71-11 ,984 STONE, Lyle Martin, 1941ARCH AEOLOGICAL RESEARCH AT FORT MICHILIMACKINAC, AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY HISTORIC SITE IN EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN: 1959-1966 EXCAVATIONS. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1970 Anthropology University Microfilms, A XEROX Com pany, Ann Arbor, Michigan © 1971 Lyle Martin Stone ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH AT FORT MICHILIMACKINAC, EIGHTEENTH CENTURY HISTORIC SITE IN EMMET COUNTY MICHIGAN: 1959-1966 EXCAVATIONS Volume I By Lyle M. Stone A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Anthropology 1970 ABSTRACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH AT FORT MICHILIMACKINAC, AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY HISTORIC SITE IN EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN: 1959-1966 EXCAVATIONS By Lyle M. Stone The site of Fort Michilimackinac (ca. 1715 to 1781), located in Eimiet County, Mi chi gem, has been under archaeological investigation since 1959. This report is an analysis, interpretation, and formal description of the archaeological data derived from the site between 1959 and 1966. The purposes of this report are: (1) to interpret the site in terms of the social and cultural phenomena by which it was characterized and which are reflected both in its archaeological and historical documentation; and (2) to explain, illustrate, and test a formal approach to historic artifact analysis. This approach is based on a formally structured taxonomy, termed "formal classification." The conceptual framework for this study is based on the posi­ tion that differences in the formal, temporal, and spatial dimensions of archaeological remains are the products of differential cultural behavior. As such, cultural behavior can be delineated through an analysis of archaeological remains. This study has demonstrated that there were important cultural differences between the French and British occvqpations of Fort Michili­ mackinac and that these differences are directly reflected in the Lyle M. Stone formal, temporal, and spatial dimensions of the archaeological remains from the site. The site's occupation during the French period of con­ trol (ca. 1715 to 1761) has been characterized as a fortified trading settlement which exhibited a low level of cultural differentiation and social conplexity. The French occupants during this period were en­ gaged primarily in fur-trade activities and were largely dependent on locally available resources for subsistence and economic svpport. In contrast, the site's occipation during the British period of control (1761 to 1781) is characterized as a functionally specific military post which exhibits a high level of cultural differentiation and social complexity. The occipants of the site during this British period of control were primarily engaged in military activities or in activities which directly supported the British military garrison. As such, these occupants were dependent on externally available resources for their subsistence and economic support. Formal classification has been demonstrated to be a productive taxonomic method which permits a systematic analysis of the site's artifacts in terms of their temporal, spatial, and formal dimensions. Formal classification is thus a useful method in facilitating the in­ terpretation of different cultural phenomena on an historic site. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to express my appreciation to ny wife, Betty, whose assistance in the laboratory phases of this project and whose patience and encouragement during several years of family neglect were instrumental in the con$>letion of this report. Dr. Charles E. Cleland, as Chairman of my doctoral guidance committee, has provided invaluable direction and advice both during the preparation of this thesis and throughout my graduate career at Michigan State University. Other members of my guidance committee. Dr. Moreau S. Maxwell, Dr. Ralph Nicholas, and Dr. Alfred B. Hudson, supported this research through their continued evaluation of and advice on this thesis. I am especially grateful to Dr. James A. Brown for his guidance during the formulation of a formal approach to artifact classification and analysis. This archaeological project and subsequent report preparation have been supported by the State of Michigan, Mackinac Island State Park Commission. I would especially like to acknowledge Dr. Eugene T. Peterson, the Director of this agency, and Dr. David A. Armour, Assistant Director, for their technical advice and patience in seeing this project through to a conclusion. Members of the Michigan State University Museum staff, in­ cluding its Director Dr. Rollin H. Baker, Dirk Gringhuis, Dora Kelley, ii Val Berryman, Charles Smith, Chester Trout, and Sharon Ringwald, are acknowledged for their technical advice and assistance both in arti­ fact analysis and report preparation. I would also like to thank the Museum for allowing me to use space and facilities during the course of the analysis. A number of other persons assisted in the preparation of this thesis: Beatrice Monahan assisted in the formal classification of all artifact categories; Denise Fitch edited the entire report; and Mar­ jorie Labyak is responsible for all line-drawn artifact illustrations. I would especially like to acknowledge Barbi Mel, the report typist, whose ability, patience, and responsible criticism contributed sub­ stantially to the form and organization of the thesis. I would also like to thank several individuals not directly associated with this project: Bruce Fry, John Dunton, and John Fortier, all of Fortress of Louisbourg National Historic Park, Nova Scotia, contributed through personal communication to the organization and content of this report. In addition, T. M. Hamilton, associated with the Museum of the Great Plains, Lawton, Oklahoma; J. Jefferson Miller, Associate Curator of the Division of Ceramics and Glass, Smithsonian Institution, Museum of History and Technology; and Donald Chaput, Chief Historian for the Michigan Historical Commission, Lansing, contributed materially to the content of this report. In acknowledging the assistance of these persons, I wish to emphasize that the responsibility for the content of this thesis is completely my own. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................. ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS............................................ vi LIST OF T A B L E S .................................................. x Chapter 1. 2. 3. 4. INTRODUCTION............................................ 1 Research Objectives ................................. 4 Theoretical Basis in Historical Archaeology . . . . . 5 Limitations of Study................................. 9 DESCRIPTION, HISTORY, AND EXCAVATION OF THE SITE. . . . 13 Description............................. 13 H i s t o r y .............................................. 14 Excavation............................................ 33 FORMAL CLASSIFICATION AND THEINVESTIGATION OFFORMAL VARIATION WITHIN THE ARTIFACT CATEGORIES ............ 39 Definition and Theoretical Basis..................... 39 The Mechanics of Formal Classification............... 43 Analytic Features of Formal Classification.......... 47 SYNTHESIS AND INTERPRETATION........................... 50 Part I: Archaeological Synthesis ................... Part II: A Comparison of the French and British Social Systems..................................... iv 52 71 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.) Chapter APPENDIX A: Page Conclusions......................................... 77 STRUCTURE DESCRIPTIONS............................. 80 Part I: Part II: APPENDIX B: S t r u c t u r e s ................................. 81 Features...................................... 118 ARTIFACT DESCRIPTIONS................................ 143 Introduction............................................ 144 Part I: Formal Artifact Descriptions ............... 157 Buttons.............................................. 158 Buckles.............................................. 221 Cufflinks............................................ 263 Beads..............................................2 88 Tinkling Cones ................................... 369 Rings................................................ 377 Kaolin Pipes ..................................... 398 Jew's Harps.......................................... 419 A w l s ................................................ 430 C e r a m i c s ............................................ 437 S p o o n s .............................................. 459 Forks................................................ 472 B r i c k s .............................................. 480 Pintles.............................................. 486 K n i v e s .............................................. 493 Gunf lints............................................ 526 Fishhooks.................. 562 Bale S e a l s .......................................... 568 Part II: Brief Artifact Descriptions ............... 608 REFERENCES CITED ................................................ 618 v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Mackinac Straits Area ................................... 3 2. Anonymous Map of Mackinac Straits, ca. 1717 . . . . . . . 20 3. Magra M a p .............. 27 4. Nordberg Map............................................. 29 5. Crown Collection Map..................................... 31 6. Structure Interpretations ............................... 136 7. Structural Evidence ..................................... 138 8. Structural Evidence ..................................... 140 9. Structural Evidence ..................................... 142 10. B u t t o n s .................................................... 201 11. B u t t o n s .................................................... 203 12. B u t t o n s ..................... * ............................. 205 13. B u t t o n s .................................................... 207 14. B u t t o n s ............................... - ................... 209 15. B u t t o n s .................................................... 211 16. B u t t o n s .................................................... 213 17. B u t t o n s .................................................... 215 18. B u t t o n s ................ 217 19. B u c k l e s .................... 247 20. B u c k l e s .................................................... 249 21. B u c k l e s .................................................... 251 vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) Figure Page 22. B u c k l e s .................................................... 253 23. B u c k l e s .................................................... 255 24. B u c k l e s .................................................... 257 25. B u c k l e s .................... 259 26. B u c k l e s ................................... 261 27. C u f f l i n k s .................................................. 282 28. C u f f l i n k s .................................................. 284 29. C u f f l i n k s .................................................. 286 30. Distributionof Cl, SA, T2, Va Necklace B e a d s .............. 336 31. Distributionof Cl, SA, T2, Va Molten Necklace Beads. . . 32. Necklace Beads.............................................. 340 33. Necklace Beads................................... 34. Necklace Beads.............................................. 344 35. Seed Beads.................................................. 359 36. Rosary Beads................................................ 368 37. Tinkling Cones.............................................. 376 38. R i n g s .......................................................390 39. R i n g s .......................................................392 40. R i n g s .......................................................394 41. R i n g s .......................................................396 42. P i p e s ...................................................... 416 43. P i p e s ......................................* ...............418 44. Jew's H a r p s ................................................ 424 45. Awls.........................................................435 46. Ceramics.................................................... 456 vii 338 342 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) Figure Page 47. Ceramics.................................................... 458 48. Spoons...................................................... 466 49. Spoons...................................................... 468 50. Spoons......................................* ...............471 51. F o r k s ...................................................... 477 52. F o r k s ...................................................... 479 53. Bricks...................................................... 485 54. P i n t l e s .................................................... 491 55. Knives...................................................... 511 56. Knives...................................................... 513 57. Knives.................................... ............... 515 58. Knives................................ .. 59. Knives...................................................... 519 60. Knives...................................................... 521 61. Knives.................................................... 52 3 62. G u n f l i n t s ..................... ..........................543 63. G u n f l i n t s .................................................. 545 64. Series A, Type 1,Gunflints,Dimensions of 18Specimens . 547 65. Series A, Type 2,Gunflints,Dimensions of 31Specimens . 549 66. G u n f l i n t s ....................................... .. 67. G u n f l i n t s .................................................. 553 68. Series C, Type 1,Variety a,Gunflints,Dimensions of 177 S p e c i m e n s ............................................ 555 69. Series C, Type 1,Variety a,Gunflints,Length and Width Relationship byFrequency of 177Specimens. . . . viii 517 551 557 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.) Figure 70. p»9e Fishhooks .......................................... 566 595 71. Bale.Seals................ 72. Bale Seals.................................................. 597 73. Bale.Seals.................................................. 599 74. Bale Seals.................................................. 601 75. Bale.Seals.................................................. 603 76. Bale.Seals.................................................. 605 77. Bale Seals.................................................. 607 ix LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Comparative Historic Sites.................................. 154 2. Button Description: Class I, Series B, Type 3, Varieties b through j ............ 164 3. Button Description: Class I, Series D, Type 4, Varieties a through .................................... 170 4. Button Description: Class III, Series A, Type 1, .................................... 175 Varieties a through 5. Button Description: Class III, Series A, Type 5, Varieties a through o .................................... 178 6. Button Description: Class IV, Series A, Type 5, Varieties a through j ............................... 7. Button Measurements ......... ............ 187 8. Button Descriptions: Button Cat. 3, Series B, Type 1, Varieties a through w ................................. 192 9. . . . . . . 182 Button Descriptions: Button Cat. 3, Series B, Types 2, 3, 4, and 5 ............................................ 197 10. Buttons: Feature Associations..............................218 11. Buckle Descriptions: Class I, Series A, Category 1, Varieties a through g .................................... 225 12. Buckle Descriptions: Class I, Series B, Category 1, Varieties a through 1 .................................... 228 13. Buckle Category 1, Classification and IllustrationKey. . 14. Buckle Category 1 Measurements.............................. 242 15. Buckles: 16. Cufflink Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through f .................................... 265 241 Feature Associations..............................262 x LIST OF TABLES (Cont.) Table Page 17. Cufflink Descriptions: Class VI, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through r .................................... 272 18. Cufflink Descriptions: Class VI, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through f . . . . . . . . . . ............ 275 19. Cufflink Descriptions: Class VI, Series B, Type 2, Varieties a through g .................................... 277 20. Cufflinks: 21. Class II, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through j Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................319 22. Class II, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through g Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................321 23. Class II, Series A, Type 3, Varieties a through c Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................323 24. Class II, Series A, Type 11, Varieties a through g Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................328 25. Class II, Series C, Type 1, Varieties a through e Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................332 26. Necklace Bead Interpretations.............................. 345 27. Necklace Beads: 28. Class I, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through y Seed Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................351 29. Class I, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through c Seed Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................352 30. Class II, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through i Seed Beads Description and M e t r i c s ............................356 31. Tinkling 32. Ring Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a (through t .................................... 381 33. Ring Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through o .................................... 383 34. Ring Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 3, Varieties a through n ............... Feature Associations................ Comparative Evidence . . ............... Cones at Four Historic Sites ................. xi 287 346 373 385 LIST OF TABLES (Cont.) Table Page 35. Rings: Feature Associations................................ 397 36. Type 2 Kaolin Pipe Steins: Bore Size Frequencyand Date Computed by Binford Formula . . . . ................... 407 37. Kaolin Pipe Feature Associations and ComputedBore Di­ ameter D a t e .............................................. 412 38. Fort Michilimackinac Jew's Harps Measurements ........... 39. Jew's Harps Comparative Evidence........................... 427 40. Awl Feature Associations................................... 436 41. Spoon Feature Associations................................. 469 42. Pintle Feature Associations ............................. 43. Knife Measurements: Class II, Series B, Type 1, Varieties a through i .................................... 505 44. Knife Feature Associations................................. 524 45. Knives: 46. Series A, Type 1 Gunflint Measurements Based on Regression Formula........................................ 530 47. Series A, Type 2 Gunflint Measurements Based on Regression Formula........................................ 531 48. Gunflint Metric Attributes in Millimeters .............. 558 49. Frequency of Gunflints at Other ArchaeologicalSites. . . 559 50. Gunflint Feature Associations ........................... 560 51. Fishhook Feature Associations ........................... 567 52. Bale Seal Feature Associations............................. 590 53. Bale Seal Interpretations................................. 591 Comparative Evidence ........................... xii 422 492 525 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This report is an archaeological study of Port Michilimackinac, an eighteenth century historic site in Mackinaw City, Emmet County, * Michigan (Figure 1). Fort Michilimackinac was occupied for approxi­ mately 66 years; it was controlled first by the French from approxi­ mately 1715 until 1761 and then by the British until 1781. During this period the fort was located at the extreme northern tip of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The fort was dismantled and re-established on Mackinac Island, in the Straits of Mackinac, during the winter of 1780 and 1781. The relocated site, known as Fort Mackinac, was con­ trolled by the British from 1780 until 1796 and from 1812 to 1815. American forces held the fort from 1796 to 1812 and from 1815 until 1895. The focus of this report is the earlier Fort Michilimackinac, which has been under continuous archaeological and historical investi­ gation since 1959. The archaeological data presented here have been obtained as a result of a joint research program between the Mackinac Island State Park Commission and the Michigan State University Museum and Department of Anthropology. The site of Fort Michilimackinac was nearly 60 percent exca­ vated between 1959 and 1969 and produced over 500,000 historic and prehistoric artifacts, numerous structures, structural components, 1 Figure 1 Mackinac Straits Area 9Jt4f f 4/mr*9Am *9* Of 9VJT /vo&ntf ff+trrs/ 9*0'tV trtftroi 9**7 J*f9 *i0A!tttO9Mt \ S/otf J.V9J /* # 9 / # 2 /w jo OArJTtt SJ/&&U.S 9/vn»y 90/¥ I M 9 0 U J. « * J S) 0~? ymtf us 0** * r i / Jr-*'/ « * & ?M*Y 4 and features. The foremost objective of this research has been to pro­ vide information on the basis of which structures and period settings are reconstructed. The site's stockade and seven structures have been reconstructed since 1959 as part of a continuing restoration program. Two other objectives of this research have been the publication of archaeological and historical research reports and the training of University students in the methods of historic sites archaeology. Research Objectives The purpose of this study is to interpret the site of Fort Michilimackinac; in terms of the social and cultural phenomena by which it was characterized and which are reflected in the spatial and temporal dimensions of its artifactual content. This purpose is accomplished through an analysis and interpretation of the artifactual remains which have been recovered between 1959 and 1966. Since 1966 was the final season during which the author supervised excavations at the siter it was selected as a terminal data for this report. The site is still under investigation, hcwever, and continues to yield important archae­ ological data. A second, related objective is to explain and illustrate a formal approach to historic artifact analysis. This approach is based on a formally structured taxonomy, or formal classification, defined as the hierarchical ranking of formal properties on the basis of their relative importance or significance. 5 Theoretical Basis in Hiatorical Archaeology These objectives reflect a distinctive orientation within the field of historical archaeology. Since this is a relatively new field of study, characterized by different research methods and objectives, it is necessary to briefly describe these differences in order to place this report within its proper intellectual setting. The study of historical sites using an anthropologicalarchaeological approach is relatively new; the quality of results, until quite recently, have been somewhat substandard when compared with the results of prehistoric site research. There are several reasons for this, the most important of which is the relatively short period of time during which historic sites have been investigated by qualified persons who employ standard archaeological techniques. In addition, historic site archaeologists have traditionally been more interested in evaluating structural evidence for reconstruction and restoration purposes, rather than in studying artifacts and thejLr sig­ nificance for site interpretation. This emphasis has limited both the comparative value of artifact descriptions presented in many his­ toric site reportB as well as the interpretation of cultural phenomena which characterize these sites. Historic site archaeology has increased in quantity and quality during the past 10 years.* The excavation of historic sites has now become an accepted and justifiable endeavor for both historians *See Barka (1965); Russell (1968); and Williams (1966) for re­ views of the history of this field. 6 and anthropologists, although neither can claim to have been a major influence in the development of this new field. The results of re­ search thus far have clearly sWcwn that one must have an understand­ ing of both anthropological and historical methods and objectives. Historic site archaeology is presently being conducted by investigators who hold differing views on the theory, methods, and objectives of their research. This situation is characteristic of any new and developing fields of science and should be regarded as a desirable trait in this respect. One common approach is that of the anthropologist who conducts archaeological research to obtain data of relevance to cultural problems. This person is trained to conduct research in a highly objective manner and often utilizes scientific methods and techniques. These systematic procedures are necessary in view of the anthropologists' orientation and research objectives— objectives such as the interpretation of the social and political phenomena characteristic of the historic era and site under investigation. The inter-site evaluation of archaeological remains is an essential part of this approach to the study of cultural phe­ nomena. Thus, the anthropologist speaks in terms of empirical evi­ dence Which can be quantified, and objectively compared and evaluated. A second common approach is that of the historian who has acquired the necessary techniques of field archaeology. This person is trained in the humanities and conducts archaeological research for different reasons which are often phrased in terms of explicating or supplement­ ing the existing historical record. It should be stressed that al­ though these objectives characterize the work of many archaeological 7 historians, they do not necessarily apply to historians in general, many of whom stress research objectives very similar to those of the anthropologist. As Spaulding (1968:35) notes below, however, the approaches of anthropology and history differ in the degree of ex­ plicitness applied to explanations. The type of comparative data thus necessitated by an anthropological approach is neither necessary for nor is it produced by the archaeological historian's approach. Spaulding notes that: history and science [anthropology) cam be distinguished by the degree of explicitness of the covering laws (or empirical generalizations) Which make explanation pos­ sible. History and science share a set of techniques for producing warranted or intersubjectively verifiable knowledge, but the explanatory generalizations of history are characteristically matters of common knowledge on human dispositions or motivations, and they are quite properly implicit rather than explicit in the historical narrative . . . . History has a particularizing quality (note the phrase "for historical reasons"); science, a generalizing one. Symptoms of this difference in research orientation within the field of historical site archaeology are revealed in the following views: 1. The classification of historic artifacts is a waste of time since available historical evidence provides the information necessary for artifact interpretations (NoSl Hume 1967: 104105; 1969: 2. 13). Anthropologists are amateur archaeologists (NoSl Hume 1961: 256). 8 3. Archaeologists trained in anthropology cannot do an adequate job of excavating historic sites since they are not familiar with building techniques and artifacts used during the his­ toric period {Barka 1965s 4. 15-16). Anthropology-oriented theory acts to confine the progress of the field of historical archaeology (Walker 1967: 5. 32). Historic site archaeologists must be trained as historians rather them as anthropologists (N&el Hume 1968: ton 1955: 2; Harring­ 1129). In contrast, the following views may be presented: 1. Anthropologists are able to interpret archaeological evidence in terms of problems which historians neither realize nor are capable of interpreting (Fontana 1965: 2. 64). Historic site archaeological data has a great potential for purposes of anthropological interpretation (Cleland and Fit­ ting 1967: 3. 135). N&el Hume's failure to comprehend anthropological objectives deprives his work of relevance to the interpretation of anthro­ pological problems (Cotter 1969: 1216). The point made by Cotter is most critical to the field of his­ torical archaeology at present. It is characteristic of the historian to gather and present data which cannot be used to meet anthropological objectives. As a result, investigators wishing to interpret their 9 sites in anthropological terms are limited in the number of sources available which provide data of a caliber sufficient for comparative research. On the other hand, data generated by an anthropological approach can be of use to the historian. Although the objectives of an historical approach may be valid, I find the historians' characteristic disregard for and an­ tagonistic view of an anthropological approach unfortunate. The basis for this critical view of an anthropological approach, as ex­ pressed by N'del Hume and others, has limited the quality and quantity of data available for comparative research. This position has not only limited the realization of anthropological objectives, but it has restricted the nature of the interpretations which may be derived by the historian from archaeological evidence. It should be clear from the content and organization of this study that an anthropological approach is stressed. however, invalidate its use by persons with an tion. This should not, historical orienta­ This study has been written, with the two views in mind, as an attempt to exemplify— through interpretation— the types of data upon which an anthropological approach is based. Limitations of Study Artifact descriptions in this report are presented on three levels: Categories considered of major importance in terms of cultural interpretations are described in detail in Appendix B. Other categories present, but of lesser interpretative value, are listed and described very briefly at the end of Appendix B. Interested individuals may request additional information on these categories from the author. Categories which are presently being studied or reported on by other individuals are either omitted from this report or are presented in an abridged form. a. Burials. These categories are: The Fort Michilimackinac human skeletal remains are currently being studied by Dr. Terrance Phenice of the Michigan State University Department of Anthropology. b. Gun Parts (except gunflints). this report. Gun parts are omitted from A manuscript on the Fort Michilimackinac gun parts has been prepared by Jack Mathey. c. Glass. Glass artifacts are omitted from this report. A sunmary report by Margaret Brown of the Michigan State University Department of Anthropology is presently being edited for publication by the Mackinac Island State Park Commission. d. Ceramics. A report on the ceramics recovered during the 1959 through 1965 excavation seasons is currently in press at the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of History and 11 Technology. This report has been co-authored by Lyle M. Stone and J. Jefferson Miller II, Associate Curator of the Division of Cermaics and Glass at the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of History and Technology. The ceramic types identified will be briefly described in the present report, along with additional information on metric properties and distributional associations. The analysis of individual ceramic types is limited to that required for the interpretation of specific con­ textual problems. e. Floral and Faunal Remains. Faunal analysis has been performed on selected samples by Dr. Charles E. Cleland (n.d.) of the Michigan State University Department of Anthropology and Museum, and by Elizabeth A. Butsch of the Michigan State University Department of Anthropology, who studied samples recovered during the 1967 through 1969 excavation seasons. Floral remains from Fort Michilimackinac (1959 to 1966} have not been analyzed, although remains from later years have been studied. Neither floral nor faunal remains are described in this report. f. Indian Artifacts! Aboriginal ceramics and flint and bone tools have been found at the site. The majority of these do not relate to its historic conponenti therefore, a 12 frequency distribution by tool and ceramic category only is presented. g. Micmac Pipes. Paul How of the Michigan State University Museum is currently preparing a descriptive report on the Fort Michilimackinac stone pipes. Micmac pipes have been omitted from the present report. h. Unidentifiable Artifacts. A number of unidentifiable brass, iron, cooper, lead, and pewter objects have been recovered but are not included here. In addition, structural descriptions and interpretations are presented selectively. All structures and structural components which have been identified and interpreted are described. Structural com­ ponents which cannot be interpreted at this time are not described. CHAPTER 2 DESCRIPTION, HISTORY AND EXCAVATION OP THE SITE Description Fort Michilimackinac is located in Mackinaw City, Emmet County, Michigan (SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 12, T.39N., R.15E). The site is situated on the south side of the Straits of Mackinac and is located within the boundaries of Fort Michilimackinac State Park. The Straits of Mackinac is a five-mile wide water passage between Lakes Huron and Michigan. This Straits was historically important and is presently one of the most prominent geographical features of the Upper Great Lakes, since it is the point of closest proximity between Michigan's two peninsulas. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Mackinac Straits area provided a strategic location for both military and fur-trade ac­ tivities. To the north of the Straits is the northern or Upper Penin­ sula of Michigan and the St. Mary's River passage into Lake Superior and southern Ontario. On the south is the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, bordered on the west by Lake Michigan and on the east by Lake Huron. A number of prominent geographical features characterize the Straits area including islands, inland lakes, and streams. Mackinac Island, on which Fort Michilimackinac was relocated during the winter of 1780 and 1781, lies 8 miles to the northeast of the original site. Imme­ diately north across the Straits is the present village of St. Ignace where Fort de Baude, the original seventeenth century French garrison 13 14 in the Straits region,was established; its exact location has not yet been determined. The site is characterized by a low but noticeable relief, primarily along the reconstructed western stockade curtain which is in the same position as the stockade which existed during the period of British control. Windblown sand has accumulated along both sides of this curtain to a maximum depth of 3 feet 6 inches in the south­ west comer. This is the area of maximum elevation within the fort enclosure, at 600 feet above sea level. From the southwest comer, the ground surface slopes downward to the northeast to a minimum ele­ vation of 585 feet above sea level. The entire site is underlain by at least three different Algoma beach terraces. The terrace features, as well as an accumulation of windblown sand along the west side of the enclosure, account for the differential topography of the site. History This history of the Upper Great Lakes area and of Fort Michi­ limackinac was conpiled from a number of primary and secondary sources. Documentary information relating to specific structures at Fort Michi­ limackinac is presented in Appendix A, which includes data supplemental to structural descriptions. Although Fort Michilimackinac was not established until approximately 1715, the present discussion begins in the seventeenth century. The earlier history of the Upper Great Lakes is critical to understanding the factors which led to the 15 establishment of this post in the early part of the eighteenth century. Between 1650 and 1715, the Upper Great Lakes area underwent a rapid settlement by French missionaries, traders, and soldiers. One of the earliest trading expeditions to the Upper Great Lakes was that of two French traders: and Pierre Espirit Radisson. Medard Chouart, Sieur de Groseilliers, Radisson made his first trip to the Lake Superior region in 1654 and returned to Quebec in 1656 with many beaver furs of high quality. Groseilliers accompanied Radisson on a second trip to the area between 1658 and 1660 (Innis 1965: Bald 1954: 26). 36j These early trading expeditions established valuable contacts for the French and motivated the government of Hew France to expand its trading interests to the west. French traders were operat­ ing near Sault Ste. Marie, at the mouth of Lake Superior, by 1660 (Fowle 1925: 89) . The first permanent missionai^r settlement in the region was established at Sault Ste. Marie in 1668 by the Jesuit Fathers Louis Nicolas and Jacques Marquette (Fowle 1925: 98). This mission and the French trade center at Sault Ste. Marie attracted the settlement of displaced Ottawa Who had occupied areas along the southern Bhore of Lake Superior. By 1669, the mission was referred to in The Jesuit Relations as that of the Ottawa (Thwaites 1899: 51, 61). Vol. The Chippewa were also important inhabitants of the Sault region at this time (Kinietz 1965: 318). Shortly after the movement of French traders to the west and into the Lake Superior area British trading interests were secured to the north. The Hudson's Bay Trading Conpany was established in 1670 16 and soon came to be represented by numerous small trading posts In the James Bay area. The Hudson's Bay enterprise, supported by cheaper goods and higher fur prices, rapidly became a serious threat to French interests by creating changes in Indian trade patterns and alliances. By 1670, European influence in the Upper Great Lakes extended southward to the Straits of Mackinac area. In 1671, a mission was established by Father Jacques Marquette on the north side of the Straits of Mackinac at St. Ignace. This mission served as a focal point for groups of Ottawa who had entered the area from the Chaquamegon Bay region of southwestern Lake Superior, as well as Chippewa from the north and Huron from the east. By 1683, St. Ignace had also begun to serve as a French military post, garrisoned by 30 soldiers under the command of Daniel de Grosollon, Sieur dul'Hut (Dulhut)(Fowls 89). 1925: Fort de Baude was established adjacent to the mission by Louis de la Porte, Sieur de Louvigny in 1689 (Bald 1954; il) . 43; Surrey 1926: So­ The maintenance of a fortified post at this strategic location was a response to King William's War (1689 to 1697) and to the intru­ sion of British traders from Albany, New York, into the Mackinac Straits after 1686. This competitive threat is documented in a letter from Denonville to Seignelay, dated 1686 (O'Callaghan 1855* Vol. 9, 297) in which M. de Denonville, Governor General of Canada, noted that* Missilimakinac is theirs. They have taken its latitude; have been to trade there with our Outawas and Huron Indians, who received them cordially on account of the bargains they gave, by selling their merchandise for Beaver which they purchased at a much higher price than we. Although this encounter was short-lived and took place at a time when the French post was undermanned, it did demonstrate that British 17 traders could penetrate French territory and establish favorable trade contacts with the Indians. Antoine de Lamonthe Cadillac succeeded Louvigny as commandant of Fort de Baude in 1695. In 1696, Louis XIV ordered the Upper Great Lakes closed to the fur trade. This proclamation was issued to con­ trol the oversupply of furs due to increasing trading activity in the Upper Great Lakes. As a result, Cadillac secured permission to estab­ lish a fort at Detroit (Fort Ponchartrain), although this was a direct exception to the stipulations of the decree of 1696. Cadillac was able to convince many of the Indians remaining in the Straits to join him at Detroit (Fowle 1925: 189). The Jesuit missionaries were left at St. Ignace with only a small parish, and, by 1705, had abandoned the mission and returned to Quebec (Surrey 1926: 30-31). Although the mission was abandoned in 1705, there is some evidence to indicate that a new mission or fort was established in 1706 (Surrey 1926: Marest to Vaudreuil 1706). 125; In addition, we knew through correspondence between Pontchartrain and Vaudreuil in 1706 (O'Callaghan 1855: Vol. 9, 775, 779) that Father Marest returned to Michilimackinac in 1706 and that the area continued to be frequented by French traders and Indians during this period. By 1710, the government of New France recognized the importance of maintaining military control of the Straits of Mackinac area and ini­ tiated plans to re-establish a post at the Straits (O'Callaghan 1855: Vol. 9, 849j De Vaudreuil to Pontchartrain, Oct., 1710). Lignery, Monsieur de captain in the French army, was dispatched to Michilimack­ inac in 1712 to secure the alliance of local Indians against the Fox, 18 who had disrupted trade relations with the Indian allies of the French, and the Iroquois, who were British trading allies (O'Callaghan 1855: Vol. 9, 865i De Vaudreuil to Pontchartrain, Nov., 1712). De Lignery apparently spent several years in the Straits before the post was actually constructed. The proposed establishment of this post is again referred to in a letter written by Captain de la Forest in 1714 (O'Callaghan 1855: Vol. 9, 866-867). Maxwell and Binford (1961: 14) note that: the original plan for the expedition against the Fox was to send 20 troops under Captain D'Gschaillons, Lieutenant Lanous, and Ensign Belestre from Montreal to Michilimack­ inac to arrive early in August, 1715 . . . . However, the supplies and troops from Montreal did not arrive at the Straits in time for the coordinated operation, al­ though presumably they did arrive later that year. Maxwell and Binford (1961: 10) suggest that: it appears likely that sometime between 1715 and 1720 De Lignery with several hundred men on his hands waiting for supplies from Montreal put them to work in the timehonored military tradition by building a stockaded fort on the other side of the river, meaning on the south shore of the Straits. An anonymous map in the Ayer Collection, Newberry Library, believed to date from 1717 is also referred to by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 12), (Figure 2). 11- The map shews a stockade, square, with square bastions, on the south side of the straits, as well as a fort and mission on the north side of the Straits. The caption, indicat­ ing the fort on the south side of the Straits, states that the former fort (at St. Ignace) has been abandoned: that the fort on the south side of the Straits has a commandant, a few settlers, and even some French women, and that in 1716 about 600 Cour*urs-de-bois were gathered there during trading time. A later reference gives the year Michilimackinac. 1717 for the founding of Fort This date is mentioned in a letter dated 1767 by John Figure 2 Anonymous Map of Machinac Straits, ca. 1717 21 Porteous, an English trader at Michilimackinac, in which he states that: Michilimakinac is Situate on a large cape which forms the Southern side of the Straits between the Lakes Huron & Michigan, has Lake Huron on the E. & S.E., and on the S. and W . , Lake Michigan Lat. 45* 18, 'Long. 85.* This post was first established upon an Isld on the E. enterance of the Straits, from thence moved to the east point of the northern cape, and afterwards moved westwards, about 2 Miles, about the middle of the Straits; & in the year 1717, by request of the Ottawas whose village then stood here, was again moved over where it now stands to protect them from some of the Nations they were then at war with. Charlevoix's journal clearly illustrates that Port Michilimack­ inac was in existence on the south side of the Straits by 1721 (Charle­ voix 1744: 279). The founding date of Fort Michilimackinac on the south side of the Straits is thus narrowed to between 1714 and 1721, with the most probable date, based on the evidence presented above, falling between 1715 and 1717. Maxwell and Binford, using essentially the same evidence, concluded that the post was established about 1715 (Maxwell and Binford 1961: 113). A number of factors contributed to the establishment of this post. With the close of the Queen Anne's War in 1713, finances were once again available to support renewed trading interests and military control of the Upper Great Lakes. Although anticipated Fox conflicts gave impetus to the construction of the fort, other long term reasons were extremely relevant to its establishment. A post was necessary at the Straits in order to discourage competition from the Hudson's Bay Campauiy to the north, to control the activity of the unlicensed French traders, the Coureurs-de-bois, to secure the alliance of the local 22 Indians, and to serve as a focal point for anticipated fur trading expeditions. The Fox War of 1716 was commanded by Sieur de Louvigny. Louvigny left Montreal in May of 1716 and arrived at Michilimackinac during July or August with at least 300 Frenchmen (Thwaites 1902: Vol. 16, 342» Vaudreuil to Council of Marine, Oct., 1716). There, he combined forces with de Lignery to produce a total troop con­ tingent of nearly 800 French and Indians. This force proceeded to the fortified Fox settlement near Green Bay, Wisconsin, and sub­ dued the Fox within three days. Louvigny immediately departed for Quebec upon his return to the Straits, leaving the command of the fort to de Lignery with a garrison of no more than 23 soldiers. Louvigny returned to the Straits and relieved de Lignery of his command of the fort in 1717. In 1720, Louvigny retired his command of the post to Louis Daniel Lienard de Beaujeau. From 1720 until 1761, Fort Michilimack- inac was governed by the following French commandants (Chaput 1970: personal communication): Louis Lienard de Beaujeau Constant Le Marchand de Lignery Charles Renaud Dubuisson Jacques Testard de Montigny Jean-Baptiste-RenS Le Gardeur de Repentigny Pierre Joseph c6loron de Blainville Jean-Baptiste Jarret de Verch&res Louis de La C o m e Charles Joseph de Noyelle Chevalier de La Ve ran dry Jacques Le Gardeur de St-Pierre Francois Dvf>lessis-Faber Louis Lienard de Beaujeu 1720-1723 1723-1727 1729-1730 1730-1733 1733 1734-1742 1737 1741-1744 1745-1747 1746-1747 1747 1747-1749 1749-1752 1752-1760 23 Louis Herbin Louis Le Verrier Charles Michel de Langlade 1754-1757 1757 1760-1761 During this period, the size of the post garrison underwent very little change. In 1729 there were no more than 35 soldiers, in­ cluding officers, at the fort. In 1747 the troopB nuntoered only 28. In addition to military personnel and their families, the fort housed licensed traders, craftsmen such as blacksmiths, missionaries, and itinerate Coureurs-de-bois. Local groups of Ojibwa and Ottawa fre­ quented the fort to trade. The early French post at Michilimackinac is thought to have consisted of a small square stockade with bastions, a mission, two guard houses and (Thwaites 1902: a 40-foot long structure to house military personnel Vol. 16, 386-387; De Lignery to Toulouze, 1720). By 1760, the area within the stockade had increased to nearly three times its original size as a result of the expansion of the stockade perime­ ters and the construction of additional structures. This growth is thought to have proceeded through several phases of stockade expansion. Maxwell and Binford (1961: 27-38) and Binford (1961: summarized these expansion phases. 30-40) have Additional information on stockade expansions has been recovered since these summaries appeared and is presented in Chapter 4 and Appendix A. From 1715 until 1760, the French garrison was involved in very little military activity and served primarily to protect traders and maintain friendly relations with the nearby Ojibwa and Ottawa. The Indians were occasionally mustered, along with the French garrison, to fight against the British and allied Iroquois to the east 24 (Havighurst 1966: 51-57). In 1739, commandant Sleur de Celoron and the post garrison accompanied Baron Longuevil with a combined force of 442 Canadians against the Chickasaw in the Yazoo country of Missis­ sippi. This conflict with the Chickasaw was relatively ineffectual, because of Indian desertions, lack of supplies, bad weather, illness, and poor leadership. The expedition terminated after several skir­ mishes with the Chickasaw which resulted in meaningless negotiations (Caldwell 1938: 465-442). The capitulation of the French forces at Montreal to General Jeffery Anherst in September 1760 ended the French and Indian War (1744 to 1760) and gave control of the Upper Great Lakes to the Brit­ ish. After receiving news of the end of hostilities, the French gar­ rison at Michilimackinac, under Captain Louis de Beaujeu, left to joint French settlements in Illinois (Havighurst 1966: 58). Charles de Langlade, second in command, remained at the post and turned it over to British forces under Captain Henry Balfour in September 1761. Bal­ four immediately departed, leaving the post under the comnand of Lieu­ tenant Leslye and a garrison of 40 troops (Maxwell and Binford 1961: 13) . The articles of capitulation, agreed upon in Montreal on 8 September 1760, were very favorable to the remaining French inhabitants of Fort Michilimackinac. Religious freedom was guaranteed, and the French traders and inhabitants were permitted to retain possession of their property and goods (Nish 1965: 153-155). The latter proved to be a matter of concern to the British commandants who were forced to rent troop quarters from the French inhabitants. 25 The British maintained the Fort more strictly as a military post them as a trading post or "fortified settlement," as had been the case during the French period (Binford 1962: 50-52). During the British period, there was no further expansion of the fort’s perimeter although occupants emd traders built cabirr outside of the fort enclosure. Three maps were drawn of the fort during the first decade of British control* the Magra Map of 1766 (Figure 3), the Nordberg Map of 1769 (Figure 4), and the anonymous (Crown Collection) Map of 1765 (Figure 5). Although these maps are of limited use for exact measure­ ment purposes, they do show the approximate position of many of the buildings which existed between 1760 and 1780 and indicate the posi­ tion of many of the remaining French period structures. Both the population and the fur trade activity at Fort Mich­ ilimackinac increased during the period of British control. The change from French to British trade policies was in part responsible for this growth. Prior to 1761, the French had administered the fur trade through the sale of monopolies and trade permits. This system was unsatisfactory, since the existence of monopolies tended to increase the cost of trade goods (Jackson 1930: 235-236). The British govern­ ment removed all monopolies and previous trade restrictions and there­ after confined the fur trade in the Great Lakes to five licensed posts: Kaministiquia, Michilimackinac, LaBaye, Detroit, and Ouiatanon. A license system was implemented which permitted anyone to carry on trade from those posts. The Indians were required to carry their furs to one of the five posts and were not extended credit for trade goods as had Figure 3 Magra Map 27 Figure 4 Nordberg Map 29 Figure 5 Crown Collection Map 31 / //.ft'/j vf // . ,‘J / ’ ■ A "V >> 32 been the practice during the French period (Jackson 1930: 244). Be­ sides the increase in private traders at the fort, the number of troops increased after 1761, to a garrison of over 100 soldiers in 1781. Fort Michilimackinac was attacked and captured by a group of local Ojibwa on 2 June 1763 as a part of the Pontiac uprising. Twenty-one of the 35 British soldiers and one British trader were massacred. Nearby Ottawa released the surviving soldiers and traders and took them to Montreal and safety (Armour 1966: 43, 59, and 67). The post was not reoccupied by British forces until 1764 when Captain William Howard arrived with a contingent of 80 troops. lieved by Major Robert Rogers and 68 men in 1766. mandants were: (Maxwell and Binford 1961: Captain Lieutenant Speismacher Captain Beamsley Glazier Captain Turnbull Captain John Vattas Major Arent S. DePeyster Lieutenant Governor Patrick Sinclair Howard was re­ The succeeding com­ 14-16) Dec. 1767 July 1768 May 1770 July 1772 June 1774 Oct. 1779 - July 1768 - May 1770 - July 1772 - June 1774 - Oct. 1779 - 1781 Numerous buildings were constructed and rebuilt at the fort after 1766. 1769. A new barracks to house at least 60 men was built in The powder magazine and provisions' storehouse were rebuilt in 1773. The civilian community of the fort grew outside of the stockade enclosure after approximately 1765. John Askin, a resident trader, noted in 1778 that "there is near to one hundred houses in the Subacbs" (Quaife 1928: 69). The Revolutionary War had immediate effects upon the post and resulted in the repair of the stockade with wood from dismantled houses, the construction of an internal stockade 33 to enclose the soldiers' barracks, and the leveling of sand dunes to the west of the fort which might shield attackers (Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections 1886: 1779}. Vol. 9, 387; DePeyster to Brehu, June With the arrival of Sinclair in 1779, a decision was made to rebuild the fort at a more defensible position. During the winter of 1780 and 1781 and throughout the following year. Fort Michilimack­ inac was dismantled and moved to Mackinac Island. After 1781, the remains of Fort Michilimackinac deteriorated and were eventually covered over by windblown beach sand. A section of land enclosing the original site was set aside as a local park by the Village of Mackinaw City in 1857. The ownership of this enclosed area was transferred to the State of Michigan in 1904, to be admin­ istered by the Mackinac Island State Park Commission. Excavation Archaeological evidence of Fort Michilimackinac was first re­ covered in 1932 when the park superintendent, Chris Schneider, delin­ eated the ca. 1750 to 1781 period stockade by trenching. In 1932, the site stockade was reconstructed on the basis of this evidence. Reports of this early work indicate that the east, west, and south curtains were accurately located. There has been some question about the original location and subsequent 1960 reconstruction of the north­ west bastion and north curtain. Excavations are being carried out in 34 this area at present (1969) to determine the exact location of the north curtain. By 1959, the 1932 stockade had fallen into disrepair, and plans were made by the Mackinac Island State Park Commission to begin a program of archaeological and historical research aimed at the eventual complete reconstruction of Fort Michilimackinac. An agree­ ment was reached between the Park Commission and the Michigan State University Museum to begin an archaeological program. Excavations were sponsored by the commission and were directed and carried out by personnel associated with the Michigan State University Museum and the University's Department of Anthropology. Since 1959, infor­ mation has been recovered which allowed the reconstruction of seven structures; the commanding officer's house, the king's storehouse, a British trader's house, a soldiers' barracks, the church, the Priests' house, and a French period row house. was reconstructed in 1960. The present stockade Responsibility for the quality of archae­ ological research at the site has been held by the Curator of Anthro­ pology at the Michigan State University Museum (Dr. Moreau S. Maxwell from 1959 through 1964, Dr. Charles E. Cleland from 1965 to 1969, and since June of 1969, by the author). Field excavations have been di­ rected by Dr. Moreau S. Maxwell, Dr. Lewis R. Binford, Dr. Carl Jantzen, Mr. Ronald Vandezwall, Mr. Lyle M. Stone, and Dr. James A. Brown. Since 1966, the archaeological crew has been composed of anthropology students from Michigan State University. Prior to 1966, the work force was supplied by the Michigan Corrections Department, 35 PelIston Corrections Camp. The student training program has been par­ tially supported by the National Science Foundation Undergraduate Re­ search Participation Program, NSF Grant Number GY-760. A standard method of excavation has been practiced at the site since 1959. Specific techniques have, however, varied with different investigators and different field circumstances. Horizon? I control for the site is maintained by a grid system composed of approximately north-south, east-west intersecting lines. This control system was established by Maxwell in 1959. The center line (CL), which divides the enclosure into east and west halves, runs approximately between the north and south gates of the recon­ structed stockade. Each 10-foot line to the left or right of CL is designated by L or R, followed by the number of feet to which the line corresponds. Lines which divide the site into north-south segments are numbered in 10-foot increments from the zero line, which inter­ sects the north wall of the enclosure at the north gate. Each 10- foot square is designated by the line co-ordinates which intersect its southwest corner. Vertical control was originally based on a known elevation above sea level. This elevation was referred to as the 100-foot level with readings taken above or belcw it as needed. This system was abandoned in 1962 when the original vertical elevation reference point was removed by construction workers. Vertical control then changed to a system of measuring below ground surface which was at a known elevation above sea level. This system was changed in 1965 to the 36 one presently in use whereby elevations are measured from a datum which is the highest point of elevation within the fort enclosure. Both vertical and horizontal measurements are taken in feet and inches. It has generally been the practice to confine an excavation unit within a 10-foot square. squares are excavated as Occasionally, contiguous 10-foot a single unit. Test trenching has been carried out, however, only on a small scale in order to gain data which would be of immediate use in planning the location of future excavations. Although stratigraphic excavation is preferred, it has not always been possible due to factors such as depositional complexity, type and efficiency of field labor, the unstable nature of vertically exposed strata, and pot-hunter activity. In many cases, then, exca­ vations have been conducted in units of arbitrary 3-inch levels. Different horizontal soil zones and features are thus distinguished within a 3-inch level by means of isolated 3-inch deep excavation units which conform to the bounds of a soil unit or feature. A com­ bination of stratigraphic and isolated unit excavation has proven to be the most effective. Features such as basements, fireplaces, wall trenches, and trash pits are excavated and recorded separately. In many c u e s where stratigraphic excavation was impossible, separate feature numbers were assigned to major soil units, exposed on a 3inch level, for purposes of control. The soil from each excavation unit is passed through a 1/4-inch mesh hardware screen (1/8-inch in 37 the case of features). Artifacts collected are placed in sacks marked with the appropriate provenience information. Artifacts are washed and catalogued as a part of each season's field work. A number of permanent field records are taken during the course of excavation. Photographs in black and white and color are taken of each esqposed 3-inch level, stratum, feature, or wall profile. Square sheets are drawn of each successive 3-inch level or stratum exposed, noting all soil differences and features within the ten-foot square. Artifacts are recorded in situ only when they appear in con­ centrations or alignments or when they are obviously an imporant item for interpretative purposes. Features are recorded both on square sheets and on smaller scale feature sheets. Photographs are taken of each feature throughout the process of excavation. Through 1966, 330 features have been recorded, and 2255 square sheets drawn. The photographic record is composed of approximately 960 color slides and 750 black and white prints. Excavation maps are maintained throughout each field season; one shows all structural data recovered in the area of excavation on a scale of 1 inch to 5 feet; and a second, on a scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, shows all structural evidence from a season in relation to the entire site. Other standard records include a limit of excavation map, a daily field log, a feature list, a photo cata­ logue, and written summaries of the evidence from each square in its relation to evidence from adjoining squares. Between 1959 and 1966, 131,250 cubic feet of earth were exca­ vated with the expenditure of 28,160 man hours of labor. A total of 38 375 ten-foot squares have been excavated to an average depth of 3 feet 6 inchest this represents approximately 40 percent of the space within the stockade. The quantity and quality of data produced by these excavations has varied considerably from year to year. The field method outlined above represents a standard norm for the site, although this has been maintained with considerable flexibility by different archaeologists, resulting in field records of varying quality. It also appears that record keeping was less rigorous during certain years than during others. The mass of field data produced between 1959 and 1966 has been characterized at different times by both underinterpretation and overinterpretation. In several cases, the excavator has obviously overinterpreted the field evidence thereby minimizing the adequate recording of this evidence. Data of this type has been difficult to re-evaluate in later years. Underinterpretatian has also contributed to differences in the quality of field data produced. In this case, however, it is far easier to reconstruct and re-evaluate the evidence. Fortunately, a majority of field records are based on a "good-fit" between adequacy of the data recorded and the depth of field interpre­ tation. At the end of each summer's field season, all artifacts and records are transported to the Michigan State University Museum for analysis. After cataloguing is completed, the artifacts are sorted and stored by type catego:*y. and preserved. All artifacts are eventually cleaned Specific steps in the analysis and classification of each artifact category are described in the following chapter. CHAPTER 3 FORMAL CLASSIFICATION AND THE INVESTIGATION OF FORMAL VARIATION WITHIN THE ARTIFACT CATEGORIES The purpose of this chapter is to describe 'the analytic approach utilized to study formal variation within the Fort Michilimackinac arti­ fact categories and to eiqplain the relationship of this approach to the interpretation of archaeological data. Definition and Theoretical Basis The analytic approach described belcw and illustrated in the remaining chapters of this study has theoretical relationships to the principles of both biological and archaeological taxonomy. This ap­ proach is based on a formally structured taxonomy, termed formal classification. Formal classification, as applied in this study, may be defined as the hierarchical ranking of formal properties on the basis of their relative importance. Formal properties are the physical attributes of artifacts which result from different methods or techniques of manufacture and/or use such as form, shape, color, material, and so on. Relative inportance refers to ranked differences in attribute significance as distinguished during manufacture or use. For exanqple, a distinction made on a structural basis is considered to be more inportant in terms of manufacture and use than are 39 40 distinctions based on shape, material, or color. during manufacture or use, necessitate Attributes which, a higher level of technical discrimination or decision are assigned to a higher classificatory level. Attributes which necessitate a lower level of technical discrimination or decision will be relegated to lower levels of distinction. The formal analytic approach is most closely related to the principles of quantitative analysis commonly used in prehistoric archaeological research (Clarke 1969* 651). A number of authors (Freeman and Brown 1964; Fitting 1965; Sackett 1966; Binford 1963; and Deetz 1965) have recently explicated and illustrated a quanti­ tative approach to artifact analysis which is based on both a maxi­ mum discrimination of variable physical properties and a study of co-variation between these variables as a means of interpreting artifacts and their contexts. The concept of ranking these discrim­ inate variables in terms of attribute hierarchy is directly related to the mechanics of biological taxonomy. As such, the advantages of a taxonomic key, which facilitates the identification of taxonomic relationships, are inherent in a formal classification. David L. Clarke, in a discussion of archaeological grammar, describes a syn­ tactic grammar (archaeological syntactics) which condenses regulari­ ties in the "relations between artefacts and attributes at every level of their organization" (1969* 649). The theoretical bases for this grammar are very similar to the two views, expressed below, on which formal classification is based. The term "formal," as 41 defined in this report in reference to artifacts# has been used by other authors with essentially the same meaning. Spaulding (1955s 36), for example, refers to the formal dimension of an artifact as "all physical properties of the artifact (shape, weight, chemical composition, etc.)." Deetz (1967: 9), notes that "The formal dimen­ sion of archaeological materials consists of their physical appearance." The term "formal" may also be used to define a particular dimension or set of relational characteristics of an archaeological site, as distinct from the spatial or temporal dimensions of a site. In this sense, the formal dimension is defined by the presence of and interrelationships between the physical attributes which characterize a site and which result from human activity. Formal classification is based on two interrelated views which are: 1. That a classification of historic artifacts must be based on observed physical properties, regardless of any presumed ana­ lytic or cultural significance of these properties (see also Clarke 1969: 648). Our conception of significance in these terms is notably inadequate, since So few properties of his­ toric artifacts have actually been evaluated in terms of their spatial and temporal variation. It is assumed that once the analytic significance of all variables characteris­ tic of an artifact category (as expressed at different types of sites and in different social contexts) is known, the need for a formal classification would no longer exist, except in 42 a conparative sense. At this not yet attained "ideal" level of knowledge, we will thus be able to organize a classifica­ tion with a particular problem in mind by selecting variables with proven relevance to the phenomena or problem under study. Until this level is reached, however, formal classification must be used to promote rigorous comparative research as well as a means of evaluating the analytic significance of variables. 2. Classification is an analytic tool which is useful in evaluat­ ing the significance of variation within the spatial, temporal, and formal dimensions of a site. As such, the classes and at­ tribute differences defined need not necessarily correspond to differences recognized by the societies which produced or used them. Classification in this sense is an aid to interpre­ tation, rather than a result of interpretation; therefore, it can only be judged in terms of its relevance and utility to specific interpretative problems, rather than in terms of its representation of reality. A classification of artifacts must permit the identification of variables which have tenporal, spatial, or formal significance in terms of the site under study. Whether or not these variables correspond to differ­ ences recognized by the society which used them is irrelevant, since in this "real" situation, differences may not have been recognized which, however, do have analytic significance at present. (see also Hole and Shaw 1967s 5) Moreover, var­ iables were undoubtedly differentially recognized through 43 time* at different site types (such as trading posts, religious centers, military posts, or Indian settlements), and in differ­ ent social and cultural contexts. Variables which would there­ fore be recognized as real and significant in one situation cannot necessarily be interpreted as such in different situa­ tions . A formal classification of the type here described is concep­ tually and mechanically distinct from classifications structured either on the basis of attributes of taxonomic "convenience*' (Hole and Heizer 1969: 170-171) or of supposed functional significance. The "func­ tional type" and "convenient type" approaches limit the comparative •uid interpretative value of artifact categories identified; whereas a formal classification is more rigorous in both respects. The Mechanics of Formal Classification The mechanics and rules of formal classification duplicate in many respects the principles of binomial nomenclature in the biologi­ cal sciences. The procedure of formal classification consists of the following steps: 1. Compare all specimens within a given artifact category and note the physical properties which they possess. This results in a list of variable physical properties which characterize 2m artifact category. 44 2. Evaluate the properties defined and decide which will be used as class!ficatory attributes and which will be used as descrip­ tive measures. This decision reflects the classifier's concept of property significance and is based on his knowledge of the manufacturing technology and function of the artifact category being studied. 3. The attributes identified are then hierarchically ranked in terms of their relative formal importance. It should be pointed out that although form consistently receives the highest order of attribution, other attributes may vary in rank depending on the specific artifact category under study. An admitted degree of subjectivity characterizes the above two steps, since the validity of decisions depends largely on the classi­ fier's comprehension of differences between physical properties. It is felt, however, that this approach to classification is inherently more rigorous than other commonly used approaches and that it may eventually provide a basis upon which a completely abjective taxonomic approach is defined. 4. Name the different ranked levels and describe the attributes upon which their distinctions are based. The terms class, series, type, and variety are used here in descending order of formal importance. Each of these need not be present in any given classification; additional levels may also be added if necessary. For example, we may have an artifact category 45 containing specimens which differ in only one property: shape. If there are three shapes and no other differences, we will have three types. Variety level distinctions are often miss­ ing in certain artifact classifications where law-level phys­ ical differences were not present or were not recognized as such. 5. Sort all artifacts according to the levels defined. Descrip­ tive categories are defined by artifacts which are inconqplete or which do not exhibit all physical properties necessary for formal classification are added at this point. For example, we may have a specimen which only exhibits the attribute necessary for class level placement. In this case, the speci­ men would be assigned to a category of that class, with no further distinction as to series, type, or variety. At this point, we must also check the resultant classification against three rules which govern the reliability of any scientific classification. a. These are: Only one basis of attribution can be used on each level; however, several attributes may be used at the same time if a functional relationship can be positively demon­ strated. b. Levels must permit the placement of artifacts into mutually exclusive groupings. one level. Any given specimen can only fit into 46 c. Classes must be exhaustive or capable of including all specimens. This is often difficult in dealing with archaeological remains because of the presence of badly preserved or fragmentary specimens, although the problem is partially solved with the use of category distinctions described above. Classification is completed at this point. Three additional steps are then necessary to permit artifact comparisons, interpreta­ tions, and analysis of the derived data in terms of the temporal, spa­ tial, and formal dimensions of the site. 6. Measure all specimens; note any metric relationships between variables and types, and test for the presence of dimensional categories. 7. Evaluate the derived classes and classifcatory attributes in terms of contextual (distributional), comparative, and his­ torical evidence. This permits the identification of classes and attributes which have temporal, spatial, or formal signif­ icance and thus provides a basis for final site interpretation. 8. A final step, that of description, serves a comparative purpose. 47 Analytic Features of Formal Classification The above procedures result in a classification which possesses a number of unique comparative and analytic qualities. Formal classi­ fication: — is not structured by any specific interpretative problem. Therefore, there are no limitations imposed on the interpre­ tative purposes to which its results may be applied. — produces a classification free of built-in interpretative error and permits a re-evaluation of existing artifact inter­ pretations on an objective basis, because attribute distinc­ tions and rankings are not based on assumed knowledge of attri­ bute significance but on the presence or absence and relative formal importance of enpirically defined physical attributes. — permits a maximum recognition of and discrimination between physical properties representative of an artifact category, so that each variable property can be tested against the many factors potentially responsible for its contextual and formal variation. Any specific attribute or class can thus be iso­ lated and evaluated in terms of its contextual and interpre­ tative significance at the site. Any specific attribute can be compared with other attributes on a similar level of formal differentiation; this yields evidence of co-variation between attributes. In certain cases, it is also possible to conpare related but different artifact categories on the same level 48 of discrimination in order to identify functional co-variation between artifact categories. — produces an internally consistent arrangement of artifact classes. This permits the description and comparison of any specific arti­ fact within a category in terms of attributes which define any other artifact within the same category. — through its descriptive features permits the quantification and statistical evaluation of artifact properties. --is both easily modifiable and is flexible enough to include additions of new data. — is capable of efficiently accommodating a large and formally complex artifact sample, thereby systematizing the task of description. — facilitates the analysis of fragmentary or badly preserved artifacts through the use of category designations. — produces artifact descriptions of a caliber adequate for com­ parative research. — enables discrimination between behavioral norms of manufacture since the classificatory levels defined in a formal classifica­ tion of historic artifacts are based essentially on differences which result from differential manufacturing behavior. 49 The mechanics and advantages of a formal approach to artifact classification and analysis have been described above. Although this approach is based in part on current methods of archaeological taxon­ omy, it is a new and useful concept in the archaeological study of historic sites. The remaining chapters in this study illustrate the application of a formal approach to the analysis and interpretation of an historic site. CHAPTER 4 SYNTHESIS AND INTERPRETATION This chapter is a summary and interpretation of the archaeolog­ ical evidence described in Appendix A and Appendix B in terms of the spatial and temporal dimensions of cultural phenomena at Fort Michilimackinac; the French and British social systems as characterized by this evidence are also conqpared. The physical evidence of site occupa­ tion, as it reflects differential cultural behavior through time, is suranarized in Part I. Major differences between the French and British occupations of the site are pointed out in Part II. Both parts are based on the assumption that major differences in the spatial and tem­ poral distribution of artifacts and structures are a result of (and thus may be explained by) the changing cultural conditions at the site. The types of archaeological evidence upon which the present summary is based affect the nature and reliability of conclusions which are subsequently derived. Because of this relationship, it is impor­ tant to explain several characteristics of this evidence which are thought to affect its application to the interpretation of the site. Fort Michilimackinac was controlled by the French from approxi­ mately 1715 until 1761 and by the British from 1761 until 1781. The date of 1761, however, is not a definite demarcation between the French and British occupations. A majority of the French civilian inhabitants prior to 1761 continued to live at the site after that date. Although these inhabitants lived under British control, they were permitted to retain possession of all lands and properties which they had owned prior 50 51 to 1761. After 1761, then, the artifact assemblage is composed of both French and British remains. This condition has complicated the task of interpreting this already archaeologically complex site. In addition, as known historically and as demonstrated archaeologically, British soldiers and civilians lived in houses which had been constructed and previously occupied by the French. Thus, several rowhouse units as well as individual houses, contain both French and British artifact associations. An additional problem often arises because the British, upon re-occupying a French structure, removed all artifactual evidence of its earlier French occxpation. Archaeologically, this produces a house which is architecturally French but for which only a British oc­ cupation can be demonstrated on the basis of artifact content. Also, it is known historically that several house units were alternately occupied by persons engaged in different occupations (such as, mer­ chant, interpreter, soldier, and notary). Each of these individuals would have possessed both a task-specific set of artifacts and an as­ semblage shared by all occupants of the site. Thus, attempts to in­ terpret the relative status or occxpation of a structxire's inhabitants on the basis of artifact associations are confused by the presence of a mixed assemblage which reflects the different social positions or occupations of successive residents. A second major problem is the complex archaeological nature of the site itself. Although the distinction between French and British bxiildings is generally obvious, the site has been complicated by the numerous structure additions, modifications, superimpositions, and occupation periods which occurred. These conditions have often made it 52 difficult to attribute a specific artifact sample or assemblage to a specific structure or period of occupation. Since artifacts were more frequently recovered from non-structural contexts (such as gardens, streets, and refuse areas between buildings), it was often impossible to specifically attribute such deposits to any one of several nearby buildings from which it may have been initially derived. Some of the broad or ambiguous artifact and structure datings in Appendix A and Appendix B reflect this problem. Pothunters have produced a third complicating condition. In many cases they have obliterated critically important structural evi­ dence. In cases such as this, we can often reconstruct the destroyed evidence with logical predictions based on the distribution and orien­ tation of features in surrounding areas. Part I : Archaeological Synthesis The archaeological history of the site may be conveniently sum­ marized by dividing the site into four overlapping periods which are spatially and temporally defined by the various stockades and stockade expansion:, (see Appendix A). Each period is defined by distinctive archaeological evidence and by other structures and artifacts which were in use between several periods. Structures and stockades referred to are noted by name and "Structure Feature" number, as listed and described in Appendix A. stockade features which provide a chronological framework aret The 53 1. Feature 5— first stockade, 1715 to 1725 (1735); 2. Feature 81— first stockade expansion, 1725 (1735) to 3. Feature 82— second stockade expansion, 1751 to 1755 (1760); 4. Feature 14— third stockade expansion, 1755 (1760) to 1751; 1781. The terminal date of Feature 14 is uncertain because the twentiethcentury stockade reconstruction may have been placed over a later stockade. Artifact category-period associations are expressed in terms of relative common usage, as compared with their use during preceding and succeeding periods, and are listed by name and taxonomic designa­ tion as outlined in Appendix B. An alternative to this approach, ex­ pressing artifact use in terms of presence or absence within closely defined time periods, is less acceptable since it fails to discriminate trends in use popularity. Certain artifact categories are often termed "trade goods"; this does not imply that the category was used exclu­ sively in trade but that this was its most frequent or intended use determined from documented, trade-good lists. Period I 1715 to 1725 (1735)s Early French Occupation There is little historical documentation of structures which were present during this period. The only known reference is contained in a letter from de Lignery to Count de Toulouse in 1720 noting that he has turned over the command of the garrison to Monsieur Daniel Lienard de Beaujeu, and, that before his departure, he "had a new establishment created for the Outavois and the French, on the other Side of the River; a fort for the garrison, with two guardhouses; and a 40-foot house— all at his own expense" (Thwaites 1902: Vol. 16, 387). 54 This period is better represented archaeologically than histor­ ically; it is defined by a square, stockade enclosure (Feature 5) which has been partially excavated. Feature 5 stockade is 206 feet long The (estimated) on the east-west axis and is either 129 feet or 178 feet long on the north-south axis, depending on which of two excavated eastwest stockade trenches represent the actual south wall. ternal structures were associated with this stockade: Several in­ Feature 25 (76, 27), a rowhouse unit consisting of three, and possibly four, attached houses adjacent to the north wall of the stockade and (Feature 31) south of the rowhouse unit. an isolated house The Feature 25 rowhouse con­ sisted of three individual houses in alignment, each separated by a narrow passage and constructed of vertical pickets set in horizontal sills (north and south walls) and vertical saplings covered with elmbark siding (east and west walls). Feature 31 was constructed similarly. An external, church (Feature 62A), which joined the west stockade of Feature 5, was possibly in use during the latter part of this period. Fewer artifacts and artifact categories could be associated with this period of occupation than with any of the succeeding periods; this may be a result of the relatively low population and/or the failure of this analysis to specifically attribute artifacts to an early period of use. The majority of artifact categories which could be attributed to this period are trade goods, which are defined in terms of their probable context of utilization, as follows: - Personal Context of Utilization Beads Jesuit Rings (ClI, SA) 55 Hawk Bells Religious Medallions and Crucifixes Tinkling Cones - Household Context of Utilization Awls Brass or Copper Kettles - Craft or Activity Context of Utilization Case Knives (CII) French Clasp Knives (Cl, GI) Bale Seals Spall Gunflints (SC) Metal Projectile Points - Miscellaneous or Generalized Context of Utilization Strike-A-Lites It is clear from this list and from the distribution of these categories that anumber of artifacts traditionally referred to as trade goods were also in common use by the majority of the site's oc­ cupants. Other artifacts conmonly associated with the Period I occupa­ tion include: - Buckles, small frame with flanged or winged hook (Cl, SC and SD) - Cufflinks, two-part metal crown and back (CII) - Ceramics, brown and white tin-glazed earthenware (CA, GI, TC); green glazed earthenware (CA, G U I , TD)i blue and white and polychrome tin-glazed earthenware (CA, GI, TA and TB); and possibly brown stoneware (CB, GII, TB) 56 The ceramic types and forms present during Period I were pri­ marily utilitarian (as distinguished from higher quality, functionally specialized forms in common use during the British period of control) and were used by many of the site's inhabitants. A low artifact fre­ quency during Period 1, combined with a characteristic low level of formal diversity within and between artifact categories, indicates that the Period I assemblage was largely generalized in terms of occupa­ tional or task application. Host representative artifact categories served mutually comnon subsistence and/or economic purposes. At the Period I level of socio-economic adaptation, there was little necessity for a large or formally elaborate assemblage of material possessions. Consequently, few artifacts were present which suggest major status distinctions between occupants. _______ In terms of the cultural representation of the early French period occupation, we can reasonably say that it was probably quite homogeneous with respect to economic, political, and religious condi­ tions, as well as with respect to the material possessions of the site's inhabitants. The majority of the population, whether civilian or military, were engaged in trading with the Indians; their culture and subsistence activities were simply but efficiently adapted to this specific purpose. Status distinctions recognized were not major and probably lifferentiated civilian traders and soldiers on one level and military officers on a second level. The French inhabitants during Period I were closely dependent on resources which were locally available and only secondarily on re­ sources and goods which had to be imported. This type of settlement, 57 with a primary, local adaptation, contrasts with both the British period at Fort Michilimackinac and with the French settlement at For­ tress of Louisbourg, Nova Scotia; each of these relied heavily on a continued import supply of subsistence goods and material possessions, and each closely reflected the eighteenth-century European societies from which they were derived. Period XI 1725 (1735): Middle French Occupation The second period of French occupation is little-known histor­ ically but well-documented archaeologically. Based on information found in several documentary sources from this period, the social conditions at the site changed very little from the preceding period) however, the population increased. This conclusion is substantiated archaeologically. Period II is defined archaeologically by the period of use of stockade Feature 81, of Feature 5. the firststockade expansion following theperiod Feature 81 is a stockade which was an expansion of north and south walls of stockade Feature 5. the The north wall of the stockade was expanded and relocated 65 feet to the north, while the south wall was relocated 62 feet 6 inches to the south (this southern expansion has been qualified in Appendix A in the discussion of Fea­ ture 81). The west wall of this first stockade expansion was relocated from 2 feet to 4 feet outside, or west, of the west wall of Feature 5. The increased area (approximately 50 percent) enclosed within this first stockade expansion permitted the construction of additional internal buildings such as: Feature 88, a well, located in the northwest corner of the preceding stockade, Feature 5; two houses, Feature 89 and Fea­ ture 93, located along the west wall of the stockade; and a Commanding 58 Officer's house, Feature 51, located immediately south and east of the center of the north stockade wall. In addition, several structures which had been in use during Period I continued to be used. The church, Feature 62, was rebuilt in about 1740 but remained in essentially the same location. The early French rcwhouse unit. Feature 25 (76, 27), may have been vised as late as 1740, based on datable artifact associations. A Period I house. Feature 31, probably ceased to be used at some time during this period. This stockade expansion and related structural additions are re­ flected in the increased quantity of artifacts which can be attributed to this period. Artifact categories associated with the Period II oc­ cupation and which may be termed trade goods are listed below by their context of utilization: - Personal Context of Utilization Beads Tinkling Cones Jesuit Rings (CII, SA) Jew's-Harps (SB, Tl) Hawk Bells Religious Medallions and Crucifixes - Household Context of Utilization Awls Brass or Copper Kettles - Craft or Activity Context of Utilization Case Knives (CII) French Clasp Knives (Cl, GI) 59 Bale Seals Spall and Blade Gunflints (SA and SC) Hawk Bells Metal Projectile Points - Miscellaneous or Generalized Context of Utilization Strike-A-Lites Aside from the addition of Jew's-harps and blade gunflints (probably after 1740) to the list which represented Period l r a definite increase in the frequency of these items is noted during Period II. This increase is also reflected in other artifact categories commonly associated with this occupation which include: Cufflinks, two-part metal crown and back, and glass inset (CII and CIV) French military buttons, after ca. 1740 (Cl, SC, Tl, Va), and various French civilian buttons in use during the last part of Period II Buckles, prong-hook and winged-hook forms (Cl) Hooks and eyes, probably in vise after 1740 Needles Combs Ceramics, blue and white, polychrome, brown and white, and powdered blue or purple tin-glazed earthenware (CA, GI); green glazed earthenware (CA, G U I , TD) t and white saltglazed stoneware (CB, GI) The Period II artifact assenfclage is very similar to that de­ fined for Period I, indicating essentially a continuation of a charac­ teristic socio-economic emphasis from that period; however, there are minor differences in the formal diversity of artifacts represented. Economic activities during this period continue to be trade oriented, 60 engaging a majority of the population. An increased frequency of trade goods reflects both an increase in trading conducted through the site and an increase in the number of permanent inhabitants who were engaged in trading. The latter is also indicated by the size of the Period II stockade which enclosed approximately 50 percent more space than had the previous Period I stockade. As in the preceding period, artifact categories identified as trade goods were also in common vise by the site's inhabitants. There were additional non'-trade-good artifact categories present during Period Ilf however, the majority of these continue to represent utili­ tarian items. This increase is interpreted as a normal increase in and formal elaboration of artifact categories resulting from a population increase (accompanied by minor alterations in the social composition of the site). There are several indications that the military population of the site was becoming more formally organized throughout the Period II occvpation. Status or occupational differences may thus have been more commonly recognized, although to a lesser extent than in either of the following periods. The introduction of white saltglazed stoneware ceramics at the site, probably after 1740, is primarily recognized as a measure of its initial popularity in Europe and elsewhere and may indi­ cate the presence of minor status differentiation at the site. This ceramic type was more expensive and elaborate than other common earthen­ ware types and may have been initially limited in use to a few relatively high-status households. The introduction of this ceramic type also sug­ gests an increased efficiency in the French supply network during Period II. 61 Period II was thus characterized by an Increasing population, by trading as a major economic activity, and, possibly, by the initial recognition of low-level status distinctions, thought to be a natural by-product of an increased population with acconqpanying task speciali­ zation. Such distinctions, if recognized during the preceding period, were less formalized and contributed less to the differential cultural representation of the site. The Period II population was still closely adapted to locally available resources but had a greater variety of material possessions available. The beginnings of social differentia­ tions are recognized during this period and become more pronounced dur­ ing succeeding periods. Period III 1751 to 1755 (1760): Late French Occupation The final French period of occupation is also poorly documented in the historical records. As in the preceding two periods, we must rely primarily on archaeological data for an understanding of this period and of the social conditions by which it was characterized. Period III is defined architecturally by stockade Feature 82 and by a number of large structures which were constructed between 1750 and 1760 and which were in use throughout the remaining years of site occu­ pation. The estimated size of the stockade, based on sections which were recovered archaeologically, is 285 feet east-west by 265 feet north-south; this is an estimated 30 percent increase in the enclosed area. This expansion was accomplished by relocating the north and south walls approximately 10 feet in each direction and the west wall approx­ imately 40 feet to the west. New structures constructed within the Feature 82 stockade include: a Priest's house and blacksmith's shop. 62 both attached to the north wall of the church; a guardhouse, Feature 60; a brick kiln, Feature 77; and three rowhouse units, Feature 90 (96, 91), Feature 220, and Feature 266. When the three rowhouse units are com­ bined, it indicates that between 19 and 20 new houses were constructed during Period III. In addition, several structures from the preceding period continued to be used: the church, Feature 62, was still in use and was now enclosed within the stockade; the Period II French well. Feature 88, was abandoned sometime during the later years of this period; a house, Feature 89, was probably abandoned during the initial years of Period III, as a result of the changes which were necessitated by the Feature 82 stockade expansion. This major period of construction contrasts sharply with the levels of such activity during the preceding two periods. This emphasis may indicate a major re-organization of the site in terms of population density and social organization, although the complimentary Period III artifact associations provide little additional evidence to support this assumption. For example, we would expect a major phase of new building construction to be accompanied by a proportional increase in period associated artifacts; this does not seem to be the case. possible reasons for this observed inconsistency: There are two either the rowhouse units were constructed earlier than 1751 (this cannot be supported either archaeologically or historically) or the rowhouses were constructed late during the Period III occupation, in which case the rowhouses would not have produced a notable increase in artifact frequency during Period III. This second alternative is the most logical at present; it is tentatively suggested that rowhouse Feature 220 was constructed early in Period III but that the other two rowhouses were constructed during the final years 63 of Period III. Future excavations in the east half of the site should provide evidence which will illuminate this problem. Period III artifact associations reflect an increase in the number of non-trade-good categories and a continuation of the preceding Period II, trade-good emphasis. Period III trade-good associations are listed below and are expressed in terms of context of utilization. - Personal Context of Utilization Beads Tinkling Cones Jew's-Harps (SA and SB) Hawk Bells Religious Medallions and Crucifixes - Household Context of Utilization Awls Brass or Copper Kettles - Craft or Activity Context of Utilization Case Knives (CII) French Clasp Knives (Cl, GI) Bale Seals Blade and Spall Gunflints (SA and SC) Metal Projectile Points - Miscellaneous or Generalized Context of Utilization Strike-A-Lites In conparing this list with that of Period II, very little dif­ ference is noted in the frequency and formal diversity of artifact cate­ gories. Jesuit rings were notably infrequent during this period. 64 Other Period III artifact associations include: French Military and civilian buttons Buckles, most types are present in low frequency Cufflinks, round and octagonal brass and glass inset (CVI and CIV) Rings with glass sets (Cl) Textiles Hooks and eyes Combs Lead pencils Needles Ceramics, all tin-glazed earthenware types (CA, GI)t white saltglazed stoneware (CB, GI)i and Chinese export porcelain (CC, GI) The Period III artifact assenfelage, in comparison with that of the preceding period, is represented by an equally large number of tradegood categories but by an increased frequency and formal diversity of categories which represent non-trading activities. The presence of both porcelain and white saltglazed stoneware, for example, indicates a con­ tinued increase in social differentiation noted initially in Period II and an increased efficiency in the s\g>ply and distribution of goods over that of Period II. The inportation of large quantities of fine ceramics, such as porcelain, must certainly have required a more effi­ cient supply network and mode of transportation. The presence of por­ celain at the site during Period III further suggests that there was an increase in the number of persons who used comparatively expensive and fragile material goods. This in turn may indicate the increased 65 presence of high status individuals relative to the status differences which characterized the preceding two periods. The French military garrison at the site was probably larger and more systematically organized than it had been during Period II. This is indicated by an increased frequency of French military buttons and French blade gunflints, attributed initially to the French military rather than civilian population. It is also probable that the French and Indian War of this period conqselled the French military garrison to become better organized. These factors also indicate that more pronounced status distinctions would have been operative in distin­ guishing different grades of military personnel and in distinguishing military personnel from individuals engaged in different occupations (for example, itinerant traders, merchants, priests, and specialized craftsmen such as blacksmiths and gunsmiths). The Period III, French occupation was characterized by a greater degree of social differentiation which indicates that the social organi­ zation of the site was more complex. The recognition of status differ­ ences probably increased during this period, due both to the increased presence of high status occupations and individuals and to the noted formal elaboration of the French military garrison. The frequency of trading activities does not appear to have increased appreciably over the preceding period in spite of a more efficient supply network. The social composition of the site continued to change from generalized to differentiated with the increased presence of non-trade-oriented social and economic activities. In comparison with the preceding periods and in relation to population size, there was actually less emphasis on trading as a major economic activity. The French occupation during 66 Period III was less closely adapted to the local environment and conse­ quently more dependent on a supply of European goods. Period IV 1755 (1760) to 1781: British Occupation The final period of site occupation is well documented both archaeologically and historically. The archaeological data provides de­ tailed information which is not included in the known historical sources. The historical references provide a rather detailed chronological frame­ work for the synthesis and interpretation of the archaeological remains. Period IV is defined by the British period of occupation, 1761 to 1781; however, as previously indicated, the initial date may have been slightly earlier, in correspondence with dated structural evidence and the proposed construction date of stockade Feature 14, 1755 to 1760. Period IV is thus represented by stockade Feature 14 and by new struc­ tures which were constructed during the British period of control. Stockade Feature 14, based on the predicted location of stockade cur­ tains, was approximately 320 feet east-west by between 345 feet and 355 feet north-south. The size of this stockade represents a 32 percent in­ crease over the area enclosed by the Period III stockade. tures constructed during this period include: New struc­ a late, British Command­ ing Officer's house. Feature 11, constructed in approximately 1770: a possible British guardhouse. Feature 202; a soldiers barracks. Feature 3, constructed in 1769 and 1770; a blacksmith's shop. Feature 61, constructed over an earlier Period III French guardhouse (Feature 60) after 1767: an interior stockade. Feature 16, probably built in 1776: a blockhouse. Fea­ ture 66, built after 1779: and a Becond provisions storehouse. Feature 21, constructed after 1772. An earlier provisions storehouse, Feature 22, 67 was constructed at the same time as the Feature 14 stockade, approxi­ mately 1755 to 1760. Several structures from the preceding period continued to be used after 1761: the second Commanding Officer's house, Feature 57, was in use until about 1770; the Priest's house, associated blacksmith's shop, and church were all in use throughout this period; the brick kiln. Feature 77, had ceased to be used by 1765; the three rowhouse units. Feature 90 (96, 91), Feature 220, and Feature 266 were in use until 1781. Period IV artifact associations include the following trade-good categories which are listed by their context of utilization: - Personal Context of Utilization Tinkling Cones Jew's-Harps (SA and SB) - Household Context of Utilization Awls - Craft and Activity Context of Utilization Bale Seals, much less frequent than in Period II Blade and Spall Gunflints (SA and SC) Case Knives (CII) - Miscellaneous or Generalized Context of Utilization Strike-A-Lites This list is in sharp contrast to those of the preceding three periods of occupation. stantially . The frequency of trade goods has decreased sub­ A number of artifact categories, which were very common during Periods I through III, were either rare or absent during Period IV; these include: 68 French clasp knives (Cl, GI) Bale seals Beads Hawk bells Religious medallions and crucifixes Brass or copper kettles Metal projectile points This obvious decrease in the number of trade goods at the site reflects a major shift in economic enphasis from the preceding period. A number of additional, non-trade-good artifact categories were associated with the Period IV occupation; these include: British military buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va, Vb, Vc, Vd, Ve, Vf, Vg, Vi, Vj; CII, SA, Tl, Va), and numerous British civilian buttons Buckles, specialized military and civilian, both of which were in much greater use during Period IV Cufflinks, glass inset (CIV), infrequent use, and brass and pewter, (CVI), common use Rings with glass insets (Cl) Forks and spoons Bricks British clasp knives (Cl, GII) Blade and spall gunflintn (SA and SC) Textiles Hooks and eyes Combs Lead pencils Needles (uncommon) 69 Thimbles Cast-iron kettles Barrel hoops Ceramics, tin-glazed earthenware (CA, GI) noted by a low frequency of French specimens; brown glazed redware (CA, G U I , TB); cream colored earthenware CA, GII) ; slip-decorated earthenware (CA, G U I , TH); tortoise-shell glaze, brown and green splashed glaze, fruit and vegetable motif, and Jackfield fine earthenwares (CA, GIV); white saltglazed stoneware (CB, GI), which diminished in use during this period as a result of the initial popularity of cream colored earthenware; Rhenish stoneware (CB, GII), probably in use after 1770; and both Chinese export and English porcelain (CC) The total Period IV artifact assemblage is distinctly tripartite in nature; it is defined by sub-assemblages which represent the military, merchants or traders, and other non-merchant civilian occupants. These distinctions, although initially present during Period III, were much better defined and more easily recognized in the Period IV assenblage. This observation indicates both that the social composition of the site during this period was highly differentiated and that related major dif­ ferences in status levels were readily distinguished and of major impor­ tance in terms of the social structure of the site. The occv%>ational emphasis during this period was distinctly specialized-military, set in context of a highly differentiated society, rather them trade oriented as had been the case during the preceding three periods of Frencdi occu­ pation. The livelihood of the majority of the site's occupants during this period was probably related to the activities of the British mili­ tary garrison. As such, economic support was gained ultimately from external sources; whereas in the preceding periods, economic support was derived to a great extent from locally available resources. 70 The above conditions reflect an historically demonstrated in­ crease in population during this period, primarily in the military seg­ ment of the population. The decreased emphasis on trading as a special­ ized economic activity is clearly demonstrated by the decrease in the frequency of trade goods. This observation may be somewhat misleading, however, because of several factors: (1) the observed, decreased fre­ quency of trade goods may be an artificial result of the areas and/or structures at the site which have been excavated— the majority of British structures excavated have served specialized military purposes; British traders' houses have not been extensively excavated; (2) we would expect, on the basis of historical evidence, to witness an increase in trading activity at the site during the British period ofcontrol, since, as a result of changes in trade policies by the British, the dis­ tribution of trade goods (either in exchange for furs or as gifts) was confined to the major military posts in the Upper Great Lakes. In order to explain this problem, it is tentatively suggested that the village which was located east of the fort in fact represented a population of British traders. The fort itself had thus become a functionally spe­ cific military post, distinct in social composition from the preceding French occupational periods and the nearby British village. An increase during this period both in the frequency and formal diversity of military and civilian possessions indicates that a more advanced level of logistical efficiency characterized the British supply network. This was essential for the maintenance of the cultural norms and varied occupations which characterized the site, since the British adaptation, in representing a North American extension of European 71 cultural and economic norms, was highly dependent on an increasing supply of goods from outside sources. The presence of numerous barrel hoops, restricted to the British period of occvqpation, confirms the hypothesis that goods were being imported in greater quantities and with greater efficiency. Cleland's (n.d.) analysis of British-faunal remains supports this theory and suggests that the British were highly dependent on imported foods, particularly domesticated animals. It is apparent from the decline in religious items from the preceding period that religious activities assumed lesssocial importance during the British period of control. Part II: A Comparison of the French and British Social Systems The preceding discussion emphasizes cultural phenomena as they are archaeologically documented and reflected in each of the four pe­ riods of site occupation. The present discussion is more concerned with evaluating differences between the French and British social sys­ tems in terms of differential cultural behavior. One important condition affects the conparability of the two occupations; the French occupation has been defined as it changed through time whereas the British occupation has been characterized as a static social system which underwent little change in the conditions of occupation through time. The French occupation tookplace over ap­ proximately 45 years during which time a number of continuously evolving cultural differences were noted. The British occupation, representing a 72 short time span of 20 years, did not, at least in its archaeological manifestation, reflect changing cultural conditions. Thus, a comparison of French and British social systems is initially complicated since they have been differentially defined and interpreted. The French and British occupations of the site may be compared in terms of three interrelated factors: population density, material pos­ sessions, and cultural domains. Population Density It is estimated that the early French population consisted of be­ tween 30 and 50 permanent occupants; the site was also occupied for dif­ ferent periods of time by itinerant traders and trappers. French popu­ lation density increased to between 80 and 100 permanent occupants by 1761. The initial British population consisted of between 120 and 140 permanent occupants, including between 70 and 90 soldiers. By 1781, this population had increased to between 175 and 200 individuals. It is also probable that a comparable population increase occurred outside the fort. In comparison, the British population density was greater than that of the French and consisted of a greater, relative proportion of military personnel. Material Possessions The early French inhabitants possessed few personal items which were not essential for subsistence purposes. The majority of these were utilitarian and functionally generalized in nature and exhibited a low level of formal variation. It has been emphasized that many trade-good 73 categories were also in conmon use by the French occupants. tion had changed by the end of the French period of control. This condi­ At this time, an increased use of artifact categories representing specialized activities and different status positions is noted. However, the ma­ jority of the assemblage remains generalized in terms of occupational or task application, and reflects the local subsistence and trade orien­ tation of the population. Material possessions during the British period of control were numerous and highly differentiated both in form and function. This assemblage readily distinguishes the military and civilian segments of the population and further indicates that there were major status and occupational differences within and between these segments. The British artifact assemblage reflects a non-local adaptation. The frequency (relative to population density) and formal diver­ sity of British possessions is of a higher order than that which char­ acterized the late French period. This reflects not only a difference in the degree of social conplexity between the two societies but also a difference in the cultural norms which characterized the French and British occupations. Thus, the British occupation cannot be viewed simply as a logical extension of the preceding periods accompanied by an increase in social complexity. Cultural Domains Status Recognition! Low level status differences were recognized during the initial years of French occupation. These differences became more pronounced throughout the period of French occtq?ation, as a result of an increasing population, military formalization, external communicatio 74 and interaction, and the increased presence of individuals engaged in occupations which were neither trade nor military oriented. By 1761, definite status levels were recognized, although the number of highstatus individuals was very low. Status differences during the British occupation was very common and were equally recognized and applied by everyone at the site. Both the military and civilian segments of the population were highly differ­ entiated on the basis of status. included: Different military classes probably the Commanding Officer and his family, officers and their families, civilians under military direction (doctor, notary, inter­ preter) , and enlisted men. Among the civilian occupants we may distin­ guish a few high-status merchants, other merchants and traders, and oc­ cupational specialists, such as Priests, blacksmiths, gunsmiths, and carpenters. As noted in the discussion of material possessions, the French and British occupations differed not only in degree but in kind. This applies equally to the differential presence and importance of status levels, indicating that the French and British social systems were char­ acterized by different levels of conplexity. Military-Political Behavior: The purpose of the French military garrison at Fort Michilimackinac was to support and protect French trad­ ing activities in the Upper Great Lakes. As such the French military component served a largely economic purpose. This emphasis is charac­ terized by the French military organization as defined by archaeological evidence. The early French military garrison was small and structurally simple, reflecting a major site emphasis on trading with a secondary 75 enphasis on military support for this activity. As the duration of the French occupation increased, the military organization became more for­ malized, although its purpose remained secondary to trading interests. Fort Michilimackinac during the French period can be characterized as a fortified trading center, dependent on the European fur market for eco­ nomic support. The British military garrison was a large and tightly structured military organization. These conditions indicate that the British main­ tained Fort Michilimackinac as a site designed for military purposes with a secondary purpose of maintaining British trading interests. In conparing French and British military activities, we find that the respective garrisons were very different in terms of purpose, and organization. The French garrison can be broadly characterized as a fortified trading center, whereas the British garrison represented a functionally specific military post which derived both its economic and subsistence sipport directly from England or from other North American logistic centers controlled by the British military. Religious Behavior: Religious activities during the French pe­ riod of control were very inportant, both in terms of their role in serving the religious needs of the population, and, indirectly, in supporting the French economic and political systems. Religious ac­ tivity during the British period was of lesser importance. This dif­ ference may feflect the de-emphasis of one means of social control dur­ ing the period of British occupation and its substitution by an in­ creased military-political control of the site's occupants. 76 Economic Behavior: The economic enphasis throughout the period of French control remained trade oriented. Trade was the single most common economic activity and the one in which the majority of the French population was engaged. An increased reliance on external economic re­ sources/ with an attendant increased efficiency in the trade-good supply and distribution network/ is noted through time. Life at the site be­ came less closely tied to local resources for economic and subsistence goods and more closely dependent on externally available resources. In spite of this important trend in the change of economic conditions# the French site represented a functionally specific trade center throughout its existence; all other activities, including military, were secondary. The local economy during the British period of occupation sup­ ported and was largely dependent on the presence of a military garrison. Individuals were either engaged directly in military activities or were dependent on these activities in order to obtain subsistence and eco­ nomic goods. This type of occupation, in being basically non-locally supported, necessitated a very efficient logistics network for its maintenance. Conditions at the site were closely adapted or related to socio-economic and political conditions in England. As such, the Brit­ ish occupation represented a functional extension of English culture; this included a complex and highly differentiated social system. These observations indicate a contrast between the economic conditions and emphases which characterised the French and British oc­ cupations of the site. The French site represented a cultural and eco­ nomic re-adaptation to an Upper Great Lakes' environment, in view of the French purposes for occupying this region. The British occupation 77 remained closely adapted to an external environment and was influenced by the social and economic conditions in England at that time. CONCLUSIONS This report has exemplified a delineation of social conditions at an eighteenth-century historic site based on archaeological evidence. The analytic approach has been centered on the position that evidence of cultural activities and conditions can be derived from archaeological remains. Conversely, the formal dimensions of archaeological remains and their spatial and tenporal distribution are products of differential cultural activity. As such, this report represents both an exercise in interpreta­ tive methodology, based largely on the comparative and analytic features of formal classification, and a formal archaeological description and interpretation of a major eighteenth-century historic site. In consi­ dering these contributions, several related observations were made. 1. The analytic methods of prehistoric archaeology may be applied with equal reliability to the analysis of historic-aite remains. 2. The importance of historical evidence cannot be overemphasized. This evidence has provided both an interpretative framework and a complimentary data source. 3. Archaeological reseazch on historic sites, even if the sites are well-documented historically, can provide additional primary 78 evidence relative to historical events which occurred at the site, information on cultural behavior and social conditions which characterized the site, and information about the rela­ tionship of a site to external historical conditions. Research such as this may thus provide new evidence, previously unknown from historical sources, which may be applied to both historical and anthropological problems. 4. The formal classification of historic artifacts has benefitted this study in several ways: first, it has permitted the descrip­ tion of artifacts for comparative purposes; second, it has facil­ itated the discrimination and interpretation of important cul­ tural variables; third, it has permitted an accurate evaluation of formal variation within artifact categories in terms of tem­ poral and spatial differences; and fourth, it has permitted a reevaluation of certain types of archaeological evidence already in the literature. 5. There are major cultural differences between different types of historic sites (such as trading posts, religious centers, mili­ tary posts, or Indian settlements) as reflected in the formal structure of their archaeological remains. These differences may be due to several factors including the presence of different occupant societies with distinct patterns of cultural behavior and the different economic and political reasons for the site's occ\jpation. In addition, as demonstrated in this report, there may be important cultural differences at an individual site. A 79 comparison of the French and British social systems at Fort Michilimackinac has reflected differences, both in degree and in kind, of characteristic cultural behavior. The French population was largely homogeneous with respect to cultural behavior and exhibited a relatively single social organization. The bases for French site occtpation were trade oriented and economic. The British occupation, in contrast, was highly differentiated in terms of cultural behavior and more complex in terms of social organization. oriented. The basis for British site occupation was military APPENDIX A: STRUCTURE DESCRIPTIONS 81 Part 1 of Appendix A presents the descriptions and interpreta­ tions of each major structure identified at Fort Michilimackinac during the 1959 through 1966 seasons. Additional structural components and features have been excavated which are not interpreted in this report; these are listed and briefly identified in Part II. Structural interpretations are based on several types of evi­ dence which include: 1. Comparative and historical evidence relating to French and British methods and styles of construction; 2. Historical documents and maps which refer to specific struc­ tures at the site; 3. The position, size, and orientation of structures identified; 4. Artifact associations. All field records were reviewed and re-evaluated as a part of the structural analyses. Field records include field logs or note­ books, square sheets, feature and interpretative maps, and photographs. In addition, all published and unpublished reports on structures at the site were reviewed. PART I Structures described below are listed in the numerical order of their identifying feature number or numbers. The majority of structure 82 descriptions include the following information (if there are no data for a specific section, the section is omitted): 1. Introduction! identifies the structure by feature number or numbers, references text figures on which it appears, and notes the year or years of excavation, and cites any archaeo­ logical reports in which it has been described. 2. Location and Orientation; notes the position of the building with respect to other structures in the same area and with respect to the site's grid system. 3. Dimensions: this section lists the dimensions of the struc­ ture as interpreted. 4. Major Structural Features; includes a physical description of the structure and all related features such as basements, fire­ places, and wall trenches. 5. Artifact Associations: ations . lists select structure-artifact associ­ The artifacts listed were selected either because they appeared in high frequencies or their presence was considered particularly significant for interpretative purposes. Arti­ facts are listed both by formal taxonomic division and by in­ formal descriptive notation. 6. Relationships With Other Features: describes the vertical and horizontal relationships between a structure and other struc­ tures or features. 83 7. Documentation: references important historical sources which apply to the structure. 8. Interpretation: summarizes and interprets the preceding evi­ dence in terms of structure chronology, construction, and function. Four maps accompany the Part I structure descriptionst an in­ terpretative map (Figure 8 , and 9 6 ), and three data maps (Figures 7 , )t each of these depict a different area of the site. The areas delineated by the latter maps are indicated on Figure by heavy dashed lines. STRUCTURE FEATURE 3; British Soldier's Barracks Figures 6, 8 Feature 3, located and completely excavated in 1959, has been reported by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 70-77) and subsequently has been recon­ structed. The following description is based on that of Maxwell and Binford. Location and Orientation: north-south axis, located slightly north and west of the center of the stockade enclosure, c o m e r s in squares 110L40, 110L20, 200L40, and 200L20. Dimensions: ments) . 89'6" north-south by 22* east-west (external measure­ Major Structural Features: Walls, 1*4" to 1'8" wide, limestone footings which provide foundations for main wooden sills (16" to 18" wide by ca. 8" thick). The west wall includes, in addition, 3 carefully made pillars of cut limestone laid in mortar; the pillars are spaced 17*6" apart starting from the northwest comer. A centered, north-south row of dolomite boulders was noted in which each boulder was spaced ca. 3*4" apart; this apparently served as additional roof-beam support. The ground surface out­ side the walls was lined with a pink clay apron, 2' to 3' wide and 2n to 4" thick, which served to drain water away from the building. Two double, H-shaped fireplaces supported by chimney footings were recorded, 1 each in the north and south halves of the structure. 84 Thesefireplaces divide the structure into 4 rooms of approximately the same internal size, 21' by 20'. The 2 chimney footings, F. 13 (F. 23) (north) and F. 142 (south), were constructed of rough-cut dolomite blocks and supported brick-lined fireplaces. The footings are each ca. 11' long and 7' wide with hearth areas 2'8" wide and 3' deep. Artifact Associations* - Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va; Cl, SD, Tl, Vd; CII, SA, Tl, Va; all are British military types) - Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) - Ceramics (CB, GI, TC, scratch blue white saltglazed stoneware; CB, GI, TA, while saltglazed stoneware; CA, GIV, TB, tor­ toise shell glaze fine earthenware; CA, GI, TA and TD, tin-glazed earthenware) The frequency of artifacts associated with F. 3 is comparatively low; this results both from the short period of time during which it was occupied (ca. 10 to 11 years) and from the fact that it was occupied exclusively by British military personnel. Relationships With Other Features: F. 3 is superimposed over the northwest rowhouse unit, the north wall of F. 5, and F. 31. F. 16, a stockade trench which joins the northeast and southeast c o m e r s of F. 3 and which parallels the east wall, was constructed as an additional defensive measure to protect the barracks in the event of attack. Documentation: The construction, use, and subsequent removal of this building is well-documented: - Jan. 1765, letter from Howard to Bradstreet, enphasizing neces­ sity of building barracks. - Aug. 1765, letter from Campbell to Gage, nothing need for bar­ racks . - March 1769, letter from Gage to Glazier, noting that builders had been sent for the barracks, and enclosing a contract for the barracks construction with a New York carpenter. - Nov. 1769, letter from Glazier to Gage, noting that barracks construction has started and that two rooms will be finished by December, expect to finish all construction by June. - July 1770, letter from Turnbull to Gage, barracks completed for 60 men. - Feb. 1780, letter from Sinclair to Brehm, noting plans for re­ moval of building to Mackinac Island. - Feb. 1781, letter from Sinclair to Brehm, noting removal of building to Mackinac Island. Interpretation: Feature 3 is the British soldier's barracks re­ ferred to in the above documents, constructed in 1769 and 1770 and removed to Mackinac Island in 1781. The arrfiaeological evidence very clearly substantiates the historical evidence. 85 STRUCTURE FEATURE 5; Early French Period Fort Stockade Figures 6, 8, 9 Portions of this stockade feature were excavated during the 1959 through 1966 field seasons. Location and Orientation: Sections of the north, west, and possibly south stockades or walls of F. 5 have been located. The northwest c o m e r is in square 130L120; the north wall extends from this c o m e r to square 110 R30; the west wall extends from this c o m e r to square 260L110 and possibly to square 310L110, depending on which of sev­ eral wall trenches is interpreted as the south wall of F. 5. The most probable choice of a south wall for F. 5 is F. 241, an eastwest trench which extends between 250L100 and 240L30; a second choice is F. 273 (F. 259C), an east-west trench between 310L110 and 310L30. Dimensions: 81' or 82'. north wall, 154'; west wall, 129' or 178'; south wall, Major Structural Features: Stockade walls, 16" to 22" wide trenches, the bottoms of which vary in surface depth from 40" to 72"j the depth depends on the elevation of underlying beach gravels which is the point at which trench excavations always terminated. F. 5 con­ tained intermittent post molds, 6” to 8” in diameter. Stockade gates include a 6' wide gate in the north wall, between 100' and 106' east of the northwest comer; and a possible gate in the west wall between squares 190L120 and 220L110. The existence and exact position of this latter gate is uncertain. Artifact Associations: The majority of artifacts which can be at­ tributed to the period of F. 5 stockade use are associated with in­ dividual structures (F. 76, F. 25, F. 27, and F. 31) within the stockade. These associations are listed within the context of in­ dividual structure descriptions. Several bead types (Cl, SA, T2, Va; Cl, SC, Tl and T2; and C1I, SA, T8, Va) are clearly associated with the area bounded by the F. 5 north, east, and south walls, ttiese associations support the interpretation of F. 241 as the F. 5 south wall. Relationships With Other Features: The following structure fea­ tures overlie sections of the F. 5 stockade trench: F. 89, F. 60, F. 61, F. 88, F. 3, F. 16, F. 220, and F. 62. One rowhouse unit consisting of three structures (F. 76, F. 25, and F. 27) and 1 addi­ tional isolated structure (F. 31) are contemporaneous and associated with the F. 5 stockade. Several additional wall-trench segments (F. 32, F. 37, F. 94, and F. 95) are provisionally associated with F. 5. Interpretation: F. 5 represents the earliest evidence of a stockade at the site. This judgment is based both on artifact and structure 86 associations as well as stratigraphic relationships with other structures. The F. 5 stockade was probably constructed by the French in 1715 and was removed for stockade enlargement sometime between 1725 and 1735. The rationale for this terminal dating is based both on the initial date range (1730-1740) assigned to the first stockade expansion represented by F. 81 and on the dates assigned to structures which were definitely enclosed within, and associated with, F. 5. STRUCTURE FEATURE 14i Figures Late French or Early British Period Fort Stockade. 6, 7 The short segment of F. 14 was excavated during the 1959 season and has been described by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 48-50). Location and Orientation: F. 14 has been excavated for a distance of ca. 23' in squares 40L70, 40L80, and 40L110. An extended, deep wall trench at the south end of the site (F. 278, F. 271) may rep­ resent the south stockade equivalent of F. 14. Dimensionst F. 14 is approximately 3* wide at the top and 1'8" wide at the bottom. F. 278 (271) varies in width from 2'6" to 4*. The distance between F. 14 and F. 278 (271) is 286*. Major Structural Features: F. 14 runs east-west in 40L110 and in 40L80 and turns north in square 40L70. This stockade trench con­ tained 8" to 12'* diameter post molds and evidence of split, filler logs between the posts. Documentation: The stockade represented by F. 14 is shown on the Nordberg, Magra, and Crown Collection maps and is identified by the noted north "jog." The Crown Collection map of 1765 most closely represents the position of the F. 14 stockade. Two his­ toric references are noted which mention the repair of this stockade: leter from De Peyster to Brehm, June 1779; and letter from Vattas to Gage, May, 1773. The Magra map of 1766 shows the distance between the north and south stockades to be 285' (on a line perpendicular to the north wall at the stockade jog) which is very close to the 286’ distance between F. 14 and F. 278 (271), although the angle of the south wall on this map is very different from the angle of F. 278 (271). Interpretation: This stockade was probably constructed by the French between 1755 and 1760 and was in use throughout the period of British control. The British strengthened or rebuilt sections of this stockade at different times. It is tentatively suggested that the south wall of F. 14 is represented by the presently re­ constructed south wall of the site. 87 STRUCTURE FEATURE 16: Figures Late British Period Internal Stockade Attached to F. 3 (British Soldier's Barracks). 6, 8 Feature 16 was excavated during the 1959 season and has been partially described by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 77-78). Location and Orientation: Sections of F. 16parallel and are attached to the north, south, and east walls of F. 3. The north­ east and southeast c o m e r s of F. 3 are each joined by north-south wall-trench extensions of F. 16 at 13* and 14* respectively north and south of F. 3. At thesepoints of junction, F. 16 turns to the west and aligns with the north and south walls of Features 220 and 25 (76, 27) respectively. The west extension of F. 16, north of F. 3, is termed F. 42. Dimensions: F. 16 is 120' in total north-south length and para­ llels the east wall of F. 3 at a distance of 13'. The wall trench varies in width between 6" and 2*6". Major Structural Features: Each of the 2 F. 16 extensions which join the northeast and southeast c o m e r s of F. 3 have 3*6" wide gateways which provided entrance into the enclosed stockade area. Maxwell and Binford (1961: 78) indicate that there may have been a firing platform along the inside of the stockade wall. The angle and position of the west extension of F. 16 (or F. 42) indicates that it may at one time have joined the southeast c o m e r or south wall of the NNW rowhouse unit (F. 90). The projected west exten­ sion of F. 16 south of F. 3 is very close to the positionand angle of the north wall of the SW rowhouse unit (F. 220). Artifact Associations: Within the stockade enclosure. - Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va» Cl, SD, Tl, Vd; CII, SA, Tl, Va, all are British military types) - Ceramics (Cl, Gl, TA tin-glazed earthenware) - Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) Relationships With Other Features: F. 16 overlies a section of the F. 5 north stockade wall and portions of the clay apron which surround F. 3. Documentation: The absence of this feature on the Magra, Nordberg, and Crown Collection maps indicates that it was constructed after 1769. Two later references: Sinclair to Brehm, Feb., 1780r and Depeyster to Brehm, June, 1779, indicate that a stockade of strong pickets (an interior redoubt) had been thrown up to pro­ tect the soldier's barracks (F. 3) from attack. F. 16 probably represents this interior fortification. 88 Interpretation! F. 16 represents an interior stockade fortifica­ tion which probably surrounded the British soldier's barracks (F. 3). F. 16 was constructed between 1770, the date at which F. 3 was com­ pleted, and 1779, the date of the first historic reference to this structure. It is suggested that F. 16 was constructed after 1776 as a defensive response to conditions during the Revolutionary War. Artifact and structural associations support a 1770 to 1781 period of use. STRUCTURE FEATURE 21 (22): Figures Late French Period Provisions Storehouse (F. 22) and Superimposed British Period Provisions Storehouse (F. 21) 6, 7 These two structures were excavated during the 1959 field season; this description and interpretation is based in part on the description by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 38-50). F. 21 has subsequently been re­ constructed. Location and Orientation! Both structures are located in the northcentral section of the fort, adjacent to and to the west of the land gate. Both features sure enclosed within the north stockade "jog" defined by F. 14. The following grid units enclose features 21 and 22: 0 and 60, L10 and L50. Dimensions! F. 22, 43' north-south by 30' east-west; F. 21, 36* north-south by 23*9” east-west. Major Structural Features! F. 22, structure composed of north and south walls of 6" to 81' vertical posts set in narrow wall trenches and east and west walls of either horizontal logs or vertical logs against horizontal sills. F. 22 has a basement located in the south-central area of the structure; 9'6" north-south by 11'3" east-west; bottom lined with white-washed field stones; sides of 4" diameter vertical posts lined on the exterior with birch bark. This structure has a 2'8" wide doorway through the south wall, 8' east of the southwest comer. F. 21, the north and west walls of this structure overlie the north and west walls of F. 22.F. 21 is defined by a layered stone foundation, consisting of a bottom course of field stone overlain by 2 or 3 courses of limestone slabs. These foundations have been completely defined on the east, west, and south sides and partially defined on the north side. The foundations excavated were ca. 15" wide and were set in shallow wall trenches, 27" to 36" wide. Artifact Associations! Artifact associations with Features 21 and 22 are confusing and indicate only that the majority of artifacts from this area were deposited after 1770 (see Maxwell and Binford 1961t 41-47 for a preliminary listing of F. 21 and F. 22 arti­ facts .) 89 Relationships With Other Features: Both features are to the north of the F. 82 stockade and thus are believed to post-date this stockade feature. Documentation: The provisions storehouse is noted on all 3 period maps with the following dimensions: Magra, 46* north-south by 18* east-west; Nordberg, 39' north-south by 23' east-west; and Crown Collection, 38'-46' north-south by 28'-33' east-west. The Crown Collection map most closely represents the dimensions of F. 22 (43* north-south by 30* east-west) based on archaeological evi­ dence. It is believed that F. 21 was constructed later than the time period included by the 3 maps (1765-1769). A letter from Turnbull to Gage, Sept. 1771, suggeststhat the provisions store­ house built in 1772 and 1773 was to be established in the same location as am earlier storehouse. F. 21 received better documen­ tation, with 5 references to its construction: - Nov. 1769, letter from Glasier to Gage, noting the necessity of constructing a new provision store. - July 1772, letter from Turnbull to Gage, noting the initial preparations for the construction of a storehouse. - July 1772, Vattas to Gage, the stones and floor boards for the storehouse are being obtained. - Aug. 1772, Vattas to Gage, mentions the necessity of obtaining a carpenter to build the storehouse. - March 1773, Vattas to Gage, noting that the storehouse is nearly finished. Interpretation: Feature 22 is a provisions storehouse which was constructed by the French sometime between 1750 and 1760. This dating is based largely on the position relationship between F. 22 and F. 14 (dated between 1755 and 1760). F. 22 was in use until a new storehouse was built in 1772-1773. F. 21 represents a second storehouse which was built by the British between 1772 and 1773 and which remained in use until 1781, at which time it was dis­ mantled and removed to Mackinac Island. STRUCTURE FEATURE 25 (76, 27): Figures Northwest Rowhouse Unit (early French period rowhouse unit consisting of 3 individual structures). 6, 8 Feature 25 and related Features 76 and 27 were excavated during the 1959-1961 seasons and have been briefly described by Binford (n.d. [1961]) and Maxwell and Binford (1961: 83-84). Location and Orientation: The F. 25 rowhouse unit is loaated adjacent to the inside, north wall of the F. 5 stockade. The individual units are F. 25 (center), F. 76 (west), and F. 27 (east). 90 Dimensions; The 3 individual structures in this rowhouse unit have the following external dimensions: F. 25, 18*6" north-south by 19'6" east-west; F. 76, 18*6" north-south by 21*6" east-west; and F. 27, 17' north-south by 21' east-west. The combined row­ house unit is 65'6" in total east-west length. Wall trenches which form the 3 structures vary inwidth from 1'4" to 2*. Major Structural Features; The wall construction characteristic of all 3 units is: north and south walls were constructed of vertical pickets set in horizontal sills; east and west walls may have been of wattle construction consisting of small saplings covered with elm bark siding. The 3 units are not joined by com­ mon walls but are separated by narrow (1' to 3' wide) open areas. Each structure has additional, specific feature associations: - F. 25: clay puncheon and plank floor; boulder chimney on west wall near the southwest corner, 6* north-south by 4' east-west (external dimensions) and 4' north-south by 2'6" east-west (hearth dimensions); basement (F. 70) located in the south center of the building, 7' north-south by 3'6" east-west, con­ struction of vertical pickets with bark woven between pickets; 3*6" wide doorway through the south wall, 3* from the southwest comer; possible 3* wide doorway through the north wall, 6* east of the northwest corner; internal partitioning consists of a shadow, wall trench which extends from the northeast c o m e r of the basement to the north wall. - F. 76: internal partitions and doorways have not been defined for this unit. - F. 27: 3* wide doorway through the west wall at the southwest comer; 6'6" north-south by 4*4" east-west storage area or shed (F. 24) attached to the north wall of F. 27 at the northwest corner. Artifact Associations: The majority of artifact categories re­ covered at the site were not found in any major quantities in F. 25, 76, or 27. Necklace bead types (Cl, SA, T2, Va; C1I, SA, Tl and T2; CII, SA, T8; Cl, SC, Tl and T2) recovered from F. 76 and 25 were in use very early during the period of French control. Relationships With Other Features: F. 25 rowhouse unit is overlain by 2 later structures; F. 60 and F. 3. Interpretation: Feature 25 (76, 27) represents an early French period rowhouse, probably constructed between 1715 and 1720 and abandoned between 1730 and 1740. The association of F. 25 with F. 5 indicates that the 2 were contemporaneous, although F. 25 probably remained in use several years after the removal of F. 5. 91 STRUCTURE FEATURE 31: Figures French Period House. 6* 8 This structure was excavated during the 1959 season and has been de­ scribed by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 79-81). Location and Orientation: F. 31 is bounded by grid lines 140 and 170f L10 and L40, and underlies the south-central section of F. 3. Dimensions: surements). 17'6" north-south by 20'3" east-west (external mea­ Hall trenches vary in width from 1*4" to 2*. Major Structural Features: F. 31 is defined by 4 wall trenches; the west wall is characterized by small (3" to 4" diameter), shallow, vertical posts set in staggered double and triple rows; the north and south walls were constructed of larger (8” to 10" diameter) vertical posts; the east wall appears to combine the two types of wall construction. Each c o m e r is defined by the presence of 3, closely spaced, large, vertical logs. Doorways, 3'5" and 3'8" wide, were noted through the centers of the south and north walls respectively. A fireplace was noted adjoining the east wall; 3*3" wide at the hearth and extending 3*4" east of the wall. The limits of this fireplace are marked by vertical c o m e r posts. Artifact Associations: The small sample of artifacts associated with F. 31 does not contribute to the interpretation of this struc­ ture. Relationships With Other Features: F. 31 is overlain by F. 3. Interpretation: F. 31 is tentatively identified as a French struc­ ture. The size and construction method characteristic of this feature indicate that it was constructed early in the French period of control, ca. 1720-1730. The angular orientation of F. 31 and the correspondence in wall alignment between F. 31 and F. 27 sup­ port this conclusion. STRUCTURE FEATURE 51 (57, 11): Commanding Officer's House Figures 6, 7 These three related structures were excavated during the 1959 season and have been described and interpreted by Maxwell and Binford (1961: 52-65). The following presentation follows very closely that of Max­ well and Binford. The three features (51, 57, and 11) represent super­ imposed segments of Commanding Officer's houses which were constructed at different times. The Commanding Officer's house represented by F. 57 has been reconstructed. 92 Location and Orientations F. 51 is located in the east half of the site enclosure and is bounded by the following grid units; 60 and 100, R30 and L10. Dimensions: The size of each of the 3 structures are only approximate since none of them have been completely excavated. - F. 51, 41* east-west by greater than 21*6" north-south. - F. 57, 43' east-west by greater than 27' north-south. - f . 11, 30* east-west by greater than 27* north-south. Major Structural Features: Each of the 3 features are de­ scribed individually. - F. 51, east and west of vertical pickets set in wall trenches, no data on construction of the south wall; entrance (3'5" wide) at the southeast corner; basement in the approximate center of F. 51, 10'5" east-west by greater than 12'6" northsouth; fossiliferous limestone, bedrock floor; basement walls consist of a rectangular trench, 1” deep and 11" wide, in which 5" to 8" diameter cedar posts were set; the posts were lined on the exterior with birch bark; possible fire­ place outside of the southwest corner. - F. 57, foundations of heavy, horizontal wood sills which rest on a loose, field stone wall about 2* wide; 2 large field stone fireplace footings at the center of the struc­ ture, each H-shaped opening to the north and south, 9* east-west by 12* north-south, with a fireplace throat 4* by 4*8". The west fireplace overlies the earlier F.51 basement. The east fireplace underlies the east wall of the later F. 11. F. 57 has square-beam floor joists, ca. 8'* wide, placed about 6* on center. The west wall of F. 11 overlies the west wall of F. 57. - F. 11, foundations of rock footings with horizontal wooden sills, north-south floor joists spaced 6' apart on center; possible exterior porch on the south side; possible fire­ place represented by the west fireplace which served F. 57. Maxwell and Binford (1961; 61-62) note that From the amount of broken plaster on the surface it is apparent that the interior walls are plas­ tered, at least above a wainscoting, but probably not the ceiling. The plaster was smoothed on hand-split pine lathes 1-1/4 inches wide and one-half-inch thick, nailed directly (without furring strips) to the hand-hewn, squared wall beams. The plaster is of good quality, and still hard in spite of 180 years of submergence in the damp earth. The scratch coat (brown coat) is three- to four-sixteenths of an inch thick, carefully wiped smooth, and white washed with a good quality of white wash which is still bright. 93 Artifact Associations: Evidence of specific artifact associa­ tions with any of the Commanding Officer's house features is lacking, because of the superimposed nature of the structural remains and the extensive pot-hunting activity which has taken place in the area. Fortunately, stratigraphic relationships between F. 51, 57, and 11 permit the relative dating of these 3 features in the absence of reliable artifact associations. Relationship With Other Features t A 1'9" wide stone foundation overlies sections of the north half of all 3 Commanding Offi­ cer's house features. This foundation has not been interpreted at this time. Documentation: A Commanding Officer's house is shown on all 3 period maps with the following dimensions; Magra, 42' eastwest by 31'6" north-south; Nordberg, 45' east-west by 24' northsouth; Crown Collection, 39*6" to 42' east-west by 30' to 33' north-south. The 3 Commanding Officer's house features have been referred to specifically in a number of documents: - F. 51, Maxwell and Binford (1961: 57) have concluded that the structure in a letter from de Lignery to Council, 1720, referred to as a 40-foot house is archaeologically repre­ sented by F. 51. - F. 57; - Oct. 1768, letter from Glazier to Gage, describes the Commanding Officer's house lot size as 43' by 32'. - March, 1769, Elias Smith contract, noting that the Commanding Officer's house is to be repaired as a barrack for the Conmanding Officer and the garrison officers. - June 1770, letter from Turnbull to Gage, noting that construction work on the Commanding Officer's house is proceeding and that it will consist of 4 rooms when finished. - July 1770, letter from Turnbull to Gage noting that the Conmanding Officer's house is finished and that it consists of 4, 15' by 13* rooms, and 2 garret rooms. Interpretation; The present analysis has essentially substan­ tiated the interpretations presented by Maxwell and Binford in 1961. F. 51 very likely represents a Commanding Officer's house and/or officers quarters in use throughout the period of French control. Artifacts associated with the basement fill of F. 51 indicate that it was abandoned and filled be­ tween 1755 and 1765. We thus assume that F. 51 was Abandoned and that it was replaced with F. 57 during this period. The second Conmanding Officer's house, F. 57, was in use from this time, then, until 1770, when the construction of a new Commanding Officer's house (F. 11) was completed. F. 11 was used until 1781; there is no mention of its removal to Mack­ inac Island. 94 STRUCTURE FEATURE 60: French Guardhouse Figures 6, 8 This feature was excavated in 1960 and is briefly reported in Max­ well's 1960 preliminary report (n.d. [1960: 8-10]). Location and Orientation: F. 60 is located approximately mid­ way between F. 3 and the present west stockade, bounded by grid lines 110 and 140, L70 and L100. The structure is nearly square with a north-south, east-west orientation. Dimensions: F. 60 is composed of 2 elements, the structure proper, 21'6" north-south by 21*6" east-west (external dimen­ sions) ; and a structural addition which joins the east side, 18* north-south by 7' east-west (external dimensions). Major Structural Features: The locations of all 4 walls are indicated by wall trench segments. The east and west walls were constructed of vertical posts, 6" to 8" in diameter, spaced between 2" and 17" apart. The northern 4 posts of the west wall were larger (ca. 12" in diameter) and spaced ca. 18" on center. This would leave a 6" space between posts. Two, heavy, support posts, placed in the same hole at the southwest corner, plus a 3' gap at the south end of the west wall indi­ cate a doorway at this location. A fireplace was located at the south end of the east wall; 7' north-south by 4' east-west in total dimension, the stone hearth measured 3*6" north-south by 2*6” east-west. The inside edge of the hearth aligns with the inside edge ofthe wall, while the outside edge of the feature forms part of the east structure wall. A basement (F. 118) was located in the southwest c o m e r of this structure (8* north-south by4' east-west). F. 118 had thick plank sides (6" to 12" wide by2" to 3" thick) and a bark-covered floor. Maxwell has interpreted several wall trenches along the east side of this structure as an antechamber with exterior smoke­ house. This probable lean-to type of addition was 18*6" north-south by 5*6" east-west and had a square enclosure at the south end behind the fireplace. Post mold patterns along the south side of this addition indicate that entrance was gained at its southwest corner. There was also an entrance at the northwest comer. Artifact Associations: Artifacts frequently associated with F. 60 and particularly with the fill in F. 118 include: - Ceramics, (CA, GXI, cream-colored earthenwarei CA, GI, TC, brown and white tin-glaxed earthenware; and CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware) - Fishhooks - Tinkling Cones - Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) 95 - Awls - Hawk Bells - Buttons (CII, SA, Tl, Va; Cl, SD, Tl, Va, both British) - Beads (Cl, SA, T2, Va and Cl, SA, T3, Vd, both French) - Religions Medallions This assemblage in part reflects the suspected period of use of F. 60, that is, 1751-1769 (1770). Relationships With Other Features: F. 60 overlies both F. 76 and 5. F. 60 may in turn be overlain by F. 61. Documentation; A guardhouse is shown on all 3 period maps in the approximate location of F. 60. These maps indicate the fol­ lowing guardhouse dimensions: Magra, 19*6" north-south by 14'6" east-west; Nordberg, 20’6" north-south by 22' east-west; and Crown Collection, 22'6" north-south by 22* east-west. Both the Nordberg and Crown Collection dimensions are very close to the dimensions of F. 60. In addition, several eighteenth-century documents refer to the F. 60 guardhouse: - Sept. 1751, La Jonquiere to French Minister, guardhouse burned and repaired, a new guardhouse constructed. - 1765, Campbell to Cage, a guardhouse for an officer and 30 men needs to be built. - Nov. 1769, Glazier to Gage, guardhouse present and plans made to build a needed guardhouse (there is no definite evidence at present to indicate that this proposed guardhouse was ever constructed). Interpretation: The evidence above indicates that F. 60 was a French guardhouse, built in 1751 and used at least until 1769. After this date, 2 alternatives are feasible; either F. 60 con­ tinued to serve as a guardhouse or its use was discontinued with the proposed construction (7) of a new guardhouse in 1769. The latter alternative is suggested on the basis of the stratigraphic relationship between F. 60 and an overlying feature, F. 61. STRUCTURE FEATURE 61: British Blacksmith's shop Figures 6, 8 Feature 61 was excavated during the 1960 field season and has been reported by Maxwell in the 1960 preliminary report (n.d. [1960: 10-12 ]). Location and Orientation: The north, east, and west walla of F. 61 are superimposed over the same walls of F. 60. The south wall of F. 61 is 9*6" south of the south wall of F. 60. Dimensions: 31'3” north-south by 21'6” east-west (external measurements). 96 Major Structural Features : Horizontal log foundation and pos­ sibly horizontal log walls; entrance at the northwest comer; large stick and clay chimney outside of the west wall at approx­ imate wall center, represented by a square area bounded by a wall trench with pickets; on the inside of the west wall, oppo­ site the chimney foundation is a large rectangular area (7*8" east-west by 6' north-south) of fire-baked clay and rocks, de­ limited on its north and east sides by vertical posts and with a circular hearth area in the center filled with charred earth and charcoal. These features have been interpreted by Maxwell as a built-up hearth on a platform (inside the structure), and adjacent large chimney as a forge for metal-working. Artifact Associations: F. 61 artifact associations are not reliable because of presence of artifacts associated with the underlying F. 60. Artifacts which can be specifically attrib­ uted to the forge include gun parts, metal scrap, creamware ceramics, and British King's 8 buttons. Relationships With Other Featuresi Features 5, 76, and 60. Sections of F. 61 overlie Interpretation: F. 61 has been interpreted by Maxwell as a British blacksmith's shop, built after 1774. The present analysis substantiates this interpretation. STRUCTURE FEATURE 62: Church Area Figures 6, 8 Feature 62 was excavated during the 1960 field season and has been described and tentatively interpreted by Maxwell (n.d. [1960: 3-4; 12-14J). The following structure description and interpretation are essentially those proposed by Maxwell. The church has subse­ quently been reconstructed. Location and Orientation: Feature 62 has been assigned to several church structures in the west-central area of the fort, bounded by grid lines 160 and 210, L80 and L160. The archaeo­ logical evidence of F. 62 has been particularly difficult to interpret, due primarily to the stperimposition of 2, and pos­ sibly 3, church structures in the same area and to the exten­ sive pot-hunter activity which characterize* this area. In­ terpretations are thus provided tentatively and are based on the most acceptable explanation among several alternatives. Although Maxwell suggests that there may have been 3 different church structures in the same area, this discussion is limited to 2 structures which are at least in part definable. Dimensions: The 2 church structures will be termed F. 62A and F. 62B. The latter was apparently constructed between 1741 97 and 1743, while the former existed during the early years of French control. - F. 62A, 66' east-west by 34'6" north-south. - F. 62B, 39* east-west by 34'6" north-south. Major Structural Features; - F. 62A, walls of vertical posts set in narrow walltrenches. - F. 62B, walls of horizontal logs; floor joistslaid directly on the ground surface, north-south joists spaced ca. 9' to 11' on center; structure is rectangular except offset areas along the north and south walls at the east end, and on the south wall slightly west of center. The northeast and south­ east c o m e r extensions (9' east-west by 4*6" north-south and 11'6" east-west by 5' north-south respectively) may represent small chapels (?). The south wall extension, 23*6" east-west by 6' north-south, has been interpreted as a vestry or sacristy. Artifact Associations; Artifacts associated with either F. 62A or F. 62B have not been segregated. The following artifact categories were recovered in high frequencies in the area of F. 62. - Beads (Cl, SA, T2, Va; Cl, SC, Tl, T2, and T3; CII, SA, T8, Va, all French) - Ceramics (CC, GI, porcelain; CA, G2, crea m-colored earthen­ ware; CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware) - Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) This assemblage indicates that the area of F. 62 was in use throughout the period of site occupation. Relationships With Other Features; A total of 24 burials were found in association with the church, underlying the east end; several of these were found in a cemetery plot east of the church. A Priest's house and connected blacksmith's shop join the church on its north side. The first expansion stock­ ade (F. 81) may have bordered the east side of F. 62A. F. 62B overlies F.81 and the west stockade of F. 5. The west side of F. 62B is adjacent to the west wall of F. 82, the second expan­ sion stockade. The common south wall of F. 62A and F. 62B is in alignment with the south wall of a series of suspected French rowhouse units (F. 37 and 95). A very late stone blockhouse (7), F. 66, is superimposed over the south-central part of F. 62. Documentation: F. 62 is shown on all 3 period maps with the following dimensions: Magra, 64' east-west by 26* north-south; Nordberg, 51' east-west by 29' north-south; and Crown Collection, 62' east-west by 38' north-south. The Crown Collection measure­ ments are very close to the archaeological dimensions of F. 262A; 98 66* east-west by 34'6" north-south. Four historic references have relevance to F. 62. - Register of Baptisms and Interments at Mackinac, entry not­ ing that Marie Coussante died Aug. 10, 1743, and was the first one buried in the new church built by her father, under the holy-water font. - Journal of Peter Pond, describes the church in 1773 as ”a Commodious Roman Church . . . . Before it was given up to the British there was a French missionary established here who resided for a number of years here.” - Feb. 1780, Sinclair to Brehm, noting that the church is be­ ing transported to the Island for rebuilding at the new post. In addition, the names of the various Jesuit priests who served at Fort Michilimackinac are known: Joseph Marest Charles Michel Messaiger Jean Baptiste Saint-Pe Pierre Luc Du Jaunay Michel Guignas Jean Baptiste de La Morinie Claude Godefroy Coquart Marin-Louis Le Franc 1715 1723-1731 1730s 1730-1765 1737-1738 1741-1752 1741-1744 1753-1761 Interpretation: Features 62A and 62B are church structures which were in existence at different times during the period of site occupation. F. 62A may have been constructed as early as 1720-1725. This early structure was outside the west wall of the original F. 5 stockade enclosure. F. 62A was re­ placed by a larger church, F. 62B, in the early 1740s, This later structure was built within the fort enclosure of that time, possibly represented by the west wall of stockade Fea­ ture 82. F. 62B may have existed until the time of site abandonment, although as Maxwell points out (n.d. [1960: 13]), a third church structure may have been built after 1772. STRUCTURE FEATURE 66: Figures Late British Period Blockhouse. 6, 8 This structure was excavated during the 1960 season and has been described by Maxwell (n.d. [1960: 4-5]). Location and Orientation: F. 66 is located slightly inside of the south wall of F. 62 and is bounded by grid lines 180 and 200, L120 and L140. Dimensions: 11'6" north-south by 11*6" east-west, external me as ur ements. 99 Major Structural Features; F. 66 consists of a square, stone foundation set in shallow wall trenches, 1'6" to 2' wide, with a possible entrance through the east wall at the southeast corner. Artifact Associations; Ceramics (CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware) and gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) were found in high frequencies in the area of F. 66. The specific associa­ tion of these categories with F. 66, however, is questionable. Relationships With Other Features: the floor joists of F. 62. F. 66 is superimposed over Documentation t - Oct. 1779, letter from Sinclair to Brehm, noting that Lt. Mercer has been directed to raise a blockhouse which will overlook and command hollow ground behind a sand hill which the troops could not reduce and which will flank the traders' houses. - Feb. 1780, letter from Sinclair to Brehm, noting that "a block house has been erected, detatched, and placed so as to cover the defenseless side of this fort and to allow us some safety in opening our land gates, it is a square of 16 feet, pierced for cannon on three sides, and will enable us to keep musquetry, at a distance from it over-looking every hollow way for 600 yards.1' Interpretation: F. 66 represents the 1779 blockhouse referred to by Sinclair. This structure was constructed as a defensive measure after the church had been removed to Mackinac Island. The blockhouse was constructed in this location to protect the most vulnerable east side of the fort enclosure. STRUCTURE FEATURE 77: Brick kiln Figures 6, 8 Feature 77 was excavated during the 1961 season and has been de­ scribed by Binford (1961: 27-30). Location and Orientation: F. 77 is located south of Features 76 and 25, west of Feature 3, and is bounded by grid lines 140 and 160, L40 and L70. The long axis of this structure is oriented east-west. Major Structural Features: F. 77 is defined by a long, narrow, rectangular depression. The depression contained a layer of charcoal, ash, pink clay, fired clay, brick, and mortar frag­ ments. Two posts were noted at the west end corners; 2 addi­ tional posts were placed in the center of the north and south sides. 100 Artifact Associations; - Bricks - Ceramics (CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; CC, GI, porcelain) - Pipestems (8, dated 1750) - Buttons (1, ClI, SA, Tl, Va, British) Relationships with Other Features; P. 77 is stratigraphically be-ow a gravel layer which is associated with the construction of F. 3. Interpretation: F. 77 has been interpreted by Binford (n.d. [1961: 30]) as a brick kiln constructed during a late period of French control and abandoned by 1766; this dating and inter­ pretation is consistent with the present analysis. STRUCTURE FEATURE 81: First Expansion French Period Stockade Figures 6, 7, 8, 9 Sections of this stockade were excavated between 1959 and 1966; brief statements on this feature appear in each of the yearly preliminary reports. Location and Orientation: The north wall of F. 81 is between L30 and LI50, 50, and 60. This wall turns south at the north­ west bastion in squares 60 and 70, L140 and runs to the south through square 250L120. The south wall of F. 81 may be repre­ sented by F. 273 (259C). Major Structural Features: F. 81 consists of a deep, stockade, wall trench which has been traced for a minimum distance of 303* (110' north segment, 193' west segment). An additional 57' of the west wall and a south wall of 81* may be added if we consider F. 293 and F. 273 (259C) as a west-wall segment and south wall respectively of F. 81. This latter possibility would indicate a stockade with a west wall 250* long. A 3*6" wide stockade gate has been noted in the west wall in square 140L120. F. 81 has a 11* north-south by 11*6" east-west bas­ tion (external measurements) at its northwest corner. The wall trench which forms P. 81 varies between 3*4" and 5* wide at its surface, to ca. 15" wide at its bottom. Posts and post molds (8" diameter) were found spaced at irlregul&r intervals. This feature was probably bordered by an internal, earthfiring ramp and an external, dry ditch. Artifact Associations: The following artifact categories were represented in the F. 81 trench fill: - Beads (Cl, SA, T2, Va, French) - Ceramics (CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware: CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware) - Tinkling cones 101 Relationship With Other Features; F. 81 is underlain by F. 5 and F. 62. F. 81 is superimposed by Features 90, 220, and a series of north-south fence trenches which run between the later stockade F. 82 and the rowhouse unit represented by F. 90 (96, 91). Interpretation: F. 81 represents the first expansion stockade during the French period of control. F. 81 was constructed when F. 5 was torn down (between 1725 and 1735) by moving the walls of F. 5 65* to the north and 62'6" to the south (assum­ ing F. 273 (259C) to be the south wall of F. 81). The west wall of F.81 is between 2' and 4' outside of the original west wall of F. 5. The F. 81 stockade was probably in exis­ tence by 1735 and was in use until 1751, the date at which the next stockade expansion is believed to have occurred. The dating of F. 81 is based primarily on its stratigraphic and horizontal relationships with other structures. STRUCTURE FEATURE 82: Second Expansion French Period Stockade Figures 6, 7 Sections of Feature 82 were excavated between 1959 and 1966. Location and Orientation: A section of the north wall of F. 82 is located between grid lines 40 and 50, L60 and L110. A sec­ tion of the west wall of F. 82 may be represented by a wall trench between 110 and 220, L150 and L160 (F. 353) . The south wall of F. 82 may be represented by either F. 277 or F. 278 (271) . Dimensions: The north wall of F. 82 has been traced for a distance of 58'. The west wall of this feature, possibly represented by F. 353, has been traced for a distance of 109*. Trench features 277 and 278 (271) are 81' and 69'6” long re­ spectively. Major Structural Features: F. 82 is represented by a deep, well trench which varies between 2!6" and 3* wide at first recognition. Posts and post molds (6" to 8" diameter) were intermittently located in this trench. Artifact Associations: The assemblage of artifacts derived from F. 82 trench fill is not indicative of a time of construc­ tion. This assemblage contains artifacts which date from both the French and British periods of control. Interpretations based on other evidence indicate that the British-period arti­ fact associations are invalid. Relationships With Other Features: F. 82 is directly associated with a series of north-south fence trenches which connect with 102 the north wall of F. 90 (96, 91). The supposed west wall of F. 82 is adjacent to a north-south trench which delimits the west side of F. 62. Documentation t It is tentatively suggested that F. 82 repre­ sents the stockade referred to in the following reference: - Sept. 1751, letter from La Jonquiere to French Minister, stating that the Sieur Duplessis has enlarged the fort on the Lake side. Interpretation: F. 82 represents a second expansion stockade which was constructed during the French period of control. This stockade may be the one referred to above as having been constructed in 1751. The terminal date for F. 82 is deter­ mined by the initial date of construction of the thiid stock­ ade expansion represented by F. 14 (1755-1760). Several al­ ternatives have been considered for the location of the south wall of F. 82. The most logical choice at this time seems to be F. 278 (271). This choice would define a stockade with a 279* long west wall. STRUCTURE FEATURE 88: French Period Well Figures 6, 8 Feature 88 was excavated during the 1961 field season and has been reported in Binford's 1961 preliminary report (n.d. (1961: 22-27J). This feature has been reconstructed. Location and Orientation: Dimensions: F. 88 is located in square 130L120. See measurements in Major Structural Features below. Major Structural Features: F. 88 consists of a wooden, well shaft which has been placed ca. 16' below the eighteenthcentury ground surface. This shaft was constructed inside of an oval-shaped excavation (9* diameter at the surface and 7' diameter at the 8* deep level, the point at which bed rock was encountered). This excavation extended 6' into the bed rock and was shored with a rectangular, wooden structure con­ sisting of vertical posts sheathed with narrow planks and sheets of bark, 6* north-south by 3'8" east-west. The shoring did not extend below the bed rock level. A wooden frame shaft (3'2" north-south by 2*8" east-west) consisting of vertical, sawed planks (1” to 1-3/4" thick) nailed to square tiabers (5" to 7" square) framed inside the shaft was constructed in the bottom 8* of the well. This shaft was expanded above this point to a shaft which measured 5*6" north-south by 2*8" east west. This enlargement created interior shelves on the north and south sides of the well, 18" and 10" wide respectively. Little evidence exists of an overlying well-house structure. 103 The area between the wooden shaft and the original well exca­ vation was filled with clean sand and gravel up to the surface of the limestone bed rock. Fill consisted of redeposited lime­ stone above this level, parts of which were chinked with pink clay. Artifact Associations: The bottom 3'6" of well fill represents fill which accumulated during the period of well use. The artifact assemblage in this fill was characteristically French in conqposition and could be representative of a French assem­ blage dating between ca. 1730 and 1760. The following diag­ nostic artifact categories were recovered: - Beads (CL, SA, T2, Vaj Cl, SA, T7, Vaj Cl, SA, T9, Va; Cl, SA, T6, Vb, French) - Ceramics (CA, 61, tin-glazed earthenware, French) - Knives (Cl, GL, French Clasp Knives) - Rosary Beads The fill above this refuse deposit was deposited in one opera­ tion and consisted of a very similar artifact assemblage. Relationship With Other Features: The F. 88 well-pit excava­ tion passed through sections of the north and west walls of the early F. 5 stockade. F. 88 is adjacent to the inside of the west wall of F. 81 stockade. Interpretation: F. 88 is a well which was constructed at about the time of the first stockade expansion represented by F. 81 (1730-1735). This well was probably in use until 1755 or 1760. STRUCTURE FEATURE 89: French House Figures 6, 8 This feature was excavated during the 1961 field season and has been briefly described by Binford (n.d. [1961: 15]). Location and Orientation: F. 89 is located directly south of F. 88 adjacent to the west wall of stockade Feature 81. Dimensions: sions) . 18’ north-south by 15' east-west (external dimen­ Major Structural Features: F. 89 is a rectangular house formed by 4 wall trenches. The shallow, wall trenches contained ver­ tical pickets with evidence of pink clay used as chinking. A doorway may have been present through the south wall at the southeast corner. Artifact Associations: No artifacts were found in definite association with F. 89. 104 Relationships With Other Features; P. 89 is superiirposed over the west wall of stockade Feature 5 and is adjacent to the west wall of stockade Feature 81. The north wall of F. 89 aligns with the south side of the gate through F. 81. Interpretation; The structural similarity of F. 89 to French rowhouse units, F. 25 (76, 27), and its proximity to F. 81 indicate that F. 89 was built during the French period of con­ trol, probably after 1730. F. 89 was not in existence in 1765; this is indicated by its absence on the Crown Collection Hap. STRUCTURE FEATURE 90 (96, 91): North-Northwest Rowhouse Unit, French and British Rowhouse Unit Figures 6, 7 S'. 90 (96, 91) was excavated during the 1961 field season) eech of the feature units have been individually described in Binford's 1961 preliminary report (n.d. [1961: 16-20J). This structure has been reconstructed. Location and Orientation: F. 90 is located in the northwest area of the site, immediately south of the north wall of the F. 81 stockade. Dimensions; The 3 structures which compose rowhouse-unit F. 90 have the following external dimensions: - F. 90, 26' north-south by 20' east-west - F. 96, 26' north-south by 14'6" east-west - F. 91, 26' north-south by 25'6" east-west Major Structural Features: Each of the 3 structures are de­ scribed individually. - F. 90, north, south, and west walls consist of deep, wall trenches which contain vertical posts and post molds) the east wall is shallow and lacks wall-defined posts. A chimney is noted just north of center on the west wall, with a 3'6" to 4* long smoke chamber, constructed of crystalline rock and limestone. - F. 96, west wall is common with the east wall of F. 90, east wall indicated by deep bearing support posts, ca. 14'6" east of the southwest c o m e r t chimney at the center of the west wall, smoke chamber was 4' long inside by 6* long at its mouth, 3' deep, constructed of crystalline rock and clay. A basement (F. 83) occurs in the north-central part of the structure, 7' north-south by 5' east-west, constructed of vertical puncheons with internal plank lining and floored with bark. - F. 91, all walls of this feature are indicated by the loca­ tion of log-support "pilasters." A fireplace is located at 105 the center of the east wall, smoke chamber is 4' long inside, 6' long at its mouth, 3' deep, and is constructed of crystalline rock set in clay. Two basements are associated with this struc­ ture: (1) P. 79 located near the northwest comer, 5' east-west by 7* north-south, 5' deep, constructed of vertical posts sup­ ported with horizontal planks nailed to the posts; (2) F. 85, 7' east-west by 9' north-south, constructed of closely set, vertical puncheons. Artifact Associations; Features 96 and 91 contained the major­ ity of artifacts associated with this structure: - Bricks - Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va, British military; c i l , SA, Tl, Va, British military; CIV, SA, Tl, Va) - Tinkling Cones - Cufflinks - Ceramics (CA, GIV, TD, Jackfield; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthen­ ware; CA, Gil, cream-colored earthenware) Gunflints were notably absent in F. 90, 96, and 91. A different assemblage of artifacts characterized garden or refuse areas north and south of the rowhouse unit: - Beads (ClI, SA, French) - Ceramics (CC, GI, porcelain; CA, GII, cream-colored earthen­ ware; CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; CA, GIV, TD, Jack­ field; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware, high frequency of French) - Rings (ClI, SA, Jesuit rings) Predominantly British artifact assemblages characterized each of the 3 basements associated with this structure feature, except for the bottom level of F. 83, which contained a late, Frenchperiod assemblage. Relationships With Other Features: Binford has suggested (1962 map of F. 110 and 111) that F. 90 (96, 91) was modified during the British period of control, resulting in 2 overlying struc­ ture features, F. 110 and F. 111. The important modification is seen as the rebuilding of the common wall between F. 90 and F. 96, 6*6" to the east, where it served only as the east wall of F. 110. The west wall of F. Ill is represented by the pre­ vious common wall between F. 96 and F. 91. This interpretation is tenuous at present and is included as a possibility for fu­ ture investigation only. There is an additional eastern unit of this rowhouse, attached to the east side of F.91 and represented by an eastwest wall trench which extends from the southeast corner of F. 91. This structure is identified as F. 92. The assumed east end of this rowhouse unit is represented by north-south trench segments in squares 70 and 80 L20. This wall trench is in alignment with the eaat walls of F. 21 and F. 3. If this assumption is correct, the total east-west length of this rowhouse unit is 110*. 106 A series of 5, north-south trenches extend from the north wall of structure Feature 90 (91, 96) and join the north wall of stockade Feature 82. These trenches (garden fences) are relatively shallow and rarely exhibit post molds. In extending between F. 90 and F. 82, these trenches are superimposed on the earlier F. 81 stockade north wall. In addition, the north and south walls of F. 90 are superimposed on the F. 81 stockade west wall. Documentation; This rowhouse unit is hown on all 3 period maps with the following width (north-south) dimensions: Magra, 19*r Nordberg, 23'; Crown Collection, 24*9". The Crown Collection map very closely represents the archaeological dimension of F. 90 (96, 91), 26*. Unfortunately, individual house-unit mea­ surements are not presented on the Crown Collection map. The other 2 maps each indicate the presence and size of 5 struc­ tures which comprise this rowhouse unit. These structures exhibit east-west dimensions as follows (noted from west to east): Nordberg Magra 25' 25' 23'6" 18' 6" 23* 115' 31’6" 20* 15* 21* 23' 110'6" The total length of the Nordberg rowhouse unit (110'6") is very close to the 110' length suggested by the archaeological evi­ dence. Both the Crown Collection and the Magra maps indicate rowhouse-unit lengths between 115* and 117,6,>. The Magra map indicates that an English trader occupied the westernmost house of this unit and that British officers occupied the next house. Additional documentary information is provided for this rowhouse unit in a document entitled "State of Houses and Lands of Michilimackinac," compiled by a resident Royal Notary between 1754 and 1765. Although it is presently impossible to identify the occupants of individual houses from this source, the first recorded transaction which applies to this rowhouse unit is dated 1754. Interpretation: Structure F. 90 (96, 91) represents 3 houses in a rowhouse unit which was constructed in approximately 1751. This initial date is supported by the strategraphic relation­ ship between F. 90 and F. 81. On this basis, F. 90 was con­ structed after F. 81, at approximately the same time as F. 82, and before F. 14. It is believed that F. 82 was constructed in approximately 1751. This dating is further indicated by the presence of a late French artifact assemblage in the 107 bottom of basement F. 83. F. 90 was probably in existence until 1780-1781. The majority of artifacts associated with this fea­ ture are British in origin, whereas the trash or garden areas north and south of these units contained both late French and British assemblages. These units were presumably originally occupied by French inhabitants and were later used by British inhabitants (traders, F. 90), and military officers (F. 96). Garden features north of F. 90 (96, 91) are clearly marked by attached north-south fence trenches. These trenches terminate in the north wall of the second expansion stockade, F. 82. The possible superimposition of Structures F. 110 and F. Ill is only mentioned at this time, pending the interpretation of data recovered from the 1967 excavations in adjacent areas. STRUCTURE FEATURE 93: French House Figures 6, 7, 8 This structure was excavated during the 1961 field season and has been briefly described by Binford (n.d. [1961: 15-16]). Location and Orientation: F. 93 is adjacent to the inside of the west wall of stockade F. 81 and is immediately south of F. 90 (96, 91). Dimensions: surements) . 20* north-south by 18'6" east-west (external mea­ Major Structural Features: F. 93 is defined by 3, shallow, wall trench segments. The south wall of this structure has not been defined. An external chimney is noted at the approximate center of the east wall; the fireplace was 4* wide at the mouth and 3' deep. Internal partitioning is suggested by a 6'6" long, eastwest trench segment attached to the west wall, 7*6" from the southwest comer. Artifact Associations: The artifact categories which could be associated with F. 93 were temporarily non-specific, indicating a broad date range between ca. 1730 and 1770. Relationships With Other Features: F. 93 stratigraphically underlies a section of the south wall of F. 90, corresponds in angular orientation to the west wall of stockade F. 61, and aligns with the east wall of F. 89. Interpretation: F. 93 is a French house, constructed between 1730 and 1735, and abandoned by 1751. These dates are based on the suspected contemporaneity of F. 93 with the first expansion stockade, F. 81, and on the stratigraphic position of this structure below F. 90. 108 STRUCTURE FEATURE 202 (203, 217): Possible British Period Structure Figures 6, 9 F. 202 was excavated during the 1962 field season and has been re­ ported by Vanderwall (n.d. [1962: 1-4]; 1966: 122-123). The de­ scription and interpretation of this feature is based on Vanderwal's 1966 report. Location and Orientation: This structure is located at the east end of the southwest rowhouse unit (F. 220) and is delimited by grid lines 210 and 250, L20 and L60. Dimensions: ments) . 28' north-south by 29' east-west (external measure­ Major Structural Features: F. 202 (203, 217) consists of a number of north-south and east-west wall trench segments which have been tentatively interpreted by Vanderwall as a British guardhouse structure. The northeast c o m e r of this structure is represented by a rock foundation (F. 217), 1*10" wide, which also served as a fireplace. A 3*6" doorway is indicated by a break in this foundation on the east end of the north side. The west and north walls are represented by joined, wall trench segments while the south wall is represented by a long, deep trench which has been interpreted in this report as the south wall of stockade Feature 5. Two privies (?) are associated with this structure: (1) F. 231, located at the inside center of the south wall, 3'6" north-south by 3' east-west, verticalpost sides, and enclosed within a vertical-post structure, 6'6" north-south by 5' east-west: and (2) F. 228, located outside the west wall at the southwest corner, 3'6” northsouth by 2'6" east-west, vertical-post sides, entrance gained through a doorway in the east wall of F. 202. Artifact Associations: None of the artifacts found in the area of F. 202 can be definitely associated with the feature itself. Documentation: F. 202 is adjacent to a lot where a guard house existed which was t o m down in 1764. This lot is referenced as follows: - Oct. 1768, letter from Glasier to Gage, noting that the only King's land in the fort is the area of the Conmanding Offi­ cer's house "and a spot where the French governor used to live 42 by 25 feet where stood a house which Captain Howard (stationed at the site between 1764 and 1766) ordered to be pulled down and converted into a garden." - The Magra map (1766) indicates that this lot is "The Kings grounds, here Captain Howard pull down the Guard House and make a garden." This lot is noted on all 3 maps as either 109 a garden or a King's lot, flanked on the west by a long row­ house unit(F. 220). The west side of this lot (ca. 7*) appears to overlap the east wall of F. 202. Interpretation; Vanderwall has interpreted this structure as a guardhouse built after 1768, in an area made available by the removal of the 2 last houses of rowhouse unit F. 220 (Van­ derwall 1966: 123-124). This interpretation, as noted by Vanderwall, was originally questionable, due primarily to the existence of F. 220 rowhouse units in the same area as well as the probable presence of an earlier French structure underlying F. 202. The present analysis has been unable to more effi­ ciently identify the location and function of structure F. 202. STRUCTURE FEATURE 220: French Rowhouse Unit; Southwest Rowhouse Unit Figures 6, 9 Feature 220 was excavated during the 1962 and 1963 field seasons, has been reported by Vanderwall (n.d. [1962]; 1966), and has subse­ quently been reconstructed. Location and Orientation: The north and south sides of F. 220 are located between grid lines 200 and 240. Dimensions: F. 220 is 24'6" wide (external measurements). The total length of this unit— that indicated on the Magra and Nord­ berg maps (ca. 140-150')— has not been completely excavated; 124' of this unit have been excavated which defines the presence of 6 joined, but individual, rowhouses. Major Structural Features: Each of the 6 house units are identi­ fied and described below and are referenced by the letters A through F, starting at the west end. - A, this unit has been partially excavated and consists of a central basement (F. 215) and a fireplace (F. 214) located on the east wall towards the northeast comer. The basement, 10*6" east-west by 12'6" north-south, is constructed of ver­ tical posts, supported on the inside by limestone rocks, and has a limestone-slab-lined floor. The fireplace feature is poorly defined; it is represented by a ca. 5* square area of flat limestone rocks overlain by burned sand and clay. This fireplace could conceivably have been H-hsaped, thus serving both units A and B. The north and south walls of this unit are both very poorly defined. The east wall, defined by a pilaster support in square 220L140, appears to extend through fireplace Feature 214. - B, this house contains a basement (F. 213) and possibly was served by half of an H-shaped fireplace (F.221) along the east wall. The basement, 7'5" north-south by 4*11" eastwest is located in the south-central area of house B. The 110 fireplace consists of scattered, fire-cracked rocks set in a pink-clay matrix. Horizontal floor boards (F. 245 and F. 246), 6" to 8" wide, were noted in the southwest c o m e r of this house. The dimensions of house B are 23'6" east-west and 24*6” north-south. - c, 23' east-west by 24'6" north-south, contained a basement, F. 212, and may have been served by half of an H-shaped fire­ place (F. 221). The basement feature, 4' square, was located in the west-central area of house C and was constructed of vertical c o m e r posts with sides of horizontal planks between comers. A 6" thick layer of clay surrounded this basement. The east wall of this house is delimited by a well-defined, north-south wall trench. - D, 23'6" east-west by 24*6" north-south, contained 2 base­ ments, F. 210 and F. 209, and was served by half of an Hshaped fireplace (F. 208) at the center of the east wall. The north and south walls are marked by well-defined, deep east-west wall trenches. The east wall is defined by a north-south wall trench segment which runs through the center of F. 208. Basement F. 210, located near the center of the west wall and 4* square, was constructed of vertical posts lined with bark. Two barrels were originally located along the south side of the basement. Basement F. 209, located near the center of house D and 8*6" north-south by 5'6" east-west, was constructed of split vertical log sides and log comers. This basement was floored with 1/4" to 1/8" thick boards. The fireplace (probably H-shaped) served houses D and B and was represented by well-laid stones in the form of an L, pink clay, and burned sand and clay. - E, 24'6" north-south by 24*6" east-west, was served by half of an H-shaped fireplace (F. 208). The north and south walls of this unit are clearly defined by deep, east-west wall trenches. The east wall of this structure is repre­ sented by a short north-south trench segment in square 230L50. An internal east-west wall trench segment divides this unit into north and south parts. - F, 24*6" north-south by 23' east-west; the north and south walls of this house are defined by east-west trench segments; the east wall (?) is defined by a short, north-south trench segment in square 210L30. A possible fireplace for this house (F. 217) is located near the northeast comer. Artifact Associationst Two links of artifact association may be defined for F. 220: (1) general associations as evidenced by artifact category distribution maps and (2) specific houseunit associations defined by both feature associations and distributional concentrations. Artifacts which can be attributed to F. 220 but which cannot be assigned to specific house units are: Ill - Buttons (Cl, SC, Tl, Va, French, 1730-1760) Ceramics (CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware, low frequency) Gunflints (SA, blade gunflints, post-1740) Rings (CII, SA, Jesuit rings) Artifacts which can be attributed to specific houses are: - A, -Gunflints (SA, SC, spall and blade gunflints) -Knives (Cl, Gl, French clasp Cl, G2, British clasp) -Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, VC, Royal Irish, British) -Ceramics (CB, Gl, white saltglazed stoneware; CA, GII, cream-colored earthenware; CC, GI, porcelain; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware) - B, -Ceramics (CC, Gl, porcelain; CA, GII, cream-colored earthenware; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware, high fre­ quency French) -Knives (Cl, Gl, French clasp) -Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) -Fishhooks - C, -Ceramics (CC, GI, porcelain; CA, GII, cream-colored earthenware; CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; and CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware, high frequency French) -Knives (Cl, Gl, French clasp) -Bale Seals (French) -Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) -Beads (CII, SA, Tl; CII, SA, T12, both French types) - D, -Ceramics (CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware, high frequency French; CB, GII, TB, brown stoneware; CA, G U I , TB, brown glazed redware) -Rings (CII, SA, Jesuit rings) -Beads (Cl, SA, T2, Va; Cl, SC, Tl; CII, SA, Tl; Cl, SC, Tl and T2, all French types) -Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va; CII, SA, Tl, Va, both British military types; Cl, SC, Tl, Va, French, 1730-1760) - E, -Beads (Cl, SA, T2, Va; Cl, SC, Tl; Cl, SC, T2, French) - f , specific artifact categories could not be attributed to this house unit. In the case of F. 220, it is also important to consider those artifact categories which were generally absent or rare; these include: - Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) - Ceramics (CC, GI, porcelain; CA, G U I , TB, brown glazed redware; CA, GI, TC, brown and white earthenware, French; CA, GI, TD, powdered tin-glazed earthenware, post-1750; CB, GII, TB, Rhenish stoneware) Artifact categories recovered from the garden area south of F. 220 very closely reflect the mixed French-British assemblage found within the rowhouse proper, although all of the categories noted above as rare or absent in F. 220 were noted in high frequencies in the garden areas. 112 Relationships With Other Features; F. 220 overlies the west walls of stockade Features 5 and 81, probably overlies the west wall of stockade F. 82, and is inside stockade F. 14. The latter two associations are based on the projected locations of F. 82 and 14, since the areas in which they would occur at the west end of F. 220 have not been excavated. F. 220 under­ lies F. 202. This rowhouse unit is also associated with a series of north-south and east-west trenches to the south which are thought to represent garden frence and/or lot boundaries. The most important of these trenches, F. 233 (314, 317) runs east-west between squares 270L140 and 260L30, at a distance of approximately 21* south of the south wall of F. 220. This boundary is clearly defined on the Nordberg and Crown Collection maps. The entire north wall of F. 220 is joined by a series of shallow, wall trenches which are thought to represent porches. The north wall of F. 220 is closely aligned with the south end of F. 16, a defensive stockade thrown up around F. 3 and lasting until 1781, indicating that F. 220 was in existence until 1781. Documentation : Two documentary sources apply to the interpre­ tation of F. 220: (1) a document entitled "State of Mouses and Lands at Michilimackinac," compiled between 1754 and 1765 by a Royal Notary at the site, and (2) the 3 eighteenth-century maps of the site. The first source indicates that F. 220 was in existence at least by 1756— the first date at which a land transfer was recorded for this unit. The second source consists of the Crown Collection map (1765), the Nordberg map (1769), and the Magra map (1766), all of which document the presence of F. 220. Both the Magra and Nordberg maps very closely re­ flect the predicted length of F. 220, including the lot at the east end which at one time contained an additional house attached to F. 220, measuring 147'6" and 142'6" respectively. The pro­ jected length of this unit (and lot) based on archaeological evidence is 147*. In spite of this correspondence in the dimen­ sion of total length, individual house dimensions cannot be as easily determined. Individual houses represented on the Nord­ berg map vary in length between 19*6" and 26'6”> the same units on the Magra map vary between 18' and 30' in length. Interpretation t F. 220 represents a series of joined rowhouse units which were probably constructed by the French between 1755 and 1760 and which were in use until 1781. The majority of artifact associations are French (dating between 1730 and 1760) and secondarily, British, reflecting the feature's ini­ tial French construction and occupation as well as the re­ occupation of this area and of certain house units by British soldiers after 1761. F. 220 consisted of 6 and probably 7 house units, each of which was 24'6" in width (north-south) and between 23' and 24'6" in length (east-west). Garden plots 113 characterized the area within 21' of the south wall, while the north wall is lined with a series of porch-like additions. Four of the 6 houses defined have basements; all units are served by either double H-shaped fireplaces or single mouth fireplaces. F. 215 (in house A) was not originally believed to be a part of F. 220 based on an initial analysis. The present analy­ sis, in considering projected house size and orientation, sug­ gests that F. 215 and its associated house structure (A) were a part of F. 220, representing the westernmost house unit of this feature. STRUCTURE FEATURE 266: Figures French Rowhouse Unit; South Southwest Rowhouse Unit (Feature 266 has previously re­ ferred specifically to one house of this rowhouse unit, but is used here to refer­ ence the entire rowhouse unit). 6, 9 F. 266 was excavated during the 1964 field season and has been par­ tially described by Vanderwall (n.d. [1964]) and Stone (n.d. [1965]). Two additional house structures representing this rowhouse unit were excavated by James A. Brown during the 1967 field season. These units are briefly mentioned as they relate to the size and alignment of F. 266. Location and Orientation: F. 266 is located between Feature 220 and the south stockade of the site. This feature is bounded by grid lines 260 and 300, L20 and L.50. Dimensions: F. 266, a 24*6" wide series of rowhouses has been excavated to a total east-west distance of 125', including data produced during the 1967 excavations. Based on the alignment and spacing of house units, the total length of this unit should be 142*6", closely approximating the 141'6" and 138'6" distances derived from the Magra and Nordberg maps respectively. This unit is historically (Nordberg map) and archaeologically repre­ sented by 7 house units, 6 of which have been con£>letely exca­ vated, and 1 of which has been partially excavated through the 1967 field season. Major Structural Features; The individual house units of F. 266 are referred to in this discussion by the numbers 1 through 7, counting from the west. - 1, ca. 24'8" north-south by 13'4*' east-west, is defined by wall trenches on the north, south, and east and by a fireplace (F. 422) on the west. A basement (F. 424A) is located adja­ cent to the south wall. - 2, 24*8" north-south and 19'6" east-west, is defined by a fire­ place (F. 383) opening from the west wall, by wall trenches on 114 - - - - the north and south sides# and by the back of a fireplace (F. 348) on the east side which serves house 3. 3, 24'6" north-south by 18'6" east-west# is defined by a basement (F. 297) in the southeast c o m e r and a fireplace (F. 348) at the approximate center of the west wall. The fireplace was constructed of 2 tiers of granite boulders which form a half H-shaped fireplace opening to the east. The bottom tier consisted of 6 large boulders set on sterile beach sand and cemented with pink clay. The top tier consisted of ca. 30 smaller boulders# also cemented with clay. The maximum dimensions of this feature were 4* east-west by 5'10" north-south, with sides which vary in width from 1*6" to 1*0”. The north and east faces of the north side were prepared with white# cement-like chinking# of plaster, approximately 3/8" thick. The mouth of this feature was 3*6" wide. The basement, 7 ’2" north-south by 6*10" east-west is constructed of 2 to 3" diameter vertical posts lined on the inside with horizontal planks. Internal partitioning has been recorded in the southwest c o m e r of the basement and possibly represents a secondary enclosed area within the basement. The north wall of house 2 is de­ fined by a deep east-west wall trench segment, F. 294. The south wall is defined by a trench-like feature and scattered east-west trending wood, possibly representing a sill. The location of the east wall is indicated by the location of a garden fence (F. 281) which joins the southeast c o m e r of the house, and by a north-south trench segment in square 300L100. 4, 24'6" north-south by 22'6" east-west, is defined by a basement (F. 262) and a possible fireplace in the northeast corner. The north and south walls of this unit are poorly defined, represented by east-west-oriented soil discolora­ tions and trench segments. The east wall, defined by a narrow north-south wall trench containing upright posts, also serves as the west wall of house 5. The basement, 4*9" north-south by 5'6" east-west, is constructed of horizontally laid 4" diameter cedar logs, interior to 6" diameter vertical corner posts. 5. (also F. 266), 22,6" east-west by 24'6" north-south, is defined by a basement (F. 267) in the southwest comer. The north and south walls are poorly defined. The east wall is represented by a narrow, north-south wall trench# interrupted by a fireplace (F. 252) which serves house 6. The basement, 4'3" north-south by 4'9" east-west# is con­ structed of horizontally laid 4" diameter logs exterior to vertical c o m e r posts. 6# 24'6" north-south by 24' east-west, is defined by a fire­ place (F. 252) on its east side and a basement (F. 265) lo­ cated in the northeast comer. The southeast c o m e r of this house is defined by the junction of wall trench F. 351 115 (east-west) and wall-trench Feature 352 (north-south). F. 353, a narrow, wall trench with vertical posts represents the east wall of house 6. The fireplace, constructed of field stone, faced the east with a hearth area, 3* east-west by 2*8" northsouth. The basement, 9'5*' east-west by 6'1" north-south,was constructed of horizontally laid logs exterior to vertical corner posts. This basement was partitioned into east and west halves by a limestone wall and floored with 6" wide wooden planks. - 7, the western 5* of this house have been excavated. The north and south walls are defined by wall-trench Features 315 and 351 respectively. Artifact Associations; House units 3 through 6 are included in the following discussion. Two levels of artifact associa­ tion are noted for F. 266: (1) specific house unit associa­ tions, and (2) general rowhouse unit associations. Artifacts specifically identified with individual house units are: - 3, -Barrel HoopB -Ceramics (CA, Gl, tin-glazed earthenwarei CC, GI, porce­ lain? CA, GII, cream-colored earthenware) -Rings (Cl, SA, Jesuit rings) -Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) -Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va, British King's 8) - 4, -Buttons (CII, SA, Tl, Va, British) -Gunflints (SA and SC, blade and spall gunflints) -Rings (CII, SA, Jesuit rings) -Knives (Cl, Gl, French clasp) -Ceramics (Ca, GII, eream-colored earthenware; CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware: CA, G U I , TB, brown glazed redware) - 5, -Buttons (CII, SA, Tl, Va, British; Cl, SC, Tl, Va, French) -Gunflints (SA and SC, blade and spall gunflints) -Rosary beads -Ceramics (CC, GI, porcelain; CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; CA, G U I , TH, slip-decorated earthenware) -Buckles (Cl, SB) - 6, -Knives (Cl, Gl, French clasp) -Gunflints (SC, spall gunflints) -Buttons (Cl, SC, Tl, Va, French; Cl, SD, Tl, Va, British King's 8) -Ceramics (CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; CC, GI, porcelain; CA, GII, cream-colored earthenware; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware; CA, GIII, TB, brown glazed redware) Those artifact categories generally associated with F. 266 in high frequency are: - Barrel hoops - Beads (Cl, SB; CII, SA, T2, French) - Buckles (CII, SA) - Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va, British King's 8; CII, SA, Tl, Va, British) 116 - Ceramics (CC, GI, porcelain* CA, GII, cream-colored earthen­ ware; CB, GI, white saltglazed stoneware; CA, GI, TC, brown and white earthenware; CA, GI, tin-glazed earthenware; French is rare) The following artifact categories were notably rare or absent in the area of F. 266: - Beads - Awls - Ceramics (CB, GII, TB, brown stoneware; CA, G U I , TD, green glazed earthenware) - Jew's-harps - Buttons (Cl, SD, Tl, Va, French) The artifact assemblage found in the garden areas south of F. 266 very closely duplicates that associated with F. 266 proper. Relationships With Other Features: F. 266 stratigraphically overlies the west walls of stockade Features 5 (?), 81, and 82 and is inside the west wall of stockade F. 14. Garden fences commonly extend south of the south wall of F. 266; several of these correspond in position to the proposed north-south walls which separate F. 266 house units. Documentation: F. 266 is documented in "State of Houses and Lands at Michilimackinac,'' conpiled by a resident Royal Notary, and on all three eighteenth century maps of the site. The first source records land transactions for this rowhouse between 1754 and 1765. This source also indicates that a street (Rue De La Diable) paralleled F. 266 on the north side. This street was approximately 12* wide based on archaeological evidence. The Magra and Nordberg maps each indicate a rowhouse in the area of F. 266. The Nordberg map indicates that 7 house units were present, whereas the Magra map indicates only 6, although both maps correspond very closely in total rowhouse length, 138'6" and 141*6" respectively. The length of individual house units indicated on the NordLerg map vary between 19* and 21*6" (eastwest) . These house sizes very closely represent the sizes sug­ gested on the basis of archaeological evidence, with all but one house (house 1) measuring between 18*6" and 24'. Interpretation: F. 266 represents a rowhouse series which was constructed by the French between 1755 and 1760. The majority of artifact associations are British; specifically British mil­ itary, indicating that the majority of this unit, although cons tructed and owned by the French, was occupied by British mili­ tary personnel from the time of their arrival in 1761. This rowhouse unit was probably in use until 1781. F. 266 consisted of 7, joined house units, each of which was ca. 24'6" wide (north-south) and between 18'6" and 24' long (east-west). Walls between buildings were constructed of ver­ tical poets set in wall trenches. The north and south walls 117 probably consisted of vertical logs resting on horizontal sills which in turn were supported by pilasters. Five of the 6 units completely excavated had basements. The boundaries between each house were also delimited by north-south,garden-fence, wall trenches which extended south of the rowhouse. PRIEST’S HOUSE STRUCTURE: Figures 6, 8 The major portion of this structure was excavated during the 1967 field season; James A. Brown is presently preparing a comprehensive report on this structure which has been reconstructed. The present discussion is presented as a brief summary of evidence pertaining to this structure and is based on Brown's data. Location and Orientation: The Priest's house (as well as the attached blacksmith's shop) is attached to the north wall of the church. This structure is within grid lines 110L170, L110, and L160. Dimensions; Two different, superimposed, structures defined the Priest's house between 1750 and 1781. The first structure (Brown's Unit 1, First Foundation) was 23'2" east-west by 24' north-south. The second structure (Unit 1, Second Foundation) was 22'6” east-west by 26' north-south. In addition, two en­ trance or porch structures have been defined, 1 each attached to the north wall of the church and the south wall of the Priest's house. These 2 structures were separated by a 10' wide open entranceway. The 2 structures are 14' east-west and 6' to 8' north-south, and each is provided with a 4' wide doorway facing the interior passageway. A blacksmith's shop or forge structure (14* square) is attached to the southeast c o m e r of the Priest's house proper. Major Structural Features: The first Priest's house (first foundation) is defined by 2 joined cellars; an upper cellar, 8*10" east-west by 7*6" north-south, conposed of split logs (puncheons) and posts with attached bark; and a lower cellar, 7* east-west by 8' north-south,composed of puncheons and posts. A 2*10" wide doorway joins the 2 cellars. The second Priest's house may be represented by a fireplace located inside the southeast comer. The second foundation is offset from the first by approximately 2*6" to the east. The forge structure exhibits a forge-hearth area in the northeast c o m e r and a doorway on the west wall towards the northwest comer. The hearth is defined by a short series of large field stones set in pink clay. Relationships With Other Features: The Priest's house overlies the west wall of the F. 82 stockade, is within the F. 14 stock­ ade, and is external to the F. 81 stockade. 118 Documentation: The Priest's house is indicated on all 3 period maps; however, these representations have little dimensional correspondence with the archaeological evidence. Interpretation; The identified Priest's house was separated from the north side of the Church by ca. 24' and consisted of 2 temporally distinct structures. The earlier structure was probably built around 1750 and was in use until at least 1770. A post-1770 date is indicated for the second structure. The existence of a blacksmith's shop attached to the Priest's house has been demonstrated both archaeologically and histor­ ically. PART II The second part of this appendix is a complete list of archaeological features which were recorded between 1959 and 1966. Each feature is listed by number and location, briefly identified, and interpreted if possible. 119 Comments Feature Location F.l 120 R40 Human femur, probably in refuse pit (F.6). F.2 120 R30 Refuse pit, probably part of F.6. F. 3 See Fig. 6 British soldier's barracks (see Fart I). F. 4 110 and 120 R40 Charred beams, horizontal log molds and north-south trench segment, possibly early French structure. F.5 See Fig. 6 Earliest French stockade, described in Part I. F.6 120 R40 Refuse pit underlying and part of F.4. F. 7 100 R20 Refuse pit. F. 8 100 R20 Refuse pit. F. 9 100 £ - 90 R30 East-west trench, later identified as south wall of F. 51. F. 10 Unknown Feature number combined with F.5. F. 11 Fig. 6 Conmanding Officer's house, described in Part I. F* 12 120 R30 Deep square to rectangular pit, possible French well. F. 13 130 L30 North fireplace of F.3. F. 14 Fig. 6 Third expansion stockade (see Part I). F. 15 Unknown F. 16 Fig. 6 Stockade around F.3 (see Part 1). F. 17 100 and 100 L34 Pit covered with mustard clay. F. 18 Unknown F. 19 120 R30 Refuse pit F. 20 100 L20 Circular pit lined with clay and firecracked rock, possibly hearth. F. 21 Fig. 6 Provisions storehouse (see Part I). 120 Feature Coninents Location 6 Provisions storehouse (See Part I). F. 22 Fig. F. 23 130 L30 Footing for F.13, north fireplace of F.3. F. 24 Fig. 6 Part of F.27 (see Part I). F. 25 Fig. 6 French house in rowhouse unit (see Part I). F. 26 Unknown Possibly chimney feature associated with F.25. F. 27 Fig. 6 French house in rowhouse unit (see Part 1). F. 28 150 L45 Refuse pit, contemporaneous with F.3. F. 29 130 L50 (?) Refuse pit. F. 30 160 L45 Refuse pit. F. 31 Fig. 6 French house (see Part I). F. 32 160 and 150 North-south and east-west trench segments, possibly represent corners of French house, F, 33 180 L40 Refuse pit. F. 34 200 L20 Large refuse pit containing field stone. F. 35 190 L40 Refuse pit. F. 36 110 L20 Refuse pit. F. 37 200 L40 East-west trench segment, possibly south wall of French house. F. 38 160 and 170 L10 Brown sand pit. F. 39 160 L10 Brown sand pit. F. 40 Unknown East-west wall trench,combined with F.9. F. 41 90 Lio to 70 L40 North-south wall trench, later interpreted as west wall of F.51. F. 42 90 line between L20 and L40 East-west trench,later interpreted as east-west extension ofF.16. F. 43 Unknown Refuse pit. 121 Comnents Feature Location F.44 Unknown Refuse pit. F.45 190 L10, L20 Refuse pit. F.46 190 L10, L20 Refuse pit. F.47 170 L20 Refuse pit. F. 48 110 R30 Trench corner, possibly structure over F.12, possible French well. F.49 60 L50 North-south trench segment, possibly garden fence between F.90 and F.82. F.50 30 and 40 L70 North-south trench segment. F.51 Fig. 6 Commanding Officer's house (see Part I). F. 52 90 L10 Refuse pit. F.53 90 L10 Refuse pit. F.54 140 L10 Possible wall between F.3 and F.16 F.55 60 L110 Stockade walls, probably F.81. F .56 Unknown F.57 Fig. 6 Commanding Officer's house (see Part I). F.58 40 L70 North-south series of small posts, probably recent fence. F.59 Unknown Small pit which cuts through F.5. F.60 Fig. 6 French guardhouse (see Part I). F.61 Fig. 6 Blacksmith's shop (see Part I). F.62 Fig. 6 Church area (see Part I). F.63 Unknown F.64 170 LI20 F.65 Unknown F.66 Fig. 6 Rock pit, after 1750. Blockhouse (see Part I) . 12 2 Feature Comments Location F. 67 Unknown F. 68 Unknown F. 69 Unknown F. 70 130 - 140 L50 - L60 Basement of F.25 F. 71 130 L60 Refuse pit. F. 72 120 L60 Refuse pit. F. 73 Unknown F. 74 140 L60 Fireplace in F.25. F. 75 190 L60 Clay-lined pit. F. 76 Fig. 6 French house in rowhouse unit (see Part I). F. 77 Fig. 6 Brick kiln (see Part I). F. 78 90 L80 Fireplace of F.91 (part of F.90 rowhouse unit). F. 79 80 L90 Basement of F.91 (part of F.90 rowhouse unit). F. 80 70 L90 Refuse pit. F. 81 Fig. 6 First stockade expansion (see Part I). F. 82 Fig. Second expansion stockade (see Part 1). F. 83 80 L110 Basement in F.96 (see Part I). F. 84 110 L100 Rock-filled pit# possibly associated with F.93. F. 85 90 L100 Basement in F.91 (see Part I). F. 86 Unknown F. 87 70 LI30 Refuse pit. F. 88 Fig. 6 French well (see Part I). F. 89 Fig. 6 French house (see Part I). F.90 Fig. 6 House of French rowhouse unit (F.90) (see Part 1). 6 123 Feature Comments Location F.91 Fig. 6 House of French rowhouse unit (F.90) (see Part I). F.92 100 L60 North-south, east-west trench, possibly French house, aligned with F.37. F. 93 Fig. 6 French house (see Part I). F.94 160 and 170 L60 Possibly French house, roughly aligned with F.31. F.95 190 and 200 L70, 200 L60 North-south and east-west trenches, possibly Frendi house, aligned with F.37. F. 96 Fig. 6 House of French rowhouse unit (F.90) described in Part I. F.97 140 and 150 L70 Rock pile. F.98 Unknown F. 99 170 L70 Refuse pit. F. 100 160 L70 Refuse pit. F. 101 60 L80 Refuse pit. F* 102 70 L120 Refuse pit. F. 103 50 L70 Refuse pit. F. 104 60 L120 Refuse pit. F. 105 50 L80 Refuse pit. F. 106 70 L150 Refuse pit. F. 107 70 LI 40 Refuse pit. F. 108 60 L140 Refuse pit. F. 109 110 L100 Refuse pit. F. 110 Area of F.90 (96, 91) Possibly structure which overlies F.90 and part of F.96. F. Ill Area of F.90 (96, 91) Possibly structure which overlies F.96 and part of F.91. 124 Comments Feature Location F. 112 210 L40 Refuse pit. F. 113 200 L60 Refuse pit. F. 114 210 L40 Refuse pit. F. 115 West of F.90 Western continuation of F.90. F. 116 70 LI10 Refuse pit. F. 117 110 L100 Refuse pit. F. 118 130 and 140 L100 Basement of F.60 (see Part I). NOTE i Feature numbers 119 through 200 were originally unassigned, Feature numbers 119 through 161 have subsequently been applied to new features. F. 119 110 L120 Refuse pit. F. 120 160 L158 British zone (F.296) in Priest's house area F. 121 70 L120 West, north-south trench, possible garden fence north of F.90. F. 122 220 L60 East-west trench, probably north wall of F.202. F. 123 150 L60 Clay-brick feature in F.77. F. 124 90 110 Clay apron, west side of Commanding Officer house. F. 125 100 L80 and L90 East-west trench. F. 126 110 L120 Refuse pit. F. 127 40 L110 British zone in area of F.14. F. 128 110 LllO Northeast-southwest wall trench, in F. 93. F. 129 190 L40 Clay apron, west side of F.3. F. 130 110 L20 Clay apron, northeast corner of F.3. F. 131 70 LllO North-south trench, possibly garden fence between F.90 and F.82. 125 Comments Feature Location F. 132 120 L120 North, east-west wall trench. F. 133 180 L120 Center, north-south wall trench, same as F.81. F. 134 70 L120 East, north-south trench, possible garden fence between F.90 and F.82. F. 135 300 L90 Refuse pit. F. 136 170 L70 East-west trench, part of F.94. F. 137 160 L60 Post hole, southeast c o m e r of square. F. 138 110 L40 Clay apron, north side of F.3. F. 139 260 L90 South, east-west trench, also F.314 and F.317, garden fence south of F.220. F.140 140 L55 Log floor associated with F.76. F. 141 80 L10 Clay apron, west side of Commanding Offioer's house. F. 142 170 L30 Fireplace fill in south fireplace of F.3. F. 143 210 L60 East-west trench representing north wall of F.220. F. 144 250 L100 East, north-south trench, possible garden fence south of F.220. F. 145 70 L120 North-south trench segment in northeast section of the square. F. 146 230 L120 Probable fireplace debris associated with F.220. F. 147 220 L60 North-south trench, also F.202, west wall of F.202. F. 148 280 L80 Pink-clay area. F. 149 100 L80 East-west trench, also F.125. F. 150 70 L20 North-south wall trench in northwest corner of square, possibly garden fence north of F.90. 126 Comments Feature Location F. 151 280 L90 Shallow pit, northeast c o m e r of square. F. 152 130 L50 Pit, part of F.70, associated with F.25. F.153 80 C West fireplace, Commanding Officer's house, F.57. F. 154 215 L90 East-west wall trench, north side of F.220. F. 155 70 LI30 North-south trench, represents part of bastion feature of F.81. F. 156 120 L20 Clay apron, east side of F.3. F.157 40 L30 and L40 Basement of F.22. F.158 250 L30 East-west trench. F. 159 110 L50 East-west trench. F.160 100 L120 North-south trench, west wall of F.93. F.161 200 L150 Refuse pit. NOTE: Feature nunfcers 162 through 200 have not been assigned. F. 201 Unknown F.202 Fig. 6 F. 203 Unknown F. 204 230 L40 F. 205 Unknown F. 206 220 L30 Possible basement associated with as yet unexcavated house at the east end of F.220. F. 207 220 L30 North-south and east-west trench segment, possibly associated with F.206. F. 208 230 L80 Fireplace in F.220. F. 209 230 L80 and L90 Basement in F.220. F. 210 230 L90 Basement in F.220. Possible British guardhouse (see Part 1) Possible fireplace associated with F.202. 127 Comments Feature Location F.211 Unknown Basement In F.220. F.212 230 Basement in F.220. F.213 230 and 240 LI 30 Basement in F.220. F.214 230 L140 Possible fireplace in F.220. F.215 230 L150 Basement in F.220. F.216 240 LllO Refuse pit. F.217 220 L40 Rock foundation, northeast c o m e r of F.202. F.218 Unknown F.219 230 and 240 LllO Possible basement. F.220 Fig. 6 French rcwhouse (see Part I). F.221 230 Possible fireplace of F.220, associated with F.146. F.222 Unknown F.223 230 LllO North-south trench, west wall of F.5. F.224 230 L40 North-south trench. F.225 230 L50 Center, north-south trench. F.226 230 L50 West, north-south trench. F.227 230 L60 Refuse pit. F.228 250 L60 Basement or privy at southwest c o m e r of F.202. F.229 250 and 260 L60 Disturbed pit. F.230 250 L70 Refuse pit. F.231 240 L50 Basement or privy on inside south wall of F.202. LllO L120 128 Comments Feature Location F.232 260 L40 Refuse pit. F.233 260 L80 East-west wall trench, same as F.314, F.139, and F.317, represents east-west fence south of F.220. F.234 250 L120 Basement. F.235 250 L140 and L150 East-west trench. F.236 250 L50 Refuse pit. F.237 250 L120 North-south trench. F.238 Unknown F.239 240 L50 North-south, east-west trenches, structure over F.231. F.240 250 L80 Refuse pit. F.241 250 L90 East-west trench, possible south wall of F.5. F.242 250 L100 North-south trench, joins F.241. F.243 250 L100 Center north-south wall trench. F.244 Unknown F.245 240 L130 Floor boards, associated with F.220. F.246 240 LI40 Floor boards, associated with F.220. F. 247 240 L40 and L50 South wall of F.202. F.248 230 L60 Refuse pit. F.249 250 LI40 and L150 Basement. F.250 260 L90 Refuse pit. F.251 260 L90 and L100 East-west F.252 280 L60 Fireplace in F.266. F.253 270 L40 Soildiscoloration representing north wall of F.266. trench, same as F.311 129 Consents Feature Location F. 254 240 L30 Refuse pit. F. 255 250 L50 Rectangular-shaped rock pile. F. 256 250 LI40 North-south trench, same as F.82. F. 257 250 L50 Indian firepit. F. 258 Unknown F.25BA 310 L50 Upright log and pit. F. 259 250 L30 Refuse pit. F.259A 310 L40 East-west trench, same as F.259C. F.259B 310 L40 East extension of F.262A, log support. F.259C 310 L40 and L50 East-west trench, same as F.273, may repre sent south wall of either F.5 or F.81. F. 260 240 L60 Rock pile. F.260A 310 L50 Charcoal concentration. F. 261 250 L120 Refuse pit. F.261A 310 L50 Refuse pit. F. 262 280 L90 and L100 Basement in F.266. F.262A 310 L40 Log-support pit. F. 263 Unknown F.263A 310 L40 External fill around F.263C. F.263B 310 L40 Wall-collapse fill from east side of F.263' F.263C 310 L40 Basement. F. 264 Unknown F.264A 310 L50 Refuse pit. F. 265 270 and 280, L40 and L50 Basement in F.266. 130 Comments Feature Location F.265A 310 L80 Small concentration of charcoal, clay, and burned corn. F.266 Fig. French rowhouse unit (see Part I). F.266A 310 L40 Refuse pit. F. 267 290 L70 and L80 Basement in F.266. F.267A 320 L80 Charcoal concentration in F.278. F. 268 Unknown F.268A 310 L80 F. 269 (?) Refuse pit. Supposed structure with c o m e r s in 260L60, and 260L100, 290L60 and 290L100. F.269A 320 L80 Possible fireplace. F. 270 310 L50 Charcoal concentration, north side of F.258A. F.271 320 L40 to 320 L80 East-west trench, also F.278. F. 272 310 L70 Refuse pit. F. 273 310 L70 to 310 LllO East-west trench, same as F.259C. F. 274 310 L40 and L50 Refuse pit. F. 275 320 L40 Refuse pit. F. 276 320 L70 Refuse pit. F. 277 320 L70 to 320 L90 East-west trench, same as F.288. F.278 320 L70 and L80 East-west trench, same as F.271. F. 279 310 L80 Refuse pit. F. 280 320 L80 Refuse pit, associated with F.269A. F. 281 300 to 330 L100 North-south trench, probable garden fence extending south of F.266. F. 282 310 L100 Refuse pit. 131 Comments Feature Location F.283 310 LOO Refuse pit. F. 284 310 L90 Refuse pit. F. 285 310 L100 Refuse pit. F. 286 310 L100 Clay and charcoal pit. F. 287 310 L90 Refuse pit. F. 288 310 L40 and L50 East-west wall trench, same as F.277. F. 289 300 LllO Refuse pit. F. 290 290 LllO Clay pit. F. 291 290 LllO Charcoal concentration. F. 292 270 LllO Charcoal concentration. F. 293 250 to 310 LllO North-south trench, representing west wall of either F.5 or F.81. 7* 293A 280 LllO Clay concentration in F.263C. F. 294 280 LllO East-west trench, probable north wall of F.266. F. 295 320 L90 Clay pilaster. F. 296 260 260 270 270 280 290 310 320 320 330 "British Zone," consists of a dark brown late British period refuse strata, probably garden areas south of F.220 and F.266 row­ house units. F. 297 290 and 300 LllO Basement in F. 266. F. 298 330 and 340 L40 Fireplace, associated with unexcavated building on the west side of the land gate. F. 299 320 L100 Basement. LI30 L140 LI30 LI40 L120 L120 LllO L100 LllO LllO 132 Feature Location Comments F. 300 330 L50 Rock-filled pit. F. 301 320 L100 Refuse pit. F. 302 330 L40 Log-support pit for fireplace F.298. F. 303 320 L100 and LllO East-west trench. F. 304 270 LllO East-west trench. F. 305 340 L40 and L50 Semi-circular trench associated with F. 306 320 LllO Refuse pit. F. 307 340 L40 Log support pit for fireplace F.298. F. 308 330 L100 Refuse pit. F. 309 330 L90 Refuse pit. F. 310 260 LllO Basement. F. 311 260 LllO East-west trench, same as F.251. F. 312 160 LI30 Wood concentration. F. 313 150 L160 Clay pilasters. F. 314 270 LI30 East-west trench, same as F.139 and F.233. F. 315 270 L30 East-west trench, north wall of F.266. F. 316 160 L150 Refuse pit. F. 317 260 L30 East-west trench, same as F.314, repre­ sents garden fence south of F.220. F. 318 160 LI 50 Charcoal-stained area. F. 319 160 L150 Buri*l F. 320 160 L140 and L150 East-west trench segments, probably repre­ sent doorway to porch-like structure attached to the northwest c o m e r of the church. F. 321 260 L120 Refuse pit. 133 Comments Feature Location F. 322 270 L120 F. 323 Unknown F.324 160 L156 Clay pilaster. F. 325 160 LI 56 British xone in Priest's house area. F. 326 160 L140 Upright post pit. F. 327 160 L140 Refuse pit. F. 328 160 LI 30 Refuse pit. F. 329 160 LI 30 Charcoal and clay concentration. F. 330 160 LI 30 North-south and east-west trenches. F. 331 160 LI 40 Refuse pit. F. 332 160 LI30 to 160 L160 East-west trench. F. 333 160 L158 Rectangular, wooden box. F. 334 160 L158 Refuse pit. F. 335 160 L158 Rectangular, wooden box. F. 336 160 L158 Charcoal and seed concentration. F. 337 160 L130 Tree stump. F. 338 160 L158 Barrel feature. F. 339 160 L150 Refuse pit. F. 340 150 L158 Part of pilaster F.324. F. 341 260 L140 Refuse pit. F.341A 150 L130 Soil discoloration. F. 342 150 L150 Charcoal and ash concentration. F. 343 Unknown F. 344 140 L150 East-west trench, same as F.304. Brick and stone concentration. 134 Comments Feature Location F. 345 260 LI30 Refuse pit. F. 346 260 LI30 Refuse pit. F. 347 260 and 270 LI 30 Indian refuse deposit. F. 348 290 L120 Fireplace in F.266. F. 349 280 L120 Disturbed pit. F. 350 260 and 270 L130 North-south trench. F. 351 290 L30 East-west trench, defines south wall of F.266. F. 352 290 L40 and 300 and 310 L30 North-south trench, represents north-south trench in F.266, and garden fence south of F.266. F. 353 170 L160 North-south trench segment. F. 354 150 L150 and L160 North-south and east-west trench. F. 355 150 L160 East-west trench, same as F.254. F. 356 150 L130 and LI 40 East-west trench. F. 357 150 LI40 Refuse pit. F. 358 130 and 140 LI 40 Lower cellar, northeast c o m e r of Priest's house. 135 mr -t m m «f/T — —♦ H ' 4- 4- Figure 7 Structural Evidence 138 ! f i j t Figure 8 Structural Evidence 140 1 5 £ P^ I Figure 9 Structural Evidence 142 APPENDIX B: ARTIFACT DESCRIPTIONS Introduction The artifacts recovered at Fort Michilimackinac during the 1959 through 1966 excavations are divided into two parts for descriptive purposes. Part I includes artifact categories which have the greatest value for site interpretation; Part II includes categories of lesser interpretative value. The descriptions of artifact cate­ gories listed in Part I of this appendix are based on the formal system of classification; interpretations are based on archaeological, comparative, and historical evidence. Categories included in Part II are either listed by frequency, or are listed, briefly described, and interpreted on the basis of archaeological evidence. This two-part division of artifact categories is based on a preliminary evaluation of each category in terms of its potential contribution to site inter­ pretation. The selection of category priorities is based on several considerations, each of which is relevant in evaluating the interpre­ tative potential of an artifact category and in defining which arti­ fact categories were to be formally described in Part I. These in­ clude: 1. Site Distribution— artifact categories which exhibit areal concentrations, significant feature associations, structural associations and/or contrasting distributional patterns be­ tween formal divisions are formally described. Several arti­ fact categories listed in Part II exhibit one or more of these 144 145 traits but could not be readily interpreted. These observa­ tions are, however, included when applicable to specific Part II artifact categories. 2. Comparative Evidence— artifact categories which either are significant for the interpretation of other historic sites, or which are present in high frequencies on other sites are formally described. 3. Historical Evidence— artifact categories which can be accurately dated or assigned a nationality of use and/or manufacture on the basis of historical documentation are formally described. 4. Frequency of Occurrence— it is assumed that artifact categories of greater frequency have a greater potential for the defini­ tion of temporal and spatial differences at the site. Also, the selection of high frequency artifact categories increases the comparative value of categories formally described, since the probability that they occur on similar sites is greater. The following two considerations have been secondary in select­ ing categories to be formally described. 5. Artifact Category Representation of Context of Utilisation— one or several artifact categories representative of each context of utilization (that is, structural, household, personal, and craft or activity) are formally described in order to provide a formally valid cross section of functional activities or 146 tasks represented at the site. Artifact categories assigned to each context of utilization are listed below. 6. Applicability to Illustrating and Evaluating the Formal Approach to Classification— it has been necessary to select numerically large and formally complex artifact categories in order to il­ lustrate the mechanics of formal classification as well as to assess the comparative and analytic qualities of formal classi­ fication. The descriptions of artifact categories in Parts I and II are arranged according to the following contextual format. PERSONAL CONTEXT OP UTILIZATION Clothing and Clothing Accoutrements Textiles Buttons Hooks and Eyes Buckles Shoe Heel Plates Ice Creepers Cuff Links Ice Skate Part II I II I II II I II Adornment Beads Tinkling Cones Hawk Bells Religious Medallions and Crucifixes Rings Jewelry — Bracelets — Earrings — Pendants — Brooches — Chain — Hat Pin Part I I II II I II 147 — Spacers — Bangles Grooming Conti Hair Brush Razor Part IX I1 11 Activities Recreation — Chess Piece — Cup and Pin — Gaining Pieces — Dice — Whizzer — Marbles — Kaolin Pipes — Jew's Harps Part II 11 II II II II I I writing --Lead Pencils — Letter Seal II II HOUSEHOLD CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Maintenance and Repair Pins Needles Thimbles Awls Scissors Part II II II I II Preparation and Consumption of Food Kettle Hooks Kettle Handles Kettle Lugs Kettlesf Cast Iron Porringer Handle Plate, Pewter Spigots Ceramics, Non-European Forks Spoons Ceramics (European) Part II 148 Furnishings Hasp Locks Drawer-Pull Knobs Drawer Handles Hinges, F u m i t u r e Tacks Candle Holders Candle Snuffer Fire Tongs or "Smoker's Conqpanion" Part 1 Storage Barrel Hoops Part II STRUCTURAL CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Conponents Bricks Part I Structural Hardware and Parts Nails Hinges Pintles Screws Bolts, Nuts, and Washers Staples Keys Locks Door, Gate, or Shutter Hooks Door-Latch Hardware Keyhold Plates Part CRAFT OR ACTIVITY CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Offense and Defense and/or Acquisition of Subsistence Resources Knives Traps Projectile Points Scythes Harpoons Fishhooks Sword Parts Gunflints Part I 11 II II II I II I 149 Special Skills and/or Crafts Woodworking Tools — Files — Saws — Axes — Planes — Wedges — Chisels — Gouges — Drill Bits — Punches — Gimlets Other Tools — Hammer — Vice Part I 1 Measuring Dividers Weights Compass Clock Parts Telescope Part Commercial Bale Seals Coins Part I II MISCELLANEOUS OR GENERALIZED CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Rivets Harness Buckles Strike-a-Lites Part II II II The descriptions of categories in Part I include the following* 1. Introductory Statement— including a notation of artifact fre­ quency* method of manufacture (included if not apparent from the descriptions or if different methods of manufacture have been used to distinguish formal divisions)* information on 150 non-formal distinctions used to describe fragmentary specimens; the definition of descriptive and class!ficatory attributes and an explanation of their taxonomic arrangement; the description of attribute identification terminology; and, finally, an ex­ planation of the descriptive format utilized, including the no­ tation of what types of evidence are included in the descrip­ tions and where they are located in this appendix. 2. Description— descriptions include the definitions of formal attributes; the notations of frequency, number of specimens measured, illustration references, measurements and/or the statistics computed; and the definition of additional nonclassificatory descriptive properties. Cross-references are often noted between classificatory levels to point out impor­ tant formal relationships. Comparative and site distributional evidence and interpretations are often presented in the descrip­ tive context; this information is included as a part of the category conclusions in some cases. 3. Conclusions— conclusions include sixnmary statements on formal diversity, comparative, historical, and distributional evi­ dence, and the interpretation of specific formal artifact divi­ sions in terms of date of use and significance for site inter­ pretation. Conclusions also include the identification of formal variable significance and problems for future study. 151 Although artifact descriptions in this appendix are straight­ forward, a number of descriptive techniques and measures have been used which require esqilanation. 1. These are: Statistics-statistical measures applied in this report include Pearson's product moment correlation, or correlation coeffi­ cient (r); standard deviation (s); and arithmetic mean or aver­ age. The correlation coefficient is a measure of relationship or of co-variation between variables and is expressed on a scale between -1.0 and +1.0. A negative value indicates that there is a negative linear correlation between variables! this correlation increases in degree between zero and -1.0. A pos­ itive value indicates that there is a positive linear correla­ tion between variables; this correlation increases in degree between zero and +1.0. This measure has been applied to the evaluation of the relationships between the length and width dimensions of gunflints. The standard deviation provides a measure of dispersion of values around the arithmetic mean com­ puted from these values. The larger the standard deviation, the greater the dispersion of values about the mean. This mea­ sure has been used in a number of cases to enphasize the re­ liability of the mean and to facilitate the comparison of means between samples. 2. Historic Site Descriptions— Table 1 is provided to identify the dating, location, and source of reference of other archaeo­ logical sites referred to in this report. 152 3. Artifact Measurements— artifact measurements are either selfexplanatory or are identified and explained in the descriptive text. Measurement sumnaries include the range and/or arith­ metic mean. The mean has been conputed for all samples con­ taining more than six measurements. Individual measurements are presented when these number less than six. In certain cases a particular dimension could not be measured on all spe­ cimens t this absence, if confusing, is noted by a dash (-) . The rationale for the definition of artifact size groups is included in the descriptive text of the applicable artifact category. All measurements are presented in millimeters unless otherwise noted. The abbreviation signifies an estimated measurement. 4. Other Abbreviations— MS2 identifies the site of Port Michilimackinac. MS 2 1_ refers to non-provenience artifacts. The designations C, S_, T, V, G, and Cat, are abbreviations for Class, Series, Type, Variety, Group, and Category respec­ tively; F. is the abbreviation used for Feature. A dash (-) is used to designate unidentifiable portions of letters (which may appear as names) or synfcols which have been noted on marked specimens (see preceding section on Artifact Measurements). If a letter is present, but questionable, it is enclosed within parentheses ( ). The letters NNW, NW, SSW, and SH apply to the north-northwest (F. 90, F. 91, F. 96), northwest (F. 25, F. 27, F. 76), south-southwest (F. 220), and southwest (F. 266) rowhouse units respectively. 153 5. Figures— Photographs are provided of type specimens for each artifact category described in Part I. Line drawings supple­ ment the illustrations of several categories. Each illustra­ tion is accompanied by a figure caption which indicates the artifact figure designation, taxonomic designation, and catalog number. 6. Classification— the term "Category" when applied to an artifact description indicates that that artifact or sample could not be completely formally classified. Category descriptions follow the description of artifacts to which they are most closely re­ lated on the basis of formal attributes. Occasionally, the "Discussions" (summary observations) are presented in the de­ scriptive text. These normally summarize noted relationships between formal divisions. TABLE 1 Site Comparative Historic Sites Dates Source Ada, Michigan pre-1760, 1820-1850 Merrick 1958 Ahumada, Texas 1756-1771 Tunnell & Ambler 1967 Alachua, Florida 1750-1800 Goggin, et al. 1949 Alamo, Texas 1740-late 19th c. Greer 1967 Ft. Albany, Ontario 1680-1715 Quimby 1966 Ft. Atkinson, Nebraska 1819-1827 Kivett 1959 Bell Site, Wisconsin 1680-1730 Wittry 1963 Big Tree, New York ca. 1770 Hayes 1965 Birch Island, Ontario 1750-1800 Greenman 1951 Brewer, New York 1710- Pratt 1961 Brunswick Town, No. Carolina 1726-1776 South 1964 Canawaugus, New York ca. 1800 Hayes 1965 Corchaug, New York 1640-1660 Solecki 1950 Fatherland, Mississippi 1682-1730 Quimby 1942 Fish Hatchery, Louisiana early 18th c. Webb £ Gregory 1965 Frederica, Georgia 1736-1748 Hamilton 1964 Gilbert Site, Texas 3rd 1/4 of 18th c. Jelks 1967 Gros Gap, Michigan 1710-1760 Quimby 1963 Jamestown, Virginia 17th c. Cotter £ Hudson 1957 Cotter 1958 Kaskaskia, Illinois 1703-1763 Perino 1967 Kipp, North Dakota 1826- Woolworth £ Wood 1960 155 Table 1 (Cont.) Site Dates Source Lasanen, Michigan 1680-1705 Stone, n.d. Lawton, Texas 1650-1805 Webb & Gregory 1965 Ligonier, Pennsylvania 1758-1766 Hagerty 1963 Klinger & Wilder 1967 Longlac, Ontario 1740-1921 Dawson 1969 Longest, Oklahoma 1760-1820 Blain 1967 Los Adaes, Louisiana 18th c. Webb & Gregory 1965 Fortress of Louisbourg, Nova Scotia 1720-1760 Dunton 1968 Sutermeister 1968 Marlborough, Virgin!a 1726-1768 Watkins 1968, 1969 Orringh Tavern, New York 1790-1820 Hayes 1965 Ossossane, Ontario 1636 Quimby 1966 Pearson, Texas 1775-1830 Duffield & Jelks 1961 Pemaquid, Maine 1625-1775 Caxap 1967 Pen, New York 1685-1696 Pratt, n.d. Pensacola, Florida 1722-1752 Smith 1965 Perkins early 18th c. Pratt, n.d. Philip Mound 1600t 1700 Benson 1967 Portland Point, New Brunswick 1631-1645 1762-late 18th c. Barka 1965 Posey, Oklahoma 1830-1840 Wyckoff £ Barr 1968 Ft. Renville, Minnesota 1826-1846 Nystuen £ Lindeman 1969 Rosewell, Virginia 1763-1772 Nottl Hume 1962 Ft. Saint Joseph, Michigan 1700-1781 Quimby 1966i 1938 Sainte Marie I, Ontario 1639-1649 Quimby 1966 156 TABLE 1 (Cont.) Site Dates.. Source Santa Rosa, Florida 1722-1752 Smith 1965 Shantok, Connecticut 1620-1750 Salwen 1966 Southern Compress, Louisiana 1714-1803 Webb & Gregory 1965 Spokane, Washington 1800-1826 Combes 1964 Strickler, Pennsylvania 1650-1675 Futer 1959 Ft. Ticonderoga, New York 18th c. Calver & Bo1ten 1950 Campbell 1959 Hagerty 1963 Tutters Neck, Virginia 1701-1710, 1730-1740 NoSl Hume 1966 Klinger & Wilder 1967 Valley Forge, Pennsylvania Whitney, New York 1710-1745 Pratt 1961 Wilkinson, Louisiana 1803-1820 Webb & Gregory 1965 Womack, Texas 1700-1730 Wittry 1963 Woods Island, Alabama 1650-1715 Morrell 1965 APPENDIX B, PART I: FORMAL ARTIFACT DESCRIPTIONS BUTTONS A large and formally cotqplex sample of buttons was recovered at Fort Michilimackinac* a total of 188 formal button categories are defined from a sample of 1302 specimens. Classification and Description: The following attributes were recognized in the description of buttons: 1. Structure, defined by the number and combination of button parts or elements. Button elements are the crown (or button face), back (or reverse face), eye (metal loop for attach­ ment) , and filler (clay or other material between crown and back). The crown and back may be two separate, but joined, elements, or the obverse and reverse faces respectively of a single piece of metal. The distinguishing terminology is maintained in either case. 2. Method of manufacture, such as casting, soldering, brazing, crinping, lathe turning, and so on. 3. Material of button element composition. 4. Shape of button and button elements. 5. Decoration, defined as crown design, or the presence of metallic plate, such as gold (gilt) or silver. 6* Size refers to button diameter. 158 159 Four levels of taxonomic distinction are based on these attri­ butes: 1. Class— distinguished by differences in structure. 2. Series— defined by differences in method of manufacture. 3. Type— defined by combinations of material and shape attributes. 4. Variety— defined by combinations of design and minor shape attributes. These distinctions apply primarily to the formal classification of conplete specimens. A second, less formal, classification has been devised to include individual button elements such as crowns and by­ products of button manufacture. Similar taxonomic distinctions are made for the crown element classification, although they are less rigorously applied. Button descriptions are presented according to the formal classification defined above. Each button category is described briefly by noting its major diagnostic features; detailed verbal de­ scriptions have been avoided since most specimens are illustrated. Photographs are presented of the crown faces of nearly all categories; cross section and button back perspective line drawings are presented of selected types to illustrate important attributes. Information on button diameter and size groupings is included in the individual cate­ gory descriptions and is summarized in Table 7 . Comparative evi­ dence and information on site distribution and feature associations 160 are presented only where applicable to the interpretation of specific button categories. in Table Information on feature associations is sunmarized 10 . Many buttons are described only, and no interpretation is suggested due to the limited distributional and comparative evi­ dence available at present. Class I Crown-Back Element, and Eye Element Series A Elements C u t Together Type 1 Pewter, flat to convex crown, flat back Type 1 varieties are distinguished by eye shape (eye joins back directly or is mounted on a "neck" which joins the back) and decoration. Variety a Flat crown with sharp beveled edge? eye mounted on neck, mold seam across back and eye. Figure 10 A 30 specimens Dimensions (30 specimens): (2) 21.5-22.5. Variety b Flat crown with slightly rounded edge? mounted on neck; mold seam across back eye. Figure 10 B 9 specimens Dimensions (9 specimens): (2) 21.0-23.0. Variety c 2 sizes? (1) 15.0-17.0, 2 sizes? eye and (1) 16.0-17.5, Slightly convex crown with rounded edges? eye mounted on back? mold seam across back and eye. Not illustrated 3 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 16.0, 14.5. 161 Variety d Flat crown with basket-weave-like design; eye mounted on back, mold seam across back and eye; parallel striations on back. Figure 10 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety e Flat crown with basket-weave-like design; eye mounted on neck, mold seam across back and eye. Figure 10 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety f 15.3. Slightly convex crown; eye mounted on neck; mold seam across back and eye. Figure 10 G 4 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): Variety i 17.4. Flat crown with rounded edge; eye mounted on back; mold seam across back and eye. Figure 10 f 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety h 17.3. Flat crown with slightly raised, rounded edge; eye mounted on back; mold seam across back and eye. Figure 10 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety g 14.6. 13.6, 14.4, 15.6. Slightly convex crown with raised nunfcer 60; eye mounted on neck; mold seam across back and eye. Figure 10 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 17.0. See discussion of Cl, SD, Tl, Vg. Variety j Flat crown; beveled back; eye mounted on back; mold seam across back. Figure 10 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 15.6. 162 Discussion: Clasa I, Series A f Type 1 Four of the 7 specimens recovered from features (Table 10 ) were found in association with basements in the SSW rowhouae unit. The presence of Cl, SA, T1 specimens in this structure (dated ca. 17401780) and their absence in both early French and British military structures indicate that they were in use at the fort between ap­ proximately 1740-1745 and 1780 and that they may have been used by civilian rather than military personnel (except for Cl, SA, Tl, Vi). Olsen (1963: 552) suggests a date range of between 1750 and 1812 for similar types. The single Cl, SA, Tl, Vi specimen identifies the British Sixteenth Regiment which was stationed at the fort be­ tween 1761 and 1772. Olsen (1963: 552) notes however that numbered regimental buttons did not appear until 1767. Cl, SA, Tl, Vi thus may be closely dated between 1767 and 1772; its presence in F. 296, a late British period garden refuse deposit, supports this dating. Series B Elements Cast Together, Drilled Eye The eyehole on Series B specimens was drilled after casting. Casting evidence has been removed on all specimens. Series B, Types 1, 2, and 3 buttoneyes are wedge-shaped and taper on all sides. Series B, Types 4 and 5 button eyes are round. Type 1 Brass, crown-edge lip Variety a Flat crown with raised floral design, gilt, and edge lip; flat back. Figure 10 J 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Type 2 Brass, flat crown and back Variety a Plain, flat crown. Figure 10 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b 22.8. Flat crown with pinwheel design in relief. Figure 10 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Discussion: 17.6, 20.7. 23.7. Class I, Series B, Type 2 These buttons are similar to those described by Olsen (1963: dating between 1700 and 1765. 552) as 163 Type 3 Brass, flat crown with raised brass and iron decora­ tion, flat back All Type 3 specimens exhibit small, raised, cvg>-like decorative elements on the crown face. These cups are filled with an iron substance as a decorative addition. Variety a Flat crown with raised floral decoration* 6 drilled holes between raised designs. Figure 10 M 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 18.4. Varieties b through 1 These varieties may be described in a tabular format since they differ only in size and decorative style (see Table 2 ). TABLE 2 Taxonomic Designation Button Description: Figure Designation Class I, Series B r Type 3, Varieties b through j Frequency Size Crown Decoration 10 N 1 25.7 7 raised designs on floral background, irregular crown edge Vc 10 0 1 25.0 7 raised designs on floral background Vd 10 P 2 17.7 17.8 5 raised designs around crown border, center star Ve 10 Q 1 17.0 4 raised designs, center star Vf 10 R 1 17.1 4 raised designs, center star vg 11 A 1 17.6 5 raised designs, center star, possible fleur-de-lis Vh 11 B 1 17.3 4 raised designs vi 11 C 1 17.2 4 raised designs vj 11 D 1 17.2 4 raised designs on floral background 164 Cl, SB, T3, Vb 165 Discussion; Class I, Series B, Type 3 Three Cl, SB, Tl varieties were recovered from late British period features and are tentatively assigned to the British period (17611781) on this basis. Type 4 Brass, flat crown, round drilled eye Variety a Raised pinwheel design on crown; iron sub­ stance in each design element. Figure 11 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b Five raised designs on flat crcwn; designs separated by 5 drilled holesi irregular crown edge. Figure 11 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 5 17.3. White metal; round, drilled eye Variety a Plain, flat crown. 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b 17.1. Flat crown with inpressed center star design. Figure 11 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Discussion; 17.6. 17.6. Class I, Series B, Type 5 South (1964: 118) has assigned a date of 1726 to 1776 to similar spe­ cimens (his Type 11) from Brunswick Town, North Carolina. Series C Crown and Eye Cast Separately and Joined by Brazing Type 1 Brass crown and eye Variety a Plain convex crown with flat edge lip; concave back; U-shaped eye brazed to back. Figure 11 I 78 specimens Dimensions (78 specimens): (2) 23.5-24.5. 2 sizes; (1) 17.0-19.5; 166 South (1964t 118) has assigned a date of 1726 to 1776 to a similar type (his Type 10) from Brunswick Town, North Carolina. Campbell (1959) has examined Cl, SC, Tl, Va spe­ cimens from both Fort Michilimackinac and Fort Ticonderoga and concludes that they represent French uniform buttons from ca.' i'75o'. ' Thfe latter date is s\^>ported by distribu­ tional evidence at Fort Michilimackinac. Cl, SC, Tl, Va specimens do not occur at the site in British military con­ texts and rarely occur north of the 100 grid line or south of the 280 grid line. Specific structural associations within these limits are the SW rowhouse unit and the area between this unit and the SSW rowhouse unit, and, the north­ west c o m e r of the earliest French stockade (F. 5). Cl, SC, Tl, Va specimens have not been found in either the NNW or the SSW rowhouse units. An approximate date of between 1730 and 1760 may be assigned Cl, SC, Tl, Va buttons on the basis of this evidence. Series D Crown-Back Element Cast Around Eye Type 1 Pewter crown-back, iron eye All Cl, SD, Tl specimens exhibit a mold seam and plug and a casting spur on the back face Variety a Convex crown with impressed Ks 8 design and beaded border; concave back. Figure XI J 228 specimens Dimensions (143 specimens): (2) 18.0-19.0. 2 sizes; (1) 23.5-24.5; This button variety was worn by the British, King's Eighth Regiment which served at Fort Michilimackinac between 1774 and 1781. Cl, SD, Tl, Va buttons were found in 3 major areas at the site: (1) south of the 240 grid line, includ­ ing the SSW rowhouse unit and the garden areas north and south of this unit; (2) in the British soldiers barracks (F. 3); and (3) within the NNW rowhouse unit. Important areas of low frequency are the NW and SW rowhouse units. The SW rowhouse unit was in use during the period of Brit­ ish control (1761-1781) although, apparently, not by Brit­ ish soldiers. Table 10 indicates specific structural features within which Cl, SD, Tl, Va specimens were found. The majority of these features are late British period in association. A date range of between 1770 and 1781 is suggested by the archaeological evidence; a more accurate date of 1774 to 1781 is indicated by the historical evi­ dence . 167 Variety b Nearly flat crown and back with impressed Ks 6 design on crown. Figure 11 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 15.0. This specimen lacks the beaded-crown border characteristic of Cl, SD, Tl, Va. Variety c Nearly flat crown and back with raised Ks 8 design on crcwn and decorated crown border. Figure 11 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 14.3. This specimen differs from Cl, SD, Tl, Va in the style of crown-border decoration and in the raised Ks 8 design. Variety d Slightly convex crown with impressed 10 design, slightly concave back. Figure 11 M-N 42 specimens Dimensions (42 specimens): (2) 24.0-25.0. 2 sizes; (1) 17.5-18.5; This button variety was worn by the British Tenth Regiment, which occupied the site between 1772 and 1774. Cl, SD, Tl, Vd specimens were found in 1 major concentration in the area of the British soldier's barracks. Cl, SD, Tl, Vd specimens do not occur either in the NW or the SW rcwhouse units. Cl, SD, Tl, Va buttons have a similar pattern of distribution. Variety e Slightly convex crown with raised RI 18 design; raised rim on crown border; concave back. Figure 11 O-P 7 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): (2) 24.0-25.0. 2 sizes; (1) 17.0-18.0; The British Eighteenth Regiment (The Royal Irish) served in the Revolutionary war in 1777 (Calver and Bolten 1950: 107-108) but were never stationed at Fort Michilimackinac. The 7 specimens may have been lost at the site by members of this regiment who had been transferred to Fort Michili­ mackinac! however, there is no historical evidence to doc­ ument such a transfer. 168 Variety f Slightly convex crown with impressed 29 and wreath-like border; concave back. Figure n Q 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen); 18.2. The British Twenty-ninth Regiment was stationed at Louisbourg, Nova Scotia, and in the Virginias between 1746 and 1750; at Halifax, Nova Scotia, and in Boston between 1765 and 1773; and in eastern Canada from 1776 until 1787. Variety g Slightly convex crown with raised 60 and beaded border; slightly concave back. Figure 11 R 9 specimens Dimensions (9 specimens): (2) 23.0-24.0. 2 sizes; (1) 17.0-18.0; The British Sixtieth Regiment was stationed at Fort Mich­ ilimackinac between 1761 and 1772 (see discussion of Cl, SA, Tl in reference to Sixtieth Regimental buttons). Variety h Plain; slightly convex crown; slightly concave back. Figure 12 A 6 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): Diameter range, 16.5-32.1. These specimens appear to date within the British period on the basis of feature associations (Table ). Olsen (1963: 552) dates this variety between 1760 and 1790. Variety i Slightly convex crown with impressed 7 design and wreath-like border; slightly concave back. Figure 12 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 24.0. The British Seventh Regiment served in eastern Canada be­ tween 1773 and 1783. 169 Variety j Slightly convex crown with raised central crown design and raised wreath of roses and thistles around border; slightly concave back. Figure 12 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 16.6. This specimen identifies the Royal Highland Emigrant Corps which served in the east between 1775 and 1779 (Campbell 1959; Calver and Bolton 1950: 130-133). Type 2 Pewter crown-back, brass or copper eye Variety a Plain, flat crown; flat back. Figure 12 D 5 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): Type 3 16.9, 17.4, 15.5, 18.3. Brass crown-back, iron eye Variety a Plain, flat crown; flat back with circular striations. Figure 12 E 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): Variety b 19.7, 16.0, 16.0. Plain, convex crown with narrow, flat border rim; concave back. Figure 12 F 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 30.4, 25.9. Iron rust within the casting spur is the only evidence that these specimens possessed iron eyes. Type 4 Brass crown, brass or copper eye Type 4 varieties are described in a tabular format (see Table 3 ). An interpretative discussion follows the descriptions. Casting spurs are present on all specimens; mold seams are absent on all specimens. TABLE 3 Taxonomic Designation Button Descriptions: Figure Designation Class I, Series D, Type 4, Varieties a through e Frequency Size Comments 12 G 17 2 sizes, 16.018.0; 22.0-24.0 Flat crown and back, circular striations on back Vb 12 H 26 2 sizes, 17.518.5; 23.0-26.0 Slightly convex and concave crown and back respectively, silver plated brass Vc 12 I 1 16.7 Flat crown with beveled edge, slightly concave back, silver plated brass vd 12 J 2 22.0, 22.3 Flat crown, very slightly concave back (not shown in illustration), back cir­ cular striations ve 12 K 2 26.0, 17.3 Flat crown and back, impressed zig-zag crown border design, silver plated brass 170 Cl, SD, T4, Va 171 Discussion: Cl, SD, T4 Distributional evidence indicates that Cl, SD, T4 buttons are not associated with either early French structures or British military structures. The major area of concentration is within the SSW row­ house unit and within the garden areas to the north and south of this unit. A civilian use and date range of between 1750 and 1780 is ten­ tatively suggested by this evidence. Similar specimens have been found at other sites and have been dated as follows: Olsen (1963: 552) proposes a 1760-1785 date rangei Noel Hume (1962: 194-195), de­ scribing the Rosewell excavations, assigns a 1750-1800 date range: South (1964: 117) describes a similar type (his Type 7) as dating within the period from 1726 until 1776. Class II Crown-Back Single Element But Separated by Hollow Space, Plus Eye Series A Crown-Back Cast as Single Unit Around Eye, Two Air Holes Through Back Type 1 Pewter crown-back, iron eye Variety a Convex crown; slightly convex back; 2 holes in back. Figure 12 L 249 specimens Dimensions (125 specimens): (2) 21.0-22.5. 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; CI1, SA, Tl, Va buttons occur frequently in the following areas: (1) within the SSW rowhouse unit and in the garden areas to the north and south of this unit; (2) within and in the general area of the British soldiers' barracks (F. 3); and (3) within the NNW rowhouse unit and in the garden areas north and south of this unit. CII, SA, Tl, Va specimens are notably infrequent in the NW and SW row­ house units and in the Church and Priest's house area. The SSW rowhouse unit association is very definite; 16 and 13 specimens respectively are located in basement features (F. 262 and F. 267). A basement in the NNW row­ house unit (F. 85) yielded 4 specimens. The guard house basement (F. 118) yielded 2 specimens. This button var­ iety appears to have been used by the British military be­ tween 1760 and 1780. As Campbell (1959) points out, how­ ever, CII, SA, Tl, Va buttons were used by the British military prior to 1767-1768, or before the adoption of numbered regimental buttons. An extended period of use at Fort Michilimackinac is indicated by the noted British barracks (F. 3) association. This structure was not built until after 1769, as indicated by its absence on the Nordberg map of that date, and was not t o m down until 1781. 172 Series B Crown and Back Cast Separately and Joined by Brazing, Eye Soldered to Back Type 1 Brass crown, back, and eye Variety a Plain, convex crown and back; wide strap-like eye. Figure 12 N 26 specimens Dimensions (26 specimens): (2) 18.5-20.5. 2 sizes, (1) 14.5-16.0; CII, SB, Tl, Va specimens exhibit silver solder over the entire back face. Circumferential striations are noted on many crown faces. These specimens are not associated with major British military button types (Cl, SD, Tl, Va or CII, SA, Tl, Va). A CII, SB, Tl, Va association with the SW rowhouse unit is noted. A date range of between 1740 and 1760 is suggested on the basis of this evidence. Series C Crown and Back Cast Separately and Joined by Brazing, Eye Cast as Part of Back and Then Drilled Type 1 Brass Variety a Convex crown; slightly convex back; wedgeshaped eye. Figure 12 0 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): 15.2, 20.0, 20.3, 14.7. Circumferential striations present on button backs. Series D Crown and Back Cast Separately and Joined by Brazing, Back Cast Around Eye, Two Air Holes Through Back Type 1 Brass Variety a Convex crown and back. Figure 12 M-P 12 specimens Dimensions (12 specimens): (2) 20.0-23.0. 2 sizes, (1) 14.5-15.5; See discussion of Class II, Series D, Type 1, and Type 2. 173 Type 2 Brass crown and eye# copper (?) back Variety a Convex crown and back. Figure 12 Q 10 complete specimens# 26 backs Dimensions (26 specimens): 2 sizes# (2) 21.5-22.5. Discussion: (1) 16.0-17.5; Class II, Series D# Types 1 and 2 Both types were combined on a distribution map for interpretive pur­ poses. A high frequency of occurrence is noted within the NNW rowhouse unit. A secondary area of occurrence is the SSW rowhouse unit and the garden areas north and south of this unit. Absences are noted in the NW and SW rowhouse units# British military structures# and the Church and Priest's house area. This information suggests a civilian use be­ tween ca. 1760 and 1780 although Calver and Bolton (1950: 230) suggest that similar types were used by the French military. Feature contexts support the suggested date range of 1760 to 1780. Series E Crown and Back Cast Separately and Joined by Brazing# Back Cast Around Eye# No Air Holes Through Back Type 1 Brass back and eye, copper (?) crown Variety a Convex crown; slightly convex back; casting spur extends partially up the eye shaft; cir­ cumferential striations on back; dull# eroded crown surface. Figure 13 A 19 specimens Dimensions (17 specimens): (2) 19.5-22.0. 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; These specimens are assigned a 1760-1780 date on the basis of distributional similarity to CII, SD# Tl and CII, SD# T2. Type 2 Copper crown and brass back cast separately and joined by brazing, back cast around iron eye, circumferential striations on back face Variety a Convex crown; slightly convex back. Figure 13 B 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): (2) 19.5-20.5. possibly 2 sizes, (1) 14.0-15.5; 174 Type 3 Pewter crown and back cast separately and joined by brazingf back cast around iron eye, mold seam across back Variety a Convex crown; nearly flat back. Figure 13 C 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Type 4 Brass, crown and back cast separately and joined by brazing, back cast around eye Variety a Convex crown and back. Figure 13 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 5 23.9. Brass crown and loop c u t separately and brazed to­ gether, back cast around loop which is missing (iron or brass) Variety a Slightly convex crown and back; raised geo­ metric crown design. Figure 13 e 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class III 21.6, 21.4. 22.1. Crown, Back, and Filler, Separate Elements Series A Crown avid Back Produced Separately and Crimped Together With Filler Between The crown elements of Class 111 buttons were produced by striking a thin disk of metal in a mold which had been engraved with the de­ sired decorations. Metal backs for Class 111 buttons were produced similarly; bone and wood backs were cut and drilled. A filler ele­ ment was inserted between crown and back to make the finished but­ ton more solid and less easily damaged. Type 1 Bone back, brass crown, back is cut bone with 4 drilled holes for attachment and a recessed rim to receive the cringed crown Type 1 varieties are presented in a tabular format (Table 4 ). An interpretative discussion follows these descriptions. Refer to figures for information on crown decoration. All varieties exhibit slightly convex crowns and backs and appear to contain a clay filler element. TABLE 4 Taxonomic Designation Button Descriptions: Figure Designation Class III, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through n Frequency Size Crown Decoration and Conments 13 F 3 24.1, 15.9, 17.3 Plain. Vb 13 G 1 16.2 Plain; probably same as CIII, SA, Tl, Va; crown is slightly more convex. Vc 13 H 3 16.1, 22.6, 16.1 Raised Ks 8 with basket-weave border; gilt. Vd 13 I 1 16.6 Ks 8 symbol raised; gilt; letters HONI.SOIT. QUI.MAL.Y.Pense. around border. Ve 13 J 1 17.6 Irqpressed floral design. Vf 13 K 1 21.6 Raised herringbone design; gilt. vg 13 L-M 17.3, 16.3 Raised basket weave. Vh 13 N 1 15.8 Raised basket weave; silverplated. Vi 13 0 1 15.4 Raised geometric design. Vj 13 P 1 21.7 Raised geometric and floral design. Vk 13 Q 1 17.3 Raised floral design. VI 13 R 1 16.0 Raised floral design. Vm 14 A 1 21.3 Raised geometric and floral design; silver plated. Vh 14 B,C 1 23.7 Raised Tenth Regiment design; silver plated. 175 CIII, SA, Tl, Va 176 Discussiont Class III, Series A, Type 1 Varieties c, d, and m represent British officers* regimental buttons (see discussion of Cl, SA, Tl, Va and Cl, SA, Tl, Vd ) . Several of the remaining variety specimens were recovered from British feature con­ texts. South (1964: 115) notes that Variety a buttons (his Type 3) were a major type at Brunswick Town, North Carolina, and assigns a 1726-1776 period date to this type. Type 2 Pewter crown, bone back, back is cut bone with 4 drilled holes for attachment, and a recessed rim to receive the crimped crown, clay filler element Variety a Plain; slightly convex crown and back. Figure 14 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 3 Two-part copper (?) crown, composed of an inner solid disk and an outer perforated disk, bone back with 4 drilled holes and recessed rim, clay filler Variety a Slightly convex crown and back; floral crown design. Figure 14 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b 24.4. Slightly convex crown and back; gilt; back with 4 drilled holes and recessed rim; clay filler; geometric crown design. Figure 14 p 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 4 17.4. 15.6. Two-part copper (?) and brass crown, composed of a solid inner brass disk and a perforated outer copper disk, bone back with 4 drilled holes and beveled edge, clay filler Variety a Convex crown and back; geometric crown design. Figure 14 g 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 22.9. 177 Type 5 Brass crown, wooden back with 4 holes for attachment and recessed edge to receive crimped crown, clay filler Type 5 varieties are presented in a tabular format (Table 5 ). Refer to figures for information on decoration. All varieties have convex crowns and flat to slightly convex backs. An in­ terpretative discussion follows the Table 5 descriptions. TABLE 5 Taxonomic Designation Button Descriptions: Class III, Series A, Type 5, Varieties a through o Figure Designation Frequency Size Crown Decoration and Comments CIII, SA, T5, Va 14 H 2 21.4, 16.1 Silver plated; plain, convex crown. Vb 14 I 1 17.1 Gilt; plain; nearly flat crown. Vc 14 J 1 22.1 Convex crown; gilt. Vd 14 K 21.3, 16.0 Convex crown with lip; gilt. Ve 14 L 1 25.0 Raised basket weave design; silver plated; convex crown. Vf 14 M 1 16.8 Raised basket weave design; convex crown. Vg 14 N 1 21.8 Raised basket weave design; gilt; con­ vex crcwn. Vh 14 0 1 17.3 Raised geometric and floral design; convex crown. Vi 14 P 1 18.3 Raised geometric and floral design; convex crcwn. Vj 15 A 1 21.6 Raised floral design; convex crown. Vk 15 B 1 21.8 Raised floral design; convex crown. VI 15 C 1 16.6 Raised floral design; convex crown. Vm 15 D 1 15.8 Raised floral design; gilt; convex crown. Vh 15 E 1 22.1 Raised center star and floral design; silverplated; convex. Vo 15 F 1 20.0 Highly domed; convex crown; raised beaded design on crown border. 179 Discussion: Class III, Series A, Type 5 The small sample of wood back specimens described above cannot be in­ terpreted on the basis of distributional or comparative evidence. Type 6 Two-part brass crown# composed of an inner solid disk and am outer perforated disk# wooden back with 4 holes and recessed rim# clay filler Variety a Slightly convex crown; convex back; floral de­ sign (compare with CIII, SA, T3# Va). Figure 15 G 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): Variety b Flat crown with beveled edge; convex back. Figure 15 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c 15.9. Convex crown and back; gilt crown. Figure 15 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class III# Category 1 15.6# 21.4, 16.2. 15.9. Button Backs This category consists of button backs characteristic of Class III buttons. Two varieties are defined on the basis of material. Variety a Bone. Figure 15 J-K 19 specimens Dimensions (19 specimens): (2) 20.5-23.5. Variety b (1) 14.0-15.5; 2 sizes, (1) 13.5-15.0; Wood. Figure 15 L 19 specimens Dimensions (19 specimens): (2) 19.5-22.0. Discussion: 2 sizes# Class III Little evidence has been presented to permit an accurate dating of C H I buttons. The 84 CIII specimens (including CII# Cat. 1 backs) were plotted on a distribution map. CIII buttons are commonly found 180 in the SSW rowhouse unit, in the garden areas north and south of this unit, and in the NNW rowhouse unit. Areas of low frequency or absence are the British soldiers' barracks (F. 3), the NW and SW rowhouse units and the Church and Priest's house area. From this evidence, it appears that CIII buttons were in common civilian use throughout the period of British control (1760-1781); however, French or British attribution is not possible. Class IV Crown, Back, Eye, and Filler, All Separate Elements Series A Crown, Back, and Eye Produced Separately, Double Wire Eye Crimped to Back Through Four Drilled Holes, Crown Crimped Over Back With Clay Filler Between The crown elements of Class IV buttons were produced by striking a thin disk of metal in a mold which had been engravedwith the de­ sired decorations. Metal backs for Class IV were produced by a similar process; bone and wood backs were cut and drilled. A filler element was inserted between crown and back. Type 1 Brass Variety a crown, back, and eye, clay filler Slightly convex crown and back; 2 thin, wire cross-eyes. Figure 15 M 18 specimens (7 complete, 11 backs) Dimensions (18 specimens): 2 sizes, (2) 21.5-23.5. (1) 15.0-16.5; CIV, SA, Tl, Va specimens were recovered from the garden area between the SW and SSW rowhouse units, from the NNW rowhouse unit, and from the area of the north walls of the first and second expansion stockades. Feature contexts duplicate these associations. This evidence does not sup­ port a clear dating for CIV, SA, Tl, Va specimens. Series B Crown, Back, And Eye Produced Separately, Eye Crimped to Back, Crown Crimped to Back With Filler Between Type 1 Pewter crown, iron back and eye, clay filler Variety a Convex crown with raised Ks 8 design; slightly convex back. Figure 15 N-O 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 23.5, 16.6. These specimens represent British officers' buttons (see discussion of Cl, SD, Tl, Va) . 181 Type 2 Pewter crown, iron back, brass eye, clay filler Variety a Convex crown with raised geometric design; slightly convex back. Figure 15 P 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 3 20.9. Pewter crown, pewter back, unknown eye material Variety a Slightly convex crcwn and back; raised Ks 8 design on crown. Figure 15 Q 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 16.4. This specimen represents a British officers' button (see discussion of Cl, SD, Tl, Va). Type 4 Brass crcwn and back, unknown eye Variety a Slightly convex crown and back; raised geo­ metric and floral design on crcwn. Figure 15 R 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 5 15.8. Brass or copper crcwn, bone back with 1 drilled hole for brass eye Type 5 varieties are presented in a tabular format (Table 6 )• Refer to figures for information on decoration. All varieties have slightly convex crowns and backs. It is probable that all specimens have a clay filler element. TABLE 6 Taxonomic Designation Button Descriptions: Class IV, Series A, Type 5, Varieties a through j Figure Designation Frequency Size Crcwn Decoration and Conments CIV, SA, T5, Va 15 S 3 26.4, 26.3, 21.1 Raised floral and geometric design (sun­ burst) . Vb 15 T 1 21.6 Raised floral design. Vc 15 U 1 15.9 Raised floral design. Vd 16 A 1 22.3 Raised floral and geometric design. Ve 16 B 1 15.7 Raised floral design. Vf 16 C 1 15.4 Raised floral and geometric design. Vg 16 D 1 16.0 Raised floral and geomecric design; gilt. Vh 16 E 1 21.4 Impressed floral design. Vi 16 F 1 16.4 Impressed floral design. Vj 16 G 1 21.9 Raised geometric design (diamonds). 183 Discussion: Class IV, Series B, Type 5 CIV, SB, T5 specimens cannot be dated on the basis of distributional or comparative evidence. Class IV, Category 1 Button Backs This category consists of button backs characteristic of CIV buttons. Two varieties are defined on the basis of material. Variety a Bone. not illustrated 15 specimens Dimensions (14 specimens): (2) 20.5-22.0. Variety b (1) 14.0-15.5; 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; Iron. not illustrated 10 specimens Dimensions (10 specimens): (2) 21.5-23.0. Class V 2 sizes, Crown Over Filler-Back Series A Crown Sewn Over Filler-Back and Attached to Back Type 1 Fabric crown, wood filler-back Variety a Convex crown of woven, twisted yard (coppergreen color) over flat back; Bingle drilled hole through back. Figure 16 H 7 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): Variety b Flat crown of woven silver strips and silver wrapped yarn; flat back. Figure 16 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c diameter range, 15.5-21.5. 17.7. Convex crown of silver wrapped y a m ; flat back; wound silver wire between Yiller-back and crown. Figure 16 J 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 22.5. 184 Class VI Single Element Buttons Series A Lathe Turned Buttons With Drilled Holes for Attachment Type 1 Shell Variety a Plat crown with central recessed area through which 4 holes have been drilled; flat back. Figure 16 K-L 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens)! Variety b Flat crown with center recessed area through which 2 holes have been drilled; flat back. Figure 16 M-N 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Variety c 16.9, 15.2, 14.9. 12.4, 12.2. Flat crcwn with center recessed slit through which 2 holes have been drilled; flat back. Figure 16 0-P 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): 12.3, 11.4, 14.4, 8.8. Button Categories Three button categories have been defined which cannot be as­ signed specific class designations within the formal classification: (1) button blanks and manufacturing by-products, and (3) button crowns. (2) button filler, The button crown classification corresponds closely in formal arrangement to that proposed for complete specimens above. Category 1 Button Blanks and By-Products Type 1 Bone blanks Thin bone disks commonly used as button backs on CIV, SB, T5 buttons; each disk has one central drilled hole and is flat to slightly convex on each face. 185 Figure 16 Q 129 specimens Dimensions (75 specimens): (2) 19.5-21.5. 2 sizes, (1) 13.0-15.0; The majority of specimens appear to be button-back blanks since their edges have not been cut and recessed to receive a crimped metal crown. These specimens were manufactured on the site, probably to replace broken or worn bone button backs. The majority of specimens were found within the SSW rowhouse unit, in the garden areas to the north and south of this unit, and within the NNW rowhouse unit and the British soldiers' barracks (F. 3.) Specific feature associations cor­ respond to this general distribution pattern. This pattern of distribution and feature associations corresponds to formal types described above which have been dated between 1750 and 1780. Type 2 Bone by-products Type 2 specimens consist of bone fragments from which Cat. 1, Tl button-back blanks were cut. Figure 16 R 10 specimens Category 2 Filler Type 1 Clay Figure 16 S 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): Category 3 13.2, 15.3, 12.9. Button Crowns Series A Type 1 Brazed Form (specimens may represent formal CII, SB through ClI, SE crowns) Brass Variety a Flat, plain. Figure 16 T 31 specimens Dimensions (28 specimens): (2) 20.5-23.0. 2 sizes, (1) 16.0-17.0; 186 Variety b Plat, raised pinwheel design. Figure 16 U 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Series B Type 1 21.3. Crimped Form Brass Type 1 varieties are described in a tabular format (Table 8 Design and shape attributes distinguish varieties. Refer to figures for information on crown decoration. ). 187 TABLE & Taxonomic Designation Cl, Cl, SA, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Tl, Va T2, Va Vb T3, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj T4, Va Vb T5, Va Vb SC, Tl, Va SD, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj T2, Va T3, Va Vb § S’ u &4 30 9 3 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 78 228 1 1 42 7 1 1 1 5 3 2 7 Button Measurements •o 0) 13 Diameter Measurements I£ 30 9 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 78 143 1 1 42 7 1 9 5 1 1 4 3 2 2 sizes, (1) 15.0-17.0| 2 sizes, (1) 16.0-17.5; 16.0, 14.5 14.6 17.3 17.4 15.3 13.6, 14.4, 15.6 17.0 15.6 17.6, 20.7 22.8 23.7 18.4 25.7 25.0 17.7, 17.8 17.0 17.1 17.6 17.3 17.2 17.2 17.6 17.3 17.1 17.6 2 sizes, (1) 17.0-19.5; 2 sizes, (1) 23.5-24.5; 15.0 14.3 2 sizes, (1) 17.5-18.5; 2 sizes, (1) 17.0-18.0; 18.2 2 sizes, (1) 17.0-18.0; 16.5-32.1 (range) 24.0 16.6 16.9, 17.4, 15.5, 18.3 19.7, 16.0, 16.0 30.4, 25.9 (2) 21.5-22.5 (2) 21.0-23.0 (2) 23.5-24.5 (2) 18.0-19.0 (2) 24.0-25.0 (2) 24.0-25.0 (2) 23.0-24.0 188 TABLE 7 (Cont.) Taxonomic Designation SA, SB, SC, SD, SE, SA, T4, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Tl, Va Tl, Va Tl, Va Tl, Va T2, Va Tl, Va T2, Va T3, Va T4, Va T5, Va Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Vk VI Vm Vn T2, Va T3, Va Vb T4, Va T5, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj & I TJ 4> Pm *at *o 1a 13 17 26 1 2 2 249 26 4 12 36 19 6 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 26 1 2 2 125 26 4 12 36 17 6 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Diameter Measurements 2 sizes, (1) 16.0-18.0; 2 sizes, (1) 17.5-18.5; 16.7 22.0, 22.3 26.0, 17.3 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; 2 sizes, (1) 14.5-16.0; 15.2, 20.0, 20.3, 14.7 2 sizes, (1) 14.5-15.5; 2 sizes, (1) 16.0-17.5; 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; 2 sizes, (1) 14.0-15.5; 21.6, 21.4 23.9 22.1 24.1, 15.9, 17.3 16.2 16.1, 22.6, 16.1 16.6 17.6 21.6 17.3, 16.3 15.8 15.4 21.7 17.3 16.0 21.3 23.7 17.4 24.4 15.6 22.9 21.4, 16.1 17.1 22.1 21.3, 16.0 25.0 16.8 21.8 17.3 18.3 21.6 (2) 22.0-24.0 (2) 23.0-26.0 (2) 21.0-22.5 (2) 18.5-20.5 (2) (2) <2) (2) 20.0-23.0 21.5-22.5 19.5-22.0 19.5-20.5 189 TABLE 7 (Cont.) & c § Sf b Taxonomic Designation T6, c m , Cat. 1, CIV, SA, Tl, SB, Tl, T2, T3, T4, T5, CIV, Cat. 1 9 cv. SA, Tl, CVI, SA, Tl, Cat. 1, Vk VI Vm Vn Vo Va Vb Vc Va Vb Va Va Va Va Va Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Va Vb Va Vb Vc Va Vb Vc Tl T2 Cat. 2 Tl Cat. 3, SA, Tl, Va Vb SB, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 19 19 18 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 10 7 1 1 3 2 4 129 10 3 31 1 16 7 2 26 TJ a> 4> I 3 Diameter Measurements 3 4) 35 X 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 19 19 18 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 7 1 1 3 2 4 75 23.8 16.6 15.8 22.1 20.0 15.6, 21.4, 16.2 15.9 15.9 2 sizes, (1) 14.0-15.5; (2) 2 sizes, (1) 13.5-15.0; (2) 2 sizes, (1) 15.0-16.5; (2) 23.5, 16.6 20.9 16.4 15.8 26.4, 26.3, 21.1 21.6 15.9 22.3 15.7 15.4 16.0 21.4 16.4 21.9 2 sizes, (1) 14.0-15.5; (2) 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; (2) 15.5-21.5 17.7 22.5 16.9, 15.2, 14.9 12.4, 12.2 12.3, 11.4, 14.4, 8.8 2 sizes, (1) 13.0-15.0; (2) 3 28 1 16 7 2 25 13.2, 15.3, 12.9 2 sizes, (1) 16.0-17.0; 21.3 2 sizes, (1J 15.5-17.0; 2 sizes, (1) 15.0-16.0; 18.3, 17.4 2 sizes, (1) 15.5-17.0; 20.5-23.5 19.5-22.0 21.5-23.5 20.5-22.0 21.5-23.0 19.5-21.5 (2) 20.5-23.0 (2) 21.5-23.5 (2) 21.0-23.0 (2) 21.0-23.5 190 TABLE 7 (Cont.) & e § Taxonomic Designation I fa z £ * 5 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 8 Diameter Measurements a> =1 8 u Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Vk VI Vm Vn Vo Vp Vq Vr Vs Vt Vu Vv vw Vx vy Vz Vaa Vbb Vcc Vdd Vee Vff Vgg Vhh Vii vjj Vkk Vll Vtnm Vnn Voo Vpp Vqq Vrr Vss Vtt •a 9 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 21.6, 15.6, 28.9 16.7, 22.3 15.6, 15.5, 15.7 15. 3 25.2 17.2, 17.3 15.8 15.0 15.8, 21.4, 21.4, 30.4, 15.5 17.0, 16.0 24.7 17.6 22.5 21.4, 14.8 24.6 15.9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 8 15.6 17.9 15.8 21.8 21.5 25.2 24.6 26.7 24.3 25.5 22.3 15.7, 16.0 22.0- 24.5 (range) 16.4, 19.5 16.2, 25.0 16.8, 12.3 24.0, 16.7 15.7 19.3 16.2 22.0 15.7, 22.3 21.9, 17.2 17.8 21.4, 21.0 191 Taxonomic Designation T2, T3, T4, T5, Vuu Vw Va Vb Vc Va Vb Va Vb Va Vb Vc 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 Number Measured (Cont.) Frequency TABLE 7 Diameter Measurements 1 17.8 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 23.6 28. 3 15.8 22.3, 15.9 16.4 21.6 23.7 16.6 18.7 18.8 TABLE 8 Button Descriptions: Taxonomic Designation Figure Designation Button Cat. 3 SB, Tl, Va 16 V Button Cat. 3, Series B, Type 1, Varieties a through w Frequency Size Crcwn Decoration and Comments 16 (1) 15.5-17.0 (2) 21.5-23.5 Plain, slightly convex Vb none 7 (1) 15.0-16.0 (2) 21.0-23.0 Plain, convex, gilt Vc none 2 18.3, 17.4 Plain, domed-convex (1) 15.5-17.0 (2) 21.0-23.5 Convex with edge rim Vd 16 W-X Ve 16 Y 5 21.6, 16.4, 19.5 Raised basket-weave design, gilt, slightly convex Vf 16 2 3 15.6, 16.2, 25.0 Raised basket-weave design, slightly convex Vg 16 AA 1 28.9 Raised basket-weave, bilt, slightly convex Vh 16 BB 3 16.7, 16.8, 12.3 Raised geometric design, domed-convex Vi 16 CC 1 22.3 Raised floral and geometric design, gilt, flat crown Vj 16 DD-EE 3 15.6, 24.0, 16.7 Iiqpressed floral design, gilt, slightly convex Vk 16 FF-GG 2 15.5, 15.7 Reused floral design, gilt, (1 specimen lacks gilt), slightly convex VI 16 HH 1 15.7 Raised geometric design, gilt, slightly convex 26 TABLE 8 (Cant.) Taxonomic _ .. Designation Figure „ . . Designation . Frequency Size Crown Decoration and Comments Vm 16 II 1 15.3 Raised geometric design, domed-convex Vh 17 A 1 25.2 Raised geometric design, gilt, slightly convex Vo 17 B-C 2 17.2-19.3 Flat, gilt, raised Ks 8 design (horse symbol and letters HONI.SOIT.QVL.MAL.Y.PENSE. v*> 17 D 1 17.3 Slightly convex, geometric and floral design raised Vq 17 E 1 15.8 Slightly convex, geometric design raised Vr 17 F 1 15.0 Slightly convex, raised geometric design Vs 17 G 2 15.8, 16.2 Slightly convex, raised geometric design, gilt Vt 17 H 2 21.4, 22.0 Slightly convex, raised geometric design Vu 17 I-J 3 21.4, 15.7 22.3 Sli^itly convex, raised floral design Vv 17 K 3 30.4, 21.9 17.2 Slightly convex, impressed floral and geo­ metric design, gilt VW 17 L 1 15.5 Slightly convex, raised floral design Vx 17 M 2 17.0, 17.8 Slightly convex, raised floral design vy 17 N 1 16.0 Slightly convex, impressed floral design Vz 17 0 1 24.7 Slightly convex, raised geometric design, gilt Vaa 17 P 1 17.6 Domed convex, raised geometric design TABLE 8 (Cont.) Taxonomic Designation Figure Designation Frequency Size Crown Decoration and Comments Vbb 17 Q 1 22.5 Flat, raised geometric design Vcc 17 R 4 21.4 21.0 Slightly convex, raised geometric design Vdd 17 S 1 14.8 Slightly convex, raised geometric design, gilt Vee 17 T 1 24.6 Slightly convex, reused floral and geometric design, gilt Vff 17 U 1 15.9 Slightly convex, raised geometric design Vgg 17 V 1 Vhh 17 W 1 15.6 Flat crown, raised brass cups with iron, raised floral design Vii 17 X 1 17.9 Slightly convex, reused floral design Vjj 17 Y 1 15.8 Slightly convex, reused floral design, gilt Vkk 17 Z 1 21.8 Slightly convex, raised geometric design Vll 17 AA 1 21.5 Slightly convex, reused floral design Vtam 17 BB 1 25.2 Slightly convex, reused floral design Vnn 17 CC 1 24.6 Slightly convex, raised geometric and floral design Voo 17 DO 1 26.7 Slightly convex, raised floral design, gilt Vpp 17 EE 1 24.3 Slightly convex, raised geometric design, gilt Vqq 17 FF 1 25.5 Flat, reused floral design Domed-convex, raised floral design TABLE 8 (Cont.) Taxonomic Designation Figure Designation Frequency Size C r a m Decoration and Comments Vrr 17 GG 1 22.3 Domed-convex, raised geometric design, gilt Vss 17 HH 2 15.7, 16.0 Slightly convex, raised floral design Vtt 18 A 8 22.0-24.5 Flat, plain, gilt Vuu 18 B 1 17.8 Slightly convex, raised geometric and floral design Wv 18 C 1 Slightly convex, raised floral design 196 Types 2, 3, 4, and 5 These types may be combined and described in the same tabular format (Table 9 ). Type 2 button crowns are represented by specimens which have an inner solid brass disk and an outer perforated disk (compare with CIIIr SA, T3, T4, and T6). Type 3 button crowns are silver plated brass. Type 4 speci­ mens are brass and exhibit attached fabric filler. Type 5 specimens are pewter. TABLE 9 Taxonomic Designation Button Descriptions: Figure Designation Button Category 3, Series B, Types 2 , 3, 4, and 5 Frequency Size Crown Decoration and Comments Cat. 3, SB, T2, Va 18 d 1 23.6 Slightly convex, perforated design Vb 18 E 1 28.3 Slightly convex, perforated design, gilt Vc GO rH fa 1 15.8 Slightly convex, perforated design, gilt 18 G, H 3 22.3, 15.9 Slightly convex, plain 18 I 1 16.4 Slightly convex, geometric design T4f Va 18 J 2 21.6 Flat, plain Vb 18 K 1 23.7 Flat, impressed floral design, gilt T5, Va 18 L 1 16.6 Slightly convex, plain Vb 18 M 1 18.7 Slightly convex, raised Ks 8 design Vc 18 N 1 18.8 Slightly convex, raised geometric design T3, Va Vb 198 Discussion: Button Category 3 All Category 3 button specimens were combined on a distribution map for interpretative purposes. Their presence is noted in the NNW, SW and SSW rowhouse unitsf and in the garden areas north andsouth of the SSW rowhouse unit. Areas of absence of low frequency are the Church and Priest's house area and the British soldiers' barracks (F. 3). These buttons were apparently worn by civilians from at least 1740 until 1780. A similar but more restricted pattern of dis­ tribution was noted for formal button types (ClII and CIV) to which Category 3 crowns correspond as a structural element. Discussion: Buttons The preceding formal classification of buttons provides a large body of data for comparative research. Unfortunately, many of the button types described were neither dated nor assigned to specific nationalities of use. This shortcoming reflects both the inadequacy of comparative evidence and the failure of site distributional evidence to yield firm dates. As with other artifact categories described in this report, several unresolved problems resulted from the analysis. The large majority of button types were assigned dates between 1740 and 1780; this is inconsistent with the known period of site occupation. observation could be the result of two interrelated factors: This (1) mis­ interpretation, and (2) differences in the social composition and size of population at the site prior to and after 1740. The most frequent button types were of military usage and were standardized in both structure and design. Civilian buttons were less frequent and lacked standardization in either structure or design. Similar observations have been made for buckles and other items of civilian adornment, such as rings and beads. 199 The distribution of different button types at the site is a very useful indicator of structure contemporaineity and usage. evidence is further elaborated in Chapter 4. This Figure Figure Designation 10 Buttons (Actual Size) Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS2 A Cl, SA, Tl, Va 1305 B Vb 2445 C Vd 881 D Ve 2024 E Vf 3416 F Vh 2563 G Vh 3094 H Vi 3314 I Vj 1608 J SB, Tl, Va 2650 K L M T2, Va Vb T3, Va 2741 896 1 N Vb 1 0 Vc 1900 P Vd 1101 Q Ve 2890 R Vf 1 Figure n Figure Designation A Buttons Taxonomic Designation Cl, SB, T3, Vg (Actual Size) Catalog ^ Nunfcer, MS 1192 B Vh 1 C Vi 1 D Vj 3004 E F G T4, Va 7b T5, Va 1106 1 310 H Vb 2687 I SC, Tl, Va 1 J SD, Tl, Va 411 K Vb 2348 L Vc 448 M Vd 1343 N Vd 676 O Ve 1460 P Ve 1400 Q Vf 151 R Vg 2781 Figure 12 Figure Designation A Buttons Taxonomic Designation Cl, (Actual Size) Catalog ^ Number, MS SD, Tl, Vh 1399 B Vi 1416 C Vj 493 D T2, Va 871 E T3, Va 2462 p Vb 2014 G T4, Va 1 H Vb 1 I Vc 344 j Vd 3026 K Ve 1499 L CII, SA, Tl, Va 2443 M SD, Tl, Va 2370 N SB, Tl, Va 169 0 SC, T2, Va 3120 p SD, Tl, Va 1348 Q SD, T2, Va 2004 Figure Figure Designation A 13 Buttons Taxonomic Designation cilr (Actual Size) Catalog ^ Nuntoer, MS SE, Tl, Va 1459 B T2, Va 2060 c T3, Va 264 D T4» Va 1 E T5, Va 1 p CIII, SA, Tl, Va 2066 q Vb 3120 H Vc 2007 j Vd 2216 j Ve 528 K Vf 1464 ^ Vg 2 40 M Vg 1951 N Vh 2771 0 Vi 1402 p Vj 2891 q Vk 1520 R VI 911 207 0 tc Figure Figure Designation 14 Buttons Taxonomic Designation (Actual Size) Catalog ^ Number, MS A CIII# SA, Tl, Vm 2184 B Vn 2457 q Vo 578 D T2, Va 812 E T3, Va 759 F Vb 2642 G T4, Va 1853 H T5, Va 2699 X Vb 1 j Vc 1025 K Vd 2512 L Ve 1 H Vf 1427 N Vg 2821 O Vh 2606 P Vi 1399 Figure 15 Figure Designation A Buttons Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS SA, T5, Vj 3331 B Vk 364 C VI 645 D Vm 244 E Vn 813 F Vo 2000 G T6, Va 1 H Vb 267 I Vc 657 Cat. 1, Va 1687 K Va 460 L Vb 2390 SA, Tl, Va 1 J M N CIII, (Actual Size) CIII, CIV, SB, Tl, Va 2643 O Va 1282 P T2, Va 1 Q T3, Va 2323 R T4, Va 2085 S T5, Va 1954 T Vb 1144 U Vc 1356 o Figure 16 Figure Designation Catalog Number, MS Figure Designation SB, T5, Vd 554 S Cat. 2, Tl, Va 2269 B Ve 267 T Cat. 3, SA, Tl, Va 1 C Vf 4 U Vb 2834 D Vg 587 V SB, Tl, Va 1416 E Vh 1470 N Vd 2828 F Vi 1776 X Vd 2623 G Vj 1 Y Ve 2214 SA, Tl, Va 978 Z Vf 1416 I Vb 1 AA Vg 1240 J Vc 1 BB Vh 21 SA, Tl, Va 200 CC Vi 1820 L Va 3082 DD Vi 432 M Vb 3052 EE Vj 1 N Vb 3448 FF Vh 889 0 Vc 2031 GG Vk 2884 P Vc 3391 HH VI 2461 Tl, Va 1930 II Vm 2369 T2, Va 344 A H K Q R Taxonomic Designation Buttons (Actual Size) CIV, CV, CVI, Cat. 1, Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS amm% K V ( ) 2 Figure 17 Catalog Number, MS Buttons (Actual Size) Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation A Cat. 3, SB, Tl, Vh 1 R Vcc 741 B Vo 894 S Vdd 2519 C Vo 1633 T vee 1 D Vp 1320 U Vff 1 E Vq 1 V Vgg 1019 F Vr 1 W Vhh 189 G Vs 2536 X Vii 203 H Vt 2571 Y Vj j 1 I Vu 2834 Z Vkk 2675 J Vu 528 AA vil K Vv 2337 BB Vnm 3104 L VW 534 CC Vhn 1066 M Vx 901 DD Voo 1 N vy 1266 EE Vpp 2177 0 Vz 1 FF Vqq 1428 P Vaa 1 GG Vrr 1724 Q Vbb 1 HH Vss 1 Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS 215 Figure 18 Buttons (Actual Size) Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS A Cat. 3, SB, Tl, Vtt 297 B Vuu 1 C Vw 1 D T2, Va 2472 E Vb 1947 P Vc 3242 G T3, Va 3335 H Va 1 I Vb 1 J K T4, Va Vb 3 2548 L T5, Va 422 M Vb 3314 N Vc 1493 m m D EjK ■ M H w H A TABLE 10 _ Frequency Buttons: Feature Associations Feature m . _. Association 297 243 262 265 262 296 263 262 299 296 300 365 227 298 292 21 118 263 54 87 297 21 82 79 210 296 262 117 3 Taxonomic ^ Designation Cl, CII, Va Va Va Va Va Va Vd Vd Vd Vd Vd Ve Ve Vh Vh Vi SD, T4, Vb Vb Vb SA, Tl, Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Frequency 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 16 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 cia' 151 18 299 348 118 267 79 254 141 229 16 85 215 85 267 85 262 216 lie 262 80 142 77 85 271 80 54 296 TABLE 10 ( Cont.) Taxonomic Designation SC, Tl, T2, SD, Tl, T2, SE, Tl, Feature Association 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 118 144 20 222 83 254 248 324 21 267 79 209 93 118 112 203 235 248 79 118 296 267 85 267 85 83 20 101 262 Taxonomic _ Designation T2, Va SA, Tl, Va Vg Vh Vj T2, Va T5, Vd Vi Vm Vo T6, Va Vb Ve CIII, Cat. 1, Va Va Vb Vb Vb CIV, SA, Tl, Va Va Va SB, T5, Va Va Ve CIV, Cat. 1, Va Va Va Va CV, SA, Tl, Va CIII, „ Frequency 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Feature _ . Association 148 297 21 281 299 118 267 85 21 226 118 21 265 85 21 246 118 209 79 82 81 213 80 21 21 85 216 79 21 219 SB, Tl, Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Frequency Frequency ■* Feature . . .. Association Taxonomic ^ Designation 267 85 21 26 296 20 267 79 16 262 21 85 21 Cat. 3, SB, Tl, Va Vd Vd Vd Vd Ve Vf Vs Vv Vdd Vss Vtt T5, Vb „ Frequency cia' 83 254 296 94 83 262 85 267 229 267 20 85 296 BUCKLES Buckles of many different types have been described in the literature (see, for example, Calver and Bolton 1959: Hume 1979: 84*88; Smith 1965: Klinger and Wilder 1967: 221*222; Noel 67, 115; Peterson 1968 : 20-22). 76 , 230*231; In these sources, the following terms are variably applied to buckles of different size, shape, func­ tion, and construction: and harness. shoe, spur, belt, knee, hat, baldric, stock, Distinctions between these forms have been made on a highly subjective basis; both size and shape have been the most im­ portant criteria for determining types. Since distinctions such as these are less critical in order of interpretative importance than the determination of either date or nationality of use, little attempt has been made to objectively distinguish these forms. in size in an approximate manner as follows: medium (stock and knee), and small (spur). They may be ranked large (shoe and belt), All of these sizes are represented in the Fort Michilimackinac sample of 419 buckles, buckle parts, and fragments. Harness buckles have been identified and are briefly noted in Part 2 of Appendix B. Classification and Description: The following attributes were recognized in the classification of buckles: 1. Form and articulation of buckle elements. Buckle elements in­ clude the frame, a hinge bar (either movable or cast as part of the frame), a hook (movable part which is attached to the hinge bar and which serves to permanently secure leather or 221 222 strap to buckle), and a tongue (prong which temporarily se­ cures a loose strap end to the buckle). Each of these elements are not present on all buckles. 2. Shape of frame and movable elements. 3. Material. 4. Decoration, usually defined by molded or inset design elements. 5. Size, refers to frame length and width and hook width. Addi­ tional dimensions such as hook and tongue length are presented when applicable. Four levels of taxonomic distinction are based on these attri­ butes: (1) class— distinguished by differences in the means of attach­ ing buckle to leather or strap; (2) series— distinguished by the form of different elements of attachment; (3) type— distinguished by a com­ bination of decoration and attachment element shape; and (4) variety— distinguished by frame decoration and/or shape of attachment element. The above formal distinctions apply to complete buckles. A second classification has been devised for the description of buckle frames. Series are distinguished by shape differences; types are dis­ tinguished by material differences; and varieties are distinguished by differences in size and decoration. The following buckle descriptions are based on these two sys­ tems of classification. Information on distributional and comparative evidence is presented in the descriptive context where applicable. 223 Table 15 lists buckle feature associations. Buckle measurements are presented in the context of individual type descriptions. gory 1 buckle measurements are presented in Table 14 . Cate Refer to illustrations for detailed information on decoration. Class I Hook Attachment All Cl buckles have a movable hook element attached to a pin or hinge bar, as well as a movable tongue element which is attached to the same hinge bar at the center of the hook. The hook element perma­ nently secures the leather or strap; the tongue element ten$>orarily secures the loose strap end while in use. All Cl specimens are curved between the ends. Cl series are defined by different forms of these elements for attachment. Series A Single Prong Hook with Single Tongue Series A specimens exhibit a hook which bears 1 prong on its distal end; this prong projects toward the inside of the buckle frame and hook. Type 1 Oval (or rectangular with rounded c o m e r s ) ; iron frame; iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 19 A 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 42.3; frame width, 32.8; maximum hook width, 29.7. Type 2 Rectangular brass frame, brass hook, iron tongue and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 19 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : frame length, 38.4; frame width, 30.5; maximum hook width, 36.8. 224 Type 3 Rectangular iron frame; iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 19 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 47.1; frame width, 31.5; maximum hook width, 27.0. Type 4 Rectangular brass frame, brass hook and tongue, iron hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 19 d 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 40.0E; frame width, 28.1; maximum hook width, 28.1. Series A, Category 1 This category consists of hook elements used with Cl, SA buckles. Varieties are distinguished by hook shape and material and are pre­ sented in a tabular format (Table 11 }. TABLE 11 Buckle Descriptions: Class I, Series A, Category 1, Varieties a through g -1 Taxonomic Designation Frequency Maximum Hook Width Cl, SA, Cat. 1, Va 4 38.OE, 38.5, 36.4, 42.OE 19 E Iron, convex hook end, concave hook sides. Vb 2 26.4, 31.8 19 F Iron, flat hook end, slightly concave hook sides. Vc 4 43.5, 42.9E, 34.0 19 G Iron, flat hook end, concave, hook sides Vd 1 40.8 19 H Iron, flat hook end, sli<£itly concave hook sides. Ve 1 31.4 19 I Brass, flat hook end, concave hook sides. Vf 4 23.0, 29.2, 26.8 19 J Iron, flat hook end, slightly concave hook sides. Vg 2 27.4, 29.OE 19 K Iron, flat hook end, slightly concave hook sides. Figure Comments 225 226 Series B Double Prong Hook and Double Prong Tongue Type 1 Rectangular, brass frame; iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 19 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 53.1; frame width, 42.6; maximum hook width, 33.8. Type 2 Rectangular brass frame; iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 19 M 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 45.OE; frame width, 40.0; maximum hook width, 34.5E. Type 3 Rectangular brass frame with rounded comers; hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a iron Decorated. Figure 19 N 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 57.2; frame width, 47.1; maximum hook width, 39.2E. Type 4 Rectangular iron frame with rounded comers; iron hook and hinge bar, tongue missing Variety a Undecorated. Figure 19 O 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 51.3; frame width, 42.0; maximum hook width, 36.8. Type 5 Rectangular brass frame with rounded comers; iron hook and hinge bar, tongue missing Variety a Undecorated. Figure 19 P 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 64.OE, frame width, 49.5; maximum hook width, 39.6. 227 Series B, Category 1 SB, Cat. 1 consists of hook elements attributable to Cl, SB buckles. SB, Cat. 1 varieties are presented in a tabular format (Table 12 ). TABLE 12 Buckle Descriptions: Taxonomic Designation Frequency Class I, Series B, Category 1* Varieties a through 1 Maximum Hook Width Figure Comments 8 41.6 (average) 19 Q-R 1 brass, 7 iron specimens; convex hook end, and concave sides. Vb 2 35.4 19 s Iron, convex hook end, concave sides Vc 2 34.5E 19 Iron, convex hook end, concave sides Vd 1 42.3 19 u Iron, nearly flat hook end, concave sides Ve 2 40.7 19 V Iron, flat hook end, concave sides Vf 11 41.2 (average) 19 W Iron, flat hook end, concave sides Vg 9 40.9 (average) 19 X Iron, flat hook end, slightly convex sides Vh 1 45.6 19 y Iron, flat hook end, slightly convex sides Vi 2 42.4, 43.4 19 Z Iron, flat hook end, concave sides Vj 1 37.8 19 AA Iron, flat hook end, flat sides Vk 1 37.9 20 A Iron, flat hook end, slightly convex sides VI 1 34.5 20 B Iron, flat hook end, slightly convex sides t 228 Cl, SB, Cat. 1, Va 229 Series B f Category 2 This category consists of 20 fragmentary Cl, SB buckle elements which can neither be assigned to Cl, SB types nor to Cl, SB, Cat. 1 varieties. See Figures 20 C-F for examples. Discussion: class I, Series A and Class I, Series B Cl, SA and Cl, SB buckles were confined on one distribution map for interpretative purposes. The majority of these specimens were found in one area of concentration south of the 220 grid line. This area includes both the SW and SSH rowhouse units and the surrounding garden areas. Several specimens were found in the area of the French guard­ house (F. 60) and in the NNW rowhouse unit. Specimens were absent in the Church and Priest's house area, in the NW rowhouse unit, and in British military structures. Feature associations (Table 1 5 ) sup­ port this distributional evidence* therefore, a broad date range of between 1740 and 1780 is suggested. Both stock, belt, and probably knee buckles are represented in this sample. Military usage is not indicated by the distributional evidence; however, it cannot totally be discounted. Series C Flanged (or Hinged) Hook, Single Prong Tongue Cl, SC buckles consist of specimens which have flanged hooks. Type 1 Rectangular iron frame with rounded comers; iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 20 G 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 27.0; frame width, 24.8; maximum hook width, 18.3. Variety b Undecorated. Figure 20 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 27.8; frame width, 22.5; maximum hook width, 16.5. This specimen varies slightly from Cl, SC, Tl, Va in hook shape. 2 30 Variety c Undecorated. Figure 20 I 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 26.6; frame width, 23.0; maximum hook width, 17.5E. This specimen's hook element has a central, heart-Bhaped hole. Type 2 Rectangular brass frame with rounded comers; brass hook and tongue Variety a Decorated. Figure 20 j 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 25.4; frame width, 20.4; maximum hook width, 13.5. The hinge bar on this specimen has been replaced with a brass straight pin. The tongue element is missing. Variety b Undecorated. Figure 20 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 25.0; frame width, 18.0; maximum hook width, 12.0. This specimen exhibits an iron hinge bar. Type 3 Rectangular brass frame with rounded comers; brass hook and hinge bar, iron tongue Variety a Decorated. Figure 20 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 23.9; frame width, 19.0; maximum hook width, 10.0. Type 4 Rectangular brass frame with rounded c o m e r s j iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 20 M 1 specimen Dimensions <1 specimen): frame length, 28.0; frame width, 24.0; maximum hook width, 14.8E. 2 31 Variety b Decorated. Figure 20 N 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen)* frame length, 44.6; frame width, 37.3; maximum hook width, 14.8E. Variety c Decorated. Figure 20 o 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 32.9. Type 5 Rectangular pewter frame with rounded comers; pewter hook, iron tongue and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 20 P 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 19.8. Type 6 frame length, 47.2; frame width, frame length, 22.6; frame width, Rectangular iron frame; iron hook, tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 20 Q-T 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 48.0; frame width, 33.2; maximum hook width, 19.0E. Variety b Undecorated. Figure 20 R 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen)* frame length, 28.4E; frame width, 21.6; maximum hook width, 13.2. This specimen is smaller than either Cl, SC, T6, Va speci­ mens and differs slightly in hook-end shape. Variety c Undecorated. Figure 20 S 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen)* frame length, 25.9; frame width, 19.1; maximum hook width, 12.3. This specimen bears a heart-shaped hole in the hook center. 232 Type 7 Rectangular brass frame, brass hook and tongue, iron hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 20 U 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 26.9; frame width, 20.9; maximum hook width, 14.0. Variety b Decorated. Figure 20 V 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 37.3; frame width, 26.0; maximum hook width, 19.0. Type 8 Rectangular brass frame, braas hook, iron hinge bar and tongue Variety a Undecorated. Figure 20 W 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 24.8; frame width, 19.1; maximum hook width, 14.3. Type 9 Rectangular pewter frame with rounded comers, pewter hook, iron tongue and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 20 X 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 24.1; frame width, 18.2; maximum hook width. Compare with Cl, SC, T5, Va. Type 10 Rectangular brass frame; iron tongue, hook, and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 20 V 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length, 23.3E, frame width, 29.6; maximum hook width. 233 Series C, Category 1 This category consists of Cl, SC hooks and tongue elements. Var­ ieties are distinguished on the basis of material and shape. Variety a Brass hook, iron tongue Figure 20 Z 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): (average). maximum hook width, 13.3 1 specimen bears an impressed mark— KP. Variety b Brass hook, iron tongue. Figure 20 AA 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c Iron hook and tongue, heart-shaped hole in hook center. Figure 20 BB 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety d Type 1 maximum hook width, 13.3. Iron hook. Figure 20 EE 6 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Series D maximum hook width, 18.1 Iron hook and tongue. Figure 20 DD 4 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety f maximum hook width, 17.3. Iron hook and tongue, heart-shaped hole in hook center. Figure 20 CC 7 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): (average). Variety e maximum hook width, 20.6. maximum hook width, 17.7. Flanged or Winged Hook, Double-Prong Tongue Rectangular brass framej iron tongue, hook, and hinge bar (hinge crosses longitudinal axis of frame) 234 Variety a Undecorated. Figure 21 A 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length* 38.0; frame width* 30.6; maximum hook width, 18.8. Type 2 Rectangular brass frame; iron hook, tongue* and hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 21 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): frame length* 38.0; frame width* 30.6; maximum hook width* 16.1. Variety b Decorated. Figure 21 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 25.7. Variety c Undecorated. Figure 21 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 24.4. Type 3 frame length* 29.6; frame width* frame length* 28.7; frame width, Rectangular iron frame with rounded comers; iron hook* tongue, and hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 21 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 22 .6 . frame length* 27.3; frame width, Series D* Category 1 SD* Cat. 1 consists of hook and tongue fragments which are used with Series D buckles. Varieties are distinguished on the basis of shape. Variety a Heart-shaped hole in hook center. Figure 21 F 3 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen) : maximum hook width* 14.6. 235 Variety b Refer to illustration for shape. Figure 21 G 3 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c Refer to illustration for shape. Figure 21 H 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety d maximum hook width# 20.8. Refer to illustration for shape. Figure 21 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Discussion: maximum hook width# 17.1. maximum hook width, 13.6. Class I# Series C and Class I, Series D All Cl# SC and Cl# SD specimens were contoined on a single distribution map for interpretative purposes. This contained distribution contrasts with that noted for Cl# SA and Cl, SB specimens. The major area of concentration is along both sides of the north wall of the earliest French stockade (F. 5). This area includes the NW rowhouse unit# the French guardhouse (F. 60)# and the area between the north wall of Fea­ ture 5# and the NNW rowhouse unit. The Church area also produced a significant number of specimens. Feature associations (Table 14 ) support this distributional evidence in indicating a French period date of between 1715 and 1740 to 50. Areas of low frequency or absence were the NNW, SW and SSH rowhouse units, and British military structures. Thus, hook form, the basic formal difference between Cl# SA and Cl# SB, and Cl# SC and Cl# SD specimens# is hi^ily significant when dating is attempted. Cl# SA and Cl, SB specimens (prong-hook form) have been dated between 1740 and 1780; Cl# SC and Cl# SD specimens (flange or winged hook form) appear to date between 1715 and 1740 to 50. There is also a correlation between hook form (prong or flanged) and buckle size. Prong-form hooks are very common on large buckle frames (such as, shoe, belt# or stock buckles)i flange-form hooks are common on smaller buckle frames (such as# knee# spur# or hat buckles). The dis­ tributional differences between the two forms may thus also be related to functional differences. Class I# Category 1 Cl, Cat. 1 includes Cl buckle elements which could not be assigned to a specific series. Three Cat. 1 types are noted; buckle frames with fragmentary hook and tongue elements» buckle hooks from either Cl# SC or Cl# SD specimens; and buckle hooks from either Cl# SA or Cl, SB specimens. 236 Type 1 Frames with fragmentary hook and tongue elements Variety a Undecorated; rectangular brass frame; iron hook and tongue elements. Figure 21 K 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): width, 43.2, 29.3. Variety b Decorated brass; rectangular frame with rounded comers; iron hook and tongue elements. Figure 21 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 34.4. Variety c frame length, 50.1, 39.2; frame frame length, 42.9; frame width, Undecorated; rectangular brass frame with rounded comers; iron hook and tongue. Figure 21 M 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 34.1. frame length, 44.1; frame width, This specimen may be a fragmentary example of Cl, SC, Tl. Type 2 Buckle hooks (Cl, SC or Cl, SD) Variety a Brass. Figure 21 N 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b Pewter. Figure 21 0 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : Variety c maximum hook width, 13.6. maximum hook width, 14.0. Iron. Figure 21 P 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : maximum hook width, 11.6. 237 Variety d Brass. Figure 21 Q 3 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety e Iron. Figure 21 R 4 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety f maximum hook width, 21.3. Iron. Figure 21 s 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 3 maximum hook width, 22.3. maximum hook width, 29.3. Buckle hooks (Cl, SA or Cl, SB) Figure 21 t -V 13 specimens (2 brass, 11 iron) Clews II Frame Bar Attachment Series A Hook Bar As Integral Part of Buckle Frame Series A specimens consist of a solid frame with a bar or hinge element between buckle sides. Both the leather, or strap, and the tongue were attached to this center bar. Type 1 D-shaped brass frame, iron Variety a Undecorated. Figure 21 H 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): 45.2. Variety b frame length, 37.9; frame width, Undecorated. Figure 21 X 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 24.2. frame length, 30.4: frame width, 238 Variety c Decorated; elongate D-shaped. Figure 21 Y 7 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): 75.7. Discussioni frame length, 41.0; frame width, Class II, Series A CII, SA specimens are thought to be military stock or belt buckles which were in use during the Revolutionary War period. Similar spe­ cimens from both Fort Ligonier, Pa., and Valley Forge, Pa., are illus­ trated by Klinger and Wilder (1967: 20). Their context at Fort Michilimackinac is restricted to the SSW rowhouse unit and to the garden area south of this unit. On this basis, a date range of between 1760 and 1781 may be assigned to CII, SA buckles. Series B Hook Bar Attachment This unit of classification may be formally inconsistent with CII series. CII, SB buckles consist of a 3-Sided frame and a hinge bar element between the frame ends. The hook-hinge bar ment apparently secured both the permanent and the loose ends leather or cloth strap. Type 1 Iron frame and hook-hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 21 Z 6 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): 20.7. Type 2 frame length, 15.1; frame width, Brass frame and hook-hinge bar Variety a Undecorated. Figure 21 AA 3 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): 18.3. Type 3 other hookele­ of a frame length, 12.0; frame width, Brass frame, iron hook-hinge bar Variety a Decorated. Figure 21 BB 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 19.6. frame length, 14.4; frame width, 239 The hinge bar on this specimen has been replaced with a brass straight pin. Class III Frame Bar With Metal Strap Attachment The single CIII specimen consists of a solid brass, elongated figure-8shaped frame with an integral central bar. A brass tongue is attached to 1 side of the buckle frame, and a brass strap is bent around the center frame bar. This strap served, in effect, as an extension of the center bar as a means of permanently attaching buckle to leather. Figure 21 CC 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class IV Frame length, 31.6, frame width, 38.4. Rivet Attachment Series A Riveted Hook Element Attached to Frame Type 1 Brass Variety a Undecorated. Figure 21 DD 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum hook width, 44.OE. This specimen consists of a hook element similar in form and frame articulation to hook elements characteristic of Cl, SA, and Cl, SB specimens. The hook element has 4 knobs or rivets which serve to permanently secure a leather strap. Series B Type 1 Rxvets Attached to Buckle Frame Brass Variety a Unde cor ated. Figure 21 EE 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 50.1. frame length, 31.lt frame width, This specimen represents half of a 2-part, hook-fastened buJckle. Each half consists of 3 rivets for leather attach­ ment cm 1 end and a hook-like lip on the other end which fastened the 2 halves together. 240 Category 1 Buckle Frames Cat. 1 consists of buckle frames and frame fragments. Hook and tongue elements are either missing or present but are too fragmentary for purposes of formal classification. Series are distinguished by dif­ ferent frame shapes. Types are distinguished by material, and var­ ieties are distinguished by decoration. The resultant Cat. 1 classi­ fication is presented in Table 13 • Table 13 also serves as a key to which the reader is referred for conparative data, since indi­ vidual variety descriptions are not presented. Table 14 presents the frequency and measurements of Cat. 1 buckle specimens. 241 TABLG 13 Buckle Category 1: Classification and Illustration Key Series A— Rectangular Frame Type 1— Iran Varieties a-i Figure 22 A-I 22 23 24 J-DD A-KK A-K 24 L-P 24 25 A-y Type 2— Pewter Varieties a-j 25 Z-II Type 3— Iron Varieties a-b 25 JJ-KK 26 A-r 26 G 26 H-J 26 K Type 2— Brass Varieties a-rrr Type 3— Pewter Varieties a-e Series B — Rectangular Frame with Rounded C o m e r s Type 1— Brass Varieties a-tt Q-JJ Series C— Oval Frame Type 1— Brass Varieties a-f Series D— D-Shaped Frame Type 1— Brass Variety a Series E— Elongate-Rectangular Type 1— Brass Varieties a-c Series F— Elongate-Oval Type 1— Brass Variety, a 242 TABLE 14 Taxonomic Designation SA, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi T2, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Vk VI Vta Vn Vo Vp Vq Vr Vs Vt Vu W VW Vx Vaa Vbb Vcc Vdd Vee Vff Vgg Vhh Vii 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Buckle Category 1, Measurements Frame Length Frame Width Taxonomic Designation 52.0 45.0 42.0 28.0 28.5 32.0 31.0 28.0 19.1 27.5 41.1 44.8 45.7 45.0 44. 3E 45.5 SA, T 2 , Vjj Vkk Vll Vnn Vnn Voo Vpp Vqq Vrr Vss Vtt Vuu Vw VWw Vxx Vyy Vzz Vaaa Vbbb Vccc Vddd Veee Vfff Vggg Vhhh Viii vjjj Vkkk Vlll Vnmzn Vnnn Vooo Vppp Vqqq Vrrr T3, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve SB, Tl, Va Vb 36.0 43.7 45.5 47.8 39.0 26.9 36.4 50.9 52.0 53.0 53.4 53.0 50.6E 25.8E 41.1 43.4 56.4 44.9 36.0E 30.2 33.0 32.7 29.5 38.6 32.0 30.2 29.1 40.9 47.7 44.9 45.5 45. 5E 29.0 28.7 51.0 1 1 1 1 1 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Frame Length Frame Width 45.0E 37.1 59. 0E 30.4 35.3 47.9 25.5 24.6 27.4 27.0 25.3 56.0E 52.4E 19.0 24. 3 20.0 19.5 46.5 49.0 48.5 46.1 43.0 40.9 27.0 64.0E 31.0E 27.9 47.4 46.4 24.0 36.0 40.4 243 TABLE 14 (Cont.) Taxonomic Designation Frame Length Frame Width Taxonomic Designation SB, Tl, Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Vk VI Vtn Vn Vo Vp Vq Vr Vs Vt Vu Vv VW Vx Vy Vz Vaa Vbb Vcc Vdd Vee Vff Vgg Vhh Vii Vjj 52.5 57.6 43.7 26.8 42.5 25.0 31.9 24.7 42.7 42.8 42.8 44.2 31.0 19.2 31.4 19.7 25.0 20.0 32.9 31.4 46.0E 47.0E SB, Tl, Vkk Vll Vmm Vnn Voo Vpp Vqq Vrr Vss Vtt T2, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj T3, Va Vb SC, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf SD, Tl, Va SE, Tl, Va Vb Vc SF, Tl, Va 50.2 40.7E 49.0E 43. OE 46. IE 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 Frame Length Frame Width 74. 2E 43.6E 49.6 30.0 46.8E 45.9E 37. 6E 26. 5E 21. IE 47.4 46.0 29.0 43.0 37.0 23.0 39. OE 34. OE 39.6 61.5 24.0 27.7 27.0 30.4 85.4 32.8E 32.8 33.5 51. 2E 33.0 32.0 34.0 35.0 35.0 244 Discussion: Category 1 Buckles The following varieties were manufactured of white brass or white metal: SA, T2, Vq; SA, T2, Vpp; SA, T 2 , Vqq; SA, T2, Vrr; SB, Tl, Vk| SB, Tl, Vl; and SB, Tl, Vm. Several varieties were made of silver plated brass (SB, Tl, Va and SB, Tl, V u ) . Site distribution of SA and SB buckle frames was compared, and no significant differences were noted between the two. Buckle frames produced of different metals were also studied separately; again, no significant distributional differences were noted between iron, brass, and pewter specimens. A combined SA and SB dis­ tribution indicates that Cat. 1 buckle specimens were found frequently in the NNW, SW, and SSW rowhouse units, and in the garden areas adjacent to these units. The area along the north wall of the earliest French stockade (F. 5, and including the NW rowhouse unit) produced fewer spe­ cimens . SA and SB specimens were nearly absent from an area between the NW and SW rowhouse units and within the British soldiers' barracks (F. 3). These areas of distribution are duplicated by feature associa­ tions (Table 15 ). This evidence supports a date range of between 1715 and 1781 for Cat. 1 specimens, although specimens were more fre­ quent in post 1735 to 1740 contexts. Discussion: Buckle descriptions above have been presented as briefly as possible in the context of a formally structured taxonomy. Only the major classificatory attributes have been described in detail. Second­ ary descriptive attributes have either been omitted or are defined very briefly. The limited conparative evidence available has not been used for interpretative purposes. Several inqportant observations have been made with respect to buckle dating and use. The form of buckle hook and tongue elements and buckle size appear to be very important attributes for dating purposes. Large buckle frames correlate with Class I, Series A and Class II, Series B hook and tongue element forms. Smaller buckle frames correlate with Class I, Series C and Class I, Series D hook and tongue element forms. Distributional differences between these two have been explained by a combination of chronological and functional factors. Class I, 245 Series A and Class I, Series B buckles appear later at the site (ca. 1740-1780); Class I, Series C and Class I, Series D buckles appear earlier at the site (ca. 1715 to 1740 or to 1750). This correlation between frame size and hook form and tentative dating is not supported, however, by the interpretation of Category 1 buckle specimens. Cate­ gory 1 specimens (including both small and large size buckle frames) appear to date throughout the period of site occupation. This anfci- guity cannot be explained on the basis of the small sample of complete specimens formally described. Figure Figure Designation A 19 Buckles Taxonomic Designation Cl, SA, Catalog Number, MS Tl, Va 2561 B T2, Va 840 C T3, Va 2335 D T4, Va 1954 Va 3331 E Cl, SA, Cat. 1, F Vb 379 G Vc 217 H Vd 2869 I Ve 1136 J Vf 1 K Vg 2233 Tl, Va 1 L Cl, SB, M T2, Va 2977 N T3, Va 2512 O T4, Va 2468 P T5, Va 496 Va 639 Q Cl, SB, Cat. 1, R Va 1929 S Vb 1 T Vc 1981 U Vd 1465 V Ve 2099 W Vf 1083 X Vg 1663 Y Vh 661 Z Vi 1 AA Vj 2052 247 A B C D E Figure Figure Designation A 20 Buckles Taxonomic Designation Cl, SB, Cat. 1, B Catalog 2 Number, MS Vk 2064 VI 3448 C Cat. 2 618 D Cat. 2 2130 E Cat. 2 3298 F Cat. 2 1 G Cl, SC, Tl, Va 1 H Vb 1460 I Vc 871 Va 1597 Vb 1352 J T2, K L T3, Va 972 M T4, Va 107 N Vb 1550 O Vc 795 P T5, Va 2369 Q T6, Va 1416 R Vb 1 S Vc 1235 T T6, Va 812 U T7, Va 657 Vb 1648 V W T8, Va 1243 X T9, Va 1482 Y T10, Va 2337 Va 1598 AA Vb 1 BB Vc 2259 CC Vd 1019 DD Ve 1910 EE Vf 695 Z Cl, SC, Cat. 1, 249 M K N 0 p & ® ® f if e s u m © iP w \\ Z £ A A BB R CC DD Figure 21 Figure Designation A Buckles Taxonomic Designation Cl, SD, Tl, B Catalog Number, MS Va T 2 r Va 819 1003 C Vb 2073 D Vc 2994 E F T3, Va 972 Va 1 Cl, SD, Cat. 1, G Vb 850 H Vc 147 I Vd 807 J Cat. 1, Tl, Va 1 K Va 286 L Vb 1 M Vc 1400 N Cl, Cat. 1, T2, Va 3116 O Vb 296 P Vc 1 Q Vd 1787 R Ve 2215 S Vf 3458 T T3 2520 U T3 589 V T3 1 W CII, SA, Va 2670 X Vb 170 y Vc 1433 Va 2371 Z SB, Tl, Tl, AA T2, Va 284 BB T3, Va 1 CC CIII 2438 DD CIV, SA, Tl, Va 46 EE SB, Tl, Va 2441 251 Figure 22 Figure Designation A Buckles Taxonomic Designation SA, Tl, Va Catalog Number, MS 2483 B Vb 2864 C Vc 1 D Vd 2974 E Ve 1 p Vf 694 q Vg 695 H Vh 1077 I Vi 1 j T2, Va 1 K Vb 1923 L Vc 1 M Vd 2038 N Ve 2838 O Vf 2904 p Vg 2553 1399 Q Vh 1019 r Vi 1152 S Vj 2050 T Vk 3246 U VI 532 V VI 2669 W Vm 137 X Vn 1026 Y Vo 143 Z VJp 2914 AA Vq 1451 BB Vr 1025 CC Vs 1882 DD Vt 2790 Figure 23 Buckles Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS A B C D E F G H 1 J K L M N O P Q R S T U V w X Y Z AA BB CC DD EE FF GG HH II JJ KK SA, T2, Vu Vv VW Vx Vaa Vbb Vcc Vdd Vee Vff vgg Vhh Vii Vjj Vkk 2064 2472 2324 2731 2078 3302 2668 2337 1501 3123 2268 2022 369 2411 343 970 1348 554 1545 2830 1684 1208 2606 2474 1961 1440 2855 1947 2029 1390 2857 1113 2642 2536 1416 2069 692 Vll Vmm Vnn Voo Vpp Vqq Vrr Vss Vtt Vuu Vw VWw Vxx vyy Vzz Vaaa Vbbb Vccc Vddd Veee Vfff Vggg «■ I.?i M N 1ri r i &*fc$ I ■t^DHLlWni Jp* Figure 24 Figure Designation A B C D E p G H X J K L M N O p Q R S X U v Vf X Y Z AA BB CC DD EE pp GG HH II jj Buckles Taxonomic Designation SA, T2, Vhhh Viii Vjjj Vkkk Vlll Varan Vnnn Vooo Vppp Vqqq Vrrr T3, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve SB, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj Vk VI Vm Vn Vo Vp Vq Vr Vs Vt Catalog ^ Number, MS 706 34 3123 1223 171 555 592 2247 1658 62 3 1640 1 1776 2844 1 1606 1154 1 2536 3107 1531 1969 1680 2084 3043 1546 2078 1 2916 1466 3466 546 1 243 1442 1915 257 Figure 25 Figure Designation A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB CC DD EE FF GG HH II JJ KK Buckles Taxonomic Designation SB, Tl, Vu Vv Vw Vx Vy Vz Vaa Vbb Vcc Vdd Vee Vff Vgg Vhh (not photographed) Vii vjj Vkk Vll Vmm Vnn Voo Vpp Vqq Vrr Vss Vtt T2, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj T3, Va Vb Catalog Number, MS 2712 1036 2427 2945 2337 3269 875 3482 2972 2430 1 2348 695 1507 1771 53 2608 2018 1018 2312 1908 1 2395 2492 1 2970 3045 2313 2828 2865 1706 2671 2305 114 2556 3431 1606 117 nrrrr^ H ' K ry^rr \ M "S N l M O R T ’ AA GG HH R B »B .-w 9_ _ r W n rC " S X ^ DD Y z 9™ * EE pF Figure 26 Buckles Taxonomic Designation HJCS.L f SC, Tl, Va 2034 Vb 1 Vc 1772 Vd 1 Ve 2144 Vf 1957 SD, Tl, Va 1 SE, Tl, Va 2513 Vb 1 Vc 2646 SF, Tl, Va 2480 261 A B C D 262 TABLE 15 Taxonomic Designation Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, Cl, CII, Frequency T2, Va SA, 1, Va SD, Cat. Vd SB, Cat. 1, Vg SB, Cat. 2 S B , Cat * 2 SB, Cat. 2 SB, Cat. 2 T4, Vb SC, Vc SC, T 6 , Va Vc SC, T 8 , Va Cat. 1, Vd SD, T2, Va Vb Cat. 1, T2, Ve Vf Cat. 1, T3 SA, Tl, Va Vc c m SA, SA, SB, SF, Buckle Feature Associations T 2, Vc Vd Vh Vj VI Vnm Voo Voo Vuu V w Vddd Veee Vfff T3, Vc Tl, Vd Ve Vi Vj Vr Vdd VII Vrr Tl, Va Feature Number 116 262 87 30 296 267 21 305 131 118 85 72 132 215 133 215 81 348 267 262 267 118 240 248 220 296 85 79 236 209 83 267 85 296 296 296 134 310 88 2 265 296 267 265 CUFF LINKS The 1959 through 1966 excavations at Fort Michilimackinac pro­ duced 143 cuff links and cuff link elements. The distinction between cuff links and buttons is based on size, consistency in eye shape, and style of decorative design. It is possible, when considering these distinctions, that several specimens identified as cuff links are, in fact, buttons. Several button types may also be cuff links. The classification and descriptive terminology applied to cuff links is similar to that used for buttons. Classes are distinguished by differences in the number of cuff link elements present. Series distinctions are based on the means of production and combination of elements. Types are based on material and/or shape. Varieties are based on minor shape differences, color of glass insets, and decora­ tion. The descriptive elements of a cuff link are the crown (or ob­ verse face), back (or reverse face), eye, set, and link, which joins two cuff links. The description of individual cuff link types is highly abbre­ viated since detailed illustrations accompany the text. measurements are presented in the text descriptions. Cuff link Cuff link fea­ ture, associations and coiqparative evidence are presented in the con­ clusions. Class I Feature associations are also summarized in Table 20 Single Element Back and Eye; Single Element Crown Series A Type 1 Back and Eye Cast as One Element and Brazed to Crown; Drilled Eye Round, slightly convex crown and back; brass 263 264 Variety a Raised geometric design on crown. Figure 27 A 1 specimen Dimensions <1 specimen): diameter, 11.9. The crown on this specimen has hollow spaces which are a part of the decoration. Variety b Cluster of raised dots on crown center. Figure 27 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Claws II diameter, 14.3. Crown, Back, and Loop Are All Separate Elements Series A Type 1 Back Cast Around Eye; Back Brazed to Crown Round, slightly convex copper crown; slightly convex white-brass back Type 1, Varieties a through f are presented in a tabular format (Table 16 ) since they differ only in crown decoration. The backs on all varieties are white braws and exhibit circumfer­ ential striations which are evidence of lathe finishing. All specimens have copper or brass wire loops around which the back is cast. The crowns on all specimens aure thin copper with raised or impressed designs. TABLE 16 Cufflink Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through f Taxonomic „ . Designation _ Frequency Number , Measured CII, SA, Tl, Va 1 1 27 C 14.8 Geometric design Vb 2 1 27 D 16.3 Floral design Vc 1 1 27 E 16.4 Geometric design Vd 1 1 27 F 15.3 Geometric design Ve 1 1 27 G 16.2 Geometric design Vf 1 1 27 H 15.3 Geometric design Figure Diamter „ Crown Design 265 266 Type 2 Round, flat brass crown; slightly convex white-brass back; brass loop Variety a Plain. Figure 27 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 3 Square with rounded comers; slightly convex crown and back; brass Variety a Floral decoration with four holes in back and crown; surface gilt. Figure 27 J 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class III diameter, 16.0. diameter, 12.3. Eye Plus Single Element Crown-Back Series A Crown Back Cast Around Eye Type 1 Round, brass, crown back and eye; flat crown; convex back Variety a Plain. Figure 27 K 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 2 Round, white brass crown back; brass eye; slightly convex crown; slightly concave back Variety a Impressed circle decoration on crown center. Figure 27 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Series B diameter, 16.7. diameter, 17.1. Crown Back With Eye Brazed to Back Type 1 Round, brass, crown back and eye; convex crown; con­ cave back Variety a Raised floral and geometric crown design; gilt. Figure 27 M 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): diameter, 12.4. 267 Variety b Raised floral crown design; gilt. Figure 27 N 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c Raised geometric crown design; gilt. Figure 27 0 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 2 Raised geometric and floral crown design; gilt. Figure 27 P 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Plain; beveled crown edges. Figure 27 Q 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Engraved letter T design on crown. Figure 27 R 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 1 diameter, 11.8. Octagonal, silver (or white brass) crown back; silver eye; flat crown and back Variety a Series C maximum length, 17.2. Square with angular comers; silver (or white brass) crown back and eye; flat crown and back Variety a Type 4 diameter, 12.2. Oval, brass, crown back and eye; probably flat crown and back Variety a Type 3 13.6. maximum diameter, 18.2. Crown Back With Eye Inset Round, ivory, crown back; brass eye; convex crown; flat back Variety a Plain. Figure 27 S 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): diameter, 12.3, 12.5. This specimen has a cast-brass eye which appears to have been screwed into the cuff link back. 268 Class IV Back and Eye Cast as One Element to Receive Glass, Crown Set Series A Cast Back With Drilled Eye, Inset Glass Crown Type 1 Round, brass, back and eye, convex back; seven projec­ tions on back rim to secure cut glass set Variety a Multifaceted clear glass set. Figure 27 U 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 2 diameter, 12.3. Round, pewter, back and eye: convex back; many small projections around back rim; cut glass set Variety a Clear, patterned, glass set. Figure 27 T 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b Clear, cut, star-pattern glass set. Figure 27 V 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c diameter, 12.4. Green, star-pattem, cut glass set. Figure 27 X 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety e diameter, 11.9. Green, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 27 W 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety d diameter, 13*3. diameter, 12.2. Blue, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 28 A 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): diameter, 13.3. Class IV, Series A, Type 2, Category 1 This category consists of 9 specimens which represent CIV, SA, T2 cuff link backs without sets and 14 individual glass sets. 269 Type 3 Round, brass back and eye* convex-concave lip or rim between back and glass set Variety a Clear, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 28 B 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens)] Variety b diameter, 10.2, 11.5, 12.2. Green, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 28 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 4 back; large diameter, 10.9. Round, brass back and eye; convex-flat back; small lip or rim between back and set Variety a Engraved intaglio floral design set bottom. Figure 28 D 5 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): 11 .8 , 11 .8 . onclear, glass- diameter, 13.0, 11.7, 11.7, Seven additional CIV, SA, T4, Va cuff link sets are repre­ sented in the sample. Variety b Blue, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 28 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c diameter, 11.2. Clear, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 28 G 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): diameter, 11.2. Claws IV, Series A. Type 4, Category 1 This category consists of 3 specimens which represent CIV, SA, T4 cuff link backs. Type 5 Round, braws back arnd eye; deeply cupped back with straight sides 270 Variety a Clear, cut glass set. Figure 28 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b diameter, 10.8. Clear, cut glass set. Figure 28 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): diameter, 10.7. One part of this cuff link has been lost and was replaced with a small, hawk bell. Type 6 Round, brass back and eye; shallow, slightly convex back Variety a Clear-glass set, with brown glass "brushed" design on set bottom. Figure 28 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): diameter, 12.9. Two additional sets from CIV, SA, T 6 , Va cuff links were found. Variety b Clear-glass set, with milky-white glass "brushed" design on set surface. Figure 28 J 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c Clear, faceted, cut glass set, with engraved intaglio design on glass set bottom. Figure 28 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 7 diameter, 12.2. diameter, 11.2. Oval, pewter back and eye; slightly convex back Variety a Clear-glass set, engraved with branch and leaf design on set surface; yellow glass, stripe inset on surface. Figure 28 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum length, 13.8E. 271 Variety b Clear, faceted, cut glass set. Figure 28 M 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum length, 15.3. Three CIV, SA, T7 sets and 1 back were also recovered. Type 8 Oval, brass back and eye; slightly convex back Variety a Opaque, red glass inset. Figure 28 N 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b Opaque, green glass inset. Figure 28 o 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class V maximum length, 14.9. maximum length, 14.9. Crown, Back, Eye, and Set Are Separate Elements Series A Eye Clanqped to Back, Back Brazed to Crown; Crown Con­ tains Set Only 1 CV, SA specimen has been recovered. The specimen is round with a clear glass inset, a ring-like crown element and a cupped back element. Metal identity is unknown. Figure 28 p 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class VI diameter, 14.5. Crown, Back, and Eye Are Single Element Series A Type 1 Cast Crown, Back, and Eye; Drilled Wedge-Shaped Eye Round, brass All CVI, SA, Tl varieties are described in a tabular format (Table 17 ) since they differ only in crown design and minor shape attributes. TABLE 17 Taxonomic _ . . Designation Cuff Link Descriptions: Frequency Number „ . Figure Measured Class VI, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through r Diameter Conments CVI, SA, Tl, Va 1 28 Q 14.8 Raised geometric design; flat crown and back Vb 2 28 R 13.4, 14.8 Raised geometric design; convex crown, con­ cave back 1 28 S 15.1 Raised geometric design; flat crown and back Vd 2 28 T 16.2, 16.2 Impressed floral crown design; flat crown and back Ve 28 U 15.0 Crown design of raised dots; convex crown, concave back Vf 28 V 12.3 Raised crown design of King George and letters GEO DEI.G; flat crown and back Vg 28 W 16.2 Raised crown design of John Wilkes and letters WILKES.AND.LIBERTY.NO.45; flat crown and back Vh 1 28 X 11.5 Plain, flat crown; concave back Vi 1 29 A 11.9 Raised crown design of Queen Anne, and letters ANNA D:G, flat crown and back 29 B 14.0 Raised floral crown design, flat crcwn and back Vj 272 Vc TABLE 17 (Coot.) Taxonomic Designation Frequen0y Number Heasored Pl?ure Dianeter Coment£ CVI, SA, Tl, Vk 29 C 14.3, 14.5 Raised floral pot crown design, flat crown and back VI 29 D 15.3 Raised geometric and floral crown design; flat crown and back Vm 29 E 13.5 Raised crown design of flat crown and back Vn 29 F 13.9 Raised floral crown design; convex crown and concave back Vo 29 G 16.2 Raised floral and geometric crown design; flat crown and back Vp 29 H 16.2 Raised pinwheel crown design; flat crown and back Vq 29 1 15.5 Raised geometric crown design; flat crown and back Vr 29 J 14.6 Plain crown with inpressed border design; flat crown and back 6, 5-pointed stars; 273 274 Type 2 Octagonal, brass All CVI, SA, T2 varieties are described in a tabular format (Table 18 ) since they differ only in design and minor shape attributes. TABLE 18 Cuff Link Descriptions: Number Measured Class VI, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through f Taxonomic Designation Frequency CVI, SA, Tl, Va 1 1 29 K 13.2 Impressed geometric crown design; flat crown with lip, flat back Vb 1 1 29 L 14.9 Raised geometric crown design; flat crown with lip, flat back Vc 1 1 29 M 13.2 Raised floral design; flat crown with lip, flat back Vd 1 1 29 N 15.1 Impressed geometric crown design; flat crown with lip, flat back Ve 1 1 29 13.5 Raised floral crown design; flat crown with lip, flat back Vf 2 2 29 P 13.9, 12.4 Raised geometric crown design; flat crown with lip, flat back Figure Comments 275 0 Diameter 276 Type 3 Round, pewter Variety a Raised, floral crown decoration; flat crown and back. Figure 29 Q 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Series B diameter, 14.1, 14.2. C u t Crown, Back, and Eye The majority of CVI, SB specimens have mold seams on the back; eyes are not drilled. Type 1 Round, pewter; eye attached directly to back Variety a Raised, floral crown design; convex crown, flat back. Figure 29 R 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b Raised, geometric crown design; convex crown, flat back. Figure 29 S 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety c diameter, 13.8. Raised, Spanish coin design with letters WIVTRA QUE VNUM. WR 1756 as crown decoration; flat crown and back. Figure 29 V 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 2 diameter, 16.2E. Raised, pinwheel, crown design; convex crown, flat back. Figure 29 T 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety d diameter, 11.2. diameter, 15.3. Round, pewter; eye attached to neck or shaft which is attached to back All CVI, SB, T2 specimens are described in a tabular format (Table 19 ) since they differ only in crown design and minor shape attributes. TABLE 19 Cuff Link Descriptions: Taxonomic „ , ., Designation Frequency CVI, SB, T2, Va 9 Number „ . Figure Measured Class VI, Series B, Type 2, Varieties a through g Diameter Comments 29 W 16.6 average Same crown design as CVI, SB, Tl, Vd; flat crown and back 1 29 X 15.5 Raised floral crown design; flat crown and back 1 29 Y 15.3 Raised geometric crown design; flat crown and back Vd 1 29 14.9 Raised floral crown design; flat crown and back Ve 1 29 AA 13.7 Raised geometric crown design; convex crown, flat back Vf 1 29 BB 14.8 Raised floral crown design; convex crcwn, flat back Vg 1 29 14.8 Crown design consists of raised dots at crown center; slightly convex crown, flat back Vb Vc 1 Z CC 277 9 278 Distributional and Associational Evidence: Locations of the three major cuff link classes (Class II, Class IV, and Class VI) have been individually plotted on the same distribution map. The combined pattern of distribution indicates that cuff links were very frequent in the SW and SSW rowhouse units and in the garden area north and south of the SSW rowhouse unit. Cuff links were less frequent, but present, in the NW and NNW rowhouse units, in the British soldier's barracks (F. 3) and in the garden area north of the NNW rowhouse unit. Cuff links were nearly absent in the central area of the early French stockade (F. 5) and in the Church and Priest's house area. Important differences were also noted between the distribution of each of the major cuff link classes. Class II specimens are found more frequently in the NW rowhouse unit. Class IV specimens occur most frequently in the wes­ tern portion of the SW and SSW rowhouse units and in the garden area between these unitsi Class IV specimens are present but less frequent in the area of the British soldier's barracks (F. 3) and in the French guardhouse (F. 60). Class VI, Series A cuff links were found most frequently in the SSW rcwhouse unit. (Table Cuff link feature contexts 20 ) support these tentative cuff link distributional asso­ ciations . Comparative Evidence: Class IV cuff links (with glass sets) have been reported by Calver and Bolton (1959: 226); Smith (1965: Pensacola, Florida; Noel Hume (1961: 69) from Santa Rosa, 382); and by South (1964: 279 124-125) from Brunswick Town, North Carolina. Noffl Hume suggests a date of between 1760 and 1780 for Class IV cuff links in general. The Calver and Bolton specimens most likely date from the Revolutionary War period. The specimen reported by Smith (Class IV, Series A, Type 5, Variety a_ should date between 1722 and 1752. Class VI, Series A spe­ cimens have been reported by Tunnell and Ambler (1967: mada, Texas; NoSl Hume (1961: (1950: 228). 63) from Ahu- 380-381); and by Calver and Bolton Noel Hume suggests a mid-eighteenth century date for a Class VI, Series A, Type 2, Variety a cuff link. Several Class VI, Series B, Type 1, Variety a cuff links have been reported by Calver and Bolton (1950: 228). Interpretations: This conparative evidence contributes little to the precise dating of specific cuff link types. Ncfel Hume, on the basis of a more extensive knowledge of cuff link use, has roughly defined a cuff link evolutionary sequence based on shape (1961: 383; 1970: 89). This sequence changes from the early, round shape to an octagonal shape (prior to 1760), back to a round shape, and to an oval shape (after 1750). This sequency can neither be supported nor rejected on the basis of the Fort Michilimackinac evidence. The following conclusions are tentatively suggested on the basis of the distributional evidence: 1. Cuff links were used throughout the period of site occi^ation and were more frequent after ca. 1740. Class II cuff links may have been used during an early period of occupation, ca. 1720 to 1740. Class IV cuff links were in use from at least 1740 until 1770 or 1780. Class VI, Series A cuff links were in use after 1750. Class VI, Series B specimens were in use after 1760. Figure Figure Designation A 27 Cuff Links (1:1.4) Taxonomic Designation Cl, Catalog Number, MS^ SA, Tl, Va 1 Vb 2 370 SA, Tl, Va 1399 D Vb 1071 E Vc 31 F Vd 1444 G Ve 538 H Vf 1935 I T2, Va 3301 J T3, Va 1678 SA, Tl, Va 1318 L T2, Va 3340 M SB,Tl, Va 1095 N Vb 265 0 Vc 2646 P T2, Va 1885 Q T3, Va 1390 R T4, Va 151 S SC,Tl, Va 80 SA, T 2 , Va 1427 U Tl, Va 1196 V Vb 2268 W Vc 237 X Vd 782 B C K T CII, CIII, CIV, Figure 28 Figure Designation A Cuff Links Taxonomic Designation CIV, (1:1.4) Catalog ^ Number, MS SA, T2, Ve 1217 B T3, Va 2351 C Vb 1869 D T4, Va 1291 E Vb 242 F T5, Va 2628 G T4, Vc 1 H Vb 120 I T 6 , Va 1704 J Vb 2077 K Vc 1996 L T7, Va 271 M Vb 1402 N T 8 , Va 2073 O Va 2073 P CV, SA 1823 Q CVI, SA, Tl, Va 2607 R Vb 2152 S Vc 429 T Vd 106 U Ve 2536 V Vf 3344 W Vg 1344 X Vh 1942 284 m •o AO © O ' N Figure 29 Figure Designation A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB CC Cuff Links (1:1.4) Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS CVI, SA, Tl, Vi Vj Vk VI Vta Vn Vo Vp Vq Vr T2, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf T3, Va SB, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve T2, Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vg Vh 1196 2622 2568 1939 2243 1739 554 2475 1787 1120 1412 3317 2903 1242 1731 733 2591 182 2556 1482 2363 2245 1 304 827 2571 1482 290 593 . K M f t 287 TABLE T autonomic Designation CII# 20 Cuff Link Feature Associations Frequency Feature Number SA, Tl, Va 1 85 Vd 1 123 SA, T2, Va 1 296 CIII, SB, Tl, Vb 1 21 CIII, SC, Tl, Va 1 262 CIV, SA, Tl, Va 1 296 CIV, SA, T2, Ve 1 296 Ve 1 83 CIV, SA, T4, Vb 1 2 CIV, SA, T6, Va 1 104 CIV, SA, T 7 , Vb 2 262 CIV, SA, T0, Va 1 215 CVI, SA, Tl, Ve 1 267 CVI, SA, Tl, Vn 1 107 CVI, SA, Tl, Vp 1 265 CVI, SA, T 2 , Vc 1 267 CVI, SB, Tl, Vd 1 252 Vd 1 80 SB, T2, Va 1 297 CII, CVI, BEADS Three different functional categories of beads are described in this report: necklace beads, seed beads, and rosary beads. Each of these categories is classified and described separately since none of the three exhibit the same ranked series of diagnostic attri­ butes . The rationale for this categorization is functional, although attribution in each case is based on combinations of physical proper­ ties, such as size and material. Rosary beads are made of bone or ivory and are associated with religious activities. on strings as necklaces. as decorative elements. Necklace beads were produced to be worn Seed beads were commonly sewed to clothing The functional distinction between necklace and seed beads is difficult to prove although there is historical evidence to suggest that a distinction was made (see, for exanqple, the discussion of Natchez ornaments by Du Pratz, in Swanton 1911: 55-56). Although the physical distinction between necklace and seed beads is one of size, there is no set dimension which divides the two in all cases. The criterion used here is one of relative size; bead specimens of an intermediate, and thus problematical, size are evaluated in terms of the average dimensions of the bead type to which they correspond. If an intermediate sized bead is found to be of the same type as beads which have a small average size, then the particular specimen is classified as a seed bead. 288 289 If the same bead were found to be representative of a bead type which had a large average size, it would be classified as a necklace bead. In terms of size, the bead types which are most often in question fall within the following length and width ranges: 6.0 mm; width, 4.0 to 6.0 mn. length, 3.0 to Although this test does not work in all c u e s due to small sample size, it is felt that the results more closely reflect the size distinctions intended by the manufacturer. There are several excellent sources which describe the dif­ ferent methods of manufacturing glass beads. Jelks, and Newcomb 1967: 1965: 5-9. 134-138; Sleen 1967: These include: Bell, 22-27; and Woodward These methods are briefly described at this point since the distinctions between them are used as classificatory attributes. Two methods of manufacture may be distinguished in the Fort Michilimackinac bead sample: (1) the hollow-cane (drawn) method; and (2) the mandrel-wound (wire-wound) method. (Hoilow-Cane Method) The first step in manufacturing hollow-cane beads is to heat a mass of glass ingredients to a molten state. At this point, the mixture may be colored by the addition of pigments. A small molten blob or mass is then withdrawn from the furnace on a metal rod or glaBS-blowing rod. An air-bubble is introduced into this mass either by stretching and folding or by blowing air into the mass through a hollow blowing rod. Then a second rod is attached to the mass, and the two are pulled apart (drawn) to form a long glass tube. After the tube hardens, it is broken or cut into segments 290 from which small, bead-sized segments are later derived. The glass segments are then tumbled with a mixture of sand and ash which acts as a filler that prevents the hollow tube from collapsing upon heat­ ing. The segments are then retumbled in a mixture of sand and ash while the container is heated. The abrasive action of sand and ash combined with heat reduces the sharp-ended segments to a final rounded and polished bead form. Prior to drawing, additional layers of glass or colored glass rods may be added to the molten mass. These layers are added either by immersing the molten mass into dif­ ferent mixtures of semi-molten glass or by rolling the mass which has been smoothed over a second mass of semi-molten glass (Sleen 1967: 25). Colored glass rods are added to produce a striped effect upon drawing. If the drawing rods are twisted during the process, the colored glass insets will have a wound effect. (Mandrel-Wound Method) Mam dre1-wound beads are begun the same as hoilow-came beads, except that a pocket of air is not introduced into the molten glass mass. The solid mass is then drawn and allowed to harden. The length of solid glass rod is then broken into segments of a conven­ ient size for later reheating and forming. formed with a glass-blcwing lamp. The next step is per­ A short rod segment is heated and wound or folded around an iron or copper rod into the shape of a bead. Upon cooling, individual beads are removed from the rod and then are tunfcled in the way described above. Small circular striations generally occur on mandrel-wound beads; although on 291 specimens which have been highly tumbled and heat-modified, it is often necessary to view the specimens in intense light in order to define evidence of this method. The application of decorative ele­ ments, such as colored glass rods, is probably accomplished while the bead is on the metal rod and is still in a semi-molten Btate. Classification and Description: Necklace Beads The following attributes are recognized in the classifica­ tion and description of necklace beads; method of manufacture, structure or form, decoration, shape, color, size, and surface characteristics such as striations, and so on. Different methods of manufacture refer to either hollow-cane or mandrel—wound. Structure or form refers to the presence and composition of dif­ ferent layers of glass and/ox decorative elements. types of bead structure sure recognized: one layer of glass; of glass; Four different (1) simple, conqposed of (2) compound, composed of two or more layers (3) complex, refers to specimens which exhibit appliqu€ or insets; and (4) composite, refers to specimens which are both conpound and complex. This terminology is similar to that proposed by Bell, Jelks, and Newcomb (1967: 138), except for the addition of a new structure termed "conposite." Decoration refers to dif­ ferent elements, such as ceramic or glass appliqu£ and rods, which are added to the surface of a bead. Decorative elements are de­ scribed by shape, color, number, and size. Shape refers to the shape revealed in a longitudinal cross-section of a bead. ferent shapes referred to here are: The dif­ barrel, convex, convexo-elongate, 292 tubular, round, globular, doughnut, and conical. In certain c u e s it has been necessary to combine several shape categories for an accurate description. The shape attributed to a specific bead type is based on the average shape of all specimens within that type. This permits the classification of beads within a particular type when their shapes do not precisely correspond to the descriptive shape categories, but, when all other diagnostic attributes are identical. In addition, this procedure allows for shape variabil­ ity resulting from the lack of precise shape control during manu­ facture. Color distinctions are based on values printed in the Munsell Color Chart (Munsell Book of Color 1929-1942). Examina­ tion of specimens was made in artificial light of consistent in­ tensity. Several very dark, opaque specimens were examined under intense light. Size refers to the dimensions of length (distance between ends), width (distance across center), and bore diameter. Bore diameter has been gauged with drill bits calibrated in l/64ths of an inch and later converted to millimeters. istics are attributes such asx Surface character­ presence and shape of striations, presence and density of air-bubbles, evidence of tumbling, and degree of tumbling, evidence of twisting, and patination. Four levels of taxonomic differentiation have been defined on the basis of the above attributes! and variety. facture. the class, series, type, Classes are based on differences in method of manu­ Series are based on differences in structure. Types are distinguished on the basis of combinations of shape and surface characteristics. Variety distinctions are based on differences 293 in glass color, the number, color and form of glass appliquS, and on the degree of translucency. is violated in one case. This proposed ranking of attributes In Class I, Series C, Types 2 and 4, the degree of translucency was used to define types. Difficulty was encountered in attenpting to conpare the Fort Michilimackinac bead sample with specimens from certain other sites. In many cases, it was impossible to identify important attributes such as structure and color so that they could be objectively compared with our sample. Thus, a number of important bead collections from other sites have been disregarded in this report. It was determined better to omit these entirely rather than to construct a type synonymy on such a questionable basis. Beads described in the following re­ ports were used for comparative purposes: Webb and Gregory (1965); Bell, Jelks, and Newconb (1967); Stone (n.d.); Pratt (1961); Tunnell and Ambler (1967); Benson (1967); Ritchie (1954); Herrick (1958); Greenman (1951); Wittry (1963); and Quimby (1966). In several of these reports, only the fancy or elaborate bead types could be corre­ lated with those from Fort Michilimackinac since simple beads were often described with so little information that it was inpossible to conpare the two. All bead types are briefly described and interpreted below. Individual bead type descriptions consist of a summary of character­ istic physical properties, a listing of feature associations, and reference to comparative evidence if applicable. Feature associations are listed by feature number and frequency; detailed information on each feature is presented in Appendix A, Part II. Table 27 294 provides a bead type-comparative index» the specific Fort Michili­ mackinac bead types are identified, and their type designations, frequency, and suggested dates at other sites are listed. Refer­ ence to this table also provides all bibliographic sources for comparative sites. Interpretations, based on comparative evidence, feature associations, and general site distribution, consist of a suggested date and nationality of use. "Nationality of use" refers to the society responsible for the importation and distribution of specific bead types. The date assigned to each bead type reflects the known period of time during which the type was in use at Fort Michilimackinac and at other comparable sites. Dates which precede the establishment of Fort Michilimackinac (ca. 1715) are based on comparative evidence. Table 26. Bead type interpretations are summarized in 295 Class I Hollcw-Cane Method Series A Simple Construction Type 1 Convex shape Variety a Clear, trams lucent. Figure 32 A 7 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): length, 14.6-19.0, average, 16.2; width, 6.4-10.4, average, 8.2; bore, 1.7-2.2. Shape: convex to slightly convexo-elongate. Surface: slight patina. Distribution: random; no evidence for dating. Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. Variety b Turquoise (Munsell: 5/6), translucent. greenish-Blue, 2.5 B, Figure 32 B 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): length, 10.3-15.9, average, 12.9; width, 8.0-9.0, average, 8.4; bore, 1.2-1.9. Surface: highly polished, glossy. Distribution: F.89(l), F.358(1). Variety c Black, opaque. Figure 32 C 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.5. length, 10.0; width, 7.5; Surface: dull but relatively smooth. Interpretation: 1700-1740 based on interpretation of Bell, Jelks, and Newcomb (1967). Type 2 Convexo-elongate shape Variety a Dull, milk-white, opaque. Figure 32 D 421 whole specimens 119 fragmentary specimens 688 specimens in molten and semi-molten state Dimensions (100 specimens); length, 10.4-19.3, average, 13.9, standard deviation, 1.8; width, 6.5-12.0, average, 7.8, standard deviation, .80; bore, 1.4-2.4. 296 Shape: range from convexo-elongate through convex to almost barrel; some have slight longitudinal constriction through center. Surface: semi-glossy to smooth. Discussion: majority of bead ends are either lopsided or have small glass protrusion which has been snapped. Distribution: Two separate distribution maps were plotted for this bead type: one shows all individual specimens and fragments (Figure 30 ); and a second shows all molten specimens (Figure 31 ). The first map reveals a highly restricted and concentrated distribution of Variety a beads within three major areas: (1) in the area of the northwest c o m e r of F.5, the early French stockade, and the French rowhouse unit along the inside north wall of F.5 (ca. 30 percent of the sample); (2) in an area immediately south of the NW rcwhouse unit (ca. 12 per cent of the sample); and (3) in the center of the 5H French rowhouse unit (ca. 20 per cent of the sample). Variety a beads rarely occur north of the 110 line and south of the 240 line, both of which correspond very closely with the suggested north and south walls of the original French stockade, F.5. Other artifacts within features in these 3 areas indicate that the associated assemblages were primarily of French origin. The primary Variety a feature association within the SW rowhouse unit was F.208, a fireplace in 230L80. The second distribution map indicates that the majority of molten Var­ iety a beads were associated with this same feature. This suggests that the third house of this rcwhouse unit may have burned and destroyed a store of Variety a beads in the process. The areas between and to the west of these 3 areas of concentration yielded a significant number of Var­ iety a beads, although specific clusters were not identi­ fied. Comparative: French origin; widely distributed in North America. Interpretation: French, 1710-1750. The limited distribution of Variety a beads at the site indicates that they were not used late in the period of French occupation; thus, there is a suggested terminal date of 1750. The distribution of Var­ iety a beads further indicates that the NW and SW rowhouse units were occupied at the same time. Variety b Blue (Munsell: bluish Purple-Blue, 2.5 PB, 5/6), semi-translucent. Figure 32 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 16.8; width, 7.9; bore, 1.6. Surface: dull with minute longitudinal striations; faint rings encircle the ends. Cooperative: see Table 27. 297 Variety c Black, opaque. Figure 32 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 2.3. Surface: Type 3 length, 13.2; width, 9.0; glossy, glazed, slightly crazed; untumbled. Round shape Variety a Dull, milk-white, opaque. Figure 32 G 55 whole specimens 10 fragmentary specimens Dimensions (20 specimens): length, 5.3-8.4, average, 7.0; width, 6.9-9.6, average, 8.0; bore, 1.6-2.0. Shape; varies from round to semi-barrel. Surface: semi-glossy and smooth; tumbled. Discussion: essentially same as Cl, SA, T2, Va except for tumbling; size and degree of tumbling are distinguish­ ing attributes; both bead varieties probably produced at same time. Distribution: correlates highly with that of Cl, SA, T2, Va; Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1710-1750, based on site d i s t r i ­ bution and correlation with Cl, SA, T2, Va. Variety b Turquoise (Munsell: 5/6), translucent. Figure 32 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.7. greenish Blue, 2.5 B, length, 8.9; width, 6.8; Shape: semi-barrel with rounded ends. Shrface: glossy; partially dulled by use. Variety c Blue-green (Munsell: bluish Blue-Green, 7.5 BG, 4/6), translucent. Figure 32 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.7. length, 7.0; width, 6.0; 298 Shape: semi-barrel with rounded corners Surface: semi-glossy with numerous, minute, air-bubble pits. Variety d Dark-brcwn, opaque. Figure 32 J 28 specimens Dimensions (14 specimens): length, 6.0-7.8, average, 6.7; width, 8.2-9.9, average, 8.6; bore, 1.6-1.7. Shape: varies from round to semi-globular. Surface: dull; show considerable use wear; several specimens have circular striations around the ends. Discussion: 2 segments of 3 beads each are attached by small brass links; majority show wear concavity on ends produced by the links on which they were strung. Distribution: specific feature-artifact associations un­ clear; association appears to be French; 11 specimens in association with either F.60 (French guardhouse) or F.61 (British blacksmith's shop overlying F.60). Conparative: Variety d probably dates from first half of 18th century; see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1710-1750, religious function. Variety e Blue (Munsell: bluish Purple-Blue, 2.5 PB, 3.5/8), trams lucent. Figure 32 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Surface: Variety f length, 8.2; width, 9.1; bore 1.3. highly polished. Clear, translucent. Figure 32 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 8.2; width, 8.4; bore, 1.2. Surface: highly patinated which produces a silver-glossy (pearl-like) appearance; when patina is chipped away, clear, translucent nature of the glass is noted; glass body appears to be highly crazed. Type 4 Barrel shape Variety a Dull milk-white, opaque. Figure 32 M 10 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): length, 8.10-11.0, average, 9.1; width, 7.4-9.6, average, 8.4; bore, 1.5-1.9. 299 Surface: highly tumbled. Discussion: differs from Cl, SA, T2, Va and Cl, SA, T3, Va specimens only in shape and sizer this variety repre­ sents a highly tumbled style of Cl, SA, T 2 , Va (as does Cl, SA, T3, Va ) . Distribution: all 3 varieties have similar distribution at site. Comparative: Table 27 shows date range coincident with that of Cl, SA, T2, Va. Interpretation: French, 1710-1750. Variety b Dark brown, opaque. Figure 32 N 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): length, 6.6-11.5, average, 9.2r width, 8.0-12.2, average, 10.lr bore, 2.0-3.1. Surface: semi-glossy with considerable use wear. Discussion: several smaller specimens resemble Cl, SA, T2, Vd which have been identified as rosary beads. Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1710-1750. Variety c Blue (Munsell: bluish Purple-Blue, 2.5 PB, 4/6), translucent. Figure 32 O 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Surface: Type 5 length, 9.1} width, 9.1; bore, 1.9. semi-glossy with light, silvery patina. Tubular, fibrous structure, untuntoled Type 5 specimens exhibit a fibrous appearance. This character­ istic is produced by the presence of numerous small longitud­ inal air-bubbles which extend the length of the bead. There is a correlation between this structure and the absence of tumbling as opposed to presence of tumbling and the absence of a fibrous structure as in Type 6 which follows. It is sug­ gested that tumbling with heat would act to remove the noted longitudinal air-bubbles, thus producing a Type 6 bead. Variety a Clear, translucent. Figure 32 P 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 3.7} bore, 1.8, 1.2. length, 13.0, 15.0} width, 5.0, 300 Surface: glossy; numerous striations and longitudinal airbubbles; ends sharp and untumbled. Distribution: F.249 (1). Variety b Light blue (Munsell: 6/6), translucent. Figure 32 Q 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 2.7. Surface: Variety c Blue Purple-Blue, 10.0 B, length, 20.0; width# 4.1; glossy; ends sharp and untumbled. Lavender (Munsell: 7/4), translucent. Figure 32 R 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen); bore, 2.4. reddish Purple, 7.5 P, length, 18.6; width, 3.6; Surface: glossy; numerous air-bubble striations produce semi-translucent appearance; ends sharp and untumbled. Variety d Green (Munsell: translucent. Figure 32 S 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 2.1. yellowish Green, 2.56, 5/8), length, 26.0; width, 4.5; Surface: very glossy and polished; longitudinal striations less frequent than preceeding T5 varieties; ends sharp and untumbled. Variety e Dark brown, semi-opaque. Figure 32 T 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 3.9; bore, 2.8, 1.3. length, 17.1, 8.0; width, 4.8, Surface: semi-glossy; appear black under normal light; semi-translucent only under intense light. Variety f Figure 32 U 4 specimens Blue-gray (Munsell: purplish Purple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 4/8), translucent. 301 Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 12.5-14.14, average, 13.2; width, 3.9-4.9, average 4.5; bore, 1.7-1.8. Surface: semi-glossy with slight patina; longitudinal striations common on surface and throughout body, ends sharp and untumbled. Distribution: F.226(1) and F.220(1). Variety g Blue (Munsell: purplish Plurple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 3/10), semi-translucent. Figure 32 V 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 6.1; bore, 1.9, 2.1. Surface: tions. Variety h length, 19.2, 21.2; width, 6.0, dull; numerous longitudinal air-bubble stria­ Royal blue (Munsell: purplish Purple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 2/10), semi-translucent. Figure 32 W 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 13.1— 22.6, average, 18.8; width, 5.0-6.0, average, 5.6; bore, 1.1-2.0. Surface: glossy; longitudinal striations throughout bead and on surface; ends sharp and untumbled. Type 6 Tubular, tumbled Type 6 beads have rounded ends as a result of tumbling.Longi­ tudinal, air-bubble striations are rare. Variety a Blue-gray (Munsell: purplish-Purple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 4/8), translucent. Figure 32 X 8 specimens Dimensions (8 specimens): length, 10.6-14.6, average, 13.5; width, 4.0-5.2, average, 4.6; bore, 1.2-1.9. Surface: semi-glossy with slight patina; all ends slightly rounded. Distribution: F.81(1). Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1600-1700, based on interpretation of Benson (1967). Variety b Blue (Munsell: translucent. Purple-Blue, 5.0 PB, 3/12), 302 Figure 32 Y 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): length, 10.2-20.6, average, 16.8; width, 4.9-6.0, average, 5.3; bore, 1.3—1.7. Shape: slight longitudinal curvature on 3 specimens. Surface: semi-glossy to dull. Distribution: F.209(1) in association with artifacts which suggest French provenience. Interpretation: French, 1710-1750; based on context and associations with Cl, SA, T2, Va specimens. Variety c Royal blue (Munsell: purplish Purple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 4/10), translucent. Figure 32 Z 5 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): length, 11.9-20.8, average 17.9; width, 4.7-6.6, average, 5.6; bore, 1.2-1.7. Surface: highly-polished, glossy; a few longitudinal striations present in all specimens; ends show evidence of tumbling. Variety d Clear, translucent. Figure 32 AA 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1 .0 . length, 15.5; width, 3.2; bore, Surface: dull with slight patina; ends show evidence of tumbling. Variety e Light blue (Munsell: B, 7/2), opaque. Figure 32 BB 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1.5. Surface: Discussion: Blue purple-Blue, 10.0 length, 9.4; width, 4.2; bore dull; rare longitudinal striations; tumbled. Class I, Series A, Types 5 and 6 (simple, tubular). All specimens were plotted on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. The majority of specimens occur south of the 210 line in two areas of concentration: (1) within the central unit of the SW French rowhouse unit, and (2) in a garden area south of 303 The SSW rowhouse unit. Tentative evidence for French affiliation (as suggested for Type 6, Varieties a and b above) is derived from these di stributi ons. Type 7 Tubular, opaque, untumbled Variety a Red (Munsell: opaque. Yellowish Red, 7.5 R, 4/6), Figure 32 CC 10 specimens Dimensions (10 specimens): length, 12.7-61.9, average, 28.7; width, 2.8-3.5, average, 3.2; bore, 1.0-1.7. Surface: dull, slight patina; longitudinal striations common; ends irregular and appear to have been snapped without subsequent tumbling. Distribution: F.88(l). Type 8 Tubular,opaque, molded, twisted Variety a Red (Munsell: opaque. Figure 32 DD 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 2.6. Yellowish Red, 7.5 R, 4/6), length, 31.8; width, 4.2; Shape: square; twisted 1/4-turn. Surface: dull; numerous longitudinal striations; ends irregular. Distribution: F.85(l). Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1630-1760. Type 9 Tubular, fibrous structure, opaque Variety a Green (Munsell: opaque. Green-Yellow Green, 10 GY 6/4), Figure 32 EE 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length, 30.9-50.5, average, 39.1; width, 4.0-4.8, average, 4.4; bore, 2.2. Surface: dull, eroded. Distribution: F.88(2). Interpretation: French, 1730-1760. 304 Variety b Light blue (Munsell: greenish Blue-Green, 2.5 BG, 6/2), opaque. Figure 32 FF 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 3.0. Surface: Variety c dull, eroded. Yellowish white, opaque. Figure 32 GG 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.9. Surface: Variety d length, 33.9; width, 5.5; length, 18.4; width, 5.0; dull with irregular ends. White, opaque. Figure 32 HH 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 3.4; bore, 1.3, 1.3. length, 12.3, 11.4; width, 3.5, Surface: dull; 1 has small patch of white, opaque glaze, irregular ends. Type 10 Globular shape Variety a Dark brown, opaque. Figure 32 II 17 specimens Dimensions (17 specimens): length, 7.7-11.9, average, 9.8; standard deviation, .94; width, 11.4-13.9, average, 12.6, standard deviation, .73; bore, 2.6-3.0. Surface: varies from glossy to dull with patina; appears black except on fractured specimens where dark brown is noticeable. Discussion: Fairly uniform in size Distribution: F.209(2); F.227(1). Comparative: similar beads reported from Lasanen Site; see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1670-1750. 305 Type 11 Globular to barrel shape This is a problematical type designation varies from nearly doughnut to barrel to mens are very small in relation to other though they are longer than the majority Variety a because specimen shape globular. All speci­ necklace beads, al­ of seed beads. Blue (Munsell: bluish Purple-Blue, 2.5 PB, 4/6), translucent. Figure 32 JJ 15 specimens Dimensions (8 specimens): length, 3.0-5.2, average, 3.9; width, 4.4-5.6, average, 5.0; bore, 1.5-1.6. Surface: majority dull; several have heavy patina. Interpretations: French or British, 1750-1780. Variety b Light blue (Munsell: Blue Purple-Blue, 10.0 B, 5/2), opaque. Figure 32 KK 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 3.5; width, 4.3, bore, 1.6. Shape: barrel Surface: glossy; ends uneven and highly tumbled. Type 12 Multi-faceted, cut or ground surfaces; round to oblong Variety a Black, opaque. Figure 32 LL 7 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): 14.6; bore, 1.3-1.9. length, 8.9-20.2; width, 9.6- Shape: round to oblong; ends cut perpendicular to bead axis. Decoration: facets vary in shape and have either 4 or 5 sides; vary in number from 32 on small specimens to 40 on large specimens. Variety b Clear, translucent. Figure 32 MM 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.6. length, 10.2; width, 14.0; 306 Surface: very glossy. Decoration: 40 facets of varied shape and sizer have either 4 or 5 sides. Variety c Green (Munsell: Green-Yellow Green, 10.0 GY, 6/6), translucent. Figure 32 NN 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.3. length, 8.3; width, 9.0; Shape: ends cut perpendicular to bead axis. Decoration: 35 irregularly-shaped facets which have 4 or 5 sides. Variety d Clear, translucent. Figure 32 OO 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 7.3-9.2, average, 8.1; width, 8.8-9.4, average, 9.1; bore, 1.7-2.3. Surface: dull with slight patina; numerous air-bubble pits. Decoration: facets irregularly spaced and shaped; vary from 5 to 6 sides; occur only on median surface. Series B Type 1 Compound Construction Tubular, three layers Variety a Red (Munsell: opaque. Yellowish Red, 7.5 R, 4/6), Figure 32 pp 22 specimens Dimensions (12 specimens): length, 13.0-19.0, average, 13.4; width, 3.8-5.3, average, 4.2; bore, 1.1-1.6. Structure: center layer of light green, translucent glass; middle layer of red, opaque glass; outer or surface layer of very thin glass veneer. Surface: glossy and polished; numerous longitudinal striations; ends irregular and tunfcled. Discussion: referred to in literature as "Comaline d'Aleppo" style. Distribution: F. 248(1). 307 Type 2 Tubular, two layers Variety a White, opaque, tumbled. Figure 32 QQ 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): length, 10.4-20.5, average, 13.8j width, 3.4-5.5, average, 5.8; bore, 1.0-1.7. Structure: inner layer of white, opaque glass with numerous air-bubble pits; outer layer of clear glass veneer. Surface: tumbled. Distribution: F.296(1). Variety b White, opaque, untumbled. Figure 32 RR 7 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): length, 11.4-13.1, average, 12.3; width, 3.3-4.1, average, 3.5; bore, .9-1.3. Surface: irregular ends. Discussion: same as Cl, SB, T2, Va except that it has not been tumbled. Type 3 Doughnut shape, two layers Variety a White, opaque. Figure 32 SS 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length, 4.0, 3.4, 3.7; width, 6*0, 6.2, 6.0; bore, 1.5, 1.7, 1,5. Structure: inner layer of white, opaque glass; outer layer of clear glass veneer. Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: 1670-1800 (?). Series C Type 1 Complex Structure Convexo, opaque Variety a White, opaque; three sets of colored, striped insets, each composed of one blue and two red stripes. 308 Figure 32 TT 20 specimens Dimensions (11 specimens): length, 8.9-19.8, average, 14.7; width, 5.8-9.1, average, 7.4; bore, 1.3-2.0. Shape: varies from convex to convexo-elongate. Surface: dull on the majority. Decoration: 3 sets of colored glass insets; each is composed of 1 center blue stripe, bordered on each side by 1 red stripe; insets are straight and run the length of bead. Distribution: F.238(1), F.201(1), F.227(1). Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. Variety b White, opaque; three red, striped insets. Figure 32 UU 23 specimens Dimensions (12 specimens): length, 11.0-14.0, average, 12.7; width, 8.0-9.2, average, 8.4; bore, 1.2-1.8. Surface: dull; several specimens have irregular ends. Decoration: 3 equally-spaced, red stripe insets; each runs the length of bead. Discussion: irregular ends also found on Cl, SA, T2, Va; considerable variation between specimens in width and spacing of stripes. Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1680-1760. Variety c White, opaque; six reddish-brown, striped insets. Figure 32 W 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length, 13.8, 13.2, 13.9; width, 7.4, 7.8, 8.7; bore, 2.2, 1.7, 1.5. Surface: dull. Decoration: 6 equally-spaced, reddish-brown stripes; stripes spiral (1/4 turn) around bead between ends. Distribution: F.70(l). Cooperative: several recovered from other sites; see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. 309 Variety d White, opaque? four colored, striped insets, two green and two red. Figure 32 WW 6 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 12.3-17.3, average, 14.8? width, 7.2? bore, 1.2-1.7. Surface: dull and eroded. Decoration: 4 equally-spaced, colored glass insets which run length of bead? 2 green and 2 red alter­ nate. Distribution: F.209(1), F.227(1), F.3(l). Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. Type 2 Barrel, opaque Variety a White, opaque. Figure 32 XX 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 2.0. length, 11.9? width, 9.0? Discussion: same bead as Cl, SC, Tl, Vc except for the distinct barrel shape. Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. Variety b White, opaque? six colored glass stripe insets? alternating blue, red, and green. Figure 32 YY 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 8.0-9.8, average, 8.9? width, 8.7-9.0? bore, 1.9-2.0. Decoration: 6 stripes, 2 each red, green and blue, al­ ternating? stripes spiraled around end of bead in 1/8twist. Cooperative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. 310 Variety c Yellow (Munselli reddish Yellow, 2.5 Y, 8/10), opaque; four colored glass stripe insets, al­ ternating green and red. Figure 32 ZZ 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1.9. length, 5.5; width, 7.0; bore, Surface: dull. Decoration: 4 stripes, 2 red and 2 green, alternating; stripes equally-spaced between ends. Variety d Dark brown, opaque; six yellow stripes. Figure 32 AAA 1 fragmentary specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): than 9.2. length, 8.3; width, greater Surface: dull. Decoration: 6 yellow insets (number estimated); stripes equally-spaced between ends. Discussion: Class I, Series C, Type 1 and Type 2 All specimens were contained on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. The combined distribution of these specimens duplicates that of Cl, SA, T2, Va. This evidence confirms the dat­ ing of the individual varieties as between 1700-1750, French. Type 3 Globular, opaque Variety a Brown, opaque; four alternating, white stripe glass insets. Figure 32 BBB 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 10.0; bore, 2.6, 1.7. length, 8.0, 8.5; width, 11.0, Surface: dull and patinated. Decoration: 4 equally-spaced white insets which extend between ends. 311 Variety b Brown, opaque; five alternating white stripe glass insets. Figure 32 CCC 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): I.9. length, 8.8; width, 10.5; bore, DI b cussion: differs from Cl, SC, T3, Va only in the pres­ ence of 5 insets. Variety c Brown, opaque; six alternating white stripe glass insets. Figure 32 DDD 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): II.3; bore, 1.9-2.6. length, 9.2-13.4; width, 10.0- Discussion: differs from Cl, SC, T3, Va and Cl, SC, T3, Vb only in the presence of 6 insets. Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1700-1740. Variety d Brown, opaque; seven alternating white stripe glass insets. Figure 32 EEE 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 2.4. length, 8.9; width, 10.5; bore, Discussion: differs from other Type 3 specimens only in the presence of 7 insets. Distribution: F.83(l). Variety e Brown, opaque; eight alternating white stripe glass insets. Figure 32 FFF 15 specimens Dimensions (8 specimens): length, 7.0-8.6, average, 7.7; width, 8.7-10.8, average, 10.1; bore, 2.2-2.4. Shape: doughnut to globular; often lopsided. Surface: dull with slight gold patina; irregular ends; insets often raised slightly above the bead's surface. Decoration: 8 white glass insets which alternate between ends in a spiral (1/8-turn) design. 312 Variety f Brown, opaque; nine alternating white stripe glass insets. Figure 32 GGG 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 2 .6 . length, 5.5; width, 9.3; bore, Discussion: differs from Cl, SC, T3, Ve only in presence of 9 insets. Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1700-1740. Variety g Brown, opaque; three circumferential white glass insets. Figure 32 HHH 7 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): length, 6.2-10.8, average, 8.3; width, 9.5-11.1, average, 10.3; bore, 2.2-2.9. Shape: doughnut to semi-barrel Surface: dull. Decoration: 3 irregularly-spaced white insets which extend around circumference of bead; insets job irregularly and join at different intervals. Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretation: French, 1680-1750. Discussion: Class I, Series C, Type 3 All specimens were combined on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. Specimens seem to occur in three major clusters: (1) in the area of the northwest c o m e r of the first expansion stock­ ade (F.81); (2) in the area of the church and Priest's house; and (3) in an area immediately north of the French guardhouse (F.60). Evi­ dence concerning date or affiliation is inconclusive. Type 4 Barrel, translucent Variety a Turquoise (Munsell: greenish Blue, 2.5 B, 6/6), translucent; eight white stripe insets. Figure 32 III 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1.7. length, 7.4; width, 6.9; bore, Surface: dull. Decoration: 8 equally-spaced longitudinal white glass stripe insets. 313 Distributions F. 296(1). Comparative: see Table 27. Interpretations French, 1700-1760. Variety b Blue (Munsell: translucent. greenish Blue, 2.5 B, 5/2), Figure 32 JJJ 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length 9.0, 10.9, 7.8} width 7.2, 8.0; bore, 2.5, 1.7. Discussion: color is only factor distinguishing Cl, SC, T4, Vb from Cl, SC, T4, Va. Variety c Royal blue (Munsell: purplish Purple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 3/10), translucent} eight white stripe insets. Figure 32 KKK 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 2.4. length, 12.2} width, 8.0} bore Discussion: again, differs in color only from previous 2 varieties. Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1700-1760. Variety d Green (Munsell: Blue-Green Blue, 10.0 BG, 7/4) , trams lucent} eight white stripe insets. Figure 32 LLL 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 1.6. length, 10.0} width, 7.0; Discussion: differs from other T4 varieties only in color. Interpretation: French, 1700-1760. Type 5 Round, trams lucent Variety a Blue (Munsell: trams lucent. Figure 32 MMM 1 fragmentary specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): greenish Blue, 2.5 B, 5/2), length, 7.9} width, 8.2} bore, 1.5. Shape: round. Discussion: differs from Cl, SC, T4, Vb in shape only. Interpretation: French, 1700-1760. 314 Variety b Blue green (Munsell: 6/6), translucent. Figure 32 NNN 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1. 6 . greenish Blue# 2.5 B, length# 7.3; width, 7.3; bore, Discussion: distinguished from Cl# SC# T5, Vb on the basis of color only. Distribution: F.238(1) . Interpretation: French# 1700-1760. Variety c Turquoise (Munsell: greenish Blue# 2.5 B, 5/4)#semi-translucent; three (?) sets of colored stripe insets# each composed of one red with a bordering white stripe. Figure 32 OOO 1 fragmentary specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1.7. length# 9.5; width# 8.2; bore# Surface: dull# eroded. Decoration: 3(?) sets of longitudinal colored insets; each conqposed of a center red stripe bordered by white stripes. Distribution: F.254(1). Type 6 Round, opaque Variety a Black, opaque; three sets of patterned white glass insets. Figure 32 PPP 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1 .6 . * length# 11.4; width, 10.9; bore, Surface: dull. Decoration: 3 sets of white glass insets; sets resemble floral pattern with angular (swirled) branches running between ends. Type 7 Tubular, opaque Variety a White# opaque; three sets of glass insets# each composed of one red, yellow# and blue stripe. 315 Figure 3 2 QQQ 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 16.9*24.9, average, 20.7; width, 5.4-6.9, average, 6.1} bore, 1.9-3.0. Surface: dull with glossy insets. Decoration: 3 sets of longitudinal, twisted (1/4-turn) stripe insets; each inset consists of 1 center yellow stripe bordered by 1 blue and 1 red stripe. Distribution: F.54(l). Variety b Blueish white (Munsell: Blue, 5.0 B, 8/2), opaque; three sets of glass insets, each com­ posed of one red, yellow, and blue stripe. Figure 3 2 RRR 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 9.4; width, 6.9; bore, 1.6. Discussion: distinguished from Cl, SC, T7, Va only by color. Distribution: F.209(1). Variety c White, opaque; three sets of glass stripe insets, each conposed of one center silver-blue stripe bordered by red stripes. Figure 32 SSS 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1. 3. length, 17.2; width, 5.6; bore, Surface: dull, eroded; slight patina. Decoration: 3 sets of longitudinal twisted (1/2-tum) glass stripe insets; insets consist of 1 center silver-blue stripe bordered by red stripes. Variety d White, opaque; three red glass stripe insets. Figure 32 TTT 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): length, 13.3-15.5, average, 14.7; width, 3.8-4.6, average, 6.1; bore, 1.3-1.7. Surface: eroded appearance because of numerous longitudinal striations. Decoration: 3 equally-spaced longitudinal red stripes. Distribution* F.70(l), F.138(1). Interpretation: French, 1700-1750. 316 Variety e Blue (Munsell: bluish-Purple-Bluer 2.5 PB, 4/6)r opaque; six sets of glass stripe Insets, each set consists of one red and two white stripes. Figure 32 UUU 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length, 18.0, 16.6, 17.5; width, 6.2, 6.3, 5.8; bore, 2.0, 1.9, 2.1. Surface: dull, numerous faint longitudinal striations. Decorations: 6 equally-spaced sets of colored glass stripe insets; sets consist of 1 red stripe bordered by white stripe on each side. Variety f Blue (Munsell: bluish Purple-Blue, 2.5 PB, 4/4), opaque; five (?) sets of glass stripe insets, each set consists of one red and two white stripes. Figure 32 V W 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1.9. length, 17.5; width, 6.5; bore, Discussion: may be an additional specimen of Cl, SC, T7, Ve; basic color and surface appearance appear to be slightly different; longitudinal striations much more noticeable than in Cl, SC, T7, Ve; decorative elements differ only in the number of sets present, although this may be a result of erosion or variation in manu­ facture . Discussion: Class I, Series C, Type 7 All specimens were combined on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. The only significant cluster of Type 7 specimens occurs in the central unit of the SW French rowhouse unit. Associa­ tions within this particular unit suggest French affiliation. On this basis. Type 7 specimens are tentatively interpreted as French. Type 8 Tubular, translucent Variety a Blue-gray (Munsell: bluish Purple-Blue, 2.5 PB, 6/2), translucent; three (?) sets of striped glass insets, each consists of one red and two white. Figure 33 A 2 fragmentary specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 4.0; bore, 1.1, 1.5. length, 16.4, 7.7; width, 4.6, 317 Surface: gloBsy with faint longitudinal striations. Decoration: 3(?) sets of insets: 1 center red strip bordered on both sides by 1 white stripe. Distribution: F.210(1). Series D Compound-Complex Structures Type 1 Tubular, three layers of glass Variety a Red (Munsell: Yellowish Red, 7.5 R, 5/6), opaque: inner layer: light green, trans­ lucent, center layer: red, opaque: outer layer: clear glass veneer: three sets longitudinal glass insets, each of one center dark red stripe, with one white stripe on each side. Figure 33 B 22 specimens Dimensions (22 specimens): Length, 7.9-18.0, average, 14.9, standard deviation, 2.6: width, 2.8-4.8, average, 3.9, standard deviation, .49: bore, .80-1.9. Structure: 3 layers of glass (see above). Surface: dull with frequent longitudinal striations: patina. Decoration: 3 sets of longitudinal insets: each consists of dark red stripe flanked by white stripes. Discussion: referred to in literature as "Comaline d'Aleppo." Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1650-1750. Type 2 Tubular, two layers of glass with longitudinal insets Variety a White, opaque. Figure 33 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 2. 0 . length, 14.5: width, 6.9: bore, Structure: inner layer: white, opaque: outer layer: clear glass veneer. Surface: glossy: longitudinal insets removed by erosion. Discussion: longitudinal surface insets are assumed because of presence of a deep longitudinal surface groove: this type of groove characterizes beads on which insets have been removed through eroAion. 3X8 Type 3 Tubular, two layers with grooves Variety a Blue and white, opaque; two layers; inner: white opaque; outer: red opaque; red layer covered with blue and white longitudinal glass insets. Figure 33 D 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 6.0; bore, 1.9-1.8. length, 15.0, 13.8; width, 7.0; Structure: inner layer: opaque, porous, white glass; outer layer: opaque, red glass. Discussion: red layer has an irregular cross-sectional which resembles a gear with angular, pointed teeth; the grooves between the exterior teeth are filled with longitudinal white and blue glass insets. Class II Mandrel-Wound Method Series A Simple Construction The shapes of several types in this series have been modified by molding or press-faceting during manufacture. Evidence of facet­ ing or molding is thus more important in distinguishing between types than is shape. Type 1 Faceted,eight five-sided All Type 1 bead varieties exhibit eight, five-sided pressed facets. A series of four facets encircle each bead end and join at the center to form an apex, or line of maximum cir­ cumference. The two rows of facets are normally offset. Bead shapes vary, depending on degree of facet modification from oval, through round, to elongate. All specimens exhibit circumferential surface striations, indicative of the mandrelwound technique of manufacture. All specimens are semitranslucent to translucent. The major distinguishing feature between Type 1 varieties is color; therefore, all Type 1 specimens can be described in a tabular format (Table 21 )* TABLE 21 Clan 11, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through j Beads* Description and Metrics Length Hangs Color Designation 11 e Width ? Mn9* * < Visual ! s. rpe 1 Va 20 7 6(1) Blue 7.5-11.1 purplish VurpleBlue, 7.5 fft, 3/10 9.1 11.0-12.0 11.4 3.0 33 E Dull surface patinai seni-transluceat. 13.4 3.1-3.4 33 r Dull surfacei seni-tranalucent 33 0 Glossy surface patiaai traaalucaati elongated shape. 33 ■ Glossy surface! translucent. 33 I Dull, (halt-white surface fron dscovcsiticni seai-translucant. ft S 5 BSU) Blue-grey pwplish Tuple* Blue, 7.5 n, 3/2 7.2-IB.9 Vc 3 3 Turquoise greenish Blot, 2.5 B, 5/6 IB.5, 10.7, 20.0 12.6, 9.B. 12.7 Vd 1 1 Crean 6raan. 5.0 e, 6/4 5.5 9.2 Ve 2 2 TallowBed Telloa io.o tm, 5/io B.2, 14.5 11.4, 17.B Tallow-Mad Tallow, 1 0 .0 n , 6/4 5.5-11.0 8,6 6.4-14.0 10.3 2.6-3.4 33 J Dull to glossy surface, saveral eptclaena vary glossy with greasy feeling, others dull. reddish Tallow, 2.5 T. B/B B.3-10.0 9.1 9.0-11.6 10.2 3.4 33 E Dull, tdulA-white surfaoei sani-translucent. Clear 7.2-15,2 10.0 10.5-14.7 11.7 2.3-3.4 33 L Dull with patlea to glossy-greasy surface! traaelooaat; 2 elongate specisens. vf vg Vh 11 10 200(1) « “ Telloa t 27 11 145(1) 12.4 11.1-16.4 -. 2.5 3.4 72(1) n 4 3 Clear 4.0, 10.7, 11.3 9.9, 11.3, 11.7 3.0 13 M Cloudy, slight patina, sanitransluoent. 2 2 Milk-white 1 0 .4 , t . g 10.0 , 10.2 2.6 33 ■ Li^it-felue cast! sani-translucent. •All Steenstoes in williaetars. Sea Table for co^arative evidence. 320 Discussions Class 11, Series A f Type 1, Varietiea a through j All specimens were contained on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. Varieties a and h were first plotted individually to see if color differences were distributianally significant; this was not the case. The combined distribution map indicates that Type 1 beads occur in two very broad areas of concentration: (1) in an area including the northern portion of the church, the northwest c o m e r of Feature 5 (original French stockade), and an area between the north stockade of Feature 5 and the south wall of the NNW rowhouse unit; and (2) an area within the central portion of the SW French rowhouse. Notable absences occur in areas of British mili­ tary occupation. This distributional evidence, feature associations, and the comparative evidence listed in Table 27 suggest a French affiliation for Type 1 beads. Although Type 1 beads are known from as early as 1680 in the Great Lakes region, their presence at Fort Michilimackinac does not seem to date before 1730 to 1735. Interpre­ tation: French, 1730-1760 (possibly as late as 1780 in French contexts). Type 2 Nodular, "Mulberry" All Type 2 beads exhibit molded glass knobs over their entire surface. The knobs generally occur in either two or three circumferential rows. The basic bead shape is barrel, although this has been modified by molding to produce knobs. Knobs on different specimens vary considerably in number, size, and shape. Many specimens exhibit circumferential surface stria­ tions. Several specimens exhibit longitudinal grooves which may be mold seams. The major distinguishing feature between Type 2 varieties is color. All Type 2 specimens can therefore be described in a tabular format (See Table 22 ). TABLE 22 Class II, series A, Type 2 , Verieti.es e through g Seeds* Description end Hetries • s Tasononic Designation ? 5 1 3 I sr 6c Type 2 Va m • visual ■kmsell Langth Bangs 0 Z s S 315(1) e * a la ? < t m width Bangs ic s a s ft. Color i Grey-blue Purplish PurpleBlot, 7.5 PB, S.7-7.5 I Bore Range u I •H ^4 * 6.8 8.7-10.0 9.6 lb 3.1-3.4 0 Glossy surfscs, pstins; translucent- 3/2 Vb 4 4 Purple Purple Purple, 10.0 P, 5/10 8.4-10.0 9.2 9.9-10.6 10.1 2.4-3.4 Vc 2 2 145(1) U0it reddish Yellow, 2.5 Y, 8/8 7.7, 7.2 9.8-10.5 3.0-3.2 Q Surfece seni-glossy with patina) translucent. vd 2 2 Light pink purplish Bed, 2.5 R, 8/2 7.5, 7.3 11.5-10.0 3,2 S Glossy eurfscei translucent. Ve 24 6.8-11.3 9.5 9.0-11.8 10.8 Vf 14 6.8-10.0 8.4 9.3-12.6 10.6 2.3-3.4 8 70(1) Clear-silver 10 285(1) Clear 118(1) 1 1 Yellow •All dinsnsions in aillinsters. See Table for co^aratiws evidence. Yellow, 5.0 Y, 8/8 7.5 8.9 2.8 2.4-3.0 2.8 P Dull to flossy surface] shiny or chalky petins ci.— isi) trene lucent. S Clear with silver patina; translucent. T Cloudy-clear, elicit patina on several spec)sensi translucent. 0 ibis specinsn is badly weathered and nay be a Variety c bead. 322 Discussion? Claws II, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through g All specimens were combined on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. Varieties e and £ were first plotted individu­ ally to see if color differences were distributionally significant; this was not the case. This distribution map indicates that Type 2 specimens occur in three well defined clusters: (1) in the area of the northwest corner of feature 81 (first expansion French stockade); (2) in the northwest c o m e r of feature 5, earliest French stockade (including two units which line the inside of this stockade); and (3) in an area along the north side of the South-south French rowhouse unit. Feature contexts correspond with the above areal clus­ ters and suggest a French affiliation for Type 2 specimens. Com­ parative evidence (Table 27 ) supports this conclusion and indicates a suggested date for this bead type of between 1690 and 1750. This bead type appears to have occurred in the earliest French contexts at Fort Michilimackinac. Interpretation: French, 1690-1760. Type 3 Faceted, five sides The three Type 3 varieties exhibit a tubular shape which has been modified by five pressed longitudinal facets. All speci­ mens exhibit faint circumferential striations. The major dis­ tinguishing feature between Type 2 varieties is color. All Type 3 specimens can therefore be described in a tabular format (Table 23 ). TABLE 23 Class 11. Series A, Type 3, Varieties a through c Beads* Description and Metrics e 6 S' c 3 s 2 z Color * 8 • Visual Munsell Length Range Width Range Bore Range Comments Figure Taxoncaic Designation • u s • tu 0 z h. Va 1 1 146(1) Vb 2 2 Turquoise Vc 1 1 Aaber Type 3 12.9 11.0 2.8 greenish Blue, 2.5 B, 5/6 13.7, 14.2 8.0, 9.0 2.3, 2. 8 33 W Dull surface; highly air-bubble pitted; translucent. Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 6/8 9.0 7.0 2.6 Dull*surface; translucent. •All diaensions in millimeters. See Table 27 for cMfwrative evidence. 33 V 33 X Semi-glossy surface; translucent. 323 Clear 324 Type 4 Groove molded* washboard Variety a Blue (Munsell: purplish Purple-Blue, 7.5 PB, 4/14), translucent. Figure 33 Y 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 3.7. length, 10.2; width, 10.1; Shape: barrel with flat to concave ends. Surface: semi-glossy; heavy silver patina; marked by 28 longitudinal grooves which curve slightly between ends. Type 5 Press flattened Variety a Longitudinally flattened oval shape; surface decoration of white opaque glass or ceramic inlay design. Figure 3 3 Z and AA 8 specimens 7 fragmentary specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): length, 15.0, 17.0; width, 17.6, 17.0; thickness average, 6.2; bore, 3.0-2.8 . Shape: disk; originally oval; subsequent longitudinal compression produced rounded disk shape. Surface: semi-glossy; highly leached; circumferential surface striations very common. Decoration: opaque white ceramic or glass designs on both faces; decoration of one face is wavy longitudinal line with star offset on each side; on the other face decora­ tion is a 1/4-moon in the shape of a face with a star offset on the face side. Distribution: F.118(1). Cooperative: see Table 27 Type 6 Convex, highly visible, circumferential striations Variety a Clear, translucent. Figure 33 BB 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 16.0-20.0, average, 18.0; width, 13.4-15.0, average, 14.1; bore, 3.4-3.6. Surface: dull, highly patinated; very noticeable circum­ ferential grooves wind around the bead between the ends. Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1700-1750; see also discussion of CII, SA, Til. 325 Variety b Milk-white, semi-translucent. Figure 33 CC 25 specimens 6 fragment airy specimens Dimensions (9 specimens): length, 11.0-24.0, average, 16.7; width, 9.0-19.0, average, 12.7; bore, 2.7-3. 6 . Surface: dull, several specimens have slight patina; circumferential grooves and striations very common. Distribution: F.31(l), F.331(1), F.70(2), F.209(1), F. 8 8 (1); areal distribution not diagnostic, although feature associations suggest French affiliation. Interpretation: French, 1700-1750; see also discussion Of CII, SA, Til. Type 7 Convex, obliterated circumferential striations, highly polished Variety a Milky-white, opaque. Figure 33 DD 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length, 21.5, 23.4, 27.5; width, 17.3, 16.0, 17.7; bore, 2.8-3.5. Surface: highly polished, glossy; circumferential stria­ tions present but more noticeable in the glass core. Distribution: F.70(l). Interpretation: French, 1700-1760; see also discussion of CII, SA, Til. Variety b Blue (Munsell: opaque. Figure 33 EE 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 2 .0 . Purple Blue, 5.0 PB, 5/10), length, 18.3; width, 14.3; Structure: circumferential lines noted in glass body. Surface: highly polished. Type 8 Round, highly visible circumferential striations Variety a Clear to cloudy, semi-translucent. Figure 33 FF 87 specimens Dimensions (23 specimens): length, 7.5, 20.2, average, 11.5; width, 8.9-18.5, average, 12.0; bore, 2.2-3.4. 326 Surface: dull to semi-glossy; several have light silver patina; 49 specimens have smooth, greasy feeling and appearance; these specimens also have light blue cast or hue; circumferential striations common and deep in many cases. Distribution: F. 254(1) , F. 262(1), F.147(1), F.97(l) , F. 70 (1) , F.296(1), F. 88(1) , F.118(1), F.267(1), F.241 (1 ) . Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1700-1750; see also discussion of CII, SA, Til. Variety b Amber (Munsell: Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 6/8), semi-translucent. Figure 33 GG 10 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): length, 8.0-9.5, average, 8.8; width, 7.5-10.4, average, 9.4; bore, 2.6-3.2 Surface: dull and chalky; circumferential striations common. Distribution: F.85(l), F.209(1). Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1700-1750; based on feature asso­ ciations and typological similarity to CII, CA, T8, Va. Type 9 Round, obliterated circumferential striations, highly polished Variety a Light blue (Munsell: Figure 33 HH 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 3.8. Blue, 5.0 B 7/6), opaque. length, 12.4; width, 12.8; bore, Surface: highly-polished, glossy; numerous air-bubble pits; circumferential striations notably absent except under microscopic examination. Variety b Amber (Munsell: Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 6/8, translucent. Figure 33 n 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 2.7. length, 12.6; width, 13.0; bore, Surface: highly-polished, glossy, patinated; circumferen­ tial striations rare. 327 Variety c Green (Munsell: translucent. Figure 33 JJ 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 3.3. Green-Yellow, 5.06 Y, 8/8), length, 10.2; width, 11.1; bore, Surface: highly-polished, glossy; air-bubbles present throughout core. Type 10 Doughnut shaped, highly visible circumferential striations Variety a Clear to cloudy; semi-translucent. Figure 33 KK 15 specimens Dimensions (8 specimens): length, 4.3-7.9, average, 6.1; width, 10.6-12.4, average, 11.4; bore, 2.4-3.5. Surface: dull, chalky; longitudinal striations common. Comparative: see Table 27 Interpretation: French, 1700-1750; see also discussion of CII, SA, Til. Type 11 Doughnut shaped, obliterated surface striations Type 11 bead shape varies from a standard doughnut shape with slightly incurving ends to doughnut shaped with con­ vex ends. This latter shape is referred to as modified doughnut. All Type 11 specimens are translucent and exhibit a glossy to semi-glossy surface appearance with longitudinal striations noticeable primarily on the bead ends. The major distinguishing feature between Type 11 varieties is color. All Type 11 varieties can therefore be described in a tabular format. (Table 24 ) TABLE 24 CIm s II, SeriM A, Typt n 4 Vari«tiM a through g Ntdi1 ^ascription w d Mstrics m 8 tiMMve Dwi^Mtion & s r H Typa 11 Va 2 « u S Color Visual Langth hangs c 2 Width Rang* S S R°C* Nunasll 2 8 6 ClMT 6 5 209(3) Dark blua 28 14 210(1) 5.4-7.2 6.3 10.5-13.3 11.7 3.1-3.3 LL Dull aurfaca, transluosat-cloudy. purplish Purpla- 5.2-7.8 Hot, 7.5 FI, 3/10 6.3 12.2-14.0 12.8 1.5-3.5 Ml Ssai-glossy aurfaca, translucent. Yallow-lad Tallow, 10.0 5.0-8.3 6.0 11.2-13.3 12.2 1.7-3.2 7.3 11.9-13.3 12.6 1.9-3.7 00 Glossy, patinatad surface i translucent. 328 Vc • a s Glassy, patinatad turfscai translucent. T*. 6/8 vd 6 6 100(1) Dark reddish Tallowbad, 2.5 YU, 5/10 6.3-6.3 Va 4 3 Litftt M » r nddish Tallow, 2.5 T, 8/6. 6.8, 8.4, 66 12.0, 13.8, 11.3 1.9-2.4 FF Saai-glossy, patinatad surface) translucent. Vf 5 2 144(1) Turquoise graanlah Blua, 2.5 1, 5/6 6.6, 7.0 2.3-2.7 3C Glossy surfacai traaalucant. •all diswtsiaas in ailliaatars. Baa Table 27 foe co^aratiee aridanca. 12.5, 12.8 329 Discussion: Claws II, Series A, Type 11 All specimens were combined on one distribution map as an additional interpretative aid. Variety c was plotted individually to see if color differences were distributionally significant; this was not the case. One broad area of concentration is noted from this map: within the known bounds of Feature 5, the earliest French stockade. Feature asso­ ciations sipport this distributional evidence in indicating French affiliation for Type 11 beads. Interpretation: French, 1700-1760. An additional distribution map was plotted for a number of different types(including Type 11, Variety a) which show marked similarities in structure and surface appearance, althoughshapes differ between types. The types compared were: CII, CII, CII, CII, CII, SA, T6, Va and Vb SA, T7, Va SA, T8, Va SA, T10, Va SA, Til, Va Site distribution and feature associations for the above types suggest their use throughout the French period of control. Interpretation: French, 1700-1760. Type 12 Elongate, spiral shape Variety a Amber (Munsell: Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 6/8), translucent. Figure 33 RR 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 3.0. length, 13.7; width, 10.3; Structure: 4, joined, doughnut-shaped segments. Surface: dull, chalky. Discussion: the structure of this specific bead may represent a stage in the process of manufacturing this shape (spiral-shaped) of bead. Type 13 Conical shape Variety a Light amber (Munsell: Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 6/8), semi-translucent. Figure 33 SS 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 3.0. length, 8.0; width, 8.9; bore, 330 Shapei edges taper longitudinally on a convex plane from maximum width of 11.4 mm to minimum width of 5.8 mm. Surface: dull, chalky; circumferential striations common. Distribution: F.145(1). Variety b Dark amber (Munsell: reddish Yellow-Red, 2.5 YR, 5/10), semi-translucent. Figure 33 TT 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 2 .6 . length, 11.4; width, 8.2; bore, Shape: tapers longitudinally on a straight plane from maximum width of 8.2 mm to minimum width of 5.4 ran. Surface: dull, chalky; circumferential striations common. Variety c Chalk white, opaque. Figure 33 UU 1 specimen Dimensions (specimen): length, 8.3; width, 8.2; bore, 1.6. Shape: tapers longitudinally on a straight plane from m a x i m u m width of 8.2 mm to minimum width of 3.7 mm. Surface: dull, chalky, eroded; circumferential striations present. Variety d Clear, cloudy, semi-translucent. Figure 33 W 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen); length, 7.2; width, 7.2; bore, 2.3. Shape: tapers longitudinally on a straight plane from maximum width of 7.2 mm to minimum width of 5.4 mm. Surface: dull, highly eroded; circumferential striations obliterated because of surface erosion. Type 14 Conical, molded Variety a Li$it amber (Munsell: reddish Yellow, 2.5 Y, 8/8), semi-translucent; four pressed facets. Figure 33 WW 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 3.0. length, 8.0; width, 8.9; bore, Shape: tapers longitudinally on the straight plane from maximum width of 8.9 ran to minimum width of 4.8 mm. 331 Surface: dully, chalky; 4, round, pressed facets are present. Type 15 Convexo-elongate Variety a Amber (Munsell: Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 6/8), translucent. Figure 33 XX 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens); 10.9; bore, 2.6, 2.8. length, 11.4, 16.1; width, 8.8, Surface: semi-glossy; circumferential striations present but shallow. Series B Clams II, Series B compound structure beads have not been found at Fort Michilimackinac. Series C Complex Structure Type 1 Convex Varieties a through e White, opaque. Five of the six Type 1 varieties differ only in design and color of surface decoration and therefore may be described in tabular form. Varieties a through e (Table 25 ) a11 exhibit a white, opaque body with colored circumferential glass insets. These insets are raised slightly above the bead surface in several cases. TABLE Daai^wtion 25 Claai II, Seriaa C, Tjpa 1, Variation a through a Baada* Daacription and Natrics Visual Color of iMOtS & c I Laogth Width Rango Bora Ranga 2 I 0 X rypa 1 3 Vb 3 26241) 1.6, 1.7, 1.6 k Bin*, wavy, circunfarential inaat arowd aach and) a pink inaat around cantar. 1.5 Blue, wavy, circiafarantial inaat around each endt 3 blua inaata around cantor. Pink blua 11.9, 14.2. 13.0 7.5, 8.0, 6.9 1 1 Blua 13.9 Vc 3 Pink 13.5, 13.2. 13.2 7.3, 7.0, 6.4 1.5, 1.7. 1.7 C 1 pink, circwfarantial inaat around cantan laaf uotif. Vd 1 1 Tailor B.5 4.6 1.6 Talloir, circunfarantial inaat svirlad around baad batwaan ands. Va 1 Gold 12.5 7.9 1,9 1 gold circunfarantial inaat around cantori also, aaidanaa of inaata of wtknoun color around sach and. 3 1 90(1) • k ll H ums Iona in a illia a ta r s . Saa M i l 27 foe c o g i n t i v t avidanoa. 7.7 332 Va 333 Variety f Black, opaque. Figure 34 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 1 .6 . length, 11.6; width, 5.6; bore, Surface: semi-glossy, patinated. Decoration: 1 white, wavy, glass circumferential inset around each end with 1 wavy circumferential inset around center. Type 2 Round Variety a Mulberry (Munsell: Red, 5.0 R, 4/12), semitranslucent; insets of yellow and white glass. Figure 34 G 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): length, 8.0-9.0, average, 8.6; width, 9.2-10.0, average, 9.7; bore, 2.0-2.6. Surface: semi-glossy, slightly patinated; rough and airbubble pitted on all specimens. Decoration: raised set of white glass insets which en­ circle center of bead producing loop effect; set of 4 equally spaced yellow glass dots on each side of center decoration. Variety b Black, opaque; green and white glass dots. Figure 34 H 1 fragmentary specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 6.5; width, 7.6; bore, 1.9. Surface: semi-glossy. Decoration: randomly-spaced, irregularly-shaped glass dots (10 on 1/2 bead fragment) composed of white dot on which green dot is superimposed. 334 Discussion; Necklace Beads An analysis of the interrelationships between the formal, spatial, and temporal dimensions of necklace beads has provided a number of resources for site interpretation. The frequency and con­ text of the different bead types which have been described indicate: (1) differences in settlement types, or, contrasting social, polit­ ical, and economic emphases between French and British periods of control; (2) the presence and location of activity areas, that is, trade good svg>ply and distribution areas; (3) dates, nationality of vise, and function of specific structures; and (4) the relative occu­ pation contenporaneity of different structures. Each of these has been considered in greater detail in Chapter 4. Necklace bead interpretatii is have been presented within the context of specific bead type descriptions and have been summarized in Table 26. Reference to this table indicates that the majority of bead types recovered at the site are attributable to the French period of control, although several types designated as French have also been found in limited quantities in British contexts. This is an indication of the dual French and British occupation of the site after 1761. Dates assigned to bead types are generally very broad and could not be more narrowly defined with any degree of accuracy. This reflects both the information contained in conparative evidence and the fact that many bead types were in common use over extensive periods of time. Figure 30 Distribution of Cl, SA, T2, Va Necklace Beads 336 -I tnCIHCN ■•I • K C I M C M *- « « M C I « f N t JUL Figure 31 Distribution of SA, T 2 , Va Molten Necklace Beads 338 DISTRIBUTION OF C I.S A .T t.V o MOLTEN NECKLACE K A O S ••I SPECIMEN **S SPECIMENS •-IO SPECIMENS .JX. at. Sit. Figure 32 -u Iid p o 713 2016 2056 2228 742 2003 1201 339 2008 1768 2101 3150 2082 1483 645 1511 1 1 1 1 1 1517 1 1 1 1001 2328 1 1004 1151 140 1220 1915 2245 340 U V w a B ■ ■ ■ x __ E X G 6 6 G Q Q R R C ^ D p p Z A A =*»— ■ HHH II I S S * B B «B JJJ KKK cc t t „ __________ D D u u " m <' vv LLL _ m m m EE I A FF j l - gg ku# ' "If * I W W N N N 000 H H vv o JC r YY ppp ZZ 5 JJ • KK AAA * A 000 • R R R l l p o R Mm A H MM.yf W N N § B B b A — sss ccc| uuu ° DD# vvv 2 TTT 8 o •H s +1 O S Color 3 o*--------------------------2 Visual Munsell Taxonomic _ , Designation 25 Blue Vb 61 Black Vc 10 Light blue Purple-Blue, 5.0 PB, 4/4 bluish PurpleBlue, 2.5 PB, 7/4 Width Range „ Comments fa 2.7-5.0 1.4-3.3 Z Glossy surface, translucent; sub-surface striations; tumbled. 2.3-7.0 2.3-4.0 AA Glossy surface, opaque; untumbled. 2.5-4.0 2.8-3.3 BB Glossy surface, opaque; untuntoled. *A11 measurements are in millimeters. Bore diameters were not systematically measured. Bore diameters average ca. 1.0 mm and vary from .7 mm to 1.5 mm. Length and width measurements refer to largest and smallest specimens of each variety. See Table for comparative evidence. 352 Cl, SA, T2, Va Length _ Range ro ■h Comments 5 Red purplish Red, 2.5 R, 5/10 4.2-6.8 2.7-3.2 LL Glossy, patinated sur­ face, translucent. Vb 2 Blue bluish PurpleBlue, 2.5 PB, 3/8 8.2-9.0 4.1-4.3 MM Glossy surface, translucent. Vc 3 White 4.8-9.0 4.5-7.4 NN Dull, white surface, opaque. Vd 5 Dark brown 6.0-8.7 3.5-5.2 00 Semi-Glossy, patinated surface, translucent. Ve 1 Turquoise bluish BlueGreen, 7.5 BG, 5/4 7.1 3.3 PP Dull surface, opaque. Vf 1 Yellow reddish Yellow, 2.5 Y, 7/6 8.8 4.3 QQ Dull surface, opaque, Vg 1 Mustard Yellow Yellow-Red Yellow, 10.0 YR, 7/8 6.2 3.2 RR Dull surface, opaque. Vh 1 Blue bluish PurpleBlue, 2.5 PB, 5/4 4.2 2.6 SS Dull surface, translucent. Vi 1 Mulberry 6.2 3.2 TT Dull surface, semi-translucent. *All measurements are in millimeters. Length and width measurements refer to largest and smallest specimens of each variety. 356 CII, SA, Tl, Va 357 Discussion: Seed Beads The limited area in which seed beads have been systematically recovered at the site is characterized by both French and British associations. Specific areal clusters are, however, misleading since they reflect the presence of archaeological features in which an attempt was made to collect seed beads. The interpretation of seed bead types in terms of period or nationality of use is not possible on the basis of this limited evidence. Figure ■H "fa if cr> 1/1 £ & t S & 8 ’£ s s 8 ied by civilian merchants during the mid-1760's. Tinkling cones are also associated with stockade trenches, F. 81 (8) and F. 82 (5), and British zone refuse fill, F. 296 (9). In addition, tinkling cones occur in nearly every excavation unit at the site} this suggests a random distribution, although conditioned by greater frequencies within units in the southern portion of the site. There is no significant difference between the distribution of tinkling cones which retain fragments of the leather attachment and those which did not. Tinkling cones are found in min­ imal quantities in areas of known military occupation (that is, F. 3, 372 British barracks, and F. 31, F. 32, and F. 11, Commanding officer's house). In addition, a low number of tinkling cones were found in the area of the church. An area between the two southern rowhouse units shows the greatest non-feature concentration of tinkling cones. This area includes a street (Rue Du Diable) which is adjacent to the SSW unit as well as a row of garden plots attached to the rear of this unit. Comparative Evidence: Tinkling cones have been documented from a number of sites; although adequate comparative information is available from only sev­ eral of these. The following sites are indicative of the area and time range suggested for the use of tinkling conesi Wisconsin (Wittry 1963: 19); (1) the Bell Site, (2) the Gilbert Site, Texas (Jelks 1967: 92); and (3) Fort Renville, Minnesota (Nystuen and Lindeman 1969: Table 31 25). lists the frequency and metrics of specimens recovered from these three sites and Fort Michilimackinac. It is significant to note that tinkling cones have not been recovered from the Site of Fortress of Louisbourg, Nova Scotia (John Dunton, 1968). TABLE 31 Site *H>r?xi“ te Site Tinkling Cones at Four Historic Sites Frequency ■* Length , y Average 43 20.0-30.0 Length y Range Comments i/db65 Bell 1680-1730 1715-1781 1125 25.53 11.6-42.8 Average based on sample of 146 Gilbert 1750-1775 46 20-40 16.0-66.0 12 blanks recovered; Indian manufacture Renville 1826-1846 13 23.0-42.0 373 Fort Michilimackinac 374 Interpretations: The preceding evidence indicates that tinkling cones were manufactured by the occupants of a region which frequented the site of recovery, whether European or Indian. Tinkling cones were ap­ parently worn as clothing ornaments by both Europeans (civilians) and Indians; this is definitely the case at Fort Michilimackinac where the large quantity found could not be attributed entirely to the small Indian population living within the stockade. Moreover, the distribu­ tion of specimens at the site suggests that they were worn by inhabi­ tants, since they do not occur in specific clusters which might be identified as areas of production or distribution. Tinkling cones at the site are thought to have been worn by both French and British in­ habitants throughout the period of occupation. Metric comparisons between specimens from Fort Michilimackinac and other sites indicate that a standard size range was common for tinkling cones regardless of differences in time or place of manufacture. Although tinkling cones are not thought to be primary trade goods, they were probably manufactured at Indian sites from the scrap remains of brass and copper trade goods, such as kettles. The absence of tinkling cones at the Fortress of Louisbourg may indicate differences between the social and economic conposition of the populations at the two sites. Figure 37 Figure Designation Tinkling Cones Catalog Number, MS2 A 1795 B 2289 C 2153 D 1805 E 1868 F 1 G 1347 H 1452 I 1 J 408 K 3362 L 3403 376 A B C H F G H D I J E K L k u i £ 1 fNC H E S RINGS A total of 121 rings and ring fragments were recovered at Fort Michilimackinac during the 1959 through 1966 excavations. Of this total, 72 were "Jesuit Rings," 31 had glass sets, and 18 were of the band or wedding ring style. Rings are formally classified into class, series, type, and variety categories. Classes are distinguished by differences in form (defined by the presence or absence of glass sets); series are distin­ guished by the form and combination of ring elements (ring elements are the band, face, and set); types are distinguished by ring shape, and/or the number and location of sets; varieties are distinguished by differences in set cut and color and/or differences in design on the ring face. The following ring descriptions are presented according to this classification. Comparative and distributional evidence is presented in thering discussion following the descriptions. is summarized in Table 35 . Feature information Information on ring measurements is pre­ sented in the descriptive text. Ring measurements consist of inside band diameter which is given in standard units of ring measurement. Class I Rings With Glass Sets Series A Ring Band and Face Cast As One Unit; Glass Sets Added All SA rings are brass. Type 1 One large, central glass set on ring face; three small glass sets on band on each side of central set 377 378 Variety a Multifaceted, light blue center set; purpleblue band sets. Figure 38 A; Figure 39 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b a Multifaceted, light green center set; purpleblue band sets. Not illustrated 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Variety c size, 7-1/2, 8-3/8. Multifaceted, blue center sett purple-blue band sets. Not illustrated 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Variety d size, 5-1/8. size, 5-5/8, 8-3/8. Multifaceted, clear center set; purple-blue band sets. Figure 38 B 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): size 8, 5-1/2. The illustrated specimen has a molded rather than a cut glass center set. Type 1, Category 1 This category consists of 2, Cl, SA, Tl bands without sets. Type 2 One large center glass set on ring face; two small, glass sets on band on each side of center set Variety a Molded, clear glass center set; purple-blue band sets. Figure 38 C; Figure 39 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 3-1/2. Type 3 One large, center glass set onring face; one small glass set on band on each side of center set 379 Variety a Multifaceted, light green center set; purpleblue band sets. Figure 38 D; Figure 39 C 3 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): size, 1-1/4. Variety b Multifaceted, clear glass center set; purpleblue band sets. Figure 38 E 2 specimens Type 3, Category 1 This category Type 4 consists of 2, Cl, SA,T3 bands without sets. One,large, center glass set on ring face; two small glass sets on the band on raised mounts Variety a Clear sets. Figure 38 F; Figure 39 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): size, 5-1/4. Type 5 Single, large, round center face set Variety a Clear glass set; sethas flat surface with beveled edges. Figure 38 G 1 specimen Variety b Multifaceted, clear center set. Figure 39 E 1 specimen Variety c Multifaceted, light pink center set. Figure 38 M 1 specimen Variety d Molded, clear glass center set. Figure 38 1 1 specimen 380 Variety e Black, center set; white bust in cameo relief. Figure 38 J; Figure 1 specimen 39 G Type 5, Category 1 This category consists of 5, Cl, SA,T5 frames without Series B sets. Ring Band and Face (or Set Mount) Separate and Brazed Together; Glass Set Added The single Cl, SB specimen is silver. Type 1 One large center glass set Variety a Multifaceted, clear glass set. Figure 38 K; Figure 1 specimen Series C 39 F Face and Band of Wound Copper or Brass Wire, Produced Separately and Joined by Y a m or String Type 1 Face of wound copper wire and four spaced, glass seed beads; band of wound wire Variety a Four light green glass seed beads, spaced with wound copper wire. Figure 38 L 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Class II size, 6. Rings Without Glass Sets Series A Ring Band and Face C u t as One Unit; Engraved Face Design All SA rings are brass and are referred to as Jesuit Rings. Type 1 Octagonal-shaped face All CII, SA, Tl ring varieties are described in a tabular format (Table 32 ) since they differ in face design only. All speci­ mens have engraved or iiqpressed face designs. TABLE 32 Ring Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 1, Varieties a through t Taxonomic Designation Frequency Number Measured CII, SA, Tl, Va 9 2 Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj 1 5 1 3 1 1 5-1/2, 6 1 4-1/2 1 7-1/2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5-3/4, 8/14 1 1 6-1/2 6-1/4 Comments (Face Symbol or Mark) Figure 38 M 39 H,I 38 J 39 K,L 39 M 39 N 39 0 39 P 39 Q 39 R 40 A 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 B C D E F G H I J K N Flower synfcol at center IB 2 hearts and 2 dots 2 hearts PI 2 hearts with 2 crosses above IM IF 1 heart with flower symbol above LV IN BI 1 heart and 3 dots IB (?) Cross hatch design H LR FI T 381 Vk VI Vta Vh Vo Vp Vq Vr VS vt Size 382 Type 1, Category 1 This category consists of 7, CII, SA, Tl rings which could not be assigned to specific varieties. Type 2 Round face All CII, SA, T2 ring varieties are described in a tabular format (Table 33 ) since they differ in face design only. All specimens have engraved or impressed face designs. TABLE 33 Ring Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 2, Varieties a through o Taxonomic Designation Frequency Number Measured CII, SA, T2, Va 1 1 6-1/4 40 L Unknown symbol Vb 1 1 6-1/4 38 N 40 M Unknown symbol Vc 1 1 8-3/4 40 N Superimposed, transposed W's Vd 1 40 0 Heart symbol 40 P Unknown symbol 40 g XX Ve 1 Size 3-1/4 Comments (Face Symbol or Mark) Figure 1 vg 1 1 7-1/4 40 R Priest with cross Vh 1 1 6-3/4 40 S IN Vi 1 1 3-1/4 40 T D (?) Vj 1 40 U DI Vk 1 40 V Heart symbol VI 1 41 A Heart symbol with 3 arrows Vm 1 41 B FI Vh 1 41 C XX Vo 1 41 D Unknown symbol 383 Vf 384 Type 2, Category 1 This category consists of 1 CII, SA, T2 ring which could not be assigned to a specific variety. Type 3 Heart-shaped face All CII, SA, T3 varieties are described in a tabular format (Table 34 ) since they differ in face design only. All specimens have engraved or inpressed face designs. TABLE 34 Ring Descriptions: Class II, Series A, Type 3, Varieties a through n Taxonomic Designation Frequency Number Measured CII, SA, T3, Va 1 1 5 38 0 41 E Unknown symbol Vb 1 1 5-1/2 41 F Unknown symbol Vc 1 1 6-1/4 41 G FP Vd 1 41 H Unknown symbol Ve 1 1 4-1/4E 41 I H Vf 1 1 3-1/2 41 J Unknown symbol Vg 2 41 K Unknown symbol Vh 1 41 L N Vi 2 1 5-7/8 41 M V Vj 1 1 6 41 N Superimposed, transposed H's Vk 1 1 6-7/8 41 0 X VI 1 1 5-1/4 41 P H Vin 1 41 Q Unknown symbol Vn 1 41 R Superimposed, transposed H's Size Comments (Face Symbol or Mark) Figure 385 386 Series B Ring Band and Face Cast as One Unit; Raised or Offset Face With Design All CII, SB rings are brass and may possibly be termed Jesuit Rings. Type 1 Rectangular, offset face Variety a Engraved lines on face. Figure 41 S; Figure 38 P 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): size, 4-1/2, 4-3/8. Type 2 Elongate, offset face Variety a Engraved lines on face. Figure 41 T 2 specimens Series D Band Ring, No Face All C I I , SD rings are brass, except CII, SD, T3 which is gold. Type 1 Flat, inside band surface; face Variety a Plain, no design. Not illustrated 10 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens); Variety b convex, outside band sur­ size, 8-1/4, 4-3/4, 6-1/4, 3-1/4. Central ridge on band outside surface. Not illustrated 1 specimen Variety c Cross hatch design on band outside surface. Not illustrated 1 specimen Variety d Figure 38 Q 1 specimen Grooves on each edge of band outside surface. 387 Type 2 Convex outside and inside band surfaces Variety a Plain. Figure 38 R 4 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): Type 3 size, 4-7/8, 6-3/4, 7-1/4. Flat outside and inside band surfaces Variety a Woven-line design on outside band surface. Figure 38 S 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): size, 4-3/8. Distributional and Associational Evidence: Class I and Class II rings were plotted on individual maps for interpretative purposes. The small sanple of Class I rings (with glass sets) were associated most clearly with the SW rowhouse unit. Feature associations (Table 35 ) indicate that Class I rings were recovered primarily from late French and British period contexts. Class II rings are associated with the SH corner of the Commanding Officer's house and with the NW and SW rowhouse units. Class II spe­ cimens were present but less frequent in the central area of the early French stockade (F. 5). Feature associations (Table 35 ) indicate that Class II rings were recovered primarily from French period fea­ tures and, secondarily, from British period features. Comparative Evidence: Two Class I rings have been reported by Smith (1965: Santa Rosa, Pensacola, Florida (1722-1752) . Rings) have been reported by Wittry (1963: 67) from Class II rings (Jesuit 18) from the Bell Site, 388 Wisconsin (1680—1730), and by Jelks (1967: 95—96) from the Gilbert Site, Texas (1750-1775). Interpretations: Class I rings (with glass sets) may be assigned a ca. 1750 to 1780 period of use at the site. Class II, Series A rings (Jesuit Rings) were used most frequently by the French between ca. 1720 and 1750, although several specimens were recovered from later British contexts. No temporal differences were noted between different types of Class II, Series A rings. This is expected since the different types of Jesuit rings often bear the same initials or symbols. Hume's (1970: Noel 266) suggestion that the initials on Jesuit rings rep­ resent the "customer's" initials is not supported by the present evi­ dence. It is unlikely that 10 rings so marked would bear the same initials (that is, Class I, Series A, Type 1, Variety a). The final interpretation of these initials and symbols will be reached only through additional historical research. The absence of Jesuit rings in the Church and Priest's house area strongly suggests that this ring type was not distributed by the resident Jesuit Priest. Figure 38 Figure Designation A Rings Taxonomic Designation Cl, SA, Tl, B Catalog 2 Number, MS Va 1117 Vd 1335 C T2, Va 2035 D T3, Va 2876 E Vb 2349 F T4, Va 1422 G T5, Va 1573 H Vc 2061 I Vd 1296 J Ve 1886 SB, Tl, Va 1256 SC, Tl, Va 2211 SA, Tl, Va 790 K Cl, h M CII, N T2, Vb 2608 O T3, Vi 1574 P SB, Tl, Va 1266 Q SC, Tl, Vd 1 R T2 2110 S T3 2583 390 B C D E Figure Figure Designation 39 Rings Taxonomic Designation (Is2) Catalc Number, SA, Tl, Va 1117 B T 2 , Va 2035 C T3, Va 2876 D T4, Va 1422 E T5, Vb 1 F SB, Tl, Va 1256 G SA, T5, Ve 1886 H CII, SA, Tl, Va 790 I Va 1154 J Vb 1792 K Vc 504 L Vc 313 M Vd 1881 N Ve 746 O Vf 1146 P Vg 1187 Q Vh 2088 R Vi 284 Cl, 392 Figure 40 Rings (Is2) Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation Catalog ^ Nunfcer, MS A CII, SA, Tl, Vj 2743 B Vk 1217 C VI 58 D Vm 1145 E Vn 718 F Vo 1573 G Vp 1198 H Vq 1280 I Vr 2276 J Vs 290 K Vt 423 L T2, Va 1 M Vb 2608 N Vc 1350 0 Vd 608 P Ve 1021 Q Vf 752 R Vg 2236 S Vh 1622 T Vi 2014 U Vj 1458 V Vk 284 394 Figure 41 Rings (Is2) Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation Catalog ^ Number, MS A CII, SA, T2, VI 58 B Vtn 97 C Vn 1247 D Vo 812 E T3, Va 1220 F Vb 2421 G Vc 1 H Vd 1 I Ve 1463 J Vf 2390 K Vg 694 L Vh 2737 M Vi 1574 N Vj 1207 O Vk 2445 P VI 1 Q Vm 205 R Vn 1655 S Tl, Va 1266 T T2, Va 659 396 397 TABLE 35 Rings: Feature Associations Frequency Feature Number 6 F. 127 Tl, Cat. 1 1 F. 124 cat. 1 1 F. 120 T 3 , Va 1 F. 297 T 4 , Va 1 F. 128 T5, Vc 1 F. 213 CII, SA, Tl, Vc 1 F. 248 VI 1 F. 297 Tl, Cat. 1 1 F. B#15 Cat. 1 1 F. 129 T2, Vm 1 F. 3 Vn 1 F. 5 T3, Va 1 F. 70 Vf 1 F. 246 Vk 1 F. 262 Vm 1 F. 130 SC, Tl, Va 1 F. 263c Va 1 F. 75 Taxonomic Designation Cl, SA, Tl PIPES A total of 5,328 kaolin pipe fragments were recovered at Fart Michilimackinac during the 1959 through 1966 excavations. Of this total, 4,347 specimens are stem fragments; 644 are bowls and bowl fragments; 156 are heel fragments; and 181 are marked bowl, heel, and stem fragments. Kaolin pipes have received more critical attention in the lit­ erature of historical archaeology than any other artifact category, with the possible exception of ceramics. This emphasis is justified by the demonstrated interpretative value of kaolin pipes; kaolin pipes cure reliable indicators of the temporal and chronological dimensions of an historic site, within acceptable limits of error. The dating of kaolin pipes is based on the identification of a number of formal at­ tributes which vary through time. The following attributes are noted for their chronological significance; pipe-bowl form (Oswald 1951 and 1955); pipe-stem bore size (Harrington 1954; Onwake 1956; Maxwell and Binford 1961); manufacturer's marks and decorative design elements (Atkinson 1962 and 1965; Spence 1941-1942; Oswald 1960 and 1955); and surface features such as polishing or burnishing. The most reliable kaolin pipe dates are derived by the combined study of all of these attributes, since any single attribute is susceptible to misinterpre­ tation due to factors such as inadequate sample size and undocumented population fluctuations. In addition, many of the common manufacturer's marks found on kaolin pipes were in use far many generations and often were used by individuals other than the original manufacturer. 398 399 A critical review of the extensive literature on kaolin pipes has not been undertaken for the purpose of this report. The most sig­ nificant results of kaolin pipe analysis have been produced by those individuals who have specialized in their study {that is, Walker, Os­ wald, and Omwake). The purpose of this present section on kaolin pipes, therefore, is to formally describe the Fort Michilimackinac sample in terms of contextual variation. Interpretations are thus suggested primarily on the basis of archaeological rather than com­ parative evidence; comparative evidence will be presented when it applies directly to the identification of specific pipe types from the site. Classification and Description: The classification of kaolin pipe bowls and stems are presented separately. Kaolin pipe bowls are divided into four levels of classi­ fication; the class {based on presence or absence of manufacturer's marks or decorative design elements); the series (based on the dif­ ferent means of producing the marks or design elements); the type (based on the location and representation of the mark or design ele­ ment) ; and the variety (based on minor variations in the mark or design element). Several standardized terms are applied to the description of kaolin pipes: bawl (including the bowl base and heel) and heel (defined as the short projection from the bcwl base) . The heel may be either pointed (spur or spike style) or flattened. The right and left sides of a bowl are distinguished by the pipe's orientation in the user's mouth. to the user. The back bowl face is the side of the bowl closest 400 Kaolin pipe distributional and feature associational evidence is presented in the descriptive text. Interpretations are also pre­ sented in the text and are summarized in the concluding discussion. The description of each pipe type or variety includes information on pipe-stem bore size {given in multiples of l/64th of an inch). This information is summarized and dated by the Binford regression formula (Maxwell and Binford 1961: 108) whenever more them five measurable specimens are present in a sample. Table 37 summarizes pipe stem and bowl feature associations and lists the stem-bore date computed for each feature. Pipe Bowls Class I Marked or Decorated Series A Type 1 Molded Mark or Decoration Mark consists of letters RT enclosed by a heart sym­ bol ; three stars border the heart; this mark appears on the left and right bowl faces Figure 42 A 5 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): bore, 6.0, 4.5. The bowl rim on the single complete bowl is nearly parallel to the projected pipe stem. Type 2 Mark consists of the letters GE enclosed by a circle; this mark appears on the right bowl face Figure 42 B-C 15 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): bore, 4.5, 5.0, 4.0, 4.5. Flattened and spur heels appear on Cl, SA, T2 bowls. One spe­ cimen was found in F. 299. The remaining specimens are asso­ ciated with 1730-1760 French structures. Interpretation: probably of English manufacture. 401 Type 3 Mark consists of a W on left side of heel and am M on right side of heel Not illustrated 7 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): bore average, 4.5j date, 1759. Short, flattened heels appear on 3 specimens. The bawl rim on the single complete specimen is parallel to the projected stem. One specimen was recovered from F. 79. Interpretation: Type 4 English manufacture and use. Mark consists of small, raised heart symbol on left and right sides of the heel Figure 42 D 9 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): bore average, 5.0* date, 1740. Short, flattened heels on 3 specimens. from F. 85. Interpretation: Type 5 One specimen recovered English manufacture. Mark consists of small, raised dot on left and right sides of the heel Not illustrated 5 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): bore average, 5.0: date, 1740. One specimen has a short, flattened heel. Interpretation: Type 6 none. Decorative design element consists of raised lines from the bowl base which extend halfway up the bowl on all faces. Figure 42 E 6 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): bore, 5.5, 5.0. Bowl rim is parallel to the projected stem on the single com­ plete bowl. Interpretation: probably after 1770, based on style of decor­ ation. 402 Type 7 Scroll, branch, or floral design elements Five Cl, SA, T7 varieties are defined on the basis of minor differences in design element. Only 1 specimen of each variety has been found, and all were fragmentary. Variety a Raised rose and thistle design around entire bowl. Figure 42 F 1 specimen This specimen has a spur heel. Variety b Raised branch design on both sides of front bowl-face mold seam. Figure 42 G 1 specimen Variety c Raised branch design on both sides of back bowl-face mold seam; elongated triangle con-* taining 2 clusters of 7-dot flower designs on left face. Figure 42 H 1 specimen Variety d Raised branch design on both sides of back bowl-face mold seam; circular crest containing harp and crown symbols on the left bowl face. Figure 42 I 1 specimen This specimen has a short, flattened heel. Variety e Scroll and flower design on entire bowl sur­ face. Figure 42 J 1 specimen Diacuasioni Class I, Series A, Type 7 Cl, SA, T7 pipe bowls are dated after 1770 on the basis of comparative evidence. Series B Type 1 stalled or Impressed Hark or Design Element Mark consists of the letters TD enclosed within a circle 403 Three Cl, SB, Tl varieties are defined on the basis of second­ ary design elements within the circle. Variety a Winged or curled leaf design above and below letters TD. Figure 42 K 36 specimens Variety b Figure T-like symbol above letters TD. 42 L This specimen is broken below the TD. Variety c Winged or curled leaf design below TD; two impressed dots above TD. Figure 42 M 1 specimen Discussion; Class X, Series B, Type 1 All Cl, SB, Tl bowls are characterized by short, flattened heels. Ten specimens were measurable and had an average bore diameter of 5.05; a date of 1739 may be assigned using the Binford formula. Cl, SB, Tl specimens were found in 8 different features: F. 85, F. 89, F. 265, F. 267, F. 213, F. 248, F. 102, and F. 83. Eleven specimens were found within the garden area north of the NNW rowhouse unit. Interpretation; Type 2 English manufacture; French and British use after 1750. Mark consists of letters WM enclosed within a circle; a winged or curled leaf design occurs below the letters Figure 42 N 1 specimen Type 3 Mark consists of wine goblet enclosed in a circle; located on the back face of bowl Figure 43 A 4 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen); Interpretation: bore, 6.0. Dutch manufacture. 404 Type 4 Rampant lion symbol on bowl base Figure 43 B 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): Interpretation: Type 5 probably Dutch manufacture based on glossy, burnished, surface appearance. Deer symbol on bowl base Figure 43 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Interpretation: Type 6 Mark consists of number 16, with a crown symbol above; located on the bowl base Interpretation: Mark resembles powder horn with looped suspension cord; placed on flattened-heel bottom Interpretation: Type 1 bore, 6.0, 6.0. Dutch manufacture. Figure 43 e 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Series C bore, 6.0. probably Dutch manufacture based on glossy, burnished, surface appearance. Figure 43 D 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Type 7 bore, 6.0, 6.0, 6.0. bore, 5.5. probably Dutch manufacture. Stamped and Molded Design Elements Letters R, TIP, and PET enclosed in circle molded on right bowl face; letters RT stamped on back bowl face Figure 43 F 16 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): bore average, 4.64; date, 1754. Cl, SC, Tl specimens are without heels. Bowl rims on the 2 complete bowls are parallel to the projected steins. One Cl, SC, Tl specimen was found in each of the following features; F. 148, F. 152, F. 82, and F. 21. Cl, SC, Tl specimens are associated with the SW and SSW rowhouse units. Interpretation: English manufacture; French and English use, 1740-1780. 405 Type 2 Inpressed letters TD enclosed In circle; winged or curled leaf design above letters and single loop design below letters; molded letters T and D on opposite sides of flattened heel. Figure 43 G 5 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): bore, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0. One specimen was found in F. 215. Interpretation: Type 3 none. Inpressed teapot symbol on flattened heel base; molded crest of six stars on left side of heel; bowl lips are rouletted Figure 43 H 3 specimens, plus 40 rouletted rim fragments Dimensions (3 specimens): bore, 5.0, 5.5, 5.0. Obtuse angle between bowl rim and stem on 2 conplete specimens. Bowl surfaces are glossy and burnished. Cl, SC, T3 specimens were found in 4 features; F. 267 (4), F. 85 (2), F. 83 (1), and F. 249 (1) and are associated with the northwestc o m e r of F. 5, and the SSW, SW, and NNW rowhouse units. Interpretation: Type 4 Dutch manufacture; French unknown date range. andBritish use, Impressed letters WG enclosed in circle; winged or curled leaf design above and below letters; symbol located on bowl back face; letters W and G on oppo­ site sides of flattened heel. Figure 43 I 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): bore, 4.5. Bowl rim is parallel to stem on single complete specimen. specimen was recovered from F. 215. Interpretation: Class II One none. Plain or Unmarked Bowls A total of 20 plain bowls were found; 13 without heels, 2 with spur heels, and 5 with short flattened heels. One specimen was recovered from each of the following features; F. 144, F. 21, F. 314, and F. 267. 406 ClasB I and Class II, Category 1 Thiscategory consists of bowl base fragments. Cat. 1 types are based on thepresence or absence and type of heel represented. Type 1 Bases with short, flattened heels A total of 29 Tl heel fragments were recovered; 1 was found in both F. 80 and F. 263. The distribution of Tl heels indicates an association with the garden areas south of the SW rowhouse unit. The 24, Tl specimens with measurable stem fragments have an average bore diameter of 4.70; the computed Binford date is 1752. Type 2 Bases with spur heels A total of 17, T2 heel fragments have been recovered. The dis­ tribution of T2 specimens is not indicative of structural associations. The 16, T2 specimens with measurable Btem frag­ ments have an average bore diameter of 4.34 and a computed date of 1766. Type 3 Bases without heels 110 specimens Dimensions (62 specimens): bore average, 4.76; date, 1750. T3 heels were found in the following features: F. 252, F. 21, F. 3, F. 262, and F. 90. F. 80, F. 263C, Classes I and II, Category 2 This category consists of 624, non-diagnostic bowl fragments. Stems Two types of kaolin pipe stems are represented in the Fort Michilimackinac sanple— marked stems and plain stems. Type 1 Stems marked with circumferentially inpressed dot and saw tooth design; name of city of manufacture (GOUDA) is at each end of the design Figure 43 K-M 15 specimens Dimensions (14 specimens): bore average, 5.71; date, 1713. One specimen bears the letters G.D. BOOS and GOUDA. Interpretation: Dutch manufacture and French use; 1715-1735. 407 Type 2 Plain stems 4347 specimens Dimensions (4347 specimens): bore average, 4.62; date, 1755. The frequency and computed data of stem fragments according to bore size is presented in Table 36. TABLE 36 Bore Size Type 2 Kaolin Pipe Stems: Bore Size Frequency and Date Computed by Binford Formula Frequency Date 3.5 35 1797 4.0 821 1778 4.5 2196 1759 5.0 823 1740 5.5 335 1721 6.0 87 1702 6.5 50 1683 Contrasting patterns of site distribution have been noted between pipe­ stem samples of different bore diamter. Seven distribution maps have been drawn; each represents the total number of specimens within a size category; size categories, frequencies, and Binford dates are listed in Table 36. One inportant distributional trait characterized each of these maps. Pipe stems were deposited more frequently in non-structural contexts, such as garden or street areas between structural units. This distribution makes it difficult to define associations between pipe-stern size categories and individual structures. The dates provided in Table 36 indicate an inconsistency between the known dates of site occupation and the dates assignable to pipe stems derived from the site. This may be explained either by an incorrect derivation and/or use of the Binford formula or by the presence of factors (necessarily assumed inoperative by the Binford formula) which effect the differential presence of different sized pipes through time. Assuming the Binford formula to be essentially correct in that it is based on a demonstrable linear relationship between bore size and time, we are left to explain the noted inconsistencies in terms of several inportant external factors. 408 In using the Binford formula at a dual occupation site such as Fort Michilimackinac, several conditions must necessarily exist so that accurate dates may be derived from pipe-stern analysis. First, we must assume that the French and British inhabitants of the site smoked kaolin pipes with nearly the same frequency relative to population size (that is, there was neither a difference in the popularity of the custom of smoking between the French and British nor was there a difference in pipe availability of pipe-type preference between the French and British). Second, there must be an equal availability of different sized pipes at different times (that is, the period of time between pipe manufacture and importation and use must be nearly the same for different sized pipes). Third, the site's population must be stable throughout its existence. None of these conditions existed at Fort Michilimackinac. The most important factor affecting the differential frequency of different sized pipes at the site was population size; the population of the site grew rapidly after British occupation. Of secondary importance is the probability that the French used micmac pipes with greater fre­ quency than did the British (due either to availability or preference). A third possible factor is the likelihood that the French supply net­ work was less efficient than that of the British; this condition would have produced a greater time lag between pipe manufacture and use dur­ ing the French period of control. In spite of these factors which probably influenced the differential presence of different sized pipes on the site and which consequently affected the accuracy of the derived Binford dates, the seven distri­ bution maps (each showing the location of all pipes in a particular stem-bore size category) are very useful in providing a relative chronology for the location and intensity of social activity at the site between 1715 and 1781. Moreover, we are in an excellent position to identify and evaluate the factors mentioned above which might have influenced the dates derived from the Binford formula. Each of the seven maps have been visually compared; the following re­ sults are expressed in terms of pipe-stem frequency by area of occur­ rence. Maps which originally referred to bore sizes 6.5 and 3.5 have been conbined with those which refer to 6.0 and 4.0 bore sizes respec­ tively; this change results in five rather than seven distribution maps. Map 1, 6.5 and 6.0/64 Bore sizes (1683, 1702) High Frequency: garden area between SW and SSW rowhouse units, area of the southwest c o m e r of the Commanding Officer's house, area west of the NW corner of F. 5. Present but Less Frequent: random in all areas. 409 Map 2, 5.5/64 Bore size (1721) High Frequency: garden area north of NNW rowhouse unit, area of northwest corner of F.5, area of the southwest corner of the Commanding Officer's house, central area of F. 5 enclo­ sure, garden area between SW and SSW rowhouse units. Present but Less Frequent: garden area south of the SSW rowhouse unit, SSW, SW, and NNW rowhouse units. Map 3, 5.0/64 Bore size (1740) High Frequency: NNW, SSW, and SW rowhouse units, garden areas north and south of the NNW rowhouse unit, area of the Commanding Officer's house, garden areas north and south of the SSW rowhouse unit. Present but Less Frequent: Church and Priest's house area, British soldier's barracks (F. 3), area of the northwest c o m e r of F. 5. Note that stem frequency in the central area of the F. 5 enclosure has decreased. Map 4, 4.5/65 Bore size (1759) High Frequency: NNW, SSW, and SW rowhouse units, south half of the British soldiers' barracks, F. 3 (this association could also be with an underlying French house, F. 31), garden areas north and south of the SSW row­ house unit. Present but Less Frequent: random in all other areas. Map 5, 4.0 and 3.5/64 High Frequency: garden area north of NNW rowhouse unit, south half of British soldiers' barracks (F. 3), west half of the SSW row­ house unit, garden area south of the SSW rowhouse unit. Present but Less Frequent: random in all other areas. A very definite frequency decrease from the preceding period is noted in the NNW and SW rowhouse units and in the garden area north of the SSW rowhouse unit. The above associations indicate definite variations between pipe-bore size categories and areas of occurrence through time. These associa­ tions are compared with other archaeological evidence in chapter 4 to determine structural dates and contemporaneity: chapter 4 also includes a discussion of the factors mentioned above as they relate to the re­ liability of the Binford pipe-stem dates. Type 2 pipe stems have also been used in this report to approximately date individual features based on the Binford procedure (this evidence 410 is summarized in Table 37 )• The results of dating individual fea­ tures by this means are far from accurate in many cases and must be compared with dates derived by independent means. We can, at best, hope for a very generalized chronological arrangement of features from earliest to latest, since the frequencies of features assigned to in­ dividual date brackets are disproportional and inconsistent with the known period and density of site occupation. For example, only one feature (F. 88) was found to date between 1730 and 1740. The remain­ ing features were assigned post-1740 dates in the following frequencies: 1740-1750 (4 features), 1750-1760 (20 features), 1760-1770 (3 features), and later than 1770 (2 features). Discussion: The following general conclusions may be drawn from the anal­ ysis of Kaolin pipes. 1. The results of the Binford procedure for dating stem fragments must be evaluated in terms of external and internal variables which affected the site's occupation and the use of kaolin pipes by its inhabitants. Other authors, such as Noel Hume (1963) and Wylie (1969), have documented important conditions which affect the validity of Binford.' s formula. 2. Nationality of use, country of manufacture, and date of use have been suggested in the text for specific kaolin pipe types when applicable. The two most significant distinctions appear to be between the use of Dutch versus English pipes and between the time of use of spur-heel versus flattened-heel pipe styles. Dutch pipes were used more frequently during the French period of control. This suggestion is based on the early date (1713) assigned to 15 Dutch stems and on comparative evidence which identifies the use of obtuse bowl forms (characteristic of 411 Dutch pipes at the site) between ca. 1650 and 1725. Flattened- heel pipe styles were in use between ca. 1730 and 1760. Spur- heel pipe styles were in use between ca. 1750 and 1780. These dates are based largely on the Binford formula although they are in part confirmed by distributional evidence. 3. English-made pipes were in use throughout the period of site occupation; greater frequencies occurred during the period of British control. 4. Kaolin pipes were much less frequent during the period of French control; this is a measure of the relatively low popu­ lation during this period and, possibly, of the extensive use of Micmac pipes by the French. 5. Kaolin pipes are excellent indicators of trash deposit loca­ tions and periods of use. 412 TABLE 37 Kaolin Pipe Feature Associations and Confuted Bore Diameter Date Steins t Frequency 3 29 6 6 1 1 1 3 3 34 12 13 14 16 20 21 Bowls: Frequency Cl, CII SC, Cat. 1, T3 (1) (1 ) Cl, CII SB, T5 (1) SC, T1 (1) SC, Cat. 1, T3 (1) (1 ) Cl, 1 1 2 4 1 1 4 3 3 1 4 19 6 12 17 13 84 85 1 29 87 88 89 90 94 97 11 6 1 1 1 1 2 7 sc, Cat. 1, T3 Cl] Cl, CI, SA, T3 (1 T1 SC, Cat. 1, (1 Cl, CI, Cl, SC, SB, SB, T1 (1 T1 (1 T8 Cl CI, CI, CI, CII SA, SB, SB, T4 (1 T1 (1 T8 (2 Cl CI, CI, SB, T1 (1 SC, Cat. 1, T3 (1 CI, SB, H * 29 30 38 44 45 46 54 71 74 75 77 79 80 81 82 83 n Cl, Tl, Vl 413 (Cont.) Steins: Frequency 109 116 118 123 124 126 128 129 130 132 134 135 138 142 144 145 146 147 148 150 152 153 154 156 160 209 213 1 1 8 12 1 5 2 2 4 1 5 4 1 5 214 215 2 20 216 221 227 230 231 233 236 238 240 241 248 249 252 6 1 5 11 1 1 1 2 3 2 8 14 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 6 Bowls: Frequency CII (1) CI# CII SA, T1 (1) (1) CI, sc, Tl (1) CI, CI, SB, Tl (1) SC, Cat. 1, T2 (1) CI, CI, CI, SC, SC, sc, T2 (1) T4 (1) Tl (1) CII CI, CI, CI, CI, (1) SB, Tl sc, T3 Tl SC, SC, Cat. 1, T3 (1) (1) (1> (1) 414 (Cont.) Stems: Frequency 262 263 25 3 265 267 16 41 271 282 283 284 296 297 298 299 302 310 314 321 341 2 2 1 1 17 5 1 1 1 7 5 1 3 Bowls: Frequency CI, CI, CI, CI, CI, CI, CII CII sc, Cat. 1, T3 (1) sc. Cat. 1, Tl (1) sc. Cat. 1, T3 (1) SB, SB, SB, Tl (1) Tl (1) T8 (4) (1) (1) CI, SA, T2 (1) CII (1) Figure Figure Designation 42 Kaolin Pipes Taxonomic Designation (Actual Size) Catalog 2 Humber, MS A CI, SA, Tl 687 B T2 2054 C T2 645 D T4 580 E T6 1400 F T7, Va G Vb 164 H Vc 849 I Vd 2297 J Ve 1735 K SB, Tl, Va 2120 L Vb 1483 M Vc 1459 N T2 552 416 Figure Figure Designation A Kaolin Pipes (Actual Sise) 43 Taxonomic Designation T3 1468 B T4 1834 C T5 243 D T6 2378 E T7 1420 F CIf SB, Catalog ^ Number, MS SC, Tl 2620 G T2 3284 H T3 2212 I T4 2073 J Steins, Tl 433 K Stems, Tl 1446 L Steins, Tl 1353 M Stems, Tl 2104 418 S> /®\ ft**' W G j^qptaaac*$ JEW’S-HARPS The Jew's-harp is a small musical instrument consisting of two metal parts: a lyre-shaped iron or brass frame and a slender iron vibrator (tongue) which is attached to the curved end of the frame head and extended past the length of the frame shanks. The distal end of the vibrator is curved or bent to form a finial. There appear to have been two different techniques of manufac­ turing Jew's-harps: specimens). casting (brass specimens) and hand forging (iron A notch to receive the iron vibrator is cut into one side of the frame head on iron specimens; this feature is cast on brass specimens. The vibrator is set into this notch and secured by hammer­ ing metal from both sides of the notch down over the vibrator edges. Classification and Description The classification and description of Jew's-harps is based on the recognition of five variables: marks. material, form, shape,size, and Three levels of taxonomic differentiation are defined from these variables: the series, type, and variety. are based on differences in form. Series distinctions In this context form refers to the structure or morphology of an artifact rather than to any specific attribute such as shape or metal type. in frame metal. Types are based on difference Varieties are based on differences in frame shape. Size distinctions and the presence and type of marks are presented as descriptive attributes only. 419 420 Series A Flattened Frame Head, Parallel Shanks Type 1 Iron Figure 44 a 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): length, 43.3, 35.3, greater than 28.6, 39.1; width, 33.3, 25.1, 33.2, 33.2. Iron specimens exhibit flattening across the frame head and down both sides to the point of shank head juncture. Shanks retain the square shape of the preformed iron stock. Type 1 specimens exhibit a triangular head shape with rounded comers. Type 2 Brass Figure 44 B-E 8 specimens Dimensions (7 specimens): Length 36.3-39.4, average, 37.6; width, 22.8-29.2, average, 25.0. Brass specimens are flattened across the frame head and down both sides to the point of shank juncture. Frame shanks are square in cross section. The frame head is triangular in shape. Seven spec­ imens show a stanped mark at the center of the flattened frame head. Three different marks are represented: a B (2 specimens), an R (3 specimens), and a symbol composed of two elements, each similar to an H with concave sides (2 specimens). Except for one specimen, this saiqple of seven exhibits a great uniformity in both width and length dimensions. An additional specimen represents a second size category with a width of 14.3 nxn, and a length of 26.2 mm. Series B Square- to Diamond-Shaped Cross Section Throughout, Tapered Shanks Type 1 Brass, file marks on all surfaces Variety a Round-shaped frame head. Figure 44 F-J 70 specimens Dimensions (57 specimens): length, 38.5-66.0, average 55.0, standard deviation, 6.83; width, 23.0-30.0, average 25.8, standard deviation, 1.87. Two size categories based on length are tentatively suggested: one narrowly defined between 48.0 nxn and 50.0 ran, and one broad category between 54.0 ran and 61.0 mm. No further size distinctions could be made although other dimensions such as width and weight were not tested. A correlation coefficient 421 of .75 reveals that the variables of length and width are fairly closely related. Variety b Triangular-shaped frame head. Figure 44 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 2 length, 51.3E; width, 28.4. Iron File marks are not present on iron specimens. There are several other attributes which distinguish this type from Series B, Type 1. The center ridge, which forms one c o m e r of the square iron stock, is hammered flat across the entire frame head. This pro­ duces a beveled effect on the head surface. There is a great deal of variation between specimens in the extent and degree of this bevel. Variety a Round- to slightly oval-shaped frame head. Figure 44 L-N 24 specimens Dimensions (18 specimens): length, 52.0-66.7, average, 30.3, standard deviation, 4.30. A standard deviation of 4.30 for width indicates that this is a highly variable dimension, although directly related to var­ iation in length as suggested by a high coefficient of corre­ lation, .85. Two broad length categories were identified: one between 54.0 mm and 58.0 mm, and a second between 61.0 and 65.0 mm. Variety b Triangular-shaped frame head. Figure 44 0 15 specimens Dimensions (15 specimens): Length, 51.7-62.0, average, 56.4j width, 34.0-42.5, average, 38.5. Width and length measurements deviate moderately from their respective means. Table 38 sunmarices metric attributes for all Jew's-harp types that were described above. tive measure has been computed. One additional between-type compara­ TABLE 38 axonomic signation Description Fre­ quency Fort Michilimackinac Jew's-Harps Measurements Percent of Total Total Measured Width Range Width Mean Width SD Length Range Length Mean Length SD A CC ties A rype 1 rype 2 Iron, flat head 4 3.27 4 25.1-33.3 Brass, flat head 8 6.55 7 22.8-29.2 25.0 Brass, round head 70 57 23.0-30.0 25.8 35.3-43.3 36.6-39.4 37.6 45% 38.5-66.0 55.0 6.83 67% .75 52.0-66.7 59.7 4.63 61% .85 51.7-62.0 56.4 ties B rype 1 Variety b 1 m 00• rype Brass, trian­ gular head 57.3 1 Iron, round head 24 19.67 18 22.5-37.3 30.3 Iron, trian­ gular head 15 12.29 15 34.0-42.5 38.5 122 100 1.87 28.4 51.3 E 2 Variety a Variety b TOTAL -Average percent of frame length represented by shank length -Correlation coefficient between length and width -Standard deviation 4.3 52% 422 Variety a Figure Figure Designation 44 Jew's-Harps Taxonomic Designation Catalogue Nuniber, MS2 A SA, Tl 650 B SA, T2 2593 C SA, T2 1451 D SA, T2 3468 E SA, T2 186 F SB, Tl, Va 2791 G SB, Tl, Va 2880 J SB, Tl, Va 2060 I SB, Tl, Va 92 J SB, Tl, Va 23 K SB, Tl, Vb 1 L SB, T2, Va 2686 M SB, T2, Va 1434 N SB, T2, Va 1053 0 SB, T2, Vb 2677 425 Associational Evidence: Series B, Type 2, Varieties a and b Jew's-harps have been com­ bined into one comparative category since the analysis of individual varieties did not produce significant results. two varieties differ only in combin tion. discussion: The fact that these the shape of frame head justifies this Three samples will thus be compared in the following Series A: Series B, Type 1: and Series B, Type 2. The distribution of Series A specimens within the site appears to be random; there is no observable concentration or association be­ tween this category and any specific structures or artifact types. A highly contrasting distribution is noted between Series B, Types 1 and 2. Each type is found in one major area which is exclu­ sive from the other. Approximately 43 percent of Series B, Type 1 specimens are found concentrated in a circular area within the center of the SW rcwhouse unit and between this unit and the SSW rcwhouse unit. Only one specimen of Series B, Type 2 is found within this entire area. A number of Series B, Type 2 specimens are found con­ centrated in the area of the NNW rcwhouse unit, whereas only one specimen of Series B, Type 1 has been found in this area. Also, an area within the northwest c o m e r of Feature 5 (earliest French stock­ ade) , contains four Series B, Type 2 specimens and no Series B, Type 1 specimens. Other areas of presence and absence are approximately the same between the two types, although both appear to be randomly distributed in areas other than those above. The notation of spe­ cific structural features within which these different types were found adds little to their interpretation. Series B, Type 1, Variety 426 a specimens were found in four different features: F. 296 (1), British Zone; F. 297 (1), basement in the SSW rowhouse; F. 248 (1) pit in the SW rowhouse; and F. 215 (2) basement in the SW rowhouse unit. One each of Series B, Type 2, Variety a specimens were found in three individual features: F. 296, British Zone; F. 124, clay apron around the commanding officer's house; and F. 83, basement in the NW rowhouse unit. Comparative Evidence: Jew's-harps have been found in small quantities at a number of historic sites (Table 39 ). Several of the sites listed contrib­ ute little to an understanding of differences in Jew's-harps types through time, either because the specimens cannot be adequately dated, or they cannot be identified as to specific type. The single brass specimen from Pemaquid, Maine, could apparently date between 1625 and 1775; the one brass specimen from Corchaug, New York, appears to represent a different style (that is, similar to Series A, Type 2) due to the R mark; and the six brass specimens from the Strickler Site, Pennsylvania, cannot be identified for comparative purposes. The remaining sites which have produced iron specimens range in date from 1640 to 1830. Brass specimens other than those problematical examples already noted appear to date after 1740. This comparative table gives little evidence for suggesting a time difference between iron and brass specimens; both types occur during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and early nineteenth centuries. TABLE 39 Site Jkpproxinate site Detaa Length* Width* Michiliawckinac Typology 50E 50E 21.2E 28.6E SB, Tl, Va SB, T2, Va 48E 39E 3IE 24E SA, T2 SB, T2, Va 11 66.5E 31.SE SB, T2, Va 11 60E 39E SB. T2. Va 21 11 50.5E 69. B 11 67 Fre­ quency Paaaquid, IB He. 11 Corchaug, a.i. 1640-1660 Strickier. Jew'a-Harpa Co^iarative Evidence IB 11 Source bOlCvKe IpSUv ev 6B Penn. Shantok. Cam. lb20*17W Bell. wie. 1680-1730 Penaacola, Fla. Tex. Almo. Tax. 1756-1771 1740™- Langlac. Ont. Big Tree. N.I. ca, 1770 Orringh Tavern, B.T. Canavaogua, H.r. ca. 1800 Spokane. ■aah. 1800-1826 Poeey, Okla. 1830-1840 (1) SB. T2, Vb SB, T2, Va 38 XU M Plttry 1963; 35 " SUtA 19052 SB, T2. Va Tixinell and Aabler 1967i IB 63 11 IB 4SE 4tt 28 71-72 SB, Tl, Va SA, Tl, (7) SB, Tl, Va 2B SB. Tl, Va UiyVl 19b5« 11 11 SB, T2, Va IB SB, T2, Va 3B 57x26, 51x22, 48x26 SB. Tl, Va 2B 46-48 SB, Tl, Va * Converted fma inchee to m where neceaaery ■ Braaa I Iron b j 427 Himade. 1722-1752 ” aAlVtn ItM) i 21 .E j/“ 55 ™ U y M X9v5* 55 “ Hiytt 19b5» 55 Wyckoff and Barr 1968: 42-43 428 Historical Evidence: In the hopes of supplementing the archaeological record, a number of trade good and personal property lists dating between the seventeenth and early nineteenth centuries were reviewed. Five ref­ erences to Jew's-harps were found as follows: — "Jews Harps 6 for a large Racoon" British (Flick 1925: V. 4, 895) . dated 1765, — "Jews Harps small and large” (Flick 1921: V. 3, 334). — "20 Groce of Small Jews H a r p s 42/--- 42" dated 1770, British (Flick 1931: V. 7, 782). — "20 Groce of the smallest brass Jews Harps" dated 1769, British (Flick 1931: V. 7, 780). — "brass jews1-harps" dated 1749 from a British document (Jacobs 1966: 100). dated 1761, British The first four references are from the letters and documents of Sir William Johnson. These citations give us information on the relative value, size, and material of Jew's-harps. Interpretations: Several problems have been defined with respect to understand­ ing differences in the frequency and types of Jew's-harps found on North American historic sites. First, nearly 4-1/2 times as many specimens were recovered from Fort Michilimackinac than from a total of specimens at 14 other sites which have been reported. Although Jew's-harps are very common at Fort Michilimackinac, it is clear that they are uncommon in the majority of archaeological sites and in the historical literature. Second, the distributional evidence tx I Tin-Glazed Earthenware Type A Blue and White France) (eighteenth century, England and Figure 46 A-L 4065 specimens (217 French on the basis of physical attributes; these are discussed separately in confeination with Type B French specimens at the end of the Type B description). Vessel Form Frequency and Measurements: -Plates (322 s h erds): rims (200-260 range, 220-240 most frequent, 17 specimens measured); bases (80-160 range, 8 specimens measured). -Bowls (395 sherds): rims (140-220 range, 180-220 most frequent, 2 2 specimens measured); bases (80-120 range, 1 2 specimens measured). -Cups (422 sherds): rims (80-100 range, 3 specimens mea­ sured) ; bases (40-80 range, 4 specimens measured). -Mugs (13 sherds): sured) . bases (60-100 range, 5 specimens mea­ -Cup or Mug Rims (114 sherds). -Miscellaneous (2795 sherds). 440 Distribution: -High frequency: Church-Priest's house area; NNW rowhouse unit; area between NNW rcwhouBe unit and north wall of F. 5; SSW rowhouse unit and garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: unit. Feature Associations F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. Interpretation: Type b 21 215 262 263C (1) (1) (2) (3) Interpretation: Discussion: 149 150 215 216 231 236 248 255 (1 ) (1 ) (3) (2 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 262 263C 265 282 267 306 341 (2 ) (3) (2 ) (1 ) (4) (1 ) (2 ) (eighteenth century, England and France) (76 French on the basis of physical attributes) Feature Associations F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. French and British vise, 1715-1781, greater frequency after ca. 1750. Polychrome 187 specimens (based'on 1216 specimens): F. 83 (1 0 ) F. 87 (1 ) F. 8 8 (1 ) F. 1 0 1 (1 ) F. 118 (4) F. 1 2 0 (2 ) F. 139 (2 ) F. 143 (1 ) 54 (1 ) (1 ) 70 (3) 71 (3) 74 (2 ) 79 (2 ) 81 (2 ) 82 (3) 21 NW rowhouse unit; SW rowhouse F. F. F. (based on 111 specimens): 267 (2) 296 (4) 310 (2) French and British, 1717-1781. Type A and Type B French sherds (293 specimens) Figure 46 G-L Distribution: -High frequency: SW rowhouse unit, garden area south of the SW rowhouse unit; garden area south of the SSW row* house unit. -Less frequent but present: commanding officer's house, NNW rowhouse unit, SSW rowhouse unit. 441 Feature Associations F. F. F. F. F. 21 30 77 (4) (1) (1) 88 (1) 118 (3) Interpretation: Type C F. F. F. F. F. (based on 293 specimens): 209 (1) 2 1 0 (1 ) 229 (1) 240 (2) 248 (1) F. F. F. F. F. 254 262 263C 267 271 (1) (2) (1) (1) (1) F. 293 (1) F. 296 (2) French and British use, 1715-1781, greater frequency between ca. 1735 -1760. Brown and White (eighteenth century, France) 168 specimens Distribution: -High frequency: NW rowhouse unit; guardhouse (F. 60); garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: Church area; garden area north of NNW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. F. 54 82 85 90 (1) (1) (1) (1) Interpretation: Type D F. F. F. F. 118 267 296 314 (2) (1) (1) (1) French use, ca. 1720-1750. Powdered Blue or Purple 161 specimens Distribution: -High frequency: area between F. 3 and provisions store' house; garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit; SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: NW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. 21 (1) 150 (2) 159 (1) F. 250 (1) F. 267 (4) F. 302 (1) F. 3; outside north wall of 442 Interpretation: Group II French and British use, 1750-1781, greater frequency after 1760. English Cream-Colored Earthenware Type A Plain (ca. 1765-1780, England) Figure 46 O-P, R-V 2977 specimens Vessel form frequency and measurements tative of all Group II types): (measurements represen­ -Plates (654 sherds): rims (220-280 range, 260 most fre­ quent, 27 specimens measured); bases (140-160 range, 150 most frequent, 15 specimens measured). -Saucers (59 sherds): rims (140 most frequent, 7 speci­ mens measured); bases (60-80 range, 1 2 specimens mea­ sured) . -Bowls (33 sherds): rims (120-180 range, 12 specimens measured); bases (50-80 range, 8 specimens measured). -Cups (258 sherds): rims (80-160 range, 34 specimens mea­ sured) > bases (40-60 range, 11 specimens measured). -Bawl or saucer bases -Miscellaneous (708 sherds). (1265 sherds). Distribution: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: SW rowhouse unit; Church area; garden areas north and south of NNW rowhouse unit; area north of SW rowhouse unit and within west stockade of F. 5. Feature Associations: F. 6 (1 ) F. 2 1 (1 1 ) F. 75 (1 ) F. 79 (1 ) F. 81 (4) F. 82 (7) F. 83 (2 ) F. 104 (1 ) F. 1 1 2 (1 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 118 (2 ) (4) 129 (1 ) 142 (3) 146 (1 0 ) 151 (1 ) 159 (1 ) 209 (2 ) 2 1 0 (4) 120 F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 213 (1 ) 215 (1 1 ) 216 (1 ) 2 2 1 (3) 229 (30) 230 (1 ) 247 (1 ) 248 (1 ) 262 (2 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 263C 265 267 281 296 297 299 315 321 (9) (4) (13) (1 ) (59) (3) (8 ) (1 ) (1 ) 443 Interpretation: Type B British, 1765-1781, greater frequency after 1770. Relief Borders (ca. 1765-1780, England) Figure 46 M-N, Q 678 specimens Vessel form frequency: -Plates (365 sherds). -Saucers (57 sherds). -Bowls (12 sherds). -Cups (178 sherds). -Hugs (60 sherds). Distribution and Feature Associations: -Duplicate that of Type A. Interpretation: Type C British, 1765-1781, greater frequency after 1770. Polychrome (ca. 1765-1780, England) 84 specimens Distribution and Feature Association: -Duplicate that of Type A. Interpretation: Type D British, 1765-1781, greater frequency after 1770. Handles, Finials, Spouts (ca. 1765-1780, England) 44 specimens Distribution and Feature Associations: -Duplicate that of Type A. Interpretation: Type E 20 British, 1765-1781, greater frequency after 1770. Transfer Printed (ca. 1765-1780, England) specimens Distribution and Feature Associations: -Duplicate that of Type A. 444 Interpretations Group III Type A British, 1765-1781, greater frequency after 1770. Coarse Earthenware Unglazed Redware (eighteenth century, probably North America) 9 specimens Interpretation: Type B none. Brown Glazed Redware (eighteenth century, England, France, or North America) Figure 46 W-Y 227 specimens Vessel form measurements: rims (200, 2 specimens measured); bases (80-100 range, 3 specimens measured). Distribution: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: area between north wall of F. 5 and south wall of NNW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. F. F. F. 14 16 54 109 117 132 (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (2 ) Interpretation: Type C F. F. F. F. F. 254 265 267 299 339 (1 ) (1 ) (4) (1 ) (1 ) British, 1760-1781. Green and Purple Decorated Redware (eighteenth cen­ tury, probably French) 4 specimens Interpretation: Type D none. Green Glazed Earthenware (eighteenth century, probably France or England, possibly North America) Figure 46 z-BB 319 specimens 445 Vessel Measurements* rims (230-300 range, 260 most frequent, 8 specimens measured)/ bases (120 most frequent, 3 speci­ mens measured). Distribution: Type D coarse earthenware has been divided into light green (255 specimens), and dark green (64 specimens) on the basis of color. Light green: -High frequency: Priest's house and attached black­ smith's shop (164 specimens). -Less frequent but present: unit (12 specimens). center of SW rowhouse Dark green: -High frequency: house units. garden area between SW and SSW row­ Feature Associations: Light Green Dark Green F. 6 (1) F. 85 (1) F. 209 (7) F. 242 (2) F. 21 (1) F. 6 6 (2) F. 117 (1) F. 242 (2) F. 352 (1) Interpretations: Type E Light green— French, 1740-1760j Dark green— French use suggested on the basis of feature associ ations. Brown and Green Glased Earthenware (first half of the eighteenth century, probably France or French Canada) 33 specimens Interpretation: Type F none. Yellow G l u e d Earthenware (first half of the eighteenth century, probably France or French Canada) 44 specimens Interpretation: none. 446 Type G Carmel Glazed Earthenware (eighteenth century, prob­ ably England or France) 38 specimens Feature Associations: F. 81 (1) F. 215 (1) F. 238 (1) Interpretation: Type H. none. Slip-Decorated Earthenware (eighteenth century, Eng­ land) Figure 46 101 F. 259B (1) F. 265 (1) CC specimens Distribution: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit} garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. 90 (1) 231 (1) 259C(1) Interpretation: Group IV F. F. F. 262 (1) 265 (1) 310 (1) British, 1760-1781. Fine Earthenware Type A Whieldon Type (Brown and Green Splashed Glaze)(17551775, England) 9 specimens Interpretation: Type B British, 1760-1780. Whieldon Type (Tortoise Shell Glaze) England) (1755-1775, 69 specimens Distribution: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit: garden area south of SSW rowhouse unit. 447 -Less frequent but present: garden area north of SSW rawhouse unit; British soldiers' barracks (F. 3). Feature Associations: F. 21 (1) F. 129 (1) F. 267 (3) Interpretation: Type C 10 Whieldon-Wedgwood Type (Fruit and Vegetable Motifs) (ca. 1755-1775, England) specimens Interpretation: Type D 68 British# 1760-1781. British, 1755-1775. (NEW TYPE) Jackfield, Black Glazed Red Earthenware, very glossy surface, relief floral decoration common. Manufactured at Jackfield, Shropshire, England, be­ tween 1760 and 1775 (Mankowitz and Haggar 1957: 117). specimens Distribution: -High frequency: NNW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of the NNW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: SSW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. 21 (1) F. 155 (1) F. 267 (1) Interpretation: Class B British, 1770-1781. Stoneware Group I English White Saltglazed Stoneware Type A Plain White (ca. 1740-1770, England) Figure 47 a 1796 specimens Vessel form frequency (vessel form measurements are presented after the discussion of Type B) t 448 -Plates (931 sherds, including 78 plain rims). -Mugs (8 sherds). -Cups (266 sherds). -Bowls (78 sherds). -Saucers (15 sherds). -Cup or saucer (443 sherds). -Miscellaneous bases and handles (29 sherds). -Saucer or bowl bases (53 sherds). Distribution: -High frequency: British soldiers 1 barracks, F. 3 (espe­ cially in the south one-third of this unit); SSW row­ house unit; garden areas north and south of the SSW rowhouse w i t . -Less frequent but present: NNW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of the NNW rowhouse unit; Church area; SW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 20 21 30 51 54 79 81 82 (1 ) (18) (2 ) (2 ) (2 ) (2 ) (3) (3) Interpretations: Type B F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 83 85 118 139 140 141 215 230 (2 ) (2 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (2 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 238 240 246 248 255 262 26 3C 265 (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (3) (1 ) (3) (7) (6 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 267 275 29 3A 296 298 299 352 (18) (1 ) (1 ) (1 0 ) (1 ) (2 ) (3) English manufacture, used during both the late French period of occupation (1740-1760) and throughout the British period of control (1760-1781). Relief Decorated (ca. 1740-1770, England) Figure 47 B-D 560 specimens (546 specimens are relief molded plate rims; 4 specimens are relief molded (pastoral design) teapot frag­ ments) . Distribution: -Duplicate that of Type A. 449 Feature Associations: 2 1 (6 ) F. F. 81 (2 ) F. 82 (1 ) 83 (1 ) F. F. 118 (2 ) F. 135 (1 ) F. 136 (1 ) Interpretation: Discussion: F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 138 215 229 230 260A 261 262 (1 ) (1 ) (3) (1 ) (2 ) (1 ) (1 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 26 3C 265 267 296 310 314 321 (5) (2 ) (1 1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (2 ) English manufacture, 1740-1781. Class B, Group I, Type A and Type B (Measurements) -Plates: rims (220-300 range, 220-240 most frequent, 20 specimens measured)j bases (120-180 range, 140-160 most frequent, 16 spe­ cimens measured). -Cups: rims (80-140 range, 80-100 most frequent, 19 specimens measured); bases (30-60 range, 40 most frequent, 13 specimens measured). -Bowls: rims (100-200 range, 120-140 most frequent, 13 specimens measured); bases (30 most frequent, 11 specimens measured). -Saucers: Type C rims (120 most frequent, 3 specimens measured). Scratch Blue (ca. 1740-1770, England) Figure 47 E-F 255 specimens Distribution: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unitj British soldiers' barracks (F. 3) . -Less frequent but present: garden areas north and south of NNW rowhouse unit; SW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. F. F. 21 118 215 216 226 (1 ) (1 ) (2 ) (1 ) (1 ) Interpretation: F. F. F. F. F. 241 252 262 267 275 (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (3) (1 ) F. 279 (1 ) F. 296 (6 ) F. 299 (2 ) 1750-1775, British. 450 Type D Polychrome (ca. 1740-1770, England) Figure 47 G 166 specimens Distribution: Similar to other Class B, Group I types. Feature Associations: F. F. F. F. 21 79 263C 267 (1) (2) (1) (3) Interpretation: Grow? II F. F. F. 281 (2) 290 (1) 296 (3) English manufacture, 1740-1781. Stoneware Miscellaneous Type A Rhenish Stoneware (eighteenth century, Germany) Figure 47 H-I 8 6 specimens Vessel form measurements: -Mugs: rims (ca. 60, 3 specimens measured); bases (ca. 60, 3 specimens measured). Distribution: -High frequency: garden area north of SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: SSW rowhouse unit; area b e ­ tween NNW rowhouse unit and north stockade of F. 5; British soldiers' barracks; garden area south of SSW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. 21 (1) 72 (2) 130 (3) Interpretation: Type B F. 142 F. 158 F. 267 (1) (2) (2) 1770-1780, German. Brown Stoneware (eighteenth century, probably England) Figure 47 J-K 229 specimens (this total number of sherds probably represents no more than 1 0 vessels). 451 Distribution: -High frequency: area immediately outside of the north wall of F. 3; center house of SW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: Church area; area immediately west of east wall of Church; area south of NW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. 16 F. 21 F. 81 F. 130 (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (5) Interpretation: Type C F. F. F. F. 144 156 241 339 (2 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) Probably French# ca. 1730-1760. clusion is very indefinite. This con­ Red Stoneware (mid-eighteenth century# England) 17 specimens Interpretation: Class C British manufacture. Porcelain Group I Chinese Export Porcelain Type A Blue and White (eighteenth century# China) Figure 47 L-O 3095 specimens Vessel form frequency (measurements presented at the end of Group I discussion): -Cups (181 sherds). -Saucers (189 sherds)* -Bowls (163 sherds). -Mugs (28 sherds). -Miscellaneous (2534 sherds). Distribution: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of the SSW rowhouse unit; Church area. -Less frequent but present: (F. 3). British soldiers* barracks 452 Feature Associations: F. 2 1 (2 ) F. 79 (1 ) F. 82 (1 ) F. 83 (1 ) F. 104 (1 ) F. 118 (1 ) F. 138 (1 ) Interpretation: Type B F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 142 146 148 154 156 213 215 (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (5) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 229 230 248 263 261 262 265 (3) (2 ) (2 ) (1 ) (1 ) (4) (1 ) F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 267 276 296 297 299 314 352 (19) (1 ) (2 0 ) (1 ) (2 ) (1 ) (2 ) 1750-1781 primary period of use at the site. Polychrome (eighteenth centuryr China) Figure 47 p 460 specimens Di s tribut ion: -High frequency: SSW rowhouse unit; garden areas north and south of SSW rowhouse unit. Feature Associations: F. F. F. F. F. 81 215 229 233 248 (1) (1) (1) (2) (1) Interpretation: Type B F. F. F. F. 262 263 267 297 (1) (7) (2) (2) F. F. F. 299 (1) 302 (1) 308 (1) F. F. F. 310 (1) 339 (1) 352 (6 ) 1760-1781, primary period of use at the site, Chinese manufacture. Brown Glaxe (eighteenth century, China) 46 specimens Distribution: -Duplicate that of Types A and B. Feature Associations: F. 93 (1) F. 262 (1) F. 282 (1) Interpretation: 1760-1781 period of use, Chinese manufacture 453 Discussion: Class C, Group I (Measurements) -Cups: rims (80-140 range, 100-120 moat frequent, 14 specimens measured); bases (30-60 range, 40-60 most frequent, 34 spe­ cimens measured). -Saucers: rime (120-200 range, 140-160 most frequent, 22 speci­ mens measured)i bases (60-120 range, 80-100 most frequent, 6 6 specimens measured). -Bowls: 100 rims range, Group II (140-200 range, 8 specimens measured)j bases specimens measured). (70- 2 English Porcelain Type a Type -B Type c Liverpool (about 1770, England) Worcester (1765-1775, England) Blue and White (Miscellaneous) (1760-1780, England) Figure 47 Q-R 83 specimens Distribution: -High frequency: center unit of SSW rowhouse unit. -Less frequent but present: garden areas north and south of NNW rowhouse unit; center area of F. 5 stockade. Feature Associations: F. 121 (1) F. 249 (1) F. 267 (1) Interpretation: 1760-1781, period of use at the site, British. Dis ciossion: The above description of ceramics distribution and feature associational evidence has permitted the dating of many ceramic types based on their site context. These new date determinations are more precise than those suggested by Miller and Stone on the basis of his­ torical evidence alone. As such, the new dates reflect the period of 454 use of specific ceramic types at the site rather than their period of manufacture and use which is reflected by the Miller and Stone dates. The new dates suggested, however, have nearly always been within the date range originally determined by Miller and Stone. Data on the size range of specific ceramic type forms has been included to facil­ itate the conparison and identification of ceramic types found on other sites. The type of evidence provided by ceramics analyses is partic­ ularly valuable for the purposes of this report; the dating of ceramics is more reliable than the majority of other artifact categories de­ scribed; different ceramics types and forms are reliable and sensitive indicators of the different social adaptations and activities and dem­ ographic changes which characterized the site; these and other aspects of the interpretative potential of ceramics data are considered in the conclusions presented in Chapter 4. Figure 46 Ceramics (Is.5) Taxonomic Designation Figure Designation Catalog Number, MS Ta Plate rim 2073 B Plate rim 2926 C Plate rim 1582 D Bowl rim 2704 E Bowl base 2536 F Bowl base 310 G Bowl (French) 2091 H Bowl (French) 1797 I Bowl base (French) 1906 J Cup (French) 1556 K Plate rim (French) 1120 L Plate rim (French) 2472 A CA, GI, Tb Plate rim 3268 N Plate rim 1438 O Ta Bowl base 3310 M CA, GII, P Bowl 1 Q Tb Bowl 2253 R Ta Saucer 1038 S Saucer 2704 T Saucer 2253 U Cup 3004 V Cup 3307 W CA, G U I , Tb Plate rim 2084 X Bowl 2719 y Mug 2891 CA, GIII, Td Large bowl 2851 AA Large bowl 2080 BB Large bowl 1188 z CC CA, GIII, Th Mug 1 456 B M Figure 47 Figure Designation Ceramics (1:.5> Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS A CB, GI, Ta Plate rim 2345 B Tb Plate rim 2294 C Plate rim 2704 D Plate rim 2137 E Tc Cup 2460 F Cup 2100 G Td Cup rim 1 H CB, GII, Ta Mug rim 1 Mug base I j Tb Storage Vessel K L Storage vessel CC, GI, Ta Ci5 > 2834 1038 1 354 M Saucer 3297 N Saucer 1 0 Saucer 3027 p Q r CC, GII Tb Punch bowl 1697 Sauceboat 2851 Mug base 3208 SPOONS A total of 61 spoons and spoon fragments have been recovered at Fort Michilimackinac during the 1959 through 1966 excavations. Spoons are classified by series, type, and variety. are distinguished by the different metal of manufacture: iron, brass, or silver. pewter, Since the majority of specimens are incom­ plete, the classification of pewter spoons two parts: Series stems and bowls. (Series A) is divided into Series A stem types are distinguished on the basis of stem shape; bowl types are distinguished on the basis of bowl shape. Varieties are distinguished by decoration and/or minor shape differences. Manufacturer's marks have been noted on several specimens and are presented as descriptive attributes. Table 41 summarizes spoon feature associations. Series A Pewter (Stems) Type 1 Offset stem end SA, T1 stems exhibit a broad, offset area at the handle end of the stem. The stem tip is slightly up-curved on all specimens. Variety a Thin stem end. Figure 48 A-B; Figure 50 A 7 fragmentary specimens, 1 complete specimen Dimensions (5 specimens): maximum stem width, 22.9 average. The single complete (restorable) specimen (Figure 48 B) is 194.6 ran in total length with a bowl width of 40.0 mm. The bowl bottom exhibits a rat-tail stem extension which extends nearly half the bowl length. This specimen is marked on the stem back with 3 identical, inpressed symbols; each symbol consists of a crown over the letters IB or EB. 459 460 Variety b Thick stem end, raised loop decoration on stem surface at tip. Figure 48 C; Figure 50 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : Variety c Thick, narrow, Btem end. Figure 48 D 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): Variety d maximum stem width, 14.8. Plain stem surface; crest-like decoration on stem back. Figure 48 G; Figure 50 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 2 maximum stem width, 17.3. Small, narrow stem end. Figure 48 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : Variety f maximum stem width, 16.8, 16.8. Knobs on each side of stem at bowl end of stem offset; crest-like decoration on stem back. Figure 48 E; Figure 50 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety e maximum stem width, 21.9. maximum stem width, 22.6. Tapered and rounded stem end The ends on all SA, T2 stems are wide, rounded, and taper to a narrow shaft at the point of bowl junction. Variety a Decorated stem surface. Figure 48 H; Figure 50 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : maximum stem width, 21.2. This specimen has an unidentifiable mark on the stem back and a raised floral-like design on the stem surface. 461 Variety b Decorated stem surface. Figure 48 I; Figure 50 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum stem width, 21.2. This specimen has a raised, floral-like design on the stem surface. An identical specimen is illustrated by Price (1908: 4) who assigns a 1700-1760 date to this spoon type. Variety c Thick stem; small, circular, impressed mark on stem surface at tip. Figure 48 J; Figure 50 G 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): 22.7. maximum stem width, 19.2, 22.5, The marks on SA, T2, Vc specimens are impressed circles which contain a raised design of 4, spaced crowns. Variety d Thin stem, circular impression at stem tip, decor­ ated stem back. Figure 48 K; Figure 50 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum stem width, 20.8. This specimen has an inpressed circle segment at the stem tip. The back decoration consists of a crest-like symbol encircled by unidentifiable letters. Variety e Thin stem; central ridge on stem surface; raised letters on stem back. Figure 48 L; Figure 50 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum stem width, 20.4. The back of this specimen bears the letters -ONDON, and RUE. Variety f Thick stem, undecorated. Figure 48 N 3 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): 20.4. maximum stem width, 22.8, 22.1, 462 Variety g Thin, narrow stem; marked stem back. Figure 48 N 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum stem width, 11.3. The letter X is impressed into the back of this specimen. Variety h Thick stem with central ridge. Figure 48 0 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): maximum stem width, 20.4. This specimen has a sharply up-curved stem tip and a central ridge on the stem surface which extends from the stem tip to the point of minimum shaft diameter. Similar specimens are illustrated by Price (1908: 84-85). Noel Hume describes a similar specimen from Rosewell, Virginia (1962: 197-198), to which he assigns a date in the mid-eighteenth century. Series A, Category 1, Miscellaneous Stems Fifteen stem fragments which could not be assigned to specific SA types are included in this category. One specimen bears a mark on the back side consisting of the letters LONDON (Figure 50 J). Series A Type 1 Pewter (Bowls) Large, oblong bowl with rat-tail stem extension on bowl bottom. Figure 49 a 4 specimens Dimensions (4 specimens): bowl width, 44.2, 42.0, 42.3, 42.1. This type of bowl was probably comnon to both SA stem types. Noel Hume (1962: 197-198) describes a similar specimen from Rosewell, Virginia, to which he assigns a date in the mid-eighteenth century. Type 2 Round bowl Figure 49 b 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 3 bowl width, greater than 39.0. Small, oblong bcwl; rat-tail stem extension absent Figure 49 D 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): bowl width, 23.1, 20.8. 463 Series A, Category, Miscellaneous Bowls This category consists of 3 fragmentary specimens w h ich could not be assigned to specific SA b o w l types. Series B Iron Only 1 iron spoon was recovered (Figure 49 c) . This specimen has a diamond-shaped st e m end w h i ch tapers from a m aximum w idth of 2 0 . 1 m m to a minimum width o f 5.4 m m at stem-bowl junction. A slight rattail stem extension is n o ted on the bowl bottom. The s t e m is 111.2 m m long; the bowl is 63.1 m m long and 39.3 m m wide. Series C Brass Type 1 Small s t e m and b o w l fragments Figure 49 E-F 6 specimens Dimensions (2 stems); Dimensions (2 bowls): m a x i m u m s t e m width, m a x i m u m bowl width, 12.3, 20.3, 8.9. 21.3. One stem specimen has an unidentifiable mark on the back consisting of 3, rectangular impressions. Type 2 Large, s t e m fragments Figure 49 G 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): m a x i m u m s t e m width, 20.8, 20.8. These specimens could b e either fork or spoon s t e m ends. Series D Silver Figure 49 H Figure 50 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): stem length, stem width, 1 1 .2 . 72.0; bowl length, 34.7; m a x i m u m This specimen bears 2 impressed marks on the s t e m back; the first rep­ resents a seated w o m a n and the second a crown and harp. Th e s t e m has a rounded end and a central ridge. Discussion: A total of 12 spoon fragments w e r e recovered from 10 different feature contexts (Table affiliation, although two 41 ). (F. Three features are p rimarily of British 88 and F. 118) are associated w i t h French 464 structures. All spoon specimens were confcined on a single distribution map for interpretative purposes. This map indicates that spoons were associated most frequently with the SSW rowhouse unit. Spoons were also recovered from the SW rowhouse and from the guardhouse (F. 60). Both types of evidence indicate that spoons were in use pri­ marily during the British period of control; the "IONDCN” marks on several Series A specimens support this conclusion. Figure Figure Designation 48 Spoons Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS A SA, Tl, Va 1035 B Va 2982 C Vb 2729 D Vc 715 E Vd 2566 F Ve 2152 G Vf 2537 H SA, T2, Va 1347 I Vb 2292 J Vc 268 K Vd 2070 L Ve 2297 M Vf 2249 N vg 1222 O Vh 1 INCHES Figure Figure Designation 49 Spoons Taxonomic Designation Catalog . Number, MS' SA, Tl 2857 B T2 2596 D T3 C SB, Tl 2331 E SC, Tl 773 F Tl 2430 G T2 2468 H SD, Tl 2890 469 TABLE 41 Taxonomic Designation SA, Spoon Feature Associations _ Frequency Feature MuI* er Tl, Vc 2 118 Vc 1 88 Vc 1 81 Vc 1 21 Cat. 1 1 118 SA, Cat. 1, stem 1 263c SA, Cat. 1,stem 1 83 SA, T2,bowls 1 267 1 296 SA, T3,bowls SC, Tl 1 265 SD, Tl 1 299 Figure 50 Figure Designation Spoons Taxonomic Designation (Actual Size) Catalog , Number, MS' SA, Tl, Va 2982 B Vb 1 C Vd 2566 D Vf 2537 E SA, T2, Va 1347 F Vb 2292 G Vc 268 H SA, T2, Vd 2070 I Ve 2277 J SA, Cat. 1 2534 K SD, Tl, Va 2890 wu^w.-iin immwi UMDO* NOQNO FORKS The 34 forks and fork fragments recovered at Fort Michilimackinac are divided into two classes on the basis of form: Class I forks have separate handle elements; and Class II forks have handles which are an extension of, or integral part of, the fork shaft. Class I series are based on means of handle attachment. are based on shaft shape. Class I types The shaft of a Class I fork is the area between the bolster and the prongs or tines. The bolster is a raised area between the shaft and the handle stem. Class II series are based on the number of tines. ture. Measurements, Class II types are based on metal of manufac­ feature associations, and comparative evidence are presented in the text descriptions. Class I Handle Added All Cl specimens are conposed of two elements: the iron part of the fork which consists of a stem, shaft, and tines; and bone handle ele­ ments or plates which are attached to the fork stem. All Cl specimens have 2 tines. Series A Riveted Handle Attachment The stem on Cl, SA specimens consists of a thin, rectangular ex­ tension of the fork shaft. Bone handle plates are attached to each side of the stem with iron pins. All Cl, SA specimens have a bolster against which the handle plates are placed. Type 1 Concave shaft Figure 51 a -D 8 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): 48.0E. tine length, 44.3, 58.9, 58.0, 45.9, Cl, SA, Tl forks have a slightly concave shaft. Four of the 8 specimens have bone, handle plates. Two of these are of the "pistol grip" style (Barka 1965* 270) which may be recog­ nized by the presence of handle plates which are offset at the handle end (Figure 51 A ) . The other 2 specimens have straight 472 473 handle plates which are capped by iron plates on the handle end. Similar specimens have been reported from Jamestown, Virginia (Cotter 1958: 189), and Portland Point, New Bruns­ wick (Barka 1965: 270-272). Two Cl, SA, Tl specimens were recovered from a basement in the SSW rowhouse unit (F. 267). Type 2 Convex shaft Figure 51 E-F 4 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): tine length, 58.5, 59.2, 65.0. Three Cl, SA, T2 forks retain bone handle plates and iron plates on the handle end. Cl, SA, T2 forks have been re­ ported from Fort Atkinson, Nebraska (Kivett 1959: 63-64), and Marlborough, Virginia (Watkins 1968: 159). One Cl, SA, T2 specimen was recovered from F. 229. Series B "Rat-Tail" Handle Attachment Cl, SB forks have stems which are rectangular in cross section. The stems are centered and are an extension of the fork shaft. The rat-tail stem is inserted into a solid-bone handle which had been drilled to receive the stem. Type 1 Concave shaft Figure 51 G, I 3 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): tine length, 56.0, 64.0. One Cl, SB, Tl specimen was found in F. 85. Type 2 Convex shaft Figure 51 H 3 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): tine length, 58.2, 55.0E. One Cl, SB, T2 specimen was found in F. 299. Discussion: Class I, Series B Cl, SB forks have been recovered at Rosewell, Virginia (Noel Hume 1962: 197) , Posey, Oklahoma (Wyckoff and Barr 1968: 38), and Portland Point, New Brunswick (Barka 1965: 270-272). 474 Class II Handle, Extension and Integral Part of Shaft CII forks consist of tines and a handle. Series A Type 1 Four Tinec Iron Figure 52 A-C 12 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): 190.8. total fork length, 185.2, 186.1, CII, SA, Tl forks exhibit an expanded, round-to-oval shaft end. F. 304 and F. 16 both produced 1 CII, SA, Tl fork. Type 2 Pewter Figure 52 D-F 3 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): tine length, 44.8E. One CII, SA, T2 specimen was found in F. 80. Series B Type 1 Three Tines Iron Figure 5 2 G 1 specimen Dimensions <1 specimen): tine length, 44.1. One CII, SB, Tl specimen was found in F. 118. has a rectangular handle shaft. This specimen Discussion: Distributional differences could not be detected between Class I and Class II forks. The combined sample (34 specimens) enough to yield evidence of areal clustering. is not large Specimens were found within the SSW rowhouse unit, in the garden area north and south of the SSW rowhouse unit, in the area of the northwest corner of the earliest French stockade (F. 5) and in the NNW rowhouse. Feature associations 475 confirm this pattern of distribution. This evidence indicates that forks were in greater use during the British period of control. Two-tine forks (Class I) appear to have little utility for dating purposes, since they have been found on other sites during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and early nineteenth centuries. Figure 52 Figure Designation A Forks Taxonomic Designation Cl, SA, Tl Catalog ^ Number, MS 1399 B Tl 1159 C Tl 884 D Tl 2553 E T2 1 F T2 2499 G SB, Tl 740 H T2 1106 I Tl 2536 477 Figure 51 Forks Figure Designation Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS A CII, SA, Tl 1007 B Tl 1469 C Tl 1562 D T2 1031 E T2 1026 F T2 1398 G SB, Tl 821 BRICKS The excavations at Fort Michilimackinac produced 246 brick fragments. All specimens appear to have been locally manufactured by a "place" process (Harrington 1950s 30). This process consists of filling a rectangular wooden mold with clay, scraping or "strik­ ing” off the excess surface clay, and then inverting the mold to re­ move the brick for drying. Classification and Description: Complete bricks were not recovered at the site; a number of specimens could be measured for thickness and width dimensions. Thir­ teen specimens were measurable on both dimensions; 10 width and 15 thickness dimensions were measurable on individual fragments. The total of 23 width dimensions averaged 108.4 mm (also ca. 4-1/4 inches or 48 French Ligne), with a standard deviation of 2.20 mm. This is a highly consistent dimension and nearly all specimens measured between 4-1/8 inches and 4-1/2 inches. Thickness is less consistent; the average of 28 specimens was 72.0 mm., with a standard deviation of 5.35 mm. Several very small brick fragments contributed to the high figure of standard deviation. A more realistic thickness average of between 74.0 and 78.0 mm (ca. 3 inches or 32-34 French Ligne) is noted if these fragments are omitted from the measured sample, although the thickness standard deviation is still significantly higher than that computed for width. The majority of brick fragments were either reddish-buff or tan; the colors of very few specimens represented intermediate shades 480 481 of reddish-ton. Color cannot be correlated with distribution at the site or with feature associations. Nearly all bricks have a smoothed {"struck") top surface with longitudinal striations which result from striking or scraping off excess clay (Figure 53 A). The top surface edges are often rounded and are raised above the side and top surfaces. several specimens are obliquely flattened. The end corners on This may have resulted from inverting the mold to remove a brick before it had hardened. The bottom surfaces are generally coarse and irregular and have a thin layer of fine sand. With the exception of the top, this fine sand layer is characteristic of all surfaces and was added to the mold prior to the clay to facilitate removal of the dried brick. Harrington (1950: 31) gives a discussion of this process. surfaces are generally flat and smooth. The edge The clay is very coarse textured, and there are large gravel and pebble inclusions. One fragment (Figure 53 brick. B) represents a different type of This specimen is very smooth on all surfaces, has a fine­ grained texture, and is light buff in color. This fragment has been cut or molded to produce an angular face. Associational Evidence: A number of brick fragments were associated with structural features as follows: F. 77, "brickkiln" (28) ; F. 83, basement in the NNW rcwhouse unit (8); F. 79, basement in the NNW rowhouse unit (14); F. 310, basement of unknown association in 260 L110 (1) t F. 213, 482 basement in the SW rowhouse unit (3). These associations indicate that bricks were used during both the French and British periods of control. Other bricks have a random distribution south of the 220 grid line. The absence of bricks in British military structures is notable. Feature 77 has been interpreted as a "brickkiln" ford 61: 27-30) . (Bin- This view may be questioned and is discussed in greater detail in Appendix A. Comparative Evidence: Several sources discuss the processes of brick manufacture as well as the frequency and sizes of bricks found in North American sites; these include: Lazarus (1965: Harrington (1967: 69-84); South (1964: Both Harrington (1967: 1-17) and (1950: 16-39); 67-74); and Chase (1968: 11) and South (1965: 33-49). 67, 73) note that brick size is an unreliable chronological indicator, because of non-temporal variation in brick dimensions produced during manufacture. Fort Mich- ilimackinac bricks (ca. 3 inches thick by 4-1/4 inches wide) corre­ spond closely in width to bricks from both eighteenth-century British colonial (South 1965: 73) and late eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century American sites (Lazarus 1965: 75) . The thickness dimension is unusually large when compared to bricks from other sites. Xnterpretati ons: Brick fragments at Fort Michilimackinac were associated with features from both the French and British periods; however, they did not occur throughout the full period of site occupation. A tentative 483 date range of between 1735 and 1765 is suggested for the use of bricks. This estimate is based both on associations with specific structures and artifacts. Bricks were not a common building material at Fort Michilimackinac and may have served a specialized purpose which has not been determined. This is suggested by the low frequency of occurrence as well as by the unusually large thickness dimension. Figure Figure Designation 53 Bricks Catalog Nuirber, M S 2 A 1520 B 1344 C 2973 D 1344 485 PINTLES Classification and Descriptions Pintles are iron objects used for door hardware; in combina­ tion with iron hinges, they are used to mount a movable door, gate, or shutter to a solid support, such as a door jamb or gate post. Pintles are fastened to or driven into the solid support; the hinge is attached to the movable object. All pintles have a round, vertical pin (hinge bar) over which the looped end of a hinge is placed, and a horizontal shaft for attachment to a solid support. The Fort Michilimackinac door hardware sample includes 93 pintles and 102 hinges which were used with pintles. Only pintles are formally described in this sec­ tion; hinges are briefly described in Part 2 of this appendix. Three levels of taxonomic distinction are used in the descrip­ tion of pintles: the series, type, and variety. Series are distin­ guished by differences in the means of attaching pintle to support. Types are based on pintle shape and the number of separate elements present. Varieties are based on minor shape differences. The term "hinge pin" refers to the round, vertical shaft upon which a hinge is mounted. The pintle "shank" is the horizontal shaft which is secured to a solid support. The hinge rotates on the hinge pin, and the shank supports the hinge as well as the suspended door, gate, or shutter. Site distribution, feature associations, and comparative evi­ dence are presented in the concluding statements. are also summarized in Table 42 . Feature associations Pintle measurements are presented in the text descriptions. 486 487 Series A Type 1 Secured By Nails or Screws Flared shank Figure 54 A-B 12 specimens Dimensions (8 specimens): total pintle length range, 46.8-101.8, most frequent lengths, 90-100; maximum shank width, 41.2-80.1, most frequent width, 55-65; hinge-pin length, 17.0-38.7, most frequent hinge-pin lengths, 32-38. SA, T1 pintles have flared shanks; the maximum width is at the end opposite the hinge pin. The hinge pin on all specimens is slightly offset from the plane of the shank due to a shank curvature in the area of shank and hinge-pin junction. Eleven specimens have 3 holes on the shank for nail or screw attachment; 1 is in the area of minimum shank width, and 2 are on the opposite end. Two spe­ cimens are very small and may have been pintles for household furnishings or window shutters. Series B Secured By Driving or Imbedding Shank Into Wood Type 1 Shank and hinge pin are separate elements All SB, Tl specimens consist of a hinge pin around which a shank has been wrapped and forged. SB, Tl varieties are distinguished by differences in shank shape. Variety a Rectangular non-tapered shank. Figure 54 C-D 7 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): pintle length, 46.1-71.2; shank width, 14.9-24.2; pin length, 27.8-47.6. Two Va specimens have split shanks (Figure apparently expanded when driven into wood. Variety b 54 C ) ; these Rectangular shank, notched and tapered. Figure 54 E-G 21 specimens Dimensions (16 specimens): pin length (13), 22.4-67.9; pin diameter (16), 7.5 average; shank length (11), 71.3 average, 59.2-94.2 range; shank width (16), 10.9-22.5. The shanks on SB, Tl, Vb specimens are notched on the bottom tcward the hinge-pin end and taper from this notch to the shank end. 488 Variety c Rectangular, tapered shank. Figure 54 H-I 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): pin length, 53.2, 12.2; total pintle length, 155.0, 69.6; maximum shank width, 23.3, 11.6. The angle of the shank bottom on SB, Tl, Vc pintles is perpen­ dicular to the hinge pin. The top edge of the shank tapers from a maximum width at hinge-pin junction to the shank end. Type 2 Shank and hinge pin are single element Figure 54 J-N 51 specimens Dimensions (51 specimens): maximum shank thickness (50), 4.3-15.3, average, 9.5; pin diameter (51), 5.2-15.3, average, 10.9; maximum shank width (51), 7.3-17.4, average, 11.9; pin length (36, mea­ sured from shank bottom to hinge-pin end), 21.5-61.5, average, 43.8; total pintle length (36), 65.1-134.3, average, 100.0. SB, T2 pintles are made of a single piece of iron and consist of a round hinge pin and a rectangular, tapered shank. The shank bottom is generally perpendicular to the hinge pin; the top edge of the shank tapers from a point of maximum width at hinge-pin junction to the shank end. Both sides of the pintle heel (area at the hinge and pin-shank bottom junction) are commonly pinched or notched. One specimen (Figure 54 K) has an obtuse hinge and pin-shank angle. Distribution: The small sample of Series A pintles were found in both French and British feature contexts (Table 42 ). SB, Tl pintles were found most frequently in the Church and Priest's house area and in the garden area north of the SSW rowhouse unit. The presence of SB, Tl pintles at or near the walls of all four rowhouse units may indicate the location of windows, or possibly doors, in the case of several large specimens. Series B, Type 2 pintles were found most frequently in the Church and Priest's house area and in the garden area north of the SSW rowhouse unit. All pintle types were rare in structures, except for those found in the Church and Priest's house area. 489 Comparative Evidence: Both SB, Tl and SB, T2 pintles have been recovered from the Fortress of Louisbourg, Nova Scotia (Sutermeister 1968). (1968: Watkins 165) reports the recovery of two, SB, T2 pintles from Marl­ borough, Virginia. Pintles have also been reported from several other sites (Woodward 1969; Cotter 1957) but are of little value in dating the Fort Michilimackinac specimens. Interpretations: The Church and Priest's house area produced 16 pintles. A blacksmith's shop was located in the southeast c o m e r of the Priest's house during the French period of control; this indicates that pintles were produced locally during that period. The majority of pintles recovered were associated with French period features or with structures that housed British soldiers but which were constructed during the latter part of the French period. Pintles were not associated with either the Commanding Officer's house or with the British soldiers' barracks (F. 3). It is known that the British barracks and other buildings were removed to Mackinac Island in 1780-1781. Figure 54 Figure Designation A B C rintles Taxonomic Designation SA, Tl Catalog Number, MS 933 Tl 1 SB, Tl, Va 2493 D Va 2519 E Vb 2282 F Vb 733 G Vb 2303 H Vc 1 I Vc 2399 J T2 2433 K T2 925 L T2 1556 M T2 3242 N T2 348 492 TABLE 42 Taxonomic Designation Pintle Feature Associations _ Frequency Feature SA, Tl 2 118 Tl 1 262 Tl 1 85 SB, Tl, Vb 2 83 T2 1 88 T2 1 348 T2 1 141 T2 1 310 T2 1 255 T2 1 262 T2 1 80 T2 1 90 KNIVES A total of 512 knives and knife fragments were recovered at Fort Michilimackinac during the 1959 through 1966 excavations; this total is divided into 70 formal categories. Classification and Description: The description of knives is based on the recognition of the following attributes: (1) presence or absence and shape of hinge ele­ ment; (2) size of knife elements (dimensions or elements measured vary with the type of knife) ; (3) blade and handle shape; and (4) articula­ tion of blade and handle elements. The terminology applied t^o knife descriptions is somewhat standard in the literature (refer to Hagerty 1963: 95-96; Peterson 1958: this report: 1-5). The following terms are used in handle, blade, edge (the blade cutting edge), back (the blade edge opposite the cutting edge), heel (the curved blade end at blade-bolster junction on case knives or the same area at the hinge end on clasp knife blades), bolster (a raised or offset area between blade and handle on case knives), bolster lining (metal plates between handle plates and spring on clasp knives) , and tang (the hinge end on clasp knife blades). The procedures of formal classification applied to other arti­ fact categories have been altered somewhat in the case of knives. Since many of the specimens are represented by only handle or blade elements (or fragments of these elements), it has been necessary to divide the formal classification into two parts which are based on the knife ele­ ments present. follows: The knife classification is formally structured as two classes are distinguished on the basis of form which 494 refers to the presence or absence of a hinge between the blade and handle. This distinction divides the Fort Michilimackinac knife sample into two classes: Class I (clasp knives) and Class II (case knives). A non-formal distinction termed the "Group" has been applied to dis­ tinguish Class I knives as either blades (Group 1) or handles Group 1 is then formally subdivided into type and variety. types are distinguished by the form of blade-hinge element. varieties are distinguished by differences in blade shape. (Group 2). Group 1 Group 1 It has not been possible to apply similar distinctions to Group 2 specimens since blades are either missing or are present but are clasped within the knife handle. type. Group 2 specimens are formally divided into series and Group 2 series are distinguished on the basis of handle form. Group 2 types are distinguished on the basis of handle shape and the articulation of handle elements. tinguished. Class II specimens Group 2 varieties have not been dis­ (case knives) are divided into series (on the basis of shape of the handle attachment) , type (on the basis of blade shape), and variety (on the basis of minor shape differences). Category distinctions have been used extensively in the descriptions of both Class I and Class II knives. Knife descriptions are presented according to the formal dis­ tinctions above. Comparative and distributional evidence is presented in the specific type descriptions. feature associations. Table 44 summarizes knife- Knife descriptions are necessarily brief and are confined to the formally identified attributes. Knife illustra­ tions are extensive, however, and should permit the identification of ®iany attributes not described. 495 When the manufacturer's names or symbols impressed on the knives are listed, questionable letters are placed in parentheses (a), and letters present but unidentifiable are designed by a dash {-} . Class I Hinge Present Between Blade and Handle (Clasp Knives) Group 1 Class I Blades The Group 1 classification is based primarily on blades and blade fragments. Group 1 knife blades are referred to as “French clasp knives" in the literature. Type 1 Knob or flanged hinge element All Tl specimens exhibit a flattened knob which extends from the hinge end of the blade. This knob served as a blade stop while the knife was in use. All Group 1 types as well as all Tl specimens have a hole near the hinge end through which an iron red was passed for handle attachment. Variety a "Standard" blade shape. Figure 55 A-F 159 specimens Dimensions (52 specimens): length, 94.8-135.0, average, 122.2, standard deviation, 9.6; width, 16.9-23.4. The blade back is angular in shape. The back section nearest the blade-hinge end is generally straight while the blade section nearest the blade point is often slightly concave. The majority of Va specimens have been inqpressed with manufacturer's names or symbols. Names stamped on 24 specimens are listed below. 1. — HE. — R 5. 2. -AN— (L) E (R)- 6 3. ANTOINE.ER 7. 4. 8 (L)AYN . . -. (IL) - — V 9. OINE. (I)E-E IV (ST).CH APELON 10. ANTOIN (A)NMEI P(I)-VD 11 IERRE. B (E)(I)-. (LEI)ILS 12 . ANO -RIOL . I (E) AN — R(R) - 496 13. I.PERRI N.LAYNE 17. CLAVD(CNA) PE- 21. -V(ST). (CH) -ION 14. CLAVDE -LOTO(N) 18. — .E (L) A(N) LAVN 22 . PIERRE. --0 MAS. LLIEVN- 15. —E (R) IEVN(E) 19. -VST.CH AP (E) LON 23. IEAN BARME 16. —R. E O 20. C (I)AVDE 24. S.B-E.(A)--- Thirteen additional specimens had marks which included sym­ bols (Figure 61 A-M). Additional names and symbols have been identified on Va specimens from other sites: see Rus­ sell (1967: 172)I Quimby (1966: 6 8 ); Perino (1967); Wittry (1963: 37); Harris (1965: 348-349); and JeIks (1967: 21 - 22 ). Va clasp knives are associated with the MW and SW rowhouse units, the Church and Priest's house area, the commanding officer's house, and the garden areas to the north and south of the SSW rowhouse units. Areas of absence or low frequency are the NNW and SSW rowhouse units and the British soldiers* barracks (F. 3). Va feature associations (Table 4 4 ) con­ form generally to this pattern of distribution. This evi­ dence suggests a 1715 to 1760 period of common use at the site. This suggested date is supported by comparative evi­ dence (Table 45 ) which indicates that French clasp knives were found at sites occupied or influenced by the French b e ­ tween 1680 and 1760. Variety b "Kitchen Knife" blade shape. Figure 55 G 6 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): range, 16.1-21.2. length range, 117.0-128.0; width Vb specimens have an upturned and rounded blade tip. Two Vb specimens have been inpressed with manufacturer's marks: 1. I— (E) (P)E - IEVN(E) Figure cimen. 2. PIERRE. B-(R) 61 N illustrates a mark noted on a third, Vb spe­ 497 Variety c Convex blade shape. Figure 55 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 11.3; width, 18.2. Both the back and edge of this specimen taper to a point. Variety d "Hawk-bill" blade shape. Figure 55 I 1 2 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): length, 126.2, 121.0, 129.8; width, 21.6, 23.7, 27.4. The hawk-bill shape is characterized by a back which tapers sharply at the blade tip. The other section of back is parallel to the blade edge. Three specimens bear manufac­ turer's names: 1. -O— - I (E) VN- 2. ANDRE.EORI AI EVNE 3. A(A) EL — (A ) Figure 61 O-R illustrates marks noted on 4 additional spe­ cimens . Variety e Sharply tapered "Hawk-bill" blade shape. Figure 55 J 6 specimens Dimensions (5 specimens): range, 22.5-25.5. length range, 109.1-124.8; width Ve specimens differ from Vd specimens in having a very sharp back taper at the blade tip. The blade back and edge are not parallel. Variety f Sharp back taper, parallel back and edge blade. Figure 55 K 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 90.3E; width, 16.3. This specimen may be a small example of Tl, Ve, although the back and edge are parallel. 498 Type 1, Category 1 This category consists of Tl specimens which could not be clas­ sified into formal varieties. Figure 55 L-O 4 specimens One specimen was marked with a manufacturer's name: 1. ROO(M) (E) AD Type 2 Hinge-end knob element Type 2 specimens bear a knob which extends to the rear of the knife blade. This knob is actually a horizontal extension of the blade back. This knob served the same purpose as does the raised knob on Tl specimens. Variety a Angular blade-back shape. Figure 56 a 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 122.5; width, 23.6. The mark on this specimen is illustrated in Figure 61 Variety b Straight blade-back shape, rounded heel. Figure 56 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Both the back and the blade point. Type 3 length, 115.3e » width, 21.2. edge taper from the blade-hinge end to This specimen has a rounded heel. Extended hinge-end knob element The 2 T3 specimens exhibit a knob element which is extended from the blade-hinge end. Variety a S. Angular blade-back shape. Figure 56 c 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 118.6E; width, 21.0. 499 Variety b Slightly concave, tapered blade-back shape. Figure 56 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 4 length, 118.2E; width, 19.3. Ring and knob hinge element The single T4 specimen has a hinge element which consists of an offset ring and knob. The ring bears a hole for handle attach­ ment. Variety a Angular blade-back shape. Figure 56 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 154.1; width, 23.9. Group 1, Category 1 This category consists of 2 pewter fragments which are thought to be handle tips for Gl knives. The 2 specimens cure illustrated in Figure 56 F-G. Discussion: Group 1 All Group 1 specimens are identified as different forms and shapes of French clasp knives. Group 2 Class I Handles The G2 classification is based primarily on handles. present in some cases and are partially described. Series A Blades are Handle Conposed of Spring and Handle Plates SA specimens consist of bone or metal handle elements which are attached directly to the handle spring by iron pins. One pin is passed through the blade for blade attachment. All blades have hinge elements formed by a notched or offset bladehinge end. Type 1 Crescent-shaped handle Figure 56 H 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 20.5E. blade length, 103.IE; blade width, This specimen has 3 handle attachment pins and a sharply curved spring and handle. 500 Type 2 Notched handle shape Figure 56 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 3 6 6 .6 . Slightly curved handle shape Figure 56 j 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 4 handle length, handle length, 86 .8 . Copper handle with raised floral decoration Figure 56 K-M 7 specimens Dimensions (6 specimens): handle length range, 53.4-95.5. All T4 specimens have 3 handle attachment pins. Handle plates are copper with raised floral designs. Spots of red and white paint were noted as additional decorative elements on several specimens. Series B Handle Composed of Spring, Handle Plates, and Bolster Linings SB specimens are distinguished by the presence of bolster lin­ ings between the handle plate and spring. Type 1 Rounded-end handle Figure 56 n 4 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 24.1, 26.3. length, 113.8, 117.8; width, Tl specimens have a solid-iron bolster lining. One handle end is rounded; the other (hinge end) exhibits a short, raised area against which handle plates are placed. Handle plates are missing on all Tl specimens. The handle spring terminates at a wooden inset which serves to protect the knife point. Two Tl blades exhibit manufacturer's marks (Figure 61 T - U ) . Peterson (1958: 131) illustrates a sim­ ilar specimen from a Revolutionary War site. Type 2 Raised areas on each end of bolster lining, slightly rounded handle end Figure 56 O, P 3 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): handle length, 78.2, 94.0. 501 These specimens are smaller than SB, Tl knives above and exhibit a longer raised area on the bolster lining at the hinge end. Bone handle plates are present on 2 specimens. Type 3 Upturned, pointed handle 7 Figure K^*• A 3 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): 1 handle length, 95.2, 98.2. The bolster linings on T3 specimens bear a raised area at the hinge end. Bone handle plates cover the remaining section of the bolster lining. Type 4 Curved handle Figure 57 B,C 10 specimens Dimensions (3 specimens): 120.7. handle length, 107.7, 104.2, T4 specimens have bolster linings which exhibit raised metal areas on both ends. Bone handle plates are attached between these raised areas. Hagerty (1963: 106) notes similar specimens from both Ticonderoga, New York, and Ligonier, Pennsylvania. One specimen was marked with the following name: 1. AILOY DOJD Type 5 Straight handle Figure 57 D 2 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): handle length, 86.3, 102.8. The bolster linings on T5 specimens bear short, * '.sed areas at the hinge end. Bone or ivory handle plates, en­ graved with cross hatching, are attached to the remaining boIster-lining surface. Type 6 Slightly curved handle Figure 57 E 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): handle length, 114.5. T 6 specimens exhibit bolster linings with raised areas on the hinge end. The opposite handle end is capped by a circular metal knob. The raised bolster-lining surface is covered by bone handle plates. 502 Type 7 Straight handle Figure 57 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen) : handle length, 113.2E. This specimen has a bolster lining without raised areas; handle blades are not present. Group 2, Category 1 This category consists of 8 blades of the type associated with Group 2 handles. Figure 57 G-K illustrates different Group 2 blade forms. Figure 57 l represents a brass, bolster lining. Class I, Category 1 This category includes handles from Cl clasp knives. Type 1 Handles Figure 57 M,N 2 pairs brass handles Two pairs of perforated brass handles were recovered from the site. These may represent handles for French clasp knives (Cl, Gl, T1-T4). One specimen (Figure 57 N) con­ tains leather on the inside. Discussion: Class I, Group 2 Group 2, Series A, and Group 2, Series B specimens were combined on one distribution map for interpretative purposes. This map does not indicate that Group 2 knives were associated with any specific struc­ tures. The largest area of concentration (6 specimens) occurs in the area between the SW and SSW rowhouse units. Feature associations (Table 44 ) indicate that Group 2 specimens were recovered from con­ texts which date after ca. 1740-1745. The limited comparative evidence noted above (Hagerty 1963: 106; Peterson 1958: 131) suggests that Group 2 knives were present in contexts dating after 1760. Class II No Hinge Between Handle and Blade (Case Knives) 4 Class II knives are represented by a single piece of iron which forms both a blade and handle shaft. Series A Pointed Handle Shaft (rat-tail) Cl I, SA knives are characterized by a long, pointed iron handle shaft. The handle (bone or wood) hew been driven onto the shaft. Type 1 Tapered blade edges; centered, square-section handle shaft; oblong bolster shape Figure 57 O 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): 17.9. Type 2 blade length, 129.OE; blade width, Tapered back edge; offset, square-section handle shaft; round bolster shape Figure 57 Q 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): 29.5. blade length, 146.2; blade width, Type 2, Category Two fragmentary specimens were recovered; these resemble T2 knives in blade shape (Figure 57 P-R). Both specimens have impressed manufacturer's marks (Figure 61 V-W). Type 3 Angular back edge; centered, round-section handle shape, round bolster, shape; "table knife." Figure 58 a 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): blade width, 24.2. Type 3, Category One ivory handle fragment (Figure 58 knife handle. Type 4 B) represents a T3 Tapered blade edges; centered, square-section shaft, large round bolster Figure 58 c 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 25.1. blade length, 154.OE; blade length, Class I, Series A, Category 1 This category consists of 5 fragmentary specimens which have rat-tail handle shafts. See Figure 58 D-H. Discussion: Class I, Series A The 17, SA specimens can not be assigned a date of use on the basis of archaeological evidence. Comparative evidence (Table 45 ) indicates that SA knives were common during the first 75 years of the eighteenth century. 504 Series B Flat. Handle Shaft Cl If SB knife-handle shafts are rectangular in shape and are the same thickness as the knife blade. Type 1 "Standard" blade shape, no bolster Tl specimens have a straight blade back and edge. The edge tapers to a point. Varieties are distinguished on the basis of blade-heel shape and are described in a tablular format {Table 43 ). Refer to Figure 58 I-O, and Figure 5 9 A-B for an identification of heel shape. impressed symbols were noted on 10 specimens (Figure 61 X-GG). TABLE 43 Taxonomic Designation Knife Measurements: Frequency Class II, Series B, Type 1, Varieties a through i Specimens Measured Blade Length 58 I 19.2, 22.4 139.0, 174.0 58 J 24.9, 23.7 179.1, 195.7 Vc 58 K 28.3 182.6 Vd 58 L Ve 58 m 24.7 141.1 Vf 58 N 25.0 131.2E Vg 58 0 Vh 59 A Vi 59 B Vb 14 505 Blade Width CII, SB, Tl, Va Figure 506 Class II, Series B, Type 1, Category Ten fragmentary Tl specimens were found at the site; these could not be assigned to specific Tl varieties. One Category specimen is marked (Figure 61 h h ) . Type 2 "Standard" blade shape; no bolster; very thick blade and shaft Figure 59 c 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): blade width, 22.2. This specimen is marked with the following letters: LACQVE LERISEL Two wooden handle plates are attached with iron pins. Type 3 Angular ("kitchen knife") blade shape; round .bolster Figure 59 D 13 specimens Dimensions (2 specimens): width, 25.6, 28.6. blade length, 157.0, 173.0; blade Three T3 specimens were marked with impressed symbols (Figure 61 II-KK). Class IX, Series B, Type 3, Category Three fragmentary specimens seem to be T3 knives Type 4 (Figure 59 E) . Curved blade end, round bolster Figure 59 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): 20 .0 . blade length, 69.4; blade width, This specimen has wood, handle plates and a curved blade tip. The blade shape resembles that of a farrier's knife. Type 5 Straight back, convex edge, round bolster Figure 59 G-H 2 specimens Dimensions (1 specimen): blade width, 20.5. 507 Type 6 Straight back and edge, bolster present Variety a Rectangular bolster. Figure 59 I 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): blade width, 20.1. This specimen bears an impressed symbol (Figure Variety b 61 LL). Round bolster. Figure 59 J 1 specimen Type 7 Curved blade shape, single cutting edge Type 7 varieties are based on heel shape. Variety a Angular heel. Figure 60 A 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b Heel absent; blade reaches maximum thickness, at blade-handle junction. Figure 60 B 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 8 blade width, 14.8. blade width, 11.1. Curved blade shape, double cutting edge Variety a Heel absent, triangular shape handle, plano­ convex blade. Figure 60 C 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Variety b blade width, 16.2. Centered handle; blade is diamond-shape in cross section. Figure 60 D 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): blade width, 15.4. 508 Variety c Slight heel between blade and handle; blade is triangular: shaped in cross section. Figure 60 E 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): Type 9 blade width, 15.5. Tapered blade back, round bolster Figure 60 F 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): blade width, 19.8. This specimen may represent a specialized knife type, possibly modified from a standard C1I, SB knife blade. The specimen has bone handle plates and an iron handle-end cap nailed to the bone plates. Class II, Category 1 Cat. 1 consists of blade, handle shaft, and handle fragments from ClI knives: -Handles, 7 specimens (Figure 60 G-N). -Handle shafts, 24 specimens (Figure 60 -Blade fragments, 135 specimens. 0). Six of the handles have bone or ivory handle plates; the seventh specimen has a lead, handle plate. Discussion: Class II Distributional differences have not been noted between Cl I, SA and Cl I, SB knives. On this basis, all Cl I specimens have been combined on the same distribution map for interpretative purposes. This map clearly indicates that CII knives are associated with the majority of struc­ tures at the site. CII knives are infrequent in only one area within the area between the SW and SSW rowhouse units. Although CII knives were in use throughout the period of site occupation, they appear in greater frequency after ca. 1740-1745; this is indicated by their high frequency in the SW and SSW rowhouse units and by their presence in feature contexts (Table 44 ) . Discussion: Knives Although this classification is formally structured, it is limited in several respects because of the incomplete and modified condition of many specimens. In spite of these limitations, however. 509 the formal differences described do provide a source for dating pur­ poses. Class I (clasp knives) and Class II (case knives) appear to have been used at the site with equal frequency (256 specimens and fragments of each class are represented in the knife sample) .* Case knives could not be assigned to different time periods on the basis of formal distinctions, although they appear to have been more fre­ quent after ca. 1740 to 1745. Clasp knives are divided into two dif­ ferent groups, which cure primarily distinguished by different forms of blade and hinge elements. The clasp knives of Class I, Group I are primarily of French usage and provenience (1715-1760). Class I, Group 2 clasp knives were used extensively only during the last 40 years of the site's occupation, ca. 1740-1780. ^CII, SA, T3 and CII, SB, T3 knives represent 18 specimens which can not properly be termed "case" knives. These types represent tableware or table knives. In addition, several other types (CII, SB, T4, and CII, SB, T7 and T 8 ) may represent specialized knife forms to which the term "case" does not apply. Figure Figure Designation Knives 55 Taxonomic Designation Cl, Gl, Tl, Va 976 B Va 654 C Va 1971 D Va 1 E Va 1101 F Va 2608 G Vb 2506 H Vc 1772 I Vd 2469 J Ve 1139 K Vf 1 1 3302 M Cat. 1 2378 N Cat. 1 1 O Cat. 1 1237 L Cl, Gl, Tl, Cat. 511 Figure 56 Knives Taxonomic Designation Cl, Gl, T2, Va 953 Vb 1 T3, Va 1101 Vb 1183 T4, Va 883 Cl, Gl, Cat. 1 3290 Cat. 1 554 G2, SA, Tl 1 T2 2286 T3 2815 T4 1 T4 1186 T4 1 SB, Tl 1901 T2 1 T2 1 513 Figure 57 Figure Designation A Knives Taxonomic Designation T3 1556 B T4 1 C T4 14 D T5 1 E T6 929 F T7 1321 Cl, G2, SB, Catalog Number, MS G Cat. 1 , Tl 2477 H Cat. 1 , Tl 353 I Cat. 1 , Tl 1 J Cat. 1 , T2 2575 K Cat. 1 , T3 2369 L Cat. 1 , T4 1 Cat. 1 , Tl 1348 Tl 1 Tl 2327 M Cl, N O CII, SA, P T2 Q T2 R T2 (Cat.) 1574 1 (Cat.) 795 Figure 58 Knives Taxonomi c Designation f ClI, SA, T3 T3 2665 (HANDLE) T4 2682 3370 SA, Cat. 1 65 Cat. 1 3389 Cat. 1 1925 Cat. 1 2361 Cat. 1 812 SB, Tl, Va 1206 Vb 2989 Vc 1 Vd 1907 Ve 1 Vf 1 Vg Figure 59 Knives Taxonomic Designation t CII, SB, Tl, Vi 1 Vh 1387 T2 1556 T3 2733 T3, Cat. 1 1416 T4 289 7 T5 2619 T5 1 T 6 , Va 1267 T 6 , Vb 840 519 Figure 60 Figure Designation A Knives Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS CII, SB, Cat. 1, T7, Va 1234 B Vb 1417 C T 8 , Va 1 D Vb 1460 E Vc 1378 F G T9 CII, Cat. 1, 3007 Tl, Va 1441 H Va 1 1 Va 1440 J Vb 1084 K Vb 2256 L Vb 3441 M T2, N ° Va Vb T3, Va 1383 3466 2670 Figure 61 Figure Designation A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB CC DD EE FF GG HH II JJ KK Knives Taxonomic Designation Cl, Gl, Tl, Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Va Vb Vd Vd Vd Vd T2, Va G2, SB, Tl Tl CII, SA, T2 (Cat.) (Cat.) SB, Tl, Va Va Vd Vd Vd Vd Vc Vc Vd Ve Tl, Cat. 1 T3 T3 T3 T 6 , Va Catalog Nunfcer, MS 2099 1 1101 1 2041 1 2834 132 228 976 1153 423 996 2889 2305 1435 l 444 953 2865 1901 795 1574 3242 1206 2724 1355 1 2989 267 1 2928 1 106 2458 2733 1109 1267 3»oa 'no*w A CJ 01 tf .S ' A f 8 % N < jo < OQ Q uj O uj * * r r a u * Z O- O >- 6 < 2; N O 6 5 * 6 X cn J- *» I ft 1 t o » * A 1 OQ - d 30CJ s b oC <3> ■3* HH4* OQ Uj to Ui g I ^ o< ^ A r ‘ > ^ o.N A > O o to 0 coefficient. w IO to o CO to in n o* in > H to I—* to M .u H* cn h-* 00 to 1 CO to 0 1 CO 00 o Ol to —1 a H* to to to -o • O' 00 cn • I-* t-1 • 0 to * 10 at* CO a 'O I—* to I-1 • ■ a 1 ui o > • 1 co O' • 1 to •— 1 cn to • co 1 co to to 00 00 cn in • cn at* Cn to • -o O' cn • o 1 t-> t—• a O' • O 1 co O' • u» KJ • O u> • 0 1 H* t-> a 0 • 0 t- 1 1—1 a. t-> a. •V I-1 «• . t—1 a I-* h-* • H* • o to cn M Cn O' O' 0 t- 1 t—1 CO t- 1 O' to I—* o 0 to to Cn to 8SS Average Standard Deviation Cn to a ho 00 a O' 1 co to Range a o to -o a Average t-* CO ■o (Tl 00 Ol * • o to to • to —1 0 I-1 M • t -o o O' a • o Standard Deviation u> • 0 1 0 • 0 • 0 Cn h-1 *• h-■ « t—1 Thickness Range Length-Width r* Length-Width Ratio 0 Frequency, Chalk-Heels 10 Frequency, Burned Frequency, Fire-steels Frequency, Bottom Face Negative Flakes In Millimeters a th * o 1 1 -• t—1 * o H * • a 0. 10 o to CO Range Attributes a « a 00 t—• a to cn M t—* h-> ■ >0 to to to . CO o » CO CO 1 0 to <0 0 00 a 1 o a 00 ■u 00 • to aU * » to to CO O' Metric • *Cfc GO * Ol CO a Gunflint to h-> 48 -o TABLE 10 • Taxonomic Designation K> rt cn > co TABLE 49 Site Site Date Kipp, N.D. 1826- Gilbert, Tex. 1750-1775 Posey, Okla. 1830-1840 Alachua, Fla. 1750-1800 Santok, Conn. 1620-1750 Frequency of Gunflints at Other Archaeological Sites British Series A Indian Series C 28 28 13 57 Total 69 32 7 114 Source Woolworth & Wood 60:268 Blaine 67:81-84 66 Wyckoff & Barr 68:56 15 15 Goggin et al. 49:16 3 3 Salwen 66:20 Woods Is., Ala. 1650-1715 8 5 13 Ahumada, Tex. 1756-1771 4 4 8 Alamo, Tex. 1740, late 19th c. 4 9 1 17 Greer 67:64-65 3 9 5 17 Blain 67:177-178 Tunnell & Ambler 67:94 Longest, Okla. 1760-1820 Pearson, Tex. 1775-1830 8 1 9 Bell, Wis. 1680-1730 5 9 14 Wittry 63:30 Womack, Tex. 1700-1730 23 3 31 Harris et al. 65:341-343 149 229 6 Frederica, Ga. Spokane House, Wash. 5 1810-1826 13 74 13 Duffield & Jelks 61:56 Hamilton 64:55 Combes 64:39 559 3 Morrell 65:45 560 TABLE 50 SA Tl 6 16 17 21 23 38 45 46 84 85 118 119 133 139 142 144 148 150 152 209 213 215 216 220 227 229 230 231 236 240 241 243 246 248 249 254 SA T2 Gunflint Feature Associations SA T3 SA Cat. SC Va SC Vb SA Total 6 2 LI 1 1 35 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 3 2 4 5 4 1 9 9 2 7 2 561 (Cont.) SA T1 277 279 281 293 296 297 299 306 310 314 315 325 328 338 348 358 SA T2 SA T3 SA Cat. 1 1 1 SC Va SC Vb 2 SA Total 1 1 2 2 4 2 4 1 1 47 18 6 1 1 47 19 6 1 1 5 2 5 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 FISHHOOKS The 1959 through 1966 excavations at Fort Michilimackinac produced a total of 219 fishhooks; cimens. 143 of these were complete spe­ Two different types of fishhooks are represented in this sample; they are distinguished by differences in the means of attach­ ing the fishhook to the line. The most common type, secured by wind­ ing and tying the line around a flattened shank end, is represented by barbed and barbless varieties. Measurements presented in the following descriptions include length which is the distance from the shank end of attachment to the maximum point of shank curvature, and width which is the distance between the shank and the barbed hook end. Classification and Description: Type 1 Flattened shank end Variety a Barbed. Figure 70 A-P 217 specimens Dimensions (141 specimens): 9.5-32.4. length range, 20.5-B1.6; width range, Tl, Va specimens have flattened shank ends. The line was attached by first winding the line around the flattened part; and then binding the line by wrapping and tying a second piece of string around the shank and line. All specimens have one barb on the hook end. Hook shafts are round in cross section; the shaft dia­ meter varies directly in proportion to hook size. Two graphic techniques were used to study the presence of fishhook size cate­ gories: (1 ) a length and width scattergram, and (2 ) dimensionfrequency graphs. Eight size categories are tentatively indicated on the scattergram; they are: 562 Length 1. . 3. 4. 5. 6 . 7. 8. 2 20.5 28.4 33.8 38. 7 43.4 50.7 58.7 69. 7 - 26.2 32.3 38.0 43.4 47.4 57.8 64.9 81.6 Width 9.5 11.6 - Frequency 7 17 13 15 13 33 35 12.6 12.6 13.4 - 18.0 15.8 - 2 0 . 6 18.9 - 2 2 . 1 19.0 - 23.5 19.9 - 26.3 25.2 — 32.4 8 Several of the size categories defined, particularly in the width dimension, are not mutually exclusive. When considering both dimensions, however, these size categories do seem to be valid. The length and width frequency graphs defined a very similar set of size categories. Variety b No barb. Figure 70 R 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 104.6: width, 40.6. This specimen lacks the barb which is characteristic of Tl, Va fishhooks. Type 2 Ring shank end Variety a No b a r b . Figure 70 Q 1 specimen Dimensions (1 specimen): length, 125.9: width, 33.2. This specimen was produced by reshaping a large iron needle. The needle eye end has been bent to form a ring for line attachment. The hook portion of this specimen is triangular in cross section: the remainder of the shaft is round in cross section. Associational Evidence: Fishhooks are associated most frequently with the 5SW and SW rowhouse units, the garden area between these units, the Priest's house area, and the French guardhouse (F. 60). Fishhooks are present, but less frequent, in the NW and NNW rowhouse units and in the British 564 soldier's barracks (F. 3). Specific feature associations (Table 51 ) support the above distributional evidence in indicating that fishhooks were in use throughout the period of site occupation; however, they were more frequently used during the middle to late periods of French control (ca, 1735-1760). This conclusion confirms, in part, the sug­ gestion of Cleland (n.d.) that the subsistence of French inhabitants was based largely on non-domesticated animals such as deer, fish, and fowl. Interpretations: Fishhooks were used throughout the period of site occupation; a greater frequency of use was noted during the period between ca. 1735 and 1760. Fishhook size categories were defined, although no attempt was made to correlate these with present-day fishhook sizes. Figure Figure Designation 70 Fishhooks Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS2 A Tl, Va 2570 B Tl, Va 2193 C Tl, Va 979 D Tl, Va 824 B Tl, Va 1 F Tl, Va 1335 G Tl, Va 2481 H Tl, Va 195 I Tl, Va 1150 J Tl, Va 2375 K Tl, Va 757 L Tl, Va 2314 M Tl, Va 274 N Tl, Va 3229 O Tl, Va 3437 P Tl, Va 3070 Q T2 , Va 228 R Tl, Vb 494 566 MC H E S 567 TABLE Taxonomic Designation si Fishhook Feature Associations Frequency Feature Tl, Va 1 3 Tl, Va 1 130 Tl, Va 2 21 Tl, Va 1 74 Tl, Va 1 83 Tl, Va 1 81 Tl, Va 88 Tl, Va 7 118 Tl. Va 1 209 Tl, Va 1 229 Tl, Va 1 254 Tl, Va 1 249 Tl, Va 1 267 Tl, Va 1 302 Tl, Va 1 314 Tl, Va 2 33 Tl, Va 1 341 BALE SEALS Classification and Description: The bale seal is a small, circular, cast-lead object used to seal and identify the contents of packaged goods. The most common type of bale seal found at Fort Michilimackinac consists of two, thin, circular, lead disks which are connected by a narrow band of lead. A circular knob or post appears on the center of one disk and a corre­ sponding hole is present on the other diskj two knobs and two holes are sometimes present. A seal of this type is attached to a bale or parcel of goods by first passing the knob through a hole in the parcel binder and then bending the seal so that the hole in one disk passes over the knob on the other. The seal is permanently fastened by press­ ing the two disks together, thereby flattening the knob and interlock­ ing the disks. A mark is also pressed into one or both sides of the seal during this procedure. This mark may identify the manufacturer, country, or city of origin of the sealed goods. In cases where only one face is marked, the reverse side is usually incised at the same time with numbers which may signify the quality and/or quantity of contents. A second, less common, type of seal consists of a single lead disk through which wires are passed to secure the seal to a parcel. This type of seal is stamped, or cast, on both faces with manufacturer's marks. A third type of seal consists of a single lead disk to which a narrow lead band is attached. The band is bent over to join the disk and is then clamped} both faces of this type of seal are often marked. 568 569 Two attributes were recognized in the classification of bale seals: (1 ) type of attachment or form, and (2 ) decoration, which refers to any mark or symbol impressed or cast upon the lead seal. Three levels of taxonomic distinction were defined on the basis of these at­ tributes: (1 ) the series— distinguished by major differences in means of attachment: (2 ) the type— distinguished by variations within specific means of attachment; and (3) the variety— distinguished by differences in decoration. Both series and type criteria were easily defined. Var­ iety level distinctions, however, required the comparison of each spe­ cimen with each other specimen in order to find corresponding decora­ tions . In most cases, the descriptions of bale seals are supplemented with illustrations. bale seal. "Obverse" refers to the mark-decorated face of a "Reverse" refers to the opposite face which usually is in­ cised with numbers. For purposes of reference, these distinctions are also made on seals which have marks on both faces. The description of decoration generally is brief since illustrations of most specimens are presented. The maximum diameter (Md.) of all specimens are given in millimeters. A - designates a letter or symbol which is present but which could not be identified. Comparative information and interpre­ tations are presented after the descriptions of bale seals. Series A Knob Method of Attachment Type 1 Single knob attachment Variety a Obverse: Figure DI AMR 17 71 A, 1 specimen, M d . , 19.1. Reverse: 1 fleur-de-lis 570 Variety b Obverse: Reverse: Variety c 1. 2. Figure 71 b, 1 specimen, Md. , 2 0 .6 . 1 fleur--de-lis C, with crossed branches below unidentifiable incised numbers Figure 71 C-G, 5 specimens, distinguished on the basis of large, paired letters which appear on the obverse face. Figure 71 c, Md., 23.4. IL Reverse: Obverse: unidentifiable incised numbers Figure 71 D, Md., 22.5. Obverse: XI, or possibly IT, Reverse: 12 1 3. 4. Figure 71 E, Md., 30.6. H Cbverse: Reverse: unidentifiable incised numbers Figure 71 F, Md., 26.3. R.H Obverse: Reverse: 22 30 5. Figure 71 Obverse: Variety d 1. G, Md., 24.8. I Reverse: DON 2 24 Figure 71 H-K, 4 specimens, distinguished on the basis of the letters AN on the obverse face. Figure 71 H, Md., 23.2. A Obverse: Reverse: 1 2 2 2. Figure 71 I, Md., 24.9. AN Obverse: Reverse: * 7 24 3. Figure 71 J, M d . , 24.2. Obverse: AN Reverse: 3jt7 232 4. Figure 71 K, Md., 26.1. Obverse: AN Reverse: 654 232 571 Variety e Obverse: Figure 71 ROLL A ONT L, 1 specimen, Reverse: M d . ,21.6. VI ALE -ES 173 See also Series A, Type 2, Variety a for a similar mark. Variety f Obverse: Reverse: Figure 71 Reverse: Figure 72 Figure 72 Figure 72 Figure 72 Figure 72 Obverse: 3. Figure 72 Obverse: Reverse: 10197 Reverse: 190 22.2 Figure 72 D-F, 3 specimens, distinguished on the basis of similar marks. Obverse: 2. Reverse: c, 1 specimen, Md. , 25.7. cross symbol Variety j 1. M d . ,20.7. B, 1 specimen, M d . , 22.0. indistinguishable Variety i Obverse: A, 1 specimen, ROV BAIX circular quartered crest with 8 diamonds in diag­ onally opposite quarters, and 7 dots in diagonally opposite quarters; a row of 5 fleur-de-lis appears above the crest; a row of 3 diamonds appears at the side of the crest. Variety h Obverse: M d . , 20.6. 3, 5-sided stars and 1 fleur-de-lis 162 Variety g Obverse: M, 1 specimen, D, M d . , 21.5. LLE AR_VE ON__ROLE BOISSEON 73 Reverse: none E, M d . , 22.7. VISLI MAR__V OL f Reverse: none , M d . , 24.4. BOISSEZO_ and 1 fleur-de-lis. none 572 Variety k 1. Figure 72 G, M d . , 19.0. Obverse: Reverse: 2. . cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above none Figure 72 L, M d . , 18.4. Obverse: Reverse: 7. none cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above and letters MET on border Figure 72 K, M d . , 21.0. Obverse: Reverse: 6 cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above crossed branches on border, possibly 3 fleurde-lis in center Figure 72 J, M d . , 20.7. Obverse: Reverse: 5. cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above Z DE OROL OE AME Figure 72 I, M d . , 21.3. Obverse: Reverse: 4. 4 fleur-de-lis cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above Figure 72 H, Md . , 20.0. Obverse: Reverse: 3. Figure 72 G-N, 8 specimens, distinguished on the basis of similar marks composed of a bird (cock) symbol and/or the name SAMET. 3 fleur-de-lis cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above Figure 72 M, M d . , 21.6. Obverse: Reverse: cock symbol with 3 fleur-de-lis above TROL DE SAME 573 8. Figure 72 N, M d . , 22.0 Obverse: Reverse: Variety 1 Obverse: Reverse: Figure 72 O, 1 specimen, M d . , 22.5E. dog or rampant lion symbol 2 fleur-de-lis Variety m 1. none ITE DE. NTKOLLE SAMET Figure 72 P-Q, Figure 73 A-B, 4 specimens, distinguished on the basis of numeral style. Figure 72 P, M d . , 20.8. Obverse: Reverse: 32.AV with 1 fleur-de-lis below Reverse: 1 D.E SC 2. Figure 72 Q, M d . , 21.6 Obverse: E Cl 2 3. Figure 73 A, M d . , 21.8 Obverse Reverse: DE TOT 31.A 3 4 4. Figure 73 B, M d . , 21.6 Obverse: Variety n 1. NIO DE Reverse: 32.A 1 Figure 73 C-G, 4 specimens, distinguished on the basis of similar marks. Figure 73 C, M d . , 18.7. Obverse: Reverse: men in a boat, facing right, with 2 hearts with piercing arrow above 1492 6 574 2. Figure 73 D, M d . , 22.6. Obverse: Reverse: 3. Figure 73 E, Md . , Obverse: Reverse: 4. Reverse: Obverse: Variety p Obverse: Variety g Obverse: Reverse: 24.4. 4 men in a boat, with 3 men on the left facing right, and one on the right facing left; 2 hearts with piercing arrow above; 2 5-sided stars above none Reverse: Variety o 21.4. 4 men in a boat, third from left standing and facing front; probable pierced hearts above 3-1 Figure 73 G, M d . , Obverse: 21.8. 3 men in a boat, facing right, with 2 hearts with piercing arrow above, and with 2, 5-pointed stars above, indistinguishable letters on por­ tion of the border 2117 Figure 73 F, M d . , Obverse: 5. 4 men in a boat, facing right, with 2 hearts with piercing arrow above 1163 31 Figure 73 H, 1 specimen, M d . , ,THO WILSO & COM BO- Reverse: Figure 73 none Figure 73 221 23 I, 1 specimen, M d . , Reverse: 24.6. 26.8. cross symbol; the letters VRRE appear on the border J, 1 specimen, M d . , 24.3. symbol of stone tower with 3 five-sided stars above; letters E.ET. MARTIN A appear around border 313 242 575 Variety r 1. Figure 73 K-M, 3 specimens, distinguished on the basis of similar name marks. Figure 73 K, Md. , 25.5. Obverse: 2. PACKE ONEX) 16 22 Figure 73 L, M d . , 26.2. Obverse: 3. Reverse: PACKER LONDON Reverse: none Figure 73 M, M d . , 24.6. Obverse: CK Reverse: 212 Variety s Obverse: Figure 73 N, 1 specimen, M d ., 19.8. AD Variety t Obverse: Reverse: tree symbol with 1 five-pointed star on each side; letters G1 on border 09 3 Figure 74 A-B, 2 specimens, distinguished on the basis of similarity in letters Figure 74 A, M d . , 18.8. Obverse: 2. T.V ASA Figure 73 O f 1 specimen, Md., 20.6. Variety u 1. Reverse: 3 fleur-de-lis Reverse: 3 fleur-de-lis in center, bordered by L.AVNE MAZAMET Figure 74 B, M d . , 26.6. Obverse: Reverse: Variety v Obverse: Reverse: 2 fleur-de-lis in center, bordered by .E CARLAJE none Figure 74 C, 1 specimen, M d . , 17.6. lamb with staff symbol in center, 3 fleur-de-lis above and bordered by -EN. MANVYAC none 576 Variety w Figure 74 Obverse: Reverse: Symbol of bird on crossed branches 3891 Variety x Figure Obverse: Reverse: Figure Obverse: Variety z Figure Obverse: DON Variety aa Obverse: 74 F, 1 74 Figure 74 specimen, Md., 27.8. specimen, Md., 38.6. specimen, M d . , 27.5. 31 43 H, 1 specimen, M d . , 26.4. Reverse: Figure 74 Obverse: Reverse: G, 1 Reverse: LON Variety bb none I, 1 specimen, M d . , 2 8.2. none HONORE SCELLIER, with 1 fleur-de-lis above and below letters Variety cc (Not illustrated) ESCVRE T.OLIER EGOTIANS MONTAY BAN Variety dd Reverse: E, 1 Letters F M in the center with bar between letters which forms a W below the letters; the bar is crossed above the letters 1 22 1 2 Reverse: Obverse: 74 2 fleur-de-lis, bordered by RCA_ ATI I ...1733..ECB none Variety y Obverse: D, 1 specimen, Md . , 22.4. 1 specimen, M d . , 25.8. Reverse: (Not illustrated) ^ 17 1 specimen, M d . , 30.3. large WA with bar between letters which forms a double loop below the letters 2415 577 Series A, Type 1# Category 1 This category consists of specimens which are represented by only one disk— the disk which bears the hole or ring. The 22 specimens are described individually. The obverse face is represented in all cases. In addition, there are 33 specimens which are not marked or on which marks appear but are indistinguishable. 1. Figure 74 J, Md., 23.5. Symbol represented by elongate double loop 2. Figure 74 K, M d . , 20.6. ION_ _N_ DUR _U 3. Figure 74 L, M d . , 24.3. Symbol composed of 4. Figure 74 M, Md., 23.4. IAROV.D E .IDM 5. Figure 74 AVDE 6 . 7. around border N, Md., 20.9. and 1 fleur-de-lis around border Figure 74 GEOR superimposed Vs, 1 of which is upside down O, M d . , 21.6. LD. LONDON. Figure 74 around border p f Md., 26.9. P DON 8. Figure 74 E .MA 9. q, M d . , 21.4. around border Figure 74 R, Md., 25.2. Possible letter T 10. Figure 74 Q E.D. CON S, M d . , 22.8. 578 11. Figure 75 A, M d . , 24.9. 99 12. Figure 75 B, Md., 29.2. RIOVE 13. DE ASSON around border Figure 75 C# Md., 29.4. E. INSPECTION D around outside border IDRE around inner border 14. Figure 75 D, M d . , 21.4. fleur-de-lis 2 15. Figure 75 E, Md., 22.2. LE T 16. Figure 75 F, M d . , 27.4. unidentifiable symbols 17. Figure 75 G, Md., 23.5. Symbols, see illustration 18. Figure 75 H, Md., 19.5. RC VIL RET 19. with 1 fleur-de-lis below letters Figure 75 I, M d . , 17.9. CA NE IS SSO 20. Figure 75 J, M d . , 23.1. F 21. BPIEV around border Figure 75 K, M d . , 24.8. AUD AKEFIELD around border* probably Wakefield 22. (Not illustrated), Md. , 33.4. RICHARD & IOHN. -L- RS. IN WAKEFIELD of crest in center of seal around border; portion Series A, Type 1, Category 2 This category consists of specimens which are represented by the disk which bears a knob. The 8 specimens are described individually. The reverse face is represented in all cases. In addition, there are 13 specimens which are unmarked or on which marks appear but are indis­ tinguishable. 1. Figure 75 L, M d . , 27.5. 9 22 2. Figure 75 M, M d . , greater than 20.0. Unknown marks 3. Figure 75 N, M d . , 28.6. 36 > 0 4. Figure 75 O, M d . , 28.2. 340 5. Figure 75 P, Md., 21.2. V 19/9 6 . Figure 75 Q, M d . , 23.7. 177 2. 3 7. Figure 75 R, M d . , 19.9. 75 S, M d . , 23.2. 497 2 8. Figure 580 Series A Type 2 Double knob attachment This type of seal is distinguished from Type 1 seals by the pres­ ence of 2 knobs on a disk, rather than 1. The principle of attach ment is the same for both types. Variety a Figure 75 Obverse: ROLL DE. FONTENAY Variety b Obverse: Variety c Obverse: Variety d Obverse: Reverse: Series B Figure T, 1 specimen, Md., 21.6. Reverse: 75 none U, 1 specimen, Md., 19.9. Reverse: Figure 75 none ALMANO CONMUNE ONZE TAILLS V, 1 specimen, M d . , 17.5. Reverse: Figure 75 3 fleur-de-lis RAL D.E AZ ME W, 1 specimen, M d . , 23.7. ANU Cl CO plus 12 unknown letters unknown design Disk-Band Method of Attachment Series B bale seals consist of a single lead disk to which a narrow lead band is attached. The band is bent over to join the disk and is then clamped. Series B seals commonly exhibit marks on both faces. Type differences are not distinguishable within Series B bale seals. Obverse refers to the disk face against which the lead band is pressed although this is not recognizable in all cases. Variety a Obverse: Reverse: Figure 76 A, 1 specimen, Md . , 16.0. IV*- L U E F oriented in a circle about the center of the specimen 3 fleur-de-lis plus the letters ADAI- 581 Variety b Figure 76 O-RY B, 1 specimen, M d . , 14.3. Obverse: FRR Reverse: A2 FILS in the seal center, with 1 fleur-de-lis be low indistinguishable mark Figure 76 Variety c around the border C, 1 specimen, M d . , 13.2. Obverse: DONLE- Reverse: A.2 FIL in center 3 fleur-de-lis Figure 76 Variety d Obverse: Reverse: -AN.CO none Variety e Obverse: Reverse: Figure 76 E, 1 specimen, Md., 15.3. F, 1 specimen, M d . , 16.8. symbol of crown none Figure 76 G-H, 2 specimens, distinguished on the basis of the same name. Figure 76 Obverset Reverse: 2. 3 fleur-de-lis in center possible synfeol of a bird perched on a branch in center of seal} unidentified letters surround a portion of this symbol 4 unidentified symbols Variety g 1. D, 1 specimen, Md., 12.9. around border, Figure 76 Variety f Obverse: Reverse: around border Figure 76 Obversex Reverse! G, Md . , 12.1. ABR BAS FI- with 1 fleur-de-lis below with 1 fleur-de-lis above H, M d . , 16.3. N-ABRIQVE around the border, with 1 fleur-de-lis in center ASFIL.DE with 1 fleur-de-lis above letters A 582 Variety h Figure 76 1-0. Variety h is represented by 11 specimens which exhibit the same symbol: a circle encloses a palm tree and an alligator extends across the tree trunk. The letters COI appear on the left side of the tree, and the letters NE appear on the right. This symbol appears on seals which bear the marks of 5 differ­ ent manufacturers. The first 3 illustrations (Figure 7 5 I, J-K) bear the same name. The following 3 (Figure 76 L-M) bear different names. Figure 76 N-O are 2 representative specimens of 6 seals which bear the same manufacturer*s last name but different first names. 1. 2. 3. F i g u r e 76 I, M d . , Obverse: Reverse: A. 2 FILS in center? POUR LEST- around border; additional A.2 is noted on one edge ILS palm symbol Figure 76 J, Md., Obverse: Reverse: A.2 in center, surrounded by POUR LESTRANGER FILS palm symbol Figure 76 K, M d . , Obverse: Reverse: 4. Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 5. Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 6. Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 7. Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 20.7. am 15.3. 16.1. A . 3 in center, surrounded by POUR -LSIRANGER FILS palm symbol L, M d . , 14.1. LOVE around center palm symbol M, M d . , 13.3. PIL around center, --- in center palm symbol N, 3 specimens, M d., of 1 specimen, 16.2. A2 FIL in center, surrounded by HENRY LARGUIER & COMP palm symbol 0 , 3 specimens, M d . , of 1 specimen, PIERRE LARGU— R palm symbol 13.9. around center, A2FILS in center 583 Series C Type 1 Wire Method of Attachment Single wire All Type 1 specimens esdiibit a single perforation on a plane parallel to the seal diameter, presumably through which an attachment wire was passed. Variety a Figure 76 P-R Variety a is represented by 6 specimens which exhibit the same symbol. This symbol is identical in most cases to that defined for Series B, Type 1, Variety h specimens. The first 2 speci­ mens (Figure 76 p-Q) represent different manufacturers. The remaining 4 specimens (Figure 76 r) represent the same manu­ facturer. 1. Figure 76 Obverse: symbol of bird in center, with a C, and 2, 5pointed stars above; ETVIALOLOMB around border palm symbol; this specimen differs from those noted above in that the letters COINE are repre­ sented by a C and an N on either side of the palm trunk; the letters DE NISME-.-ACT encircle the seal edge. Reverse: 2. Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 3. Figure P, Md., 14.9. 76 Q, Md., 14.9. POUR LESTRAN in center, surrounded by BODET GEP palm symbol R, 4 specimens, Md. ET IAL-- (1 specimen), 15.8. Obverse: H.LARGUIER & COMPE. around center, with 1 fleur-de-lis in center Reverse: palm symbol See also Series B, Type 1, Variety h, no. 6 ; 1 other spe­ cimen is identical to the 1 described; 2 other specimens bear the letters FORS instead of a fleur-de-lis on the obverse face. Variety b Obverse: Figure RO — R 76 S, 1 specimen, Md., 10.1. Reverse: A AM EN 584 Variety c Figure 76 T, 1 specimen, Md . , 16.0. Obverse: CORP Reverse: unidentifiable letters This specimen is nearly triangular in shape. Variety d Figure Obverse: leaf (?)motif symbol in center surrounded by HERENEE LYC in center, surrounded by (EB)? --- Reverse: Variety e 1. Figure 76 V-X, 3 specimens, distinguished on the basis of similarity in mark design. Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 2. V, Md., 16.1. Rampant lion with 3 fleur-de-lis above — ---- Figure 76 Obverse: Reverse: 3. 76 U, 1 specimen, M d . , 13.2. W, Md., 13.2. rampant lion with 3 fleur-de-lis above ARD in center, 1 fleur-de-lis above Figure 76 Obverse: X, Md., 13.2. rampant lion Reverse: D and 3 fleur-de-1: -AND Variety f Figure 76 Obverse: DE VSSV I— D Variety Obverse: Reverse: g Figure 76 A2 FIL Y, 1 specimen, Md . , 13.0. Reverse: AS A — Z, 1 specimen, M d . , 12.1 in center, surrounded by RLEAN R-RES. CORBERT around center, 3 symbols, possibly fleur-de-lis in center 585 Type 2 Double wire Variety a 1. 2. Figure 77 A-C, 19 specimens, distinguished on basis of the same design element. Figure 77 a , M d . , 16.3. Obverse: crossed wreath around the letters- Reverse: crown symbol Figure 77 B, the C.D.I. 3 C Md., 11.8. Same description as no. 1 above 3. Figure 77 C, Md., 16.8. Same description as no. Variety b Obverse: Reverse: Variety c Figure 77 1 above D, 1 specimen, Md., 20.2. encircled 3 in center, surrounded by M.none Figure 77 E-G, 5 specimens; distinguished on the basis of the same mark; there are 2 styles of Variety c bale seals, the first (4 specimens) which exhibit the letters M. C. X R. R. and the second letters M. C. (1 specimen) which exhibits the R. R. Two specimens of the first style and the single second style specimen are illustrated. 1. Figure 77 Obverse: E, M d., 14.7. M. C. X R. R. Reverse: X 586 2. Figure 77 same as: no. no saj Note: X 95 Obverse: Reverse: 3. F, Md., 16.1 Figure 77 Obverse: 1 the two other specimens of this style exhibit respectively, 26X and X on the reverse faces. 102 G, M d . , 16.5 M. C R. Reverse: 24 R Variety d (Not illustrated), 1 specimen, M d . , 19.8. Obverse: Reverse: none Q.B in center, with 1 fleur-de-lis and 2 stars superimposed Bale Seal Category 1 This category includes 4 specimens which are questionable bale seals and which are described as follows: 1. Figure 77 H, 3 specimens, Md. (1 specimen), 10.1. Obverse: .P Reverse: A.2 FIL LE ROY Two additional specimens define the same style. These specimens are very thin disks with no attachments. 2. Figure 77 I, 1 specimen, M d . , 19.7. Obverse: crest (see illustration) Reverse: none This specimen exhibits a reverse face which is smaller in diameter than the obverse face. 587 Discussion: Three distinct series of bale seals have been distinguished on the basis of different types of attachment. Series A seals cure represented by 136 specimens! of this total* 90 had marks or symbols. The remaining 46 seals have been placed in Series A, Categories 1 and 2: specimens which did not bear marks or symbols. Series B is represented by 19 specimens and Series C by 39 specimens. were assigned to a questionable bale seal category. Four seals From a total of 198 specimens* 152 exhibited marks or synfeols; 104 of these could be assigned a specific country of origin (Table 53 ). The 83 specimens of French origin were identified by the presence of French synbols* such as the fleur-de-lis or words. The 21 British specimens were identified by the presence of English words. British seals were rep­ resented by only Series A specimens; French seals appear in all three formal categories. Series A seals were produced by casting. A mark or symbol was stamped on the obverse face of a seal by a clamping device which also functioned as a die. in most cases. The reverse face was hand incised with numbers The majority of Series A seals exhibit cord or fabric­ like impressions on their inner surfaces which is evidence of attach­ ment to cloth or woolen goods. Series B seals were probably cast* although they could have been easily produced by cutting a circular disk from a sheet of lead. Series B seals were stamped on both faces with marks or symbols by a die-clanp. Series C seals were first cast and then clamped with a die which inparted a mark on both faces and which compressed the seal in order to secure the attached wire. 588 Several bale seal distribution maps were plotted as an aid in studying the significance of distributional variation between different formal types of bale seals and between seals identified as French or British. Series A seals do not occur in specific clusters at the site but are distributed in approximately equal densities in most areas where they are present. Series A specimens are nearly absent in the SW and NW rowhouse units and occur in lew densities within the earliest French stockade (F. 5) and in British military structures. of Series A specimens within the two rowhouse units The absence is enigmatic.The two potential reasons for this absence (1 . absence of commercial ac­ tivities within the rowhouse units; and absence of bale sealsat 2 . the site during the period of rowhouse use) evidence. are not supported by other The limited sample of Series B seals appears to have a random distribution except for a small cluster at the west end of the garden area between the two south rowhouse units. appear to have a random distribution south of the Series C seals 220 grid line. Series C seals cluster in one area north of this line which is within and to the east of the northern section of the British barracks (F. 3). The association in this area is indefinite, however, since Feature 3 overlies an earlier French rowhouse unit. Feature 27. This latter association is the most reasonable. French bale seals were noted in one major area of concentra­ tion which is within and between the western sections of the two south rowhouse units. French specimens are noticeably infrequent within the bounds of the original French stockade (F. 5) and appear randomly else­ where. The distribution of the small sample of British seals is random. 589 Eighteen seals (17 French and 1 British) were found in feature contexts (see Table 52 for specific feature associations). The features represented are primarily of French association, although several exhibit mixed French and British assemblages. The comparative evidence for bale seals is inadequate for spe­ cific dating purposes. Cotter and Hudson (1957: 95) report Series A, Type 1 seals from Jamestown, Va., although information on marks or symbols is not presented. Nystuen and Lindeman (1969: port Series A, Type 1 seals from Fort Renville, Minn. Bolton (1950: 26) also re­ Calver and 26) describe two specimens from Fort Ticonderoga, N.Y., which resemble the single Series A, Type 1 specimen from Fort Michilimackinac. These seals identify the manufacturer as OLIER and the place of manufacture as MONTAUBAN. Interpretations: The majority of seals recovered at the site were identified as French, although the presence of British specimens and distributional evidence indicates that bale seals were in use during both the French and British periods of control. Significant distributional differ­ ences were not observed between specific seal forms through time or space. Bale seals did not occur in specific clusters which could be interpreted as loci of commercial activities. 590 TABLE Taxonomic Designation 52 Bale Seal: Frequency Feature Associations Feature Nationality of Use SA, Tl, Va 1 85 F Vk 1 296 F Vn 1 82 N Vo 1 85 B Vt 1 262 N Vy 1 248 N Cat. 1 1 102 N Cat. 1 1 249 N Cat. 1 1 88 N Cat. 1 1 94 N Cat. 1 1 72 F 267 N Cat. 1 Cat. 1 1 83 N SB, Tl, Vh 1 88 F SC, Tl, Ve 1 249 F Vg 1 3 F T2, Va 1 267 F TABLE 53 Nationality of Use Taxonomic Designation SA, Tl, Va Vb Vc, No. No. No. No. No. Vd, No. No. No. No. Ve Vf Vg Vh Vi Vj, NO. NO. No. Vk, NO. No. NO. NO. No. No. No. No. VI Bale Seal Interpretations 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 F F B B B B B B B B B F F F N N F F F F F F F F F F F F Taxonomic Designation Vm, Vn, Vo Vp Vq Vr, Vs Vt Vu, W Vw Vx Vy Vz Vaa Vbb Vcc Vdd Nationality of Use No. No. No. NO. No. No. No. No. NO. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 NO. 1 No. 2 No. 3 NO. 1 No. 2 F F F F N N N N N B N B B B B N N F F F N F N B B B F N tn VO TABLE 53 (Cont.) Taxonomic Designation SA, Tl, Cat. 1, No. NO. NO. No. No. No. No. No. No. NO. NO. NO. NO. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. NO. No. No. No. NO. NO. NO. NO. NO. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 N N N N F B B N N N N F B F N N N F N N B B N N N N N N N N Taxonomic Designation T2, SB, Tl, Va Vb Vc Vd Va Vb Vc Vd Ve Vf Vg, Vh, SC, Tl, Va, Vb Nationality of Use No. NO. No. No. No. NO. No. No. No. No. No. NO. NO. No. No. NO. No. No. No. 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 1 2 3 3 3 3 F F F N F F F F N N F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F N 592 SA, Tl, Cat. 2, Nationality of Use TABLE 53 (Cent.) Nationality of Use Taxonomic Designation Vc Vd Ve, Vf Vg T2, Va, NO. 1 NO. 2 NO. 3 No. NO. No. No. No. 1 2 2 2 3 No. No. NO. No. 1 1 1 2 Vd Cat. 1, 59 3 Vb Vc, No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 N N F F F N F F F F N N N N N N F F F F N Figure 71 Bale Seals Taxonomic Designation (Actual :e) Catal mber, SA, Tl, Va 1416 Vb 2994 Vc No. 1 202 7 Vc No. 2 1332 Vc No. 3 2739 Vc No. 4 1706 Vc No. 5 988 Vd No. 1 1 Vd No. 2 349 Vd No. 3 647 Vd No. 4 126 Ve 1558 Vf 1218 595 Figure 72 Figure Designation Bale Seals Taxonomic Designation (Actual Size) Catalog Nunfcer, MS 2 A SA, Tl, Vg 1705 B Vh 1 C Vi 3131 D Vj No. 1 2363 E Vj No. 2 2043 F Vj No. 3 2043 G Vk No. 1 2247 H Vk No. 2 76 I Vk No. 3 2790 J Vk No. 4 2834 K Vk No. 5 2788 L Vk No. 6 79 M Vk No. 7 80 N Vk No. O VI P Vm No. 1 896 Q Vm No. 2 325 8 3302 938 597 9 1 M o7 */ a a M W Q Figure Figure Designation 73 Bale Seals Taxonomic Designation Catalog Number, MS 3 2971 Vm No. 4 1082 C Vn No. 1 1961 D Vn No. 2 2479 E Vn NO. 3 304 F Vn No. 4 1 G Vn NO. 5 1 H Vo 1 I Vp 2736 J Vq 1 K Vr No. 1 1144 L Vr No. 2 2832 M Vr No. 3 845 N Vs 1427 O Vt 2445 A SA, Tl, Vm B No. (Actual Size) 599 WOCINofn Figure 7 4 Figure Designation Bale Seals Taxonomic Designation (Actual Size) Catalog Number, MS^ A SA, Tl, Vu No. 1 1344 B Vu No. 2 2012 C Vv 972 D VW 1976 E Vx 116 F Vy 2041 G Vz 144 H Vaa 2686 I Vbb 353 J SA, Tl, Cat. 1 No. 1 258 K No. 2 3466 L No. 3 1353 M No. 4 2371 N No. 5 O No. 6 1542 P No. 7 2027 Q No. 2 388 R No. 9 S No. 10 8 448 1 2775 H QNORE SCiE 1T-TE1 Figure 75 Figure Designation A Bale Seals (Actual Size) Taxonomic Designation 1 No. 11 1468 B No. 12 2736 C No. 13 2460 D No. 14 582 E N . 15 2388 F No. 16 2181 G No. 17 1405 H No. 18 1235 I No. 19 673 J No. 20 2501 K No. 21 1110 L SA, Tl, Cat. Catalog Number, MS^ 2 No. 1 2619 M No. 2 845 N No. 3 1761 O No. 4 2018 P No. 5 1 Q NO. 6 2110 R No. 7 688 S No. T SA, Tl, Cat. SA, T2, Va 8 2060 2609 U Vb 1221 V Vc 2642 W Vd 3-9 603 SP I * NOLt 'NTEN/SV ALMANty c o n m v n e , oiy;zE v TAi^lV Figure Figure Designation 76 Bale Seals Taxonomic Designation (Actual Size) Catalog Number, MS^ A SB, Tl, Va 1924 B Vb 1 C Vc 2993 D Vd 374 E Ve 578 F Vf 274 G Vg No. 1 1962 H Vg No. 2 650 I Vh No. 1 2150 J Vh No. 2 1 K Vh No. 3 1468 L Vh NO. 4 1269 M Vh No. 5 471 N Vh NO. 6 2 37 O Vh NO. 7 1345 P SC, Tl, Va NO. 1 1795 Q Va NO. 2 2851 R Va No. 3 1 S Vb 1378 T Vc 1388 U Vd 2181 V Ve NO. 1 311 W Ve NO. 2 2388 X Ve NO. 3 1730 Y Vf 1198 Z Vg 133 605 FILS J a 2 r|i r *ovn k B > f P r*1 |B£> V I svi .UJOJ Figure 77 Figure Designation Bale Seals (Actual Size) Taxonomic Designation Catalog Nuntoer, MS^ A SC, T2, Va No. 1 2170 B Va No. 2 2653 C Va No. 3 1448 D Vb E Vc No. 1 1499 F Vc No. 2 603 G Vc NO. 3 1652 166 H Bale Seal Cat. 1 No. 1 2283 I Bale Seal Cat. 1 No. 2 85 607 APPENDIX B, PART II: BRIEF ARTIFACT DESCRIPTIONS PERSONAL CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Clothing and Clothing Accoutrements Textiles ( 8 6 specimens). The majority of textile fragments represent uniform braid or decoration consisting of thin, copper-sheet wrapped, silk-core y a m . The y a m is either woven or braided into long and narrow segments which serve as uni form or clothing ornamentation. Several specimens of carbonized cloth fabric also have been recovered. Interpretation: 1750-1780, primarily British use. Hooks and Eyes (153 specimens). Seventy-six hooks and 77 eyes have been recovered, the large majority of which are iron; the remaining specimens are copper. The majority of hooks vary in length between 36 mm and 41 mm and in width between 16 mm and 24 mm. Eyes exhibit one predominant width size, between 8 mm and 14 mm, and one predom­ inant length size, between 12 mm and 16 mm. Interpretation: 17401780, primarily British use. Shoe Heel Plates (33 specimens; 28 brass and 5 iron) . Heel plates were either flat (29 specimens) or had a lip at the back edge which fit over the shoe heel. All specimens have 3 drilled holes for at­ tachment. Interpretation: 1730-1780, possibly more common during French period. Ice Creepers (5 specimens). Ice creepers consist of an elongate, flat, iron bar on each end of which are 2 iron spurs or prongs, bent down, and 1 flange or eyelet for attachment, bent up. The 5 specimens vary in length between 71.5 and 103.4 mm. Interpretation: none. Ice Skate (1 specimen). The single specimen consists of a thin, endcurved iron bar with a lip for shoe-toe attachment and a drilled flange on the opposite end for heel attachment. The specimen is 303.2 mm in total length. Interpretation: none. Adornment i Hawk BellB (117 specimens). Hawk bells consist of a brass crown, back, and eye, and an iron danker. The eye is expanded on the inside and brazed to the back; the back is brazed to the crown. The crown has a slit with round holes at each end. Seventeen specimens have crowns with impressed marks, such as a D or a 4, and crown symbols. Size: diameter range, 11.0-27.0 mm; possibly 5 size categories; 13.5-14.5; 15.5-16.5; 19.5-20.5; 21.5-22.5; and 26.0. Interpretation: 17301770, primary use during French period. Religious Medallions and Crucifixes (27 specimens; 7 medallions and 20 crucifixes). All medallions and crucifixes are brass. Three medal­ lions were octagonal, and 4 were round. The face of each medallion and crucifix bears raised, religious symbols. Interpretation: probably French use. 609 610 Jewelry — Bracelets (7 specimens). Six bracelets are made of round or rectan­ gular brass rods. One specimen is made of twisted brass wire. Interpretation: none. — Earrings (13 specimens). Five silver specimens each with, a single suspended bob and 7, two-part brass specimens with glads sets. Interpretation: possibly French, 1730-1760. — Pendants (5 specimens). These include brass and silver frames with enclosed glass sets. Interpretation: none. — Brooches (38 specimens} 26 silver-plated brass and 12 pewter). Brass specimens consist of a circular ring with attached, movable tongue. Pewter specimens consist of a cast, circular ring with a stationary cross bar. Interpretation: 1760-1780, British. — Chain (17 specimens; 15 brass, 2 iron). Interpretation: none. — Hat Pin (1 specimen). — Spacers (17 specimens; 3 brass, 14 catlinite). — Bangles (6 specimens; 4 silver, 2 glass). All specimens are triangular-shaped. Glass specimens consist of blue or blue and white glass. Grooming Combs (46 specimens). Combs are double-edged, fine-toothed, and made of bone or ivory. Interpretation: 1740-1780, French and British. Hair Brush (1 specimen). One ivory hair brush was recovered; it was 143.6 ran in length. The specimen has 2 rows of 1 2 holes each for in­ sertion of brush material or hair. Interpretation: none. Razors (6 specimens). Hollow-ground steel blades from straight edge razors have been recovered; 3 of these have unidentifiable, impressed, maker's marks. Blades range in length from 129 ran to 136 mm. Inter­ pretation : none. Activities Recreation — Chess Piece (1 specimen). Ivory chess pawn. Interpretation: none. — Cup and Pin (7) (8 specimens). Hollow, cone-shaped, bone objects, possibly the cups for a "cup and pin” game. Specimens vary in length from 26.8 ram to 30.3 mm and in maximum diameter from 14.6 mm to 16.6 nm. Interpretation: probably French, 1730-1760. — Gaming Pieces (7) (14 specimens). Bone or ivory circular disks, often with incised linear or circular decoration on both faces; specimens vary in diameter from 11.1 mm to 20.9 mm. Interpretation: prob­ ably French, 1730-1760. — Dice (3 specimens). Square, bone objects with series of inpressed dots on each of 6 faces to represent numbers 1 through 6 . Inter­ pretation: none. 611 — Whizzer (12 specimens). Round, lead disks with toothed edges and 2 center holes through which cord was passed. Interpretation: possibly French, 1715-1760. — Marbles (20 specimens). Colored clay or stone objects which vary in diameter from 12.3 m m to 18.2 mm. Interpretation: none. Writing — Lead Pencils (25 specimens). Round or rectangular lead bars, often tapered to a point on both ends. Interpretation: 1750-1781; probably locally manufactured and primarily of British use. — Letter Seal (1 specimen). Brass with impressed crest. Interpreta­ tion: none. HOUSEHOLD CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Maintenance and Repair Pins (781 specimens). All pins are made of silver-plated, brass wire with a spiral coil wire-head soldered to the shaft. Pins vary in length from 21 mm to 41 mm; the majority are between 31 sn and 36 mm long. Needles (56 specimens). Needles were found in the following forms, sizes and materials. — Steel, diamond-shpaed point, slit eye; (9 specimens); length range, 108 iran to 138 non. — Steel, triangular-shaped point, slit eye; (17 specimens); length range, 96 mm to 229 ran; 2 specimens stamped with manufacturer's mark of the letter P superinposed by a crown symbol. — Steel, round, slit or drilled eye; (23 specimens); length range, 38 mm to 208 mm, most common, 40 mm-45 mm. — Steel or brass, round shaft with double prongs on each end (netting needle); (3 specimens). --Bone, single- or double-ended with drilled hole at shaft center or end. Interpretation: 1730-1770, primarily French use. Thimbles (41 specimens). All specimens are brass with slightly tapered sides and slightly convex tops. All exterior surfaces are patterned with small, round or square impressions. Thimbles range in maximum diameter from 13.3 mm to 19.2 mm, with am average of 15.9 mm; and in length from 14.6 ran to 19.8 mm, with an average of 17.7 mm. Interpre­ tation: British, 1760-1780. Scissors (26 specimens). Twenty-three specimens are iron with either equal-sized round or oval finger rings or with oblong rings of unequal size. The 3 brass specimens are handle fragments, 2 of which bear in­ cised decoration. Interpretation: 1715-1781, French and British, greatest use between 1730 and 1760. 612 Preparation and Consumption of Food Kettle Hooks (5 specimens). suspended. Interpretation: S-curved iron bars from which a kettle is none. Kettle Handles (7 specimens). Curved iron rod with curled ends which are looped through kettle or vessel lugs. Projected vessel diameter range based on handle length between ends, 170 mm-260 mm. Interpreta­ tion : none. Kettle Lugs (72 specimens). Square-shaped lugs from copper kettles. All brass specimens (65 specimens) are riveted to kettle fragments, have a single hole for handle attachment, and have folded c o m e r s on the lug end nearest the handle. Brass lugs range in length between 47.4 rran and 122.2 mm, with an average of 75.5 mm; and in width between 35.1 mm and 100.6 mm, with an average of 70.5 mm. There is a very high, positive correlation between length and width. The most fre­ quent form of iron lug (5 specimens) consists of a curved iron plate with a down-curved hook for handle attachment. A second form (2 spe­ cimens) is U-shaped with flanged ends for vessel attachment. Inter­ pretation: 1730-1765, primarily French use, manufactured or repaired locally. Kettles, Cast Iron (59 specimens). All specimens are fragments (feet, rims, and body sherds) of large, cast-iron kettles. Interpretation: 1740-1780, primarily British vise. Porringer Handle (1 specimen). bowl. Interpretation: none. Perforated, pewter handle for porringer Plate, Pewter (1 specimen). Pewter dinner plate, 229.1 mm in diameter, 2 sets of marks on back side; the letters C.P enclosed in circle at plate center, and the letters (S) RD engraved on the rim. Interpreta­ tion: none. Spigots (27 specimens, including spigot keys and key fittings). All spigots are made of brass and consist of a tube, movable cock, and cock-stop which projects from the tube surface. Keys and key fittings for spigots have also been recovered. Interpretation: 1730-1780, French and British use. Ceramics, Non-European (781 sherds). Aboriginal ceramics (late pre­ historic and historic) occur at the site either in association with French features or in contexts which predate the site's establishment. Interpretation: associated with the pre-site occvpation of the Straits' area and with the early periods of French occupation, ca. 1715-1740. 613 Furnishings Hasp Locks (79 specimens). Iron trunk locks consisting of a hinge element and a lock element. Two forms of hasps are represented in the Fort Michilimackinac sample; these consist of (1) a two-part hinge element with a closed loop attached to one part (46 specimens) which is inserted into a receiving slit on a separate hasp-lock mechanism ( 2 0 specimens); and (2 ) a single iron bar with a slit on one end ( 1 0 specimens) which is passed over a receiving loop (3 specimens) and which is secured by passing a third element between the two. With the first form, the lock mechanism was mounted on the trunk body while the hinge element was attached to the lid edge. Interpretation: spe­ cimens were recovered from both French and British contexts. Drawer—Pull Knobs (10 specimens). as drawer pulls. Interpretation: Small brass knobs apparently used none. Drawer Handles (16 specimens). Curved iron rods attached to drawers with cotter-key-like pins. Interpretation: none. Hinges, Furniture (30 specimens). two-part hinges. Interpretation: Small brass or silver-plated brass, probably French. Tacks (59 specimens). Decorated and plain furniture upholstery tacks of brass (55 specimens) or pewter (4 specimens). One of the brass tacks was double-shanked. Interpretation: 1740-1770, primarily French use. Candle Holders (7 specimens). All specimens are made of brass. Three of the 4 complete specimens have octagonal-shaped bases, the remaining specimen is round. Interpretation: 2 specimens are associated with French features. Candle Snuffer (1 specimen). Iron. Interpreation: Fire Tongs or "Smoker's Companion” (1 specimen). tion: none. none. Iron. Interpreta­ Storage Barrel Hoops (462 specimens). Iron straps used to secure barrel stays. The majority of specimens were fastened with 1 iron rivet. Fragments of 4 brass specimens were recovered; each was inpressed with a "King's Broad Arrow." Interpretation: 1750-1780, primarily British use. 614 STRUCTURAL CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Structural Hardware and Parts Nalls. Nails from the site have not been counted. The “rose-head" type, with either a drawn or flattened point, is the most common style. Drawn-point rose-head nails taper on all 4 sides; flattened point rosehead nails taper on only 2 sides. The second most common type is the "L-head," with either a drawn or flattened point. Other types include the "double-shank box nail," the "offset-head nail" and a "rose-head" nail with large head and short shank. A large number of "T-head spikes" have also been recovered. Hinges (150 specimens). Iron hinges of two forms were found: (1) single unit, two-part hinge (36 specimens); and (2 ) hinge bars used with a pintle. The latter form are either strap- or square-shaped. Seven of the strap, hinge bars have flared ends. All specimens were secured with screws or nails. Interpretation: 1730-1780, French and British. Screws (19 specimens). Iron, vary in length from 19.1 mm to 44.2 mm. The number of grooves per 10 mm varies between 3.5 and 4.5. Interpre­ tation: 1760-1780, British. Bolts (1 specimen); Nuts (6 specimens); and Washers (5 specimens). specimens are made of iron; all nuts are square. Interpretation: possibly British use. All Staples (52 specimens). Square- and round- (U-shaped) ended iron staples which vary in length from 19.4 mm to 79.1 mm and in width from 28.9 mm to 69.3 itin. Interpretation: 1740-1780, primarily French use. Keys (39 specimens). Iron door and cabinet lock keys, solid and hollow shank forms. Interpretation: common during both French and British periods of control. Locks (70 specimens including 52 lock parts). Iron rim locks (14 spe­ cimens) and padlocks (4 specimens). Interpretation: the majority of specimens were associated with buildings constructed during the French period of control but which were occupied throughout the British period. Door, Gate, or Shutter Hooks (14 specimens). L-shaped iron hooks, stapled to permanent support and looped over receiving ring on movable door, gate, or shutter. Door-Latch Hardware (30 specimens). Including 4 iron, sliding, latch bolts; 8 iron-lift, latch bars, horizontally mounted on the door and rotated on 1 nail through the bar end; 2 iron thumb lifts, or lifters for latch bars; these objects are hinged at the center and extend through the door to permit lifting the latch from the opposite door side; and 16 iron latch bar catches, notched U- or V-shaped objects G15 which are driven into the door frame. Interpretation: associated w i t h French structures but in use throughout the period of site occupation. Keyhole Plates (19 specimens). Brass and iron specimens were found; several iron specimens are ornamental. Interpretation: probably French. CRAFT OR ACTIVITY CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Offense and Defense and/or Acquisition of Subsistence Resources Traps (3 specimens). none. Fragments of iron trap springs. Interpretation* Projectile Points (43 metal specimens). Iron (19 specimens) and b r a s s (24 specimens) projectile points represented by 4 shapes: leaf-shaped and stemmed; triangular stemmed; basal-notched stemmed; and triangular. Interpretation: 1720-1760, French, probably distributed as trade goods. Scythes (4 specimens) . Iron scythe blade and attachment element frag­ ments. Interpretation: none. Harpoons (10 specimens) . Six bone, 3 iron, and 1 brass specimen. Bone harpoons vary in length between 98.4 an and 241.3 mm and have between 1 and 5 barbs. All bone specimens bear a drilled hole near the p r o x ­ imal barb. Interpretation: none. Sword Parts (18 specimens). Sword parts consist of 5 brass, hand guards; 1 brass handle; 1 steel, sword-blade fragment; 1 iron pommel; and 11 scabbard clips or sword frogs (10 brass and 1 iron) . Five of the brass clips have 2 attachment rivets on an offset shank projecting from the back face. The remaining clips are U-shaped; 3 of these b e a r inpressed or raised designs. Interpretation: rivet style scabbard clips are probably British, the remainder appear in French contexts. Special Skills and/or Crafts Woodworking Tools — Files (37 specimens). Rectangular, round, triangular, convexo-flat, and convexo-concave (cross section) iron files. The majority of files have tapered rather than offset tangs and fine double-cut teeth. Several specimens have rasp teeth. Interpretation* 1740 1780, primarily French use. — Saws (12 blade fragments) . All saw blades are small and are either brass (2 specimens) or iron (10 specimens) . Blades vary in w i d t h between 14.1 mm and 30.1 mm. Interpretation: none. 616 — Axes (23 specimens, 4 complete). All specimens are of iron and of the well-known trade axe style. One specimen bears an impressed "three rivers" set of marks. Interpretation: French and British. — Planes (2 specimens). Iron plane blades, 1 of which bears an uniden­ tifiable maker's mark. Interpretation: none. — Wedges (6 specimens). Iron. Interpretation: none. — Chisels (15 specimens). Steel. Interpretation: none. — Gouges (7 specimens). Steel, all specimens have handle shafts. Interpretation: none. — Drill Bits (10 specimens). Steel. Interpretation: none. — Punches (9 specimens). Steel. Interpretation: none. --Gimlets (4 specimens). Steel. Interpretation: none. Other Tools — Hammers (5 specimens). Iron. Interpretation: none. — Vice (1 specimen). Iron vice jaw. Interpretation: none. Measuring Dividers (3 specimens). Steel. Interpretation: none. Weights (9 specimens). Seven brass, nested apothecary weights (1.815.2 grains weight range, 10.8 mm to 25.6 mm diameter range); 1 small, rectangular, brass weight marked 1/2 DRAM and 1 large lead weight with an iron hook. Interpretation: none. Conpass (5 specimens). Four brass conpass backs and 1 bone compass plate. Interpretation: none. Clock Part (1 specimen). Brass clock gear. Interpretation: none. Telescope (1 specimen). Three-part (or tier) iron telescope with 2 eyepieces. Length, 215.9 mm. Interpretation: French. Comoercial Coins (28 specimens). Of the 15 identifiable specimens, 7 were British (George I and George II), 7 were French (Louis XIV and Louis X V ) , and 1 was a Spanish bit. MISCELLANEOUS OR GENERALIZED CONTEXT OF UTILIZATION Rivets (310 specimens, 100 finished and 210 blanks). Rivet blanks are made from diamond-shaped, thin, copper sheet which range in length from 14.0 mm to 48.3 m m and in width from 11.0 mm to 18.9 mm. Blanks are rolled into a tapering tube and then hammered to produce a flattened head. Interpretation: 1730-1750, French. 617 Harness Buckles (10 specimens). Square or round iron frames with a movable iron tongue attached. Interpretation: none. Strike—A—Lites (60 specimens). Three types of steel strike-a-lites (fire-steels) have been recovered: (1) steel bar with shanks extending from each end of the striking edge to form a handle (4 specimens); (2) steel bar with 1 shank extending from 1 end of an elongate striking edge to form a handle (9 specimens); and (3) oval-shaped with a center hole through which fingers are passed for grasping the object (47 spe­ cimens) . The third type varies in length from 62.8 mm to 99.0 mm and in width from 31.0 mm to 39.9 mm. Interpretation: 1730-1780, greater use during French period of control. REFERENCES CITED Armour, David A. X966 Massacre at Mackinac— 1763. Mackinac Island State Park Commission, Mackinac Island, Michigan. Atkinson, D. R. 1962 Maker's Marks on Clay Tobacco Pipes Found in London. Archaeological Newsletter, Vol. 7, No. 8, pp. 182-188. London. Part I. 1965 Maker's Marks on Clay Tobacco Pipes Found in London. Part II. Archaeological Newsletter, Vol. 7, No. 11, pp. 249-256. London. Bald, Clever F. 1954 Michigan in Four Centuries. Harper and Brothers, New York. Barka, Norman Forthune 1965 Historic Sites Archaeology at Portland Point, New Brunswick, Canada, 1631-1850. MS, doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge. Bell, Robert E . , 1967 E. B. Jelks, and W. W. Newcomb A Pilot Study of Wichita Indian Archaeology and Ethnohistory. Final Report to the National Science Foundation, Grant GS-964. Benndorf, Bearbeitet Von Helga and Arthur Speyer 1968 Indianer Nordamerikas 1760-1860. Offenback a. m. Roland Mayer and Co., Benson, Carl A. 1967 The Philip Mound: A Historic Site. The Florida Anthropol­ ogist, Vol. 20, Nos. 3-4, pp. 118-132. Tallahassee. 618 619 Binford, Lewis R. 1962 A Discussion of The Contrasts in the Development of the Settlement at Fort Michilimackinac Under British and French Rule. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Newsletter, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 50-52. 1963 A Proposed Attribute List For the Description and Classifi­ cation of Projectile Points. In: "Miscellaneous Studies in Typology and Classification." Museum of Anthropology, The University of Michigan, Anthropological Papers No. 19, pp. 193-221. Ann Arbor. n.d. Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, 1961 Season: Prelimr(1961)inary Report. MS, on file, Mackinac Island State Park Com­ mission, Lansing. Caldwell, Norman W. 1938 The Chickasaw Th/eat to French Control of the Mississippi in the 1740's. .he Chronicles of Oklahoma, Vol. 16, No. 4. Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma City. Calver, William Louis, and Reginald Pelham Bolton 1950 History Written With Pick and Shovel. ical Society, New York. The New York Histor­ Camp, Helen 1967 Pemaguid Lost and Found. Arlington, Massachusetts. Ancient Pemaquid Restoration. Campbell, J. Duncan 1959 British Army Buttons, 1750-1780, Excavated in the United States. MS, on file, Michigan State University Museum, East Lansing. Casanowics, 1909 Immanuel The Collections of Rosaries in the United States National Museum. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, Vol. 36, No. 1667, pp. 333-359. Washington, D.C. Chaput, Donald 1970 Personal Communication, Letter of April, 1970. 620 Charlevoix, Le P. de 1744 Journal d*un Voyage fait par Ordre du Roi dans L'Amerique Septentrionnale: Adresse1 a Madame la Duchess de Lesdiquieres. Vol. 3, Nyon Fils, Paris. Chase, David W. 1968 Fort Toulouse, First Investigations, 1966. In: The Confer­ ence on Historic Site Archaeology Papers 1967, Vol. 2, Part I, pp. 33-49, edited by Stanley South. Clarke, David L. 1968 Analytical Archaeology. Methuen and Co., Ltd., London. Cleland, Charles E. n.d. A Comparison of French and British Subsistence Systems at Fort Michilimackinac, Mackinac City, Michigan. National Historic Sites Service. Ottawa (in press). Cleland, Charles E. and James E. Fitting 1967 The Crisis of Identity: Theory in Historic Sites Archaeology. The Conference on Historic Site Archaeology Papers, Vol. 2, Part 2, Historical Archaeology Forum— 1968, pp. 124-138, edited by Stanley South. Combes, John D. 1964 Excavations at Spokane House— Fort Spokane Historic Site, 1962-1963. Laboratory of Anthropology, Washington State University, Report of Investigation No. 29. Pullman. Cotter, John L. 1958 Archaeological Excavations at Jamestown Colonial National Historical Park and Jamestown National Historic Site, Virginia. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Archaeological Research Series Number Four. Washington, D.C. 1969 Review of Ivor Noel Hume's "Historical Archaeology." Amer­ ican Anthropologist, Vol. 71, No. 6, pp. 1215-1216. Menasha. Cotter, John L. and J. Paul Hudson 1957 New Discoveries at Jamestown, Site of the First Successful English Settlement in America. Washington, D.C. 621 Cotter, John L. and Edward B. Jelks 1957 Historic Site Archaeology at Jamestown. Arnericam Antiquity, Vol. 22, No. 4, Part 1, pp. 387-389. Salt Lake City. Dawson, Kenneth C. A. 1969 Archaeological Investigations at the Site of the Longlac Historic Trading Post, Thunder Bay District, Ontario. Ontario Archaeology, Publication No. 12. Toronto. Deetz, James 1965 1967 The Dynaunics of Stylistic Chaunge in Arikary Ceramics. Illi­ nois Studies in Anthropology No. 4, The University of Illinois Press, Urbauia. Invitation to Archaeology. Doubleday, New York. Dunton, John 1968 Personal Communication, Letter of May, 1969. Fitting, Jaunes E. 1965 A Quantitative Examination of Virginia Fluted Points. Amer­ ican Antiquity, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 484-491. Salt Lake City. Flick, Alexander C. 1925 The Papers of Sir William Johnson. Vol. IV. Division of Archives and History, The University of the State of New York, Albany. 1931 The Papers of Sir Williaua Johnson. Vol. VII. Division of Archives and History, The University of the State of New York, Albany. Fontana, Bernard L. 1965 On the Meaning of Historic Sites Archaeology. American An­ tiquity , Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 61-65. Salt Lake City. Fowle, Otto 1925 Sault Ste. Marie and Its Great Waterway. Sons, New York. G. P. Putnam's 622 Freeman, Leslie G. and James A. Brown 1964 Statistical Analysis of Carter Ranch Pottery. In “Chapters in the Prehistory of Eastern Arizona, II." Fleldiana: Anthropology, Vol. 55, pp. 126-154. Chicago. Futer, Arthur A. 1959 The Strickler Site. Pennsylvania. Susguehannock Miscellany. Harrisburg, Greenman, Emerson F. 1951 Old Birch Island Cemetary. Original Contributions from The Museum of Anthropology, the University of Michigan, No. 11. Ann Arbor. Greer, John W. 1967 A Description of the Stratigraphy, Features and Artifacts From an Archaeological Excavation at the Alamo. Texas State Building Commission, Archaeological Program Report No. 3. Austin. Hagerty, Gilbert 1963 The Iron Trade-Knife in Oneida Territory. Pennsylvania Archaeologist. Vol. 33, Nos. 1-2, pp. 93-114. Gettysburg, Pennsylvani a . Hamilton, T. M. 1960 Additional Comments on Gunflints. Vol. 22, pp. 73-79. Columbia. The Missouri Archaeologist, 1964 Recent Developments in the Use of Gunflints for Dating and Identification. In "Diving Into the Past." edited by J. D. Holmquist and A. H. Wheeler, pp. 52-57. St. Paul. 1969 Personal Communication, Letter of August, 1969. n.d. The Louisbourg Gunflints. MS, on file, at the Fortress Louisbourg, Louisbourg, Nova Scotia. of Harrington, J. C. 1950 Seventeenth Century Brickmaking and Tilemaking at Jamestown, Virginia. The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 58, Part I, pp. 16-39. Richmond. 623 1954 Dating Stem Fragments of Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Clay Tobacco Pipes. Archaeological Society of Virginia Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 9-13. 1955 Archaeology as an Auxiliary Science to American History. American Anthropologist, Vol. 57, pp. 1121-1130. Menasha. 1967 The Manufacture and Use of Bricks at the Raleigh Settlement on Roanoke Island. The North Carolina Historical Review, Vol. XLIV, No. 1, pp. 1-17. Raleigh. Harris, R. K . , I. M. Harris, J. C. Blaine, and J. Blaine 1965 A Preliminary Archaeological and Documentary Study of the Woitia Site, Lamar County, Texas. Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society, Vol. 36. Dallas. Havighurst, Walter 1966 Three Flags at the Straits. Jersey. Prentice-Hall, Englewood, New Hayes, Charles F . , III 1965 The Orringh Stone Tavern and Three Seneca Sites of the Late Historic Period. Rochester Museum of Arts and Sciences, Re­ search Records, No. 12. Rochester. Herrick, Ruth 1958 A Report of the Ada Site, Kent County, Michigan. Michigan Archaeologist, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 1-26. Ann Arbor. Hole, F. and M. Shaw 1967 Computer Analysis of Chronological Seriation. sity Studies, Vol. 53, No. 3, Houston. Hole, Frank and Robert F. 1969 Rice Univer­ Heizer An Introduction to Prehistoric Archaeology. and Winston, Inc., New York. Holt, Rinehart Innis, Harold 1965 The Fur Trade in Canada. Yale University Press, New Haven. — Jackson, Marjorie Gordon 1930 The Beginnings of British Trade at Michilimackinac. History, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 231-270. St. Paul. Minnesota 624 Jacobs, Wilbur R. 1966 Wilderness Politics and Indian Gifts: The Northern Colonial Frontier, 1748-1763. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Jelks, Edward B. et a l . 1967 The Gilbert Site. Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological So­ ciety, Vol. 31 for 1966. Dallas. Kinietz, W. Vernon 1965 The Indians of the Western Great Lakes; University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. 1615-1760. The Kivett, Marvin F. 1959 Excavations at Fort Atkinson, Nebraska: A Preliminary Report. Nebraska History, Vol. 40, No. 1. Lincoln. Klinger, Robert L. and Richard A. Wilder 1967 Sketch Book 76, The American Soldier 1775-1781. Arlington, Virginia. Cooper-Trent. Lazarus, William C. 1965 A Study of Dated Bricks in the Vicinity of Pensacola, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. XVTII, No. 3, Part 2, pp. 69-84. Gainsvilie. Lindeman, Carla G. and David W. Nystuen 1969 The Joseph R. Brown House, Final Report on Archaeological Excavations. Minnesota Historical Archaeology Series No. 1. St. Paul. Mankowitz, Wolf and Reginald G. Haggar 1957 The Concise Encyclopedia of English Pottery and Porcelain. London. Maxwell, Moreau S. 1964 Indian Artifacts at Fort Michilimackinac, Mackinaw City, Michigan. Mi chi geui Archaeologist, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 23-30. Ann Arbor. n.d. Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, 1959 Season: Preliminary (1959) Report. MS, on file, Mackinac Island Stfcte Park Commission, Lansing. 625 n.d. Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, 1960 Season: Preliminary {I960) Report. MS, on file, Mackinac Island State Park Commission, Lansing. Maxwell, Moreau S. and Lewis R. Binford 1961 Excavation at Fort Michilimackinac, Mackinaw City, Michigan: 1959 Season. Michigan State Museum Cultural Series, Vol. 1, No. 1. East Lansing. Miller, J. Jefferson, II and Lyle M. Stone n.d. Eighteenth-Century Ceramics From Fort Michilimackinac: A Study in Historical Archaeology. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. {in press). Munsell Book of Color: 1929-1942 Munsell Color Company, Inc. Baltimore. Nish, Cameron 1965 The French Regime. Canadian Historical Documents Series, Vol. 1. Prentice Hall of Canada, Scarborough, Ontario. Noel Hume, Audrey 1963 Clay Tobacco Pipe Dating in the Light of Recent Excavations. Archaeological Society of Virginia Quarterly Bulletin, Vo l . 18, No. 2, pp. 22-25. Noel Hume, Ivor 1961A Preservation of English and Colonial American Sites. Archaeology, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 250-260. 1961B Sleeve Buttons: Diminutive Relics of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries - Antiques, Vol. LXXIX, No. 4, pp. 380-383. New York. 1962 Excavations at Rosewell, Gloucester County, Virginia, 19571959. Contributions from the Museum of History and Tech­ nology, Paper 18, United States National Museum Bulletin 225. Washington, D.C. 1967 Historical Archaeology in America. Vol. 1, pp. 104-105. London. 1968 Archaeology and the Colonial Craftsman. The Iron Worker, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 2-14. Lynchburg, Virginia. Post Medieval Archaeology, * 1969 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. Knopf, New York. 626 Nystuen, David W. and Carla G. Lindeman 1969 The Excavation of Fort Renville: An Archaeological Report. Minnesota Historical Archaeology Series No. 2. St. Paul. O'Callaghan, E. B. 1855 Documents Relative to The Colonial History of the State of New York. Vol. 9. Albany. Olsen, Stanley J. 1963 Dating Early Plain Buttons By Their Form. American Antiquity, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 551-554. Salt Lake City. Omwake, H. Geiger 1956 Date-Bore Diameter Correlation in English White Kaolin Pipe Stems, Yes or No? Quarterly Bulletin, Archaeological Society of Virginia, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 1-13. Oswald, Adrian 1951 English Clay Tobacco Pipes. The Archaeological Newsletter, Archaeological Institute of America, Vol. 3, No. 10. New York. 1955A The Evolution and Chronology of English Clay Tobacco Pipes. The Archaeological Newsletter, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 243-250. London. 1955B Tobacco Pipes of Broseley Shropshire. The Archaeolgical Newsletter. Vol. 5, Nos. 10 and 11, Parts 1 and 2, pp. 187-190 and 222-225. London. 1960 The Archaeology and Economic History of English Clay Tobacco Pipes. Journal of the British Archaeological Association, Third Series, Vol. 23, pp. 40-102. London. Perino, Gregory 1967 The Kaskaskia Indian Village Site, 1700-1832. The Conference on Historic Site Archaeology Papers 1965-1966. Vol. 1, pp. 127-130. Peterson, Harold L. 1958 American Knives; The First History and Collectors* Guide. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. 627 Pratt, Peter P. 1961 Oneida Iroquois Glass Trade Bead Sequence: Onondaga Printing Co. Syracuse, New York. 1585-1745. n.d. Set of bead, color transparencies loaned to the M.S.U. Museum in 1968. Price, F. G. Hilton 1908 Old Base Metal Spoons, With Illustrations and Marks. London. Quaife, Milo M. 1928 The John Askin Papers, 1747-1795. Vol. 1. Burton Historical Records, Detroit Library Commission. Detroit. Quiniby, George X. 19 38 Dated Indian Burials in Michigan. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, Vol. 2 3, pp. 63-72. Ann Arbor. 1966 Indian Culture and European Trade Goods. Wisconsin Press, Madison. The University of Ridley, Frank 1954 The Frank Bay Site, Lake Nipissing Ontario. American An­ tiquity, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 40-50. Salt Lake City. Ritchie, William A. 1954 Dutch Hollow, An Early Historic Period Seneca Site in Livings­ ton County, New York. Researches and Transactions of the New York State Archaeological Association, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 199. Albany. Russell, Carl P. 1967 Firearms. Traps, and Tools of the Mountain Men. York. Knopf, New Sackett, J. R. 1966 Quantitative Analysis of Upper Paleolithic Stone Tools. American Anthropologist, Vol. 68, No. 2i2, pp. 356-394. Menasha. 628 Salwen, Bert 1966 European Trade Goods and The Chronology of The Fort Shantok Site. Archaeological Society of Connecticut Bulletin No. 34, pp. 5-38. New Haven. Smith, Carlyle S. 1960 Two Eighteenth Century Reports on The Manufacture of Gunflints in France. The Missouri Archaeologist, Vol. 22, pp. 40-50. Columbia. Smith, Hale G. 1965 Archaeological Excavation at Santa Rosa Pensacola. The Florida State University, Department of Anthropology, Notes in Anthropology, Vol. 10. Tallahassee. Solecki, Ralph 1950 The Archaeological Position of Historic Fort Corchaug, Long Island, and Its Relation to Contemporary Forts. Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of Connecticut, No. 24, pp. 3-40. South, Stanley A. 1964A Analysis of Buttons From Brunswick Town and Fort Fisher. The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 113-133. Gainesville. 1964B Some Notes on Bricks. The Florida Anthropologist, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 67-74. Gainesville. Spaulding, Albert C. 1955 The Nature of Archaeological Data. Seminars in Archaeology, 1955, The Society for American Archaeology, Memoir No. 11, 1956, pp. 36-37. Salt Lake City. 1968 Explanation in Archaeology. In: New Perspectives in Archaeology, edited by Sally R. Binford and Lewis R. Binford, pp. 33-39. Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago. Spence, George C. 1941-1942 Notes on Clay Tobacco Pipes and Clay Pipe Makers in Cheshire. Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society Transactions, Vol. 56, pp. 45-66. England. 629 Stone, Lyle M. n.d. n.d. (1965) n.d. (1966) Trade Beads from the Lasanen Site. MS, on file, at Michigan State University Museum, East Lansing. Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, 1965 Season: Preliminary Report. MS,on file, Mackinac Island State Park Commission, Lansing. Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, Report. MS,on file, Mackinac Island 1966 Season: Preliminary State Park Commission. Sullivan, James 1921 The Papers of Sir William Johnson, Vol. III. The Division of Archives and History, The University of the State of New York. Surrey, N. M. Miller 1926 Calendar of Manuscripts in Paris Archives and Libraries Relat­ ing to The History of the Mississippi Valley to 1803, Vol. 1 , 1581-1739. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Department of Historical Research. Washington, D.C. Sutermeister, Helen 1968 An Eighteenth-Century Urban Estate in New France. Medieval Archaeology, Vol. 2, pp. 83-118. London. Post- Thurston, Reverend Herbert, S. J. 1902 History of The Rosary in All Countries. Scientific American Supplement, No. 1370, pp. 21960-21963. New York. Thwaites, R. G. 1896-1901 1902 The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: Travels and Eatplorations of The Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610-1791. The Burrows Brothers Co., Cleveland. The French Regime in Wisconsin— I, 1634-1727. Collections of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Vol. 16. Tunnell, Curtis D. and J. Richard Andbler 1967 Archaeological Excavations At Presidio San Agustin De Ahumada. Texas State Building Commission, Archaeological Program Report No. 6. Austin. 630 Van Der Sleen, W. G. N. 1967 A Handbook on Beads. Liege■ Belgium. J o u m e e s Internationales du Verre. Vanderwal, Ronald L. 1966 Fort Michilimackinac: Dating Techniques. Archaeologist, Vol. 12, No. 3. Ann Arbor. The Michigan n.d. (1962) Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, 1962 Season: Preliminary Report. MS, on file, Mackinac Island State Park Commis­ sion. Lansing. n.d. (1964) Excavations at Fort Michilimackinac, 1964 Season: Preliminary Report. MS, on file, Mackinac Island State Park Commis­ sion. Lansing. Walker, Iain C. 1967 Historic Archaeology— Methods and Principles. Archaeology 1967, pp. 23-24. Historical Watkins, C. Malcolm 1968 The Cultural History of Marlborough, Virginia. National Museum Bulletin 253. Washington, D.C. United States Webb, Clarence H. and Hiram Gregory 1965 French and Spanish Contact Materials From Natchitoches and Los Adaes Louisiana: A Preliminary Report. The Florida Anthro poloqist, Vol. 18, No. 3, Part 2, pp. 15-44. Gainesville. William, Franz Michel 1953 The Rosary: Its History and Meaning. New York. Williams, Stephen 1966 Historic Archaeology, Part and Present. School of American Research of The Archaeological Institute of America, Annual Report, pp. 23-26. Santa Fe. Witthoft, John 1966 A History of Gunflints. Nos. 1 and 2, pp. 12-49. Pennsylvania Archaeologist, Vol. 36, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. 631 Wittry, Warren L. 1963 The Bell Site, Wn9, An Early Historic Fox Village. The Wisconsin Archaeologist, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 1. Woodward, Arthur 1965 Indian Trade Goods. Oregon Archaeological Society, Publica­ tion No. 2 . Portland. Wyckoff, Don G. and Thomas P. Barr 1968 The Posey Site: A Historic Site in the Three Forks Locale, Eastern Oklahoma. Archaeological Site Report No. 10, Oklahoma River Basin Survey, University of Oklahoma Research Institute, Norman. Wylie, F. A. 1969 Research on Clay Pipes. Paper Presented at the Second Annual Meeting of The Canadian Archaeological Association. Toronto.