hine, 1912: 185) . The limited extent of construction activity on Fishers Island in the early decades of the Winthrops' ownership is underlined by the squabbles in the family during the last years of John Winthrop, Jr. 's life. During the winter of 1674/1675, Fitz-John wrote to his father of his dissatisfaction at having to share the inheritance of Fishers Island with his sister, as well as the cost of the mortgage and the lack of fencing on Fishers Island. It is unlikely that extensive improvements were made on the island in the year preceding Governor John Winthrop Jr. 's death in 1676. Following a 1680 customs jurisdiction dispute between New York and Connecticut over the salvage of ships rigging washed up on Fishers Island, the New York authorities took steps to integrate Fishers Island and neighboring islands with the government in Manhattan. In June and August, 1680, Governor Andros sent a New York constable to be sworn in on Fishers Island (and take responsibility for the ship rigging) , and assigned a newly appointed justice to be responsible for Fishers Island (letters from Edmund Andros published in Winthrop Papers, 1889: 462-465) . Three years later, on September 13, 1683, the New York governor instructed the Sheriff of Long Island to issue a summons for "the ffreeholders of ffishers Island to name one 49 to vote along with the East Rideing of Long Island, & Silvesters & Gardiners Island to vote with the East end of Long Island" for a meeting of the New York General Assembly to be held in New York City the following month (Fernow, 1883 : 770-771) . Although no house is shown on Fishers Island on the 1689 John Thornton map published in The English Pilot: The Fourth Book (Figure 11; map discussed in Allen, 1991) , this map does show the reefs east of the island and the hummocks north of Fishers Island. In 1690, Fitz-John Winthrop led an expedition against French Canada that got no further than Lake Champlain before retreating to Albany (Caulkins, 1852: 256) . While he was in the field he received a letter from the New London minister, Gurdon Saltonstall, who reported a raid by a French vessel on July 17, 1690: "This night there came over from Fishers Island a small number of Indians, who give an account of a skirmish that they had with a small number of the French. They have brought over a scalp with them and say they have left one dead there whose scalp they had not time to take. It is presumed (upon their report) that your house is rifled at the Island" (Winthrop Papers, 1889: 4) . This report shows that Indians were still living on Fishers Island and working for the Winthrops as late as 1690, although the location of their dwellings is not known. There were also English servants included among "your Islanders" , as Rev. Saltonstall notes. However on July 17, the minister did not 50 have time to contact Winthrop's former employees. As he wrote a week later, he had just returned from Hartford with a fever, and "When I got home, I found all your Islanders but Jonathan in a very great fright hurrying to Boston the very next morning, & so could by no means come to a speech with them" (letter of July 24, 1690 published in Winthrop Papers, 1889: 7) . Given that the raiders sacked Winthrop's manor, a clue to its location is also provided by Gurdon Saltonstall's July 24, 1690 letter. After anchoring just outside New London harbor overnight under false colors before deciding that the locals were too wary to allow an unimpeded landing, at daybreak on July 17, the French privateer "weighed anchor and stood over for your Island; 3 of them came to anchor there between the hammocks & the harbor" (Winthrop Papers, 1889: 6) . This is clearly a description applying to the entry to West Harbor, indicating that the object of their raid was reached from West Harbor. Following their raid on the Winthrop manor, the French party sailed for Block Island, where they encountered Capt. Paine, who was at anchor there. The raiding boats were engaged and put to flight. One Indian member of Paine's crew died during the engagement (letter of July 28, 1690 in Winthrop Papers 1889: 10-11) . In the melee following the French raid on Fishers Island, the Winthrops' faithful servant Jonathan, who had initially planned to stay on Fishers Island after the flight of the other 51 farmworkers, was frightened off by a ship sent to Fishers Island from New York. As Rev. Saltonstall wrote to Fitz-John Winthrop on August 1, 1690, "This week we have been alarm'd by vessels on the coast, which proved (New] Yorkers, sent in pursuit of the enemy. They landed with a Periauger [whaleboat] on Fisher's Island, which hath scared Jonathan & Peter off; Jonathan, as Mrs Betty tels mee, offers his share of graine to any body that will secure the rest, but will not venture himself upon the Island without a guard" (Winthrop Papers, 1889: 12) . The evidence that there were cereal crops grown on Fishers Island in addition to the livestock raised there is interesting, in light of 1698 correspondence between the Winthrop brothers discussing the completion of a fence to divide pasture from arable fields (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 539-540) . The construction of a stone fence around the pasture on Fishers Island was probably interrupted by the 1690 French raid. In the course of a March 31, 1691 letter from Wait Winthrop to Fitz-John Winthrop about selling horses, Wait mentions "the old stone-hors at the island" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 495) . This horse would have been used to haul stones out of cultivated fields and to carry them to the edge of the fields where a wall was built. Due to the confusion caused by the combined French and New York threats to the safety of the Winthrops' servants on the island, Fishers Island remained undeveloped for several years 52 following 1690. The danger of another French raid on Connecticut ports and shipping remained until a peace treaty was signed in Ryswick in 1697 (Caulkins, 1852: 258) . There was a Fishers Island tenant during this period named Smithers, but there seem to have been problems with his honesty (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 531) , and there were rumors of pirates visiting the island during this time (Hine, 1912: 189) . The Winthrop Manor house does not appear to have been immediately rebuilt, as no buildings on Fishers Island were mentioned in Fitz-John Winthrop's 1702 will, which provided his wife Elizabeth "one hundred and fifty pounds in money out of the rents of Fisher's Island, as it shall be come first due" and willed his brother Wait cattle, horse and sheep "both upon Fisher's Island and the maine[land] " (Winthrop Papers, 1889: 413-416) . However the raid on Fishers Island in 1690 raised again the question of providing some means for the defense of New London by building defensive works on the island. According to Hine, "The location of Fishers Island became of great strategic advantage, and the necessity of placing a beacon upon Mt. Prospect, the highest hill lapped by the waters of the Atlantic between Maine and Florida, was realized at this time" (Hine, 1912: 189) . Gurdon Saltonstall wrote to Fitz-John Winthrop about a proposal to establish a beacon on Fishers Island in 1690: "There hath been proposal made concerning a beacon to be placed on Mount Prospect on your island, and that a watch and 53 ward be kept there, which I would desire your judgment of, if you think it meet" (quoted in Hine, 1912: 190-191) . As late as 1690, there was still only one substantial house on Fishers Island (Hine, 1912: 188) , and that may have been burnt during the raid Rev. Saltonstall described. However a number of Indians, Europeans and Africans were employed on Fishers Island as servants, and their houses would have been more modest than the Winthrops' manor house. According to a recent history of Fishers Island, "Several old building foundations that have not been identified are conjectured to be what was left of the dwellings of the Indian workmen" (Wall and Wall, 1982: 33) . However substantial stone foundations and structural remains with "a variety of stone structures and features" appear to be an early-mid 18th century development according to the most recent work on the Mashantucket Pequot Reservation (McBride, 1990: 110) . The discovery of the foundations of an oval stone structure adjacent to a drystone wall in the northeastern portion of Lot 2 of the Zabohonski parcel during the archaeological survey reported here, makes it necessary to undertake a detailed survey of the historical sources referring to early stone constructions on Fishers Island. The intensive use of the island for stock raising makes it possible that these stone walls represent animal pens and sheepfolds from early 18th century farming, stone foundations from Revolutionary War smugglers huts, or 54 wigwam foundations inhabited by some of the Native Americans living on the island in the late 1600s and early 1700s. The negotiations for the arrival of a prospective tenant on Fishers Island in 1698 provide a valuable window on the state of development on Fishers Island near the beginning of the 18th century. The published correspondence between the joint owners of the island, Fitz-John Winthrop and his younger brother Wait-Still in 1698 provides a wealth of details about the state of their manor on Fishers Island that are useful in reconstructing the historical archaeology of Fishers Island. This correspondence also provides a detailed look at farming practice in coastal New York and reveals a continuation of their father's scientific interests in their plans to domesticate moose on the island to supplement the fast-disappearing stock of wild game in New England at the time. In a letter of Wait Winthrop to Fitz-John Winthrop dated February 22, 1698, Wait discusses the planned visit of some potential tenants of Fishers Island to view the island. "Mr. Royce, of Sudbury, who I told you (I think) had a mind to remove that way with som of his neibours" and "two men were fiting for their jorney to veiw the island" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 528-529) . At this time, there was no one living on Fishers Island, although there had been a previous tenant named Smithers on the island. Wait wrote that "We had need well to consider about termes for those men. Thay can expect but to setle and 55 fit themselves the first year; and if we can make but what we use to do for next year, we may let them get what thay can besides. " On April 18, 1698, Wait writes from Boston that Royce and his companion had embarked on board a ship for Fishers Island: "The Sudbury men are abord Mr Hamblin and will land at the island" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 529) . Matters did not develop as the brothers had hoped, and their discussions with Mr. Royce and the Sudbury men had encountered problems by July 11, 1698, when Wait wrote in terms that make it clear that there was little except livestock on Fishers Island at this time: "As to the matter about the island I know not what to say. I thought you had bin sattisfied about their capacity to manage their matters. Thay are as much strangers to me as to you. As to letting to shares in such a place, where a considerable stock is kept without much charge or trouble, espetially sheep, if the tenant has a thurd of the increase it will be grate profit to him, and can only be balanced by his manuring a considerable quantity of land by tillage, which he must do to halves. You know what Smithers his lease was, which I think was indiferant, if a tenant would be honest. . .If thay would build, it might be best to let them small farmes such as thay could manage" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 531-532) . Nothing more is heard of the men from Sudbury, but two 56 weeks later, Wait is enthusiastically proposing a new scheme for stocking Fishers Island with moose. By the end of the 1600s, game had become scarce in southern New England, and deer were so reduced in numbers that Massachusetts had enforced the first closed season on their hunting in 1698 (Cronon, 1983: 101) . Moose were also becoming rare, and on July 25, 1698 Wait wrote from Boston that "Here was a man from North Hampton sayes his brother got two young moose, a buck and a doe, but kild the buck before he heard I desired to get som, but keeps the doe and does not question to get a buck this season. I have encouraged him with the hopes of a resonable price for them if he procures a couple. If thay should not do at Fishers Island as well as cattle, thay may at Tarpolin. However, thay may make presents which may not be unacceptable" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 536) . In a letter written to Fitz-John from Boston on November 24, 1698, Wait discusses the problem of finding a tenant for Fishers Island. Another potential tenant, Anthony, was holding out for having a year rent-free in order to use the money for building. However Wait also mentions that a partially completed stone wall pasture fence was already in existence dividing the pasture from the cultivated fields. As this letter provides a careful description of the agricultural landscape on Fishers Island in late 1698, it is worth quoting in detail: "I know not what to say about Anthony. He insists upon ten years, and will give fifty pounds after seven year and forty 57 before, only he speaks of but twenty or thirty pounds the first year, and that we must allow a years rent towards building. It must be considered that it will keep a thousand sheep and all his cattle in the condition it now is in, and that a smale charge will dich and drayn the meadows and bank out the salt water, which, if don, will make them twice as good as thay now are, and also that the rest of the farm will have little advantage of the commons if thay have that part, and, if thay have the hill against the plaine as far as the lane, whether the brook and swamp will prove a suffitient fence if it be over prest with cretures. On the other hand, whether our circumstances will afford us opertunity to improve it to better advantage at present, and whether it be not better to have it well brought too and cleared, with the remainder of the outside fence made with good stonwall (which thay must be obliged to) , and to receive so much per annum in the mean time, and a good orchard planted and som housing built, ought to be well considered" (Winthrop Papers, 1882: 539-540) . This letter raises several interesting questions about the early pattern of agriculture on Fishers Island. What is the location of the "remainder of the outside fence made with good stonwall (which thay must be obliged to) "? This suggests that the brook and swamp had until then been a sufficient barrier to keep livestock from the grain fields that their servants abandoned during the summer of 1690. It also suggests that 58 there was an incomplete stone drywall perimeter fence isolating an area with enough pasture to feed 1000 sheep, and that this fence would have been completed by the Winthrops or their servants shortly after 1698. The well-dressed east-west drystone wall in the northeastern portion of the Zabohonski parcel noted during surface survey may represent one of these early Winthrop farm walls. This wall predates the 20th century, and is similar in construction technique to a nicely dressed stone wall that was an animal barrier found in the middle of Fishers Island near Oyster Pond (C.B. Ferguson, 4 .4. 1992) . According to Charles B. Ferguson, this wall goes back to the 17th-19th century farming period on Fishers Island. The construction technique is similar to 17th-18th century English drystone walls in East Anglia, where the Winthrop family had property. In the winter of 1699, Wait was still discussing terms of the lease of Fishers Island with his brother. At this time the main livestock found on the island were cattle and horses, but Wait believed that by killing the trees by girdling them, the island could easily be opened up for sheep pasture. In a letter written in Boston on January 7, 1699, he noted "I know not what those men might be able to do in a year or two, but it seems to me with out question, in an ordinary way of Providence, that a thousand sheep, with land suffitient to keep them well winter and summer, are worth a hundred pounds per annum, and may so be 59 let at all times; and how many 1000 sheep the island would keep in a litle time, if most of the cattle and horses were drawen off and turned into sheep, the treese being a little girdled, may well be considered" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 542) . Eventually, Fitz-John Winthrop and his brother Wait persuaded William Walworth, a family friend from the London area who was already working for them in November, 1698, to settle on Fishers Island (Hine, 1912; Winthrop Papers, 1882: 539) . According to Hine, the "war scares and labor troubles evidently caused so much annoyance to Fitz-John Winthrop that he induced Wm. Walworth, a family friend, to come here from near London to introduce the English system of cultivation, with which Walworth was known to be well acquainted. Thus Wm. Walworth became the first lessee. To this place he brought his young wife and here his four eldest children were born" (Hine, 1912: 188-189) . Walworth remained on Fishers Island until around 1702 . According to the brief obituary notice in Joshua Hempstead's diary when Walworth's wife died, aged over 84 years, in January, 1752 , "Her Husband was William Wallsworth & She lived with him as Tennant on fishers Island above 50 years ago & then came off & he was the first that Ever Set up Butchering in Newlondon" (Joshua Hempstead, 1711-1758/1902: 582) . Having a ready supply of livestock from Fishers Island to sell in New London's first butcher shop enabled Walworth to prosper from the livestock he raised for the Winthrops. 60 During the early 1700s, the tenants of Fishers Island completed a number of fences enclosing fresh water sources such as had been envisioned by the Winthrop brothers in their correspondence. The freshwater wetlands near the Zabohonski parcel may have been enclosed by one of these fences. Livestock were pastured throughout the island wherever there was a pond to water stock enclosed by the fences that prevented them from wandering out into the scrub and woodlands outside pasture areas: "Fences were built in such places as to take advantage of the fresh water ponds across the island, and to allow free range within these limits to the cattle" (Hine, 1912: 197) . These fences around perennial water sources and freshwater wetlands were the basis of farming and pasture on Fishers Island until the 19th century, and were maintained throughout the time that the Winthrop family owned the island (Hine, 1912: 197) . During the early 1700s, the increasing trade and prosperity of southeastern Connecticut and adjacent islands led to the October, 1707 appointment of John Shackmaple to be collector, surveyor and searcher for Connecticut during the reign of Queen Anne. His district included Fishers Island, Gardiners Island, and the eastern end of Long Island in addition to Connecticut. The appointment was profitable. John Shackmaple was able to ensure that he was reconfirmed in his office following the accession of George I, and given a new commission issued on May 3, 1718 by the Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations 61 (Caulkins, 1852: 229) . Following a renewal of Saltonstall's proposal for a warning beacon on Fishers Island in 1704, a beacon was constructed on the west point of Fishers Island where it could be readily seen from the mouth of the Thames River below New London. In a letter of June 19, 1706 to Governor Fitz-John Winthrop, it is noted that "whereas there is a former order of council for the keeping a ward upon Fishers Island for the discovery of an approaching enemy in order to give a more timely notice to New London by fixing one or two beacons made on said island for that account it is now ordered that the Beacon made on the west point of Fishers Island shall be fired upon discovery made from Mount Prospect of one ship, or two other topsail vessels standing in towards said island from the southard or northard of Block Island or upon discovery of five ships standing in from the southard or five from the northard of Block Island, and that both beacons on Fishers Island shall be fired upon the discovery of a greater number of vessels standing in as aforesaid" (quoted in Hine, 1912: 190) . The risk of French raids continued to concern the towns of coastal Connecticut, and in the summer of 1712 an armed guard of seven men commanded by Nathaniell Beebee was posted on Fishers Island. According to the minutes of the Connecticut Governor and Council on June 2, 1712: "Upon the consideration of the hazard of the coast and 62 coasters by reason of the French privateers, and for preventing as much as may be coasting vessels from falling into their hands, and other mischiefs by surprize; "Ordered, that a beacon be erected on Fishers Island in the usual place on the western point, and an out guard of seven men maintained there; that a suitable boat be provided to pass between the island and this place, as often as may be with conveniency; that the men imployed in this service be allowed two shillings per day and their subsistence" (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 50) . This garrison, which appears to have been the first stationed on Fishers Island, was discharged three months later on September 4, 1712. Its location on the western tip of Fishers Island and provision for a boat suggests that the present ferry mooring could have been used. The militia included skilled boat builders, and the terms of the discharge included 20 shillings per month "for the boat improved by the said guard" (Ferguson, 1925: 50) . The additional 4 shillings and sixpence per week living expenses provided to each member of the guard also suggests that some of their food had to be brought in at additional expense from New London or purchased at higher prices locally. After Fitz-John Winthrop's death in 1707, Fishers Island passed to his younger brother, Wait-Still Winthrop, who continued to live in Boston until his death 10 years later. His 63 business affairs in New London and Fishers Island were managed by his son, John, who married a daughter of Governor Dudley of Connecticut. Wait Winthrop was eventually successful in transferring moose to Fishers Island by the early 1700s. "From papers in the possession of one of the later Winthrops, it appears that an attempt was made by him or his son John in the year 1712 to transport a pair of moose deer from the island to England, as a present to Queen Anne, which failed by reason of one dying and the other breaking its leg, and Her Majesty was finally presented with the horns only" (Hine, 1912: 190-191; Thompson, 1918: II, 251) . The removal of the moose may have been necessitated by legal wrangles with tenants after Fitz-John Winthrop's death. A 1712 letter from Gurdon Saltonstall to Joseph Dudley discusses the problems Wait was having with tenants. These tenants made the absence of John Livingston, one of the executors of Fitz-John's will, a pretext to delay delivery of lands and stock that were formerly the joint property of Fitz-John and Wait. The letter concerning this problem also notes, "There is some controversy about the remaining rent, & damage by moose" which would have to be decided by arbitration or a legal suit (quoted by Ferguson, 1925: 51) . During this dispute, William Wallsworth's lease expired, and in 1714 George Havens became the tenant of a part of Fishers Island (Hine, 1912: 191) . 64 The bitter disputes related to this lease may have played a role in the legal wrangles that surrounded Wait's children's inheritance and could perhaps have played a role in John's self-imposed exile in England for the last 21 years of his life from 1726-1747. However another reason for residence in England was the interest Wait's son John took in his grandfather's scientific pursuits, eventually also becoming a fellow of the Royal Society. The diary kept by Joshua Hempstead from 1711-1758 provides extensive documentation of farming, hunting and activity on Fishers Island during the first half of the 18th century. Joshua Hempstead was a farmer, surveyor, and boat-builder from New London who frequently acted as an agent for the Winthrop family in matters regarding activities on Fishers Island during this time. Fishers Island was isolated from both Connecticut and New York during the early 1700s, and taxes were collected only at infrequent intervals. On November 17, 1744, Joshua Hempstead "went to Madm Winthrops. the Sheriff of Suffolk County is come for Taxes for fishers Island for 22 years" (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 434) . According to the 1734 New England Coasting Pilot map (Figure 12) , the main house on Fishers Island at this time was located in the eastern portion of the island; two other smaller dwellings are shown in the central and western portion of the 65 island that may have belonged to other tenants or servants of the tenants. The first time this house on the east end of Fishers Island is referred to is during a visit of Joshua Hempstead to take stock of the Winthrops' animals in 1731 (Hine, 1912 : 192) . Although bricks made before 1800 from the deposits at Clay Point were used in the construction of the old Mansion House and other 17th-18th century buildings on Fishers Island, George Mumford's 1731 house on the East End is said to have been built of bricks imported from the Netherlands (Hine, 1912: 192, 198-199) . Dutch bricks brought over as ballast in ships coming to buy whale oil during the 1700s are also known from Sag Harbor and eastern Long Island (Willey, 1964; Zaykowski, 1991) . The rocks and channels around Fishers Island continued to be dangerous obstacles to shipping during the early 1700s (Figure 12) , and salvage from shipwrecks was one of the activities on the island. On August 2-3, 1716, Joshua Hempstead "went to fishers Island to fetch a mast that I bought of Mr Ja Lord for 3 pounds & he to allow the fetching & Salvage out of it. " With the assistance of four men the mast was taken to East Harbor from where it had washed up on the south side of Fishers Island, and then brought into New London (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 57-58) . On the outbreak of the Revolutionary War in 1775, Fishers Island was an important landmark for Connecticut soldiers 66 serving in Connecticut and Rhode Island. The journal of Simeon Lyman of Sharon written between August 10 and December 28, 1775 contains two references to Fishers Island. On August 23, 1775, 20 soldiers went to Fishers Island for a holiday jaunt during a break in drill and marching: "There was about 20 of us went aboard a sloop and went to Fisher's Island about 12 m" . There was nothing as noteworthy on Fishers Island as in the vicinity of New London the following day where they visited a Spanish ship wrecked in the 1750s near New London: "We walked about and we went aboard of the old Spanish ship that was cast away. It was 8 rod long and four decks, and there was rooms as fine as any in the housen all papered off" (Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, vol. VII, 1899: 115) . After marching overland to Stonington from New London in early September, 1775, Lyman and his company experienced being under hostile shelling for the first time, then gathered apples and played ball for two days. On Friday, September 8, the soldiers were shipped back to New London, sailing south to avoid the rocks north of Fishers Island. Despite being seasick, "We had a very good wind, and we went round Fishis Island about 40 miles, and we arrived at New-londen about 9 o'clock at night to our old tent to our great joy with the rest of our soldiers" (Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, vol. VII, 1899: 117) . During the Revolutionary War, Fisher's Island bordered one 67 of the most important theaters of war. According to Caulkins, "The first naval expedition under the authority of Congress was fitted out at New London in January, 1776" (Caulkins, 1852: 509) . Commodore Hopkins' fleet of four vessels, the Alfred, Columbus, Andrea Doria and Cabot, were equipped with from 14 to 36 guns. He returned to port in April, 1776 having taken 70 prisoners, 88 cannons and a large quantity of military and naval stores. Other ships were fitted out by the State of Connecticut (Middlebrook, 1925) , and the resulting naval warfare was one of the greatest military successes of the Revolutionary War. The three-way trade between New England and the rebellious colonies, the West Indies and England had been extremely profitable for over a century (1660 letter of John Winthrop, Jr. encouraging investment and immigration, Winthrop Papers, 1882: 65) . This trade was put in jeopardy by the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, which resulted in English investors involved in the trans-Atlantic trade losing an estimated 66 pounds sterling out of every 100 pounds earned before the war. In 1776 the cost of salt foods for the West Indies rose by about 50% and corn by about 400%, while the price of sugar had fallen by as much as 40% and rum by over 35% (Middlebrook, 1925: 4-5) . However the land war did not initially go in favor of the Continental Army. The Battle of Long Island, August 29, 1776, brought an end to organized military resistance to the British 68 on Long Island, and showed the ineffectiveness of local militias in combat against a professional army. The regiment of Southold Minute Men was disbanded, and many Patriots fled to Connecticut (Case, et al. , 1876: 17) . The Continental Navy was still able to plan salvage operations in Long Island Sound and Fishers Island Sound in November, 1776. A letter from Joseph and William Russell to Barnabas Deane dated November 15, 1776 refers to two ship spars that got loose and needed to be recovered from Fishers Island and Long Island and brought to the shipyards in Providence: "The Naval Committee thank You for the Information of the two large Spars which got loose in the Sound and we have wrote to Mr Nathaniel Shaw of New London to use his best Endeavours to get them from Fishers' & Long Island to New London & from thence here" (Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, vol. XXIII, 1930: 47-48) . By the following winter, however, the British had established a successful blockade of New London. The frigates Amazon and Niger were stationed most of the winter of 1776-7 near the west end of Fishers Island, effectively blockading the mouth of the Thames River. The resourceful citizens of New London were still able to reach Fishers Island and take advantage of its resources despite the blockade. On February 14, 1777, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr. wrote to Joshua Huntington refusing to pay extra for timber recently 69 logged and delivered from Fishers Island: "Sir, I Received yours of this date per the barer and in Answer, Can only Say, that I give the Workmen on my Ship from Four to Six Shillings per day and I find them, the Master Workman I Suppose must have Two Dollars and he to find himself, the Iron I gave thirty pounds per Ton for, and am to pay Twenty Shillings per Ct. for working the Timber I purchas'd Standing on Fishes Island, and made no other Bargain only to pay the Customary price" (Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, XX, 1923: 53) However a month later, on March 14, 1777 there was alarm in New London when a fleet of eleven sail, including the Amazon, Greyhound, Lark and auxiliary transports, sailed round the western point of Fishers Island and anchored near Groton shore. However instead of landing in Connecticut, they raided the Winthrop's holdings on Fishers Island. According to a report from New London dated March 14, 1777, a fleet of 20 ships at anchor in Gardiner's Bay had raided Fishers Island. "Last Sunday the British Fleet took from John Brown on Fishers's Island, 106 sheep, 8 oxen, 11 cows, 22 yearlings, 26 swine, 24 turkies, 48 fowls, 123 bushels corn, 100 do. potatoes, 5 1/2 tons pressed hay, and 3 cords wood. Also, a barrel of pork out of the cellar, blankets, sheets, and shot some sheep" (dispatch quoted in Onderdonk, 1849: 63) . This list gives a good picture of the productivity of an 18th century farm on Fishers Island, and it is interesting to note that the farmer 70 had a cellar, either under his house or nearby. Nevertheless, this confiscation was not greatly resented, because the navy paid Mr. Brown in gold for what they had taken (Caulkins, 1852: 525) . However this amicable compensation did not remain a permanent arrangement. In July, 1779, a large fleet sailed from New York. No attempt was made to land near New London, but Fishers Island and Plum Island were thoroughly ransacked and plundered, and the hay and buildings which could not be carried off were set on fire (Caulkins, 1852: 530) . The January, 1779 map of Fishers Island engraved by William Fadden, Geographer to the King (Figure 13) does not show any detail of buildings on Fishers Island. Despite the absence of permanent occupation, Fishers Island became a thriving center of smuggling during the later years of the Revolutionary War, and the ruins of the smugglers huts survived until the late 1800s. According to an unnamed source quoted by Henry L. Ferguson, "During the eighteenth century, smuggling was extensively carried on along the Connecticut coasts, especially at the eastern and western extremities of Long Island Sound. At Fishers Island there were erected small warehouses or shacks wherein smugglers stored their goods, and ruins of which still stand. Incoming vessels from foreign ports would lie-to or anchor off the spot, send their contraband ashore, and with a cargoe fully entered on their manifests, sail 71 to New London or other ports. Later the contraband would be smuggled in by small craft as opportunity offered" (Ferguson, 1925: 60) . In 1780, John Winthrop received permission from the Connecticut authorities to rebuild his house and outbuildings that had been destroyed earlier in the Revolutionary War, but did not take up residence there (Ferguson, 1925: 61) . Hostilities between British and Continental forces lessened when peace negotiations began, and enterprising Long Islanders began to smuggle goods from behind British lines to Connecticut consumers who were feeling the effects of the British naval blockade. Preventing this smuggling became a priority of Connecticut naval forces, which were authorized on November 7, 1781 to "watch and guard the coasts near and go on Fishers Island, seize, take and secure any boats carrying on illicit trade and goods found on sd island for illicit purposes" (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 61) . While patrolling Long Island Sound on April 3, 1782 , the Connecticut sloop Centurion, a 6 gun ship of 25 tons with a crew of 25 commanded by Joseph Dodge, captured a Long Island whaleboat near the western end of Fishers Island. This whaleboat, commanded by Talmadge, had on board smuggled British goods bound for Rhode Island or Connecticut (Middlebrook, 1925: 65) . On May 3 , 1782, a one gun galley of the Connecticut navy commissioned one month earlier, seized a 70 ton British sloop 72 between Fishers Island and Long Island. The sloop, which was laden with lumber, had been abandoned in distress by its crew and was safely towed into New London and confiscated (Middlebrook, 1925: 138) . Following the conclusion of the Revolutionary War, Fishers Island was used as a quarantine station for arriving immigrants. On July 2, 1788 a mishap occurred that led to two boats being upset and a party of immigrants being drowned as they were being taken to Fishers Island where tents were to be erected for their shelter during the quarantine period (Caulkins, 1852: 577) . In April, 1793, Fishers Island was rented from the Winthrops by Captain Allen, whose family had made a fortune from trade with Madeira during the Revolutionary War. Between 1793 and 1812, Squire Allen had twelve families as his tenants, and also hired five or six girls to spin and weave, two dairy women who made 260 cheeses a day in addition to butter, a cook and her assistant, as well as a schoolteacher/chaplain who served both the Allen family and their tenants (Hine, 1912 : 194-195) . William H. Winthrop purchased his brothers' share of Fishers Island in 1818. The woodland on the island, which had been a strategic resource to both sides during the Revolutionary War, was largely destroyed by a hurricane in September, 1815, apart from relict patches on the edges of swamps (Hine, 1912: 195) . At the beginning of the 19th century, communication with 73 the outside world was still more efficient by water than by land, and Fishers Harbor is one of the only features noted on Fishers Island in the 1829 Burr Map (Figure 14) . Although the 1838 U.S. Coastal Survey map (Figure 15) shows the fences and fields of "West End Farm" in detail, there was no construction shown on North Hill at this time, apart from a geodetic survey marker on top of the hill. At this time, vegetation on the parcel consisted of open pasture and dune grass. In 1838, the tenant of Fishers Island was Ruel R. Strickland, who lived in the Mansion House on the west end of the island. In 1843 , William H. Winthrop, Jr. lived in the east end farm house, and lived on Fishers Island for 11 years, moving to the Mansion House after Mr. Strickland's lease expired in 1846. The loss of the steamship, Atlantic, which wrecked on the rocks below North Hill, on November 30, 1846, led to the recognition that a permanent beacon to mark the channel through Fishers Island Sound was needed. The North Dumpling Light-house north of Fishers Island was built in 1848 on land purchased from William H. Winthrop in 1847, and the light-house was re-fitted in 1855 (Bayles, 1874: 391) . The maps of this period do not show any constructions or features on or near the Zabohonski parcel (Figures 16-17) . According to Thompson, during the 1830s-1850s, peat from the swamps was used for fuel, and although the island was capable of supporting 3000 sheep and 300 74 cattle, a smaller number of livestock was kept because raising English hay was more profitable. During the 1830s-1850s, Thompson described the agricultural economy of Fishers Island during the final period of the Winthrop family's ownership: "The staple articles raised here are wool (of the Saxony and merino breeds) , butter, and cheese. The beef and mutton are of superior quality and flavor. The base of one of the hills is a fine clay, of which great quantities of bricks have been manufactured. There are forty-five persons of all ages upon the island, employed in the business of the farms, dairy, &c. " (Thompson, 1918: vol. II, 248) . When William Winthrop died in 1860, the ownership of Fishers Island passed to his wife. Following her death in 1863, the Winthrops' two sons deeded Fishers Island to George F. Chester, who immediately reconveyed the property to Robert Fox, a New York manufacturer who built a grist mill on Fishers Island and brought brushland under cultivation. After the death of Robert Fox in 1871, Fishers Island was managed on behalf of his heirs until 1889, when Fishers Island and all its small contiguous islands were sold to Edmund M. Ferguson, with the exception of 101 tracts previously sold by the trustee of the Fox estate (Hine, 1912: 197) . Little development took place on Fishers Island during the 1870s, according to the 1873 Beers map (Figure 18) . 75 Extensive development of Fishers Island began after Mr. Ferguson bought it from the Fox estate. Edmund M. Ferguson was a prominent citizen of Pittsburg, Pa. , and was the president of the Merchants & Manufacturers Bank of Pittsburg. Together with his brother and H.C. Frick, Edmund Ferguson had been one of the pioneers in the coke industry. He continued to develop the island actively until his death in 1904. The old dairy farms at West End, Middle Farm and East End were brought under new management, and new buildings for cattle were provided. Then a creamery was built at Middle Farm to make and market Fishers Island butter from the increased stock. Mr. Ferguson also saw that more people needed to get to Fishers Island on a regular basis. The old ferry to New London was replaced with the steamer Munnatawket in 1890, and an additional summer boat, the steamer Restless, entered service in 1904, cutting the time of a journey to New London to thirty minutes (Hine, 1912 : 198) , fifteen minutes faster than the journey takes ninety years later. The results of new developments on Fishers Island can be seen on the 1896 Belcher Hyde map (Figure 19) and the 1901 Colton map (Figure 20) . A boat landing was built near the Munnatawket Hotel, and Crescent Avenue was improved to provide access to summer cottages and private residences near the hotel, although there was no construction on or adjacent to the Zabohonski parcel at this time. In the spring of 1899, the 76 Fishers Island Electric Light, Heat & Power Co. was organized, more than a decade before many communities in western Suffolk County had electric power. Power lines were run to reach all the houses on the west end of Fishers Island, as "the increasing summer population at the hotels and cottages created a demand for electric light which was almost a necessity" (Hine, 1912: 199) . According to Henry L. Ferguson, the development of Fishers Island resulted from the intention of the Ferguson brothers to keep the island like a private estate, but their own skill and enjoyment of entrepreneurial activity and investment led to many changes: "The original idea of the Fergusons was to keep the Island as it always had been, simple and like a private estate. Unfortunately one thing led to another and the Island started to expand. To utilize the large barns and the hay it was decided to raise horses. This was tried, but soon proved a dismal failure. The Mansion House that had been open for many years became cramped and, the prospects becoming brighter, an addition was joined to it and a number of cottages built. The supply of accommodations, however, was soon outgrown and first one addition and then another was added, and more cottages built, until the Mansion House itself could hardly be seen, surrounded as it was by so many other buildings" (Ferguson, 1925: 71) . The Ferguson brothers also helped capitalize the Fishers Island Brick Manufacturing Company, which made high quality 77 brick and had the capacity to produce 16.25 million bricks a year (Hine, 1912 : 199) . By 1912 they had built 25 summer cottages, in addition to the extensions made for summer visitors at the Mansion House, and had also built 20 other cottages for their employees on the island. In 1912, "Many own their own homes and find it a most delightful place, restful and quiet, free from many of the temptations incident to a larger population" (Hine, 1912: 199) . The strategic importance of Fishers Island, which had been of concern to the authorities in Connecticut since the mid 1600s, was officially recognized by the United States in 1898, when a tract of 216 acres on the west end of the island was acquired by condemnation for the construction of Fort H.G. Wright (U.S. Army, 1988: 308) and purchased (Swett, 1920s) . The post was completed and established in 1900 (General Order 43, Adjutant General's Office, April 4, 1900) . By 1912, 50 buildings had been erected on the army post, in addition to emplacements for 30 guns of all sizes, including 12-inch calibre guns (Hine, 1912: 201-202) . The Cartographic and Architectural Branch of the National Archives has catalogued many maps and plans of Fort H.G. Wright (list in the Henry L. Ferguson Museum, Fishers Island) . During the 1920s Fort Wright offered "peculiar advantages for detailed training in engineering and artillery", as well as being "happily situated with respect to facilities for 78 amusement" in Boston and New York, according to an article in the Recruiting News by F.S. Swet (Swet, 1920s) . By the 1930s, a guide to army posts and towns advised its readers that "There are no accommodations on the island. The summer cottages are habitable in the winter and rents are prohibitive in the summer" (Sullivan, 1935: 61-62) . However by this time Fort H.G. Wright had become an important training center for four National Guard regiments from southern New England and coastal New York, in addition to the coastal artillery training camps held there yearly. By the 1930s "the sub-aqueous sound ranging plant which is located here" was doing "valuable experimental work in the tracking of ships and the location of the fall of shots by sound" (Sullivan, 1935: 62) . As preparations for World War II got underway in 1940, additional measures for the defense of the entrance to Fishers Island Sound and Long Island Sound led to the construction of gun emplacements on North Hill as well as on the eastern side of Crescent Avenue southeast of the Zabohonski parcel (Figures 21-23) . However the North Hill reservation was abandoned after the war and sold, and only Crescent Avenue is shown on the 1950 U.S. Army map (Figure 24) , or the 1970 U.S. Geological Service map (Figure 25) . 79 FIGURE 8 1635 BLAEU MAP j alinquacs Q juaeS Gschcoi cu - VIA Q�. s Naraticous ,2iLAquam � 4 Z�• �E chuques. IL - sa,il�ilcaus 4,;k4 r �I4pR'�riser xt ty ratlpa.cns Raquac � r Q OL Auxf �Wecic p e ry �iklJYanes J �yJll Naw C�wss fags :�lroyieuls �y4 �'�. \ r eerlieidl,r srdorariw.. �j�l �.i� -•1�,�yrrir+?r \ morhic ans \ � r 'Pequatoos ��Nsrir `s`.sisev trraWO Eplolt � Z• - 2�� 4 11 \ 1 iii. 0� Wz Site is indicated by arrow. 80 FIGURE 9 1675 ROGGEVEEN MAP y 1r \. low so ,,Pick � ��� / i _ ��• � � i '/' \` � \ 93 \' // \ Site is indicated by arrow. 81 FIGURE 10 1675 SELLER MAP Mho � S• c •T a i y � c 1 Tdo � A- v t lel tone~of -Cp ' 'L-,'! O ly a ._ r ►� o o n d � �;: S D Ilia N Site is indicated by arrow. 82 FIGURE 11 1689 JOHN THORNTON MAP i r ` \ \ \ \ \ dr34. ~r \ \ 4 s A'A7A Pj.lwr: of j�I. • L S Sd bo r� \ N Site is indicated by arrow. 83 FIGURE 12 1734 NEW ENGLAND COASTING PILOT MAP Now• ondon�.11l�;.,e,. l� ✓�•f� �lL�'f�e.r vf�l,�+.aa� �'�` 7 t/x, R�:ot.a,Y,GroYt, .S y y%�/ ��•�Gsu�y*�tarlr�sa... .f 1Lz(i��.�,.������ . New O-31don'n 8 r y� t �2 � 2� �Gy•�...,�' � .52 Bl..4 Our> r Je♦ • "•». t 2C • • • • .p. . *1 iii 2S �I.© � Z --► E.lhe*s I�1���,',f.Ra��,9,.,,,,��,1�� • �., is y Zs` G ��a J �. e4 9 �• � � I � 3 Z ./�an Af 4affiffi ffi �•.�Z� 2g a�� .• •• •�f �j�ac� lfa�.,,pra N Site is indicated by arrow. 84 FIGURE 13 1779 FADDEN MAP M5 A '_ �'�-- ;mss.,-� � •-.- :�a::�, SO CAW Wig* East Emwea lo Viso Sil ��•-%jj;%�: ,Eag�ave�aad . -f►� _ �F�ia/�sx; �'"�- " ------------- - __�=j j• /`j�- �,�,�RKGfJ�4p mtfaTCl-�� 'r 0/'lDfi �j. N site is indicated by arrow. 85 FIGURE 14 1829 BURR MAP V i I Ami - I I I it• �t a • ar _ _ ff�� 4t• • _ �: XAL i� I _ O IrI •' �� r N Site is indicated by arrow. 86 FIGURE 15 1838 U.S . COASTAL SURVEY MAP 4 P �o 00, I Milt St w db + 10 \�o %6\_ 00/ Lig �� ; Al Site is indicated by arrow. 87 FIGURE 16 1842 MATHER AND SMITH GEOLOGICAL MAP }�'•"�.. •'.''"�- - �,-•�f/` ..' - -._•tet,< ►:.._ ..,�� '`;�+:: �'�f�=�_ Ir NZ 10 a 41 fit, f - � ,. _ vf•' lL � •� i '��'����� ��' � / �dera•naw�.• _ Ailmnou$aod..._.f._.�� Site is indicated by arrow. 88 FIGURE 17 1858 CHACE MAP I - e f • • • AW ir- N Site is indicated by arrow. 89 FIGURE 18 1873 BEERS MAP j,,l•,i,;,, ,• •�._ _� -=Z• `� -__r,� :�= _`'may /// ,,Ili,;�!��' �.;, _� - r, , __- • \"W Oe z 7 OSE Site is indicated by arrow. 90 FIGURE 19 1896 BELCHER/HYDE MAP • pafici IRS \ Le�din9 �,L,e�. fawY ATAMKLf //MAN710N LAND � 'i�� ••''tll ie.. 446 °�� 2o.. a. 9 1"1 � Ce 41. . NFA$ y (�• s BOUT"V 9 LAC H Pft=PCGT M Wilderne �s"a eta iges and Towns in which Locatet Scuttle Hole,Southampton Hoganock,Southampton. Mineola Park.North Hempstead. Sea Cuff, star Bay. Holbrook,Brook Haven. Montauk Association.Fast Hampton. Seaford.Hempstead Hollis.Jamaica. Montauk Point, Fast Hampton, 8earingtown.North Hempt Hollis Heights,Jamaica. Moriches,Brook Haven. Selden,Brook Hares Hollis Park,Jamaica. Morris Park,Jamaica. Setauket.Brook Haven. Holllswood,Jamalca. Mt.Sinal,Brook Haven. Sheed Nine,Babylon. Huntington. Huntington, Murray Hill.Flashing. Shelter Island Heights.Sim Huntington Harbor,Huntington. Nassau Heights,Newtown. Shelter Island Park,Shelte Hyatt Heights.Newtown. Napeague Beach.East Hampton. Shinnecock Hills,Sonthami Hyde Park.North Hempstead. New Cassell,North Hempstead. Smithtown,Smithtown. Highland Valley, North Hempstead.New Snablk.Southold. Smithtown Branch,Smitht Indian Head Smithtown. Newtown,Newtown. Smithtown Landing.Smith Indian Reservation,Southampton. Newtown Heights,Newtown. Smithville South.Hempste Inwood, Hempstead. Nlasiquogue.Smithtown. Southampton,Southamptoi Irma Park, Hempstead. North Beach,Newtown. South Glen Cove,Oyster a Islip.Islip. North Bellport,Brook Haven. South Haven.Brook Havet Jamaica,Jamaica. North Country Club,Oyster Bay. South Jamesport. Blverhet Jamaica Heights,Jamaica. North Haven, Southampton. -South Manor.Brook Haver Jamaica Park,Jamaica. North Neck,East Hampton. thnld- N Site is indicated by arrow. 91 FIGURE 20 1901 COLTON MAP T Q er 'c Bridge •GrotM 1Fort ��W � quamlickB�i 'e S oa Dino Baa Dodges L �° Sto�su�tgfd�'t nlic,as L :t ;� ,�!J e�L b. o harbR,ek o vtmLongP.* 9 o �xp6 2-41 nxp EW-;�� d aatP.t rest ' sgam40- Race . 01 .Zigld Bovie o OdUL B L O C A L S L -A -Ar D S O u J D N Site is indicated by arrow. 92 FIGURE 21 MAP OF NORTH _� �FrsH ERs IsLaN D 93 a n►Eiv �o�� a'==:,,`< ;1�rn•n m��cr�rrznnr ur 7xez ti�ifcs Ncrrlt D�z�rr�lt�t� (ir�/rt j�` �,1��,_Nc►•tlt ncunpluuF Scuth Durnpliu� � 1t�rcck cf the At(nrrtu �`'i � ; ;;,•�� Ff«i Fl�zrz�y��oc Atmzsion Ncuse Arca 11'csr E►� Farm ����� � �rnu� Bef(c Nil( �� NarbcrT,-nnis Club `'� � �j� A(ur�fi�zrn�t�tt Ncri( /-j 3. -.� Fcr»nrlJ 1�11ts Ei�ult Ncrcl 6�n�(a►r's 1 r ,� El � �� �" ���-� N�nrk•s Ncst Pt. pito Fnn � -��� ,, Fr�rkiier r FIGURE 22 1940 LOCATION MAP OF NORTH HILL BATTERY CONSTRUCTION N. PL W\ �/ IL ' o.oso Race D1. BLOCK IS1•�M� S VICINITY SKETCH Scale c �__saoe loocea Do N°r+o�Vil0 q 05 oV0 .Sac I 1 1 / Ilk SECRET LOCATION MAP BATTERY CONSTRUCTION 4 3" GUNS SCALE IN FEET r to accompany Report of Site ,,, ° Soo 1o00 1500 Board convened under secret I e t fer orders. H eadqua rters 15 Corps Area, Dafed Oct. 9,1940. 94 U B C AMT/No 5 1913) OC . ► II rnrow 1�io[fru S 1Lac b. / CAM10 Ne 4(914) [Oy 511 DIRT CONS 111 4 ► ort H 0"s"11RY LONS 111 l0 (i..t l.b E orcwla=wwr IF S 0 No 8 rp vsr,n uar rover Bo So DIRT CONS 111 B"Oso OTRY CONS111 O Loc 8.0 roc as as s/WRY CONS t14 04 So WRY C014S 214 /�/�Y rorrrwr«rrOo So DIRT CONS tlb -"--"---'` In 6-3 CP SIGNAL STATION He ! LM•a LOG 846 as So WRY co"S 216 NEO► No 3 7 s 9 No D toelwewwr p 234 Corr SC 5/l No.P10 Lt &1 So Bray CONS 111 O1 S/WRY MAITLAND roc 1r of 91 S•WRY CONS 214 B C •TRT MAITLAND � UK ti 0 C AMT/ No 6 1916) b C-2 CP 81 8/DIRT CONS 215 D1$1 STRY BENJAMIN N[OP Nap Oa/0 WRY CONS tll B C DIRT BENJAMIN Oe So @TRT CONS 111 Q ��:0 0 • C AMID No t 1912) SCR L96 SET No. 7 r1TTu 04 54 WRY CONS 214 � SIGNAL STATION Not 6'4 CP MET. STATION No t • SGS/l No u 814 aura 8454 BIRY CONS LIS F SB No 4 11 No 4A 1aI rY4� � 216 0 s-5 CP TIDE STATION 0•Sr DIRT CONS 214 r roc to f S B No 6 A-A-6TRY-Aer-2- 1, Bell 96 CONS 9 B'S.&TRY CONS 215 81 S•DTRT CONS t15 �,1Y As SCR/L SET 2 9 IkDcA C) B1S10TRY CONS 217 r T•e1� • C /TRY CANS 115 AG-Oft 110PPBCa1•f/ SC S/L 1b 19 O 20 bLANp .4� y O C DIRT CONS 211 O•$a DIRT MAITLAND 0 G /WTO No 3 19131 rat 6D S.11 a O'S*DIRT MAITLAND Ba 58 WRY BENJAMIN SCR 296 SET No 5 FSB No 7 H O'S'&TRY BENJAMIN S C S/L No 15 0 C OTRY CONS 111 ee 15.1 DpZRf•.OTRT-DAdA*" pro ave /C WRY CONS 214 a�H •C AMID No 1 19111 84 s4 WRY CONS 111 @1•Ss @TRY CONS 111 SCR 296 SET He 6 Or sI BTRT CONS 217 01 61 Way CONS t16 H 0 C P O4 S4 DIRT DUNN 0 H SC S/L He 9.10.11,612S C.S/L No 3 I 4 N0O► IsIl So BIRY CONS 216 S C S/L No 7 A 0 NEC P [SCiZvi SETIk2•• v".oac C-3 CP 4 N roc' 1. rat n B' S liar CONS 111 `-1ti as•1 6-6 C P •a Sa n;RY DUNN � o UK K� SIGNAL STATICN He 4 N 1 •aa�ux D;S;so CONS 111 as so WRY CONS 111 _ W O / Way CONS 114 94 S4 DIRT DUNN y LAX s• Yr,re 64 WRY CONS217 SCR 296 SET No 0 Uj 0 1 I fe" SCR 682 rcc Is SC 5/1. No 17 0 IB 0 mass WRY CONS 111 84S4 O/RT CONS lit 01 81 DIRT CONS t16 iatrrM(T 01 S1 Billy DUNN 0 SCR 296 SET No 1 LEGEND > N -TEMPORARY In B1 SI #IRV CONS III C-1 CP NN SUSPENDED y 9-si..r•Tor Ot5•+TRY CONS lit 6-1 CP -- HEOP Nei O1 S•DIRT CONS 111 SIGNAL STATION Nei d 81 S• Stay CONS lit MET STATION Mn 1 0' $I DIRT OUHN Fs8 He t A 3 haj !s 8 No. 1 91 So DIRT CONS 111 SECRET t7i &'S1 WRY DONS lit S G SIL No 102 of • DIRT CONS 112 9 CDIRT CANS 112 H 0 LONG 4SAm) SOut-�A � 91 sa WRY DUNN ttj D C WRY DUNN 0366 DIRT CONS 216 B G star CONS 216 LDCATION OF ELEMENTS SCR 296 SET No 3 • o • ro r• •o as SCR 296 SET No 4 SCR 502 THOr144aa of Tana S C S/L No 3 A 6 FIGURE 24 1950 U.S . ARMY MAP North HIEL i '17h '�I- J y 'ter--- • ` � �j��❑" i • f •Jam,:•.:. .-',i PORT H \N\ A 7 Oyy0 5p too N Site is indicated by arrow. 0 2000 Ft. I � 96 FIGURE 25 1970 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP Northlor Hill kll - yc¢ •? ;�• Hawks Nest Point -- , o J r..P /O SQ' •GZ1 •• i nr :�, West �y r "Jj HarborfRSKE Goo", Island• cio Hay • 11 it - l °, c Harbor ff giz Silver Eel �. �– a'���so u ` Cove �_.. _ •.:_�•=o � _ �.� d` .� W cl�e!rpr�rr�eid ilderness 10 BLOCK ISLAND so try T48 2540000 FEET (N.Y.)749 • &N*cwww-o40L0ac^1wRvcY .s»INoio".oc-1971 751 �E72 Race Pt ROAD CLASSIFICATION Heavy-duty Light-duty Medium-duty Unimproved dirt ..a..... ;_'?U S. Route (�1 State Route CONNECTICUT Interstate Route QUADRANGLE LOCATION NEW LONDON, CONN.—N. Y N4115—W7200/7-5 (U.S.G.S. , 1970) N Site is indicated by arrow. 0 2000 Ft. 97 IV. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ZABOHONSKI MINOR SUBDIVISION. FISHERS ISLAND. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK. A. METHODOLOGY. The archaeological investigation of the Zabohonski parcel was divided into two stages: 1) the surface field reconnaissance; and 2) the subsurface testing program. A topographic map and site plans prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King of Norwich, Connecticut, dated August 26, 1991, were utilized in this study. The site boundaries were established with the use of a Brunton Pocket Transit. Once the boundaries were established, the site was divided by transects following an approximately east-west axis for the surface field reconnaissance. The transects were separated by 20 m intervals (ca. 66 feet) and a Brunton pocket transit was used to follow the transect lines. The site was traversed by foot and was inspected for possible signs of buried archaeological features and surfaces. The subsurface testing program placed test holes at 20 m intervals along the 20 m transect lines; thereby establishing a 20 x 20 m grid. All excavated sediments were sieved using a 6 mm (1/4 inch) mesh to ensure the recovery of even the smallest artifacts. The 20 x 20 m grid size was utilized due to the fact 98 that the site lies within a potentially sensitive archaeological zone. Each excavated hole penetrated a minimum depth of 60 cm. B. THE SURFACE SURVEY. The surface of the parcel is covered with vegetation, including cat briers, locally dense undergrowth, shrubs and trees. In addition the ground surface is covered with turf or leaves. Two prehistoric artifacts were found on the surface of the Zabohonski parcel. A broken, bifacially flaked vein quartz projectile point rough-out was found on the surface of test hole C4 on the Zabohonski Minor Subdivision parcel. A worn grinding stone metate was also found on the surface 10-15 m east of test hole D3 near a back-hoe trench on the parcel. In Lot 2, in the northeastern portion of the parcel, the outlines of an oval stone but or animal pen was noted adjacent to a 17th-18th century drystone wall near test hole C5 (Figure 26) . These stone walls could perhaps be associated with the dwellings of Indian servants of the Winthrops, like stone foundations noted elsewhere on Fishers Island (Wall and Wall, 1982 : 33) . Substantial stone foundations and "a variety of stone structures and features" are also characteristic of early to mid 1700s Pequot architecture in Connecticut (McBride, 1990: 99 110) . The intensive use of the island for stock raising also makes it possible that these stone walls in Lot 2 represent animal pens and sheepfolds from 17th - early 18th century farming. A 1717 letter from John Winthrop, the grandson of the first settler, describes animal pens near swamps, a location that would fit these stone features near wetlands on the parcel (Ferguson, 1925: 52) . Spoil heaps and terracing by bulldozing during the 1940s and recent dumping have had a substantial impact on the southeastern portion of Lot 1 of the proposed subdivision. The potential significance of the site and the presence or absence of undisturbed cultural layers cannot be determined without subsurface testing. As the parcel had the potential to provide information about prehistory, further archaeological investigation involving subsurface testing was indicated. C. THE SUBSURFACE TESTING PROGRAM. The test holes were dug at 20m intervals along the 20m transect lines trending approximately east-west and northwest-southeast across the site. There were 4 transect lines designated A - D (Figure 26) with a total of 13 holes. The entire area of the site slated for development was covered 100 by the subsurface testing program, with the exception of areas within the 100 foot wetlands setback from the stream through the center of the parcel (Figure 26) . The individual test holes were roughly 30cm (12 inches) in diameter and were excavated with a shovel. The test holes were dug to a minimum depth of 60cm (ca. 2 feet) . D. DESCRIPTION OF SOILS AND RESULTS OF THE SUBSURFACE TESTING. Riverhead sandy loam on 8 to 15 percent slopes (RdC) is found on the northern portion of the parcel. This soil is often as much as 15 percent gravel by volume (USDA, 1975: 83) . RdC has a representative Riverhead series soil profile, with a 30 cm thick brown to dark brown topsoil A horizon (10YR 4/3 in the Munsell Soil Color classification used by the USDA) , overlying a 50 cm thick strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) to yellowish-brown (10YR 5/4) subsoil (USDA, 1975: 81) . Test hole D3 is typical of the RdC soils found on the Zabohonski parcel on Lot 2 . Below a 25 cm topsoil/plow zone from 18th-19th century farming is a deposit of windblown sandy loam or plowpan overlying a cultural level. The strong brown (Munsell Soil Color 7.5YR 4/6) subsoil encountered in test hole I 101 D3 is typical of RdC soils in Suffolk County (USDA, 1975) . Test hole D3 Prehistoric. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-25 topsil 10YR 3/3 loam 25-35 B 7.5YR 4/6 sandy loam 35-55 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 sandy loam 55-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 sandy loam Finds 35-55 one impact-damaged siltstone arrowhead base, Levanna type; milky quartz debitage; one granitic anvil stone. Three areas of Haven loam on 2 to 6 percent slopes (HaB) are found in the southern, eastern and northeastern portions of the parcel. Haven loams are deep, well-drained, medium-textured soils well-suited to crops. HaB soil is commonly found on moraines along shallow, intermittent drainage channels. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture soil survey of Suffolk County, "most areas in the western part of the county are used for housing developments" (USDA, 1975: 72) . Test holes A4, A5 and D4 are typical of the HaB soils found on the parcel: 102 Test hole A4 Modern. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-20 bulldozed topsoil 10YR 3/3 loam 20-60 B 10YR 5/6 sandy loam Finds 0-25 modern building materials - pieces of tar roofing shingle and one piece of a molded 20th century brick. Test hole A5 Negative. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-30 topsoil 10YR 3/3 loam 30-60 B 10YR 5/6 sandy loam & gravel Test hole D4 Prehistoric. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-25 cultural 10YR 3/3 loam 25-50 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 sandy loam 50-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 sandy loam Finds 0-25 flaked quartz, including one fragment of a broken, bifacially thinned projectile point blank with cortex on one edge, together with four flakes and flake fragments. 25-50 one granitic anvil stone/grinding slab, and two 103 angular granitic chunks. Prehistoric artifacts were recovered from eight (8) of the 13 test holes excavated on the Zabohonski parcel (Figure 26) . One (1) test hole, A4, yielded modern building material from the mid - late 20th century (Figure 26; Appendix A) . Following is a summary of the finds and contexts of the positive test holes on the Zabohonski parcel. A detailed description of the positive test holes is found in Appendix A. E. ARTIFACTS. Prehistoric artifacts found in the surface survey and subsurface archaeological reconnaissance of the Zabohonski parcel include used grindstones with a worn, pecked grinding surface (test hole B1 and also from the surface near a backhoe trench 10-15 m east of test hole D3) granitic hammerstones (test holes B2, C41 C5 and D5) ; hoes used to cultivate fields, dig storage pits and gather subsurface roots and mineral resources (test holes B1 and C4) ; flaked, pecked and partially ground granitic axes/adzes (test hole B2) and flakes from shaping, using or re-edging granitic bifaces (test holes Al and B1) ; anvil stones (test holes D3, D4 and D5) ; and flaked quartz bifacial rough-outs, debitage and quartz flakes (test holes A2, 104 C4, C5, D3 , D4 and D5) . The skillful bifacial reduction technique used in manufacturing quartz projectile points was also evidenced in surface finds and test holes from the Zabohonski parcel. Although quartz is difficult to work successfully (Boudreau, 1981) , both soft hammer and hard hammer reduction sequences can be observed in waste flakes from the parcel, following the criteria established experimentally by Ohnuma and Bergman (1982) . The base of a Levanna arrowhead (Ritchie, 1961) with impact damage was also found on the Zabohonski parcel. In test hole D3, the base of a micaceous metamorphosed siltstone Levanna arrowhead was found. This piece had retouch along the edges and a ventral impact fracture on its distal end. The raw material is a quartz-rich material found in adjacent parts of Connecticut that has a tendency to break with conchoidal fracture (Rodgers, 1985; geological observation by R.A. Jackson, March, 1992) . This piece is characteristic of waste found around a camp or village site when a damaged arrow point base is brought back still attached to the arrowshaft, and is then removed, replaced and discarded. Levanna arrowheads are typical of Late Woodland prehistory in coastal New York and southern New England (Ritchie, 1980) . Late Woodland period thinning flakes from the basal ears of Levanna point blanks or from narrow Madison points were also found in test holes A2 and C5 on the Zabohonski parcel (basal ears: analysis of material in 105 collection of the American Museum of Natural History, 1991; see also Ritchie, 1961; Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988: 103 ; catalogue and detailed lithic analysis in Appendix A) . Evidence of contact period stone use was also found in test hole C4. One of the finds from a depth of 20-40 cm below the surface in this test hole was a 1600s-1700s quartzite strike-a-light with a concave, steep, stepped and scaled abrupt retouch notch from repeated blows with the steel bar of a flint and steel kit. The strike-a-light stone tool is held in one hand with some tinder tucked under it, and is then struck by a piece of high carbon steel held in the other hand so that the edge of the steel just brushes against the edge of the strike-a-light. As the high carbon steel makes contact with the stone tool, a superheated spark is struck from the edge of the steel tool and falls on the piece of dry tinder, setting it alight. In the days before matches, this was an effective way of starting a fire or lighting a pipe that worked even with a strong prevailing wind such as would have often been encountered here near the northern shore of Fishers Island. The fire that burned the fire-cracked fragment of rock also found in this test hole may have been started in this way. The broken granitic anvil stone found in test hole D3 , the granitic anvil stones found in test holes D4 and D5, the worn grinding stone found on the surface east of test hole D3 , and the grinding slab found in test hole B1 were made from local 106 granitic rocks derived from nearby deposits in Connecticut (Rodgers, 1985) . These tools show an investment of time and energy by local villagers dependent on processing gathered roots and cultivated cereal crops. As a smooth grinding surface cannot grind grain, the worn working surface has to be repeatedly renewed by pecking new spalls from the grinding surface to expose sharp mineral grains that will crush and powder the grain kernels and chunks as they are caught between the hammerstone or hand grinding slab and the rough surfaces of the fixed lower metate/grinding slab (Dodd, 1979 ; Evans, 1897: 250) . The grinding surface needs to be continually renewed after it has been worn down by repeated contact with grain, vegetables, cosmetics, oils, and other foods and processed materials. According to one description of the lithic technology involved, "the large flat lower stone. . . is usually made from a coarse granitic rock which can be chipped repeatedly to roughen the surface as it wears down" (James, 1979 : 32) . In 1896, Walter Hough of the Smithsonian Institution observed the process of hammering and pecking the grinding surface of an oblong corn-grinding stone with a hammerstone with "rapid and continuous blows, raising an ear-torturing noise" (Hough, 1897) . Although not frequently noted in archaeological or ethnographic publications, among the most characteristic features of a re-surfaced grinding stone are the scalloped, 107 i core-like flake removals around any acute angles on the periphery of the grinding surface. These flake removals are accidental results of pecking back and forth across the worn grinding surface to spall and roughen it. Similar patterns of ' grindstone dressing, flaking and breakage can be observed in the worn grindstones from the Zabohonski parcel. ' Food and raw material processing also required auxiliary tools such as the anvil stones found in three test holes (test holes D3 , D4 and D5) . Pounding nuts and roots to extract and process sources of oil, cosmetics, food and medicine would have ' resulted in heavily pitted anvils (Jones, 1936) . ' Stone hammerstones weighing between 1/5 pound and 1 3/4 pounds were found in four test holes (B2, C4, C5 and D5) . These are domestic tools used for processing food and raw materials used in and around the household. Stone hammers such as those found in abundance at the Zabohonski parcel had a number of uses. Hammers were used in food preparation to crush maize and hominy kernels as well as Ifood tubers. Sinew was also pounded with hammers in order to allow the bundles of sinew in tendons to be teased into individual fibers that could then be used for sewing and for making bowstrings, fishing line and other strong threads and lines. Hammers were also needed to dress and roughen the grinding surface of milling stones. on village and camp sites, grinding 108 stones are often found smoothed down and discarded after use, like the grinding stones found on the Zabohonski parcel in test hole B1 and on the surface 10 m east of test hole D3. The light, 5.6 ounce plano-convex bun-shaped granitic hammer with battered perimeter found in test hole C4 is similar to the mano/metate re-roughening tools identified on prehistoric North American sites by Dodd (1979) . Native American baskets from coastal New York and New England were well known for their quality (Speck, 1909 ; Harrington, 1924 : 48, fig. 20; Stone, 1983: 291-293) and Native Americans were in demand as skilled weavers of chair seats in New London during the early 1700s (Hempstead 1902/1711-1758) . Some of the hammers found on the Zabohonski parcel could have been used to make basket splints of swamp maple and hickory logs: "Four foot logs are hammered until the grain separates, then strips are pulled off. These are shaved with a spoke shave until they are smooth" (Speck, 1909: 189) . Baskets produced by these techniques were made and traded by their makers as late as 1773 when "Peter Gonoe Indian" paid a bill to the Havens store on Shelter Island with a basket worth one shilling threepence (Lamont, 1975: 10) . Crudely flaked and abraded granitic digging tools/hoes were found in two test holes (B1 and C4) . Similar crudely shaped and irregular amorphous digging tools are illustrated by Holmes (Holmes, 1919: figs. 114-115, 130, 136, 140) . Digging in the 109 moraine soils of Fishers Island was intensive work and tools were quickly worn out and needed to be resharpened. A possible hoe resharpening flake struck off a tool with a battered and abraded working edge was found in test hole C4. Picks and hoes were multi-purpose tools and would also have been used to dig up wild roots and tubers, break up fields for cultivation, and dig pits for crop and commodity storage. Similar irregular digging tools with smoothed working edges abraded by repeatedly cutting through sandy loam have been found in both Connecticut (Fowler, 1946) and Long Island (Harrington, 1924 ; Miller, 1990a) . Stone hoes were used in Rhode Island until the early 1600s according to Roger Williams (1643 : 38) , and stone hoes were recently found in 1630s-1640s Native American agricultural fields in an area of the Town of Huntington, Long Island formerly known as "Old Fields" (Miller, 1990b-c) . Two examples of roughly finished, bifacially flaked, pecked and partially ground granitic axes/adzes were found in one test hole on the Zabohonski parcel (test hole B2) , and a flake from thinning a porphyritic granitic axe/adze blank was found in test hole Al. Porphyritic granitic debitage (discarded flaked stone) found in test hole Al included a flake with a lipped bulb of percussion from a flaking tool that absorbed some of the countershock from the piece being hammered during flaking. 110 Although the lipped point of percussion is a feature characteristic of soft hammer flaking using antler billets (Ohnuma and Bergman, 1982) , granitic raw material is extremely tough, and a fairly massive flaking tool with effective inertial mass would have been required to remove this flake. Deer antler would be too light. A Late Woodland period piece of whalebone, radiocarbon dated A.D. 1420-1670, that would have been an effective flaking tool was excavated from the Shinnecock Sebonac village site near Southampton (Harrington, 1924; Ceci 1990b: 7) . Moose flaking tools would also have been available from moose hunted on and near Fishers Island up until the time of European contact (Winthrop Papers, 1863: 278; Hine, 1912: 186) . A number of activities are indicated by the artifacts found on the Zabohonski parcel. Woodworking is suggested by the axes and adzes found on the site. Food preparation, raw material processing and basketry are suggested by the grindstones, hammerstones and pestles which were found on the site. Stoneworking, including arrowhead manufacture and resharpening is shown by the flaked quartz pebbles, cores and flakes. 1 111 FIGURE 26 MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF TEST HOLES 3 4 5 Lot 2 • • • D S8 • C N 6 Lot 1 4 • • • 0 100 Ft. O • � O ? O O dumpy V � Key: o negative test holes • positive prehistoric test holes si surface find ® wetlands 112 V. CONCLUSIONS. The Zabohonski parcel is located within one mile of potentially important Native American sites on Fishers Island, and a shell midden was reported near the stream on the parcel by Henry Ferguson. Evidence of prehistoric activity on the parcel was found in subsurface testing. A stream is found within the parcel, and this factor would encourage seasonal or permanent settlement on the site. In Lot 2 , the discovery of a well-made drystone wall along transect C as well as the wall of an oval stone structure south of this wall near the eastern boundary of the Zabohonski parcel reported here, have made it necessary to undertake a detailed survey of the historical sources referring to early stone constructions on Fishers Island. The intensive use of the island for stock raising makes it possible that these stone walls represent field walls, and either an animal pen or sheepfold from early 18th century farming, the stone foundations of a Revolutionary War smugglers hut, or a wigwam foundation formerly inhabited by some of the Native Americans living on the island in the late 17th-early 18th century. The subsurface testing and surface survey of the parcel showed contact period as well as prehistoric Native American activities including stoneworking, food preparation and hunting. 113 Two areas of potentially significant prehistoric sensitivity were identified on the Zabohonski parcel: Lot 2 and the western portion of Lot 1 (Figure 26) . All test holes in Lot 2 were positive for prehistoric artifacts, and it is possible that the North Hill shell midden identified by Henry L. Ferguson (Figure 6; Ferguson, 1935: 10) is within the wetlands area in the southern portion of Lot 2 that was not tested because it would not be impacted by the development of the Zabohonski parcel. Prehistoric finds on Lot 1 were concentrated without exception in the western portion of the parcel. Flaked quartz and granitic debitage was found in test holes Al and A2 (Appendix A) . A granitic axe, a granitic adze, and a battered granitic hammerstone were found in test hole B2. A concentration of granitic tools found in test hole B1 included two (2) granitic hoes. Both of these hoes had proximal crushing on the tang or tool butt in order to bind the tools securely to their hafts and use-abraded working edges. A possible butchering tool with reddish smudges adhering to its cutting edge was also found in test hole B1. This was a large (15 x 8.5 cm) maul-struck granitic flake weighing over 12 ounces (388. 1 g) . It had a plain flaked striking platform, a primarily cortex covered dorsal surface, and opposed flake scar(s) on its cutting edge. This tool can be classified as a naturally backed knife (Bordes, 1983: 122) . 114 A small, portable household grinding slab weighing 2.21 lb (1 kg) which had a worn, pecked working surface was also found in test hole B1 in the western portion of Lot 1 on the Zabohonski parcel. In contrast, the eastern portion of Lot 1 showed extensive disturbance by bulldozing and dumping. The absence of prehistoric artifacts in test holes B3 and C3, C4 and C5 indicate that further development of this portion of the Zabohonski parcel would not impact potentially significant cultural resources. In accordance with New York State guidelines in dealing with cultural resource surveys, the recovery of potentially significant prehistoric artifacts and historic features on the Zabohonski Minor Subdivision parcel during the Stage IB archaeological reconnaissance would indicate further archaeological testing and limited excavation in order to define the boundaries, integrity and significance of potential cultural resources on the parcel. 115 APPENDICES APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF POSITIVE TEST HOLES AND FINDS I APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF TEST HOLES ON THE ZABOHONSKI PARCEL Abbreviations used: p.z. - plow zone; 1. - loam; s. - sand; cl. - clay; b.z. - bulldozed; g. - gravel; t. - topsoil. H. - historic (1646-) ; M. - modern (1940-) ; P. - prehistoric (before 1646) ; *P - prehistoric (before 1646) in situ below plow zone; ?P possible prehistoric. Soil color descriptions are taken in the field using the Munsell Soil Color Charts (1988 edition) , the soil color measurements used to classify soils in Suffolk County and elsewhere by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. In Suffolk County plowed soil and topsoil with humic material are usually dark brown (10YR 3/3-10YR 4/4) , and the portion of the subsoil B horizon reached in shovel probe testing can be strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) , yellowish brown loam or sand (10YR 5/4-5/6) and occasionally light yellowish brown sand and gravel (10YR 6/4) . Artifact descriptions follow conventions based on experimental and ethnographic tool manufacture and use; flake classification also uses soft hammer/hard hammer distinctions developed and used in blind tests by Ohnuma and Bergman (1982) . A-1 Test hole Al P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-40 cultural 10YR 5/6 s.l. 40-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Finds 30-40 2 .0 g porphyritic granitic debitaQe (A-B) A) 1 expanding biface thinning flake, dihedral striking platform, hard hammer flake removal, no dorsal cortex, hinged termination, 1.0 x 2. 0 x 0.6 cm, 1.55 g. B) 1 expanding flake, soft hammer flake removal (lipped bulb of percussion, tough raw material: ?moose or ?whalebone flaking billet) , no dorsal cortex, sharp termination, 1.2 x 1.4 x 0.3 cm, 0.45 g. This raw material is extremely tough, and a fairly massive flaking tool with effective inertial mass would have been required to remove this flake. Deer antler would be too light. A Late Woodland period piece of whalebone, radiocarbon dated A.D. 1420-1670, that would have been an effective flaking tool was excavated from the Shinnecock Sebonac village site near Southampton (Harrington, 1924 ; Ceci 1990: 7) . Moose flaking tools would also have been available from moose hunted on and near Fishers Island up until the time of European contact (Winthrop Papers, 1863: 278; Hine, 1912: 186) . A-2 Test hole A2 P. Location Next to modern rock dump. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-20 t. 10YR 3/3 s.l. 20-30 cultural 10YR 5/6 s.l. 30-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Finds 20-30 6.8 g quartz flakes and debitaae vein quartz (A-B) : 4 g; milky quartz (C-E) : 2.8 g A) 1 edge of bifacially thinned vein quartz blank, 1.9 x 0.8 x 0.75 cm. B) 1 axially split expanding flake, plain striking platform, hard hammer flake removal, cortex on butt, no cortex on dorsal surface, axial and lateral dorsal flake scars, sharp termination, 1.8 x (1.8) x 0.9 cm. C) 1 expanding thinning flake struck from edge of a bifacially thinned piece, plain striking platform, soft hammer flake removal (lipped, diffuse point of percussion) , no dorsal cortex, complex centripetal dorsal flake scars, termination plunging slightly over bifacially thinned edge opposed to striking platform; may have been struck from ear of triangular Levanna blank or narrow Madison point, both Late Woodland types (Ritchie, 1961; Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988: 103) ; 1.2 x 1.4 x 0. 3 A-3 cm. D) 1 expanding flake butt, no cortex, struck from bifacially thinned piece, plain punctiform butt, centripetal dorsal flake scars, distal snap/flex break during flake removal, (1.7) x 1.7 x 0. 3 cm. E) 1 flake tip, no cortex, undercutting lateral hinge fracture on dorsal surface, sharp termination, (1.4) x 1.9 x 0. 6 cm. Test hole A3 Negative. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-20 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 20-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Test hole A4 M. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-20 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 20-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Finds 0-25 73 .7 g modern building materials A) 6.2 g tar roofing shingle B) 67.5 g molded 20th century brick A-4 Test hole A5 Negative. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-60 B lOYR 5/6 s.l. & g. Test hole B1 P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-20 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 20-30 B 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. 30-40 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. 40-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Finds 30-40 1.7975 kg (3 .95 lb) granitic tools (A-D) A) 1 granitic hoe, proximal crushing on tang in order to bind it securely to haft, use-abraded working edge, 9 x 8 . 1 x 1.8 cm, 158.3 g. B) 1 granitic hoe, bifacially abraded working edge, abrading/crushing near tool butt on one side to bind it to haft, 9. 1 x 6. 3 x 3 .2 cm, 251.1 g. C) 1 large maul-struck granitic flake ?butchering A-5 tool with red smudge on cutting edge, plain flaked striking platform, mostly cortex covered dorsal surface, but opposed flake scar(s) on distal edge. This is not a primary flake but a naturally backed knife (Bordes, 1983 : 122) . Dimensions 15 x 8. 5 x 3 .4 cm, 388. 1 g. D) 1 grinding slab with worn, pecked surface, 13 . 5 x 9.9 x 5.4 cm, 1 kg (2.21 lb) . Test hole B2 P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-20 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 20-30 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. 30-40 cultural 10YR 5/6 s.l. 40-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Finds 30-40 2 .4823 kg (5.46 lb) granitic tools (A-C) A) 1 battered granitic hammerstone, 11 x 7.8 x 7. 1 cm, 777 g (1.71 lb) . B) 1 broken granitic adze, bifacial flake scars on working edge that has been re-edged by grinding, break on left side from rebound of tool butt against haft, 6.3 x 5. 6 x 3 . 6 cm, 132 . 3 g. C) 1 bifacially flaked and partly ground granitic A-6 axe, battered and flaked by use on working edge, 14 x 13 x 8 cm, 1. 573 kg (3 . 46 lb) . Test hole B3 Negative. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-25 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 25-60 B 10YR 5/6 s.l. Test hole C4 P. Location just north of dressed 18th-19th c. drystone perimeter wall. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-35 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 35-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. Finds surface 1 broken vein quartz bifacial rough-out, (4.2) x 3 .2 x 2 . 4 cm, 21.9 g. 20-40 19.4 q quartzite tool & debitage (A-B) 371.4 g granitic tools and debitage (C-E) A) 1 17th-18th c. quartzite strike-a-light with concave, steep, stepped and scaled abrupt retouch notch from use with steel bar of flint and steel kit, 2. 3 x 4.3 x 1.4 cm, 15. 1 A-7 9- B) 1 burnt quartzite spall from fire-cracked rock, 4.3 cm maximum length, 4.3 g weight. C) 1 granitic hammerstone, battered on both ends, 6.8 x 6.4 x 2 . 8 cm, 175.7 g. D) 1 bifacially flaked hoe, use-abraded working edge, abraded notch near butt on one side from modification to attach the tool to its haft, 9.1 x 6.9 x 2 .5 cm, 193 .7 g. E) 1 granitic ?hoe-rejuvenation or adze use flake, central ridged flake from edge of wear-abraded hoe or adze, crushed striking platform, sharp termination; could have been accidentally removed from working edge of a ground adze during use; 2 x 1.4 x 0.7 cm, 2. 0 g. Test hole C5 P. Location 2m south of line of dressed 18th-19th c. drystone perimeter wall, near circular structures built up against it. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 1. & wall chips 30-40 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 S. Finds 0-20 A) 5 pieces of drystone walling granitic flakes and chips, 807.5 g (1.78 lb) . A-8 2 . 2 g quartz debitage B) 1 axially split vein quartz primary cortical flake, plain flaked striking platform, sharp termination, 1. 3 g. C) 1 expanding thinning flake from bifacially flaked blank, crushed striking platform, centripetal flake scars on dorsal surface, sharp termination, evidence of bifacially flaked edge on distal portion of flake plus a small patch of pebble cortex on right distal edge/tip indicate this flake may have been struck from ear of triangular Levanna arrowhead blank or narrow Madison point; 1.2 x 1.7 x 0.3 cm, 0. 6 g. D) 1 expanding milky quartz flake, plain punctiform striking platform, soft hammer flake removal (lipped point of percussion) , no cortex, centripetally flaked dorsal surface, sharp termination, 0.8 x 1.0 x 0. 1 cm, 0. 3 g. 20-40 506 g (1. 11 lb) granitic tools, flakes and angular waste (A-C) 1. 1 g milky quartz debitage (D-F) A) 1 granitic hammerstone, battered on both ends, 10. 6 x 8. 3 x 6.7 cm, 481 g (1.31 lb) . B) 3 granitic biface thinning flakes, centripetal flake scars, maximum lengths 2.6, 2.1, 1.7 cm, 5.4 g total weight. C) 19.6 g angular granitic chunks. A-9 D) 1 fragment of milky quartz primary cortical flake. E) 1 expanding milky quartz thinning flake, soft hammer flake removal (diffuse, lipped point of percussion) , plain flaked striking platform, no cortex, centripetal flake scars on dorsal surface, incomplete termination, 1 x 1. 1 x 0.2 cm. F) 1 expanding milky quartz thinning flake, crushed striking platform, no cortex, centripetal flake scars, 0.7 x 0.9 x 0. 1 cm. Test hole D3 P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-25 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 25-35 B 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. 35-55 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. 55-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. Finds 35-55 4. 6 g flaked siltstone arrowhead (A) 1.3 g milky auartz debitage (B-C) 1.586 kg (3.49 lb) granitic tool (D) A) 1 base of micaceous metamorphosed siltstone Levanna arrowhead, with a ventral impact fracture on distal end. A-10 The raw material is a quartz-rich material found in adjacent parts of Connecticut that has a tendency to break with conchoidal fracture (geological observation by R.A. Jackson, March, 1992) . This piece is characteristic of waste found around a camp or village site when a damaged arrow point base is brought back still attached to the arrowshaft, and is then removed, replaced and discarded. Dimensions (2 .5) x 3 . 2 x 0.7 cm, 4 .9 g. B) 1 offset ridge milky quartz thinning flake, soft hammer flake removal, diffuse lipped point of percussion, plain flaked striking platform, no cortex, centripetal dorsal flake scars, sharp termination, 1.8 x 1.2 x 0. 35 cm, 0.8 g. C) 1 tip of milky quartz flake, proximal break, sharp termination, no cortex, (1.3) x 1. 6 x 0. 3 cm, 0.5 g. -55 D) 1 broken granitic anvil stone, 11. 5 x 10 x 11 cm, 1.586 kg (3 .49 lb) . Test hole D4 P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-25 cultural 10YR 3/3 1. 25-50 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. 50-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 s.l. Finds A-11 0-25 6.7 a milky quartz debitaae (A-E) A) 1 fragment of broken, bifacially thinned projectile point blank, cortex on one edge, 2.2 x 1.4 x 0.9 cm. B) 1 expanding flake, dihedral striking platform, pebble cortex on right edge, centripetal flake scars on dorsal surface, sharp termination, 2 x 2.2 x 0.7 cm. C) tip of broken primary flake, (1.2) x 2 x 0.4 cm. D) 1 flake fragment, no cortex, 1.4 cm maximum length. E) 1 expanding thinning flake, soft hammer flake removal, diffuse lipped point of percussion, no cortex, centripetal flake scars, sharp termination, 0.9 x 0.9 0.2 cm. 25-50 808.2 a (1.78 lb) granitic tool and angular waste (A-B) A) 1 granitic anvil stone/grinding slab, 10. 5 x (8. 5) x 6 cm, 673 g. B) 2 angular granitic chunks, 135.2 g. A-12 Test hole D5 P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 1. -30 stones stopped excavation of test hole Finds 0-30 1. 3 a quartz debitage (A-B) 433 . 6 g ( .95 lb) granitic tools (C-E) A) 2 vein quartz flake fragments, no cortex, maximum lengths 1.7, 1.4 cm, 0.9 g total weight. B) 1 milky quartz flake fragment, cortex on one edge, 0.4 g. C) 1 burnt granitic hammerstone, heavily battered on both ends, 6.9 x 4.9 x 4.3 cm, 175.1 g. D) 1 granitic pebble hammerstone, battered on both ends, 5 x 4 . 5 x 3 .4 cm, 96.9 g. E) 1 granitic anvil stone, pecked on one surface, 9.9 x 7. 1 x 4 cm, 336.7 g. A-13 APPENDIX B NEW YORK STATE FORMS CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Executive Summary Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Zabohonski Minor Subdivision Project/Facility Location Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island Recommendations of the Stage 1A Report No additional work recommended X Additional work recommended Results of the Stage 1B Report (if appropriate) No sites found in project area 1 Site found in project area Recommendations of the Stage 1B Report (if appropriate) No additional work recommended X Additional work recommended Stage 2 Report attached Yes X No X Project should be modified to avoid site(s) Recommendations of the Stage 2 Report (if appropriate) Site(s) do not appear to meet the criteria of the NY State Register of Historic Places Site(s) appear to meet the criteria of the NY State Register of Historic Places Project should be modified to avoid site(s) n Summary prepared by /fit Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. , Archaeological Consultant Date April 9 . 1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Stage 1A Report Project Information Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Zabohonski Minor subdivision Project/Facility Location Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island Permits Applied For Description of Project Description of Impact Total acres of project site 5.9 acres Total acres to be impacted Environmental Information Topography gently to moderately sloping Geology Woodfordian moraine Soils Riverhead, Haven and Muck Drainage well drained (in area of subsurface testing) Vegetation brush and successional mixed deciduous/coniferous Forest Zone Man-Made Features and Alterations 17th-18th c. wall in Lot 2 bulldozing and dumping in southeastern portion of Lot 1 Documentary Research 1. Site Files (within 1 mile radius) a. NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) Statewide Inventory of Historic Property State Register of Historic Places National Register of Historic Places National Register of Eligible Listing State/National Register proposed b. NYS Museum Excavations by Robert Funk c. Henry Ferguson Museum 2 . References a. Texts Beauchamp, William 1900 Aboriginal Occupation of New York. New York State Museum Bulletin No. 32. Albany, New York (P• ) • Funk, Robert E. 1976 Recent Contributions of Hudson Valley Prehistory. New York State Museum Memoir 22. Albany, New York (P.—) . Parker, Arthur 1920 The Archaeological History of New York. New York State Museum Bulletin Nos. 237, 238. Albany, New York (p. ) . Ritchie, William A. 1969 The Archaeology of New York State. Natural History Press: Garden City, New York (p. ) . Ritchie, William A. and Robert E. Funk 1973 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in the Northeast. New York State Museum and Science Service Memoir No. 20. Albany. New York (p. ) . X Other (See Attached Bibliography) . b. Maps X Beers, F. W. 1873 County Atlas of SUFFOLK X Burr, D. H. 1829 Atlas of New York State. Stone and Clark, New York. Library of Congress 1981 Fire Insurance Maps in Library of Congress. Stone and Stewart, Publishers 18_ New Topographical Atlas of County. X Other (See attached bibliography) . 3. Previous Surveys None recorded in OPRHP files Survey(s) completed for project area Sensitivity Assessment/Site Prediction The presence of freshwater wetlands and a stream in the center of the parcel, the recent excavation of a Late Woodland site (Flounder Inn North and South) a few hundred feet north of the parcel, and the possible presence of the North Hill shell midden (Ferguson, 1935: 10) on or near the parcel suggest potential prehistoric sensitivity. Recommendations Mitigation by focusing construction in the southeastern portion of Lot 1 already impacted by bulldozing and dumping. Attachments X Topographic Map X Project Map/Site Plan Environmental Assessment Form State Museum Correspondence Site File Information Previous Survey Information X Other (specify) See attached report. Stage lA Report prepared by Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant Date April 9, 1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Stage 1B Report Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Zabohonski Minor Subdivision Project/Facility Location Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island Documentary Research Addendum (if needed) Local site inventory checked (specify) Informants interviewed (name, address, specialty) X Other sources checked (specify) See attached report Results of Documentary Research no sites reported 1 site reported (describe briefly) Prehistoric shell midden may be located on parcel Field Investigation Description of structure for survey team (number, organization) . One (1) New York State certified archaeologist with one (1) field assistant. Date of survey and description of general surface and subsurface conditions (including season, ground visibility and relative wetness of soil) . February, 1992 ; good digging conditions; early thaw; well-drained soils. Description of general soil characteristics, including texture and depth to sterile soil. See attached report. 20-30 cm deep topsoil over cultural in weathered subsoil; bulldozed in southeastern portion of Lot 1. Outline of field testing strategy, specifying (when used) : sampling techniques (i.e. type, interval, unit size) , surface inspection techniques (i.e. transect interval, method of ground examination) , subsurface techniques (i.e. type, interval and average depth of excavation unit; for screening note size of mesh) , remote sensing techniques. The entire parcel was subjected to surface reconnaissance. Subsurface testing covered the entire parcel using a 20m x 20m grid because of potential sensitivity and finds. Test holes were dug with a shovel and all sediments sieved through a 6 mm (1/4 inch) mesh. Test holes were dug to a minimum of 60 cm. Description of intensity of coverage and rationale for excluding areas from survey. Attach a map with location and type of each excavation unit; areas surface inspected. Any areas not surveyed should be clearly delineated. No area excluded from survey. Test holes were dug on a 20m x 20m grid. Description of problems encountered during survey which may have influenced results. NA Results of Field Investigation no sites identified 1 site(s) identified Describe general nature and distribution of sites Late Woodland village/campsite on both banks of stream, including all of Lot 2 and western portion of Lot 1. For each site, complete a site inventory form (OPRHP) , providing general boundaries and information on nature of the site (e.g. lithic scatter, historic midden, rockshelter) . Each form should be marked feconfidential". Recommendations X No additional work Additional work recommended recommended Stage 2 Report attached Yes X No X Project should be modified to avoid site(s) Rationale Evaluate the effect of the proposed undertaking on identified cultural resources. If cultural resources are present but will not be impacted, explain why. If construction on the parcel takes place in the southeastern portion of Lot 1 that has already been impacted by bulldozing and dumping, no potentially significant cultural resources will be impacted. If cultural resources will be impacted, explain how each will be affected. Describe possible precautions, protective measures or project modifications which would avoid or alleviate these impacts. Identify sites and/or areas which require additional study. Outline nature and extent of additional investigation(s) recommended. End Stage 1B If Stage 2 Site Evaluation Report is not completed at this time, proceed to Supportive Data section. Stage 1B Report prepared by � y��✓V�� Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant Date April 9 , 1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Supportive Data Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Zabohonski Minor subdivision Project/Facility Location Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island Reports should include the items listed below. Bracketed information is optional. Put a check mark next to each item appended. PLEASE NOTE: Most attachments below often provide precise locational and compositional data on archaeological sites. This information is confidential to protect the resource from vandalism. All attachments with site-specific information should be omitted from report copies which will be available to the general public. X qualifications of principal investigator(s) X topographic map with project area noted X map(s) of test locations, field inspection, and areas of cultural material (map(s) must have title, legend, bar scale and directional arrow) X site inventory form (mark ItConfidentiallf) X artifact catalog X record of soil stratigraphy in each test unit X [copies of relevant, supplemental historic maps] [continuation sheets for preceding questions where the space available was insufficient for a complete response] For reports on surveys which include Site Evaluation and Definition (Stage 2) , the following items should also be included: project area map with site boundaries delineated (mark "Confidential: For Agency Use Only'$) soil profiles photographs, as appropriate, characterizing project area and documenting salient cultural remains recommendations Certification: I certify that I directed the cultural resource investigation reported here, that my observations and methods are fully reported, and that this report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Supportive Data prepared by Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant Date April 9 , 1992 CONFIDENTIAL NEW YORK STATE PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM For Office Use Only -- Site Identifier Project Identifier Date Your Name Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Phone (516) 757 6244 Address 594 Main St. Northport, NY zip 11768 1. Site Identifiers) 2 . County Suffolk One of following: City Township Town of Southold Incorporated village Island Fishers Island 3. Present Owner Address zip 4. Site Description (check all appropriate categories) : Site X Stray find Cave/Rockshelter X Workshop Pictograph Quarry Mound Burial ? Shell Midden X village X Surface evidence ? Camp Material in plow zone X Material below X Buried evidence ? Intact occupation plow zone floor Single component X Evidence of features (Stone oval enclosure) Multicomponent Location Under cultivation Never cultivated Previously cultivated X Pastureland Woodland X Floodplain X Upland sustaining erosion Soil Drainage: excellent X good fair poor Slope: flat gentle X moderate X steep Distance to nearest water from site (approx. ) : stream on parcel Elevation: 10-30 feet above MSL 5. site Investigation (append additional sheets, if necessary) : surface -- date(s) February, 1992 Site Map (Submit with form*) Collection *Submission should be 8 1/211 x live, if feasible Subsurface -- date(s) February. 1992 Testing: shovel X coring other unit size no. of units 13 Submit plan of units with form Excavation: unit size no. of units (Submit plan of units with form*) Manuscript or published report(s) (reference fully) : Present repository of materials 6. Component(s) (cultural affiliation/dates) : Late Woodland (A.D. 1050-1637) ; contact period (1637-1750) 7 . List of material remains (be as specific as possible in identifying object and material) : Porphyritic granitic grindstones, anvil stones, axes and adzes; hoes; hammerstones; porphyritic granitic and quartz debitage; micaceous siltstone Levanna point with impact damage; quartzite strike-a-light. If historic materials are evident, check here and fill out historic site form. X 8. Map References: Map or maps showing exact location and extent of site must accompany this form and must be identified by source and date. Keep this submission to 8 1/210 x 1111 if possible. USGS 7 1/2 Minute Series Quad. Name New London For office Use Only UTM Coordinates 9. Photography (optional for environmental impact survey) : Please submit a 511 x 711 black and white print(s) showing the current state of the site. Provide a label for the print(s) on a separate sheet. *Submission should be 8 1/211 x 1111, if feasible Investigator Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. CONFIDENTIAL NEW YORK STATE HISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM For Office Use Only -- Site Identifier Project Identifier Date Your Name Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Phone (516) 757 6244 Address 594 Main St. Northport, NY zip 11768 1. site Identifier(s) 2. County Suffolk One of following: City Township Town of Southold Incorporated village Island Fishers Island 3. Present Owner Address zip 4. Site Description (check all appropriate categories) : Structure/site Superstructure: complete x partial collapsed not evident_ Foundation: above x below (ground level) not evident _Structural subdivisions apparent _Only surface traces visible List construction materials (be as specific as possible) : 1640s-1700s field wall that is perhaps referred to in Winthrop correspondence. Grounds _Under cultivation _sustaining erosion Woodland _Upland _Never cultivated X Previously cultivated _Floodplain X Pasture Soil Drainage: excellent X good_ fair_ poor_ Slope: flat_ gentle X moderate X steep_ Distance to nearest water from structure(approx. ) 0-200 feet Elevation: 10-30 feet above MSL 5. Site Investigation (append additional sheets, if necessary) : Surface -- date(s) February, 1992 _Site Map (Submit with form*) _Collection Subsurface -- date(s) February. 1992 Testing: shovel coring_ other unit size no. of units 13 (Submit plan of units with form*) Excavation: unit size no. of units (Submit plan of units with form*) *Submission should lie 8 4411 x 11", if feasible Investigator A'C. Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Manuscript or published report(s) (reference fully) : (See attached report) Present repository of materials 6. Site inventory: a. date constructed or occupation period 1644-1700s b. previous owners, if known John Winthrop, Jr. & family c. modifications, if known (append additional sheets if necessary) ] 7. Site documentation (See attached report) : a. Historic map references 1) Name Date Source Present location of original, if known 2) Name Date Source Present location of original, if known b. Representation in existing photography 1) Photo date Where located 2) Photo date Where located c. Primary and secondary source documentation (reference fully) See attached report. d. Persons with memory of site: 1) Name C.B. Ferguson Address Fishers Island 2) Name Address S. List of material remains other than those used in construction (be as specific as possible in identifying object and material) : 1 quartzite strike-a-light (depth of 20-40 cm in test hole C4) may come from earlier historical period than the wall, as granitic flakes from dressing the stones of the wall found in test hole C5 occurred at a depth of 0-20 cm. This would support a date of 1690s-early 1700s suggested by the Winthrop correspondence. A letter of March 31, 1691 discusses the sale of "the old stone hors at the island" after a French pirate's raid led to the abandonment of the farm, pasture and grain fields. A Nov. 24, 1698 letter discusses the need to complete walls near a swamp and stream on the outside perimeter of the Manor farm, and tenants in 1712 were upset about moose eating their apple trees (letters of Wait-Still to Fitz-John, published in the Winthrop Papers, 1882: 495; 539-540; and of Gurdon Saltonstall to Governor Joseph Dudley quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 51) . During the early 1700s, farmers in the area typically spent several days every month clearing fields of stones that would damage plowshares, and then building walls with the stones (Diary of Joshua Hempstead, 1711-1758 published by the New London Historical Society) . If prehistoric materials are evident, check here and fill out prehistoric site form. x 9. Map References: Map or maps showing exact location and extent of site must accompany this form and must be identified by source and date. Keep this submission to 8 1/211 x lit$ if feasible. USGS 7 1/2 Minute Series Quad. Name New London For Office Use Only -- UTM Coordinates 10. Photography (optional for environmental impact survey) : Please submit a 511 x 711 black and white print(s) showing the current state of the site. Provide a label for the print(s) on a separate sheet. REFERENCES Ales, M.F. 1979. A History of the Indians on Montauk, Long Island. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistory Volume III. Ginn Custom Publishing, Lexington, Massachusetts. Allen, David Y. 1991. Dutch and English Mapping of Seventeenth-Century Long Island. Long Island Historical Journal 4 : 45-62 . Barker, Alex W. 1992. Powhatan's Pursestrings: On the Meaning of Surplus in a Seventeenth Century Algonkian Chiefdom. In A.W. Barker and T.R. Pauketat (eds. ) Lords of the Southeast: Social Inequality and the Native Elites of Southeastern North America. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 3 . Washington, D.C. : 61-80. Bayles, R.M. 1874 . Historical and Descriptive Sketches of Suffolk County and its Towns, Villages, Hamlets, Scenery, Institutions and Important Enterprises. Port Jefferson, New York. Beauchamp, W.M. 1899. Map of the Territorial Divisions of the Aborigines of New York. New York State Museum. Beauchamp, W.M. 1900. Aboriginal Occupation of New York. Bulletin of the New York State Museum no. 32, vol. 7 (February, 1900) . 1978 AMS Reprint, New York. Black, R.C. 1966. The Younger John Winthrop. Columbia University Press, New York. Bock, P.K. 1966. The Micmac Indians of Restigouche. National Museum of Canada Bulletin No. 213, Ottawa. Bonner, Lynn. 1990. Digging for a Bit of History. The Day, New London, July 8, 1990: F7-F8. Booth, Nat E. 1949. The Archaeology of Long Island. In James E. Truex (ed. ) . 1982. The Second Coastal Archaeology Reader: 1900 to the Present. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistory, vol. V. Suffolk County Archaeological Association. Ginn, Lexington, Massachusetts. R-1 Bordes, Francois. 1984 . Lecons sur le paleolithique. t. 2 , le paleolithique en Europe. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris. Boudreau, Jeffrey. 1981. Replicating Quartz Squibnocket Small Stemmed and Triangular Projectile Points. In R.J. Barber (ed. ) Quartz Technology in Prehistoric New England. Institute for Conservation Archaeology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts: 5-33 . Briggs, Marion Ferguson. n.d. The Archeological History of the Indians of Munnatawket (Fishers Island, New York) 9 , 000 B.C. to 1646 A.D. mimeographed pamphlet, Henry L. Ferguson Museum, Fishers Island, New York. Case, Albertson, Mary Case Berresford Sinclaire, and Sara Case Faulkner. 1876. Historical Sketch of Southold Town. Reprinted by Friends of the Southold Free Library, Southold, L.I. , New York. Caulkins, Francis Manwaring. 1852. History of New London, Connecticut. Published by Author, New London, Connecticut. Ceci, L. 1977. The Effect of European Contact and Trade on the Settlement Pattern of Indians in Coastal New York, 1524-1665: the Archaeological and Documentary Evidence. Ph.D. Dissertation, Faculty of Anthropology, City University, New York. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. Ceci, L. 1979. Reconstructing Indian Culture on Long Island: Fisher's Study of the Montauk. In Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistorv, vol. III. Ginn Custom Publishing, Lexington, Massachusetts: 8-12. Ceci, L. 1990a. Native Wampum as a Peripheral Resource in the Seventeenth-Century World-System. In L.M. Hauptman and J.D. Wherry (eds. ) The Pequots in Southern New England. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma: 48-63 . Ceci, L. 1990b. Radiocarbon Dating "Village" Sites in Coastal New York: Settlement Pattern Change in the Middle to Late Woodland. Man in the Northeast 39: 1-28. Chapman, Mary Haldane. 1965. This Was Southold. In A Summer of History: Official Program, Town of Southold 325th Anniversary Celebration. Southold, Long Island, New York. R-2 Connecticut Historical Society. 1899-1967. Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society. Hartford, Connecticut. vols. 7, 17, 20, 23, 27, 31. Craven, Charles E. 1906. A History of Mattituck, Lona Island, New York. Privately published. Cronon, William. 1983 . Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. Hill and Wang, New York. Dodd, W.A. 1979. The Wear and Use of Battered Tools at Armijo Rockshelter. In B. Hayden (ed. ) Lithic Use-Wear Analysis. Academic Press, New York: 231-242. Evans, J. 1897. The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons and Ornaments of Great Britain, 2nd ed. Longmans, London. Ferguson, Henry L. 1925. Fishers Island N.Y. 1614-1925. reprinted (1974) by Harbor Hill Books, Harrison, New York. Ferguson, Henry L. 1935. Archaeological Exploration of Fishers Island, New York. Indian Notes and Monographs vol XI, No. 1. Museum of the American Indian. Heye Foundation, New York. Fernow, B. (ed. ) 1883. Documents Relating to the History of the Early Colonial Settlements. Weed, Parsons and Co. , Albany, New York. Flint, Martha Bockee. 1896. Long Island before the Revolution. Reprinted 1967 by Ira J. Friedman, Inc. Port Washington, New York. Fowler, William S. 1946. The Hoe Complex of the Connecticut Valley. American Antiquity 12: 28-34 . Fuller, M.L. 1914. Geology of Long Island, New York. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington. Funk, Robert E. and Pfeiffer, John E. 1988. Archaeological and Paleoenvironmental Investigations on Fishers Island, New York: A Preliminary Report. Connecticut Archaeology Bulletin 51: 69-110. Gardiner, Lion. 1660. Relations of Pequot Warres. Reprinted 1901 by Acorn Club, Hartford, Connecticut. R-3 Gast, M. and Sigaut, F. (eds. ) 1979-1981. Les technicrues de conservation des grains a long terme, vols. 1-2. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) , Paris. Gramly, R.M. 1977. Deerskins and Hunting Territories: Competition for Scarce Resources of the Northeastern Woodlands. American Antiquity 42 601-605. Harrington, M.R. 1924. An ancient village site of the Shinnecock Indians. American Museum of Natural History Anthropological Papers 22/5. Reprinted in G.S. Levine (ed. ) . 1977. Readings on Long Island Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. I. Suffolk County Archaeological Association, Stony Brook: 30-64. Hauptman, L.M. and Wherry, J.D. (eds. ) 1990. The Pequots in Southern New England. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma. Hayes, R.O. 1983. Ethnographic Studies of the Shinnecock. In G. Stone (ed. ) The Shinnecock Indians: A Culture History. Suffolk County Archaeological Association. Ginn Custom Publishing, Lexington, Massachusetts: 331-335. Hempstead, Joshua. 1711-1758. Diary. Collections of the New London Historical Society, vol. 1. 1970 reprint of 1901 edition. New London Historical Society, New London, Connecticut. Henry L. Ferguson Museum. 1991. Newsletter vol. 7, no. 1. Hine, F.E. 1912 . Fishers Island. Its History and Development. Records and Papers of the New London Historical Society. Vol. III. Part II. New London, Connecticut: 178-204. Holmes, W.H. 1919. Handbook of Aboriginal American Anticruities, Part 1. Introductory: the Lithic Industries. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 60. Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Horton, Azariah. 1744. Second Journal of Mr. Azariah Horton, Missionary to the Province of New York, from 22d November 1741, to 16th May 1742. The Christian Monthly Herald 5: 45-67. Hough, Walter. 1897. Stone-working at Tewa. American Anthropologist 10: 191. R-4 Howell, George Rogers. 1887. The Early History of Southampton, Long Island, New York, with Genealogies. 2nd Edition. Weed, Parsons & Company, Albany, New York. James, Wendy. 1979. 'Kwanim Pa: the Making of the Uduk People. Clarendon, Oxford. Jefferson, Thomas. 1791. Vocabulary of Unquachog or Puspatuck collected by Thomas Jefferson at Brookhaven, Long Island on June 13, 1791. Reprinted in Gaynell Stone Levine (ed. ) 1980. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistorv. Vol. IV. Languages and Lore of the Long Island Indians. Suffolk County Archaeological Association/ Ginn Custom Publishing, Stony Brook, New York/ Lexington, Massachusetts: 17-18. Jensen, H.M. and J. Soren, 1974. Hydrogeology of Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. Jones, Volney H. 1936. The Vegetal Remains of Newt Kash Hollow Shelter. In W.S. Webb and W.D. Funkhouser, Rock Shelters in Menifee County, Kentucky. Reports in Archaeology and Anthropology, Vol. III, Number 4. Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky: 147-165. Kaeser, Edward. 1964. A Primer for Pottery Classification, Metropolitan Coastal New York. In: Gaynell S. Levine (ed. ) . 1978. The Coastal Archaeology Reader: Selections from the New York State Archaeological Association Bulletin 1954-1977. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistorv, Vol II. Suffolk County Archaeological Association, Stony Brook, New York: 68-75. Lamont, H.O. 1975. The Story of Shelter Island in the Revolution. Shelter Island Historical Society, Shelter Island, New York. Latham, Roy. 1965. Late Indian Graves in Laurel, Long Island, New York. In Gaynell S. Levine (ed) . 1978. The Coastal Archaeology Reader: Selections from the New vork State Archaeological Association Bulletin 1954 - 1977. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistorv, Vol. II. Suffolk County Archaeological Association, Stony Brook, New York. Long Islander. June 10, 1857. R-5 Massachusetts Historical Society (eds. ) . 1863-1889. Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society. Fourth Series vol. 6, Fifth Series. vols. 4, 8, Sixth Series. vol. 3. McBride, Kevin A. 1990. The Historical Archaeology of the Mashantucket Pequots, 1637-1900. In L.M. Hauptman and J.D. Wherry (eds. ) The Peguots in Southern New England. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma: 96-116. Middlebrook, L.F. 1925. Maritime Connecticut during the American Revolution. The Essex Institute, Salem, Massachusetts. Miller, Robert L. 1990a. Stage II Archaeological Investigation of the Bayberry Hills Site, Shinnecock Hills, Town of Southampton. Clover Archaeological Services, Inc. , Northport, New York. Miller, Robert L. 1990b. Stage IB Archaeological Investigation of the Timber Ridge at the Plains Site, Greenlawn, Town of Huntington, New York. Clover Archaeological Services, Inc. , Northport, New York. Miller, Robert L. 1990c. Stage II Archaeological Investigation of the Timber Ridge at the Plains Parcel, Greenlawn, Town of Huntington. Clover Archaeological Services, Inc. , Northport, New York. Mood, F. 1937. John Winthrop, Jr. , on Indian Corn. The New England Ouarterly 10: 121-133. Ohnuma, Katsahiko, and Bergman, Christopher. 1982. Experimental Studies in the Determination of Flaking Mode. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology, London 19: 161-170. Onderdonk, H. 1849. Revolutionary Incidents of Suffolk and Kings Counties. 1970 reprint, Kennikat Press, Port Washington, New York. Pelletreau, W.S. (ed. ) 1874. The First Book of Records of the Town of Southampton. Town of Southampton, Sag Harbor, New York. Pelletreau, W. 1903. A History of Long Island from its Earliest Settlement to the Present Time. Lewis Publishing Company, Chicago and New York. R-6 Ritchie, W.A. 1953 . Indian History of New York State. Part III The Algonkian Tribes. New York State Museum and Science Service, Albany, New York. Ritchie, W.A. 1961. A Typology and Nomenclature for New York Projectile Points. New York State Museum and Science Service Bulletin No. 384, The University of the State of New York, State Education Department, Albany, New York. Ritchie, W.A. 1980. The Archaeology of New York State. Harbor Hill Brooks, Harrison, New York. Rodgers, John. 1985. Bedrock Geological Map of Connecticut. Connecticut Geological and Natural History Survey/ U.S. Geological Survey. Connecticut Geological and Natural History Survey, Natural Resources Center, Department of Environmental Protection. Rountree, Helen C. 1989. The Powhatan Indians of Virginia. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Sirkin, L. 1982 . Wisconsonian Glaciation of Long Island, New York, to Block Island, Rhode Island. In G.J. Larson and B.D. Stone (eds. ) Late Wisconsonian Glaciation of New England. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa: 35-59. Sirkin, L. 1986. Pleistocent Stratigraphy of Long Island, New York. In D.H. Cadwell (ed. ) The Wisconsonian Stage of the First Geological District. New York New York State Museum Bulletin 455, Albany, New York: 6-21. Solecki, Ralph. 1950. The archaeological position of historic Fort Corchaug, Long Island, and its relation to contemporary forts. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of Connecticut, No. 24: 3-40. Speck, F.G. 1909. Notes on the Mohegan and Niantic Indians. In C. Wissler (ed. ) . The Indians of Greater New York and the Lower Hudson. Anthropological Papers, American Museum of Natural History, vol. III. New York: 181-210 Stone, Gaynell and Josephine Smith, with Alice Bunn Martinez, Harriet Crippen Brown Gumbs, and Alice Thompson Phillips. 1983. Material Culture. In: Gaynell Stone (ed. ) . 1983 . The Shinnecock Indians: A Culture History. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistory, Vol VI. Suffolk County Archaeological Association. Ginn Custom Publishing, Lexington, Massachusetts: 291-296. R-7 Stone, G. 1989. Long Island as America: A New Look at the First Inhabitants. The Long Island Historical Journal. Spring 1989. Volume 1/2: 159-169. Strong, J.I. 1983 . The Evolution of Shinnecock Culture. In G. Stone (ed) . The Shinnecock Indians: A Culture History. Suffolk County Archaeological Association. Ginn Custom Publishing, Massachusetts: 7-52. Sullivan, C.J. 1935. Army Posts and Towns. The Baedeker of the Army. Swet, F.S. 1920s. Fort H.G. Wright, N.Y. Recruiting News [vol. not known] p. 14. Teeter, Karl V. 1976. Algonquian. In Thomas A. Sebeok (ed. ) Native Languages of the Americas. Plenum Press, New York: 505-525. Thompson, B.F. 1918. History of Long Island. 3rd edition, R.H. Dodd, New York. Tooker, W.W. 1911. The Indian Place Names on Long Island. New York. U.S. Army. 1988. Order of Battle of the United States Land Forces in the World War. vol. 3 . part 2 . Zone of the Interior: Territorial Departments. Tactical Divisions Organized in 1918. Posts, Camps and Stations. Center of Military History, United States Army, Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1975. Soil Survey of Suffolk County, New York. Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1983. Soil Survey of New London County, Connecticut. Washington, D.C. Viemeister, August. 1974. An Architectural Journey through Long Island. Kennikat Press, Port Washington, New York. Wall, James, and Wall, Joanne. 1982. Fishers Island. Peninsula Press, Fishers Island, New York. Whitaker, Epher and Charles E. Craven. 1931. Whitaker's Southold. Edited by Charles E. Craven. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. R-8 Willey, Nancy B. 1964. Built by the Whalers: a Tour of Historic Sag Harbor and its Colonial Architecture, 5th edition, Old Sagg-Harbour Committee, Sag Harbor, Long Island, New York. Williams, Roger. 1643. A Key into the Language of America. 1963 reprint of 1866 Narragansett Club edition. Russell & Russell, New York. Winthrop Papers. Reprinted in Massachusetts Historical Society (eds. ) . 1863-1889. Wood, Silas. 1828. A Sketch of the First Settlement of the Several Towns on Long Island. Reprinted in 1968 by Ira J. Friedman, Port Washington, New York. Wyatt, R.J. 1977. The Archaic on Long Island. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 288: 400-410. Youngs, Selah. 1907. Youngs Family: A History and Genealogy. New York. Zaykowski, Dorothy I. 1991. Sag Harbor. Sag Harbor Historical Society, Sag Harbor, New York. R-9 MAPS CONSULTED 1988 Hagstrom Suffolk County Map 1984 U.S. Geological Survey Map 1975 Suffolk County Soil Map 1974 Geology of Long Island Map (Jensen and Soren, 1974) 1970 U.S. Geological Survey Map 1953 Ritchie Map of Coastal Algonkian Tribes ca. 1600. 1950 U.S. Army Map 1940s Long Island Sound Defenses Maps 1935 Ferguson Map of Prehistoric Sites on Fishers Island 1901 Colton Map 1896 Belcher Hyde Map 1873 Beers Map 1858 Chace Map 1842 Mathers and Smith Geological Map 1838 U.S. Coastal Survey Map 1829 Burr Map 1779 Fadden Map 1734 New England Coasting Pilot Map 1689 John Thornton Map 1675 Seller Map 1675 Roggeveen Map 1635 Blaeu Map 1614 Block Map R-10