Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGuest Minor Sub, FI STAGE IA AND IB ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK DATE: April, 1992 LEAD AGENCY: APPLICANT: Southold Town Planning Board John S. Guest & Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Margaret H. Guest Southold, New York 11971 Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island, New York, 06390 Contact Person: Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Telephone: 516-765-1938 PREPARED BY: LOCATION: Clover Archaeological Services, Inc. West of Crescent Avenue 225 Main Street, Suite 202 on North Hill, Fishers Northport, New York 11768 Island, Town of Southold Telephone: (516) 754-5044 Suffolk County, New York Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant Q QgpNN�tiC�,��r,. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. NATURAL SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III. THE ARCHIVAL SEARCH RELATED TO THE GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK . . . . . . . . . . 9 A. SITE LOCATION IN THE AREA OF THE GUEST 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 GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL . . . . . . 38 IV. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK . . . . . . . . . . 111 A. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 B. THE SURFACE SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 C. THE SUBSURFACE TESTING PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 D. DESCRIPTION OF SOILS AND RESULTS OF THE SUBSURFACE TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 E. ARTIFACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 V. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 9. The 1675 Roggeveen Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 10. The 1675 Seller Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 11. The 1689 John Thornton Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 12 . The 1734 New England Coastal Pilot Map . . . . . . . . . . 97 13 . The 1779 Fadden Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 14 . The 1829 Burr Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 15. The 1838 Coastal Survey Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 16. The 1842 Mather and Smith Geological Map . . . . . . . . 101 17. The 1858 Chace Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 18. The 1873 Beers Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 19. The 1896 Belcher Hyde Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 20. The 1901 Colton Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 21. Map Showing North Hill Gun Emplacement . . . . . . . . . . 106 22. 1940 Location Map of North Hill Battery . . . . . . . . . 107 23 . 1940s Map of Location of Elements of Coastal Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 24 . 1950 U.S. Army Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 25. 1970 U.S.G.S. Topographic Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 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 Guest 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 Guest Minor Subdivision is a 13 .7 acre parcel located on Fishers Island Sound west of Crescent Avenue in Fishers Island, Town of Southold (Figure 1) . The northern and western boundaries of the site border Fishers Island Sound. The southern boundary of the parcel borders lots in private ownership. The eastern boundary of the parcel borders Crescent Avenue and lots in private ownership. The parcel is located on North Hill, and is characterized by moderately to steeply sloping topography (Figure 2) . The northern portion of the parcel has been altered by bulldozing on the site of a World War II coastal artillery emplacement. The highest point, in the central portion of the site south of the existing house on Lot 2, measures 70 feet in elevation above mean sea level (MSL) . The lowest point is on the shore of Fishers Island Sound. Thus, the total relief is approximately 70 feet. The vegetation found on the site consists of successional mixed deciduous upland forest and ground cover. Freshwater wetlands cover portions of the site near the southern and northern boundaries of the 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) . Four 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 and Plymouth very bouldery soils on 15 to 35 percent slopes (RpE) , the dominant soil type, are found throughout the central portion of the parcel. "These very bouldery soils are only on Fishers Island" , and are not found in Long Island or southern New England (USDA, 1975: 84 ; USDA, 1983 ; conversations with Chandler, Palmer & King, and New London County Soil and Water Conservation District office, March, 1992) . The surface layer of these soils is sandy loam or loamy sand with many large boulders several feet in diameter scattered over the surface and embedded in the soil (USDA, 1975: 84) . Riverhead very stony sandy loam on 8 to 15 percent slopes (ReC) is found on the southern portion of the parcel. This soil is found only on Fishers Island on morainic deposits, and has many stones larger than 10 inches in diameter scattered over the surface or embedded in the soil (USDA, 1975: 83) . ReC 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 3 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) . According to the USDA soil survey of Suffolk County, "The stones on the surface of this soil limit its use to woodland or to pasture" (USDA, 1975: 83) , which is the use attested for northwestern Fishers Island for the period from 1640 to 1940 (Winthrop Papers; Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758 ; Hine, 1912 ; Ferguson, 1925) . Two areas of Haven loam on 2 to 6 percent slopes (HaB) are found in the southeastern 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) , and the northeastern pocket of HaB on the Guest parcel was the site of the camp of a small detachment of the United States Army coastal artillery during the Second World War. Escarpments (Es) , bluffs that have slopes greater than 35 percent are found along the western and northern boundaries of the parcel. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture soil survey of Suffolk County, "soil horizons have not formed in this actively eroding material", which is found mostly along the north shore of the islands in Suffolk County (USDA, 1975: 69) . 4 NEW LONDON CO. colccrtcur 0 2000 41000 am am i;�FFd i X.—00 MYSTIC TOWN New YORK SOUTHOLD TOWN— I.K1.- JApp—~.j 0,,ORTm CuMFLING 2 "*LATIMER REEF C7SOUTH DUMPLING FISHERS I S L A N D S 0 U AT DE q FLAT HUMMOCK Cla Point X11"s Kill Brooks Nt-t C/) cmocomouNr L�-, H COVE WICOPESSET ffu"gry 4, IS Hawks Nest A It ralt pt -0 P.Lnt $LAI 0 0 H re... co 14 0 WRECK IS.IN 00 0 ,C 0 h-' rt 01 if Nint B L 0 C K I S L A N D S 0 U N D S v): ro us [ICK Wilderness Point 51 52 53 54 55 (Hagstrom, 1989) Site is indicated by arrow. FIGURE 2 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP I 11 l�FoAYh ll_l �\l *v �I' l` '� -•I Hewke Newt -- — .�"•, '•'� � Point �__•ice._ yty��-T1+ 'n '�� West Harbor / Stony \'V* ?c: ' Beach Flsllers r j. land Gooaa o,.Maiand y 34 a(d ,< -�^"si,� Harbor, � ,x •/• a `,W_ �1`. ,.* A��^ �!'` -J, C •'�\ •.lam., \�`_ �a Silver Eel Cove US COAST GUARD) /'�\65.�:• \\ f OOff STATION*• * ''• ?�, ,_CourS� __� ~`• N xal.ti,�u. 7i�%• ••�! If =`l� *tr* C�.� �WATF.R /l w it �' `' * \ S CI;TITER r ' - I \f J-- L� ' ElfzabeCh Field/ * Wilderness ISLAND i Point BLOCK SDU 9Mr428�� INTERIOR—GEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESTON,VIRGINIA-1999 2 540 000 FEET (N.Y.) 150 15 1w11 72 ROAD CLASSIFICATION Primary highway, Light-duty road, hard or hard surface Improved surface Secondary highway, hard surface Unimproved road -_-_ (J Interstate RouteState Route U S Route CONNECTICUT I QUADRANGLE LOCATION NEW LONDON, CONN.— N. Y. 41072-C1-TF-024 N (U.S .G.S . , 1984) Site is indicated by arrow. 0 2000 Ft. 6 H NLOCW to. co GONN� ORIENT IT. PLUM IOA1101N[Ilt H. si)UPiD I'ONG Sj.,&ND MONTAUK LIOTO NECK ...... EAST HAMPTON .9 UT"AMPTON G) *SMITHTOWN cm�� 0 t-4 OGS NAL/ "OLLOW HILLS MASTIC MAI"ETTO Li J HILLS ............. OCEAN ro Pont Is. ATLANTIC POCKAWAT ATLAO o 30 Mormino km Location map showing linear pattern of moraines. HH' marks the Harbor Hill Moraine and RR' the Ronkonkoma Moraine of Fuller ( 1914). (Sirkin, 1982) FIGURE 4 SOIL MAP N Es O 100 Ft. HaB RpE (USDA, 1975) HaB ReC Es Escarpments HaB Haven loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes. ReC Riverhead very stony sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes. RpE Riverhead and Plymouth very bouldery soils, 15 to 35 percent slopes. 8 III. ARCHIVAL SEARCH RELATED TO THE GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK. A. SITE LOCATION IN THE AREA OF THE GUEST 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 Guest 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 Guest parcel (Figure 6) : 1) The North Hill site (Ferguson, 1935: 10) is a shell heap located east of the Guest 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 east of the Guest parcel 9 on the north side of Crescent Avenue has been recently 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, 10 1988) . A large cow bone from the shell zone in one test trench (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 11 the surplus needed for planting the next season, or even for 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, 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 Guest 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 Guest property, provided fresh water. During the 1600s, when an unpolluted source of drinking water was wanted, Native 12 Americans also constructed wells by sinking a hollowed 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, 1990: 230, note 14) . However, Ceci is unlikely to be correct in 13 inferring that these are points where wampum would have been available (Ceci, 1990: 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 14 1991-1992, and winter seal fur was one of the most important 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 Guest parcel could have provided fresh water, fish, and wildlife for seasonal exploitation by prehistoric inhabitants. 15 FIGURE 5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY MAP i or „ �1 1, . 1 \ ,C ! ! Suffolk County Archaeological Cultural Resources Inventory, 1978 Association Areas of intensive aboriginal habitation Site is indicated by arrow. 4.. Areas of generalized aboriginal activity Areas of low activity or insufficient data 16 ARCIIEOLOGICAI_ EXPLORATION OF t FISHERS ISLAND WINTHROP NEI IY YORK o _t„ o a 11:;'l,1,11,YANU3 4. .� IOC. .� 'tl Stray Ourws t ' o ® Shefl heaps eI79eVAT10N 13 . W MIDDLE D Ul #AEM ® (:�Pc P7JH YOEiN Nlll M G) HAWKS NE31 POI T O(� / C m MANSION ERICA YARD Now Wesluly ��- e 4�4 O �* London West 111HHH Mystic Mystic 1 1 D 8 May oor ILNI 3u NPEQUOT / yyy---��� i b NLDOE C ® fONT • is 10^Ijj 9. f 'Ot � �y�tut .So'nd•\� C�1��va�i Qe1 FLglveis �"�"' .�i•8 / NIDI"r-1 ' SCAe 0/Mlll3 , site is indicated by arrow. FIGURE 7 1614 BLOCK MAP :+ .. i�r�r1 It i• � :ivy .•, ^ v AKJ oma" l °� ' �'. r i 4 " . ti • w :,� � � � 't til! ' • •'l .• .:t.w IV Vow tY pow �� - y. ,i •►..ter ' ' �..,,'� � "-�L iti�' ,ti. .>iY ��• �,:''yh EARLIEST CHART SHOWING FISHERS ISLAND N MADE BY ADMIRAL BLOCK IN 1614 Site is indicated by arrow. 18 2 . HISTORIC PERIOD SITES The historic period development of Fishers Island and North Hill on the Guest parcel can be followed in maps of the area (Figure 7 - Figure 25) . There is no construction on or adjacent to the Guest 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 Guest parcel: 1) The site of the 1646 Winthrop Manor, near the western shore of West Harbor, southeast of the Guest 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. 19 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 escarpment in the northwestern portion of Lot 2 together with the existing house on the projected Guest Minor Subdivision. 20 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 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 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 21 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 advised 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 alarm 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 22 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 take in groups further west on Long Island (Ales, 1979) . 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 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 23 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) , 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 , 24 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 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 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. The discovery that Fishers Island was an important source of unused pecked and flaked grinding stone blanks made during the archaeological fieldwork discussed in this Stage IA/IB report sheds additional light on the continuing use of Fishers Island in the late 1600s, even after its purchase by John Winthrop, Jr. Native American stone sources such as Flint Ridge, Ohio or the pipestone quarry in Minnesota were held and used in common (flint: Holmes, 1919 ; William R. Miller, personal communication; pipestone: Catlin, 1844: II, 170) . Grinding roots and seeds needed for subsistence required portable grinding stones. For communities in coastal New York and New England groups during the Late Woodland period, Fishers Island supplied an accessible source of an essential commodity -- mutate slab rough outs made from already broken up, glacially transported granite. This buried morainal material, although 26 derived from mainland outcrops of pophyritic granitic rocks was of a better quality for stoneworking because it was free from the embedded fractures and flaws found in mainland outcrop screes subjected to repeated episodes of surface freezing and thawing. Taking of seals, as well as fishing, farming and hunting is also 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 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 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 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 the skin of a moose, which was 27 killed upon one of your hummocks by Fishers Island lately and carried to Wequashcuck" (letter of Roger Williams relaying the Narragansett request quoted in Hine, 1912 : 186) . By accepting delivery of the moose skin Wequashcuck forwarded, John Winthrop, Jr. reinforced his standing and ownership of Fishers Island. Among coastal Algonquian tribes, the sachem traditionally owned the skins of all deer and animals killed in his territory (Rountree, 1989: 38) . 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 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 28 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. 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 29 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 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 pieces of shell debris were recovered from Fort Corchaug (Ceci, 1977 : 297-298) . Native Americans obtained carbohydrate and some protein 30 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 around Fishers Island near the Guest parcel. 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) . Transport was by dug-out canoe. When the Pequots 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 31 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 of uneasy relations between the European settlers of Southold 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) . 32 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, 1990) . 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 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 33 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) . For example, in Fitz-John Winthrop's will, written in March, 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) , 34 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 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. 35 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: " . . . 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) . A century later, the Corchaug along with other Native 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) . 36 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) . 37 C. THE SETTLEMENT HISTORY OF FISHERS ISLAND AND THE GUEST 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 river, 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 American population during the 1614-1675 period, as contemporary maps do not indicate Native American villages or groups resident 38 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 Munnawtawkit [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 one of the first families of New London, "An underlying base of rock, is everywhere ambitious to intrude into light, and often appears in huge masses heaped together, or broken, and tossed about in wild disorder. Places often occur, where the surface is 39 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" (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) . 40 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 farre 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 41 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 & salted 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. 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 42 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 by 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 43 by an English geographer, Seller, West Harbor is shown, indicating that this anchorage was used by ships 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 44 this and their threatening behavior, forced Uncas to pay one 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 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 45 (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) . 46 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. John Winthrop, Jr. was an early member of the group of 47 scientists, courtiers and entrepreneurs who formed the Royal Society of London during the 1660s. His correspondence with his colleagues includes discussions of astronomical observations, traditional Indian agriculture, tent caterpillers, tides, wheat rust and the manufacture of tar. The Royal Society was happy to receive anything from the New World. Winthrop sent in a carefully nailed box, an example of "Hony combe stone" (barnacles or vesicular basalt) from Fishers Island, a hummingbird, and an offer to introduce poison ivy that was not taken up (Black, 1966: 313) . In 1660 Winthrop also made an unsuccessful attempt to domesticate wild North American game animals on Fishers Island. He hoped to domesticate New World livestock that could then be induced to pasture on Barbados, which was dependent on New England for food supplies. In a May 22, 1660 letter to Daniel Searle, the Governor of Barbadoes, Winthrop wrote that this experiment to accustom the animals to a shipboard diet had not been as successful as he had hoped: "I provided last summer two young bucks, and for the safety of them put them upon an iland where my servants keep them very tame and fitted them for a sea voyage by learning to eat such things as may be suitable for them at sea. The one of them being brought over to New Lond: to be ready for the first oportunity of passage was accidentally lost: the other I hope is safe upon the Iland, and have severall tymes sent downe order to my servants, that it should be ready 48 for Mr Hamblins coming thither, but now he informes me that he is not likely to touch in those parts, having taken in his full fraught heere in the river: I shall therfore give order it to be kept in hand for the next oportunity" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 59) . There is no record of this deer reaching Barbados, and ships' masters may have remained reluctant to take on board a skittish wild animal with little chance of surviving the voyage. The importance of the livestock on Fishers Island was 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 49 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 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 50 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 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. George Fox, the Quaker missionary, visited Fishers Island briefly in late May, 1672 . According to his journal entry, he was en route from Rhode Island to Shelter Island accompanied by 51 another Quaker. Fox wrote that "we came to Fishers Island, where at night we went on shore, but were not able to stay for the musquetoes (a sort of gnats or little flies) which abound there, and are very troublesome", so that they slept aboard ship instead (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 26) . The next day their sloop was unable to make headway for Shelter Island, and "finding our sloop was not able to live in that water, we returned again, and came to anchor before Fishers Island, where we lay in our sloop that night also. There fell abundance of rain, and our sloop being open, we were exceeding wet" . Having finally made it to Shelter Island, Fox and his companion stayed only a short time and set out again but ran into a gale when they attempted to reach Long Island. "We were upon the water all that day and the night following, but found ourselves next day driven back near Fisher's island. For there was a great fog, and towards day it was very dark, so that we could not see what way we made" but finally anchored off the coast of Connecticut and rode out the storm (Ferguson, 1925: 27) . Not all ships were so lucky, and shipwrecks occurred fairly frequently in Fishers Island Sound. The year 1680 witnessed an attempt by Connecticut authorities to seize goods washed ashore on Fishers Island after a shipwreck. In a letter written from New London on March 10, 1680, Fitz-John Winthrop wrote the governor of Connecticut to protest the arrival of "a warrant from your honor & councill, 52 which came hither under covert from your secretary to seize and secure severall goods on Fishers Island" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 285) Fitz-John Winthrop claimed exemption of Fishers Island from Connecticut jurisdiction on the grounds that New York had royal jurisdiction. The correspondence, claim and counter-claim, between Connecticut and New York with Fitz-John caught in the middle, dragged on through 1680 (Hine, 1912: 184; Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 285-294) . Winthrop spent the months of June-August 1680 on Fishers Island, and then returned to New London. Meanwhile, correspondence relating to the competing customs jurisdictions of New York and Connecticut continued until November. Although with the onset of winter tempers cooled, Connecticut never yielded in this dispute during the lifetime of Fitz-John Winthrop or his heirs. The boundary dispute between New York and Connecticut was not settled until 1878-1879, and then only grudgingly (Hine, 1912: 184-185) . From the official correspondence it is not clear what gave rise to the 1680 dispute, but salvage rights may have played a role. On March 15, 1680, Fitz-John wrote his brother Wait-Still a brief account of the dispute, which seems to have begun over the rigging from a shipwreck, and the ship's owners or creditors trying to recover it by a claim through Connecticut courts. "Severall coyles of rigging haveing been taken up, a part of the wreck that was lost on the island, I have detayned 53 them till they were taken away by authority, & the pretenders thereof procured a warrant from the Comissioner here which I saw noe reason to comply with. After that they applyed themselves to the Governor at Hartford, who granted a warant & apoynted a water baly to goe over to the island & seize all such things as are found to be any part of that wreck, which warant I have allsoe refused; the island being formerly claimed by Collonell Nicolls, & that never taken of by this collony" (Winthrop Papers, 1882 : 294 ; the letter was written so quickly that Fitz-John forgot the usual formal practice of dating correspondence 1679/1680 for the first three months of the new year) . Following this dispute between New York and Connecticut over eastern Suffolk County, 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 to vote along with the East Rideing of Long Island, & Silvesters & Gardiners Island to vote with the East end of Long Island" for 54 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 have time to contact Winthrop's former employees. As he wrote a week later, he had just returned from Hartford with a fever, and 55 "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 farmworkers, was frightened off by a ship sent to Fishers Island from New York. As Rev. Saltonstall wrote to Fitz-John Winthrop 56 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. 1 Due to the confusion caused by the combined French and New f York threats to the safety of the Winthrops' servants on the island, Fishers Island remained undeveloped for several years following 1690. The danger of another French raid on Connecticut ports and shipping remained until a peace treaty was 57 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 ward be kept there, which I would desire your judgment of, if you think it meet" (quoted in Hine, 1912: 190-191) . 58 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 walls of two oval stone structures cut by a modern access path near the wetlands in the southern portion of the Guest 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 wigwam foundations inhabited by some of the Native Americans living on the island in the late 1600s and early 1700s. 59 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 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 60 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 weeks later, Wait is enthusiastically proposing a new scheme for stocking Fishers Island with moose. By the end of the 1600s, 61 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 before, only he speaks of but twenty or thirty pounds the first year, and that we must allow a years rent towards building. It 62 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 there was an incomplete stone drywall perimeter fence isolating an area with enough pasture to feed 1000 sheep, and that this 63 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 Guest parcel (Figure 26e) 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 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 64 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. During the early 1700s, the tenants of Fishers Island completed a number of fences enclosing fresh water sources such 65 as had been envisioned by the Winthrop brothers in their correspondence. The freshwater wetlands near the Guest 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 (Caulkins, 1852 : 229) . Following a renewal of Saltonstall's proposal for a warning 66 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 coasters by reason of the French privateers, and for preventing as much as may be coasting vessels from falling into their 67 1 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 ttwo 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 ' business affairs in New London and Fishers Island were managed by his son, John, who married a daughter of Governor Dudley of 68 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) . The bitter disputes related to this lease may have played a role in the legal wrangles that surrounded Wait's children's 69 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 ecological and medical bent that characterized the future John Winthrop, F.R.S. can be seen in a letter from New London that he addressed to his father on October 24, 1717 : "I have some red cedar berryes which I gathered at Fishers Island: they say Mr Brenton sowed some at Rhode Island, and has a young grove of cedars now on his farme. Many people hereabouts carry them in their pockets and eat them, as being very wholesom & strengthening, they say, to the vitalls, and good for all sorts of ails the indians say" (Ferguson, 1925: 51) . As the Winthrops and their tenants continued to employ Indians on their farms on Fishers Island as late as 1738 (Hempstead, 1711-1758/1902: 342) , John Winthrop could have gathered this information on Native American medicinal plant use directly from one of his neighbors. He was also an early observer of animal behavior. When a hard winter in early 1717 led to "prodigious storms of snow" , John Winthrop was barely interested in the economic loss involved in the 1100 sheep he had lost in addition to cattle and horses buried in the snow. He was more interested in how the unusually large numbers of forest predators "from the upland 70 parts of the country were, in great numbers forced down to the sea side among us" and had to make nightly raids on his flocks to survive (quoted in Ferguson, 1925: 52) . He describes the wolves' behavior in surprisingly neutral terms for someone who has just sustained a rather substantial loss: "they nestled kenneled and burroughed in the thick swamps of these ample pastures, nightly visiting the pens and yards for their necessity" . In this 1717 letter to Cotton Mather, who was also a distinguished early American correspondent to the Royal Society responsible for introducing the use of positive and negative controls in quantitative studies of public health intervention (Boorstin, 1965: 252-253) , John Winthrop provides valuable incidental information on early 1700s agricultural installations in coastal Connecticut and Fishers Island. The animal pens and yards on John Winthrop's farm were located close to the sea shore near "thick swamps" . Although Fishers Island was free of wolves and predators by 1717, stone-walled pens and yards would have been found in the vicinity of coastal wetlands and swamps. Archaeological survey should recover some indications of similar structures. The stone walls noted on the surface in the vicinity of the wetlands in the southern portion of the Guest parcel during archaeological surface survey in 1992 (this report) may perhaps be the remains of such animal pens. 71 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, 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 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 72 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) . During a storm in January, 1735, several New London men died in a shipwreck in Fishers Island sound when a ship belonging to the New London Society, in which Joshua Hempstead had invested, was lost on its way home from Rhode Island after disposing of a cargo of pitch and tar from North Carolina. On January 20, 1735, New London received "the Malencholly News of the Death of Elisha Turnner, Jonathan Gore & Job Taber. the said Turnner was master of a Small Scooner belonging to the Newlondon Society had been to North Carolina & Returned home in the Storm & Run on the Rocks in fishers Island Sound near Masons 73 Island & there perished with the Cold & wet. 2 men Saved Hez Beebee & the Mate. Said Beebee & Taber were passengers from Rhoad Island" (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 284) . The tides and winds in Fishers Island Sound sometimes forced boats between Connecticut and Long Island to take shelter off Fishers Island, especially during winter months. In November, 1738, Joshua Hempstead, together with his son and daughter were almost shipwrecked near Fishers Island during a storm that interrupted a journey to Sag Harbor. At the time, Joshua Hempstead was making hard cider and marketing it in Long Island in return for grain, and it is clear that the decision to throw a few barrels over the side to lighten the load on the boat so that it could make it safely to land was not his own, as he was careful to keep a record of who promised to pay for it. On November 13, he "Set of Designed for Sag harbour in Jonathan Rogers's Boat with Joshua & Daughter Starr, John Bolles & Jonathan Waterhouse passengers & had the wind about W N. W & the Latter end of the flood. as the Sun Rise the wind Rise & blew Exceeding high. wee were got near or Quite half over & the Sea very big & angry wee found the Wind too hard for us. wee had 21 barrels of Cydar on bord & were forced to fling overboard 3 barrels vizt 1 Terse of .2 barrels & 1 barrel & a 1/2 barrel of Water to Lighten her & Jonathan Boles proposed it promised to be his part of the Charge & Jonathan Waterhouse Said nothing to it. wee got Safe into fishers Island Hay harbour about 9 Clock & l 74 I After about 2 hours Stay went up to the House where wee Stayed al night & Mr Mumford Entertained us very Courteously & would take nothing of me or mine, & Sent his Son to help us get of the Boat which was a ground on the flatts. wee got no harm in our persons nor Boat though wee were very wet & very Cold" (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 342) . Hempstead's diary that night concludes, "The Tops of my fingers are numb near froze. " According to Henry Ferguson, this 1738 reference is the first time that the sand bar at the mouth of Hay Harbor is mentioned (Ferguson, 1925: 55) . Development of the pastures around Hay Harbor, perhaps including the area near the pond south of North Hill and the Guest parcel, would have led to erosional runoff from livestock paths, mires, and bare patches of overgrazed forage on the pastures bordering Hay Harbor. This erosion would have led to the build up of the sand bar obstructing the entrance to Hay Harbor, and to changes in the coastline similar to those occurring elsewhere in Suffolk County as a result of increasingly extensive agricultural land use during the 18th century. The next day the Hempstead party attempted to continue their voyage to Long Island, but ran aground again before returning home to New London: "Tuesd 14 fair moderate. wee came away about it the Wind W - & Tide of Ebb could onely fetch into Mr mumfords bay & there wee got a ground Running after the Canno which broke from the Stern for want of a good panter & drove a 75 Shore & one of Mr Mumfords Indians Robin brot her off to us & wee Set Jonathan Bolles & Waterus on Shore there & Stayed on bord till after Sund Set & then got off & Little wind & tide of flood. wee Rowed & Sailed & Turned into the Harbour & got up before 9 Clock at night" (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 342) . It is interesting to note that Indian families serving the Winthrops and their tenants were still living on the western end of Fishers Island in 1738. According to the Walls, "Early writings about the Winthrops. . .state that descendants of the Indians who previously migrated to the island for hunting and fishing were employed here as laborers by the settlers. 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: 32-33) . Two years later, unfavorable tides again forced Hempstead to stay overnight on Fishers Island en route to Long Island. on January 18, 1740, Joshua Hempstead "went on Bord Edward Havens' in a Large Light Sloop bound for Long Island & the flood being spent wee Could not make it out & Stood away for fishers Island & lay there al night" (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 360) . It is not reported where they spent the night, but Havens and Hempstead must have disembarked near the western end of Fishers Island, although they do not mention staying at the tenant's house. The next morning "wee got Early on Bord with the help of the Tide got up to plumb gut & met the Ebb there & the wind 76 failing wee Came too after wee were got through the gutt & waited for the next flood. " Rather than waiting for a favorable tide to float to Havens' home in Shelter Island, Hempstead then boarded a faster sloop from New York bound for Southold which had come alongside Havens' barge, and completed his voyage from New London to Long Island in two days. The western end of Fishers Island continued to be a hazard for winter shipping. On January 29, 1746, Joshua Hempstead's diary records that "a Boston Sloop from the west Indies with Rum Suger & molasses Run on Rocks at the west End of fisher's Iland &c yesterday morning & got of & Run a shore without Side the harbour near full of water. they unloaded her & to day Run away for Millstone point the wind being fresh at East" (Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758: 455) . As the ship ran aground just outside West Harbor, the harbor for the early Winthrop manor that would have been simply referred to as "the harbor" on the western portion of Fishers Island, the rocks that holed the Boston sloop in 1746 may have been the rocks off North Hill near the Guest parcel. During the French and Indian wars in the 1750s, the citizens and merchants of New London began to worry about their vulnerability to attack, and petitioned for increasing the town defenses. At this time, Fishers Island was viewed as a potential threat to security. As a February 7, 1757 petition to the General Assembly in Hartford from the notables of New London observed, "a Vessell of forse may Lye Unobservd In the daytime, 77 behind fishers Island, within five Leagues of this town; and In two hours time, Under favour of the night, may land what Number of men they think proper, to Compleet such Designe without being Discovered Untill Actualy Landed" (Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, vol. XVII, 1918: 288) . On the outbreak of the Revolutionary War in 1775, Fishers Island was an important landmark for Connecticut soldiers 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 78 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 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 79 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 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) . In the autumn of 1776 there was a great exodus of refugees leaving Southold by ship from inlets and harbors, such as Mattituck Creek and Goldsmith's Inlet; 48 ship captains assisted in the evacuation (Jefferson, 1932: 7) . Throughout the war, a steady stream of refugees fled to Connecticut, almost half the population of Southold according to some estimates (Chapman, 1965: 10; Jefferson, 1932: 10) . Those remaining in occupied Long Island were subject to "frequent insults, indignities and losses of property" (Case, et al. , 1876: 17) . The size of the British garrison on Long Island, and the complex logistics of maintaining and defending long lines of supply and communications quickly became a burden to the occupying forces. John Adams was among the first to recognize the unexpectedly beneficial strategic liability that the British 80 success in the Battle of Long Island in August, 1776 had imposed. Writing to John Winthrop from Philadelphia on September 4, 1776, Adams noted that "The possession of Staten Island, Long Island and Manhadoes Island will be more than the whole fleet and army of our enemies can defend and maintain, and they will leave millions in gold and silver among the inhabitants of those islands. They cannot divide their force: if they do, they are undone. They cannot march into the country: if they do, their retreat will be cut off. Is it not better for the continent that they should stay at New York, than that they should have forced winter quarters again at Boston, or at one of the southern colonies, which would certainly have been the case, if they had not succeeded at Long Island?" (Winthrop Papers, 1878) . 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. 81 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 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. 82 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 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 83 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 to New London or other ports. Later the contraband would be smuggled in by small craft as opportunity offered" (Ferguson, 1925: 60) . Meanwhile, on Long Island, there was considerable resistance to British occupation. Whale-boats from the Connecticut coast carried out raids on British troops and Loyalists and sometimes even on Patriots, and in 1781, a representation was made by citizens in Southold complaining of the raiding parties (Onderdonk, 1849: 103) . In addition, to discourage Americans from working for or dealing with the British, American rebels circulated counterfeit British money (Jefferson, 1932: 20-21) . According to a report from New London dated May 2 , 1777, Mrs. Hubbard's inn in Mattituck, Southold, was one site where Ethan Allen's brother posted counterfeit bills to discourage dealings with the British. Levi Allen also 84 gave examples of the counterfeit bills to Rufus Tuthill at Oyster Pond and to John Brown, the Winthrops' tenant on Fisher's Island (Onderdonk, 1849: 64) . 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 85 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 86 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 it 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 North Hill (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 cattle, a smaller 87 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) . 88 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 North Hill and the Guest parcel at this time. In the spring of 1899, the 89 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 90 Island Brick Manufacturing Company, which made high quality 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 91 being "happily situated with respect to facilities for 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 on the Guest parcel as well as on the eastern side of Crescent Avenue (Figures 21-23) . However the North Hill reservation was abandoned after the war and sold, and only the service road giving access to the Guest parcel and Crescent Avenue are shown on the 1950 U.S. Army map (Figure 24) , or the 1970 U.S. Geological Service map completed before the existing house on the parcel was constructed (Figure 25) . 92 FIGURE 8 1635 BLAEU MAP aliuyuacs 4 a[t,uluaes GaeLeos. .raiys. Nu,•aticous a�. � Aquau : i �1 cLuqucs.a 1yffe2. 1, ' -. i A jLd'� WSru,l,ilcaus 94 rftr..riarlct dr ,�. 4% l[aquac pit• r• flj , For dtil WC cic Makimanrs ` �y, ALUM Naw, Coe firs :�mrcrtle �i �4 �� s tortiei6ut oraorrn,e• �� �� Z,� Jeirirr `� < morhicaus 'L4:t/�rir Rrv.k.•a .�_ V�eirnr Rrw ew 5.::.,rru.s 'Peau ato os f iL i � � r �7�1er Riri.•rMr•a t� i�,� \ V • J!.•rJrklc t�nJ4 • #- Z Site is indicated by arrow. 93 FIGURE 9 1675 ROGGEVEEN MAP j, kz IZ so �► ,\ / \ w i v .Y s tj 93 \ i 1r � , N Site is indicated by arrow. 94 FIGURE 10 1675 SELLER MAP r , � y � I • is _1:.i.L.. - ._ � • sm" Auk ,ti. ww. O k .L_irirl' ra AWL *co..." , a it A v �• T Q • J i 4S s� :K�' �' • N Site is indicated by arrow. 95 FIGURE 11 1689 JOHN THORNTON MAP -.4 V 1 -- � � 0 ,�j / Mrs i ow N Site is indicated by arrow. 96 FIGURE 12 1734 NEW ENGLAND COASTING PILOT MAP New ondon.«.,e ,:.a,.Ad- Ne4r o�donffi B *L Irpual . • iP�� �o . z ti � 10 ,ss IS .I. ...: EJhe*s I1Mi3.*SRot� ,•.,.. `'yl�.� oy�ra,F, d 7 zs 74 * p•PL.•tiLL �c - y ZJ svr+g m Q T 14abt721on 1 9 fficJ;� 2g&9D� ,jleae2 •fa N Site is indicated by arrow. 97 FIGURE 13 1779 FADDEN MAP IC _ --'sem,. �� _ =__—\• ,. MA it _` tea. � � ��1,` u ,..,1a; -� "j/��•:�` •,:; ;�i ova r r�rya VAf!,�Ro6ini7 �i �t t• .0i ASS _i% ����� � /- �/ice /�-•fjjQ' *�•./ �/ '/� -ff���!jj�: ;Eagraved.'sad , •� ,���;;��_�1 - / Januarstrt Wig,- N Site is indicated by arrow. 98 FIGURE 14 1829 BURR MAP 0�* - t Bivii -� it• + +N�^R S 4` ra..+� •1 ? y- . - - � aa�..r. •i• 71— Arenwt i' 1 r N Site is indicated by arrow. 99 FIGURE 15 1838 U.S . COASTAL SURVEY MAP �s i N�TMMl4 �/� i s rk/o,,,m, N so j_ �,��/ MINI ,� �� �►� i�/� � \\11\\\\\\���,`\\=� IN Ilk (� . // cis$ �'�' v'(�w �.� _ S• �f'+� /��• �;11'1 �\ �� '• 00ar \\0 N 94 Site is indicated by arrow. 100 FIGURE 16 1842 MATHER AND SMITH GEOLOGICAL MAP 1. ' ..p• �p�1�i�/ i-rj41 / :. •.�.• �;4^�-.�yS..-��..��j_�� �j`�•.shy K 7✓�r,.��`Z `s /' 7 -i/;li L7{ / e�Com•r. �•et'• C'• _ �!i•�I j�..: 1i-fur.�"�.'.r- ��.}��Y,iw: 1rhov �\ /11�� ��\�. , max• /• ��%'�� � --y�•"- f ::• /%i,�j FLlera no«i. Ailsviou 3sod.. ..._.._ ]Marsh _. N Site is indicated by arrow. 101 FIGURE 17 1858 CHACE MAP M �• N Site is indicated by arrow. 102 FIGURE 18 1873 BEERS MAP X30---�-------- -- sa' —------ ------� •--- - --- ---- --� 5 a' 1 1 =dam •1�'�;%�.j 'y ,_-_=.rte, � ;�,,, 1iy I%\t'�\�\• ���_ ^-� �/�' ��� --•1.� ,' •gra. '}�\,\,\\\\�`.J� �' ��� %��/%/ __ .f-.I I i I i• 1 11• i _ 1 I N Site is indicated by arrow. 103 FIGURE 19 1896 BELCHER/HYDE MAP v; \� LandingMU ATAWKCr �jt /C/ amu M [L �rW910N � LANG � �,1..[ � � //r G�+ags o� �� 9 � e 4"L. SOUTH 6+[AC N PSosn[cr j5'e B�r'N VI'A&rnem iges and Towns in which Locate( mpton Hoganock, Southampton. Mineola Park,North Hempstead. Seattle Hole, Holbrook,Brook Haven. Montauk Association,Fast Hampton. Sea CWT,Oysteerr . BBayay. Mord.Hempstead. P Hollis,Jamaica. Montauk Point, Fast Hampton. 8earingtown,North Hemp Hollis Heights,Jamaica. Moriches,Brook Haven. Belden,Brook Haven. Hollis Park,Jamaica. Morris Park,Jamaica. Setaaket,Brook Haven. HoWswood,7amaica. Mt.Sinai,Brook Haven. Sheed Nine, Babylon. Huntington, Huntington, Murray 11111,Flashing. Shelter Island Heights,Sh Huntington Harbor, Huntington. Nassau Heights,Newtown. Shelter Island Park, Shelte Hyatt Heights,Newtown. Napeagae Beach,Fast Hampton. Shinnecock Hills,Southam Hyde Park,North Hempstead. New Cassell,North Hempstead. Smithtown,Smithtown. Highland Valley, North Hempstead.New Sufiblk,Southold. Smithtown Branch,Smith Indian Head Smithtown. Newtown,Newtown. Smithtown Landing,Smi Indian Reservation,Southampton. Newtown Heights,Newtown. Smithville South, Heaps Inwood, Hempstead. Nlasiquogne,Smithtown. Southampton,Boathampto lm Irma Park, Hempstead. North Beach,Newtown. South(filen cove.Oyster Islip, Islip. North Bellport,Brook Haven. South Haven,Brook Hai Jamaica,Jamaica. North Country Club,Oyster Bay. South Jamesport, Rlverh Jamaica Heights,Jamaica. North Haven, Southampton. .gouth Manor,Brook Have Jamaica Park,Jamaica. North Neck, Fast Hampton. Southold Southold. N Site is indicated by arrow. 104 FIGURE 20 1901 COLTON MAP T (+I �4�' er ' cBridte •Grotma 1Fort H vEi► quaawckB�ri 'e Sto $ta. ono Dood§ev I. 4v smo 4 n]ws L t j P �B L `4 C Rock /rot=LongP.t � �= 9 O ITN,a Y vx \ I D�.. — NEW ' $ Ea—A- 8, � �\ 1g � a- ' Sg"Bmiw� Aam . 40� - 0 OtaLML B L O C K S L -A N D S O U 1Y D N Site is indicated by arrow. 105 FIGURE 21 MAP SHOWING NORTH HILL GUN EMPLACEMENT �ISHEIZS ISLAND ciArgx Farw 4-� c�,.`�` � ;1�rn•n rrra�r rimm� in rsa2 o ti(i(rs p � .� I,� �� ,1�-Ncrrlc nurnplicrrl So(+th Dunrplirc� � - Ncc•tk J 11'T'fC�Cf tllf Atlmit(c �✓. i � I�� F(Rt El!}})f})fOC lltmcstan Ncuse Arm 11'rsr E}r� �znn \\�,� �rrrf it F�ccr Hicc ��rfC �,r NarbcrTcnnis Club ,��- Alfuirfrirnitle'r N�7rl �j ��� �1 �rf•nfrr•(� (f�lrs E:crtcic Ncrr( 6rv•lcrr's A1urc{cck Curtccr�r l� ;��'•��' - '�� A � •"" ,1�(�i1J(Cll f�0!(SC FOCI: �ottolnn �� • � � �F Erfrkno►• 1' -,�l ..• �, 106 FIGURE 22 1940 LOCATION MAP OF NORTH HILL BATTERY CONSTRUCTION N. f,SHlws i �6I i tay �wr o aso F� - , wde..nas Pr. Race Pt.r� O 009 BLOCK 15L-�'~O g VICINITY SKETCH Sc al* ' saoo �oowh � e H,u - Norr oA1on A 105 '0 `116 0 - •` - � ,vim 3•� - .. •��� ��,����� �/ � •\ 'p A.,15-, s 4 : y -n 61CIZET LOCATION MAP BATTERY CONSTROCTION 4 JK3' GUNS To accompany Report of Si fe sao o soo i000 isoo SCALE FEET Board convened under secret le f far orders H sodquarfers Is Corps Area^�afed Oct. 9,1940. 107 U B C AMTS No 5(915) s BC . ► 1 w tLOC ato." W S 1 8 C •MIS Ne • (914) — � Q B1[S13 Bi RY GONS 111 wns[roue Ioc [S B"S"BTRY CONS 111 F� • IYAM C wncI.IrTo"t i 5 B No B l0 lOt n• 0/Ss BTRY CONS 111 'OD e91M" [AS's�t B S BTRY CONS I11 cot ho as Ss am CONS 214 B[So 01Rr CONS 214 Cl .wt"I..c Be Ss BTRY CONS 215 —'-" G-! CP SIGNAL STATION No 3 LOC 21 IOC 4 Bs Ss BTRY CONS 216 N NEOP No 3 FSB No 5 [� � _aia:s ra"t SG S/L No.218 22 Bs Se BTRY CANS 111 Ss 51 SIR'.'MAITLANO LOA ►' wY C 2 CP 85 61 BTRY CONS 214 B C BTRY MA17LAND [roc=i B C AMID No 6 (916) G-2 CP at S=BTRY CANS 215 81 S=BTRY BENJAMIN b 6-2No 2 as Ss CANS NS 217 B C BTRY BENJAMIN Soso STAT CONS 111 �+•"'[•D Q HEOP 0 C ANTS No 2 (912) SCR 296 SET No 7 SII[. SIGNAL STATION No.2 unto 6-4 CP MET. STATION No 2 0454 BTRY CONS 214 h] 1 a- --BiA'rNa-E 5 C 5/L Ib IS B 14 S•54 HTRT CANS YIS FSO No 4 0 No 4A [°11Y"� ISLAMO G-5 CP TIDE STATION 8'S'BTRY CONS 214 tat Se FSB No 6 J1-a-B7R 6 2� V, B4 S4 96 CONS 9 N SCR 296 SET 2 9 0 B S'DIRT CANS 215 Bs Ss BTRY DONS 215 B6-CRP fIbFFM•N->L Jrly ISLAND F-3 SC 5/L No 19 B 20 B►SoBTRT CANS 217 [�Y[s11 B C BT RT CANS 215 1G-8Rf-f10Pf'OCrt•f/ 5l AND B C BTRY CANS 217 Bs as BTRY MAITLAND B C AMID No 31913) LOC 6o s'ii s O'S'DIRT MAITLAND Bs Ss BTRY BENJAMIN SCR 296 SET No 5 FSB No 7 1, B'S'BTRY BENJAMIN S C S/L No 15 B C BTRY CONS 111 o R H SITE = Q 00 *F-S;mS-QAetmA potty B C BTRY CONS 214 0 C •Mie No I (Sill t 84 S•BTRY CONS 111 I 813 Sts BTRY CONS 111 Z hyj SCR 296 SET No 6 B1 SI BTRY CONS 217 Bs S=BTRY CONS 216 N D C P e4 S•BTRY DUNN O H SC S/L No 9,00,11,812 ^ S G.5/L No 3 B 4 HOOP BS So BTRY CONS 216 I•xj C1 l` SG.S/LNo78S NECP C,, [SCi 29v 5°?124e ic +qb C-3 CP g14$14PTRY CONS 111 ww n G-s C T• e5 Ss^:RY DUNN00 r Q AD SIGNAL STATIC-/No 4 ur POOWCt =i BY ST BTRY CONS 111N 1 BS SS DIRT CONS 214 est S. BTRY CANS 111 _ W Bs SS BTRY DUNN B'S• BTRY CONS 217 y Lac oA SCR 296 SET No 0 G MYIQR.AIAA SCR 682 En ua IS SC S/L No 17 8 IB O 8s Ss BTRY CONS 111 Fyj 5454 BTRY CONS 112 - - 81 St S1RY CONS 216 C] (� AWt.•"S(tt 8o$s BTRY DUNN EEGEND 0 V UX SCR 296 SET No 1 > i -TEMPORARY � 81 SI (1TRY CONS I11 C-1 CP M11 SUSPENDED y [Ast".".You Best (ITRY CONS IIY G-1 CP I� wC Io -- NEOP No$ - L1 Bs Ss BTRY CONS 111 SIGNAL STATION Nag BS 55 81RY CONS IIY MET STATION M4 1 d BI SI BTRY DUNN FSB No 2 8 3 � F S S NO. 1 Bo Ss BTRY CONS III 0's' BTRY CONS 112 S C S%L SECRET No 182 01 Ss BTRY CONS 112 - z B C BTRY CONS 112 M D LONG ISLAM SOL^5 B3 Ss BTRY DUNN En B C BTRY DUNN tij DISI B1RY CONS 216 LOCATION OF ELEMENTS B C BTRY CONS 216 SCR 296 SET No 3 1 0 1 wo 11 so as SCR t96 SET No 4 bmr-uw - SCR 502 T"OOSANDS or YARo1 S C 5/L No S 8 6 FIGURE 24 1950 U.S. ARMY MAP North H , aWkS ' p�No f�61. _ oily ,gyp 5 ,► Ars vat I G e N Site is indicated by arrow. 0 2000 Ft. 109 FIGURE 25 1970 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP Nort Hint. ,< \\ u 3 'oma_ •ao Hawks Nest S O U :T-!,'-' �,T� �/ r = �• West /in �' �. ry Harbor fiSF{E Goose^ Island l 1' \ I circr Hay * �,�1.�1'30i ' Harbor �p ,� ���,,"„ .:,; �...- ���• '`, • JI•�•i� ';cid �:.;. i ';'�'� �'r©11�T7 @O:. ��•- •��'•; •mss\\\.\, Silver Eel —�' "\' �o: CoveGiyurse -6 r, lri...U � 30 `• � \r\^ Wilderness cc== meld a_ - BLOCK ISLAND Point So(jND 748 ✓ 2 540 000 FEET (N Y.)749 0 INTERIOR-GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.W.SNINGTON O C-19- )CIJlOWM,CG 72 Race Pt ROAD CLASSIFICATION Heavy-duty Light-duty Medium-duty Unimproved dirt U S. Route (� State Route ' CONNECTICUT ' ^ interstate Route QUADRANGLE LOCATION NEW LONDON, CONN.—N. Y N (U.S.G.S. , 1970) Site is indicated by arrow. 0 2000 Ft. L I 110 IV. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION, FISHERS ISLAND, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK. A. METHODOLOGY. The archaeological investigation of the Guest Minor Subdivision 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 December 4, 1989, 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 and 40 m intervals (ca. 130 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 and 40 m transect lines; thereby establishing a 20 x 20 m and 20 x 40 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 40 m grid 111 size was utilized due to the fact 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. Flaked quartz was found on the surface of the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel in four locations, all associated with modern disturbance (Figure 26: S1-S4) . S1, a unifacially flaked quartz pebble "turtleback" blank that had been flaked, ground and prepared for projectile point manufacture (Holmes, 1919; Sheets, 1973) , was found on top of a 17th-19th century drystone wall in the northeastern portion of the Guest Minor Subdivision (Figure 26: e) . S2 , a quartz flake fragment with pebble cortex on one edge, was found in the side of a World War II foxhole near the path in Lot 3 of the December 4, 1989 subdivision map prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King. S3, a trapezoidal section soft hammer quartz bladelet with pebble cortex on the right edge, was found in the lawn north of the existing house on Lot 2. Three milky quartz flakes (Figure 26: S4) were also found near the 112 pillbox observation point overlooking Fishers Island Sound on the northwestern escarpment of the Guest parcel. A detailed description of these pieces is found in Appendix A. In Lot 1, in the southeastern portion of the parcel, the outlines of two oval stone huts or animal pens were noted where their foundations had been cut by grading for a modern path (Figure 26: a) . The foundations were 0.50 to 1.50m in thickness, and the width of the enclosed area was 4 to 5 meters. These stone walls could perhaps be the location of the dwellings of Indian servants of the Winthrops, like stone foundations noted elsewhere on Fishers Island (Wall and Wall, 1982 : 33) . The location on the southeast slope of North Hill would have been sheltered from the prevailing northerly winds on Fishers Island. 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: 110) . The intensive use of the island for stock raising also makes it possible that these stone walls in Lot 1 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 bordering the parcel (Ferguson, 1925: 52) . Spoil heaps and terracing by bulldozing during the 1940s had a substantial impact on Lots 2 and 3 of the proposed 113 subdivision. A road was cut to provide access to the heavy machinery needed to build the gun emplacement overlooking Fishers Island Sound and to defend the approaches to New London and Long Island Sound. Cutting and filling also occurred in order to build the quarters and facilities needed by the soldiers manning and defending the gun against possible enemy attack. The extent of this disturbance roughly corresponds to the area of Haven loam on 2 to 6 percent slopes in Lots 2 and 3 (Figure 4) . Grading for construction in the 1940s, and the construction of the existing house in Lot 2 approximately 20 years ago, have extensively altered the area between the house and the World War II barracks and bath house. 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 and 40m transect lines trending approximately east-west across the site. There were 12 transect lines designated A - O (Figure 26) 114 with a total of 34 holes. The entire area of the site slated for development was covered by the subsurface testing program, with the exception of areas of the existing lawn, building envelope and access road on Lot 2 which had already been impacted, and bulldozed soils between the 1940s camp and the adjacent path (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 very stony sandy loam on 8 to 15 percent slopes (ReC) is found on the southern portion of the parcel. This soil is found only on Fishers Island on morainic deposits, and has many stones larger than 10 inches in diameter scattered over the surface or embedded in the soil (USDA, 1975: 83) . ReC 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) . According to the USDA soil survey of 115 Suffolk County, "The stones on the surface of this soil limit its use to woodland or to pasture" (USDA, 1975: 83) , which is the use attested for northwestern Fishers Island for the period from 1640 to 1940 (Winthrop Papers; Hempstead, 1902/1711-1758 ; Hine, 1912 ; Ferguson, 1925) . Test hole A4 is typical of the ReC soils on the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel. The strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) subsoil is slightly darker than the typical Riverhead soil profile, perhaps because of ash mixed with the subsoil as a result of the cultural activities occurring in the topsoil in association with the use of the anvil stone found there. Test hole A4 Prehistoric. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 topsoil 10YR 2/2 sandy loam 30-50 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 sand and gravel 50-90 B 7.5YR 4/6 sand and gravel Finds 30-50 granitic anvil stone Test holes B2 and B3 are typical of the HaB soils found in the southeastern portion of the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel (Figure 4) . This pocket of loamy soil is close to the stone foundations of two oval huts, sheds or animal pens observed in the surface survey reported here (Figure 26:a) , and may be the 116 result of animal manure or domestic waste disposal altering the soil composition. Test hole B2 Prehistoric. Depth Horizon Description 0-20 topsoil 10YR 2/2 loam 20-70 B 7.5YR 4/4 loam Finds 20-70 20 granitic flakes and chips Test hole B3 Prehistoric. Location On terrace on southern slope of North Hill. Depth Horizon Description 0-25 topsoil 10YR 2/2 loam 25-45 cultural 10YR 5/6 loam Finds 15-45 (A) 1 piece of prehistoric grit tempered pottery. (B) 9 granitic flakes and chips. (C) 1 vein quartz flake used as a core. Riverhead and Plymouth very bouldery soils on 15 to 35 percent slopes (RpE) , the dominant soil type, are found throughout the central portion of the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel. In Suffolk County, "These very bouldery soils are only on Fishers Island", and are not found elsewhere in Long Island 117 or in southern New England (USDA, 1975: 84; USDA, 1983) . The surface layer of these morainal soils is sandy loam or loamy sand with many large boulders several feet in diameter scattered over the surface and embedded in the soil (USDA, 1975: 84) . Test holes G1 and G2E5 are typical of the RpE soils found on the parcel. Modern disturbance by bulldozing an access road during house construction led to erosional slumping and secondary redeposition of subsoil sand over the top of a buried subsoil in test hole G2E5. Test hole G1 Negative. Depth Horizon Description 0-35 topsoil 10YR 2/2 loam 35-90 B 7.5YR 5/6 sand and gravel Test hole G2E5 Prehistoric and Modern. Location Next to large glacial erratic, 5 meters east of the location of G2 on the subsurface testing grid. Depth Horizon Description 0-5 humic 10YR 2/2 loam 5-20 eroded subsoil 10YR 6/4 sand 118 20-45 buried humic 10YR 2/2 loam 45-60 B 7. 5YR 5/6 sand and gravel Finds 0-20 (A) 1 worn grinding slab, broken during dressing by hammering to renew and roughen grinding surface. (B) 1 piece of modern brown bottle glass. 45-60 (A) 2 granitic flakes. (B) angular pieces of granitic waste from roughing out ground stone artifacts. Prehistoric artifacts were recovered from twenty three (23) of the 34 test holes excavated on the Guest parcel (Figure 26) . Three (3) test holes yielded modern or recent coal, glass, ceramic and metal 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 Guest 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 Guest parcel include roughed out grindstones (test holes A3, I3 and O5/P5) ; 119 used grindstone fragments broken by hammering on the worn grinding surfaces to roughen and renew them (test holes A3 and G2E5) ; hammerstones and hammerstones/Destles (test holes A3 , B4, C2, D3 , D4, E2 and G3) ; hoes, picks and mauls used to extract and break up granitic rock for manufacturing grindstones and other tools (hoes and picks: test holes A3, C3/C4, E2 , I3, I4 , N3 ; mauls: test holes G3, I3, O5/P5) ; flaked, pecked and partially ground granitic axe/adze blanks (test holes B4, E2 , I3 and O5/P5) ; anvil stones (test holes A4 and G3) ; flaked quartz cores, pebbles, bifacial rough-outs, broken bifacial pieces, and quartz flakes (surface finds S1, S2, S3 and S4 ; test holes A3 , B3 , M2 , M3W5, M4E5, N3, N4, N5 and 05) . The granitic and porphyritic rocks were derived either from sources in southern Connecticut (Rodgers, 1985) or from glacial moraine derived from southern Connecticut. Other finds include prehistoric pottery fragments found in test holes B3 and O5/P5, and a porphyritic gunflint found in test hole G3 that was similar in workmanship and material to gunflints used ca. 1640-1650 at the recently discovered Shinnecock Fort in southeastern Long Island (Hamilton, 1982 ; Miller, 1990) . The porphyritic gunflint(s) found at the Shinnecock fort were made out of a raw material exotic to Long Island, and may have been brought in by Pequots armed with guns who took refuge in Long Island following their defeat in Connecticut in 1637. According to Roger Williams, Wequashcuck, 120 a Niantic sachem, "sheltred 4 Pequts Sachims & 60 Pequts at Long Iland where now they are" (letter received by John Winthrop, Jr. on July 9, 1637, printed in Winthrop Papers, 1863 : 208) . The dominant type of artifact found on the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel consisted of fragments of broken granitic grinding slab rough-outs and worn grinding slabs broken during resurfacing. For example, in test hole A3 were found 2 refitting pieces of broken granitic grinding slab. The dimensions of the refitted pieces were about 1. 3 ft. in (incomplete) length, 1 ft. in (incomplete) width, and 2 .4 inches thick. The original width and length of the unbroken grinding slab rough-out would have been greater. The total weight of the two pieces recovered from the test hole is 13 kg (about 28. 6 lb) . This grinding slab had been given a crudely defined plano-convex cross-section but broke on two edges while the grinding surface was being dressed and pitted by hammering. Another artifact found in the same test hole also shows the use of hammerstones to dress the surface of grinding stones. In this case, the broken grinding slab had already been heavily used, to the point where all surfaces had been smoothed and rounded. This artifact from test hole A3 broke as the grinding surface was hammered to renew the rough grinding surface needed. This shows that local people brought their grindstones to the granite quarry, perhaps to allow local specialists to renew them or to work on their old grindstones themselves while they were 121 making new grindstones to trade for other commodities. The effort devoted to the manufacture of heavy, not very portable grindstones on Fishers Island, is a further indication of ' year-round investment of time and energy by local villagers Idependent 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 122 ethnographic publications, among the most characteristic features of a re-surfaced grinding stone are the scalloped, core-like flake removals around any acute angles on the Iperiphery of the grinding surface. These flake removals are 1 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 broken grindstone rough-outs and worn grindstones from the Guest parcel. Stone hammerstones weighing between 1/2 pound and 1 1/2 pounds were found in six test holes (A3, B4, C2, D3 , D4, E2 and G3) . Heavier mauls weighing between 3 and 10 1/2 pounds were found in three test holes (G3, I3, and 05/P5) . These mauls were used to break up granite cobbles and boulders during the process of making grindstones. A comparable range of heavy tools weighing between 2-17 pounds was used to break up raw material at a prehistoric chert quarry on the east bank of the Hudson River (Brumbach, 1987) , and heavy stone mauls were also in evidence at prehistoric stone quarries elsewhere in eastern North America (Holmes, 1919) . Stone hammers such as those found in abundance at the Guest parcel had a number of uses. Hammers were used in food preparation to crush maize and hominy kernels as well as food tubers. Sinew was also pounded with hammers in order to allow the bundles of sinew in tendons to be teased into individual 123 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 Isurface of milling stones. On village and camp sites grinding 1 stones are often found smoothed down and discarded after use, but here and throughout the area around North Hill, roughed out and broken grinding stone blanks are the most common finds, indicating that during prehistoric times a thriving local specialization in the manufacture of grindstones occurred on Fishers Island. By using chunks of rock that glaciers had already broken down and dumped off the coast of Connecticut more than 21, 000 years before, people from coastal New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island were able to share a labor-saving source of ready-shaped raw material not available in such quantity and quality on the mainland. 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 Guest 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 124 these techniques were made and traded by their makers as late as I1773 when "Peter Gonoe Indian" paid a bill to the Havens store on Shelter Island with a basket worth one shilling threepence I (Lamont, 1975: 10) . Crudely flaked and battered pebbles and angular granitic shatter fragments used as quarry picks and hoes were found in six test holes (A3, C3/C4, E2, I3, I4, N3) . These were used to extract and break up granitic cobbles and boulders used to manufacture grindstones and other tools. Similar crudely shaped and irregular amorphous stone picks, sledges and quarry tools are illustrated by Holmes (1919) , especially associated with materials such as mica, pipestone, hematite and turquoise where repeated hammering and battering on raw material was needed to extract and shape it (Holmes, 1919: figs. 114-115, 130, 136, 140) . Quarrying was intensive work and tools were quickly worn out and needed to be resharpened. Two pick resharpening flakes struck off tools with battered and abraded working edges were found in test hole E2 . 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, 1990) , and stone hoes were used in Rhode Island 125 1 until the early 1600s according to Roger Williams (1643 : 38) . iFlaked, pecked and partially ground granitic axe/adze blanks were also found in four test holes on the Guest parcel 1 (B4 , E2 , I3 and O5/P5) . When granitic boulders were broken up for making grindstones, good flakes useful for making the axes I and adzes needed in carpentry and boat building were also produced as a valuable by-product. These tool blanks would usually have been taken to camp sites away from the quarry to complete them, as grinding and polishing could take several days. Granitic shatter and flaked debitage produced during the quarrying and preliminary shaping of granitic grinding querns and woodworking tools was also found in eleven (11) test holes on the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel, making it the most common category of artifact. This granitic debitage was most frequently found in test holes on the southern slopes of North Hill (test holes A3 , B2 , B3, B4, C2, D3, E2, E3 , G2E5 and G3) , and was noted in only one test hole in the northern portion of the parcel (M3W5) . Two roughly shaped pestles with crudely shaped, battered and rounded working edges were found in test hole I3 . One of these pestles weighed 1.3 lb. , and the smaller pestle weighed 1/4 lb. The crude, irregular shape of these pestles, was noted in addition to the unusual edge wear that was concentrated on the perimeter of the pestle and resembled the bevel on a jeweller's dop-stick, suggesting that they had been 126 used to polish and abrade a grindstone or axe/adze blank with crushed glacial emery powder from local deposits. The two pestles from test hole I3 were found in association with Ishattered hammerstone fragments, a quarry pick, a small maul weighing 3 . 3 lb. , a very large unfinished granitic grinding slab I weighing 23 kg, as well as a flaked/pecked granitic axe/adze blank also found in test hole I3 . The concentration of stone working tools at this location suggests a specialized episode of tool production occurred here. Hammering and shaping granitic tool blanks also required auxiliary tools such as the anvil stones found in two test holes (test holes A4 and G3) . Evidence of the use of one of these anvil stones came from the careful stratigraphic excavation of test hole A4 . A 5.5 kg granitic anvil stone was found at a depth of 30-50 cm in this test hole. Many small pebbles with a single break facet were also found at a depth of 50-90 cm under the anvil stone in test hole A4. As someone had repeatedly hammered on the food, raw material or tool blank that was being worked on top of the anvil, the underlying pebbles were being crushed as well, clear evidence that the anvil stone was in use at the place that it was found. The skillful bifacial reduction technique used in manufacturing quartz projectile points was also evidenced in surface finds and test holes from the Guest parcel. Both soft hammer and hard hammer reduction sequences can be observed, 127 i following the criteria established experimentally by Ohnuma and iBergman (1982) . Although quartz is difficult to work successfully (Boudreau, 1981) , a well-thinned, heat-treated ' quartz pebble "turtleback" blank (Holmes, 1919) was found on top of a wall in the northern portion of the parcel (Figure 26: Si) . This blank had been roughed out by the removal of centripetal flakes from one face of a flat pebble; the flaked surface was then ground and abraded to strengthen striking platforms and to facilitate control of the pressure-flake removals that would have been used to finish the piece (Sheets, 1973) . No projectile points were found in the artifact assemblage from the positive test holes on the Guest parcel. A number of activities are indicated by the artifacts found on the Guest 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. Quarrying and roughing out of granitic querns and tool blanks is shown by the broken metate rough-outs, one of which weighed more than 50 pounds, and the granitic axe/adze blanks at different stages of production. 128 I FIGURE 26 I MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF TEST HOLES 1 1 2 3 4 5 • Lot 3 O • O S2 o • • • N S1 e o • • , f 10 o M 1/0 L Dc n a Key o K o negative test holes S3 9- b • positive prehistoric test holes • • si surface finds Lot 2 a) Area of stones in oval formation for possible hut, shed, or animal pen foundation O • • G b) Existing house c) Pillbox d) Gun emplacement e) stone walls f) WWII bath house • • E g) Area of bulldozed path Lot 1 O • • D N o • o C a • • • B • • A o 1008. 5 4 3 2 1 129 1 V. CONCLUSIONS. The Guest parcel is located within one mile of potentially important Native American sites on Fishers Island. Evidence of prehistoric activity on the parcel was found in subsurface testing. Two perennial surface water sources are found within and immediately adjacent to the parcel, and this factor would encourage seasonal or permanent settlement on the site. The discovery of the walls of two oval stone structures cut by a modern access path near the wetlands in the southern portion of the Guest parcel in the archaeological survey 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 animal pens and sheepfolds from early 18th century farming, stone foundations from Revolutionary War smugglers huts, or wigwam foundations inhabited by some of the Native Americans living on the island in the late 17th century. The subsurface testing and surface survey of the parcel showed contact period as well as prehistoric Native American activities including raw material quarrying and stoneworking, food preparation and hunting. Two phases of extensive modern building construction have 130 I 1 already occurred on the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel, primarily impacting transects K-N on Lots 2 and 3 in the central and northern portion of the parcel (Figure 26) . The talus of the building envelope for the 1970s house on the top of North Hill can be observed on transect K. Test holes M1 and N2 are both found on a 1940s bulldozed cut and fill terrace. The isolated prehistoric finds in the M and N transects show signs of being broken by bulldozing and may no longer be in primary context, especially if they have been moved down by bioturbation from prehistoric deposits nearer the surface that were destroyed by the construction of the 1940s camp and bath house. In accordance with New York State guidelines in dealing with cultural resource surveys, the recovery of potentially significant prehistoric cultural resources on the Guest Minor Subdivision parcel during the Stage IB archaeological reconnaissance would indicate further subsurface excavation in order to define the limits of the site; the integrity of the site after at least a half century of military construction followed by modern construction; and areas of secondary disturbance and redeposition of artifacts. Following the determination of the integrity and boundaries of the prehistoric cultural materials, data recovery from within the proposed building envelope(s) , and/or mitigation by altering the building envelope(s) so as to involve already impacted areas are among the options that could be considered. 131 1 APPENDICES 1 APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF POSITIVE TEST HOLES AND FINDS i APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF TEST HOLES ON THE GUEST MINOR SUBDIVISION 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 A3 P. Depth (cm) Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 S. 30-60 B 10YR 5/8 S. 60-80 cultural 10YR 5/8 S. & g. 80-90 cultural 2 .5Y 5/3 S. & g. Finds 50-65 3 siliceous flakes, 1 g total: (A) 1 offset ridge flake, plain striking platform, no cortex, sharp termination, 1.7 x 1 x 0.4 cm (B) 1 offset ridge flake, crushed striking platform, primary dorsal cortex, sharp termination, 1. 1 x 0.8 x 0. 2 cm (C) 1 expanding cortical flake, sharp termination, 0.8 x 1.3 x 0. 2 cm 65-80 (A) 1 granitic hammerstone, battered on both ends, 8 . 5 x 6. 0 x 5. 5 cm, 0. 52 kg (1. 14 lb) 60-90 (A) 2 refitting pieces of broken granitic grinding slab, reassembled dimensions (39.5) x (33) x 6 cm (about 1. 3 ft. in length x 1 ft. in width, 2 .4 inches thick. The original width and length of the unbroken grinding slab rough out would have A-2 i been greater. The total weight of the two pieces recovered from the test hole is 13 kg (about 28.6 lb) . This grinding slab had been given a roughed out plano-convex shape but broke on two edges while the grinding surface was being dressed and pitted by hammering. (B) 1 broken worn grinder, plano-convex section, used as ?anvil; worn grinding stone may have broken as it was being dressed and pecked to renew a functional grinding surface; (9 .9) x (6) x 6 cm, 341 g (0.75 lb) . (C) 1 granitic quarry pick, flaked and battered on working edge, 11 x 7 x 6.8 cm, 868 g (1.91 lb) . (D) 90. 1 g angular granitic shatter (E) 1 primary cortical quartz flake, 1 x 0.8 x 0.2 cm, 0.2 9. Test hole A4 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 s.l. 30-50 cultural 7.5YR 4/6 S. & g. 50-90 B 7.5YR 4/6 S. & g. Finds 30-50 granitic anvil stone, 19 x 16 x 13 .5 cm, 5.44 kg (11.96 lb) . A-3 i 50-90 numerous small pebbles with single break facets, crushed during use of anvil stone on top of them. Test hole B2 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-20 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 20-70 B 7.5YR 4/4 1. Finds 20-70 17 granitic flakes and chips, 90.2 g Test hole B3 P. Location on terrace on southern slope of North Hill Depth Horizon Description 0-25 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 25-45 cultural 10YR 5/6 1. Finds 15-45 (A) 1 piece of prehistoric grit tempered pottery, combed lines exterior surface, 6 g. (B) 1 vein quartz flake used as a core, ventral surface used as striking platform for 1 direct retouch flake removal 1.2 cm long, 2 ventral flake removals by inverse retouch on one edge (lengths of flake scars 0. 6, 0.7 cm) ; 2 .2 x 1.7 x 1. 1 cm, 4 . 1 g. A-4 Test hole B4 P. Location side of modern path Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 1. & rocks 30-40 cultural 10YR 5/6 1. & rocks -40 lenses of rocks Finds 0-40 (A) 2 pieces of refitting, axially split granitic pebble hammerstone/pestle, old break facets, 5.4 x (3 .4) x 4 cm, 91. 6 g (about 150 g original weight) . (B) 1 broken hammerstone fragment, axial split, battered on both ends, 6. 6 x 6. 1 x (3 .1) cm, 145. 1 g. (C) 1 flaked granitic triangular section ?pick/?hammerstone/?heavy duty drill with use abrasion rounded tip and battering on edges, 8 .2 x 6. 6 x 5.3 cm, 283 .7 g. (D) 3 granitic flakes/chips, 8.3 g. A-5 Test hole C2 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-25 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 25-60 cultural 7. 5YR 4/6 1. 60-70 B 10YR 6/4 1. Finds 0-25 (A) 7 granitic flakes & chips, 9.7 g. 35-50 (A) 1 quartzite pebble hammerstone on pointed pebble wedge, battered on both ends; 7. 6 x 5.2 x 5. 1 cm, 224 g (about 1/2 lb) . (B) 2 angular granitic shatter chunks with pebble cortex, 11. 3 g total weight. 60-70 (A) 2 granitic flake fragments/angular chips, 4 . 4 9- A-6 Test hole C3 Negative. Location southeast of 1940s barbed wire perimeter fence around World War II gun emplacement. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 t. 30-50 glacial erratic on side and bottom of hole. Finds 0-30 A) 1 axially split granitic hammerstone/pestle fragment, abraded on flattened end, (6.3) x (3 . 3) x 2.7 cm, 72 . 5 9- B) 2 pieces angular granitic shatter, 25. 6 g. Test hole D3 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-25 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 25-40 B 7.5YR 4/6 S. -40 lens of rocks stopped digging Finds 0-40 A) 1 broken adze rough-out used as a hammerstone or broken during shaping; pecked all over; pecked and partially ground bevelled working edge, spalled by breaks on edge and side that destroyed evenly but incompletely abraded surface, 6. 1 x 4 . 1 x 3 .9 cm, 127 .4 g. B) granitic flakes/angular chips, 7 . 2 g. A-7 Test hole E3 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 30-80 B 10YR 5/6 S. Finds 40-60 A) 1 granitic hammerstone, battered on both ends, 6. 9 x 6. 4 x 4 .7 cm, 194 .9 g (0.43 lb) . B) angular chip of porphyritic granitic rock used as a flake core, 1. 1 cm long flake removal from one side, hackled vertical fracture on neighboring edge showed material or technique failed, dimensions of piece 3. 1 x 2.4 x 1. 2 cm, 9. 6 g. May represent waste from use of intentional breaks/fractures volontaires to make or attempt to make a porphyritic gunflint. C) angular chip of granitic rock, 3 .2 cm maximum length, 9.9 g. Test hole G1 Negative. Depth Horizon Description 0-35 topsoil 10YR 2/2 loam 35-90 B 7.5YR 5/6 sand and gravel A-8 Test hole G2E5 P.M. Location Next to large glacial erratic, 5 meters east of the location of G2 on the subsurface testing grid. Depth Horizon Description 0-5 humic 10YR 2/2 1. 5-20 eroded subsoil 10YR 6/4 s. 20-45 buried humic 10YR 2/2 1. 45-60 B 7.5YR 5/6 s. & g. Finds 0-20 (A) 1 worn grinding slab, broken during dressing by hammering to renew and roughen grinding surface, (15) x (12) x 8 cm. (B) 1 piece of modern brown bottle glass, 2 . 2 g. 45-60 (A) 2 granitic flakes, 3 . 1 g. (B) angular pieces of granitic waste from grinder manufacture/dressing and from roughing out ground stone artifacts, 50.7 g. A-9 Test hole G3 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 l.s. 30-80 B 10YR 5/6 l.s. Finds 30-60 A) 1 porphyritic granitic spall gunflint on expanding flake, plano-convex profile, some pebble cortex remaining on left edge, plain flaked striking platform, ventral thinning on proximal end of butt to remove bulb of percussion, centripetal flake scars on dorsal surface, steep abrupt inverse retouch on right edge, inverse retouch on distal end to create sharp striking edge, 2 . 6 x 3 .2 x 1.3 cm, 10.7 g. B) 4 primary fragments of angular granitic shatter, 14 .7 g total weight. C) 1 granitic pebble hammerstone, 9.7 x 8 .5 x 5.8 cm, 618 g (1. 36 lb) . D) 1 broken granitic anvil stone with bipolar flake scars on break facet, 11.2 x 7.8 x 8. 6 cm, 918 g (2 . 02 1b) . E) 1 maul/anvil stone, 18 x 14.5 x 10.5 cm, 4 . 32 kg (9. 51 lb) . A-10 Test hole I3 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 30-45 B 7 .5YR 4/6 l.s. Finds 30-45 A) 1 very large granitic grinding slab rough out, pecked surface, flaked sides, 37 x 40.5 x 13 cm, 23 kg (50. 6 lb) . B) 1 heavy granitic pebble hammerstone, battered on both ends, 13 .5 x 10.7 x 7.8 cm, 1.5 kg (3 .32 lb) . C) 1 granitic pebble hammerstone, battered and spalled on both ends, 10 x 8. 1 x 6. 3 cm, 600 g (1. 32 lb) . D) 1 granitic hammerstone/pestle battered on both ends, one end pointed, opposed end has a flattened concave pestle base with abraded perimeter, 9.8 x 8. 2 x 6.4 cm, 579 g (1.27 lb) . E) 1 granitic axe blank made on pebble shatter chunk, roughed out plano-convex profile, pecked pebble cortex on butt/tang, pecked and flaked ventral break facet ground near tool bit edge, dorsal surface mostly pebble cortex with two inverse retouch flake scars on left distal edge, 8.3 x 7 x 3 . 3 cm, 262 . 8 g (about 1/2 lb) . F) 1 granitic broken tanged hoe, worn direct retouch on bit, axially split during use, 10.5 x (7. 3) x 3 .7 cm, 218. 5 g (7 oz, probably about 1/2 pound when complete) . A-11 G) 1 granitic hammerstone/pestle, one end pointed and battered, opposite end is a worn oval pestle base with abraded perimeter, 7. 1 x 5.2 x 4 cm, 146.8 g (4 .7 oz) . H) 1 granitic hammerstone fragment, battered both ends, axially split during use, 6.3 x (5) x 4. 1 cm, 130.2 g (4 oz. , probably about 1/2 lb before it broke) . I) 1 tip of vein quartz hammerstone fragment, battered on end, (2 .4) x 4 .2 x 3. 3 cm, 39.8 g. Test hole I4 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 l.s. Finds 30-40 A) 1 quartz pick, butt abraded to allow better hafting, worn surface from use abrasion extends about 3 cm from working edge, 19 x 14 x 5 cm, 1.845 kg (4 . 06 lb) . A-12 Test hole K1 Negative. Location On the steep north ?talus slope of North Hill. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 2/2 s. 30-60 ? b. z. fill 7.5YR 4/6 S. & g. Test hole L3 Negative. Depth Horizon Description 0-5 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 5-40 b. z. 7 .5YR 4/6 S. & g. 40-70 b. z. 2 .5Y 6/4 S. Test hole L4 M. Location In path between WWII camp foundations. Depth Horizon Description 0-5 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 5-35 b.z. 2.5Y 6/4 S. 35-55 b. z./t. mottled and very disturbed mix of 10YR 3/3 and 7.5YR 4/6 Finds 0-20 A) 2 pieces of burnt coal cinder, 17 .7 g. B) 1 piece of coal, 19 g Comment Foul sediment washed out of bathhouse drain. A-13 Test hole M1 M. Location On bulldozed cut and fill contour west of WWII bathhouse. Depth Horizon Description 0-25 b.z. 10YR 3/3 1. 25-35 b.z. mottled 7.5YR 4/6 and 10YR 3/3 s. & 1. 35-40 1940 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 40-60 ?b. z. fill 10YR 7/2 S. 60-70 ?b. z. fill 2.5Y 6/3 S. Finds 0-30 A) 1 piece green glass bottle rim, 3 g. B) 1 piece clear glass bottle, 5.5 g. Test hole M2 P.M. Depth Horizon Description 0-55 b. z. t. 10YR 3/3 1. 55-70 B 2.5Y 6/3 S. Finds 0-50 A) 3 pieces of molded navy blue 1940s thermosetting plastic Bakelite duffel coat button with broken ?anchor insignia, 1 g. total weight. A-14 B) 1 piece of brown beer bottle glass, 3 .3 g. C) 1 burnt piece of green glass, 1. 3 g. D) 1 piece of clear bottle glass, 1.4 g. 55-70 1 piece of edge of bifacially flaked milky quartz, no cortex, edge of projectile point blank with two transverse breaks, possibly from weight of bulldozer scraping and grading topsoil and pressing this piece into the subsoil; (2) x (1. 2) x 1 cm, 2 .4 g. Test hole M3W5 P. Location 5 meters west of grid location because M3 sits next to old WWII bath house foundations and rubble. Depth Horizon Description 0-35 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 35-70 B 10YR 5/6 S. 70-80 B 2 .5Y 6/3 S. Finds 20-30 A) 1 large granitic expanding flake from roughed out tool blank that had been heat-treated after preliminary bifacial flaking; reddened surface of plain flaked striking platform contrasts shiny surface of dorsal flake scars and ventral surface; undercut axial hinged flake scars on dorsal surface, sharp termination; 4 . 3 x 6.9 x 1.4 cm, 38.7 g. A-15 60-70 A) 1 plunging expanding quartz flake from bifacially flaked rough-out, plain cortex covered striking platform, no cortex on dorsal surface, opposed dorsal flake scars, proximal overhang removal by abrasion to strengthen striking platform for pressure flaking and controlled thinning, evidence of bifacial flaking on plunging distal end, 1.3 x 1.5 x 0. 8 cm, 1.7 g. Test hole M4E5 P. Location 5 meters east of grid location because cement foundations of WWII bath house are located on top of M4. Depth Horizon Description 0-25 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 25-60 B 7.5YR 4/6 S. Finds 20-40 2 quartz flakes, 0.7 g total weight: A) offset ridge flake, lipped point of percussion, no dorsal cortex, dorsal grinding, broken distally, (1. 3) x 1.2 x 0. 4 cm. B) expanding flake, lipped point of percussion, no dorsal cortex, broken distally, (0.7) x 1.2 x 0. 2 cm. A-16 Test hole M5 Negative. Depth Horizon Description 0-35 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 35-60 B 10YR 5/6 S. Test hole N2 Negative. Location On edge of steep drop to wetlands, continuation of bulldozed cut and fill terrace on the western portion of the M transect. Depth Horizon Description 0-5 t. 10YR 2/2 1. 5-20 b. z. 10YR 3/3 l.s. 20-60 ?b. z. 10YR 5/6 S. & g. Test hole N3 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-60 B 10YR 5/6 S. & g. Finds 40-60 A) 1 piece of milky quartz primary pebble shatter, dorsal cortex, 4 . 1 g. B) 1 basalt pebble axe/pick/chopping tool, bifacially flaked working edge with 3 flake removals from flaked A-17 striking platform, 5.5 cm wide use-altered working edge, some spalling and crushing on flaked working edge; 18 x 6.5 x 4 .5 cm, 557.7 g (1.23 lb) . Test hole N4 P. Location On side of path. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-45 B 7.5YR 4/6 S. Finds 0-30 A) 1 milky quartz expanding flake from thinning projectile point, complex bifacially flaked striking platform, soft hammer flake removal (lipped point of percussion) , no cortex, centripetal dorsal flake scars, sharp termination; 3 x 2 . 2 x 0. 6 cm, 2 .7 g. A-18 Test hole N5 P. Location On side of path. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-65 B 7.5YR 4/6 S. Finds 40-60 A) 1 quartz flake fragment, no cortex, 1. 3 x 0.8 x 0. 2 cm, 0. 1 g. B) 1 granitic hoe/axe with abraded, bifacially flaked working edge, 6. 3 x 8 x 4 . 1 cm, 227. 3 g (1/2 lb) . Test hole 04 Negative. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-50 B 7 .5YR 4/6 S. 50-65 B 2 .5Y 6/4 S. A-19 Test hole 05 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-60 B 7 .5YR 4/6 S. Finds 30-40 A) 1 plunging, expanding quartz flake, lipped point of percussion, plain flaked striking platform, dorsal cortex except near distal edge where the flake plunged over the opposed, already bifacially flaked edge of a narrow Madison point blank, 1.2 x 1. 6 x 0.5 cm, 1. 1 g. Test hole O5/P5 P. Depth Horizon Description 0-30 t. 10YR 3/3 1. 30-70 B 7.5YR 4/6 l.s. Finds 40-60 A) 8 chips of eroded, smooth-surfaced, grit-tempered, prehistoric pottery, 7.8 g total weight (cf. Late Woodland pottery from the Barlow Pond site, Fishers Island described in Funk and Pfeiffer, 1988: 103) . B) 1 large granitic maul battered on both ends, 20 x 11. 1 x 7 . 5 cm, 2.273 kg (5 lb) . C) 1 wedge-shaped axe blank, crushed and pecked surfaces, 9 . 8 x 11 x 6.7 cm, 927 g (2 . 04 lb) . A-20 D) 1 broken grinding slab rough-out, pecked concave grinding surface, (11.5) x 11.8 x 4.2 cm, 691 g (1.52 lb) . A-21 APPENDIX B NEW YORK STATE FORMS CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Euecutive Summary Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Guest Minor Subdivision Project/Facility Location Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island Recommendations of the Stage IA Report No additional work recommended X Additional work recommended Results of the Stage 1B Report (if appropriate) No sites found in project area 2 Site(s) found in project area Recommendations of the Stage IB Report (if appropriate) No additional work recommended X Additional work recommended Stage 2 Report attached Yes X No 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 moclified to avoid site(s) Summary prepared by Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. , Archaeological Consultant Date April 6, 1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Stage 1A Report Project Information Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Guest Minor Subdivision Project/Facility Location Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island Permits Applied For Description of Project Description of Impact Total acres of project site 13 .7 acres Total acres to be impacted Environmental Information Topography moderately to steeply sloping Geology Woodfordian moraine Soils Riverhead and Plymouth and Haven Drainage well drained vegetation brush and successional mixed deciduous/coniferous Forest Zone Man-Made Features and Alterations house, path, gun emplacement 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 on and adjacent to the parcel, as well as the recent excavation of a Late Woodland site (Flounder Inn North and South) a few hundred feet east of the parcel suggest potential prehistoric sensitivity. Recommendations Further investigation to determine the integrity, boundaries and potential significance of prehistoric occupation or activity on the parcel. 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 1A Report prepared by Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant Date April 6, 1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Stage 1B Report Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Guest 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 2 sites reported (describe briefly) A) Late Woodland grindstone quarry from morainal soils B) 1940s artillery emplacement 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. 20-90 cm deep topsoil over cultural in weathered subsoil; bulldozed in northern portion of parcel. 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/20m x 40m 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/20m x 40m grid. Description of problems encountered during survey which may have influenced results. NA Results of Field Investigation no sites identified 2 site(s) identified Describe general nature and distribution of sites A) Broken grindstone rough-outs in stony and bouldery soils. B) World War II gun emplacements and camp. 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 "confidentialle. Recommendations No additional work X Additional work recommended recommended Stage 2 Report attached Yes X No 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 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. i 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. r� Stage 1B Report prepared by Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Archaeological Consultant Date April 6, 1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION Supportive Data Applicant Name Project/Facility Name Guest 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 "Confidential") 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 6, 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 X Quarry Mound Burial Shell Midden 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 enclosures) Multicomponent Location Under cultivation Never cultivated Previously cultivated X Pastureland Woodland Floodplain X Upland Sustaining erosion Soil Drainage: excellent X good fair poor Slope: flat gentle moderate X steep X Distance to nearest water from site (approx. ) : 0-100 feet Elevation: 0-70 feet above MSL S. 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 1111, if feasible subsurface -- date(s) February, 1992 Testing: shovel X coring other unit size no. of units 34 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 grindstone, axe and adze rough-outs; quarrying picks, hoes, mauls; porphyritic granitic gunflint; quartz debitage; grit-tempered pottery 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 1/211 x 111, 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 71, 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 pp 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 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) : Structure/site Superstructure: complete x partial collapsed not evident_ Foundation: above x below (ground level) not evident _Structural subdivisions apparent _Only surface traces visible _Buried traces detected List construction materials (be as specific as possible) : Reinforced cement pillbox and gun emplacements Grounds _Under cultivation _Sustaining erosion _Woodland _Upland _Never cultivated _Previously cultivated _Floodplain _Pasture Soil Drainage: excellent X good_ fair_ poor_ Slope: flat_ gentle_ moderate X steep__X Distance to nearest water from structure(approx. ) Elevation: 0-70 feet above MSL S. 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 34 (Submit plan of units with form*) Excavation: unit size no. of units (Submit plan of units with form*) *Submission should lie 8 1 � x 1111, if feasible Investigator ►nn„�� Robert L. Miller, Ph.D. Manuscript or published report(s) (reference fully) : Present repository of materials 6. Site inventory: a. date constructed or occupation period 1940 b. previous owners, if known 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 Address 2) Name Address 8. List of material remains other than those used in construction (be as specific as possible in identifying object and material) : 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 1119 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 51' x 711 black and white print(s) showing the 1 current state of the site. Provide a label for the print(s) on a separate sheet. 1 I I .I " ��;t JOHN EDWARD PFEIFFER 14 Hillside Road . Old Lvme. Lono . 067"1 /2031 434-8829 Vote Universztv of New York . Ph. D. September 1992 Wesleyan University . M. A. Andhropolog, 198i:16 University Of Connecticut . B. A. 197� Old Lvmn High School , qradus1ed 1967 Experience u Proiect Direrto^ The Hawk 's Nest - Edson LuLus: A Lute Woodland Habitation and Midden Site or, West Harbor . Fishers Island. Funded by the Inslitute for Americon Indian Studiei:L ^nd t |/e H L Ferguson Museum o Projec` Direc!o` Field Sdho/'l in Cunnecticut Archaeology 179� Sponsored b, Uhe Institute For Ame/ zum|. India/. S\ udiew: Wms!/iopto// . CumnwciiLuK u Ttiba] Hzstnrian and Anthropologist fo! / |`e Moheumo Tribe and Notion I`/c. NurwiLh . 199� Cunnecticu`[ : a Federal Pecogniiimn prujecL funded bv a Bureau of Indian AFfairs otant . o Visitzv'¢ Lecture!- Graduate ecturerG/ adua[ e Liberal Studies Pruorem. Wesle`'an Uoiverszts . Middleto'w/ . 1984 -present Lum/eLiiwut . cuurces include: Afro-Native American interface of the 17th and 18th centurv ; Intro tu Archaeology; Intr '` to Historic Archaeoloqy: Archives and Artifacts 1635-1800: The Archaeology of Us - Oldavai to Plimouth: Prehistor , of Southern New England. o Consultant in Cultural HesuurLe Management. New lot 1, 1982 oresant projects include: Rve Marshland Conser `'unL,; Vruoer Island; The Shaodbonk Site in Hyde Part : Hutterite proiect zr' Esopus: Doherty and Edson oropertie�. Fishers Island. 4 { "Late and Terminal Archaic Periods ` in Connecticut , " Archaeological / Societv of Connecticut Bulletin #47 1984 � "Bashan Lake: 450U Years of Prehistory, '' Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin 046 1983 ' ' "Remote Sensing: Archaeological Applications in Southern New England , " Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin 045 1982 "The Griffin Site: Archaeological Evidence of a 3500 B. P. Ceremonial Complex in a Southern New England Site, " Master 's Thesis, Department of Anthropology, � Wesleyan University , Connecticut 198() "The Griffin Site: A Susquehanna Cremation Burial in Southern Connecticut , '' Man in the Northeast , Volume #19 1980 4wards o "Graduate Student of the Year , " Northeastern Anthroplogical Association , Hartford , Connecticut 1985 o Sigma Xi Award , Wesleyan University. Middletown . Connecticut 1980 � o Director of Archaeological Excavations at The Griffin Site. Old Lyme. Coonecticut 1975 o Director of Archaeological Excavations � at the Ames and Griswold Point sites . Old Lyme. Connecticut 197� o Archaeulogical Surveyor of New London County , Connecticut.. 1972 "The Hopeville Pond Site, " Archaeological Societv of Connecticut Bulletin , in press 1993 "Late and Terminal Archaic Cultural Adaptations of the Lowest Connecticut River Valley , " Doctoral Dissertation . Department of Anthropology. State Universitv of New York at Albany 1992 "Early Wharf Construction in the Esse: Shipyards" , paper presented at Eastern States Archaeological Federation Meeting , Williamsburg , Virginia 1991 "The Late and Terminal Archaic Periods of Connecticut Prehistory: A Model of Continuity" . in Eygerime*n-��� a[ld �������tigDg on thV A[�!��! A���� �� thf-� �d-.-AUS-tyltU RmigDt edited by Dr. Roger Moeller 1990 "Radiometric Dates from Two Cremation . Burial Sites in Southern New England . " Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin #52 1989 "An Investigation into the Ancient Burial Ground at Crescent Beach,, Nianticv Connecticut , " Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin #52~ co-author Malcarne 1989 "Archaeological and Paleoenvironmental Investigations on Fishers Island , New York: A Preliminary Report , " Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin #51 . co-author Dr . Robert Funk 1988 "Dill Farm Locus I : Early and Middle Archaic Components in Southern New ` England , " Archaeological Society Of Connecticut Bulletin #49 1986 REFERENCES Ales, M.F. 1979. A History of the Indians on Montauk, Lona 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 I Southeast: Social Inequality and the Native Elites of I Southeastern North America. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 3 . Washington, ID.C. : 61-80. Bayles, R.M. 1874 . Historical and Descriptive Sketches of Suffolk County and its Towns, Villages, Hamlets, I Scenery, Institutions and Important Enterprises. 1 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. Bonner, Lynn. 1990. Digging for a Bit of History. The Day, New London, July 8, 1990: F7-F8. Boorstin, Daniel J. 1965. The Americans. 1: The Colonial Experience. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth. Booth, Nat E. 1949. The Archaeology of Long Island. In James E. Truex (ed. ) . 1982. The Second Coastal Archaeolpgy Reader: 1900 to the Present. Readings in Long Island Archaeology and Ethnohistory, vol. V. Suffolk County Archaeological Association. Ginn, Lexington, Massachusetts. R-1 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. Brumbach, Hetty Jo. 1987. A Quarry/Workshop and Processing Station on the Hudson River in Pleasantdale, New York. Archaeology of Eastern North America 15: 59-83 . 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. Catlin, George. 1844 . Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Conditions of the North American _ Indians, 2 vols. 1973 reprint, Dover Publications, 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 Ethnohistory, vol. III. Ginn Custom Publishing, Lexington, Massachusetts: 8-12. Ceci, L. 1990. 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 . 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, Long 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 Peguot Warres. Reprinted 1901 by Acorn Club, Hartford, Connecticut. R-3 Gast, M. and Sigaut, F. (eds. ) 1979-1981. Les techniques de conservation des strains 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. Hamilton, T.M. (ed. ) 1982. Indian Trade Guns, 2nd ed. Pioneer Press, Union City, Tennessee. 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 Antiquities, 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. R-4 Hough, Walter. 1897. Stone-working at Tewa. American Anthropologist 10: 191. 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. Jefferson, Wayland. 1932 . Southold and its People in the Revolutionary Days. L.I. Traveler Print, Southold, New York. Jensen, H.M. and J. Soren, 1974. Hydrogeology of Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. 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 york 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 Pequots 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. 1990. Stage II Archaeological Investigation of the Bayberry Hills Site, Shinnecock Hills, Town of Southampton. Clover Archaeological Services, Inc. , Northport, New York. Mood, F. 1937. John Winthrop, Jr. , on Indian Corn. The New England Quarterly 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. 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. R-6 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. Sheets, Payson D. 1973. Edge Abrasion During Biface Manufacture. American Antiauity 38: 215-218. 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. 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. R-7 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. 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. R-8 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 1985 Bedrock Geological Map of Connecticut 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 R-10