Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
HPC agenda 102799
r ' a a _ — _ _ AGENDA 1 �' 1 2 15 E Orange County Historic Preservation Commission Wednesday, - October 27 , 1999 7 : 00 p . m . Planning and Ag Center Conference Room 306 Revere Road Hillsborough , NC 7 : 00 I . Call to Order 7 : 00 Ii . Additions to the Agenda 7 : 05 III . Approval of Minutes ( September 22 , 1999 ) 7 : 10 IV . Chair Comments 7 . 15 V . St . Mar s Road Archaeological Survey Y 9 Y Please find attached a copy of the study report from Linda Stine and Thomas Hargrove , which has been approved by the state and forwarded to the County . The architectural study from consultant Geoff Henry has not yet been completely reviewed by the SHPO , and will be presented in November . 8 : 00 VI . Review of Visual Resource Goals ( RCS , 1993 ) The adopted County Commissioners goals for 1999 - 2000 include HPC consideration of a viewshed protection program for historic sites , starting with review of visual resource goals identified by the Rural Character Study ( attached ) . 8 : 15 VII . Updates on Various Topics ➢ White Oak Grove School ➢ Manuscript Picture Request and Press Release ➢ Hiring of Land Use and Preservation Planner ➢ CLG grant ? ? ➢ Long -Term HPC Issues 8 : 30 VIII . Adjournment Pagel of 3 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 22 , 1999 Members Present: Tom Allison, Chair Jean Anderson Carolyn Connor Robert Rich Rob Golan Members Absent : Brad Lessler Staff Present : David Stancil, Environment Resource & Conservation Director Carol Crawford, Administrative Assistant AGENDA ITEM # 1 : CALL TO ORDER Chairman Allison called the meeting to order at approximately 7000 p . m . AGENDA ITEM #29. CONSIDERATIONS OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA AGENDA ITEM #39. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. August 25 , 1999 MOTION : Rich moved to approve the minutes for August 25 , 1999 . Seconded by Connor . VOTE : Unanimous , AGENDA ITEM #4 : CHAIR COMMENTS Allison noted the ongoing projects of the publication of a manuscript about the history & architecture of Orange County, the study of St. Mary ' s Corridor and how the HPC can impact preservation of the corridor, the White Oak Grove School local designation any other item that may come up . AGENDA ITEM #5 : Welcome to New Members : Chairman Allison welcomed new member Rob Golan to the Historic Preservation Commission and described goals and objectives of the HPC . It was noted staff had not heard from Brad Lessler regarding attendance . Staff was requested to put together a new member packet of information including the Historic Preservation Element booklet, and other background information such as study list for eligible sites . AGENDA ITEM #6 : White Oak Grove School Discussion Stancil reported that the representatives from White Oak Grove School had called to be excused from the evening agenda. Iris Chapman requested the discussion on possible Local Landmark Designation to be held after they have a community meeting and, asked for assistance with a meeting to rebuild community Lasted updated 09/30/99 1 Page 2 of 3 interest . Ms . Chapman indicated that some community consensus had been lost since tthey became aware of the fact that the State declined the property for National Register Nomination. They have their by- laws written and are prepared to send the application to be a 501 (c)3 non profit. They want to take advantage of that while the current State grant cycle concludes October 21 st . They are still interested in doing the renovations needed to restore the building and doing a program to get the school back to its former status . The HPC thought the previous indications of the White Oak Grove School group were that completing the non-profit organization would most likely produce local landmark district (LLD) . The community pride, historic and cultural value would be recognized by an LLD . Other tax breaks would not likely affect the property under the non-profit status . It was also noted that the changes to the interior of the school were not usually something reviewed under the LLD . A noted change was the gables , which changed the outside building appearance, which could be fixed easily. The HPC noted the next step would be for the White Oak Grove School group to request LLD from the HPC . Further UPC contact with the State at this time on reconsideration of their findings could be counter-productive . Stancil reported Lois Ann Hobbs had inquired about renovation and cleaning up the old Quaker Cemetery dating by the 1750 ' s at Mars Hill Baptist Church. They had questions about the acreage loss from five to one acres by 1985 and wanted to know if any information on this could be located to help them determine why it happened . The HPC noted concerns about that cemetery due to development in that area and noted that Tom Magnuson may have research . Stancil also reported that the Land Legacy Program is now scheduled for October 13th BOCC consideration, and that the personnel recruitment for a preservation planner has been completed with twenty- one applicants responding . Stancil noted that the position will devote half of their time to historic and agricultural preservation planning . Allison noted that in the past staff had notified the HPC of pertinent development involving historic sites included in the inventory . Stancil replied that could be done again once the new person was on board . . The UPC agreed it would be good to have this information . Stancil also noted that a press release asking for pictures for the manuscript is being drafted for publishing in the News of Orange, The Herald (Chapel Hill section) and possibly the Burlington Times . A publicity plan including how to solicit outside funding, what other sort of publicity about the manuscript could be done, and finalizing the contract for completion was discussed . The HPC agreed that staff should go forward with the press release for documentary photographs as soon as possible, and to finalize the publicity plan at the next meeting . AGENDA ITEM #7 : Joint Master Recreation and Parks Report Stancil gave an overview of the Executive Summary Report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group and asked for HPC questions and input on what areas of potential coordination the HPC might see with the Parks Council and the Joint Land Acquisition Program . For example, this board could be involved in protection of cultural resources in conjunction with a park site . The Chatwood area might be where a park in terms of open space might be able to augment the preservation of an adjoining cultural site . Connor noted that the Chatwood area adjoins the recently County acquired Duke Forrest Land possibly an access road into it. The HPC noted the site might appeal to the criteria and is on the market. It was noted there are cultural resource ruins in the Duke Forest site such as old mill sites including Cabe ' s Mill, which is in the State Park, and an adjoining graveyard . And that how these sites give a lot of character to open space sites for hikers . The idea of parks that include preservation of old farmsteads or historic sites was discussed . It was noted that a park in Rowan County has a combination of playing Lasted updated 09/30/99 2 Page 3 of 3 fields , open space , and a nineteenth century mill which is preserved within the park might be a good example for the Parks and Resource Land Council . In that idea, it was noted that in the Chatwood/Duke Forest area there is the Faucette Mill and the Old Trading Path as well . The HPC noted that something should be done to preserve the area . Stancil reported that Jennifer Miller from SHPO indicated the HPC could do a Local Landmark District based on her review of the HPC by- laws . The HPC requested information on how to proceed with this idea noting that it must be done with the willingness of the different owners . A suggestion was made for the landowners to approach the HPC with an idea of what they would like done as being the first step . It was noted that Chatwood is already on the LLD list . The different pros and cons of design guidelines were discussed . It was suggested to find out what the Town of Hillsborough has in place . The HPC asked about the connection with the Land Legacy Program . Stancil explained there are six sections for criteria for acquisitions, which are being folded into the LLP, including the criteria from the HPC Historic Resource Evaluation Form . The HPC discussed the northern part of the County relating the Little River Basin, noting there might .be some good undeveloped natural areas for consideration . Stancil noted a probability of why few areas are shown in the Natural Areas Inventory being due to much agriculture being done in the northern two townships . From a natural resource and cultural standpoint there are several areas of significance . AGENDA ITEM #8 : ADJOURNMENT Rich moved to adjourn the meeting . Allison adjourned the meeting at approximately 8 : 30p . m . Lasted updated 09/30/99 3 An Archaeological Context for St . Mary ' s Road Corridor, Orange County, North Carolina Linda F . Stine and Thomas Hargrove September 20th, 1999 lit 1 `: :to got vo of to *so It It 'AP �; . Y • • y go o got 4 to 00 It to too VAt • -� t '� ••�. , Ilk Nag 40 � , . -2• F T /'•• �•p two to a . . of _ . or or go 0 It J ; •` I:. r 0 c46 . �a I No IF too At ot ito a ION * too �� oev . go too • (� • / + Woo : OTC= : :C -2� 1,7. E r �� � "- �-,�- ;�. : � ' l go IF d I rIt Iggo low a go 0 fta-= 'Qa �ito' era .�✓acG' /// It .� Prepared for the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department , Hillsborough and the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History, Raleigh An Archaeological Context for St. Mary ' s Road Corridor, Orange County, North Carolina Linda F . Stine and Thomas Hargrove September 20th , 1999 i Prepared for the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department, Hillsborough and the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History, Raleigh Abstract An archaeological investigation of the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor was undertaken in the summer of 1999 as part of Orange County ' s long term goal of developing a St . Mary ' s Road Corridor ( S . R. 1002) Preservation Plan. To help develop -that plan archaeologists used North Carolina state inventory files, historical maps , documentary research, historical aerial photographs , and informant interviews to determine where prehistoric and historic sites might be located in the project area. The results of that research were correlated and numerous potential archaeological sites (exclusive of architectural survey sites) were marked for possible future field examination. Results from a concurrent architectural and National Register of Historic Places evaluation survey of the same project corridor were integrated with the archaeological data. A total of 23 archaeological sites were recorded through field reconnaissance of the project area. This included farmsteads, house sites , cemeteries, industrial sites, and abandoned roads . One area of focus was to search for possible correlation between the existing route of St . Mary ' s Road and the prehistoric and historic route of the Trading Path. This was accomplished and it was shown that much of the existing road does follow the path of that. old trail. Five bypassed portions of the old Trading Path/road have been identified through interpretation of 193 8 aerial photographs of the project area. Two of those segments have been verified in the field as obvious landscape features . The other three segments are not readily visible on the ground surface . i Acknowledgment The archaeologists Deborah Joy, Linda F . Stine, and Thomas Hargrove would like to thank the members of the St. Mary ' s community who helped with this project. Members of the Anderson, Gosling, and Lutz families, in particular, shared their, knowledge of local history, resources, and archaeological sites . We would also like to acknowledge the help and support provided by Orange County planner Don Belk and his assistant Carol Crawford in Hillsborough. We would also like to thank archaeologist Dolores Hall at the Office of State Archaeology in Raleigh for her guidance . Thanks also his remote sensing skills , as well as a day ' s to Dr. Roy S . Stine for volunteering fieldwork. The Geography Department, University of North Carolina at Greensboro provided equipment for Kristen Selikoff' s report graphic production. 9 This publication has been financed in part with federal funds from the National Park Service, Department of Interior and the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department, through the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior, the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation iDepartment, or the North Carolina Division of Archives and History, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation by the Department of the Interior, the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department, or the North Carolina Division of Archives and History. 11 Table of Contents Abstract i Acknowledgments Report : Introduction p . 1 Environmental Overview p , 3 Prehistoric Overview p , 4 Historic Overview p . l 1 Results of Site File Research p . 20 Results of Town Hall/Collector' s Survey p . 25 Results of Historical Map, Aerial Photographic , and Deed Research p . 25 Results of Archaeological Reconnaissance p , 32 Summary of Results and Recommendations for Future Research p . 40 Bibliography p . 54 4 Table 1 . St. Mary' s Road Architectural Survey Sites p . 22 Table 2 . Archaeological Sites , Reconnaissance Survey of St. Mary ' s Road p . 34 Figure 1 . Project Location Map p , 2 Figure 2 . Portion of the Great Trading Path Mosley 1733 p . 9 Figure 3 . Hillsborough and Environs, Mouzon Map 1775 p . 13 Figure 4 . George E . W. Tate Map of Orange County 1891 p . 19 Figure 5 . Portion of the Michael Synnott Grant of 1752 p . 27 Figure 6 . Portion of the John Dennis Grant of 1759 p . 29 Figure 7 . Portion of the 1938 Aerial Photograph depicting the Trading Path near Ayr Mount Plantation p . 33 111 An .Archaeological Context for St . Mary ' s Road Corridor, Orange County , North Carolina Linda F . Stine and Thomas Hargrove September 20th, 1999 . Introduction The archaeological reconnaissance survey of the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor ( SRI002) came about due to the desire of the people of Orange County to help record and preserve the historical and rural character of St . Mary ' s Road (Figure 1 ; Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department 1999) . Over the last decade a series of initiatives in Orange County instigated by citizens and local government officials have resulted in development of an Orange County Comprehensive Plan, including a Preservation Element (Jaeger et . al. 1996 ; see also Stancil 1999 and Environment and Resources Protection Committee 1998) . County residents repeatedly noted that the historic structures and viewscapes along historic St . Mary' s Road formed an important part of Orange County' s joint heritage . The St. Mary' s Road Corridor, tentatively extending from that road ' s intersection with N . C . Highway 70 eastwards to the Orange and Durham county lines, was recommended as a "proposed scenic corridor" (Jaeger et. al. 1996 : 3 ; Shifter 1996) . Orange County is using a landscape perspective to create a preservation plan for the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor (Belk 1999 ; Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department 1999) . A landscape approach is an integrative study of how people shape, and are "shaped by the land in dynamic cultural and natural contexts . A landscape approach in preservation guides interdisciplinary research and evaluation of historical properties . . . [and] fosters a regional perspective for evaluating and managing a project ' s historic properties" ( Stine and Stine 19970. 189) . In 1998 Orange County received a National Park Service Survey and Planning Grant through the Certified Local Governments program (administered by the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources) to help develop a St. Mary ' s Road Corridor Preservation Plan. The purpose of this plan is to "identify the important architectural, archaeological, and cultural features that distinguish the corridor as a historically significant landscape in Orange County" ( Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department 1999 : 2) . This preservation plan will be predicated on results of a separate architectural survey of the standing structures in the project area (Henry 1999) and on the results of this project, the archaeological investigation of the St . Mary' s Road Corridor (Belk 1999 ; Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department 1999) . As part of the archaeological investigation of the 'corridor, archaeologists were asked to accomplish three major tasks . Task one was to complete a background literature search of relevant North Carolina State archaeological site files , cemetery files, and the 1 CY �rrrrrm7-,T—,�—� Cool 1 ' , ` 4 4, , , 1 ' ` . 11 11 11a ' ' 4 , 11, , , , ' ' 1 ' i1 , 4 1 l t ' ' 1 1 ,t ;f • � ' < � < ' � ` : ' : ; , ' 1 , 1 , ' a , 1 1 ta ' 14 1 , connote ! )Ian 4owi u1 ; . � ° t ,- • + ' I ` t ' : 1 4 P a) CN moo' ' ' N c� '--+ f � 1 a r1 ' 1 1 , 1 ; : ; 1 , tt44 4 1 . �, ' `; i • 44444Ot�'02/ 1V33� J 1PV-s vg7d ` I p cis ' i. ! a ; 4 4 ' l , 1 ,, '4 4 ' ' , , t}y� Fit I got 1 , t , �414 1 , t 4 4 4 I a , t 1 1 ` W 3 ji p ' : ' : ; : g 1 ; : a ' ' ' I —^�---- - ' 1 ' l , 1 1 ; 1 ; 1 ; 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , t ; 1 1 t , 1 , t C MONSOONO C� N 14I414 . . 1 Pl PI .a O 1 11 ; t , 1 , C ota a) WOOD m _ ; 1 a O .0 A ' I , 1 ' , 1 , 1 , , , 1 , 1 ' m o Q O err : ; t' t9 : 1 ' l 4Y a , , ' N W . ' : _ a. 4�, 1 , < ; a . , . 1 1 b , . 1 ' . , I ; t �; 4 4tli� ; 1 , v� �„� ' ` ' ` \ 144 #i4 4 00 > IOU � ; to wii m W 4 ,1 ,a ' , ' 1 . . . . . . \ low' ` , ` ` ' ' ` ' ' ' ' ' ' J I1114 , ' ' 1 ; l ` V ta , 1 < LL `or I 'al i . . 1 , 1 1 1 I , I ,a 1 1 t 1 , 14441 1 ' a 4 l\ V rt ; ' t ' ' ` 1 1 t 1 I ` r ' It 1 ` 1 1 a , ' 111 ` a ; ' ' I ' ' Q14 //�� LZ ' ` ' ' < 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' , ` 1 ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' 1 <' I ' < ' ' ' ; `' ; 1 , 1 ' 114 < ' 1 Q ¢ LV 1 , a ' 1 t 1 • 7I ••• . I�' , , t , , , t 1 ` , , ` 444 'a t 11 ' I ; rl , ; a; 1 1 S4 ova 1 e ' : I; a , P ' ; : , 1 ; 111t a(' 1 : 1 : 1. 1 ' l 1 , 1 t ;64 ; ; , ' l 4 , 4 ' N 1 , ' , ` --_'_ __---- - �:' ' tom ' N �• .�:'.•:: 0 . a ; , , ::; . :: : :: r. O I . a . „ 1 a0 * 1 1 , O U V III : t cn . ; , i t 2 standing structure files. All project area landowners were also contacted and invited to a public Town Hall- style meeting to report their knowledge of archaeological sites in the area. They were asked to bring along any artifact collections in their possession so that the archaeologists could record the sites and identify their artifacts . Members of the Tar Heel Archaeological Society, a regional group of enthusiasts, were also contacted to see if they have any knowledge of archaeological materials in the project area. Task Two was to integrate the results of historic research, site file research, and informant interviews . Task Two included groundAruthing potential site locations as feasible during an archaeological field reconnaissance of the St. Mary' s Road Corridor. These data were used td create a context for understanding archaeological resources in the project area. Task Three was to correlate all of these data in a report with recommendations for future work. This report is the culmination of those tasks . Environmental Overview The project area is located in the rolling hills of the Piedmont physiographic province . The Piedmont is an uplifted plain dissected by myriad streams . These lands tend to have somewhat steep slopes around creek drainages . The major drainage in the project area is formed by the Eno River and its tributaries (e . g. , Buckwater, Little, and Strouds creeks) . The Eno tends to flow towards the east/southeast and eventually forms part of the Neuse River basin (Daniel 1994 : 2) . The project corridor does not cross the Eno River (Figure 1 ) . The historic placement of the road, however, was influenced by the location of that river and its tr 'butar ' s . St . Mary ' s Road is located about 1 , 500 .3 , 000 ft north of the Eno River near the western boundary of the project area. The project road trends more to the northeast in the eastern half of the project area (Figure 1 ) . ' At the intersection of Buckwater Creek and the Eno , found about 11 , 000 ft south of St . Mary ' s Road, the Eno takes a sharp turn to the south. Although the study corridor does not cross the Eno River, St . Mary' s Road does cross some of its tributaries . The approximately 6 . 4 mile stretch of St. Mary ' s Road Corridor under study crosses Strouds Creek about 0 . 7 miles east of the road' s intersection with N . C . Highway 70 . It passes over Little Creek about 1 . 5 miles to the east of that same intersection with Highway 70 . The corridor crosses an unnamed creek at about 2 . 7 miles east of that same intersection point with the highway. This creek flows into Buckwater Creek just south of St. Mary' s Road. Buckwater Creek tends to parallel the corridor to the east, until a point located about 4 . 7 miles east of the intersection of Highway 70 and St . Mary ' s Road. At this location Buckwater turns southwards towards the Eno River, after it is joined by another tributary (unnamed branch) that crosses St . Marys Road in the vicinity. One other branch (Finches) parallels St . Mary ' s Road to the south, extending from Buckwater Creek east across Pleasant Green Road . The project area falls within the Carolina Slate Belt and is geologically complex. The local topography is broken into a series of pronounced ridges, generally trending northeast to southwest and separated by deep, V-shaped valleys (Wilson and Carpenter 1975 : 13 ; Heron 1979 % 34-37) . The highest elevation in the project area reaches 724 ft above Mean Sea Level, found about 0 . 8 miles south of St. Marys Road at a point 4 miles east of Hillsborough (U . S . G . S . Hillsborough Quadrangle 1994) . The actual road corridor 3 tends to follow gentler slopes with rolling elevations ranging from about 490 to 590 ft above Mean Sea Level. The soils in this region are generally formed from materials resulting from weathering slate (Dunn 1977 : 4) . These soils include the Georgeville-Herndon- Tatum association, mostly found along the western half of the corridor. Dunn describes these soils as "Gently sloping to moderately steep , well drained soils that have a surface layer of silt loam and a subsoil of clay loam, silty clay loam, silty clay, and clay , on uplands" (Dunn 1977 : General Soil Map after p . 94, see also p . 5 ) . Lands closer to the Eno River tend to be part of the Tatum- Goldston association described as "Sloping to steep, well drained soils that have a surface layer of silt loam and slaty silt loam and a subsoil of silty clay, silty clay loam, and slaty silt loam; on uplands " (Dunn 1977 : General Soil Map after p . 94 , see also p . 5 ) . The remaining soils, north and east of the Eno River, tend to fall within the Georgeville-Herndon association of "Gently sloping to moderately steep , well drained soils that have a surface layer of silt loam and a subsoil of clay loam, silty clay loam, silty clay and clay; on uplands (Dunn 1977 : General Soil Map after p . 94 , see also PP • 4 - 5) • This region is composed of metasedimentary and metavolca.ruc rocks (e . g. , andesitic- dacitic tuffs) and lithics falling within the Mafic igneous complex (Wilson and Carpenter 1975 : Plate 1 ) . It also contains a wide variety of minerals . The region was mined historically . A crushed stone mine and a copper mine are listed as inactive mines in the 1970s . The copper mine was located north of St . Mary ' s Road, east of Pleasant Green Road . The crushed stone mining operations were located south of St . Mary ' s in the same vicinity, south and west of Buckwater Creek Wilson and Y ( Carpenter 1975 : Plate 3 ) . Historically the project area would have been covered in a mixture of hardwood forest ( e . g . , oaks , poplars, hickory, sweetgum, maple, beech, ash) and pine (e . g . , loblolly) (Hargrove 1982 : 4) . These forests would have provided a rich resource base for animals such as deer, beaver, .mink, rabbit, turkey, quail, opossum, raccoon, and even bison. Predators such as wolves, bobcat, bear, and mountain lions would have hunted these animals . Waterfowl and other birds, such as the passenger pigeon, would have also inhabited the region (Hargrove 1982 : 4 after Dunn 1977 ; Shelford 19749 Lawson in Lefler 1967) . This rich habitat also provided a fine resource base for human beings throughout much of the historic period . Prehistoric Overview Archaeologists have identified a series of general prehistoric cultural periods based on distinctions in material culture, site distribution patterns , and concomitant changes , in the cultural spheres of technology, economy, belief structures , and social organization. These cultural periods are discussed below. Paleo - Indian Period- At the end of the Pleistocene and beginning of the Holocene , the cool and dry climate and associated boreal tundra and spruce/pine forest was replaced by a cooler and wet environment with an associated deciduous forest cover (Anderson and O ' Steen 1992403 ; Daniel 1994 : 6 ; Goodyear et. al . 1989 : 19-23 ) . Early native groups would have adapted to these changing environmental conditions . The earliest recorded human 4 settlements in the North Carolina Piedmont are Clovis-period campsites dating from the close of the last Ice Age about 12 , 000 years ago . Fluted Clovis points are occasionally found in surface collections in the region, but no intact Clovis sites have been recorded in the North Carolina Piedmont . Clovis points have been found in Orange County, including one surface find from Cedar Grove, north of Hillsborough (Perkinson 1973 ,027) . The oldest excavated site in the North Carolina Piedmont dates from the Hardaway period, about 10 , 000 B . C . to 8 , 000 B . C . ( Coe 1964 : 57 ; Ward 19839, 61 ) . We know almost nothing about these earliest North Carolinians . They were probably nomadic hunters and gatherers, but we do not know whether these eastern Paleo4ndians were like their Paleo -Indian contemporaries in Missouri and Florida, who hunted now- extinct big game animals such as mammoth, ground sloth, and bison ( Steponaitis 1986 *0369) . Archaic Period- The following Archaic period is somewhat better known, but still the subject of debate because of scanty information about major aspects of subsistence and social organization. Overviews of the Archaic period have suggested that the nomadic or semi- nomadic hunter-gatherers, fishers, and shellfish collectors developed regional adaptations to the Holocene ' s warmer climates, the expanding deciduous forest (with its edible mast of acorns and hickory nuts) , and smaller game animals (such as the white-tailed deer) . Early and Middle Archaic settlements in the southeastern United States apparently tended to be small , temporary camps with little or no evidence of substantial dwellings or other structures (Steponaitis 1986 * 3719 Willey 1966 : 60 ; Caldwell 1958 ; Anderson and Hanson 1988 ; Anderson 1992 ) . The Early Archaic period in North Carolina is sub- divided into a Palmer phase (about 8 , 000 B . C . ) and a Kirk phase (7 , 000.6 , 000 B . C . ), both characterized by corner- notched points (Coe 1964) . Also present in the Piedmont but less common than the corner-notched points are projectile points in the "bifurcate tradition" (about 6, 900 to 5 , 800 B . C .) . These points feature basal concavities or notching (Daniel 1994 * 10) . Although sites with Early Archaic points will probably be found in several areas near the St. Mary' s Road, sites with intact Early Archaic remains tend to be very rare . The Middle Archaic period is represented by a variety of distinctive point types . The Stanly phase ( 6 , 000- 5 , 000 B . C . ) is represented by a square- stemmed point with a "Christmas tree" shaped blade . The Morrow Mountain phase (5 , 500- 4, 000 B . C .) is represented by a point with a distinctively contracting stem. The Guilford phase (4 , 000- 3 , 500 B . C . is represented by a cigar- shaped or spike4ike point (Coe 1964 ; Daniel 1994 * 114 2 ;Blanton and Sassaman 1989) . In Daniel ' s overview of Orange County ' s prehistoric settlements, Middle Archaic sites were common, but only ( so far) in disturbed surface or plowzone contexts (Daniel 1994 , 12) . The Late Archaic, or Savannah River period ( 3 , 500- 500 B . C . ) is characterized by large, triangular points with broad stems and by large bowls carved from soapstone (Coe 19646* 119) . In some parts of the Southeastern United States, the Late Archaic period saw a rise in regionalism and in the number of permanent long-term villages along major rivers and coastal areas ( Steponaitis 1986) . So far in the North Carolina Piedmont, the archaeological evidence for such changes is lacking , chiefly because we know of few if 5 any Late Archaic sites with intact evidence for subsistence and long-term settlement (Daniel 1994 : 13 ) . Researchers could expect to find Archaic -period sites in any of the area's level, well-drained areas, especially on the better- drained floodplains along Buckwater Creek, on the dry ridgetoes overlooking the floodplains of Buckwater, Strouds, and Little Creeks , and on the level knolls , saddles , hilltops, and ridgecrests of the uplands . Woodland Period- The Woodland period in eastern North America (beginning around 700 B . C . ) is . often marked by the appearance of farming , ceramics, the bow and arrow, and in some areas (although not in the project region) by the construction of burial and temple mounds . Significant dependence on maize farming, often considered one of the features of Woodland societies , may have come to the Piedmont as late as A. D . 1000 (Ward 1983 : 72- 73 ) . Hunting and gathering apparently played a more important role than farming (which played a supplementary role) during the Early Woodland period and most of the Middle Woodland period throughout most of the southeastern United States ( Steponaitis 19864379) . In most respects, the Early Woodland period in the Piedmont remains largely a mystery. In the North Carolina Piedmont, the first recognized Woodland period is the Badm phase, marked by sand-tempered, fabric - or cord-marked ceramics and large , often crude triangular points (Ward 1983 : 61 ) . Coe ( 1964) suggested that Badin dated from 500 B . C . to A. D . 500, but no radiocarbon dates are available for sites of this period. The successor to the Badin phase was the Yadkin period, whose ceramics resembled its predecessor' s , with occasional linear or check stamping added to the decorative motifs ( Coe 19646. 55 ; Ward 1983 : 61 - 63 ) . Another difference between the Badin pottery and the later Yadkin pottery is the latter's use of crushed quartz temper ( Coe 1964 : 30) . Coe ( 1964) dated the Yadkin phase from A. D . 500 to1200 , but the four published radiocarbon dates for Yadkin phase remains are much earlier, dating from 393 B . C . to 165 B . C . (Eastman 1994 : 26 - 27) . Daniel ( 19946. 14) has suggested that Orange County was not the scene of intensive use or settlement during the Early and Middle Woodland periods, but might have been primarily a hunting area for groups living outside of the area. Our view of the late prehistoric people of Orange County has been clarified by the results of major excavations carried out by the University of North Carolina in the Hillsborough vicinity, near the Trading Path' s Eno River ford. In the upper Eno River basin ( including our study area) , the late prehistoric period can be subdivided into a number of phases (Davis and Ward 1991 ) . The Haw River phase (A. D . 1000 - 1400) is represented by Uwharrie- like pottery with coarse sand or crushed quartz temper, net- impressed surfaces, and scraped interiors . The latter part of the Haw River phase (AD 1200 . 1400) has pottery that added some neck or lip decoration. Most of the Haw River phase settlements were apparently small, briefly occupied villages or hamlets made up of widely dispersed households, scattered throughout the valleys of the larger rivers and their tributaries . The Hogue site ( 31 OR233 ) in the "Occaneechi Bend" area near Hillsborough is an example of an early Haw River settlement , excavated by the Research Laboratories of Anthropology at UNC . The settlement pattern of the succeeding Hillsboro phase (A. D . 1400 - 1600) included relatively large , palisaded villages of perhaps 15 to 20 households, and smaller settlements or hamlets made up of dispersed 6 households located near valley margins or on nearby uplands . The Wall site (31 ORI 1 ) excavated at "Occaneechi Bend" by the RLA is an example of an early Hillsborough phase settlement . Although stone tool traditions are similar to the preceding Haw River materials, pottery decoration changes. Net impressed decorations are replaced by simple and check stamped ceramics (Daniel 19940. 15 ) . In the later part of this phase inhabitants appear to have dispersed into smaller, isolated farmsteads "along valley margins or nearby uplands of small tributary streams" (Daniel 1994 : 15 ) . A similar pattern of periodic Native American aggregation and dispersal is seen throughout the colonial era ( Stine 1990) . Based on these settlement patterns , researchers might expect to find small, dispersed hamlets of the Haw River or Hillsboro phases on the better-drained bottomlands near the Trading Path. Small campsites from any of the Woodland periods might be found on the better-drained floodplains, or on small, dry terraces or ridgetoes immediately overlooking the floodplams . Contact Period- During the sixteenth century Spanish explorers entered the foothills and mountains of North Carolina, opening the doors to European Native American trade . Piedmont Native Americans affected the European contest for hegemony, and offered raw resources (e . g . , peltry) in trade for manufactured goods (e . g . , beads) . Native Americans would soon form an important conduit for rich furs, hides, and meats in return for English, French, and/or Spanish trade goods . They would also supply warriors, language teachers and wives, and occasionally slaves to the Europeans . Different European and Native American groups would adapt to the growing mercantile system and would in turn adapt that system to their own cultural practices (Merrell 1989 ; Stine 1990) . Early historic records indicate that seventeenth- century Piedmont Native American groups were primarily Siouan speakers . Historically the names Occaneechi, Tutelo , Cape Fear, Sapon4 Shakor4 Eno , Saxapahaw, and Keyauwee are associated with distinct Siouan cultural groups ( Stine 1990a 15 ) . The last Indians in the study area were probably members of Siouan- speaking groups, including the Occaneechi, Shakori, Eno , and S issipahaw. The earliest recorded European visitor to this section of the Piedmont and its resident Indians was the explorer John Lederer, a QTerman doctor commissioned by the Governor of Virginia to look for a westward route to the Pacific Ocean in 1669 and 1670 . The Trading Path took. Lederer and other travelers through present- day Orange County. The existing right-of--way of St. Mary ' s Road follows or closely parallels that Great Path (Rights 1931 ) . It is important to note that Lederer was sent by Virginia Colony' s Governor Berkeley, who was also financially involved in the Indian Trade, to explore the region. This explains the explorer ' s interest in Native American trading practices . Lederer ' s somewhat exaggerated accounts of his travels suggests that he may have reached the vicinity of modern day Hillsborough. He describes Native American villagers who were used to "higgling , " described below: If you barely designe a home -trade with neighbour-Indians, for skins of deer, beaver, otter, wild- cat , fox, racoon, etc . your best truck is a sort of course trading 7 cloth, of which a yard and a half makes a matchcoat or mantile fit for their wear; as also axes , hoes , knives , sitars , and all sorts of edg ' d tools . Guns , poweder and shot , etc . are commodities they will greatly barter for (Alvord and Bidgood 1912 .9169470 as quoted in Stine 1990 : 18 ) . It is interesting that Lederer contrasted these "neighbor'' Indians to "further" Native Americans . These "further" groups were more interested in personal items for trade, such as "small looking glasses , picyures, beads and braclets of glass , knives, sitars , all manner of gaudy toys and knacks for their children" and other decorative and functional items ( Stine 1990018) . Lederer ' s accounts demonstrate that a well-established trading path was in existence , called the "Great Path, " the "Great Trading Path, " and/or the "Occaneechi Path" or "Occaneechi Trail" (Hargrove 1986 : 3742 ; Stine 1990 : 18 ) . It is unknown when this trade route was established, but it undoubtedly dates to prehistoric times . In the late seventeenth- century it extended for about 500 miles . It began in Piedmont Virginia (near modern Petersburg) in the vicinity of the trading post Fort Henry on the James River. From there it turned south and westward, eventually winding through the Eno River Valley (modern Hillsborough) , and then headed west by southwest to the villages of the Catawba Nation (near modern Rock Hill, South Carolina) (Merrell 1989 ; Meyer 1928 : 775 - 779 ; Stine 1990 : 184 9) . The importance of this trade route is suggested by the decision to illustrate the route on an early eighteenth-century map of the region (Figure 2) . Caravans of Virginia traders "with fifteen or more hired traders and sometimes more than one hundred pack horses loaded with trading goods brought from Europe each year traversed this route and brought back great quantities of light furs- beaver, otter, and muskrat" (Phillips 1961 : 177) 8 In 1670, the explorer Lederer stopped briefly at the village of the Shakori, which has been tentatively identified as the Jenrette archaeological site (31OR23Ia) in nearby Hillsborough (Davis and Ward 1991 * 45 ; see also Cross 1979) . The last Indian occupants of the upper Eno River basin are represented by the Jenrette phase (A. D . 1600 - 1680) and the Fredricks phase (A. D . 1680 - 1710) , both phases defined through RLA excavations near Hillsborough. Their investigations have shown that seventeenth- century Native Americans were again living in a small, palisaded village (Jenrette Site) along the Eno River (A. D . 1600- 1710) . These villagers seem to have preferred plain pottery, although some pots were decorated (brushed, or roughly smoothed, or corncob impressed, or simple stamped) . Jenrette phase sites tend to include European trade items such as beads , tobacco pipes , and gun-related artifacts (Davis and Ward 1991 : 45 ) . In 1676 , about six years after Lederer's visit, a number of refugee Indian groups in the north sought sanctuary near the Occaneechi Indian settlement along the Path on the Roanoke River (near the present boundary between Virginia and North Carolina) . These groups included the Saponi, displaced from their homes on the Rivanna and Otter Rivers to the north, the Tutelo from the upper Roanoke River, and the Conestoga. Warfare erupted between the Occaneechi and the Conestoga, and the latter were driven out . Later in the same year , the Saponi, Occaneechi and others were in turn driven out of the Roanoke River valley by a force of Virginians under Nathaniel Bacon, who opposed the Occaneechi control of the Trading Path ' s ford over the Roanoke River. The Occaneechi 8 lomllJL - — AM 1 t � � L Z • t ZA, �j t Z � ,L ! Prom. mom j l 1 , 1 1 l • moo L J! t 1- op S "Eft IL IL Abi i r. Byr o�fair t L : �. ! �i�r� � C , IL _ _ -L _...� . % - �A�i�ounr.rd ✓!cn✓ ! � y L ? Z"Nob �s� don �' `� Z � G j !. .� IN t �dollm � i lL ML ANIF omw L Jc i JL So of low ANON.L ! Am! . L L L L 1 L OL l ► k _ t - .!-. at 1 of mmmL All t — L L — _ m 1 CEOt l OL 0 Am Slow A -t .t — of = t L — i SEND momml • L _ JL — 2 y t 1 1 — — "L -L qlwml t t l MX — L oL ooft� Wilde moott lot ONES16 , WE � low _� I 1 - Acconeechv 1 1 � -t aft, t f - _ M- j111a , • o t IL — -� L t S to �jxg whL � F� fie. — MP — A.. t look,wee o t fd To�v st -!. ! "' r Z -` ! 1. Sho !. at � does . t , j- _ IL Amm. tomm. d0offiso Ll 1y Z . know Ammomm. t ML ' _ !- _ i — L 1 1„ L — � L l io0we Nf dommmus — L L , Amew �► L i _ . L AL �— L !" �. — —_ 1' .. L t L _ _ !. t _ Ammoo r — L L —� L L i J — — - l„ L — .. Sca o I CUi eaMIN . �t Figure 2 . Portion of the Great Trading Path (Mosley Map of 1733 , reproduced by Cumming 1966 : Plate VI) 9 resettled at the Trading Path' s Eno River ford in the vicinity of Hillsborough, where they were visited by European traders and explorers ( Swanton 1946 ; Stine 1990) . After Lederer, the next significant Piedmont explorer for local ethnohistory was John Lawson, who crossed the North Carolina Piedmont and Coastal Plain in the winter of 1700- 1701 . He wrote a detailed account of his journey ( Lefler 1967) . He describes a well- established system of trade among Indian groups as well as between Indian groups and various traders from the Carolinas and Virginia. Lawson stopped at the village of the Occaneechi, which has been identified as the Fredricks site (31 OR231 ) , occupying the same section of the floodplain where the Shakori village had stood near present-day Hillsborough (Lefler 19670606 Davis and Ward 1991 : 45 ) . Lawson noted that these piedmont Indians traded for both perishable items (e . g . , tobacco , rum, salt, vermilion) and non-perishables ( e . g . , cloth, clothing , hoes, kettles, beads, knives) (Lawson in Lefler 196732 -33 ; 201 ; see discussion in Stine 1990 : 27- 31 ) At the Fredricks site (A. D . 1680- 1710), European trade goods made up a much larger percentage of the artifact inventory than found at the preceding Jenrette phase site . This highlights the increased contact between peoples of Native and European descent along the Occaneechi Trail. Native pottery during the Fredricks phase is either plain (Fredricks Plain) or check stamped (Fredricks Check Stamped) but has sand temper as opposed to the earlier Jenrette phase use of crushed quartz temper (Daniel 1994416) . A palisade was used to defend the villagers at the Fredricks site ( Occaneechi village) . Wooden walls, however, could not protect the people from the twin eighteenth- century scourges of warfare and disease . This is underlined by the presence of two cemeteries that were discovered outside of the village walls . At a regional level the local population levels also declined, in part due to high mortality rates . Numerous Native American deaths can be attributed to contracting European diseases, as Native peoples had little immunity to those diseases . As a result the number of settlements also declined, and larger, nucleated settlements (possibly organized for defense) became the norm. These aggregated settlements tended to concentrate in the larger river valleys (Davis and Ward 1991 : 52 ; Stine 1990) . The widespread warfare , disease , and chaos of the period led to the consolidation of several Indian groups and decades of wandering in North Carolina and Virginia. The departure of the Indians from the North Carolina Piedmont can be inferred from occasional references in colonial records . In 1714 , Alexander Spotswood, the Lieutenant- Governor of Virginia, ordered the construction of Fort Christanna on the Meherrin River in southeastern Virginia. The fort, intended to guard the Virginia frontier from hostile Indians , was built near an early Indian reservation designed to house "friendly Indians" who could be used as a buffer against the hostile groups . Among the Indians who settled temporarily at the fort were Piedmont groups such as the Sapom the Tutelo , and the " Stenkenocks . " Around 1728 , William Byrd recorded that the " Sappony Nation" was " made up of the Remnant of Several other Nations, of which the most considerable are the Sapponys, the Occaneches, and Stenkenocks , who not finding themselves Separately Numerous, enough for their Defense , have agreed to unite into one Body, and all of them now go under the Name of Sapponys " (Miller 1957 : 128 ; see discussion in Stine 1990) . By 1730 , some of the Fort Christanna Indians had moved to Catawba territory in South Carolina, and some of them under the name of Saponi requested permission to settle with the Tuscarora on their Roanoke River reservation in 10 eastern North Carolina in 1733 . In 1743 , a trader visiting the Catawba nation in South Carolina found an amalgamation of many Indian refugee groups , speaking as many as 20 different languages . Among these refugees were such Piedmont groups as the Saura (or Sara) and the Eno , who lived in a . section of the Saura town. By the 1740s and 1750s, some of the Saponi and Tutelo had moved to Pennsylvania and New York (Beaudry 1979 : 4 - 7 ; Alexander 1972 : 96- 97 ; Stine 1990 ; Swanton 1946 : 200- 201 , 178479 ; White 1982 : 62 - 65 ) . Not all of the Native Americans living in the Piedmont after contact with Europeans chose to leave . Some families apparently remained on their farmsteads , some quietly intermarried with settlers of European and/or African descent ( Stine 1990) . Remnants of the Saponi apparently remained in North Carolina. In the 1750s a report to North Carolina' s Governor Dobbs stated that a number of Saponis were living on the plantation of William Eaton of Granville County (now Vance and Warren counties) . In 1762 the Saponi, including about 20 warriors , still lived in North Carolina near the Roanoke River and survived mainly through hunting . By the 1780s, some of them had moved to southeastern North Carolina to settle in the Robeson County vicinity (White 1982 : 67-68 , 80, 8243 ) . A number of Sapom were also living in southern Virginia during the last half of the eighteenth century. By the end of the eighteenth century, some of the Saponi had settled in northern Alamance and Orange Counties in a distinctive community called Texas or Pleasant Grove, which has survived into the late twentieth century (Hazel 1992 ) . i Historic Overview Interpretation of historic lifeways in the North Carolina backcountry is based on a combination of primary historic research ( e. g . , census records, diaries, tax records, maps) , secondary historic research (synthesizing overviews) , and the results of archaeological investigations ( e . g . , archaeological assemblages , changing site structure) . The historic overview that follows is divided into chronological sections ranging from initial . European/Native American contact to the modern era. Colonial Period- John Lawson ' s well-publicized journey and glowing descriptions of the flora, fauna, and Native customs of the Piedmont helped renew colonists ' interests in settling the interior of Carolina (Lefler 1967) . When they arrived they found that many of the Native Americans villagers encountered by Lawson and others had died or had dispersed to join other Native Americans outside the region (Stine 1990) . This left the sporadically spaced Native village horticultural lands open for exploitation. These previously cleared patches, especially along the Eno River and its tributaries ( floodplain soils) would have been readily turned by English, German, and Scotch-Irish plows . Late seventeenth- to early eighteenth-century in- migration was characterized by a slow trickle of settlers taking up their land grants . The Carolina Proprietorship system did little to promote colonization in the Piedmont . In the seventeenth century the English Crown had rewarded families of its supporters with huge land grants in the New World. They became known as the eight Lord Proprietors . Some of those grants included the Carolina Piedmont (Powell 1989 : 53 - 55 ; 84- 86) . Although the Crown later induced the . majority to sell back their grants to England in 1728 , Lord Proprietor Carteret, and later 11 1 his son, Lord Granville, refused to sell . In the 1740s the King ordered that those lands be surveyed so there would be no legal question as to the validity of colonists ' land holdings in the region. Various attempts at this survey occurred throughout the 1740s to 1770s. These lands became known as the Granville District , which measured about sixty miles wide (Figure 3 ) . Within these lands "two-thirds of the people of the province and an even larger percentage of the wealth" was centered (Powell 1989 : 93 ; see also Lautzenheiser 1990 : 15 ) . [This district continued to issue its own land grants until the American Revolution, when the property was confiscated (Powell 1989 : 94) ] The Granville "Estates offered 640 acres for three shillings and small quitrent" (Teague 1995 : 10) , and colonists recognized this bargain. In 1748 less than "20 taxable families lived on the enormous tract of land which now makes up Orange , Alamance , Caswell , Person, Chatham, and parts of Rockingham, Guilford, Randolph, Wake, and Durham counties" (Hargrove 1982 : 8) . By the 1740s and 1750s European and American immigrants brought their varied cultural heritage into the Piedmont . A few arrived by way of the Great Trading Path from Virginia and/or South Carolina; some came by way of connecting paths from the east or Tidewater; but most came down the "Great Philadelphia Wagon Road, through the Roanoke Gap in western Virginia, and on into the Yadkin River Valley" (Mattson 1996 : 3 see also Anderson 199U 84 9 ; Hargrove 1982 : 8 ) . Few of these early settlers were of African descent . It is estimated that from 54 % of the households in 1755 included slaves (usually less than ten per household) (Mattson 1996 : 40 see also Anderson 1990 : 55 ) . Early settlers were primarily of German, Scotch-Irish, and/or English descent . Early immigrants included many Quakers . The Quakers originally came from England, Scotland, and Ireland . Quaker communities in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and eastern North Carolina began "meetings" in the Carolina Piedmont in the 175 Os- I760s (Teague 1995 Vol 1 - 12) . Although some of the primary documentary records from the 1752- 1781 period were lost or destroyed records pertaining to the Granville Land Grants were retained (Weeks 1984) . These grants and occasional plats , combined with information provided by area Quaker meeting notes, helps create a picture of initial Euroamerican settlement in the St . Mary' s Road area. Mr . A. B . Markham of Durham spent many years piecing together land grant boundaries covering the 1743 - 1810 period (Markham 1973 ) . The earliest holding in the project area belongs to Abraham Nelson, recorded in 1751 . Of course the date of a grant does not necessarily reflect if or when a family chose to inhabit their holdings (Engstrom 1983 ) . Markham depicts about 14 land holdings dispersed across the Great Trading Path (close to the route of this pro 'ect ' s six plus miles of St . Mary ' s Road) . It is interesting that these holdings tend to be shaped as rectangles , with the long axis north/south. Many of the deeds are referenced to known landmarks such as the Great Trading Path, and/or to corner distances from the various loops of the Eno River . ( See the results section following for additional discussion of these grants . ) The area ' s increase in population is reflected in the mid- eighteenth-century creation of Orange County. The County was initially formed as an administrative unit in 1752 , from portions of Granville , Johnston, and Bladen counties (Anderson 1990021 ; Mattson 1996 : 2 ) . The county seat recognized in 1754 was called Corbinton, centered on about 400 acres located where the Great Trading Path crossed the Eno River (Mattson 1996 : 2 - 3 ) . By 1766 the county seat ' s name was officially changed to Hillsborough. A 12 IBM �O Wool toot do . _ftma ` .may _ lotS NP W S t a TawaIr / } Dm �,w�.."A �y �,,��•f/�ti ram !� c � �� � C�y : r• :f � � ,dow t C of �' t 'M;L C 1 .Jsru. M.�44nd � 4 >/ t1 1 � . ol rr My ` �: �..Ito ay :cores Oak i moot 61 1 `I f It �Q olf too � f e I It i -� 1 M Ilk rJA - r Imp �. Moo / '/ ; "alftol r R Frr! rS . It `d+ �� Y: uQlill> Miles 6S) � to a ! ) e �ree . ...�� e.,.. . 3 w :S vo - so 40 �O 7, o no.Y lhnorl�►Rc� rJ'ylrwrJ l J ruva. . ►1.{r .rn./ llvrh, //u-r. �1' xJrn f7ir� . l'brrt Arht hd arutr. frdnrtr✓.1/y� la.�ij� 1t iY Figure 3 . Hillsborough and Environs m 1775 (Mouzon 1775 reproduced m Cumming 1966 : Plate VIII ) . 13 year later approximately 4 , 000 "taxables" are listed as living in the area (Mattson 1996 : 2- 3 ) . In a few short years the Piedmont had more residents than the tidewater "down east . " Within the Granville District "two -thirds of the people of the province and an even larger percentage of the wealth" was centered (Powell 1989 * 93 ) . Graft and inequities in the Carolina colony concerning taxation and representation, largely between landowners in the Tidewater and farmers in the Piedmont , led to the Regulator movement . This movement was centered in the Hillsborough area. "Regulators" voiced their disapproval of government policies by refusing to pay taxes, but their grievances were not quickly or strongly redressed. In part to address the social and economic inequities between the two regions , and in part to disperse the Regulator ' s power, the British government had Carolina divide the larger administration units of Rowan and Orange counties into smaller counties . ( Orange County once contained an estimated 3 , 500 square miles, as opposed to its current 398 square miles . See Dunn 1977 : 1 ; Mattson 1996 : 2 . ) As a result new counties were formed, and new administrative regions were created (Hargrove 1982 : 8 - 11 ; Mattson 1996 : 9 ; Powell 1989 : 146 - 159) . Orange County was reduced in size as the northern third of the original bounds were taken by creation of Caswell ( later divided into Caswell and Person counties) and the southern third by formation of Chatham County. The narrow strip along the western border was incorporated into Guilford County in 1770 (Lefler and Wager 1953 : plate facing p . 1 ) . Hillsborough remained a focal point for the Regulator Movement . Government measures to placate Regulators and their supporters were to little avail and by 1771 North Carolina Governor Tryon sent armed troops to put down a brewing rebellion. In the Battle of Alamance ' on May 16 , 1771 , the Governor' s forces prevailed. Within a few short years the localized Regulator political movement would blend with a generalized Colonial dissatisfaction with taxation and representation. That wide- spread political movement culminated in the American Revolutionary War . Historic maps of the era such as the Collet Map of 1770 (Cumming 1966 :Plate . VII) and Mouzon' s 1775 map (Figure 3 ) illustrate the increasing density of settlement . The Great Trading Path is still depicted, but with major roads extending from its axis . These roads connected numerous small communities . For example, these maps depict the . early Quaker communities of Cane Creek (now the Snow Creek area of Randolph County) , established in 17510 and its "daughter" meetings of New Garden (near present- day Guilford College in Greensboro ) , established in 1754 ; and the Eno Meeting (Hillsborough vicinity) , first settled circa 1751 - 1761 (Engstrom 1983 ; Teague 1995) . Newcomers in the piedmont region tended to settle in clusters along major transportation routes. These settlements typically consisted of somewhat dispersed farmsteads joined together by a common religion and shared place of worship . The German Reformed settlers clustered in the eastern portions of the central piedmont (e . g . , modern day Great Alamance Creek area south of Burlington) ; the Quakers to the north (e . g . , Eno near Hillsborough) , south (e . g . , Cane Creek) , and west (e . g. , New Garden) and the Scotch Irish Presbyterians in between (Engstrom 1983 ; Keller et. al. 1900 * 44 Lautzenheiser 1990 : 15 ; Teague 1995 ) . These early transportation routes included waterways and roadways . Area waterways were not routinely navigable , and were even less so after construction of , numerous mill dams from the mid- eighteenth century onwards . Eighteenth- century land 14 transportation was often difficult, as the Carolina roads were sometimes flooded, often muddy, and occasionally blocked by fallen trees . Travelers arrived by horseback, "long shanks" (on foot) , or carted goods by wagon (Powell 1989 *013 & 141 ; see also Mattson 1996 : 5 - 6) . This did not stop people from traveling . Quakers are reported to have visited widely dispersed meetings to encourage each other to hold firm in their beliefs (Engstrom 1983 ; Teague 1995 ) . . In 1759 two new roadways were under construction in Orange County. These included a route leading from Hillsborough eastward to Kinston and one from Hillsborough northeast to Halifax County (Anderson 19900, 22) . Residents prior to 1759 had been dependent upon the Trading Path for the primary route through the eastern portion of the region. The Sauthier Map of Hillsborough ( Sauthier 1768 ) shows a few major routes leading from the town. These roads include the southern route to the "Quaker Settlement" (e . g. , Cane Creek) , and the Road to "Cross Creek" (e . g. , now Fayetteville) just to its east. Just a bit further east, the "Road to New Bern and Cape Fear" is observed heading south across the Eno River beginning south of a horseracing field (once the site of Occaneechi village) . The last major road depicted near the Eno River is the "Road to Halifax" heading almost due east, placed just north of the Eno River. This route apparently paralleled the old Trading Path route just east of town, in the vicinity of the oval racetrack and Ayr Mount plantation. Near Ayr Mount the Halifax road joins the Trading , Path (west of the modern intersection of St . Mary ' s Road and Highway 70) . At the 1768 intersection a homestead and probable tavern is depicted (southeast of the intersection) . This would have been the home of William Few, father of Regulator James Few. James Few was one of the local residents who was actually hanged for his political membership and subsequent rebellion (Nash 1953 : 82) . (It should be noted that a modern map depicts the "Old Halifax Road" running east from Hillsborough' s King Street, and "The Old Indian Trading Path" diverging in the vicinity of the intersection of King and modern Cameron Avenue, Hillsborough. See Dula 1979 * 110) . Most of the families that headed south or west into the North Carolina Piedmont did not arrive alone , but brought along friends and/or kin (Engstrom 1983 : 8 ) . For example, William Few ( Senior, d . 1794) headed south from Maryland in the mi& 1750s accompanied by two friends, to examine the Eno area . His son William (d. 1828) wrote an account of he and his family' s early years in the Eno community (Jones 1881 ; see also Engstrom 1983 : 74 and Nash 1953 : Appendix C) . The elder Few hoped to find lands where he could improve his production of tobacco and thus his family ' s cash flow. At the time of their move ( 1758) William Few (the younger) describes the landscape of their new 640 acres bordering property shown by Markham ( 1973 ) as being in the vicinity of Little Creek. Before moving his household the elder William Few hired a local to construct their new home ( likely log , see Mattson 1996) . The younger William Few writes that his family "found a mild and healthy climate and fertile lands, but our establishment was in the woods and our first employment was to cut down the timber and prepare the land for cultivation. My father had taken with him only four servants [ slaves ?] , who were set to work, and every exertion was made to prepare for the ensuing crop" (younger William Few, in Jones 1881 * 343 ) . The Few family removed themselves closer to Hillsborough when William Few purchased a farm along the Trading Path in 1764 . This farm was on land that later 15 7 became part of Ayr Mount plantation. It appears to be shown on the Sauthier Map of 1768 as a structure with two outbuildings and at least two hedged or fenced reef angular fields . It is clear that crops such as wheat, barley and oats were successfully produced on the farmstead (Nash 19530, 85 ) . The Few farm appears to have done double duty as a household and as an ordinary (Jones 1881 : 344 ; see also Nash 1953 : 83 ) . It was common for eighteenth- century area inhabitants to supplement their subsistence farming with income derived from milling (e . g . , saw mills, grist mills) , from running taverns (e . g . , a room or two at your house) , or from other possible cash making endeavors (e. g . , blacksmithing, raising some cash crops) (Anderson 1990 : 24 ; Mattson 1996) . William Few and his brother, for instance, ran a saw and grist mill on the Eno (Nash 1953 * 82) . Michael Synnott (aka Synodd, Sennitt, etc. ) operated a mill to the east (now modern Durham County, vicinity West Point on the Eno ) early on, and also operated one of the earliest ordinaries or taverns at one of his residences . He is listed as applying for a license to run a tavern in 1753 , at a house described as found along the Great Trading Path (Anderson 1990 : 24) . During the Colonial Period the St . Mary ' s area would, have been sparsely settled, although the lands found along the Great Path were quickly purchased in the 1750s and 1760s (Markham 1973 ) . Perusal of the relevant land grants indicates that only some of these properties were actually the seat of the main "plantation" (i. e . farmstead) . Few of these farmers would have owned slaves . Many would fit the American idealized vision of independent small farmers, the solid yeoman backbone of the Colonial Era (see Mattson 1996) . In the St . Mary ' s project area one would anticipate finding evidence of small log cabins placed in clearings close to the Great Trading Path . , or on off- shoot paths leading from that road to important public places such as local mills . Homesites would probably be located on moderate to well- drained soils near a good drinking water source (well, spring, stream, river) . Each of these farmsteads would also have held a few outbuildings such as a barn and/or granary and/or a corncrib . The material culture from the earliest colonial settlements may scanty,y, as opposed to that found at house sites built after the Revolutionary War . Roads were often difficult to traverse due to poor conditions, and the i local county seat of Hillsborough was not yet a flourishing center of regional trade . William Few (the younger) best describes this period as a time when "There were no poor laws nor paupers. Of the necessities of life there were great plenty, but no luxuries" ( in Jones 1881 : 344) . Hillsborough was then described , as a "small village , which contained thirty or forty inhabitants, with two or three small stores and two or three ordinary taverns" (Few the younger in Jones 1881 : 344) . It was not until Scotch merchants came to town that European goods became readily available (Jones 18816, 344) . Antebellum Period- . With the turn-of-the -century the Scotch merchants of Hillsborough were able to bring more European- made goods into the region. They also brought more money and subsequently choose to build places like Ayr Mount Plantation. This 1815 brick, illa was a far cry from the more typical single or double pen log cabin Palladian T-plan v cut out of the forest . William Kirkland ' s plantation was found about a mile east of town on the old William Few property. Kirkland was part of a burgeoning class of planter- merchants . He raised corn, cattle , sheep , and other grains on his property (Mattson 16 1996 : 13 ; 27) . Descendent John Kirkland did inherit William' s slaves of African descent, numbering 20 in .an 1836 inventory ( Graham Papers #955 ) . These slaves consisted of nine women, one female child , and ten men. Six of the individuals were listed as "old" such as "old Betsy" and one individual, Joe , had his occupation listed (blacksmith) . The majority of area Piedmont landowners were not dependent upon slave labor. Those families owning a small number of slaves tended to share living and work space, albeit the slaves ' needs would have been subordinate to the landowners ' . In 1790 just over 20 % of the population of Orange County were enslaved (Anderson 1990 : 55 ; Mattson 1996 : 4) . This ratio increases to 27% by 1800 (Anderson 1990 . 55 ) . In later years small Piedmont farmer slave owners increasingly constructed separate quarters when feasible . This reflected a general cultural shift in attitudes about race and slavery (Anderson 1990 : 55 - 57 ; Beck 1989 ; Kellar et . al. 1990 ; Powell 1989) . Slavery was important in the study region, but "Seventy percent of the county' s free population held no slaves at all in 1860 . Of the slave holders , only seven percent were of the planter class, possessing 20 or more slaves, and over half owned fewer than five slaves " ( Mattson 1996 : 10) . In the years prior to 1850 the majority of Orange County farm laborers lived on "small to medium- sized farms" (Mattson 1996 : 10) . After that period over "three- quarters of the county " s farms contained less than 100 acres, while just a handful comprised more than 500 acres" (Mattson 1996 : 10) This emphasis on small to medium- sized farmsteads is echoed in the size and range of manufacturers in the region. In the 1860 census the majority of enterprises were small and offered support services for the region' s agricultural sector . Related laborers ' included grist millers, blacksmiths , wagon makers , wool carders, and hide tanners (Mattson 1996 : 11 ) . Part of this trend towards increasing numbers of small farmsteads in the region is related to the transformations in the tobacco industry. The market for tobacco was enlarged with the development of the North Carolina railroad system in 1856 . This rail road line extended for about 223 miles from Raleigh through the piedmont to Charlotte (Mattson 1996 : 18). This offered easier market access for agriculturists and for manufacturers . Bright Leaf tobacco was increasingly grown in the last decade before the Civil War, and became an ever- more important cash crop in the region (Mattson 1996 : 20) . On the other hand, Orange County farmers were slow to give up planting their own subsistence crops, and cash crops remained a supplement to the yearly harvest (Mattson 1996 : 20 - 21 ) . The next few years of the American Civil War brought increasing changes in the Piedmont . Agrarian methods had to be adapted due to labor shortages brought about through Emancipation, warfare, and disease . In the St . Mary ' s Road area one would expect to continue to find saw and grist mills dotting the banks of the Eno River. The Great Trading Path would have a different name , such as the Halifax Road and/or the Oxford Highway, but its route would remain similar to that of the earlier Indian Trading Path. More and more lands would probably be cleared to plant an increasing number of cash, as opposed to subsistence, crops . Log cabins and outbuildings would continue to be constructed, but the use of frame construction would increase (Mattson 1996) . 17 U Postbellum Period - Much of Orange County ' s lands remained rural in character after the Civil War. Many Piedmont agriculturists became involved in the developing system of farm tenancy. This was due in part to post-war labor shortages and cash shortages . Numerous farm families found themselves involved in the emerging system of either cash or share renting farmland . Governmental incentives, single- cropping cash crops like tobacco and a labor shortage led to development of the furnishing system of agriculture . Basically a farm family worked land for a share of the profits after the sale of the crop, or for a cash rent . Many families became beholden to local stores, as they would purchase seed , staples, and fertilizer with credit from the next season' s crop sales . Local furnishing merchants often ended up carrying the small farmer ' s debt from one year to the next . As a result, many rural people lost their homes and their possessions. Another result of these practices was the continued decimation of farmlands. Tenants would over-farm their lands to plant as much of the cash crop as they could. Mono -cropping, however, decreased soil fertility and increased erosion, and thus decreased crop yield . Farmers would purchase fertilizer on credit and thus the cycle of dependency would continue ( Stine 19890 see also discussion in Mattson 1996 : 3540) . During the postbellum years the landscape in the St . Mary ' s Corridor can be partially extrapolated from the Tate Map of 1891 (Figure 4) . The mapmaker appears to have emphasized the locations of the numerous small churches, schools, and mills, as well as other natural features such as streams and mountains . Tate only depicts three mills in the vicinity of the project area. All are on the Eno River and they are Berry ' s j Mill, Cole ' s Mill , and Cox ' s Mill (Figure 4) . ( See research results section below for discussion of mills . ) One school is listed in the area, that of Sugar Hill . This building, however, is found north of the St. Marys Corridor, and west of New Sharon Church Road, and thus outside the project area (Vanatta, Brinkley and Davidson 1921 : 1918 Soil Map) . New Sharon Church and Saint Mary ' s Chapel are found on the Tate Map . St . Mary ' s Chapel is listed as Episcopalian. One shop (Jackson' s Shop) is shown about mid- way east on St . Mary ' s Road (here called Oxford Highway) . This location would put the shop east of modern New Sharon Church Road, directly across from S . R. 1595 . The function of this shop has yet to be ascertained. The fact that only a few homeowners are listed along St . Mary ' s Road (Turner, Hill , Douglass, Wilson) is interesting . It is clear j that many more people were living in farms along the project corridor during this time period (e . g . , Jaeger et*. al. 19969 Mattson 1996) . Tate may only have shown the farmhouses of people he actually knew, or only mapped those who paid him to do so , or perhaps only mapped farm owners ' homes, as opposed to those of farm tenants . The St. Mary ' s corridor would have been dotted by numerous small farmsteads . These farmsteads could have had frame, log, or occasionally brick structures usually underpinned by fieldstone piers and/or walls, brick piers , or even wooden block supports (Henry 1999 ; Mattson 1996) . The typical house style found during the postbellum years is the vernacular farmhouse form . variants of one story "hall and parlor" and two story "I house" types (Mattson 199629 - 31 ) . Numerous outbuildings would still have been needed to house grain, hold stock, and store farming equipment . 18 Plot 0 ! OW a If 0 'MILL . . ' ! ; amp. �.�'1_ . McCULLOCN a: H. a to to e,cVia ayS Cre ft it / � ' rat o - . South River 11• L Moodsgot It -� Little - -- - 0 to Mai rIF 9 SAW 'M .� F. 1t,•//c •%,, :c . �. ♦ f Mai 1� _ ` ft Most U ( I of or tall ORANGE 4C4D�11/ Y IMF piaS NEW SHARON CH. t t Jl : .i . l rcc Iul/ 00 � ARY j apt` c 1 i � SAINT � 'S Cti:�P 'EL i ,� • , Ea: OLD QiiAKi R .C. N. , / 01 , east, G . Lc r1v J9 (i , 1)011dlnss too r�oo * ♦ 41 No Mot , too SUSAliIHILL S, H, ' ~ - �rr•-;.: •iIr '.� ',ill . �, � go, f � . f/.' •. / 0i / / •:�f ` '. firs/ iY' aft to loot to 9 a / to Motion M Co. too IV 6 MILL f of se ;i ^ �i vZi I L ` r . ! i ! . : � , Ii � ric; IVat 0 •1. •1: 1"i , /c /• .,t Ut LOW `/—i • ' . _ Y '°' _rJ'''• ry j fROSS ROAD 11 Post World War II Period- In the ensuing decades following World War II changes in agrarian practices instigated by government farm agencies came to fruition. Falling cash crop prices , erosion, pests , and blights had underlined the need for change in piedmont agricultural practices . Some farmlands were consolidated into larger holdings as myriad small tenant and independent farmers turned to industrial occupations in neighboring towns and cities . Some farms remained the same in size , but changed the manner in which they utilized their acreage . Machine power came to replace mule and muscle on the remaining farms (Mattson 19060200 Stine 1989) . Farm labor was still needed . One resident of the Caldwell area recalls that her "Papa nearly always had hired help . A cousin of Mama ' s . . . worked for him for awhile . he lived in the house with us, shared meals, and helped with all the chores" (Holloway 1983 : 50) . Many family members and their occasional full- or part-time hired laborers began to emphasize livestock production. Government4ed initiatives helped change the face of the Piedmont as some farmers turned from cash crop production to running dairies . These dairies necessitated a transformation in outbuildings, and large dairy barns and feed silos began to dot the landscape . As prices in dairy products rose and fell some farmers turned to poultry farming (Mattson 1996 : 20 ; Stine 1989) . A clear need for sawyers would have been felt when much of the croplands and forests were turned to pasture in the St. Mary' s vicinity . Although area residents had been dealing with the mixed pine and hardwood forests of the Piedmont since historic settlement , some of the twentieth- century farmers, like their predecessors , would have ' preferred to allow experts saw their lumber . Twentieth- century saw mills were often driven by tractor engine and/or by steam engine . They were dangerous affairs . As one woman recalls "I never went very close to the sawmill when it was running : they did blow up sometimes , and the men running them would be hurt " (McBroom in Holloway 1983 : 51 ) . These sawmills were usually placed "near a creek so there would be water close by" to keep the wood- fire fed, steam boiler running (McBroom in Holloway 1983 : 51 ) . The cut logs would be brought to the milling site by wagon (McBroom in Holloway 1983 : 51 ) . Some of the sawyers had a special "dressing machine " for cutting special flooring , weatherboarding, and ceiling pieces (McBroom in Holloway 1983 : 51 ) 0 i Results of Site File Research Archaeologists have reviewed the preservation element of the Orange County preservation plan (Jaeger 1996) , overviews of Orange County architectural surveys (Mattson 1996) and countywide archaeological surveys (Daniel 1994 ; Samford and Davis 1999) . These sources offer a good general overview of the region that were used to help ' prepare the report ' s prehistoric and historic overview sections . North Carolina State archaeological, architectural, and cemetery site files were examined for specific information on previously recorded St . Mary ' s Road cultural resources . Archaeological Site Files- Over 400 archaeological sites have been recorded in Orange County (Daniel 1994 ) . Only one archaeological site ( 31 Or228 ) was previously recorded in the St . Mary' s project area, a light lithic scatter located south of the Eno River (Davis and Ward 1983 ) . 20 The cultural period of origin for the flakes could not be determined . This site is really outside of the project boundaries (Figure 1 ) . No other archaeological surveys had been reported in the St . Mary ' s project area. An archaeological survey for Cate ' s Ford Access Area for the Eno River State Park in 1982 ( found south of the St . Mary ' s Road project boundaries) revealed a thin scatter of Archaic and Woodland period artifacts along a ridgetop ( 31 Orl 76 ; Hargrove 1982 : 27) . A few additional lithics of undetermined origin were also recovered from a severely eroded portion of the Park (Area 1 , ARC- Or4 ) . In 1940 Joffre L . Coe recorded the presence of two sites located at the confluence of Buckwater Creek and the Eno River. Site 31 Orl2 , found in the northwest corner of that intersection, contained "potsherds, projectile points , a lead shot, and an atlat" fragment (North Carolina Archaeological Site Form, on file at the Office of State Archaeology in Raleigh) . The site he recorded immed iately ately to the east (31 Or14, northeast corner of the confluence) yielded "Sherds, projectile points, blades, [a] soapstone sherd, abraiding stone, chips, cs (chipped stone) drill frag(ment) " (North Carolina Archaeological Site Form, on file at the Office of State Archaeology in Raleigh) . Based on these results, combined with the results of a general countywide archaeological assessment (Daniel 1994 : 95 -97), it is anticipated that prehistoric sites will be found in the vicinity of the St. Mary ' s Corridor. Adapting Daniel ' s predictive model to the St. Mary ' s Project, archaeologists can divide oject area into three zones of differing site probability for prehist the pr oric sites : Zone I , with the highest density of sites and the highest probability for intact, subsurface remains , takes in inhabitable floodplains and terraces or ridges just above floodplains . In the St. Mary ' s Road vicinity, this zone would parallel the Eno River and some of its larger creek tributaries . The site- filled Occaneechi Bend at Hillsborough is a good example of a Zone I area. Some of the better-drained floodplains along Buckwater Creek and areas adjacent to Little Creek and Strouds Creek might qualify as Zone I . Zone II , a medium probability area, takes in ridges and hilltops within one kilometer (about 3 , 300 feet) of the main drainage channels . Prehistoric sites are common in this area and a few sites might have intact, subsurface remains, although these remains will not be as common as in Zone I . The Zone II areas along St . Mary' s Road take in most of the corridor from Hillsborough as far east as the intersection with New Sharon Church Road , Zone III , the low probability area, consists of other upland areas, mostly ridges and hilltops more than a kilometer (about 3 , 300 feet) from main drainage channels . Most of these sites are low density lithic sites dating to the Archaic period in plowzone or surface contexts . Most of the St. Mary ' s study area runs through these upland inter- riverme areas . Daniel ( 1994 : 95 - 97) does mention the historic archaeological potential for these zones of relative archaeological site probability. He states that one could expect mill sites in those portions of Zone 1 which contain selected criteria for mill and mill dam placement (e . g . , strong stream gradient , fieldstone for construction) . A number of historic mills were once "seated" along the Eno River and some of its tributaries, such as Stroud ' s Creek ( see below) . The hilltops and ridges of Zone II , the upland areas within about 3 , 300 feet of the main drainage channels, are expected to contain occasional historic farmsteads and/or cemeteries (Daniel 1994 : 95) . The probability of discovering historic sites in the remaining uplands (Zone III) is not specifically discussed (Daniel 21 19940. 97) . One anticipates that diverse types of historic sites will also be found in those upland areas that were traversed by historic road networks and that had access to water. Architectural Site Files- The results of countywide standing structure surveys are reported in Mattson ( 1996) and Jaeger (et. al. 1996) . Past Orange County inhabitants have used the media of wood, brick, stone , and/or concrete to construct various homes, churches, schools , factories , and other facets of the built environment . A total of 13 architectural sites ( standing structures) were recorded during a 1991 - 1992 survey of the unincorporated portions of Orange County within the St . Mary' s Corridor (Figure 1 ) . These survey sites were recently revisited during the architectural survey part of the St . Mary ' s Road Preservation Project (Henry 1999) . The architectural historian added 6 additional survey sites to - the North Carolina Architectural Survey Files ( Figure 1 ) . The following discussion draws upon his report (Henry 1999) . The architectural sites are summarized in Table 1 following : Table 1 . St. Mary ' s Road Architectural Survey Sites Survey # Name Remarks N/A St. Mary' s Chapel 1859 Gothic Revival, brick Or652 Gosling Log House pre- 1825 single pen Or657 St. Mary ' s School log version 1840 , replacement 1931 brick Or658 Latta Farm c . 1886A 915+ frame house destroyed 1996, 1920s farm outbuildings extant Or659 Hill Farm 1780s+ ; c . 1900 - 1910 additions on Triple A I-house Or662 Fox Hill Farm c . 1900- 1920 frame, farmstead Or665 Temple of Truth Holiness Church c . 1915 ; was Flat Rock A. M.E . Or673 Caine -Roberts Farm c . 1873 Triple A I -house and farm complex Or692 Sunnyside 1848 + , 4- square house Or693 Bacon Farm c . 1920 early dairy farm, Bungalow house Or710 Maple Hill 1820s log w/many later frame additions; Jacob Jackson Farm Or718 Walker Farm 1814+ remodeled Triple A I house by 1910 Or 1002 G . W. Walker Farm 1900+ dairy and chicken farm Orl 133 Watkins-Jones House c . 1900- 1910, Triple A I -house Or1450 Webb Farm early 19 '' c . , single pen log w/2 story frame addition Or1451 Dunlop House c . 18864885 , two - story frame w/center chimney Or1452 Freeland House Triple A frame w/outbuildings , c . 1910- 1920 Or 1453 Jacobs Farm Triple A frame w/outbuildings, c . 1890- 1910 Or 1454 Hudson House Bungalow frame house w/barn, c . 1920s Or1455 Walker House gable-roofed frame house w/ outbuildings, c . 1900s Two of these sites have been placed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) . St. Mary ' s Episcopal Chapel, constructed in 1859 , was listed in 1978 . Maple Hill, an Antebellum farm, was listed on the NRHP in 1994, as "Jacob Jackson Farm" (Henry 1999) . The Antebellum structure, Sunnyside, also known as the John Berry �I 22 House, has been placed on the study list for potential listing on the NRHP . This plantation dates to about 1848 . The so - called . Gosling Log House , also on the study list, may date to the . early 1800s (Henry 1999) . The Dortch family is said to have constructed and inhabited this log structure since at least the mid -nineteenth century (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling, personal communication 1999) . One Postbellum property has been placed on the NRHP study list, the late .nineteenth-century Caine- Roberts farmstead complex (Henry 1999) . To summarize the architectural survey findings , no extant structures from the eighteenth-century Colonial Period have been identified in the project area. A number of survey sites do date to the Antebellum Period. These consist of six farmsteads and one institutional site , St . Mary ' s Chapel. The late eighteenth century is represented by a frame rear ell to a later period extant frame house (Hill Farm, Or659) . The original one- bay house structure has a stone foundation, and a large, double- shouldered chimney measuring at least eight feet wide at its base . The historic property also incorporates a small family cemetery containing fieldstone markers . The Walker House (Or718) complex also contains a family cemetery. The burying ground ' s earliest recorded gravestone is for "the family patriarch Robert Walker ( 1767- 1826)" (Henry 1999 : 16) . The rear section of the extant house , built of heavy framed timber, is believed to date to 1814 (Henry 1999) . Three single- storied, single-pen log houses in the project area date to the early decades of the nineteenth century . The Gosling Log House ( Or652) stands alone, but the Charles Thompson Farm (Or1450) log structure has an extant, later period frame addition fronting the cabin (Henry 1999) . Mabry Hill, or the Jacob Jackson Farm ( Or710) , listed on the National Register of Historic Places, has a "single-pen, hewn log house likely constructed in 1810 . . .joined to a two - story, weatherboarded log Federal farmhouse built as a separate structure" (Henry 1999 : 16- 17) . In the 1840s a frame, Greek Revival- style addition was added to the Federal- style structure . Henry considers the John Berry House , also known as Sunnyside (Or692) (and locally as "four chimneys") as the "most significant ante-bellum home in the St . Mary ' s . Road study area" (Henry 1999 : 17) . John Berry was a well-known local builder. For example , the Greek Revival- style Orange County Courthouse was designed and built by Berry in 1846 . Berry ' s own home dates to 1848 . He did not design his house in brick, but apparently chose frame with a "wealth of interior woodwork . . . derived from Asher Benjamin' s pattern books" (Henry 1999017) . Although Berry owned a significant plantation complex, including mills ( see below) , no extant outbuildings have been located . For example , no slave quarters have been located for the estimated 45 slaves that labored on the plantation during the decade before 1860 (Henry 1999 : 17) . The last extant building dating from the Antebellum Period ( 1859) is St . Mary' s Chapel, a Protestant Episcopal Church. This "well-preserved example of brick Gothic Revival- style architecture " is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Henry 1999 : 17) . It is associated with an extant cemetery located about 250 feet to the southeast, close to St . Mary' s Road (Joy 1995 ) . The cemetery is lined by a fieldstone wall built in 1836 . The burying grounds contain an estimated 25 unmarked and 26 masked graves, although 45 grave markers with death dates ranging from 1780- 1938 were noted in total (Joy 1995 ) . (Many of the tombstones were not in situ, and were simply leaning against the walls and/or trees in the cemetery. ) A fieldstone foundation measuring about 20 feet north/south by 24 feet east/west is located in the northeast corner of the cemetery (Joy 23 1990 ; see also Eastman 1990) . This I believed to be the foundations of the original church, a log structure constructed about 100 years before the extant brick, Gothic Revival building . The original chapel was Anglican and was established in 1759 . It was only one of three eighteenth-century Anglican chapels constructed in Orange County. It was built on land that was originally granted from Lord Granville to Michael Synnott on March 25 , 1752 (Joy 1995 : 3 cites Orange County Deed Books 1 : 24) . In early January of 1759 Thomas Holden purchased 500 acres from Michael Synnott on Buckquarter Creek (Joy 1995 : 3 cites orange County Deed Books 1 : 27) . During that year one acre of land was gifted to Stephen Scarlett by Thomas Holden for the church (Joy 1995 : 3 ) . In May, of 1858 "the church trustees purchased a tract of land adjoining the original one-acre lot from Ellen Bain, descendent of Thomas Holden" for construction of the new brick church (Joy 1995 : 3 ) . Although the original St . Mary ' s school was reportedly a log structure located just northeast of the present- day Chapel, no structural evidence of the 1840s structure has been found (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling, personal communication 1999) . That log building served the local community grades I - 11 . It was replaced by a frame building, which in turn burned during the Depression. At that time it was replaced by the current brick (American common bond) school on. This brick structure ( St. Mary ' s School, Or657) was built about 1931 and continued to serve the community until 1943 . At that time students were sent to school in Hillsborough. In 1970 St. Mary' s School was reopened as a private school. It continues to serve that purpose , and has expanded in size ' with the addition of new buildings . Other Postbellum historic properties consist primarily of farmsteads (n- 11 ) . These range from vernacular expressions of typical farmhouses, such as the c . 1873 Caine -Roberts Triple A I -house ( Or673 ) to early twentieth- century Bungalows . The majority of these properties include outbuildings that reflect the changing land-patterns in the region. Henry ( 1999) notes that many area farm families have adapted their agrarian practices to transforming markets. In this region grain and tobacco production was replaced by an emphasis on dairy production in the early decades of the twentieth century. A decade later many farmers switched to egg and chicken production, with j concomitant changes in land-use and outbuilding functions . Since the 1960s many project area farmers have switched to beef production and/or to the breeding, raising, training , and boarding of horses (Henry 1999 , Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling , personal communication 1999) . These cultural transformations are reflected in the changing farm landscape , remnants of which can be seen in scattered outbuildings . The final type of historic property noted through the architectural survey is a Postbellum church, Or665 . This cinderblock church was originally described as the Temple of Truth Holiness Church, c . 1931 . It is now believed that this is the original site of the A. M. E . Flat Rock Church, built in 1915 (Henry 1999) . No cemetery is associated with this historic property Most of the St . Mary ' s Road inventorysite forms includephotographs and/or descriptions of extant outbuildings as well as outbuilding ruins . The majority of these sites were briefly visited during the archaeological survey to assess their potential for containing archaeological deposits . It was determined that all of these historic 24 architectural properties also have the potential for containing intact historic archaeological deposits . Cemetery Site Files- Cemetery sites are usually recorded as part of a separate inventory. When contacted, the State Archives in Raleigh did not report the existence of any recorded cemeteries in their files along St . Mary' s Road besides St. Mary ' s Chapel. They noted, however, that Dr. Mary Engstrom, Jean Anderson, and many local volunteers recorded over 300 sites in Orange County as part of the North Carolina cemetery survey. The Engstrom/Anderson inventory is maintained at the Orange County Courthouse in the Deed section. These cemeteries are listed by church name or by family cemetery name, not by location. This makes it difficult to determine if any additional cemeteries may be located along the corridor, besides those cemeteries described above . A total listing of the St. Mary' s Chapel (near St. Mary' s school) headstones is found in those records: A description of these stones and of the St . Mary' s chapel cemetery is found in Joy ( 1995) . The Hill and Walker family cemeteries are listed in the Engstrom records (Henry, personal communication 1999) . Results of Town hall/Collectors Survey At the June meeting of the Tar Heel Archeological Society in Burlington Stine asked members if any of them knew anything about sites along St. Mary ' s Road. One gentleman did say he recalled fining tractors at the large farm near the corner of Pleasant Green and St. Mary' s roads, about 25 years ago (Steve Wood, personal communication June 21 , 1999) . He used to see prehistoric artifacts in the driveway but the owners would not give him permission to "hunt" for artifacts . He also mentioned he used to bring a scout troop to a quarry site in the vicinity to "harden the boys up" for hiking elsewhere . He noted a few prehistoric artifacts on those trails near Buckquarter (e. g. , Buckwater) Creek. No one else could recall hearing about collections from the St . Mary' s Road vicinity. An important part of the present project was to hold an open house . A Town Hall meeting was held in Hillsborough on June 23rd, 1999 . About 15 individuals attended the meeting, besides the archaeologists and Orange County planners . A general overview of the project was given, and the audience asked questions about the prehistory and history of the area. Only one individual brought an object with them for identification and it proved to be a non- artifact . During the meeting a number of local landowners invited the archaeologists to meet with them on their lands . The Lutz family, who own land along Pleasant Green Road in the Buckquarter Creek area, and the Anderson family, who own the Caine Roberts farm (Or673 ) proved particularly informative . The archaeologists made appointments to field- check their properties and ended up with an overwhelming amount of information ( see discussion of field results) . Results of Historical Map , Aerial Photographic , and Deed Research The path of much of the St. Mary ' s Road corridor was predicated on the route of the preceding Great Trading Path (Figure 2) . This makes this project area rich in potential prehistoric , contact period, and historic sites . In order to better assess the location of possible sites, historic maps ( 1733 Mosley , 1775 Mouzon, 1770 Collet in 25 i Cummings 1976 ; Tate 1891 ) , old and new soil and geologic maps ( Carpenter and Wilson 1975 ; Dunn 19770 Vanatta, Brinkley, and Davidson 1921 ) were examined and compared to one another. The scale of many of the early maps is too large for effective comparison to the actual route of modern St . Mary ' s Road, but the general trend of the historic trading path and historic roads is the same as that for the modern roadway. Granville Grants- For more particular assessment of the original route of the Trading Path, the eighteenth- century Granville Grants located in the State Archives were examined. First, the Markham map ( 1973 ) showing the probable location of eighteenth- century parcels was examined to create a list of names of project area property owners and associated dates . This list was compared to the microfilm of the original Granville Land Grants on file at the North Carolina State Archives in Raleigh ( in the Secretary of State Papers) . These papers were also searched for mention of the Trading Path in deed descriptions . A total of 12 pertinent grants were researched . These granted lands, extending from west near Hillsborough to east (present county line) area as follows : Churton 1754 , Reed 1756, Wiley 1760, Jackson 1754 , Nelson 1751 , Taylor nd, Wade 1753 , Jackson 1760 , Dennis 17611 Dennis 1759 , Jackson 1755 , Synnott 1752 , Synnott 1762, Day 1755 . It is interesting that some of these individuals owned more than one tract of land. This underscores the fact that some of these grants were not the primary residence of the land- owners . One has to read the land descriptions and search for mention of structures in the deeds . Michael Synnott ' s 500 acre grant ( 3 /25 / 1752) has a small map (Figure 5 ) that depicts the Trading Path heading just north of Buck Quarter Creek near that creek ' s great bend towards the Eno to the south. It also shows "Mount Misery" west of the creek, which shows up on the Hillsborough U . S . G . S . topographic map as an unnamed high point for the area. Synnott sold this land to Thomas Holden in 1755 (Browning 1965 ) . Synnott ' s principle residence may have been located on his adjoining grant to the east ( 640 acres , 5 /2/ 1752) . That land grant mentions his house , which appears to also have . been used for a tavern. Michael Synnott, who owned the land along the Trading Path in the vicinity of St . Mary ' s Church and Buckquarter Creek, was an Englishman who first appeared in North Carolina ' s colonial records in Bertie County in 1748 . By 1752 he had a mill on the Eno River and a large home tract on the Trading Path where he kept a tavem described as "the d Michael Synnott now lives . " The Moravian Bishop August plantation on which the sal Spangenberg and his party of explorers stayed with Synnott in 1752 on their way to the western frontier, where they hoped to find (and did find) a tract of land for the Moravian colony. Captain Synnott and the Hillsborough based land surveyor William Churton accompanied the Moravian on their trip to the west . Synnott appears in the public record in September 1752 , when John Dunnagin became the overseer in charge of maintaining the Trading Path road from Granville County to Michael Synnott ' s place, probably referring to the tavern for which Synnott was granted a license (Anderson 1990 *020 , 23 % Browning 1969) . Synnott sold this land to Thomas Holden in 1755 (Browning 1969) . 26 40 two 0 Iwo Dose f . L CfI. . .C_ � rl � . tlall � r 0r Gi 1gerto.,e;oomZ 07 Qo� 4 wI • j off I 00 it ' G �G7` t. r Y somoo4b - - � � r/ AND _ � � � . /e4 he do: oor3 5 �j -7.e.elooI it � o� i s:'t9�. sir o�.�. Q�ca� /� v�.:✓� G`'1lrl'I.L ' �� doe �r� �Job dl �lsnftr ne asu' l � � %.� �`.� � ��»> lrl�ic �iir � .�/fr� IQ �Ch�1. ��:af�T�e�a+ro `�sr � 4'rBau . �lZe�c �r !'�� y'//11 viVON e' szc .Woe 'm Von C 2� • ��� �! � fr. ter"/�-�zC_:"' - �r0 _ S Get Voo y izov!Po....�> . � I"rl ti Figure 5 . Portion of the Michael Synnott Grant of 1752 (Granville Grant , Secretary of State Papers, North Carolina State Archives) 27 The site of Synnott ' s home and ordinary should be located on or near St. Mary' s Road east of the intersection with Pleasant Green Road . Instructions to surveyor William Churton in 1751 describe a proposed grant to Synnott that included the former home of James Moss on Buckquarter Creek (Browning 1969) . The Moss home site is also a ignificant archaeological site, if it can be located . potentially s Thomas Wiley, a Quaker planter and tavern keeper from Pennsylvania (Engstrom 1983 : 8 , 37), acquired a 560- acre Granville grant on the Trading Path and the Eno River in 1760 . The grant ' s plat shows the Path splitting into two sections on the west side of present- day Highway 70 . The southern branch follows the route of a sunken road clearly visible today on the north side of Ayr Mount . The northern branch roughly follows the . route of St . Mary ' s Road. The Wiley tract may contain a significant eighteenth-century site (William Few' s house and tavern) and certainly contains most of a major nineteenth- and twentieth century site (Ayr Mount Plantation) . William Few bought 200 acres from Thomas Wiley in 1763 and operated a tavern or ordinary on the Trading Path. Local tradition places the site of Few ' s home and tavern in the 1760s near the junction of the Trading Path and the Halifax Road, in the vicinity of Ayr Mount lands (Anderson 1989 ; Anderson 1991 : 16- 17, 35 ) . Today Ayr Mount is represented by the 1815 Kirkland mansion, placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1971 . The house was once surrounded by buildings that were vital for the operation of the large , high- status plantation complex. This complex included a kitchen, dairy, smokehouse, icehouse, barns, well, stables and very likely a slave quarters (Anderson 1991435) . Anderson, the Kirkland family ' biographer, remarked that "Almost nothing , for example , is revealed of either the Kirkland slaves or plantation operations " in the documentary record of the family (Anderson 1991 : vii1) . Some of this missing data might be retrieved through archaeology. Ayr Mount was probably the grandest (but perhaps not the most prosperous) of the plantations on the Trading Path. It could provide an excellent contrast with the sites of other farmsteads and plantations on that Path. Ayr Mount , although located west of the rridor grant project boundaries, should be considered as part of that St. Marys Co Corridor ' s archaeology study area. The Isaac Jackson family from Chester County, Pennsylvania was among the first group of Quakers who settled in the Eno River valley near Hillsborough. The three grants to Jackson on the Trading Path were only part of his holdings . So far, we do not know whether he and his family lived on one of these tracts . This family was the first of the Eno Quakers to be recorded at the Cane Creek Meeting . Several family members were disowned by that Meeting for marrying outside the faith, for bearing arms , or for aiding the Regulators (Engstrom 1983 : 8 , 10) . John Dennis received at least two Granville grants on the Trading Path. The 1761 grant shows the Path following the route of St . Mary ' s road, but the 1759 grant shows two roads (Figure 6) . The "new road" was near the route of St . Mary ' s Road, but the "old road" was south of the present corridor and near the north bank of Buckquarter Creek. The Dennis family apparently lived in Hillsborough, where they operated the Spar- Hawk Inn on Margaret Lane . With many other area Quakers, the Dennis family moved south to Georgia in the late 1760s (Engstrom 1983 910 , 3 8 ) . 28 it 44 a4 rK. Op.Fdo pdo /. -♦Iity 6! 1 &6 0 0 4� s o do 0 9 0 1 do 0 ;'' . t.+ to it if I 'o 0 ' :' ; to 4 fee 4 : it Notoom loop it YZ do of a `• ,* vim + o4p ) tom 4 01 04 , : `� �, C'~ 4: 1 ' itdo OF It Not old 6 do IF so 04 to 4 so 4 to doit � . . . to - �! ' .• kk Iwo � � o : . 9 . ,� . : � .� r4 D 4�e O` jr it . % ��� • salp — OF 4 it 446 % 0 040 Rd too 9 : ar�i' Wood •or OFF O� 'jam 1. ,7- i' . Alt ' ' .� tl jr•4 i t rZLR is to so 10 4 . .t r <94244 ems . o :i 41 , . Q�/J� l ad is or 0 ,,, / — FA did dist Food too F& 4 . it 4 j Mitedood- � �rar�d a c�•.r �-rlw f ' . ;� _� . . : ' ' is 0 FOR, 0 do 1,�r tif 0 /000 OF + I a 6 1 6 a a 6 - J7/ do : r� %t . art• It#aft 4 OF » � t .� 'li'lfSLtonsillitis Imarm Figure 6 . Portion of the John Dennis Grant of 1759 (Granville Grant , Secretary of State Papers, North Carolina State Archives) 29 Mills- Water-powered mills were vital to the rural community from the earliest years of colonization up into the early twentieth century. One of the earliest known mills ' was Michel Synnott ' s dating to 1751 . In that year he acquired 100 acres in a Granville grant that included his mill, located in present-day West Point on the Eno Park, several miles to the east of his property on St. Mary ' s Road. The narrow, rocky Eno River below Hillsborough provided many good mill seats, and at least five mills were built to serve the St . Mary' s Road community. Mills harnessed the Eno waterpower to perform a wide range of services : grinding corn and wheat, sawing wood, carding wool, and pressing oil. Water-powered tilt hammers , such as the one at Dickson ' s Mill at Few' s Ford, meant the mill complex. Mills also served as post offices, addition of a blacksmith shop to a whiskey distilleries, fishing spots, and community gathering places . Mills often influenced the development of a community' s roads, especially when a mill seat coincided with a good river ford (Anderson 1979 : 30 - 33 ;. Heron 1979) . The Eno River mills were always at the mercy of the weather. Drought meant too little water and no power, too much rain led to floods that could damage or destroy dams, millraces, and mill buildings . Based on examination of historic maps (e . g . , Tate 1891 , Cumming collection 1976) and secondary sources (e . g . , Polaris nd) , five important mill sites were found near the project area. These are described below. Berry 's Private Mill- this was located near the confluence of Strouds Creek and the Eno River, on the west side of modern- day Lawrence Road (Polaris nd) . Tate ' s map of Orange County in 1891 does not show John Berry ' s nineteenth-century mill. Berry 's Public Mill this was a grist null on the Eno River. This null operated from 1813 to 1908 (Polaris nd . Tate ' s 1891 ma still shows the mill as ` Be "(1' ) p "Berry ' s Mill. The associated Eagle Foundry, started by Allen Brown in the 1840s , was about 700 ft east of the milldam (Anderson 1989) . The 1860 federal census listed Brown' s Eagle Foundry as the manufacturer of 27 tons of iron that year . Carson 's Mill- this mill operated on the north side of the Eno River, beginning sometime before 1814 , when Alexander Carson, Jr. sold the dam to Samuel Carson. It was .possibly operating until 1833 . Tate ' s 1891 map of Orange County does not show a mill on this spot . The location of the mill is uncertain (Eno River Association 1986 ; Polaris nd) . Holden 's Mill- this was a complex with a grist mill, a cotton gin, a saw mill, a wool ill started sometime before 18I l . The operations carder, and an oil press . The first m lasted until about 1893 (Polaris nd) . When Thomas Holden (father of Reconstruction era Governor W. W. Holden) put his mill up for sale in 1845 , his advertisement in the Hillsborough Recorder provided a good picture of one of the larger mill complexes on the Eno : The subscriber, wishing to close his business in Orange, will sell all or half of his Mills on Enoe , known as "Enoe Mills , " situate five miles below Hillsborough. There is the rise of 300 acres of land, a dwelling house with six rooms and three � 30 fire-places, all necessary out -houses, miller ' s house, wagoner ' s house, and overseer ' s house . There would be employment in the mills and land for seven or eight hands . There is a Threshing Machine , Saw Mill, Cotton Gin, two Wool- Carding machines, Oil Mill, Corn and Flour Mill well known to the community. The Carding Machines have carded in one season from four to six thousand pounds of wool, at from 7 V2 to 10 cents per pound . The Oil Mill has manufactured in one season 800 bushels of flaxseed, at an advance of 75 to 100 per cent . The Merchant Mill has manufactured 800 pounds of flour in the year. Holden was living in Milton, North Carolina at the time, so he directed inquiries to his partner at the mill, Mr . J. F . Lyon (Anderson 1979 : 33 ) . Apparently this partner * acquired the mill, since Mr. Lyon was listed as the owner in the 1860 federal census . ill in this area but calls it "Cole ' s Mill. " This site is Tate ' s 1891 map shows a m located .in the Eno River State Park. Few 's 111i11- This mill site is also located in the Eno River State Park. This was a grist mill that operated from about 17594 811 . William Few, his brother James Few, and John Wood built grist and saw 111111s at Few' s Ford on the Eno . William sold his share of the mill in 1763 , a year after he started the tavern mentioned earlier (near present - day Ayr Mount) : This mill was replaced by a second mill owned by William McMillen and James Strayhom, who built a forge with a water-powered tilt-hammer . The mill went through a number of changes in partnership until leased in 1831 and 1832 by William Piper. At that time the complex included the forge and blacksmith shop , a saw mill, grist mill, woolcarder, an oil mill , and a wheat thresher: After the failure of Piper ' s mill business, the mill was acquired by Allen Brown, who added a cotton gin. Alexander Dickson became the owner in the 1840s, when he renamed it Eno Mountain Mills . Dickson sold the mill complex in 1863 . Afterwards it passed through several hands . Tate ' s 1891 map shows a mill in this location as " Cox ' s Mill . " Tate Map of Orange County in 1891 - This map shows St . Mary ' s Road as the Oxford Road. It lists various mill sites (see above) , St. Mary ' s Chapel, the homes of I . Hill ( Or659) and G. Douglass , and St . Mary ' s Chapel (c . 1859) . It also lists a "Jackson' s Shop" on the north side of St. Mary' s Road, just east of its intersection with the road (modern-day Durmont' s Drive) to C- Mill on the Eno River (Cox ' s Mill?) . The function of this shop remains undetermined ( i . e . , not listed in Branson ' s 1890 or 1896 business directories) . One suspects that it might have been a blacksmith shop . 1918 Soil Map This soil map ( scale 1 ` 1 mile ) illustrates the project area in 1918 (Vanatta, Brinkley, and Davidson 1921 ) . It was examined to search for landscape features such as the path of St. Mary ' s Road and for the presence of structures . These potential site locations were compared to structures depicted on the U . S . G. S . Hillsborough 7 . 5 ' and Northwest Durham quadrangle topographic maps and to the state architectural survey maps . Those building locations that do not correspond with a known historic site have been circled as potential historic archaeological sites . Approximately 30 potential site locations have 31 been noted for future research. Near the county line a segment of St. Marys Road was seen to deviate from the present route of the road to the north. This road segment , shaped like an inverted "V" shows up on the modern topographic map as an old road trace . It has been assigned archaeological site number 31Or498 * * . 1938 Aerial Photographs- A series of aerial photographs dating to1938 were examined at the North Carolina State Archives in Raleigh. These photographs depict a patchwork of small farms, roads, streams, and forest in the project area. These photographs were examined to search for evidence of where the modern route of St. Mary ' s Road deviates from the route in 1938 . The road segment mentioned above near the county line was seen in the 1938 photograph as still "unstraightened. " The Granville grant maps were compared to these photographs to see if researchers could ascertain dark, linear traces of the Trading Path in those portions of.the project area where that Path deviates from the modern road. This can be seen clearly in Figure 7 , where the Trading Path once continued straight by Ayr Mount ' s entrance , instead of curving to the north as the modern road does today . In three other photographs one can see a similar dark line heading straight in the 1938 version of St . Mary ' s Road, in three places where the modern road takes a curve to the north before rejoining the original straight line of the Path. This is particularly clear in the area of the curve south of the Caine Robert ' s historic property, between Buckwater Creek and the modern . route of St . Mary ' s Road. This potential site area corresponds with the traces of the old road depicted on John Dennis ' 1759 Granville grant . These linear landscape features also are evident on modern orthophoto graphs supplied for comparative study by the County. Results of Archaeological Reconnaissance The archaeological reconnaissance fieldwork began with an initial windshield survey of the corridor . This enabled the investigators to search for remnant landscape features, chimney stacks , and graveyards . Newly bulldozed/scraped areas west of Strouds Creek and north of St. Mary ' s Road were walked to search for disturbed features and/or artifacts . No artifacts or features were observed while monitoring these bulldozing activities or while searching the red clay land surface . A total of 13 architectural survey properties (from the 1991 - 1992 survey) were briefly visited by archaeologist Stine in company with the architectural historian (Geoffrey Henry) and the Orange County project liaison (Don Belk) . As feasible some of the property owners were later interviewed to help determine the archaeological potential of these historic places . When questioned most historic homeowners stated that they have found occasional historic artifacts while gardening, etc . The majority of owners indicated that prehistoric projectile points had been found occasionally, but were relatively rare . Some of the architectural properties , such as Maple Hill (0010) , have seen extensive land altering modifications during twentieth- century renovations . In one case , Latta Farm, the house has been torn down (Or658 ) , although its outbuildings remain in relatively good condition (Henry 1999) . Nonetheless , until each historic property' s subsurface resources are assessed through systematic archaeological survey, each must be judged as having moderate to high archaeological potential . . 32 46 �o' 12AIL . s{ tIto trialA. aG Q f g kr r } ' ` y1 'fit y, 9 , +>t,'� �e + J ' =-It It If ' 3? o 1 s , n7 t01* to 4 , a I .. rIt IS . .. lY - - '. a t c « r ' - pp Af ' r-0 , A IF uoi \ - ��e �` 7tYa. ` J T It 2►OFF _ yy� w I 10 r , : I, a T r + ; ,1. , t VA I IF V1LoA It ., < "tea .r I ♦ n tt` 'u 4` I of Opp rr' 1XI , , •�• p 1, y �AAA A A OF ram ' r 4 �' _ - . . AM It off "'IFF �f! of: a`� Ley � � �to OF � rIV or l q •Y+� .. AveIF I A • t. .fit•loo , - $ - IF I - PM woe owe h� - t� t . �y ri. . r IF OFF I + sIlk n ry° A �Jfee or R y 4� f OFFtA. yy N IF A : Xi < r orkd ti �� ; y `v fig. . A IV f s f i ` i w, ti � t , 10_ A w #rya a A of�� '' 10715 , ^iof � �� + , y . , �: � : . :II r J A OFn ,v .r r Y� 't t �.rtFIt I- - _ : �� �� I IV AV -�+• kCe No j w oVP _ 1 � �. , go LL f F.' j t • .,M11�. i ,tAL 1 _ s, .F w of I A it If AJ 7r .. IF .I: - . _tt - 1 h ` PV l� i t': ' IF A � f - of of 91 ,. fi , -41 or ap f is + � � - it 1 Y h } Nr { i } 7 I -:°r v - - , , k rY - t :r Ito A to 0 c .r ' ' • - r i a � w ..., , • tt + ♦ , rtoo I% r r 1to ' _ y�� l4Ar OF I of OFF ;ZOO Jo. FIT of" , rIA1 AAA f If ,: „ s , y . y Zr fe ' VIA of ' IF 'A .a or IV '4i\ IT IF ISA Y� F h s to.Sf y� , A If 44 yt Aft y f + i r - o yet a �Fj' A. --1i i, [ 4 ` ! t r 4of I f�1 ; +� y ti err �K . v { Y ,. vs, 4. , : - Y - , t Certain landowners showed potential archaeological sites on or near their properties to the archaeologists . Some of those sites proved to already be marked on the archaeologists ' maps as potential sites based on historic research. Each of these sites received a brief pedestrian survey and surface inspection. There was not enough time to field inspect all of the potential sites discovered through documentary research or local informant interviews . All potential sites have been recorded on U . S . G. S . topographic maps of the project area. Places where the modern road curves north of the old trading path route were also checked for field traces of those roads. When a definite roadbed could be seen on the ground a site number was assigned to that road segment : Archaeological sites that were visited in the field were given permanent North Carolina Office of State Archaeology site numbers. These are given in Table 2 below: Table 2 . Archaeological Sites, Reconnaissance Survey of St. Mary ' s Road Site Number Remarks 310r480 * * Ayr Mount Plantation Complex (Architectural Survey #Or2) 31 Or481 * * Trading Path Ayr Mount to Hwy 70 (sunken) 31Or482 * * Small burned house site, brick chimney stack 310r483 * * Old house site east of Temple of Truth 310r484 * * Anderson Farm area, stone quarry 310r485 * * Old road remnant from Caine Roberts House beyond quarry towards New Sharon Church (also on 1918 soil map) 31 Or486 * * Caine Roberts complex (Architectural Survey # Or673 ) 310r487 * * 1891 log cabin site , Anderson property 310r488 * * Mt . Misery stone quarry site/cabins 31Or489 * * Abandoned farmstead complex near St. Mary' s/Pleasant Green intersection (Architectural Survey # 1455) 310r490 * * Lutz home place , farmstead w/extant cabin 31 Or491 * * Farmstead site, 2 chimney stacks, barn foundation, etc . 31Or492 * * Rhew place farmstead 310r493 * * Hinds Cabin site , brick and rock chimney fall, depression (well?) 310r494 * * Saw mill activity site (west) 31 Or495 * * Saw mill activity site ( east) 310r496 * * St. Mary ' s chapel, plus foundations of previous chapel and cemetery 31Or497 * * Davis property cemetery 310r498 * * Road remnant (was the roadbed on 1918 soils map) near county Line i 310600 * * Ernest Lockhart cabin/farmstead site 31 Or501 * * Wilson/Norman farmstead and tavern site 310r502 * * David Lockhart cabin/farmstead site 3 l Or503 * * Lockhill Farm Lockhart cabin/farmstead site • i 34 St. Mary 's Site 1 (31Or480 * *) Ayr Mount is the original plantation complex constructed by the Kirkland family ' beginning in 1815 . The house was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1971 (the grounds, including the Trading Path, are not mentioned on the nomination form) . This site includes the Palladian T- Plan brick villa (Flemish bond) , the family cemetery, an approximately 40 ft north/south by 20 ft east/west stone foundation (nineteenth- century barn and/or perhaps Few' s eighteenth- century tavern) , and the subsurface remnants of associated outbuildings . Local tradition places the location of Few' s tavern on the knoll just east of the Kirkland mansion. Examination of the Sauthier ( 1768 ) map of Hillsborough indicates that that tavern may have been located on the knoll to the west of the Kirkland home (built some decades afterwards) . In either case the complex would be found on the southern side of the Trading Path. St. Marys Site 2 (31Or481 * *) There is a fine extant example of the Trading Path that extends from just below Ayr Mount Plantation where it disappears into the swamps along St . Mary' s Road northwards to just behind a commercial building (tire place) at the intersection with Hwy 70 . This can be seen on certain maps of Hillsborough (i. e . 1988 Hillsborough General Development Plan 196 & 1998 ) and on the Sauthier Map of 1768 ("Road to Halifa)C") . It also is clearly seen on the 1938 aerial photograph (Figure 7) . The road depression is at least 10 ft deep and about 50 ft wide at Ayr Mount . The Trading Path segment on the northern boundary of Ayr Mount lands is being preserved as part of that plantation complex . St. Mary 's Site 3 (31 Or482 * *) This is a small, burned house site, consisting of a brick chimney- stack in a residential lot . No symbol for a structure was observed in the site area on the 1918 soil map . There are frame outbuildings behind the house that may have been associated with twentieth-century farming activities at nearby Sunnyside Plantation ( Or692) . ( Sunnyside was the plantation seat of local builder John Berry in the nineteenth century, and continued as a farm in the twentieth century. ) St. Marys Site 4 (31Or483 * *) This consists of an old house site east of Temple of Truth Church that was located through inspection of the 1918 soil map . No structure or artifacts are visible at this site, which is now in pasture . There is a grove of large hardwoods demarcating the location of the original farmstead . A large farm pond has been constructed just west of the main house site . St. Mary 's Sites 5- 7(31Or484 * *, 31Or485 * *, 31Or486 * *) Archaeologists spent the day with Nels and Nancy Anderson, meeting at their potentially eligible historic property- , the Caine Roberts House, OR673 (St . Mary' s Site 7931Or486 * * ) . The house is a fine example of a traditional I house, with "strong gable returns. " It was built in 1873 by Addison Holding (Andersons, personal communication 1999 ) . It has numerous outbuildings , such as an office , cooling house, garage w/crib remains attached, a granary, chicken houses, and the remnants of a packing house for 35 Q a tobacco . The site of the tobacco house has been bulldozed and smoothed to build a circa 1900 saw mill (post in ground) . No artifacts were observed in that spoil . The original main barn burned and was replaced in the 1950s by the Martin family. The ' knoll to the east of that barn was checked for archaeological evidence since the area appeared disturbed. It proved to contain animal burials (horses) . A rise to the northeast Iof the main house is lightly forested (after hurricane Fran) . Here a large, approximately 46xl9 ft ellipsoidal trash dump was observed (still St . Mary ' s Site 7 ; 31Or486 * * ) . This trash dump is rich in artifacts, containing many metal objects as well as glasswares and ceramics . For example we noted whiteware sherds and two large fragments of a Bristol and Albany slipped crock ("3 " in cobalt blue) . It appears as if the area was deliberately modified for a dump ( scooped out . Enlarged gully?) . This feature has great potential for offering information about the lifestyles of the residents of the Caine Roberts farmstead. Just beyond the trash dump is the springhead to a tributary to BuckwaterBuckquarter Creek. This springhead was nicely rocked, with a rectangular aperture for keeping food and/or beverages cool. When the house was surveyed in 1993 researchers noted that the structure seemed to face the `wrong" direction, that is, northwards or away from St . Mary ' s Road . The house faces an old roadbed that once connected to a quarry site on the property, then continued northwest until it joined New Sharon Church Road. Mr. Anderson recalls in the 1960s some area farmers occasionally used this road, which fell out of use sometime soon after. The road leading from St . Mary ' s Road northwestward past the Caine Roberts farm and extending to New Sharon Church Road is visible on the 1918 soil map of the project area (Vanatta, Brinkley, and Davidson 1921 ) . This old roadbed ( St . Mary ' s Site 6 ; 31 Or485 * * ) is about 10 ft in diameter, and portions of it and a gully parallel to it contain a mixture of modern and old trash. One amethyst bottle was noted (pre1914) with a mold seam that continued to the lip . It may have been made in a three-part mold . The quarry site ( St . Mary ' s Site 5 ; 31 Or484 * * ) is found at the end of this road remnant at its intersection with a new housing development road . The stone quarry . consists of large spoil mounds and pits which have been filled in partially with tree stumps , and it is at least 100 ft in diameter . The date of the quarry is still unknown, but its stones were used to make the piers for the Caine Roberts house in the 1870s i (Anderson , personal communication 1999) . St. Marys Site 8 (31Or487 Mr . Anderson also showed us an historic house site located on another piece of his property located to the northwest of the Caine Roberts farmstead. This site was reached by way of remnant logging roads in a heavily forested part of the region. This site is located in a grassy clearing about 6, 000 ft northwest of the Caine Roberts farm nucleus . It has two main components , an artificial knoll at least 2 1/2 ft high of stone rubble , brick, artifacts; and dirt measuring about 22 ft wide and a house remnant with stone piers and a stone chimney stack . The angle of sight was 330 degrees from the knoll to the stone stack, at a distance of 101 . 6 ft . The knoll contained an amethyst glass bottle (with a continuous mold seam) , aqua canning jar fragments, an ironstone plate/saucer rim fragment (undecorated) , an old shovel remnant, a barrel ring , and a cast iron object, maybe a stove part, that read "P 57 . " This was once the location of a log cabin measuring about 16 x 24 ft . A date on the mortar on the exterior of the chimney reads 36 1891 . The cabin once had a porch overlooking terraced lands that fall gently to an east/west trending creek, an unnamed tributary to Buckquarter Creek . This is the same creek that is fed by the springheads on the Caine Roberts farm. St. Mary 's Sites 9, 114 6, 18 (31 Or488 *; 310r490 * *-310r495 * *; 31 Or497 * *) On July 2 Deborah Joy was invited to the home of Worth and Liz Lutz on Buckquarter Road. The Lutz family shared historical information and then led Deborah on a daylong hike to various sites . The Lutz' s lands were once part of Michael Synnott ' s (or Synott , or Synnod) Granville grant property in the 1750s . This plat shows the old Trading Path following the general trend of present day St. Mary ' s road, just north of Mount Misery. The Lutz ' s have moved two log structures on to their property and restored them (one barn, one shed) . The log house at the bottom of the driveway is on its original site and has been extensively restored ( St. Mary ' s Site 11 ; 31Or490 * * ) . No artifacts were observed in the area. The Lutz ' s took Deborah to an old stone quarry ( St. Mary ' s Site 9031 Or488 * * ) west of their house on top of a large hill ( is this Mount Misery?, see Synnott Grant) . The quarry site is listed (Wilson and Carpenter 1975) as an abandoned crushed stone quarry. It is believed that the stone was quarried by the State of North Carolina to provide gravel for roadways (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling, personal communication 1999) . The large quarry site has several associated cabin ruins. A return visit by Stine and student volunteers to the quarry area revealed that the southeast trending road to the quarry is in relatively good shape . The quarry entrance road is illustrated on the 1918 soil map (Vanatta, Brinkley and Davidson 1921 ) . During i the early twentieth century this road appears to have continued southwest across Buckquarter Creek, intersecting Pleasant Green Road near Pleasant Green Church. This roadway bisected an area marked as a possible location of the original Trading Path, based on deed research and on inspection of 1938 aerial photographs . Although the place where this quarry road supposedly crossed remnants of the Trading Path was visually searched for clues, no evidence of the Great Trading Path was seen on the ground. The Lutz family showed Deborah two saw mill sites consisting of rectangular saw pits and sawdust piles ( St . Mary' s sites 15 - 310r494 * * and 16- 31Or495 * * ) , and two standing structures on the north side of Happy Valley Farm Road ( St. Mary ' s Site 12 ; 31 Or491 * * ) . On the south side of the road she noted a house site with two brick chimney stacks, and a wood frame shed, grape arbor, and tobacco barn foundations known as the Rhew Place ( St . Mary' s Site 13 ; 31Or492 * * ) . She was also told to visit the nearby Blackley Place which has an old house on it, now renovated, but she could not get access to it . Deborah was also taken to a house site on the Hinds property ( St. Mary' s Site 14 ; 31 Or493 * * ) which had an extensive scatter of brick and rock from chimney falls and a foundation, a large pit that might be a well, and also saw several small rock dams located along the creek. This site is apparently going to be protected, as Eno River Park personnel are negotiating for its purchase . The Lutz family also introduced Deborah to Mrs. Davis, the owner of a house on the corner of Pleasant Green Road and the entrance drive called Buckquarter Road. She observed a family burial ground ( St . Mary ' s Site 18 ; 31Or497 * * ) close to Mrs . Davis ' house . She estimates that at least twenty graves are located in Mrs . Davis ' front yard. The fieldstone marker placement suggests that the graves face east . One stone marker had aninscription "white age 109 died 1898 . " A return inspection of the site showed that 37 r many of the graves are eroding . The ground is lightly forested and covered in periwinkle . The graves appear to extend from the Buckquarter entrance road southward towards the top of a knoll . The modern Davis house is placed on the top of this knoll . This cemetery does not appear to be noted in the Engstrom cemetery survey. St. Mary 's Site 17 (31 Or498 * *) This is the site of St . Mary ' s cemetery and of the associated 1759 chapel. This site was previously surveyed by Works Progress Administration personnel ( 1937 , 1940) and by volunteers with Jean Anderson (c . 1994) . It was revisited by an archaeologist in 1995 (Joy 1995 ) . The site is screened from the intersection of St . Mary' s Road and Pleasant Green Road ( SR 1548 ) by large hardwood trees . It consists of an approximately 200 ft east/west by 250 ft north/south fieldstone wall (built 1836) surrounding about 45 marked graves . These markers are often fieldstone, although a few marble markers are found. Dated gravestones range from 17804938 . A small stone foundation presumed to be from the original ( 1759) chapel was briefly investigated by archaeologist Jane Eastman (personal communication, 1999) . It is located within the stone walls of the cemetery in the northeast corner. The 1859 St. Mary' s Chapel stands on the hill north of the cemetery and 1759 chapel site . This building (see previous architectural site file section) was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1978 , but does not have an official state , survey site number (Henry 1999) . St. Marys Site 10 (31Or489 * *) At the intersection of St . Mary ' s Road and Pleasant Green Roads , in the southwest corner, is an abandoned farmstead with a small Hall and Parlor frame structure and various outbuildings . No artifacts were observed on the overgrown, pastured surface of the farm. The farmstead was also visited and evaluated by the architectural historian (architectural survey site #Or1455 ; Henry 1999) . This agrarian site ( St. Mary ' s Site 10 , 31Or489 * * ) appears to date to around the turn- ofAhe- century. The farm complex is clearly depicted on both the 1918 soil map and on the 1938 aerial photographs . At the St. Mary ' s Chapel Homecoming service ( 8/29/99) members of the Walker family were interviewed about this site . The site was the farm of William Walker, and dates to before 1900 . William Walker farmed the land for a long time , as he lived to be . 105 years old . He and his family grew corn, wheat, and tobacco (son William Clyde Walker and nephew Herman Walker, personal communications 1999) . St. 1vIary 's Site 19 (31 Or498 * *) The U . S . G . S . Northwest Durham topographic map shows that two structures were once located along this road. A small farmstead is visible in this area on the 1938 aerial photographs . This segment was field checked and proved to hold road remnants just north of the present day road . The roadbed is not nearly as shrunken or gullied as that portion seen at Ayr Mount , but it is an obvious old roadbed . The area is heavily forested and was heavily posted against trespassers . It was not completely surveyed as a result . 38 St. Marys Site 20 (31 Or500 * *) This is the site of the farmstead of Ernest Lockhart (deceased 1954) , Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling ' s uncle . His site is marked on the 1918 soil map . Mr. Lockhart owned about 213 acres on both sides of St . Mary' s Road . His home was a log cabin bracketed by two holly trees in the back and two dogwoods in the front, just off the porch. The cabin had two chimneys . It also had two rooms downstairs with a middle hall and it had an upstairs . The cabin was moved to a nearby location to the northwest, just west of the present garage at Mrs . Gosling ' s home . This enabled she and her mother to build their small frame house (extant) just north of the original location of the cabin in the early 1960s . At that time Mrs . Gosling added a room and kitchen ell to the cabin. The cabin burned down in a Christmas Eve fire at least ten years ago . The remains were pushed southward and buried in the southwest quadrant of her front yard, just east of the fenced pasture (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling, personal communication 1999) . The existing outbuildings at the farmstead were once associated with her uncle ' s farm The barns and sheds behind her home once housed Ernest Lockhart ' s mules and cows . He bred them for sale . He also had , a large barn across the road on modern-day Lockhill Farm. This bam has been turned into a home, now rented to the horse farm' s caretaker . Mary Jane states that she has occasionally found a few prehistoric projectile points in this area. She could, not find any of those artifacts at this time (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling , personal communication 1999) . ' St. Mary 's Site 21 (31Or501 * *) This site is located just east of the Ernest Lockhart farmstead . It is marked as two structures on the 1918 soil map . It is presently the home of Mrs . Jessie Norman, stepdaughter to Aunt Sue Wilson. The present site is covered in tall grasses . An old barn sits on a knoll facing St. Mary ' s Road. A small, blue frame house built by Mrs . Norman and her husband is located to the east of the outbuildings on the same knoll . A few large yard trees shade the home site . The frame house was built soon after the original two - story frame home burned to the ground. The new structure was built to the east of the original building and should not have impacted the archaeological potential of the historic site . The original structure was once a tavern. It had a large porch with a hatched doorway, allowing the homeowners to serve travelers through the top half of the door. The tavern structure was believed to be well over 200 years old (Jessie Norman, personal communication 1999) . This tavern site may prove to be the elusive site of Michael Synnott ' s eighteenth-century tavern (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling , personal communication 1999 ) . St. Mary 's Site 22 (31 Or502 * *) The David Lockhart cabin site is the farmstead of Mary Jane Lockhart ' s father. The log cabin is long gone, but once stood near Finches Branch on a knoll near Pleasant Green Road. A structure is found at this approximate location on the 1918 soil map . At present the site consists of a grassed area in a stand of fruit trees, found just north of a modern barn. An old driveway leads southeastward into the mixed woodlands . At the edge of the woodlands a large log tobacco packing house is still standing. It is square- hewn and V -notched and sits on a stone foundation. This was a building where the cured 39 tobacco was stored until ready for market . It was thus prevented from getting too brittle (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling , personal communication 1999) . Further to the east along the same farm road is another log building that was once part of the farm. This was a large tobacco curing barn. This hand- hewn log barn is found on the south side of the farm road. It measures about 17 . 1 ft north/south and 17 . 6 ft east/west . The barn has a dirt floor . It was once whitewashed . A sandy chinking is still visible between most of the logs . St. Mary 's Site 23 (31 Or503 * *) This is another cabin site discovered while walking Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling ' s property. This cabin site is situated on a steep knoll overlooking an unnamed branch. The site is heavily wooded, but one can hear cars from Pleasant Green Road close by . The site is located on Lockhill Farm, back in the southern quadrant of the property. The main house site is just south of an eroded roadbed or driveway that leads northwards across the branch to Lockhill Farm ' s south pasture . Based on the location of a structure on the 1918 soil map it appears that this site was a farmstead reached by way of Pleasant Green Road to the southwest . The site is in good condition, although whiteware, 1 milkglass, and clear glass artifacts were observed along the eroded drive . This scatter extended from the knoll almost to the creek bed . The site consists of two large piles of fieldstone and brick rubble , one on either side of the drive . The one on the south and west appears to be the main home site as it has two large yard trees defining the top of the knoll. Summary of Results and Recommendations for Future Research Integration of Results of Architectural and Archaeological Surveys Henry writes that "Between 1959 and 1989 the percentage of land in farms [ in Orange County] declined from 70 percent to 48 percent. Although agriculture remains important economically as well as culturally, many farms are unoccupied and deteriorating . . . The St . Mary' s Road area, with its mix of nineteenth and early4wentieth century farmsteads , forested hills , and lush horse farms , continues to be a picturesque landscape, but it is a landscape increasingly threatened" ( 1999021 ) . Preservation and management of this historic landscape must begin with recording its existing structures, objects, districts, landscape features, and archaeological sites ; thus forming the foundation for the St . Marys Corridor preservation plan (Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department 1999) . The archaeological part of the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor study has begun with the present project . The results of historical and map research, site file investigations, informant interviews , and the archaeological reconnaissance of St . Mary ' s Road have proven fruitful. At the beginning of the project only one archaeological site was known near the area, a small lithic scatter located south of the Eno River (Figure 1 ) . The present project has resulted in recording 23 additional archaeological sites, and has highlighted over 30 additional potential site locations (besides architectural survey sites) . After analyzing data from historic maps , soils maps, aerial photographs, interviews with locals , and from deed and other historical research areas of high archaeological site potential have been identified in the project area. In some cases these 40 have been identified as specific sites, based on historic research. The function and time period of operation and/or occupation of some of these sites can be inferred from research ( e : g . , mill sites such as Berry ' s Private Mill) . In many cases, however, a site ' s date of use and/or function has yet to be determined . Some potential sites have been identified from historic maps (e . g . , Tate Map of 1891 ; 1918 soil map) that show that a structure was once located at a certain spot. If field and/or modern aerial photographic research reveals that the structure no longer stands, it has been interpreted as a potential site . Some of those potential sites were "ground-truthed" through an archaeological reconnaissance survey. If field reconnaissance revealed the presence of a site a North Carolina Office of State Archaeology site number was assigned to it . As a result, preliminary archaeological background research and field reconnaissance recorded additional 23 new archaeological sites (Table 2) . This includes three sites that are also recorded and/or numbered as part of the architectural survey, which are St. Mary' s Chapel and cemetery (no architectural survey number; 31Or496 * * ) , Ayr Mount Plantation (Or2 ; 31Or480 * * ) , and the Caine Roberts complex (Or673 ; 31Or486 * * ) . These three architectural sites have archaeological components identified during field reconnaissance. The Walker House (Orl455 ; 31Or489 * * ) received an archaeological site number because it had not been previously recorded in an architectural survey (e . g . , 19914 992) , but it had been visited by the archaeologist . The remaining 17 architectural survey sites have yet to be given permanent archaeological site numbers (Table 1 ) . Future systematic archaeological investigations of those properties will likely result in each receiving a corresponding North Carolina Office of State Archaeology site number. Based on preliminary research the archaeological and architectural inventories include sites dating from at least the eighteenth through twentieth centuries . Site functions include potential taverns, plantations, farmsteads, roadways, cemeteries, churches, schools , quarries, and mills (Tables 1 , 2) . These are briefly summarized below by functional category. Road Remnants- Description and discovery of portions and potential segments of the Old Trading Path have been an integral part of this project . It has been shown that the existing route of St. Mary ' s Road does indeed follow the course of the old Trading Path. It has also been demonstrated that the modern road deviates from the Trading Path in a few instances where the modern road noticeably curves to the north before joining the original alignment of the Path. In places the old path appears to have taken the straightest route across the landscape . The modern road appears to have veered northward from that route in certain sections, but always returns to portions of the original trail. This is particularly true in the area south of the Caine Roberts property ( Or6730 31 Or486 * * ) eastwards to the St . Mary' s Chapel intersection. Those places of deviation occur where the path must have become less useful, either too worn or too muddy for continued use . ( One Hillsborough traveler states in the early 1890s that in wet weather it could take him two hours to reach St. Mary ' s Chapel by way of St . Mary ' s Road, see St . Mary' s Chapel National Register Nomination form 1978 , page 8 . ) It is recalled that part of St. Mary ' s Road was worked on in 1915 (W. C . Walker, personal communication 1999) . St. Mary ' s road appears to already have its characteristic northward curves in 1918 (see 1918 soil map) ; they are also clearly evident in the 1938 aerial photographs . Local residents 41 remember when St . Marys road was a dirt road . One resident has a picture of her property with the unpaved road in the background . She and other area inhabitants believe that St . Mary ' s remained unpaved until sometime after World War II , perhaps until as late as early 1960 (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling and C . W. and H . Walker, personal communications 1999) . Site 31Or498 * * is a road remnant on the other end of St . Mary' s Road, to the east, not far from the county line . This appears to have been altered sometime after 1938 , but before 1987 (U . S . G . S . Northwest Durham 7 . 5 ' Quadrangle Map dates to 1973 , but was photorevised in 1987) . The fact that the site area is heavily forested suggests that this road section was bypassed at least thirty years ago . Site 31Or485 * * is not a remnant of St . Mary' s Road or of the Trading Path. It was a local ,road connecting St . Mary' s to New Sharon Church Road . It shows up on the 1918 soil map of the area and on the 1938 aerials . A portion of the road was in use at least in the early 1870s when the fieldstone was quarried to provide the foundation for the Caine Roberts house . The most well-preserved segment of the Trading Path in this part of Orange County is found just west of the St. Mary ' s Project Corridor (31 Or481 * * ). This is the approximately 15 ft deep, 50 ft wide dirt road found fronting Ayr Mount Plantation (31Or480 * * ) . Inspection of modern and historic aerial photographs indicates that there may be remnants of this road to the west, extending to the adjacent plantation (Montrose ?) . This deep- gullied road section continues eastward to a point just west of Highway 70 . This landscape feature appears on Sauthier' s 1768 map of Hillsborough. This road had its genesis as a prehistoric trading route paralleling the north bank of the Eno River (Cross 19790 Rights 1931 ; Stine 1990) . Taverns - Over time the condition and placement of the historic road (i. e . , Trading Path, Oxford Highway, St. Mary ' s Road) affected settlement and land use in the project area. j As has been shown, the roadway was often too muddy for a traveler to readily make his or her destination. This explains why the area had at least four possible tavern sites, excluding those actually within the town of Hillsborough. These are two possible eighteenth- century tavern sites (Few, Synnott) , and two nineteenth- and twentieth- century house sites with "resting and watering" areas for weary and/or wet travelers . Area residents have stated that Sunnyside Plantation, for example, had a covered rest spot near Strouds Creek for travelers (Henry , personal communication 1999) . It has also been said that one of the Walker ancestral home sites (still unclear which one) also had a place for travelers to camp and water their animals "near a little branch near Little Creek" (Walker cousins, personal communications 1999) . An important mid- eighteenth-century tavern site in the region is the home and ordinary of Michael Synnott . A probable eighteenth- century tavern site ( Wilson-Norman home site , 31Or501 * * ) has been located in the project corridor, in the general vicinity of Synott ' s holdings . A two - story structure once stood on this land until it burned sometime in this century. This structure is believed to have been over two hundred years old at the time it burned. Another interesting early tavern site is that of Few s Tavern. In 1764 William Few purchased a farm along the Trading Path ( depicted on Sauthier' s 1768 map) . His farm also served occasionally as a tavern stop for travelers along the road . The exact location of this site remains uncertain, 42 but researchers do know that the Few farm later became part of the Kirkland ' s Ayr Mount ( Or2 ; 31Or480 * * ) holdings . Churches and Schools- The St . Mary ' s Project Corridor is defined as a community in part due to the eighteenth- through twentieth-century presence of a school and a chapel located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of St . Mary' s Road and S . R. 1548 . This area contains the remains of previous versions of both the chapel and the school as well as later, extant examples of each. These institutions (e . g . , St . Mary ' s Chapel- 31Or496 * * and St. Mary' s Scho & Or657) have served as a focal point for group activities and fostered a strong sense of community. The African- American community appears to have found a focal point at two early twentieth- century churches . These are the Flat Rock A. M . E . church and the Libscomb Church. The Flat Rock Church moved northward to a new location on New Sharon Church Road (original location at Or665 on Figure 1 ) in the early decades of the twentieth century (Henry 1999) . The original church location become a second church, the Temple of Truth Church. No cemetery is associated with the original church site . A cemetery is associated with the second major African American area church, the Libscomb Church on S . R. 1574 . This church is found north of St . Mary' s Road, but in the eastern side of the project area. It was visited by the architectural historian, but is considered too far from the project corridor to be considered part of the proposed St. Mary ' s rural historic landscape (Henry, personal communication 1999) . This church was i not visited by the field archaeologists . Cemeteries- St. Mary ' s Chapel is associated with an historic cemetery with graves dating from the eighteenth century through the early twentieth century (31 Or496 * It is an example of an important area cemetery containing the graves of the ancestors of many of the modern-day area St . Mary ' s Corridor residents. Two family cemeteries have been recorded during the architectural survey. These are the eighteenth- through twentieth- century Hill farm and cemetery ( Or659) and the nineteenth through twentieth-century Walker Farm and cemetery (0018 ) . An additional cemetery was found during the archaeological reconnaissance, at the Davis property (3lOr497 * * ) . Although it contained numerous graves, only one appears to have an inscription ("White Age 109 died 1898 '� . Another burial ground containing numerous fieldstone markers, no inscriptions, is reported to be found on a wooded knoll near the eastern boundary of Lockhill Farm (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling , personal communication 1999) . Although the archaeologist surveyed this area with the landowner, the gravesites have yet to be relocated . Quarries and Mills- Two quarry sites have been identified in the project area, a large, presumed twentieth-century crushed stone quarry complex (31Or488 * * ) and a small fieldstone quarry used, in part , to provide stone for the Caine Roberts House in 1873 ( 31Or484 * * ) . An "abandoned " copper mine is listed on a geologic map of the region somewhere north of St. Mary ' s Road and west of S . R. 1548 , east of an unnamed branch (Wilson and ' 43 Carpenter 1975 ) . This site has not been located . Two saw mill sites were found in the vicinity of Buckwater Creek (3 1 Or494 * * and 31Or495 * * ) . They are believed to date to the late nineteenth and/or early twentieth centuries . Although important, historic mill sites are described in this report , only one , John Berry ' s Private Mill, appears to be located within the project corridor. The others are found along the Eno River. The project area M. is shown on historic maps as being along Strouds Creek, south of St . Marys Road . The potential mill site is in heavy woods west of S . R. 1561 . The actual site was not discovered during a windshield survey of the site vicinity. This mill is associated with John Berry ( i. e . , nineteenth century, Sunnyside Plantation) . Farmsteads and Plantations- Farmsteads and plantations dominate the landscape of the project area (Table 1 , Table 2) . Early settlers were able to purchase large tracts (e . g. , 500- 600 acres) through the Granville grants . Some of the project area holdings remained large , but ' some of those initial eighteenth-century grants were broken into smaller farmsteads . By the decade before the Civil War the majority of farmers were living in small to medium farms . After that war more holdings were divided into smaller farms, many of them run by tenant labor . After World War II a pattern of re- consolidation emerged . This aggregation was the result of converting from animal to machine power, and from transforming fields of grains and tobacco to pastures for dairy, or by building compounds for poultry. By the last quarter of the twentieth century the St. Mary' s countryside was primarily a patchwork of horse farms, cattle farms , and residential homes . i Besides the tavern sites (e . g . , Few ' s Tavern; the Wilson Norman tavern site, 31 Or501 * * ) the earliest known farmstead is Hill Farm ( Or659) which has extant building components dating to about 1780 . Ayr Mount (Or2) , although found west of the project area, is a fine example of an early nineteenth- century plantation located along the Trading Path. Early nineteenth-century farmsteads and plantations in the project corridor are represented by four architectural sites ( Or652 , 0010, 0018 , and Or1450) . A potential log cabin site/farmstead is noted as being in a field just south of Finches Branch on ° Lockhill Farm (Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling, personal communication 1999) . This is the purported early nineteenth- century home site of the Lockhart family (Mary Jane ' s grandfather ' s homestead) . Although the archaeologist visited this field, visibility was too poor to judge if the site remained, and if so , where it was definitely located. No structure is shown on the 1918 soil map in this vicinity, which indicates that the house was no longer standing by that date . The John Berry plantation ( Sunnyside , Or692) , dates to at least 1848 . The Caine Roberts farm ( Or673 , 31 Or486 * * ) dates to about the last quarter of the nineteenth century, as does the Dunlop House ( Orl451 ) , the Latta Farm (Or658 ) , and the Jacob ' s Farm (Or1453 ) . An archaeological cabin site, 31Or487 * * , likely dates to 1891 . Numerous other archaeological home sites are estimated to date to the late nineteenth/early twentieth centuries, in part based on the presence of structural notations on the 1918 soil map . These areas follows : 31 Or483 * * , 31 Or490 * * , 31 Or491 * * , 31Or492 * * 3lOr493 * * 3lOr500 * * 31 * * * *Or502 , and 310r503 The abandoned Walker House/farmstead ( Or1455 , 3lOr489 * * ) dates to the late nineteenth and/or early twentieth centuries . 44 A brick chimney stack at site 31 Or482 * * demonstrates the presence of a structure, but no structure is listed in this location on the 1918 soil map . This indicates that this site may have been built after that date . The remaining architectural farm/house sites date to the early decades of this century ( Or 662 , Or693 , Or1002 , Orl 133 , Or1452, and Or1454) . Some of these historic properties were plantations (e . g . , Sunnyside), some prosperous farms ( e . g . , Caine Roberts) , while others may have been inhabited by tenants or small farm owners (e . g . , cabin site 31Or487 * * ) . Until additional research is undertaken, the full range of social and economic statuses of St . Mary ' s Corridor cabin/farmstead/plantation inhabitants remains unidentified . Prehistoric Sites- Prehistoric sites are noticeably absent from our inventories, and we know that this area was extensively utilized in the prehistoric period- the Trading Path being a prime example . The location of the Fredricks and Wall sites along the Eno River, and of two prehistoric and/or contact period sites reported at the confluence of Buckwater Creek and the Eno , supports the presence of an important Native American presence in the region. The St. Mary ' s Road Corridor is primarily in pasture or lawn, and visibility is poor. We have surveyed any scraped areas such as found near the intersection with Hwy 70 , but no artifacts were found . None of our informants had any collections of prehistoric artifacts, although some residents recall finding occasional prehistoric projectile points in their fields. The one member of the Tar Heel Archaeological Society who remembered any artifacts in the area was recalling lithics he saw 25 years ago . Tom Hargrove ' s ( 1982) intensive subsurface survey of the Cates Ford Access Area for the Eno River State Park, located along the river east of Pleasant Green Road, revealed that there were few artifacts even in exposed, eroded, and/or plowed lands . He implemented a program of subsurface testing , including shovel tests and 50 x 50 cm test pits and discovered evidence of Archaic encampments . The one real diagnostic he found was a Guilford- like projectile point/knife , dating to the Middle Archaic Period (about 6 , 000 B . C . ) . This demonstrates that there are prehistoric sites in the project vicinity. Previous Orange County archaeological surveys have also revealed areas of high archaeological potential for prehistoric sites (Daniel 1994 : 95 -97) . That site prediction model indicates that prehistoric sites should be found along floodplains and adjoining high ground, especially associated with Strouds Creek, Little Creek, and Buckwater Creek. Well- drained soils (Altavista fine sandy loam) are reported in patches along both sides of Buckwater Creek, also indicative of good potential for prehistoric sites (Dunn 1977) . Potential National Register of Historic Places District Boundaries Archaeology sites are nonrenewable resources . Archaeologists do not disturb a site without good reason, nor without a clearly stated research design. Systematic survey, testing, and excavation of archaeological sites is undertaken to help address specific research questions and to help address specific cultural resource management needs . The present grant project, planned as an initial archaeological reconnaissance, does not entail making recommendations as to the National Register of Historic Places eligibility of specific historic properties . In order to do that each site would have to be systematically tested to determine qualities of site integrity and clarity , and to uncover data on specific 45 site chronology and function, and specific site boundaries (e . g . , Townsend et . al. 1993 ) . On the other hand, the inventories of identified archaeological resources and the architectural survey properties, with their associated archaeological components, should be useful guides for initially determining the boundaries of the proposed St . Mary' s Rural Historic District (Henry 1999) . After consultation with the archaeologist , staff at the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, and members of the Orange County Historic Commission, the project architectural historian has recommended that a specific portion of the St . Mary' s Road Corridor be considered eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places as a rural historic district (Henry 1999) . St . Mary ' s distinctive rural historic landscape is recognized as illustrating "the overwhelming agricultural tradition of this . area of Orange County through the late eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries " (Henry 1999 :25 ) . The proposed boundaries, based primarily on historic architectural analysis , extend from Strouds Creek and Sunnyside eastwards to the vicinity of the "Gosling " Cabin (Figure I ; see Henry 1999 : Chapter 7) . Henry states that this district is potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places based on three criteria as follows : Criteria A - due to the "historic significance of the land use, transportation, and economic patterns" the study area has retained , such as the Trading Path, judged as "one of the most historically significant Colonial era ' roads in Orange County as well as farms that display the long history of varied agricultural pursuits in Orange County" (Henry ' 1999 : 26) . Criteria B- as the project area "contains buildings and structures related to individuals significant both in the immediate community and in Orange County" such as ilder John Berry, and the home of Robert Walker, an early area Sunnyside , the home of bu settler (Henry 1999 * 26) . Criteria C- due to the study area ' s "collection of resources embodying distinctive architectural types and styles, as we1I as buildings by recognized master craftsmen" (Henry 1999 : 26) . The archaeological resources in the project area could strengthen the potential district nomination. Additional information has been gathered about the Trading Path, adding to arguments for nomination under Criteria A. Additional farmstead sites have also added to our knowledge of agrarian land use and the project area' s settlement pattern. Under Criteria B , comparative archaeological investigations of the Berry and Walker home sites would deepen our understanding of the lifeways of individuals important to the community and to Orange County. Although archaeology would probably not add much supporting data under Criteria C , systematic archaeological investigations have the potential, under Criteria D, to add properties that have "yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history" (e . g . , Townsend et . al. 1993 ) . This presence of numerous archaeological farmstead sites also attests to the agrarian heritage in the St . Marys Project Comdor. Archaeological research has also shown that other categories of sites are not well-represented, if at all, by the inventory of ills , taverns , quarries , and road remnants . In extant buildings . These are cemeteries , m 46 addition,, potential sites such as prehistoric sites , a possible blacksmith shop (e . g. , Jackson Shops) and below ground remains of outbuildings and slave quarters have not been identified through the present architectural or archaeological projects . When these archaeological resources are considered in light of the present proposed National Register of Historic Places district boundaries (Figure 1 ) , it is clear that those boundaries wi11 have to be expanded to encompass those resources . For example, the presence of the Trading Path is an important justification for nominating the project area to the National Register of Historic Places . Archaeologists have identified the most well-preserved segment of the Trading Path at Ayr Mount Plantation. While pursuing the nomination of the St . Mary ' s Road Historic District to the National Register and/or as a local Orange County landmark, Orange County planners should consider if the corridor should be expanded to include Ayr Mount (and perhaps adjoining Montrose) plantation. These resources would be considered as contributing to the district, making the western part of St . Mary' s district noncontiguous . Within the present proposed boundaries, one of the more significant Trading Path segments appears to be found in the lands lying between the present St. Mary ' s Road and Buckwater (Buckquarter) Creek . Here there is evidence that there was an "Old" and `New" route of the path, even as early as the 1750s . Perusal of the 1938 aerial photographs of this region does indicate dark lines i imate n the approximate locations of the old and new trail, as drawn in earlier deed plats. A reconnaissance survey of part of this region (on the way to the stone quarry, 31 Or488 * * ) did not reveal any obvious signs of the old Trading Path on the ground . However, an intensive , systematic survey of this area may prove to reveal = physical traces of the old roadbeds . The proposed eastern boundaries of the St . Mary ' s Road Historic District may also have to be expanded, based on the results of future archaeological research. The present boundaries exclude potential cabin/farmstead and cemetery sites on Lockhill Farm, including the site of the Lockhart family ' s patriarch. The eastern boundary also does not include a by-passed road remnant and associated farmstead near the county line . One of the most interesting archaeological sites may prove to be 31 Or501 * * , a potential eighteenth-century tavern site . This site may also prove to be the home site of Michael Synnott, an important individual in the region ' s history. Future Archaeological Research Specific recommendations for archaeological research follow by site category. These are road remnants, taverns, churches and schools, cemeteries, quarries and mills, farmsteads and plantations, and prehistoric sites . Road Remnants- An intensive, systematic survey of the area south of the existing corridor in the vicinity of the Bacon and Walker farms should reveal physical traces of the "New" and "Old" eighteenth-century Trading Path. A program of systematic shovel testing, combined with further aerial photograph analysis should determine if any of these Trading Path remnants remain. Data from this work will help support the no of the St . Mary ' s Road Rural Historic District by verifying the presence of important eighteenth-century segments of the Trading Path. 47 A similar survey of the road remnant near the eastern project border should also be undertaken. This will help verify the presence of the Trading Path, thus marking where the eastern boundary of the proposed St. Mary ' s Rural Historic District should be placed . Some of the below-ground structural remains, and the extent of the Trading Path, can be ascertained from infrared aerial photographs taken by Scott Madry in the mid 1980s (Madry, personal communication 1999) . Although this important historic property is being preserved, it is recommended that a systematic survey of plantation resources be undertaken. A systematic , intensive shovel test of the plantation would reveal patterns of settlement and land use . These data would help Orange County and Ayr Mount ' s owners integrate archaeological information with other needs while planning any possible future alterations to the Ayr Mount landscape . The Ayr Mount National Register of Historic Places nomination (Or2 , 1971 ) does not reflect the importance of the Trading Path, nor does it describe the below and above ground outbuildings and outbuilding remnants at the plantation. It is recommended that the National Register of Historic Places form for Ayr Mount Plantation be amended to incorporate information on the Trading Path, on Ayr Mount ' s historic landscape , and on associated archaeological resources . Taverns- Ayr Mount is also important as the possible location of Few' s 1763 tavern site . An intensive shovel testing program on knolls along the southern boundary of the Trading Path should reveal the remains of this important eighteenth- century site . There is still debate as to whether a fieldstone foundation ruin in the woods just east of the Kirkland mansion stems from a barn and/or from Few ' s tavern. Another prime spot for the location of the tavern would be just west of the mansion, on high ground near the modern- day slough south of the Trading Path. Farmsteads and Plantations- Historical archaeological research at any of the known historic farms and plantations would add important information to the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor database . However , since there are numerous sites and standing structures , a selected sample of those sites should be undertaken. This would provide needed additional information to strengthen the National Register of Historic Places nomination for the district . Henry has stated that the plantation of John Berry ( Sunnyside , Or692) is of prime importance in the proposed district (personal communication, 1999) . No outbuildings from the property' s period of significance, beginning about 1848 , are extant . An intensive archaeological survey of the nucleus of the plantation should uncover important information about the spatial pattern of land use over time at the property. Additional historical research should also help isolate where certain features , such as slave quarters, might be located . The archaeological data may prove to be a contributing component of the property ' s potential National Register of Historic Places eligibility. The Walker property (0018 ) offers potential important archaeological information pertaining to area settlements in the early nineteenth through twentieth centuries . This architectural survey site contains an extant portion of the original homestead dating from about 1814 . The ruins of one of the outbuildings, a kitchen, were observed by the architectural historian (Henry, personal communication 1999) . This site 48 should be intensively surveyed to search for comparative information on changing land use patterns over time . Historical archaeological documentary, field, and laboratory research should help delineate the location and uses of outbuldings and other cultural features at the property. One other architectural survey farmstead, the Hill Farm, also dates to the early period of settlement in the corridor. This site (Or659) has an extant component dating to 1780 . Again, an intensive historical archaeological survey of the property would result in comparative data on changing historic land use patterns in the study area. It would be important to discover the exact location and condition of the Lockhart family " s ancestral farmstead on Lockhill Farm. The field on the knoll above Finches Branch should be systematically shovel tested to ascertain the site ' s location. Fieldwork should be intensive to allow the archaeologists to determine the site ' s potential for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places . These data would offer important comparative information on nineteenth- century land use and settlement patterns in the eastern section of the project corridor. The archaeological features already noted at the Caine Roberts farmstead (Or673 ; 31Or486 * * ) demonstrate that the potential for intact, significant archaeological resources on the property is high. An intensive program of systematic testing and research will result in recommendations as to the National Register potential of this late nineteenth- century agrarian complex. The current owners are highly motivated to discover the National Register of Historic Places eligibility of their historic property (Andersons, personal communication 1999) . They own one other parcel containing a recorded archaeological site with high potential for intact resources . This is the small log cabin site dating to about 1891 (31Or487 * * ) . Systematic survey and testing at this site will reveal comparative data on a small project area site, believed to represent the farm of a relatively poor family. Archaeological investigations at this site, when compared to results from the other sites listed above, will enhance our understanding of the lifeways of farmers from differing economic circumstances . Churches and Schools- The St . Mary ' s Chapel National Register of Historic Places nomination describes the extant 1859 church. The National Register of Historic Places boundaries of this property should be clarified, and the form amended. The ruins of the 1759 chapel and the cemetery (31Or496 * * ) should be considered as possible contributing elements when the National Register form is amended . Cemeteries- Cemeteries are protected by North Carolina law. It is a misdemeanor to deface or desecrate graves (North Carolina G . S . 14448) and a Class 1 felony to knowingly plow over or cover # up gravesites ( G . S . 14- 149) . North Carolina law (G . S . 65 - 74, G. S . 65 - 75) also offers guidelines concerning access to historic and abandoned cemeteries . North Carolina Statutes allow municipalities to assume control of abandoned cemeteries (G. S . 654 through G . S . 65 - 3 , and G . S . 65 - 7 through G . S . 6541 ) . It is recommended that landowners of family cemeteries in the project area be contacted and informed as to the pertinent North Carolina statutes . An effort should also be made to contact Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling , to see if she would fill out a North Carolina Cemetery Survey Form 49 should be intensively surveyed to search for comparative information on changing land use patterns over time . Historical archaeological documentary, field, and laboratory research should help delineate the location and uses of outbuldings and other cultural features at the property. One other architectural survey farmstead, the Hill Farm, also dates to the early period of settlement in the corridor. This site (Or659) has an extant component dating to 1780 . Again, an intensive historical archaeological survey of the property would result in comparative data on changing historic land use patterns in the study area. It would be important to discover the exact location and condition of the Lockhart family ' s ancestral farmstead on Lockhill Farm. The field on the knoll above Finches Branch should be systematically shovel tested to ascertain the site ' s location. Fieldwork should be intensive to allow the archaeologists to determine the site ' s potential for nomination to the National Register of Historic PIaces . These data would offer important comparative information on nineteenth- century land use and settlement patterns in the eastern section of the project corridor. The archaeological features already noted at the Caine Roberts farmstead (Or673 ; 31Or486 * * } demonstrate that the potential for intact, significant archaeological resources on the property is high. An intensive program of systematic testing and research will result in recommendations as to the National Register potential of this late nineteenth- century agrarian complex. The current owners are highly motivated to discover the National Register of Historic Places eligibility of their historic property (Andersons, personal communication 1999) . They own one other parcel containing a recorded archaeological site with high potential for intact resources . This is the small log cabin site dating to about 1891 (31Or487 * * ) . Systematic survey and testing at this site will reveal comparative data on a small project area site, believed to represent the farm of a relatively poor family. Archaeological investigations at this site, when compared to results from the other sites listed above, will enhance our understanding of the lifeways of farmers from differing economic circumstances . Churches and Schools- The St . Mary ' s Chapel National Register of Historic Places nomination describes the extant 1859 church. The National Register of Historic Places boundaries of this property should be clarified, and the form amended. The ruins of the 1759 chapel and the cemetery (31Or496 * * ) should be considered as possible contributing elements when the National Register form is amended . Cemeteries- Cemeteries are protected by North Carolina law. It is a misdemeanor to deface or desecrate graves (North Carolina G . S . 14- 148) and a Class 1 felony to knowingly plow over - or cover up gravesites (G . S . 14449) . North Carolina law ( G . S . 65 - 74, G. S . 65 - 75 ) also offers guidelines concerning access to historic and abandoned cemeteries . North Carolina Statutes allow municipalities to assume control of abandoned cemeteries (G . S . 654 through G . S . 65 - 3 , and G . S . 65 - 7 through G. S . 654 I ) . It is recommended that landowners of family cemeteries in the project area be contacted and informed as to the pertinent North Carolina statutes . An effort should also be made to contact Mary Jane Lockhart Gosling, to see if she would fill out a North Carolina Cemetery Survey Form 49 when she relocates the cemetery reported on Lockhill Farm. If an intensive archaeological survey and testing program is instigated to search for the Lockhart family ancestral site on Lockhill Farm, the archaeologists could incorporate a search for that cemetery at that time , if its location remains unknown . Quarries and mills- It is recommended that no further work be undertaken on the quarry sites if these sites are not threatened by development . The largest of the stone quarries, site 31 Or488 * * , does contain the huge landscape feature of the quarry, as well as numerous cabin sites and a well-defined access road . If this site is threatened it is recommended that an historical archaeological survey be undertaken to determine its eligibility for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places . It may contain important above and below ground cultural resources pertaining to mining and life at a mining camp . It is believed that this quarry is located at Mt. Misery, an important eighteenth-century landmark. mills have been discussed in this report, only one Although a number of historic mill, Berry ' s Private Mill, appears to be located in the project area along Strouds Creek. The other mills are located along the no River, and are important, Orange County cultural resources . (Orange County should consider an eventual archaeological survey of the mill sites along the Eno River. This would include developing an historic context on regional milling practices through time . ) For the purposes of the present project, Berry' s Private Mill site should be located through an intensive, systematic archaeological survey of the site area. The site , if found, should be investigated through subsurface testing to determine the quality and quantity of below ground remains. The site ' s eligibility for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places should be ascertained . The data derived from this project will strengthen our understanding of an important facet of life in the St . Mary' s area. It will also add important information to the interpretation of the social and economic cultural practices at John Berry ' s plantation ( i . e . , Sunnyside) . No further work is recommended at the two sawmill sites (Table 2) . These sites are located south of the present estimated boundaries for the St. Mary ' s district . Saw- milling was an integral part of rural life in the area. If these sites prove threatened in the future , they should be systematically surveyed and tested to determine if either is eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places . Prehistoric Sites- No prehistoric sites have been located during this initial archaeological investigation of the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor. Based on informant interviews, previous archaeological research near the Eno , and on the models developed by Daniel ( 1994) , we suspect that systematic, below ground testing of high and moderate areas of archaeological potential ( i. e . , Daniel ' s Zone 1 , Zone 2 ; including areas comprised of Altavista fine sandy loams) will reveal prehistoric sites . After discussions with members of the historical commission and planning office , it is recognized that the County has noted that there are high areas of prehistoric (and historic) site potential along the Eno River and along portions of Strouds, Little, and Buckwater creeks . If any of these areas are threatened with development or other earth moving activities, they should receive an intensive , systematic archaeological survey to determine if any archaeological resources 50 are going to be disturbed. It these resources are going to be affected, their potential eligibility for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places should be determined . Public Outreach In late 1996 a thirty- member Shaping Orange County ' s Future Task Force was asked to forge a unified vision of the County to help balance preservation and development needs in both rural and urban areas . These citizens formed subcommittees to deal with myriad topics, including Environment and Resource Protection (Stancil 1999) . The 1998 report of the Environment and Resources Protection Committee includes a section on historical and archaeological sites and landscapes (Environment and Resources Protection Committee 1998) . In that report members state that citizens were concerned about the increasing loss of historical structures and archaeological sites in Orange County. Task force members listed six important goals to help protect Orange County ' s historic and prehistoric cultural resources as follows . -Preserve significant historic and prehistoric sites and landscapes created by the different Orange County ethnic, national, and cultural groups, and by industrial and other activities important to the history of Orange County (e. g. , mills, ice ponds, etc.) -Encourage developers to protect and preserve historic and prehistoric sites, buildings, and landscapes. - Coordinate historic preservation activities in the county (including towns) including a joint preservation plan for the whole county. -Keep inventories updated. -Prioritize sites for preservation. -Enlighten the population on the importance of preserving prehistoric and historic sites. The County ' s cultural resources are being lost due to a number of factors besides the obvious impact of residential, commercial, and concomitant infrastructure development . For example, many owners and/or managers of historic resources (above ground) do not recognize that these lands may also hold valuable archaeological resources (below ground) . That is one reason why it is critical to integrate and disseminate the archeological and architectural grant report conclusions to historic and archaeological property owners in the St . Mary' s Project area. One way to accomplish this task is to work with the St. Mary' s Chapel Committee . The chapel, church ruins, and cemetery are still important landmarks in the lives of local residents . St . Mary ' s Chapel held a homecoming ceremony August 29th, 1999 and the response was overwhelming. Part of the Homecoming service was a discussion of the future of St . Mary' s Chapel, the associated cemetery, and of the historic resources in the St. Mary ' s community. Area residents, some with historic surnames j such as Bacon, Lockhart, and Walker, want to hold a community meeting at the Chapel 51 sometime in the next few months . This would be to discuss alternatives for preserving their joint heritage , including keeping St . Mary ' s Road a quiet , two lane corridor. Area newcomers were also at the service, and are interested in working with the community to find a solution to potential problems of over- development in the area. Not everyone agrees as to the best course of action, but they are willing to work out their differences . Area residents would like to be able to debate the merits of various options . Some of the options mentioned were as follows : 1 ) To work with an area farmland trust or similar organization that gives tax credits or other incentives for not developing agricultural lands . 2) To agree to include their lands in a National Register of Historic Places Rural Historic District. 3 ) To help St. Mary' s Road be designated as a scenic corridor. 4) To emphasize the importance of protecting the graves of their ancestors . It would be best if the Orange County Planning Department could work with these area residents by providing informed speakers for a community meeting . Area residents would attend this meeting, as the St . Mary' s Chapel and St. Mary' s School have formed a focal point for the community for many, many years . For example , in the 1950s ten rural communities were asked to spearhead local agricultural conservation efforts . The St. Marys Grange , recognized as an integral part of the rural community, was chosen to be part of that program (Lefler and Wager 1953 : 260-26 1 ) . Members of the Grange also " helped preserve the school as a community center earlier this century, and helped to restore and preserve the St. Mary' s Chapel. Some of those same individuals attended the recent Homecoming service . Conclusions The architectural assessment of the historic properties in the project corridor has been completed (Henry 1999) . One of the major recommendations is that the County "actively pursue the nomination of the St. Mary ' s Road Historic District to the National Register and/or as an Orange County landmark" (Henry 1999 : 29) . This is strongly supported by the archaeologists . The preliminary archaeological assessment of the St . Mary ' s Road Corridor has also been completed. The next step is for Orange County to apply for funds under the Certified Local Government program during the next funding cycle to hire archaeologists to undertake an intensive, systematic survey of a selected sample of the project area . This research, as outlined by category above , will result in adding depth and breadth to the proposed National Register district . This next phase of the archaeological part of the project will entail building on the existing body of historic research through additional deed and census research. Fieldwork will follow, consisting of shovel testing and excavation of several test units at historic properties such as the Wilson-Norman tavern site, the Few ' s tavern site ( if deemed part of the study area, also could include Ayr Mount outbuilding survey) , Berry' s Private Mill, Sunnyside Plantation, the Hill Farm, the Walker Farm, the Caine Roberts farm, and the Anderson ' s cabin site . A systematic survey will also be undertaken at Lockhill Farm to locate the potential site of the Lockhart ancestral farmstead along Finches Branch, and to relocate the cemetery site on Lockhill Farm The farmstead and road remnant at the 52 eastern end of the St. Mary ' s Road near the county line will also be surveyed to gather more information to help determine the final boundaries for the St. Mary' s district . An intensive survey of the area south of St. Mary' s Road between it and Buckwater Creek will determine if any of the "New" or "Old" eighteenth-century Trading Path remnants are visible on the ground. Laboratory analysis of the resulting artifacts and features will help identify the cultural affiliation, temporal periods, and spatial patterning of important sites in the district. Each site will be assessed as to its eligibility for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places based on its archaeological resources. This will enhance the overall eligibility of the St . Mary' s Road Rural Historic District for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and/or as a local historic landmark . II I i I i 53 Bibliography Alexander, Edward Porter ( editor) 1972 The Journal of John Fontaine ; An Irish Huguenot Son in Spain and Virginia, 1710 - 1719 . Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Williamsburg , Virginia. Anderson, David G . 1992a A History of Paleoindian and Early Archaic Research in the South Carolina Area. In Paleoindian and Early Archaic Period Research in the Lower Southeast : A South e . Edited by David G . Anderson, Kenneth E . Sassaman, and Carolina Perspectiv Christopher Judge . Project of the Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists . Funded by the South Carolina Department of Archives and History, and with funding and the institutional support of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pp . 74 8 : 1992b Models of Paleoindian and Early Archaic Settlement in the Southeast . In Paleoindian and Early Archaic Period Research in the Lower Southeast : A South Carolina Perspective . Edited by David G. Anderson, Kenneth E . Sassaman, and Christopher Judge . Project of the Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists . Funded by the South Carolina Department of Archives and History, and with funding and the institutional support of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and ' Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pp . 2847 . Anderson, David G . and Glen T . Hanson 1988 Early Archaic Settlement in the Southern United States : A Case Study from the Savannah River Valley. American Antiquity 53 (2 ) : 262 -286 , Anderson, David G . and J . W. Joseph 1988 Evidence for Mississippian Occupation in the Russell Reservoir : Major Excavation Assemblages . In Prehistory and History Along pper Savannah River : Technical Synthesis of Cultural Resource Investigations, Richard B . Russell Multiple Resource Area. Vol . 1 . Edited by David G . Anderson and J . W. Joseph. Prepared by Garrow and Associates for the U . S . Army Corps of Engineers Savannah District Contract No . CX5000- 7- 0012 . Pp . 252 - 320 . Anderson, David G . and Lisa O ' Steen 1992 Late Pleistocene/Early Holocene Environmental Conditions in the South Carolina Area. In Paleoindian and Early Archaic Period Research in the Lower Southeast : A South Carolina Perspective . Edited by David G . Anderson, Kenneth E . Sassaman, and Christopher Judge . Project of the Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists. Funded by the South Carolina Department of Archives and History, and with funding and the institutional support of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pp . 3 - 6 54 Anderson, Jean Bradley 1979 A Community of Men and Mills . Eno 7 . 1989 The History of Few ' s Ford. Eno 8 . 1990 A History of Durham County, North Carolina. Duke University Press published in association with the Historic Preservation Society of Durham. Durham and London. 1991 . The Kirklands of Ayr Mount . University of North Carolina Press , Chapel Hill. Anonymous (booklet) 1999 47 h Annual Homecoming Service . Historic St . Mary' s Chapel. Sunday, August 29 , 1999 . Orange County, North Carolina. Organized 1759 . Archaeological Society of North Carolina 1941 Excavations at Hillsboro . Archaeological Society of North Carolina, Newsletter 6 : 3 , 5 . Beaudry, Mary C . 1979 Excavations at Fort Christanna, Brunswick County, Virginia * 1979 Season. Brunswick County Historical Society and the Department of Anthropology, College of William and Mary. Beck, Monica 1989 "A Fer Ways Off from the Big House" : The Changing Nature of Slavery in the South Carolina Backcountry. In The Southern Backcountry: InterdisciplinarX Perspectives on Frontier Communities . Edited by David Colin Crass, Steven D . Smith, Martha A. Zierden, and Richard D . Brooks . University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville . j Pp . 108436 . Belk, Donald R. 1999 Request for Proposals . Archaeological Survey of St . Mary ' s Road Corridor. Orange County Department of Environment and Resource Conservation. Hillsborough. Describes the project background and scope of work for the project . Birnbaum, Charles A. 1994 Protecting Cultural Landscapes ,* Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic . P g� g � Landscapes. Preservation Briefs 36 . U. S . Department of the Interior, National Park Service , Cultural Resources , Preservation Assistance Division. Washington, D . C . Blackwelder Ruth 1961 The Age of Orange : Political and Intellectual Leadership in North Carolina 1752 - 1861 . William Loftin, Charlotte . 55 Blanton, Dennis Be and Kenneth E . Sassaman 1989 Pattern and Process in the Middle Archaic Period of South Carolina. In Studies in South Carolina Archaeology : Es Us in Honor of Robert L Stephenson. Anthropological Studies 9 . Occasional Papers of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pp . 53 - 72 Branson, Levi 1890 Branson' s North Carolina business directory . Levi Branson, Raleigh. 1896 Branson' s North Carolina business directory. Levi Branson, Raleigh. Browning, Hugh Conway 1969 Letter to Worth A. Lutz, Jr. Manuscript on file at the home of Worth Lutz, St . Mary ' s Road vicinity, Hillsborough. Caldwell , Joseph R. 1958 Trend and Tradition in the Prehistory of the Eastern United States . American Anthropological Association Memoir 88 , Charles, Tommy and James L . Michie 1992 South Carolina Paleo Point Data. In Paleoindian and Early Archaic Period Research in the Lower Southeast : A South Carolina Perspective . Edited by David G. ' Anderson, Kenneth E . Sassa man, and Christopher Judge . Project of the Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists . Funded by the South Carolina Department of Archives and History, and with funding and the institutional support of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pp . 242 -247 . Claggett, Steve and John Cable (assemblers) 1982 The Haw River Sites : Archaeological Investigations at Two Stratified Sites in the North Carolina Piedmont . Report No . 23386. Prepared for the Wilmington Arm Corps of Engineers . Prepared by Commonwealth and Associates, Jackson, Michigan. Coe , Joffre Lanning 1964 The Formative Cultures of the Carol Piedmont. Transactions of the Am ina erican Philosophical Society 54 ( 5 ) : 1430 . The American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, 1995 Town Creek Indian Mound : A Native American Legacy . The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill and London. Cross, Jerry L . (compiler and editor) 1979 Historical Overview of Orange and Durham Counties with Special Emphasis on the Milling industry in the Lower Eno Valley, 1979 Occaneechie on the Eno % Historical Sketch of the Indian Village Visited by John Lawson. M . S . on file , Office of State Archaeology, Raleigh. 56 Cumming, W. P . (map compiler) 1966 North Carolina in Maps . North Carolina Department of Archives and History, Raleigh , Daniel, I . Randolph (Jr. ) 1992 Early Archaic Settlement in the Southeast : A North Carolina Perspective , In Paleoindian and Early Archaic Period Research in the Lower Southeast * A South . Carolina Perspective . Edited by David G . Anderson, Kenneth E . Sassaman, and Christopher Judge. Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists and the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, Columbia, South Carolina, pp . 68 - ' 77 . 1994 An Archaeological Survey of Portions of Orange County, North Carolina. Vincas Steponaitis, Prinicipal Investigator and H . Trawick Ward, Project Director. Research Report 12 . Prepared by the Research Laboratories of Anthroplogy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill . Prepared for Orange County, North Carolina under a National Park Service Grant administered by the North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Raleigh, North Carolina. Daniels , R. B . , H. J. Kleiss, S . W. Buol, H . J. Byrd, and J. A. Phillips 1984 Soil Systems in North Carolina. North Carolina State University, North Carolina Ap,ricultural Research Service , Bulletin 467 , Davis, R. P . Stephen, Jr . , and H . Trawick Ward 1983 Archaeological Site Form for site 310r228 . On file at the Office of State Archeology, Raleigh. 1991 The Evolution of Siouan Communities in Piedmont North Carolina. Southeastern Archaeology 10 ( 1 ) : 4.0- 53 . Dickens, R. S . , H .T . Ward and R. P .Davis, Jr . (editors) 1986 The Historic Occaneechi : An Archaeological Investigation of Culture Change : j Preliminary Report of 1984 Investigations . Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. 1986 The Historic Occaneechk An Archaeological Investigation of Cuhure - Cb=e : Preliminary Report of 1985 Investigations . Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Dula, Luaile Noel 1979 The Pelican Guide to Hillsborough, Historic Orange County, North Carolina, Gretna. 57 Dunn, James 1977 Soil Survey of Orange County, North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Orange County Board of Commissioners . Eastman, Jane c . 1990 Measured drawing of St . Mary ' s Chapel stone foundation ( 1759) within existing cemetery. In the possession of the author, Tarboro , North Carolina. 1994 The North Carolina. Radiocarbon Date Study. Southern Indian Studies 42 , Engstrom, Mary Claire 1983 Early Quakers in the Eno River Valley ca. 17504 847 . Eno 7(2) : 1 -73 . Environment and Resources Protection Committee 11998 Report of the Shaping Orange County' s Future Environment and Resources Protection Committee . Web site www . co . orange , nc . us/shaDin env . htm . Lists goals and objectives of the committee, including protection of historical and prehistoric sites and landscapes . Graham Papers 1836 List of slaves belonging to the estate of William Kirkland as listed in the Probate Inventory of 1836, Graham Papers #955 , Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill . Goodyear, Albert C . , and James L . Michie and Tommy Charles 1989 The Earliest South Carolinians . In Studies in South Carolina Archaeology, Essays in Honor of Robert L . Stephenson. Anthropological Studies 9 . Occasional Papers of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Pp . 19- 52 Hargrove, Thomas 1982 Archaeological Survey Within Revised Phase 1 Development Areas of Cate ' s Ford Access Area, Eno River State Park, Orange County, North Carolina. Prepared by Archaeological Research Consultants . Prepared for the Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Raleigh. 1986 An Archaeological Survey of Treyburn, Durham County, North Carolina. Prepared by Archaeological Research Consultants of Chapel Hill for Edward Durell Stone , Jr. and Associates of Fort Lauderdale, Florida. 1993 An Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Hillsborough Reservoir, Cedar Grove Vicinity, Orange County, North Carolina. Report submitted to The Wooten Company, Raleigh, North Carolina, by Robert J. Goldstein and Associates 58 Hazel, Forest 1992 Occaneechi- Saponi Descendants in the North Carolina Piedmont : the Texas Community. Southern Indian Studies 40 : 3 -29 Henry, Geoffrey B . 1999 Technical Report : Architectural Survey and National Register Evaluation of St . MM1) s Road ( S . R. 1002 ) , Orange County, North Carolina. Prepared by GAI Consultants, Monroeville , Pennsylvania. Prepared for Orange County Department of Planning , North Carolina. GAI Project No . 99 - 125 . 10 . Heron, Duncan 1979 Mill sites on the Eno River : a geological viewpoint . Eno 7 : 3440 . Hillsborough 1968 Map . Hillsborough Planning Area, Orange County, North Carolina. In Hillsborough, N. C . General Development Plan 1968 - 1988 . Manuscript on file Town Hall, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Hinshaw, William Wade 1969 Encyclopedia of American (quaker Genealogy : containing every item of genealogical value found in all records and minutes of the thirty-three oldest monthly _ meetings which belong , or ever belonged., to the North Carolina Yearl Meeting of Friends (whose records are known to still be in existence) , with supplement to volume compiled by Thomas Worth Movehall. Originally Published in Ann Arbor, MI in 1936 with the supplement published in Washington, 1948 . This edition reprinted by Genealogical Publishing Company, Baltimore . • I Holloway, Betsy (editor and compiler) 1983 An Orange County Childhood by Ruth Gates McBroom, as told to Betsy Holloway. Published by Besty Hollowy, North Carolina. Jaeger, Dale with John Kissane, Chet Thomas, Emmeline Embry, and Christina Spurgin 1996 Historic Preservation Element Orange County Comprehensive Plan, Orange County, North Carolina. Prepared by the Jaeger Company, Gainesville, Georgia. Prepared by the Orange County Historic Preservation Commission Orange County Planning Department , Hillsborough. Jones, Charles C . (Jr . ) (compiler) 1881 William Few, Lieutenant- Colonel Georgia Militia in the Revolutionary Service . Includes an Autobiography of Col. William Few of Georgia. Magazine of American History, vol. VII : 340- 358) . 59 Joy, Deborah 1995 Archaeological Assessment of St Mary ' s Chapel Cemetery, Hillsborough Vicinity, Orange County, North Carolina. Prepared for the Committee on St. Mary ' s Chapel . Keller, John E . , with contributions by Rhea Rogers, Robert Reams, and Brian Thomas 1990 Data Recovery at 31 GF200 , Bryan Boulevard Extension, Guilford County, North Carolina . Prepared for the North Carolina Department of Transportation Contact No . A300998 . Prepared by the Archaeology Laboratories, Wake Forest University; Winston Salem. Kovacik, Charles F. and John J. Winberry 1989 South Carolina: The Making; of a Landscape . University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Originally published by Westview Press of Boulder in 1987 . Lautzenheiser, Loretta 1990 Archaeological Survey of Greensboro Western Urban Loop, Guilford County, North Carolina U-2524 . Prepared for K.imley-Horn and Associates clearinghouse number 90-E-4220 - 0276 . Prepared by Coastal Carolina Research, Tarboro , North Carolina, Lefler, Hugh Talmage (editor) 1967 A New Voyage to Carolina by John Lawson . University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill. Lefler, Hugh T . , and Paul Wager 1953 Orange County -- 1752 - 1952. Orange Printshop, Chapel Hill Markham, A. B . 1973 Map . Land Grants to Early Settlers in Old Orange County, North Carolina. Parts of Present Orange- Chatham and Durham Counties Period 1743 - 1810 . Published by the author, Durham, North Carolina. Copy on file at the Orange County Registrar of Deeds Office , Hillsborough. Mattson, Richard L . 1996 ' History and Architecture of Orange County, North Carolina. Prepared by Mattson, Alexander and Associates of Charlotte. Prepared for the Orange County Planning Office , Hillsborough. Merrell, James H . 1989 The Indians ' New World . Catawbas and Their Neighbors from European Contact Through the Era of Removal. W. W. Norton, London and New York. 60 Miller, Carl F . 1957 Revaluation of the Eastern Siouan Problem with Particular Emphasis on the Virginia Branches - the Occaneechi, the Saponi, and the Tutelo . Bureau of American Ethnology_Bulletin 164 , Mitchell, Thornton W. 1993 The Granville District and Its Land Records . The North Carolina Historical Review . Vol . 70 (2 ) : 103429 . Moseley, Edward (map) . 1733 Anew and correct map of the province of North Carolina, by Edward Moseley, Late Surveyor- General of the said province, 1733 . Reprinted by the North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Raleigh, North Carolina ( Cummings 1976) . Mouzon, Henry (map) 1775 An accurate map of North and South Carolina with their Indian frontiers. Showing in a distinct manner all the . mountains, rivers, swamps, marshes, bays, creeks, harbours, sandbanks, and soundings on the coasts with the roads and Indian paths ; as well as the boundary or provincial lines, the several townships and other divisions of the land in both the provinces , the whole from actual surveys by Henry Mouzon and others . Reprinted by the North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Raleigh, North Carolina (Cummings 1976) . Nash, Frank 1953 Hillsboro : Colonial and Revolutionary. The Orange Printshop , Chapel Hill . (stemming from a series of articles based on state and colonial records printed in the Charlotte Observer 1901 - 1902 . Originally published 1903 ?) North Carolina Geological Survey ma g Y (map) 1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Raleigh, North Carolina. Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department 1999 The St . Mary' s Road/Trading Path Corridor Preservation Plan. Manuscript on file , Hillsborough. Perkinson, Phil H . 1973 North Carolina Fluted Projectile Points - Survey Report Number Two . Southern Indian Studies 25 . Phillips, Paul C . 1961 Fur Trade , vol. 1 . University of Oklahoma. Press , Norman. Polaris Cartography nd Eno River . Polaris Cartography, Micaville , North Carolina. 61 Powell, William S . 1968 The North Carolina Gazetteer . University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 1989 North Carolina Through Four Centuries . University of North Carolina Press , Chapel Hill Rights, Douglas Letelier 1914 A Study of the Chapel Hill Indian. The University Magazine 32 (3 ) : 154460. . 1931 The Trading Path to the1ndians . North Carolina Historical Review 8 : 403426 . St. Mary ' s Grange Nd St. Mary ' s Chapel (booklet) . Published by St . Mary ' s Grange, Hillsborough, North Carolina_ Historical information taken primarily from historical research by H. Conway Browning and Dr . Lawerence F . London. Samford, Patricia M. and R. P . Stephen Davis 1999 The Archaeology of Orange County. Manuscript on file at the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department, Hillsborough. (In press, will be part of an overview of Orange County' s historic resources, no title or editor " as yet . ) Sassaman, Kenneth E . and David G. Anderson (editors) 1994 Middle and Late Archaic Archaeological Records of South Carolina A Synthesis for Research and Management . Project of the Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists . Funded by the South Carolina Department of Archives and History, and with funding and the institutional support of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Sauthier, C . J. (map) 1768 ' Map . Plan of . . . Hillsborough. Original in the British Library ' s King ' s Maps Collection. Copy on file at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. See also Engstrom 1983 Appendix III for discussion. Shanks, Henry Thomas (editor) 1950 The Papers of Willie Person Mangum. Volume One 18074 832 . State Department of Archives and History, Raleigh. Shiffer, James Eli 1996 Group blazes a trail for preservation. Newspaper article , Raleigh News and Observer . Section B p . 1 , 9 . Stancil, David (coordinator) 1998 Shaping Orange County ' s Future . Web site www , co , orange . nc . us/shaping/default . htm. Explains the goals and background history of 62 the thirty- member Shaping Orange County' s Future Task Force . Links to specific committee reports , new events , and schedule of related events . Steponaitis, Vincas 1986 Prehistoric Archaeology in the Southeastern United States , 1970 - 1985 . Annual Review of Anthropology 15 : 363404 . Stine , Linda France 1996 The First Hundred Years of the Atlantic - Piedmont Fur Trade . Paper presented at the 51 Society for American Archaeology Meetings , New Orleans . 1989 Raised Up In Hard Times : Factors Affecting Material Culture on Upland Piedmont Farmsteads, circa 1900- 1940s . Ph. D . Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 1990 Mercantilism and Piedmont Peltry: Colonial Perceptions of the Southern Fur Trade, Circa 1640- 1740 . Volumes in Historical Archaeology XIV . Edited by Stanley South. South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. 1992 Revealing Historic Landscapes in Charleston County : Archaeological Inventor Contexts, and Management . Co -Principal Investigators Linda France Stine and Steven D . Smith of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology. Prepared for the County of Charleston Planning Department, Charleston and the South Carolina Department of Archives and History. South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Stine, Roy and Linda F. Stine 1997 Integrating a Landscape Perspective with Cultural Resource Management in South Carolina. In Carolina' s Historical Landscapes - Archaeological Perspectives , Edited by Linda F . Stine, Martha Zierden, Lesley M . Drucker, and Christopher Judge . University of Tennessee Press , Knoxville . Pp . 219-235 . Swanton, John R. 1946 The Indians of the Southeastern United_ States . Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137 , Tate, George W. (map) 1891 Map of Orange County, North Carolina By the author, Bingham School, North Carolina. Teague, Bobbie T . 1995 Cane Creek, Mother of Meetings . Cane Creek Monthly Meeting of Friends, North Carolina Friends Historical Society, North Carolina Yearly Meeting of Friends, Greensboro . 63 Townsend, J. , J . H . Sprinkle and J . Knoerl 1993 Guidelines for Evaluation and Registering Historical Archaeological Sites and Districts . National Register Bulletin 36 . United States Department of the Interior, Washington, D . C . Trimble, Stanley W. 1974 Man- induced Soil Erosion in the Southern Piedmont 17004970 . Soil Conservation Society of America, Iowa. USGS Hillsborough quadrangle 7 . 5 ' map revised 1994 USGS Northwest Durham quadrangle 7 . 5 ' map revised 1987 Vanatta, E. S . , L . L . Brinkley, and S .F . Davidson 1921 Soil Survey of Orange C� . U . S . Department of Agriculture . Vuckan,. � George Paul 1948 An Atlas for Orange County, North Carolina. M. A. thesis, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill . Ward, Trawick 1977 Archaeological Survey and Preliminary Evaluation of the Proposed Cane Creek Reservoir [Orange County] . M. S . on file, Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. 1983 A Review of Archeology in the North Carolina Piedmont : A Study of Change . In The Prehistory of North Carolina: An Archaeological Symposium . Edited by Mark A. Mathis and Jeffrey J. Crow. North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Department of Cultural Resources, Raleigh. Pp . 53 - 81 . Ward, H. Trawick, and R. P . Stephen Davis, Jr. (editors) 1987 The Historic Occaneechh An Archaeological Investigation of Cultural Change : Final Report of 1986 Excavations. Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill . Ward, H . Trawick, and R. P . Stephen Davis, Jr . 1986 The Historic Occaneechi : An Archaeological Investigation of Culture Change : Preliminary Report of 1986 Investigations . Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill . 1993 Indian Communities on the North Carolina Piedmont, A. D . 1000 to 1700 . University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Research Laboratories of Anthropol Monograph 2 . 64 Weeks, Eve B . (transcriber) 1984 Register of Orange County, North Carolina Deeds 1752 - 1768 , and 1793 . Heritage Papers, Damelsville , Georgia, Wesler, Kit Wayne 1977 Archaeology and Culture Contact in the Middle Atlantic Region. M. A. Thesis; Department of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill . White, Wesley D . , Jr. 1982 Saponi: written as part of the "Historical Overview" section of a petition for ni descendants along Drowning Creek, Robeson County, recognition in behalf of the Sapo North Carolina. The Papers of Wesley D . White, Jr . , the South Carolina Historical Society, Charleston, South Carolina. Willey, Gordon 1966 An Introduction to North American Archaeology. Volume 1 , North and Middle America. Prentice-Hall, Inc . , Englewood Cliffs . Wilson, William F. and P . Albert Carpenter III 1975 Region J geology: a guide for N. C . mineral resource development and land use planning. N . C . Department of Natural and Economic Resources Regional- Geology Series 1s i j 65 AAAA AAA Ar St. hla - - - cht textural � s .ROad' C,or crndArch � �'or - - aeo lon .Re,ferenceIca ' ,Survey 16 4 + to%V, 6"Aljo e me,let t , a mA OAs , ?, _ ? ! ' y7=, 7' rr:^''�J 'l N f fr �;'I.I,j . r, I .• �Mj 1 t• •+ ' 3 �l r� `l IVO o t:._L=:.l`4� ...`. ' •.,. - (� , , ! ` �+• �v,+ "••- '., `, /- ; •`'; , 'r 5 j art- t �ve AA 0I0""AAt*o AA -Al m4AoI tl IA eII t VI AAFt AS lq AF o Af oi Il A. Io llOV oAA PsAIdA lt Ar lAi let A llAIt o i. It F a A- II wwf o vF dAl tt lA o Oo oIqVsfA o tos o II om AI -1 a . " •'� i i OAF •-'-�: •i \" � i.' 7 ' l ,l . t':yr �_ i•7 ./;m ^ • J1V j, },, _ l1 -i��•r �r • • :c ' Yf'1 ' (•. �. . . 'l ?A• ` «e.o _ A '. `I I,, ? _ } •w `. 41 i/l .✓1 . w - '4is-. . (` ` e �N r' t ;.�, , ; , � .y / `J}1 ; r { , r : r . : f' 'r i . 0 �r :.:+• ^ 0„ l i 'fit ' 1•- ', , - ;{ . � 41 ,_t '�'•.... " ' ; t "'� . ( t:...; ;- .} `• '?�(� ;1'� � ' _.,,.i�/•'f%j•^� + t - ti:.'��"t ` ' � • 4 ' .'r; l _-vr _ J 1 t . s , lam-} •1 f . ' . .,r-a^'' t l I V' �.�_ _ •t•. L.:. ,t f.- _ty -.. t) . ,? ,> . ,.t" t ..li. ' o� i . t �.---7 _ r;,fuo t ;.. r r r : .,3'. lt,~ r /' I ," "•rit •!- N 'f , ! / •• S. + tt . • .�r. i:' ' / 1. • . / ' . .`"••.._.-.. " t �'' - L`l'�, i • Jt . , � f, i •.`-... 1? 1L. :-J' � '1. { ` : •�`. - .:`. t r t t~ o.% 1 : / J !11 r a , i _ 'ti r .'".l ✓1_ yam:. li, � (. •t 'i 4 `• jf� . tt1!Xj �I�1 � sl ' • ' - _ 'wti_ . ? 1� •7 . i/ �l•' •l� :�`, • rr isl � . ( n � ' ; -� � y{p�s. �t{ �7� " f}y ^{' „ ij / i1:'' J.G . • iYr`%'y �. r �y/ �` � J1 , � Jl ' Jrs ~ '~ ] . 1 + I / Jf.,, '"Ap'l(f/ .s �.. tr i R .•� j�J " ,. �:.1q \.i li� 'I/'me• : � f • it `i' ' j'• • I �``- ` . '4, .R&�'�. (, •f � ' l ! :' . : F;'r • L+�'-! ' FI Jv. ' - '� ,Ii_ / 3 - hti✓ r,.i ) i;'i !)•�} .� / ! r;ii'yr T' . +. • 4 , t / rP !e 1 t: �`'� j ? , :1 , �� ; ,t�c. ... y"' +'r ' ..ri, .� � ' .i; �:• _ ' -• "�., , r'`- . `.'� Jr: �•s `� + ` J J •,�i' . _ .:.'r. /•f ' 1't.: • 'w 4 t .Z' �j • ` r • R; r I - ' t t `'4 . 1 ;'1 • . : . ..- : •, u� '•1r yJi t, 1 ��`, . lli + i c . l,'ir/!%% 1~)!^:Jlr S S ') !( t~ f.. � ^� t:{ m4. . .`,'` f :: u r " ✓.: • .; I Al 7, r� � '` .. i •. , 1 , +�_:r�r+s! r /' 1 ' - f 1 ' ' `• . f '' I>�, -r ' -`:' ;• _ '� m�.�+ .;` tom . .L� '�� 11 :u; f %/- John (/� , ) f;. ^ =; 7'r /�i. /r . 0 4 ` {?•' - Sri.' . '.> ts�'VIA` '` . •r '' . 1 + i` t t•� ` l +l . •� ' �~. :15/ �: rF`'• � - f ,' `. e ! / J •� '�� , � 1, t , ' + r VA, AA r1S ;4 7 ` i"'-+ • ^~ . t ., � r1 �Wt'1„Of 4'J / �„!i 'f+ r - , i = t'.. t� " `i( � , Ike •9 - • � :A:• Jt^ l _ < .(A ' E: ' ' I'f' tt,f`'.` ' tt' !,`:ram / ! .:�' / �7i)) yyi ry -� f` rt .�: !!` S 1f':.'�t t,t n'i 'i ' ..,.% :IJrhr j•, = { ' G. ,}' - 'Vs�t ) !}J t • .,1 . Al .ii it=� _ • 1 : 't` .f` `+_ ✓jji '1• .tVr :'�. . 'F'r'; lr�,./ ' .I1r A . • \ �\ '7 i•+ r( rr �i r�/,11 �� � :� •. '�! -1 • ti �� 1"✓.✓`�•!'`�:_ f i ; •'��'. . `.\ ( - M1S • �f• � � •_ ` '_ ' • 3 � '' `r,r -'�: 1 ; / air ! L J „ , r 1 ` : --/ ram �. , •, t - ; .✓�, - :` , ��� ti , t - ' , `Y ', J. ,, l • rxp , , _; . :`.1 . •'i'• • f ;f�C �•�y,+. + 1r''�+•1 „ j ' �.+ ' , f �i y ' r „ r ' l + j •y " ,, ' 1; 1 .:�, ;� /" %' .,,,�'�„1 w \ I ,< ! _%,'' o + r / , 1J ' ! .' ' ' - its yC� . : - t1 .{ >;. `� C t 1 t` , �.ems• l: 'J t �'t, '^-1(/ A. :' �'"' 1 l I• �` f f Abr . 1I �_' ' !' ::ti *' `l , /!At t \ ++S' r - , - ) ` • ' �. • r\_w _ , 1 ; aham !Vets ! �' . r . , ) j _ A ` ti \ " ,: , =Y' - -y :�5 :r �--�;t . -• _� .. grant 17 . ; '1 pt ,I; , : `` jj r f ru` S' • f(y �" Y ~ ' ' , Cowmoj ". ';' , r Z i �4 _ ;; ° goi!`.: I t 1 ^`tti •. . : ; -,yJf/ lr 1�fh :wy . . 'ar .. rR iSS L'r .ve • u �;. ' n .i; j �� _ t I ;,. t {y A . j pry _ -a 1 : , �.:.' i ? _ v c 1,,pu` 1 ' :i-� `i ^:- :? ���y/j, ',lf_, ,,�, . •.:f.• • Y - . . "'•! ryU�s.. • -� - � _ .,,. "rj), r7'-.'.yf2ogO� u: i .,� ' t r !• 1r ,, ueln.r •� ,'ly • ' fy ' r7t ` ' t71 cR. '} - r yr .�'r i•' r `7. b [ ; �,�. :r - ✓ "" �.jr , :, « ' ;x _ ' r 4�,' '',� { . t . I • , , t ••.- - ..i-.t V `= »� , Mgr i r J- 4 , '1.;' .; _ � • ' j .. , t: .• saac Jack s-`" .- _,; ,.-; ;:;,..ems: ~' .; � -' A 1 , pte q. 7 .. tti' r f 1 t.a , . " r .. ,! ,ay'• f/ . + On . �. t ; •1 'v' !' S `, r ��, r , it %'..;r � t t . ) j ; (}, �, r r _ . grant 175 _; ( � � '` '�• ' , ` = _' agks g , . :� ' 7s Kam`:! '� . )• r. �- ' .-% ffi' '�(`' "'�"' . ( _ '`` ti -,_ t • .I,' _ ^ri' ' . .'. ,''`.,' ' yII ' ..lei r,�%:Tl_, r, •'+ t ~ iig T•+�. + �1 t Z.,'�`. 1 .'sal•- . Jt _ t'-` ' ' r �` ` " $� ,Ms� $ t �_7• :- o :A � vvltt� ! . ''`�'.+,� ; .t •.� rTh -" '•;li' •r,n .;;'`f1}` iY� ,y.- ,, . -KI • ,�+� , y":• . ,J • •:-f? /&, - . ,��.^• 1 �?'Z. ,r am Reed t- <<:_ rz : r� ' � : 1{� : . tr tr: ) , I" ' _ ;,1;x _ >}�?. } r _ _ "t• grant 17 , ' t:. , "7 ,�. �f I:L :�- r. ' i,) '' t ,. Il. . %' x wit f: . ! ! i 1 '�.%' vl •'1'f . 0ti ` •.S • 11C'- • ftltb t t . «f a A, ,.`'-,Y.:.::,._.. . ' S4' '- C "y' l.,l • ' , . . . ; %�{ 1 , O 'J(, 4 •` n. t +"' • -'� i .+ � , ` j^'J• -:y, ,r,.v._, �• ,. • • .. lr _ ^t t 'Q�a . : h4;; •' .• . . ,; `yam= • ,;�', ',� \•:, �``'� y. •1.:•. : ti4 " `,�, • ter ;• tan•: 'f ,�ii.VS ,fir • '- Z.. ;f . --... _ ; . e.: , r +ti'i!!e) ;.• t1C,J . t' '"' s.}s•� � _ ��}.: ;?�: • •`'!�,�< .� �.�-•� � � .. � • ` . : . .tit: .rJ (^ ,ram 10 t ✓ $ I ' r r <•.`r • t• :=:rt• 1. . • ••:� „r ,.. � :: _fx,t� tt, • -� `� :',.. . �` i;• ZO ,- +s /, ; fr:� t • C , , r^ - _ Msd _;jf'tJa c ;.• _ , r, : ; ':Z- c ' r q ben t, ' " .1t : t ,. ` � � 11/FAA, r ' , + � . . ... ' " ' � ' : % /•.+ • llri"' / r • �. •,tS ���Y.� , ( ,:a� ' A rt, rig i' �•^", ` ~ 1.c ?. ' \ r}�y - `. •'%' � ' '}i\ i' .. -.c . J ..� '' ., !!- •3 ' 1 , Il}✓ ' `i •" `� ' r; 3� : - { . �`•+., . r , '• , _ _ re' ( o •' 1 1 ` ,f�i11 }' . • r 4s ;'r- '>l ° ` Gore rfY ketem. J Li + �.� tt % ,<t e i i %s ro ; - •w `e ��1` S t 1r �% '� i i(! .;9 .•r ,•. J 1, 's i fI ^ . , ;. .., ,:r. :,: . F e -v/i}r ,� , . � ; Y: n j` !.Sl ) to Via• ,: ,. jj7`JL_ - ✓ } � `^ : 1J < 'i. IN_ ,o • r• �� ( , 1'•►w'Cir •'`• t• �� t • ,�, •~ + ro , • i 'I , � 4 , ' �l i , �i....' ' ) ` /�.. ' ^'4y t• �.,� , . a • •� ' _ 1•`� ' _, A j 7 ?a : r: :: . � ?- I :'f• i ',r, ) = + r r t «rr .,� • ti . , (fir ;. + `j ,, : Al1 - �` 4 :c 1 _ ..; 9 I :..t,°- JjL! : � -.'S� -s "�•�,� ...'.•� r..� LiT• - - . } - :• •ii .': y� • t'-✓`�..•�)) \ �`..^-�� /✓ 'I+�•, ¢ . ' .-ti: +. 1 1 - fr • > :l � . Wltlla � .;+ • ti -(:r;. •w` {' • f ,` f N 1 t ; ism, ow 4 ;• Rf t ti� f ir. mChum T �` =x a . '. , + tf: } ;, 1 w , I 1. y' . rry.'a . ' C',J. ,l/,rr " ,r :! r iiitt • rant 1 `•�,.; . _. 7 rj rr ` ,. '•..K '? - �,, ♦ •;:..!A - -^ i �r . . . ^ti �VI. +1 -1 . . yr. S 1 ::• i + ' AA .'�•� . r ' ..x : ; � . t. 'ptti J �' • ti•' _ 1 % v= r c .`T +, j.. . •' w ' //■��{pu11� i7 /;;. ` l :;' iili f' • w ''''.(ft '•rt� "1 ..•,.;.! :`� •"':• .1 . r,�^^:�� ' ;'(1 '. ' \ t +� -�:t �'•' �� , • •:.mot.. l . M „•` j• •`� • .1 • t • . •_.,, ?V i �W ..' 1`" 'T}.'a' " ' " ' !::.. ' �;t. f'/ :N .,'k:•� J,l� i.•'' ;it?YI r`•:r . p,G ,7.;r.� r ! ' '.t �. ,,� r ' '- ti . . + • • •, ' i`• ` t ,•- "` . ��^\,� , - J �. t• e r : �'� :1.' ' Ci it : t s y .; * , 3. ! r t / ' - � v ' •`rS,l , '.. • st! : r � , , T., '` - � . c - '• : ' „ • � -•/'r '>` 7i ';:j. - .. i,��,t.�^ ..Sr ��.,,ir..:+ i. , . v'•' 1 _ y'�%'i-}:%'r •,it, i ^ , Y ' ;1 i' 't r ! w r , •� . r' . -.. >i^" •.. • n 1 .. • ' .:✓ _ ' t ,y`••\` .._1 C.: _ A , , .yr'r r.1- at rr, r tea,' y, ^k/ t ,t• ?� • : �r� .w . r. ; �.. Ji. S ' .' ." ; i:�- r 2 r 1:� HtLLSgO ' � L R'<!"' , ?�I�' �: . }. .. ," J I NINA ' c S�y` ` " • f.''�`-n J a . ROUGH � d. , ; ":'� �; ;vr ,'' ; _�� mes Ta -Q ' t ' • i ' !'. > !t .;r � . : .1 1' ti , $ '` , � :31'tl ',� �� } u y L?� "n- �.' '~' .�' ,ee Yl r ') ✓ f • 1 , , �• �. ! , la t' p y :.. i � .r �-e� � , .Av .' .` " o , / - r- -a: •. su �. '• • f 1 .. y '� • - , -- . .'_--•- " N ,yA> t• ,: V ' jr , . .t r'"' • r.. F' : fir: r,.. : p - M . • .i • • 4�..1 • i ��fl , A. Also ` 14 •'%`-_� :-��.. ; . r . r . 10 .1t 4 � u ' � . _ K7°'Q3_- `}- 0 • f.•'F ,. _t__ _'.••(y • � r � Vet ✓ R.. ..r`' . 1 V: t '�..•.�' r -. , ,• . • 'l r14! Na" • Mai 1 ^r1 /L • . . •� f • '�r •)�� � : � • , �•Y,•' , �-Y17•�t..•r �� ^•=',_-�^'�. �X ) • ��i ,� y^= • ' . t,! �f `I �,4a . V � /•�..✓ t 1(1''i'' IJ., r t,,y., ' _ , •,to Aye . „" r`1 " ' '+! ^�!;•: '_. . . '! ' :i: .. ~•�':_==` ;_j.: • .v , * � ^�. . ,,� , yZt . „s(y" , •t ,+ %• %."c .. •`• ,•w -r'J ,•'IJr. , •y,rYi'r! . ., t-t r it y^4 • 1 r t, ''/7 _,• 14 l .d • ~' '-- _��C- 3Llr .;�. .. / " ' ;•`: ,?ct , le. , •� r '` ''^= :•sr_"i.-. �1y ^•' ,t' ,• - _ �•��•P . - r _' "".`^ 'li I► +' it + •.rp^ �•+a,'-rr?illC, - ri'• • • ri �t� 7� 11t*• � Jf'�= :t . _ ''�. ► i + u NAI �:. f' t i ;� , + _ r ` .\ rt Y x • y 'v t';- , • . nr'' t T x= ! p •to ^(rtvr v ' 1 • . c . f..w _. " ! � ; trii: l 1 - fin ; :#^ r •.L , .,,tp,I+ i . t ••a,. ) IF J %rr . s' '., •. _ _ ,� : �, f.' ,L .. r ` •a,•{ I r '^' • U 7�w: 53:� ,Q*•, �_ ,. . ., .`r n • �i •: ram • ~ r�; - `- ' , ; .7r.-:;; +c` .;t 4tY.^'' ' x��iG, t .•J . Y ,, 1 Jl: `w�•, . 'b• �7v.' .,V r%' '1 --Y' • ,k 'f •. .. w I . i•• - :( r •�'�� 'd1:"•. tl :3.' , '. r ! rif1��� ..ter „ I +r%•: Lam ' ,�,... a ' 1 '• Am 'A .. ''• /.%.,.;-+... . , J ffl ;r . '^. f ! 0 .'• R' ;",?�fix. y%r . - i' •, t , „ 1 }7^ ?=� '�• � - ' L..., , r,.yf ,ti , :: 1f • ,w . �fr• c.:K. s. . ` . • ,.. . i I,�•t': • '.,y,4�. r' { P , f . .. , t /' 1 ._ iy :)PAI :t �i . ,; '7••r,.l Q1 L / •' J,�,�.. ,• t, .- +, '.y, • i ::r lr' ; i i .;;_:-: ' ,' .f. ~ 1 .• �'i • • Neer• _ .+i ) tFt metwel : ''..:,,�1 r'3•'�• , Ij• �T+' 1 ,'�J..r r.. _ Al,-. ' ..• XJ^ ' njs• f . 0r~h �. . S:, ' fir :.t t ' i' `1' r •fir• n.\.. , .+ '"t•. (' r' ,J�. l _ : 'r: : . ,r ` ,l. !) , rtTe it; t'ry. 1 }r� ,(4 icy. . � r . .i: . e ' ' 'y+� ' �°: :4•r • ..:,.` ' ' .Tf „7//. =, ; -.'•°•, { � .;..` 11( 5 ' { r' t = 1 e _ ' i'. -4:• Nl�ifa/Y `" 3 .. • " Tw.: Al r , , r. Al . '' f : : 1 / I>. .+ ' ;;�;; 6.)� � .i f . •t . t �• � J • . i'I r;.':d ., „ 4 :a �. 2ommo • ,,} 1 .2`+ :c1; , • hllrr + tl�l fr :v'+i'• �, p•'I f.s• �\..: .�•r.- c i J :r J • •r'.' ��+ : a . ;.' *Nr', r fi `Jr`' l T %t it_ 'J , , . . 1,7,' r 1. " 'o A r10 y �J / t : Sr '!;•J .✓' �.,.!:; '� • ti r • y/• •' ' , ' �'-ti •< < �� aOLc t a,_ . . r • , ;,r ` t tTr 4_ ^a+3r _•i _ :; ` ` ' „ :yi , J i." .:•' A, J14 - i ,tot i• , t} : ' {' _ • s• ' .N . ,4 i ti1'�• ` j : ; ,( at , r 'J , . / r ' ~ i mfr; , 7 mi" _ �� .•� S•. �t� aa°. ;, : 1 1 �� ~ . . _ ; : '"� . , - ' jr 70OF I j ; 1fel '. (i ' ' ti w/; 1 " . :' '" -- '''' _ ,� , _ L4. .`e:.�; ' . t , r •r + ' ' St '• ra• a • "•�•�';`C•• . , 1.• - , . t` ,.f,;•- ; . ,,,i; r if 4 r. '_•� '_.:-_ if ' •- • *.'Come t ' It ,` 7 ' ^ -- t , _ : '': i ' tiJ/ (' 1 _ fit ': ' 1 '. r+t ',` ' . s 1 - _ , . • trej Vo, .. .k: :� ; : lr ' ; ;t. . , ; , y Pot Am To I A to A I A se All It -.� '. ,ire . b i r . ` �_ • -II1i' ' , 7. • 1 G • B den S, Stye and Har -- - -- © Architectural Surve ry 1999 - t Edified b � rOve 1999 - Y Sites r ^� y Kristen S • ` - _ _ _ _, - Ayr Mount 9/ 99 1 New Arc v Arch Sites r' A FAA , A Am", FAA Am* All Aj o" Atoll All __ Vow aw -- " sereneness womesson ago merger in V AP if to w V son Vol al. OF r ' - r�,-, ! t`•:� :{ 11 : 1lQai ` „'�rrl ?• ��, { l+ s1 :, , f ' IV 41 r; -5. 1rf�/�•,�I~• : tilt %t ' rftfr . 1,•;r . ) , :� j,r1 ; i ? _ }gt. Ma. g g nnott gran �, { _ �, ; .K ,t . � llx.}(\ S Slt :r elt 'tiy.+z � !S,• '':r. . J , ,4 : , / t . •�,� - . . LL�i\ , u , {{ _ (r t ; Michael Y t �i. -; ,, .�! t, ; • ft • ��� :.tt - rt .-` f �'_ '- �t t•., lS , / +t\�% pi ' ' `- •� � � h't f -"•`�`^ - tp .� ,. t7 . , j'Ci+ sp SOCi^^. K ~` $'_` , t i ' x. J S : , •¢fJ �r vat.. . .. t,� r \! :D.w^•y t + rf on grant 1755 4 : . , rssowsgs• c.._ �t .-:. cef:F� ,{ ~< . �..q or46�" �,— • r r. ac Jacks r. ) +, :'. : �%`;r, ,{ • , '1 ='�i,. It _, . ;, ;�� . �; ; ,p - " OF �, , � Pro qV • • � ; ` lsa 1�! i1 ; .,,'} ;. . � t • s% ! �' t ' Fgt b ' ; 3ta: , } , � � , r! , ` , , j.»"t' �)rrlit i r a I 1 . `� �. a t .t� , •� ' J � ' �h •; f� ��:. '� } '.r •� :,•.. .Y ,. r, ' y� .1 ! t�'� '' d `, .� •�_\. ,•.• '•;• • jtat '.Ir r' VP is � rFev�-y i} �y�1 f // ,� t :,; •'� � jj �!!`lV� _ ', ! 1 }' : �1,y?1' / r. !!!_. `` � 4 If t _ -: '„ _ 7 Sl1t, 0�19 & !t1 {p~ `'•'. � ..� ! w_ !/ 11{. ,� '•� t� ( i4•. r ! � •�j, ` ,j�. ct � ,• fly {DYS@ %' r'/J ,f. /. ..'.�yi _ �3t--`�.+` n -s 9 . J : t V{ fi'rf`,-`•'- f tryF ! ' . ' , ,. �; "° jY �i7•l. ' �. •%! .. ' �% r ; :1�. , Is r t 1 r5 j M _ tr'� f f t � �5e �„f ^,.: ��q89 � \. f f\ � Jt� : � �" • •� , - �n Dennis g an _P •�,,J f. f ��G.tN�' . ;; rr + ::.%1' �j r; �:: r'tom -_�" -�: {IV :�r'- - �� rwr, , ; f ,;t . t y / �+•' !, ` ' ,• ;\ r ,7�" Lr' OF tons ' S � / .. ,; -• � �. �.-/•'^. �{�(-'t off regain< ,.y .•,; a` V ' • ••`i ' t . • ` �j,•. 1 : i• lt+/�' tom. .r` et {v _ is ,y,� ;;w-,M 1.'--i� `� t✓ a.. ; . - (.� 8.. ✓if/( ••' • - ` 2 11 . 'i•s , •;;•- ' :. ' ri0 f f�`f,,�',,,,-., `; ` + ''D.LL+wii •t . �. .11�{soon ,.r •i-f t j� fig . 7 'jr'`�1',\ t ar, , l ! , `•,%`ti • Ir . .�ii�• i ti i • ��,,to ear i ./ � . 1 L � . 4N ,i �• \,;. �7 . :'�( -i t`•� . !r '• tr`• : 't •/ ' \ Y �.• , , ,t fir..,,,, . I �;•;�rt .. < .+•.`.: r "'~// [: tr. •~ GYf " IAll , �.�,, :+ i t i F; ^•I. + .i- c-. . :,ti`+ , : .:t :kf•,'.F;,: . y - {' {/• J• . ) t yJt � " ': � ''� r �r' t VVF ` ' "': �,,, .,,/y,•« �.y_ \ •,r. t ,_ i �i•�t `.'Y'J�t+ , !"{�-` OF Van ;,••� } !r"�i fr= yt jor - t c-lJ JJ � . . , Vol r77[rt �' "irval .> ,• ` ,` =: `S* ' r rt caosao; dtr' lt• . �it Exon al �� t . '` l- , r •'l t •Y iy - l $ ! , '� =:'•a• t • ; ', • ' •:.SfG�'i !:J,�. . . t• } // �. .•,rv' i l , . !a i-• ' l : . 7 �• . S, '! 1 L! i '` r . � / fJ•y ._ 1 ,+'i�{•�'� � t t 11 - .�`• J1tt . t '1 t , , . '. 1 t - s rr� '•:"z! r 4'_",-• bt +s�;.t,.�, ' 1 3� 0 ��tt'• .,, '�h r "� r . l oll a _ St SPIr • t: �{ _ :� "' ti4 t •'r� 'aV I d ,%,-� � _ 3 .J � f%' v t' !� '{L ~ 1 3 �1t , F.� t `r too �' f c ( S i js � {01�80 - . 1ef(( ,�'i( • . 1)s 1 " p{ i ' �ri.'� f,:,'. �+ � we ri' �. . � , ( t + �1 y�7' . :. $ ' f13 It r I T,1 9�{1tt?► ` _ w{ ' iGs:`! �.,j ihc<illf i;' ? N.. :�1 �ylG t : x zis� 'ti y r .• . 't,.t: f- < , . \ j ' `� , a • 3_:� 1'.: .f.�:.v $+<.� • t f . ti ( _ i ' \`, �., i \ ` h 1 ,+ _ - t ��rJr if i1 } ,^`r I �,,ii '!. tip{ t \' t i - /f/.^.�,,�\ .:•r S .% y.l r .1 :.. ' ,,� • • r �. �• :r r Y • {' H �•��; , .f� Y i� �) � ; t�`\ i • a. ,4 OF .o '� - �• _•oY �y t , �cyy lr.'. pS..'a 'i_ ,� •tz i e {- ' '']�• ,. ,p? . . ) e8{1$,�1'�, ;�.r } , .fl ' r ' -'{s • 7 ih'j�r•. r� . !' '.``;1. 'J „ { . �t;.J:t;, '` �,SL�•,` i=�i rrim, •� •'r�i-.,',"!t•t _ '•"••_ J t • .. l r ` { � IV IV� . \ (! 11 ?, ,��1{! r _ �j I '; } !;t '.. . tta : • ,�SW '—, 4.�=- iFk r . t �, t f r c , . _ L _'` , � :. • L!r • • •st v(', ' '�-•;1 ,. • •Hill J; :• hFl `i.\- :t } •4y �,y ,a• � t,{ �_ 7. , - %ell• ,, i., • , ' � :! . .. C ;r - _; l, . , : / 1 _ ! , � I t ' ' ' ,td ' � tr,;'J 1 , 1 ' 4t t b O w� s. ; ' • , u t':i (ii' 1�1 �5. = � �k ' ' ` � �!StIi. �' � .y'Jt }� S' , `}(1 ' f 'f � � `�!�+'? {. �F!✓ ,r( r� S ) � ilk t •' - f -r'_ ��r i I ~ i✓ � i ' ;�\•. � *PP,} - a • � Y1�'t ' { %:ii t :!`. � :,: .�J�}11 .5"} ,11 • .tC :�{: /VOW . •;. fy •:•) ,r} ,y� `, .1.%{ ° ) :C. -' .. •�,!/ ;,( T ' C'r� ` %) � = r''„_ r t S47 %r`.Y✓r' lrt; rs� w �f{t � ;/r,i 1 'k- °} rl: r a � ', � tl'. f r" r�_�4 Ilk �( r 5 1 , i V i : , x t ' r, a r .'t ' '/ !Ls . �'.0 11 - 1?{ ' t•-i d% { / t lr, '' �" �'• i - .. �t�. . �, �'�, l �: ... . .-'�:'�. rr � t rf:{ , G r f' r<--.i^.'r:J Alt�i• •� rw. j . ,:1 ' isii , •i ' _�•' + #"S' - / J��" ,/�i I. :?il `-• '_ � ,� Q�:PwP .` ^1 . .5 �'� - } ) � '.1 ' • t . -. �.-z.`� •) ; ' : �_• , r >{• f .. � y{i' it = ..-. .5 s / . i .wnsl .its ..i1 tr ' ` t1' ,'` ; ~ �•i'ii � tl •' ' t �1 1'.'� T,.-ar. `,O � '''v ' riJ , •� _ J '�" I , i , .Y -J- i .J .j _ ?�;1+ �'! • Ilj:t. :' r _ ..;.:c:, •, � - tr , ( ^ ' r' r amir � - ' a r. tye'., , • ��•• Syi, •.t..ti<f !�' ' - i,,•• r .ram.+,..,,, , l , ` � -lI � ; '1. . . i at \ V . I -y, ,. . '" A . ,( t -' j ✓� �` rc s y )bt i l , J r 116V t. . GAVIi,` iyn.. , _t 1,teeb te. �..;' '' t` - j -310R ( _y' ^. Sr `= I. ' '•. t F , :. . ,:_ ' i ffy! _ 1 J ,r,��f Pr ewe �: ow- :Y . . f i•• }• t1 t ' •!i;• 31 , , t...., °». 7� } (^. y �• 4 _ � . 't 1 . ! ,a �1> % (goes ` . .� �y t �+f it 't i s ; - :.�; •. - � ' ',= •• ; - - r ... 1' "j� IF- t' ,! r f •H• : . y : {w �`: .tii ' BH 'r v . _.. Yv ,.,'.� .. '!dc'.•t-, " �S " ' �'.} 'rid • .s+rr•. ,�•". . \t . . { • ' \ � .,�r � ^..• ••rf ti`3 t ffFast i. i ,[ . 1�t .%- 46 c•?:'r � • ��� t.. ! {�".�{ r(<- A6 .`�"�.�++� 'iJ �_1,q.�QR _�J � w - ri •.4 :t :i� t t L: 1? P �,;y : •I11 �7: �'. i ` .:�J','- mile c.}/ ; . J. . � v , rrf ���t� :^t �• • 1. • 't , +� ' �l ra�J :• -`y,'S}"Fell 11� !` Jr i } �L-•;• . 1 ' ti�'''� i ' ' lj '.��•' `'• • �,.. l t �,./'�It 'Mora , -,r �,' _..•� _ ,�f�rt•_ C +' '-'•sr,,, iG •� .l �+j . . , t l r� "" t (�} ..r 11 i V `r • rt-�'yt ' I tj:l i' I & t•,. y).]� :..t •- S t � �/"' ? r J '. .t/ J• S! t . f ✓ ffr4 }} .\ t� r . t VIVA ` �%" •. t.�� i�t} > t', .-�'•"`� 7V � S •-z-._'• .' ram^'-'•••`t . ,.. i s _%'� 'i tl '1 ,� � A, \\ , t�{1 y ��-,,�' j • , y • JI`3 ft! ' _ y�J , 'y✓ ii` 1 ! ,.�j, ,..+•\ 7 �\ �fr^•'. ^' Y1: !7' '"iU'f '' T ` 1 I � f { I C'J t { ' � . . / j ( ^,.. %= f IS rant ur � f1 *1 w , ;: J - fir i tG3 ': ; ; �..:� , , i ' ' : �t �; � � f �:r.. /. " r .� J J . . L t ,: j t/; Jf. < . : , , t�. t =�:?, ^ t r' . : { k ' , ! Lj(1..�, hn ,`t• t• �•` ,:• ff• f . s j 1 . tr `ttC +h,u,t,, tt, Al _ ,1+G. S J ((•;j00 ,'/ to %J� : r�� ,\ , t ,l'1 y Fi� j t : S wl . . :, t,l',�1 t� 7 .fi , l,. s2s •f+z -@ �\-.. . �' j) 3 r'�' t4i . t, .. I %, 1 •- f? ' . a., W • ll14 9,�r Ja L+ • saw do. a tiIV t C y ` Nt,.,} � 1 . .�'+�: `•' , (i{�' /,� fyl ~ S�ktdiif ^iZ• :'r:- f; 'l • :,y� st tt /• ._J •jJ . ! l • . / , t �?:.'- C ' ?, %• o& ,f: • .'• � . r` •i. ,t C 41 .\t Its .. :5• Jr ;;•)�1 - ,tj. i . . : . , rPoaoo. 4 t , ._'._'%.••r..�,�, ,' . . _ i• ti ' y� '! less �. 7+ , .r.•� GL .� 4 r. i �' I^ : Yln + .ti' 1 't M rs : (� . - i t "` , r 1 �• J,- ) Sif '�4- •,i�i/ `Z ^ct� 1 t ( tt} � ' �i %�li : I :, , r iy . , ii ! :.�� ( . . � , ; . LZ��,� ! : � ^ Pr i t { . .�.• _ or , 1�."� y i ��\ ct2s-,+• l lt�w ' f , w= Fnt3� / ?• S 'l: ' , t •♦a �p4 '.:• toll jY� . ' ' Iv l n t�tf �t + - ? �• ' ' �`{` \�-:/6• .Mi' i, i. _t t. • r ���t cis': - `� _.' v . : . t t ' t t , v. , L .•:y SJ 1 ! :L)t., Si=vr . \ • rL:. • 3 - +�'.z )+.t_ t s 1}/ . ! •,{ Q' . _.J 7 r t ' _ ° 1 ,.i'' � . th -: 1 , :l ;y ': r' ''. . V4 ' t v:fG1 1 fir : W''%� F ! � � : 4 -r at �� �J '1; z h`,t �wa , r (. 1Y ,�. J f f(( �- a�a\tt tt{ t1 ,1 } !f � 'lfil!l'yt ` • f l ' .r el 'G1 � � >: t '<i,:x� •, ttti '\ t lr ' , F,�� `` _ i1. `tt' S ti• } 1 �} I '�f :�,,,. ;••� i •'•._.{. '•Y ' '•,t ( '1�. ? jr.._ "i, !a{r /_' ,, tj" t ,t.. 1 1•• (-r•_ :Yr:-• t,) {;:. - S f f(M1l'- • '7 {;{J /i{ it , v' / • t:� r 1 .� t ,,....!•'.�..f•` , c '.i :i`{�, .::.f`�f y • tt`E�-�11reyi.'',t_f1 . �j �C;,, . �t''� �ti • } lj,teli, Y }jy �� ,,..: _. ,ias:� 1 ` ` .�i:;: - Jt ° t fr , { \'; : f it ! �" , + ' a ._ :_ ` .•_ y(�(( ` 1 ..•_•. ;., ' ' yr� � , �,,.plot >S , ` ''t+_1 :. . r t•', .i- t / rt r • n � • t :l N \ s+: ;fir-: i =�'t,'C'�d ~ 7 r J . .. xTa�. t t .'•v !•-I • l l.;.t.' l:n1 i•./.:7_ 'I I"'" J� '7 • r ' _f;,r sJ .J !'�, 4 44 ,, f v ,it! � 'PP `• fiY'1v- 4j, , •ts . _:' h ✓lt r l ,[t t t '- j .r�' 3 • ,y • ,.7r� OFF, - ! . ` y , it Yt Y,�: / 1m • " . ' , 1, ,/ . .� 7! tt r •.' �ti�_�Nine - 7�,� t } �,.C.%% .I �� f�4�. n. -e" �f,+t t •� �'�'`• �y t • 'r ,li y } , r� '1'`} Vol - sea _ tl ` J/ t`•;• ! {e. ,,- „'i .+1" ,7� . '� i3i r�,}�• �wn, no 'a � j . . •')pY;.4^no y !G„ ! 7 J : � i f. . 't t , � .:3 .:^ Z+`esy ` ' ,�j�{t,:�.. f, �i ..:,r` .VwwPFV :,` ` t Con $ au ' �"ti. ' ,�tf'+ i' a IN t ' _ l�� w , : t ' \ fit �J- \ �'=r."`•.,: V.%31 's S'}�J ''' -w 1X ,. •\ , Y` • ' r Ib ,••s. . t 1 ,{ Vl 1` :^�= rl , y ��•1 =�:P' � . .. t�. . (� -�-: �- sa . � t r [ y ;�J� ti !'� � •. Ic -, i`` �' r 3 ( 1 _ v.{f' . � i l r•.'s { tt' � l V � ' , i, t �1 ; � ` �t.:') r i � at��ti,y '' �.!✓l:'town, Pallet ! _ 1 f , f' R,t::• °tf a ') S 'Tr'.,tiT�, '• p� s � . ��f }7i 1vow I, J : 1 rr. Ni i1{it (t=' ^r _ ,.fir :,.• � , J.+ iSN /, , : . _ ./fr': :'. , Y •� ' - �� +•� �• '� , .S• •} � NAA a ✓- 1 , F —h . ld i ` \t t(a..l �tlr r:� �,�,'�• .,�'�-i`,� v`,.' � !y! \\.•, ,;r Y ' ;% t.f•_ ,y�l;�::: •. . 14 �, , f , A , •.rf L 1 i r•'r-• ( ._ .' , fisr r �•• , t,'- '. `\ �. F. -r5 f �:=y + .rt . zl> ` Y �! R �>�t /It .; �r :.3_t*%.^ l `,j J 1 f+ J TO 1 � . e..�. r3,r � •: 1 �' e r •`, . r l '. c .t; •+, -, :1 ,:Xe;;rrt••,`' .•?t ;'G'a ',', _ r: se {': 'r'' r'..a-1- N' .1 1. 3 N� "•�-_`1cK �( a' it y i-r ' ^ 'r *•`Y'i ,fi`. re / i t •'� ` "•" i t . Y . �..-� 1 ; . :•riV' t tt 'I'� c a tr r / t • y; . r �' , '4�!' i; , t/. >.}; t ',ttf4v' :r '� ` R' ' ✓.. !StS' t t'` 'tow % �,i lr i�l •.� jjJ F Jr : f = - ?: . - tiC ir . • , }:'.y.�.pan, ,t.- ►.. ` i) '{,J/, � t r.�• •tr « t J ' /� tt\ ! {f ) aft .r�•,V• t ,.,,1=+, l f_�t ' + �:2 `'c•'t '•}} jC ' •?i(i''r• is= : ) i " r1ti@�{ , t(t" t � •;i•;• ; ':i-� •' t.i. 'ti• t { - .[{�.J F• t '. ' ', , ••S` t-�[ t• ;. , , } !, _ - . , . �, \� . _ J � . ,j .lfFor r �Stilc v it 1 ' t : ti . t i �1 f l � .i .! i z 1 r!. t ' 1 ,^-"a, z !ti: f %•r 1. 1 1! O _ -•'S':"a: �'i 'r :- 4. i . • i• /r' �.�' t'. /j / 4U(tyt 1 j J �� a.}_ .� r <�. f _� let \ �([(��-:`, C`11�. \-..� \tt( 1� � l' .` ' �rrtlFr f i. , .`',i?:s�4` 'tr .\' ,.�, ' not .�\,� :ICI :,1 ' _J F ' 3 j J � '� t'1.'t i' •rt •' `•Jl f t�J `- ' �"( f•-� \ . r _ •;\ •s�ti `l� ` t .J�`,s •t� �r`:fif )�ry.• �t: 4"lea �♦ � t , ,� t/,` . } ` elt .. Arm ••`., 1, {!i''- / S� 'i� \` _ ,,�, /s lt•` ,. h' ' P. t� ,� . t '".'tFT w ,J t ` • .4 'j ftt _i r, ..�•,.i1 p%� '�iS1'.!•.M ( �ii l.! s EtOr"h { .:�� r i^• t t. t � e '�' ' .J' ::'"'. !! , `l �t/ tt 'i. '� + 'Ft lf,. r 1 , rY. r f __ f�' . S''' • '+r'It . r•.. 1, rE,` x 'r �• t r •,`L_ .••, 7 J`'' • rr SAll, , �. •-y ! f, \ :S})t, . �� 1, F l ,(i!• J/ - lt.r• !ir'' 'n '�✓:�j it L--;± Z •.s,Z'"-':f it {,ry . '. iir7 ,�. •_• , •Y5� ! r , "yf .. . • �) � � , .. . _ .t�'Y , , ., ..� Vol a I-, t. 41 rCK ti . ( -..1:� ti •r '., . .1r: 't'-.•i+" o�,.''�r:�f+: ', 1.�.', . 3,� +1 . .t •.J. : S• �' . : ! ai �•Y . 4�1,L\! t V _ f , 1 tir •c f .: +j•• :�Y��";••l .. ty, ,I . •qa.' y T •.•.... i -•% r i f!�- •`t. . .S IF .y1 tl + t a ' , ,•r JI > t ,t -C.K ,:tv. / .;y:• �1 ' '!:a': ' ` � .y. r.• • ``� ,. .'•*: . .. rY . �t„ rr,� .:,�i\. ' "iC•,ijor }t•z ,, 7: t ,!� (ja rr� '•''•S�'--1 f,,, . .7y.� I , r�.i �r • f'+f%' . ,F '•'f/. ifsal `'} ' •j 5 �' - r , t„ 5'.; •l en ! -r , F , l.�Y-' S •: � a '� /J. {l � , t { JC.-;y . y r ; .. 4w ' l� ;i- .w r,... • a _ rl~ - r r - .� S t 1< ';I� tjrI r_„C -':.:,�+,;-•1 : �5.. t:' •i'' _ � �-i. -:i, t : ? ' _ 4.:. , " 5:7 , s��? '\ �` fl , �b ,.t�; r,• yC;✓_ ' . J ; t . f,• t � ) t _ .• t'>7 . _ t �Z y k r� ���.. . , >) 1 ! On ^ : t. ,`•�;,.'a• .:�tlPit L"•-,��! r i `3 \. >.. «a? - ' 'f i.' - r•{ �. y e ass .tr• �' ' _ y; ' ? ' rSt f ` ' to V�"�• rl� as -;+V' N 1, •� . 3 t�^ t /: , f . ` . .; � s ,'t'F.v} • �.l `'` , i, o•: P flb :l1 Vol ' t 83 �' t. - •.•xr' ' .r or f,w !"'11f1. ' ) li ,{ q '•+✓� ' l,ib: n Eta } S' , T,;. f,>` t. ,•t.'kAs .jr•:`:(`• t t + ' . ' , • f _ �4. '�' .t•., tt i'. t, i , r-z 1, ra �i" f' }: '�"i ,' t••' • �t5 � :\ . }}t, ttt l�,,.�• • ;'tiJ,ty;�,�f•�i� "?,r."r5. . t , . ':tt`fi• ( .\�,. , i: ' _ \•r_-^';,C:,� 1' I °{'Y' _ ,Y',• . ';r,••. .- :zr .a% 'tc• . � ' r . �+- , ri �j r:rl j� a`.. .t . .. �r •'" • t:..i Y. t ' a . nol . 1...�-.. 1' •t • 1„•.. '' ;lr.. Jft '�{{:' sel ♦ •� ,rY. f„ "f1 .J. . j a• ,l.assi'ti� a�` �y'`. -i1CGtNt ": _ .:e3 In - a - 'l:f i :� •j " I Older I::3z-r.' , h' '"`�•. .: !' :i.'.) ' a - "�'i�• � • %' i_• Y J" :.r 3aJt)ti. �'�''"L • �'V.'.' J.. ae . .1.'.`•'�:. is'.a,•g%• _' ty� •'ti<+�. ,-•d1t7 ; - V\:.•". , ••�i .'i.a:' ' 4� a ' ••;! ',Cr.••',••,y,' a1 � i7,. � : '•{�.�. :s� �-' %' '•1` ':`• • ;L�• .'i•� . t � _ n.� -; :r`.'." ;• -•.l � 'fi` ; ,� ? � � .. :t '^l ' . r; < •r• � ~hA` t/!i A rt:. 'i_ � * :,' { y • r, ;, _ _ ' •70 '•ti4^r,.. _ - y-- 't } r . � �' � %-1� ! =• ♦ - ti, <t. i`• • ! . , }✓, �111 .i ' . �.� . .f :.,\ • . : t, �., ,•.•,t , y ' !• ., kt` ;• -� . , i' z.l ;i, :'.' Y, - / r f ' -'{. �: / t11•• -• t_ l .-1 t _ _ _ ' ` .ty. •4,i� • ¢a�';• ^ a,, i{C"� : l . �..; ;i ' ••t",1ri. ` I ' ��.•.":j';h .Wt : - '` l � . ;. d :�•— -l\t„ \\-,•_Y- / 't 'tpr.r: :1� , 1+' . '`a ' - ; , r ; .,�; ,. •}•�•, i�'.t ;,.. _ * IV :% AIii .' •s� :l,y�.{t`t�lj 'iy/•�+.t -�` l }54. ::,{ l .. ', f. ti+'}; ,i i•;j - "'i' . •y . 3 : - �,C6T • . i ,l • '/ . �jl� . .. M ) ,'\M,+„•i �J• v .V.( •ti ' „v !•r' i4i : • : �I,,.:'. '•il' ,S3 4\• �j-• . •�•j r: •S !1 11' • _ .N''y.7,if' .+ •. r s we y'! t. •. Y:.r . _ r : • �� , : •-�; !1 .= ;J,, , ' .L 4i.; _ , r +' . - to" :,fir . !y:•'ll� "p .ni ) . Q �{. t\t ._--- '•_"'—",` . a , 4 \ SJ `y. -, �l� _ i iA; , r)'rr /.' _c_= . ..Vol 'r� . t'i . __ t ' 3 f y • r7 i� , .�i,'' j} , ' ,,.. rq.; .cf" 1 1 t^ . ,t__ ", 7 (".' i=:.j : oapo , �i �t -- - .z,: ? . • ! " on r \�:t ,t tJ�l_ ^as ,i : 1 . t r ./f /� } t'w�:�i� ki14 •� ,•t• `:, •f�. -%"-'• .ti Y : t ✓>` A • :�� 1 �• ;t� .J`�- ='• 1 is f '`jA... i f i . t2fui ' r� ;l y �,; of 4 . J ;. ,S : ;� • ._ y1 , ; ,._�i +f. -:•1 ,7\ : s.� � �t . ' 1 _}.,:4 .._ t ' -� =•^' :;' •`"�T ,. ,J• tf r t.:" 4=i, ''' ' t ` �'`7 ' ��{' `-•c.,foalP i�•,at V t :~ 15 4 tons 1 'iIV r' , / ( .att . . ) n tl i'y';1 < •,,,' ►.,,'^•1' 1 , rif�:',r' pia . i :i': y eI '•� Is w qv ly .sft:: '. •r�t ' { )l :`. r �?: 'J.•us old ': tt � ',r;_t i ! S►t tt, .. as, OF sit ,-:•._. irR { ,, • ' .:r:"'F: S ,, f , : t40 1-�J , ;,fi^.". :: �}! , S j . Congaree Soil A d `.. . _ - - -- d { Ow r Mount Raa _ - " MILE AY 1 soon Altavista Soil t4 _ - - -- - O Road Remnants . . . • 6 _ son owns Ford, sea tapld Road" „ New Road" - - FY 19; ,000 6 " ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF CON USSIONERS PROPOSED GOAL 5/3/99 ew a'd< v.0 s•;#. �.s�r• �a -n in:r•:;aa ^yea»�. t-. .,<� `_ .,z. �.:==x,...,,.•sa. T. IDr.S .f• ^.""ar:..'�"'"'t.. �c»�.L..,,+.i.^a• sb'•�v's..'vr...•:;�•:•^'`•rr<' u" +F- •3.'. .e ,,»;� ,�a. „M.,, ..'.. ,�.. ,.,.., :r�.-� •�. ,.ter ! '< . .-, ay,,.e...a.,y.<...+.. -,., a.�... .y: a.. :,,, ..�'*•.+. ..' .L C',.'a1.r.<7 nL, oq^c- .l' '.�..- '��,'S, N } �'.�' �n S<e «.:^�.� a,4:� .•1"i.H: '•Ti::ro.:,.T:;i., .... ,.. ... ,.,.r~. «: �.., ,et,. < a, z,. _.•..;,.;,n.,..W" 3 3: ,}�r,..... w aw. ;�'«r.,., a. .. ,...s. .r..< L .r t "^ y,..;"'eh.,:�`-:: .r � d� '•;. .,;w,�., 'r•i. #.. .aaa�t'23 i+':'St' ::G;";° «.,�}��.,,... a ::.z::�� .,M::.::... '.;�: a�`:`N .b".n. „a gg,,.t �N #R .�•- v,..x r .a...,..r M.. .tt8. .P:': Y 2. u l {{sz .. e ,>.. w .. -.a..•.. <::• ty'�'?.s '�1$. '�U,.•;^. .� .>. .'2 � ,...:,�v'�:.,.,..:.» d.•.,a,.a,<.; „F .Ahu }xt�:^ .Fu n .r.� a .5 ar• .� �'�gs Z.+ xv... t.<,;v.F.,< ,(:..«.. yr..+.<rr,c.A�... �+..,.,.- .a. n a, �n.r+o..s ,. .•a) `#:t.., a., �.v.1; .2 v -,;:�.:<.�:•ai.,..:.,,'a�..':`6.v.,.z�..a,swgw.s:.>":srz+.:z.:t:s::zi*'.;Q;.;:.c< .F:ro..n '•'ku;�M.�`z'v:. ,yr,.,. OBJECTIVE 5—Pursue viewshed protection goals to protect the integrity of significant historic sites and districts DATE TASKS/MILESTONES TARGET FOR ADOPTED COMPLETION BY BOCC Historic Preservation Commission reviews Visual Resource goals of Rural Character Study October, 1999 Joint meeting with Planning Board to discuss ordinance amendments regarding viewshed December, 1999 protection for historic districts or National Register sites ERCD and Planning staffs jointly prepare new implementation tools January—March, 2000 Report to Board of Commissioners April,2000 Public hearing on any proposed ordinance changes May,2000 rr n c� N 4 . OPTION D Option D allows for a planned residential development with a density of 0 . 72 ( 72 units . oer 100 acres ) where two - thirds , or 67 % , of the tract is left in open space ( either agricultural or natural ) . NUMBER OF UNITS : 72 UNITS PER 100 ACRES ( DENSITY ) REQUIRED OPEN SPACE * * : 67 % OF TRACT SPECIAL CONDITIONS : Option . D developments should utilize public water and sewer where possible . Where public water and sewer extension is not cost - effective , the use of community alternative wastewater systems would be permitted . The use of such systems would be contingent on participation in a Monitoring and Maintenance program adopted by the County , and such systems should also be built to public specifications . 5 . OPTION E ( RURAL VILLAGE ) Allows for the development of a " Rural Village " , a planned residential community with a small - scale village - level commercial / service core . The overall residential density of this Rural Village would be 0 . 84 ( 84 units per 100 acres ) . In order to develop under this option , four - fifths , or 80 % , of the tract must be left in open space ( either agricultural or natural ) . NUMBER OF UNITS : 84 UNITS PER 100 ACRES ( DENSITY ) REQUIRED OPEN SPACE * * . 80 % OF TRACT . SPECIAL CONDITIONS : The Committee finds that Option E is significantly different from other residential options , and should therefore be - permitted with the following conditions : A minimum tract size of 200 acres shall be required for development of a Rural Village . Public water and sewer extension is required . Rural Village developments shall be permitted only within a defined " Development Sector " , to be analyzed and defined in the future through cooperation with local governments and utility entities . Such a sector would factor in the# location of arterial and collector roadways and feasible public utility extension to create a logical , cost - effective and easily - defined corridor of the Rural Buffer where such developments would be encouraged . 8 { Rural Village developments should be located within one - mile of arterial or collector roadways for traffic management reasons . Such developments should not be located on intersections , and should be buffered from roadways , The Commercial / Institutional core of the Rural Village should be designed at the village level . This should include a road network designed to protect the visual resources of the rural . character and discourage passer - by activity . * - Single - family residential lots only . * * - Roadways and easements , except pre - existing utility easements , cannot be placed in or subtracted from open space set - asides . IV . PROTECTION OF RECOGNIZED NATURAL AREAS A . Recognition of Natural Areas As previously stated , the Committee recognizes that the protection of the County ' s : natural resources is of utmost importance as a consideration for future land use development patterns . There are two county Inventories that identify sites of specific natural cultural and historical significance in the County . The first is the Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats of Orange County , produced in 1989 by the Triangle Land Conservancy . This document lists 64 sites in Orange County that contain important natural areas or wildlife habitats . This Inventory is recognized by Orange County currently in its Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations . The Committee also recognizes this inventory ( though not complete ) as an important source for identifying natural sites to be preserved . Also the Inventory of Sites of Cultural Historic , Re creational , reational Biological and Geological Sianif icance in Orange County , produced in 1986 - 88 by the County Planning Department , is recognized by the County ' s ordinances . The Committee also recognizes this document as containing important information on sites of significance to the Count ' s Rural y 1 Character to be preserved . Therefore the Committee recommends that , outside of the open space set - asides required in three of the five development options in the Rural Buffer , prioritized efforts for the protection of Orange County ' s natural , historic , cultural , and geological resources be focused on the preservation of as much of the sites identified in these two inventories as possible , including the Purchase of Development Rights and other preservation measures to be studied in the future . Be Methods of Voluntary Protection The Committee finds that the preservation of natural resources can best be fostered through voluntary methods . It is 9 Attachment 3Ot w �- ` ::: CqAtAM ' K 44" le 1 11 Wit Ot North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources 1 . State Historic Preservation Office James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director October 11 , 1999 Orange County Board of Commissioners Alice Gordon, Chair Orange County Government Services Center 200 S . Cameron Street Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 Re : Maude Faucette House (The Elms) , Efland, Orange County Dear Chairman Gordon : It is a pleasure to report that the above-named nominations to the National Register of 'Historic Places have been approved by the North Carolina National Register Advisory Committee at its July 8 , 1999 meeting for submission to. the U . S . Department of the Interior. The nominations were forwarded to the Keeper of the National Register on October 11 , 19996 You will be notified ed when the properties are approved by the Department of the Interior is will require approximately two to three months , for entry in the Register. Th Sincerely, Ott to Jeffrey J. Crow State Historic Preservation Officer JJC/jct Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 (919) 7334763/733 -8653 ARCHAEOLOGY 421 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994619 (919) 7334342/715 -2671 RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St. , Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994613 (919) 733.6547/7154801 SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699=4618 (919) 733-6545/7154801 �+- o CM z o a Q o a s o o � _ Celebrating 60 Years of OD N Preservation North Carolina N H • H It's quite an extraordinary story: a small,dedicated group of �? citizens deeply believed that preserving the architectural leg- L acy of their state was well worth the sacrifice and expense for � the enjoyment generations. � 0 Celebrating60 Years I Y 9 -c 0 r- fSixty years have passed and thousands have caught the pres LL N ervation bug. They have worked,contributed,studied,lobbied se � and cajoled to preserve the very structures that convey and M W E) Preservation give meaning to their neighborhoods and communities. Pres- z ervation North Carolina is proud of the role it has played in North Carolina nurturing their enthusiasm into what continues to be one of the 4 strongest historic preservation movements in the nation. W CU o ac 0 au_Q Ax ow-t To share this important milestone,join us at one of a series of Ix V4 ,,,o� short luncheon programs across the state that will highlight the X � 0 people and places that have been at the heart and soul of his- toric preservation in North Carolina. a a .o V 1� October 29 Edenton Acknowledgments N November 11 Salisbury Preservation North Carolina is grateful to the fallowing .� z November 19 Asheville sponsors for making this series of programs possible: a December 3 Wilmington � � a Bank of America a' "" � December 10 New Bern Mary Duke Biddle Foundation The Lovett Foundation January 7 Raleigh o a 42 Z ao C ~ O m tf O C O. p y zc � oc a) c.. Celebrating 60 Years of I N Preservation North Carolina N H • C'f H It's quite an extraordinary story: a small,dedicated group of citizens deeply believed that preserving the architectural leg- acy of their state was well worth the sacrifice and expense for X to Celebrating 60 Years the enjoyment of future generations. X 0 OD Sixty years have passed and thousands have caught the pres t- of ervation bug. They have worked,contributed,studied,lobbied �,�I and cajoled to preserve the very structures that convey and -X MAD U Preservation give meaning to their neighborhoods and communities. Pres- z ervation North Carolina is proud of the role-it has played in ���, North Carolina nurturing their enthusiasm into what continues to be one of the strongest historic preservation movements in the nation. c 0)o own ❑wtfi To share this important milestone,join us at one of a series of .�, ,,,�� short luncheon programs across the state that will highlight the rX,,.d�0� people and places that have been at the heart and soul of his- toric preservation in North Carolina. o October 29 Edenton Acknowledgments N November 11 Salisbury Preservation North Carolina is grateful to the following N fl November 19 Asheville sponsors for making this series of programs possible: o," mCD December 3 Wilmington Bank of America CL" a oc December 10 New Bern Mary Duke Biddle Foundation The Lovett Foundation January 7 Raleigh J NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS P O BOX 1605 ATHENS , GEORGIA 30603 (706) 5424731 September 30 , 1999 Orange County Historic Preservation Commission 306F Revere Road Hillsborough , NC 27278 Dear Member, Recently, we received either your first-time application or your renewal for membership with the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions . On behalf of the NAPC , I would like to take a moment to say thank you and let you know how much we appreciate your support . The involvement of every member, whether a commission , an individual , an organization or an agency, is vital to the success of our organization and its ability to best serve the preservation community . In the coming year we look forward to bringing you helpful information and " news you can use " through The Alliance Review . We are planning statewide assistance teams for improving the work of local review commissions , special publications , and cooperative education projects with the National Park Service , the National Trust for Historic Preservation , and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers . We hope you will be in touch with us to let us know what is happening in your community and to tell us what we can do to assist you in your preservation efforts . Again , our sincere thanks , and welcome to the National Alliance ! i Sincerely , Jacqueline Renell Membership Coordinator `M STATF ck ull •pl y North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources James B. Hunt Jr. , Governor Division of Archives and History Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director MEMORANDUM STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE GRANTS ADMINISTRATOR 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh , North Carolina 27699=4617 PHONE 919433-4763 FAX: 919-733- 8653 Date : September 7 , 1999 TO : Local Historic Preservation Commissions Historic Preservation Non-Profit Organizations Local Governments J ' FROM : Linda Harris Edmisten . ;r Grants Administrator State . Historic Preservation Office RE : 1999 special appropriation for arts and humanities projects Attached please find a copy of the grant application for the 1999 special legislative appropriation to provide support for local arts and humanities projects . The August 31 cover letter from Secretary Betty Ray McCain outlines the grant process . Many historic reservation projects have been funded through previous similar M Y P P J 9 appropriations . Among them are municipal and county architectural surveys , restoration projects , National Register nomination preparation , and survey manuscript publications . ' The telephone inquiries I receive show' ' the depth and breadth of historic h preservation needs across the state . Good luck with your application . I hope to hear that historic preservation projects across the state receive richly deserved support. If you have questions , give me a call at 733-4763 . NEW MAILING ADDRESS North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office Department of Cultural Resources 4617 Mail Service Center Raleigh , North Carolina 276994617 I 109 East Jones Street • Raleigh , North Carolina 27601 -2807 j� ' �.,a STATE cr p� Okir „r Z o n y � 1� •q. 1 i (ffi P: MY'1l� R North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources Office of the Secretary James B . Hunt Jr. , Governor Betty Ray McCain, Secretary August 31 , 1999 Dear Friend of the Arts and Humanities , The North Carolina General Assembly established an $ 8 , 000 , 000 grant fund for 1999 -2000 , The legislation states that "grants shall not exceed $ 100 , 000 per project. " The criteria is as follows , 1 . The organization must be either a local governmental entity or a 501 (c) (3 ) non-profit cultural , historical , or artistic organization identified as such by the IRS 2 . The project must be for cultural, historical, or artistic projects, including visiting artist programs , or for museums If your organization has a project matching this description, and if your organization has received its 501 (c) (3) non-profit status from the Internal Revenue Service or is a local governmental entity, you may apply for a grant by .'sending us the attached one-page submission form . Your submission must be postmarked or received no later than October 21 , 1999 . Submissions via fax will not be accepted . The submission should be sent to : Donna Rosefield, Office of the Secretary, Department of Cultural Resources , 4601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 276994601 . It is important for you to contact your local legislators , as they will be crucial in the final decision-making process , The last time we had an $ 8 million grant fund, we received requests from over 810 projects requesting a total of more than $ 86 million. After the submissions have been reviewed, IF it is determined that your organization will receive money from this $8 million grant fund, you will be required to submit the following prior to receiving any money : 1 . A copy of your organization ' s 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt letter from the Internal Revenue Service 2 . A copy of your organization ' s notarized Conflict of Interest Policy (on your organization ' s letterhead) 3 . A copy of your organization ' s Articles of Incorporation 4 . A copy of your organization ' s By-Laws 5 . A list of your organization ' s Board of Directors/Trustees If you have any questions , you may call my office at 919- 7334867 . Thank you. Cordially, Betty Ray McCai , Secretary Attachment MAILING ADDRESS: Telephone: (919) 7334867 LOCATION: 4601 Mail Service Center Fax: (919) 7334564 109 East Jones Street Raleigh, NC 276994601 Raleigh, NC An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer a SUBMISSION FORM FOR DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES GRANTS PROGRAM . Please type or print clearly. Complete this page only . (You may reproduce this form on your word processor.) Your submission must be postmarked (or received at the proper address), no later than October 21 , 1999 . Submissions will not be accepted via fax. Submissions should be sent to : Donna Rosefield, Office of the Secretary, Department of Cultural Resources, 4601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 276994601 . 1 . PROJECT: LOCATION OF PROJECT: Street/Mailing Address Town Zip County 2 . LOCAL SPONSORING ORGANIZATION: Contact Person(s) Title : Address (Street Address , City/State/Zip) : Telephone (include area code) : Day. Evening : Fax: a-mail address : Project Coordinator (if not Contact Person) : Fax: Telephone (include area code) : Day Evening . 3 . AMOUNT REQUESTED : 4 . PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ITEMIZED BUDGET: I, i I' 9Gce .�-fiCCs6orcugh HistoricaCSociety cordially invites you to the . .,4nnual ,A4eeting and angstrom Award llli � illilmlill IN I III ' ' Oil VMS IN 11 , 1111 Sunday, October 17, 1999 3 p . m. at the BurtiveCCScFiooC 319 N. Churton Street in HiCCs6orough, NC Come join the .7-fistoricaCSociety for the election of officers and the presentation of the annual / vlary Claire angstrom Award ACso featuring a presentation by I CocaCauthor and Historian ,Jean Bradley Anderson titled ",�amiCy & Friends * .�l .�Couse by .Mouse Reconstruction of lgth Century HiClsborough " For more information caCCthe ACCiance for Historic HiC(s6orough at 19 -732 -7741 Joint Meeting North Carolina Literary and Historical Association Ninety-ninth Meeting Federation of North Carolina Historical Societies Twenty- fourth Meeting November 19 , 1999 North Carolina State Capitol Woman s Club ofRaleigh, 1 East Edenton Street 3300 Woman s Club Drive 11 : 00 Federation Advisory Board Meeting 6 : 00 Social Hour 12 : 30 Registration 7: 00 Dinner Presiding ' LEE SMITH, president, 1 : 00 Welcome North Carolina Literary and JOHN COMPTON, chair, Historical Association, Hillsborough Federation of North Carolina Historical Societies, Durham Invocation T. HARRY GATTON , Raleigh Presentation of the North Carolina Student Publication Awards After-dinner Address JOHN BATCHELOR, Greensboro MARGARET MARON, novelist, Willow Springs The 100th Anniversary of the Presentation of the Albert Ray Newsome North Carolina Bar Association Awards "The Law in North Carolina History . JOHN COMPTON , chair, Historic Oral Arguments" Federation of North Carolina WADE SMITH , ROGER SMITH , AND JOHN HALL, Raleigh Historical Societies, Durham Presentation of the Hugh T. Lefler and Presentation of the Mary Ruffin Poole Robert D. W. Connor Awards Award for First Work of Fiction ALEXANDER STOESEN, Greensboro LEE SMITH, president, North Carolina Literary and Historical Presentation of the Roanoke=Chowan Association, Hillsborough 4 Poetry Award E. T. MALONE JR. , Raleigh Presentation of the Sir Walter Raleigh Award for Fiction Presentation of the American Association ANN SNYDER , Historical Book Club j of University Women Award of North Carolina, Greensboro for Juvenile Literature SANDRA CHAMPION , Kings Mountain Presentation of the Mayflower Society Award for Nonfiction Presentation of the American Association RUDY TOPPING , Charlotte for State and Local History Awards JEFFREY .l. CROW , Cary Presentation of the R. Hunt Parker � Memorial Award Business Meeting of the North Carolina MARGARET BAUER, Greenville Literary and Historical Association LEE SMITH , president, Hillsborough Presentation of the Christopher Crittenden Memorial Award Adjourn WILLIAM S. POWELL, chair, North Carolina Historical Commission , Chapel Hill Fill, Fit to SIL • lb - � • — • • • • 11 - • • lb lb Fit, IMP • • IS • • • • • • IT IT FIL111 =it ' • � . IMP • . ' • • Ilk . • : • • 111 11 � • - • 11 ' . - ill - ► . - : . - iil It �. W k tt ' '�,` *` T �L"tr 1' p ' tIt y z z � r FIR JI �r Fir r5Ine I IF i ' r { f - i . � y ;i• i:. . �.�. r ' . .r `� r• tom• ' II • j F , d a IF tFI IF It t IF It IF. FF }}IF { Ift, If AAIF- {gg IF IF. IMP r IF YIF - 3 S t r .t IF s 'ff .� iIn _ 3 �q F . x +� K _Akt! _, ,, �y • y rt 0 It".�. . a 4� FIkq WIF 11 i } s0 _ - ._y9 . - `l° fit_ S 1 �s x- e , � - f .e x f r - IF .. . . . , . . . A . } rIF 1 ti IF ' I if IF 14 $ '" At � • x .4 For � , - _ P v IF .r F Ix 4 - y N A 1 1 all . - yy IF I 7. it If