Report on Archaeological Research in Prince Edward Island, 2000

Introduction:

The period June 30 to July 22, 2000, was spent undertaking archaeological fieldwork in the Maritimes, primarily on Prince Edward Island. This research was done under permit (#2000-01) in accordance with provisions of the Prince Edward Island Government, Archaeological Sites Protection Act.

Phase 1 of the fieldwork involved a nine-day (July 3 - July 14) partnership project with Parks Canada. The focus of this research was follow-up survey and testing at the newly created National Park at Greenwich, in the northeastern part of Prince Edward Island.

Most of the primary research on pre-contact archaeological sites was undertaken by Canadian Museum of Civilization during 1983 and 1985 field seasons. This summer's work was to re-locate known sites; assess the impact of natural and human agencies over the past fifteen years; to determine the significance of previously untested sites; and to identify any new sites in the Park. The area was farmed until the late 1980's and was subsequently put under a provincial moratorium to prevent private development. The land was transferred from the Province to the Federal Government several years ago to create an adjunct National Park. For this project, Parks Canada provided a crew of six people to assist Rob Ferguson (Parks, Project Archaeologist) and myself with our research.

Testing was done at the Jones site (CcCq-3) to re-establish and pinpoint the original datum control grids within the new Park survey plan. This objective was accomplished, however it proved to be a greater challenge than expected and comsumed much of the first week to accurately re-establish our original datum/grid system. Roughly 2-3 meters of shoreline have been lost to erosion since 1985 and original survey pins had either eroded or been removed through cultivation. This prehistoric multi-component fishing and mammal hunting site lies along a new interpretive trail and is a key element in the aboriginal cultural interpretation presented at the Park.

Several other sites were re-located and a previously undiscovered small shell midden deposit was recorded which had been exposed through shoreline erosion. The midden deposit was tested and samples taken for flotation. No artifacts were encountered in the shell deposit. Most of the Parks' crew, during the second week, concentrated on a number of historic sites, which we had identified in 1983 but had not been investigated. These proved very productive, yielding late 18th c. Scottish and English artifacts and especially well preserved pre-expulsion 18th c. Acadian material at the foundation site (CcCq-4) on the hilltop just west of the Jones site. Copies of all notes and photographs have been deposited with Parks Canada.

Phase 2 of the field research expanded the Greenwich study area across St. Peters Bay and at selected sites in the northeastern part of the Island. Sites previously recorded at North Lake and South Lake were re-visited and photographed to assess rates of erosion and any new development.

Sutherland Site (CcCp-7):

Extensive testing over a period of four days (July 15,17,20,21) was done at the Sutherland site (CcCp-7), located c. 4 kilometers west of St. Peters on the Greenwich road (see map). The site is situated in an elevated sloping field along the north shore, directly opposite Midgell Point on the south shore.

The site was first recorded during site surveys of St. Peters Bay in 1985. Rollie Jones brought the site to my attention as he had collected a considerable amount of surface material while the field was under cultivation. John Sutherland's father had also collected artifacts from this same area some years before (see photo). While walking the field in 1985, there was clear evidence of settlement at the lower end of the field indicated by a broad zone of dark organic soil mixed with charcoal and ash, covering over an acre. Most of the Jones' surface collected material came from this organically rich area.

During the spring of 2000, Mr. Sutherland had cultivated the lower portion of the field. An area roughly 200 meters by 50 meters parallel to the shoreline (see site map) was surface collected. Baselines running east/west and north/south were established to establish a grid for testing. Approximately 40 shovel tests were dug with 24 producing cultural and/or faunal material (shell). In addition, a single pit (test pit #25) 1 meter x 1 meter was excavated by trowel in arbitrary 10cm levels (see site map). All soil samples were screened and any artifacts recorded. Several large soil samples were removed from Test Pit 25 and fine, water-screened in the lab.

Stratigraphy:

Test pits excavated within the site area typically had an upper disturbed plough zone of 20-30 cm, underlain by a zone of compact dark soil varying in thickness between 5-20 cm. Test pits closest to the shoreline edge had preserved organic material due to the presence of shell. The amount of shell is never great, often occurring in small pockets or fragmentary pieces distributed in the soil matrix. It is assumed that prior to cultivation that much of the upper disturbed zone was much like the compact dark soil. In 1985, at the shoreline edge, in close proximity to Test Pit 25, I recorded a c.10 cm deposit of shell, which has since eroded away. According to Mr. Sutherland, a row of small trees planted 5-10 years ago along the shoreline embankment edge has washed away due to shoreline erosion. A rough estimate indicate that 1-2 meters of shoreline have disappeared in the past 15 years.

Sutherland Site (CcCp-7)

View looking east towards St.Peters

View looking west towards Morell

The site stratigraphy indicates it is probably multi-component in nature. This remains to be better defined as this initial interpretation is based on a differentiated, upper disturbed cultivated zone associated with a small amount of historic material, underlain by a shell midden/occupation level.

Cultural Evidence:
Historic component:

A small assemblage of historic material initially indicates a mid-18th-20th century presence at the site. Ceramics include glazed white earthenwares, transfer ware and a plate fragment of blue-edged pearlware. A blade-style gunflint probably is associated with the first half of this time range. A few bottle and window glass fragments were also found in surface collection and in test pits - all are associated with the plough zone.

Pre-Contact Component:
Features:

As only one 1mx1m unit was excavated, only a small area was exposed. Interestingly, however, test pit 25 intersected a large circular feature at a depth of c.40cm below the surface (see photo). Projecting the remainder of the intersected arc, the feature is estimated to be about 5m in diameter. There was a clear distinction in the soil as evident in the photo, between a light sandy soil inside the feature and the surrounding culturally richer red/black soil. It is too early to interpret its full significance, however the possibility exists that this feature may have been a house or wigwam structural outline. There was minimal indication in the wall profile of a stepped slope or wall around the feature. Further testing is required to expose and better define the feature in its entirety.

Artifacts:
Lithic Raw Materials:

A minimum of three sources of stone material are identified in the Sutherland site assemblage:

1. White Quartz: This material dominates the assemblage and is locally available from area beaches in nodule form. Many of the pieces used are pebble-sized to fashion spall end scrapers. The pebble is split using a bipolar (anvil) technique to produce a thin cortex flake. The technique results in many prismatic-shaped shatter or splinter flakes.

2. Rhyolite: Also common in the assemblage and usually associated with bifacially made blades or projectile points. The source of the rhyolite is likely Ingonish Island on the East Coast of Cape Breton. Broad-based stemmed projectile points of this material are found in the Jones collection.

3. Quartzite: Only a small amount of quartzite is present. This is also obtainable from area beaches as various sized pebbles and cobbles.

Flaked Bifacial Implements:
Excavated in TP 25 were fragments of two projectile points and possibly a third - a small side-notched point of white quartz and a larger, expanding stem point of rhyolite. Both were found at the same level (6) c.35 cm below the surface. Also fashioned of rhyolite is a distal portion of a blade or knife and several bifacial thinning flakes.

Flaked Unifacial implements:
Well-formed unifacial implements include quartz spall end scrapers. A number of these were found in surface collection and six whole or partial from TP 25 associated with the shell-bearing component (Levels 5-6).

Ground Stone Implements:
Ground stone axes and adzes appear to be an important trait of this site. Woodworking would have been associated with the construction of buildings and boats or perhaps cutting poles for the construction of fish weirs. A badly fractured axe or adze was found in surface collection. In the excavated assemblage, two small bit fragments were found in Level 4 and poll fragment in level 5. (See photo) Their fractured nature indicates woodworking activities on site.

Ceramics:
A small amount of ceramic material is in the assemblage. The most diagnostic fragment is a surface find from the field by Rollie Jones. This is a cord-wrapped stick decorated bodysherd (probably necksherd). The pattern is similar to 'rouletted' decoration described by Wintemberg from Nova Scotia sites such as Merigomish Harbour. These are fine pasted ceramics and very light due to the many air pockets created during the firing process. Shell or vegetable fibre has been used as a tempering material 'or gror' and has been lost during the firing process. There are numerous small ceramic fragments from TP 25 and several other testpits, these, however, are literally pulverized into cherry-seed size pieces, possibly indicating they were lying for some times on the living floor.

Bone Implements:
Implements of bone or antler include a harpoon or barbed bone point fragment, a fish gorge or bipointed awl and several use-wear polished or modified bone point or awl fragments.

A shark's tooth, identified by Steve Cumbaa of the Canadian Museum of Nature as the anterior lower jaw tooth of a porbeagle, Lamna nasus (from the same family as the Great White Shark) was also an implement. The tooth exhibits use-wear striations and polish at the tip and base, and would serve well to pierce hides.

Faunal Remains:
Much of the faunal material has not been identified beyond the class level, with several interesting exceptions. The porbeagle, as previously described, is common to the St. Peters Bay area from Spring to Fall and occasionally fished in winter and was probably caught in a weir. The assemblage includes both large and small mammal remains, avian species, and fish remains (including eel?) As a passing note, associated with the shell deposit found eroding from the embankment in 1985 were several beaver incisor teeth. Shellfish include oyster, conch and various soft-shelled clams.

Site Interpretation

Given the preliminary stage of archaeological investigations at the Sutherland site, conclusions on its use, seasonality and age are tentative. Diagnostic artifacts from the Sutherland site surface collection and test excavations are, at least in part, comparable to other Island and mainland sites.

The presence of stylistically diagnostic late pre-contact ceramics (CP5-6) which are dated in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Maine, sugest an age for the Sutherland site between A.D. 800-1400. Merigomish Harbour ceramics are an example of this type. As well, the style of projectile points and extensive use of tabular quartz end scrapers generally fall into this time frame.

Occupation seasonality remains to be determined following a detailed faunal analysis. From the recovered faunal assemblage, all seasons remain a possibility. Although shellfish tend not to be exploited in mid-summer. The number of woodworking implements perhaps associated with weir construction, may indicate a specific occupation period linked to spawning fish species such as salmon, gaspereau, or eels. Reconstructing the site and bay geography, given the rapid rate of erosion, would have seen an even narrower channel between this shore and that of Midgell across the bay and would certainly have been ideal for weir construction.

Conclusion:

The Sutherland site, on the evidence in hand, appears to be a late pre-contact site dating between A.D. 800 and A.D.1400. The relatively large extent and depth of the cultural deposits and multi-season occupation of the site indicates this was an important fishing, shellfish collecting and hunting site for land and probably sea mammals. To date, this is the largest pre-contact occupation recorded on St. Peters Bay. The possibility of a fall/winter site cannot be ruled out on the basis of the present evidence. Future research and analysis will hopefully resolve some of these questions.

Acknowledgements:

I am especially grateful to Rollie and Jeanette Jones for bringing this site to my attention during fieldwork at St.Peters Bay in 1985 and for sharing information on their collection. Special thanks are due volunteers Helen Keenlyside, Madelaine Keenlyside, Max Keenlyside, David Kristmanson and Bernice Kristmanson, for their dedication and hard work during the field project and to John Sutherland, for his assistance and permission to undertake testing on the Sutherland site property.