PhiladelphiaQueenswarePegg’s Run 7Eagle Glass 26 Homegrown History 32Sturgeon 64The Journal of Philadelphia Waterfront Heritage & ArchaeologyVolume 3 | 2018From the EditorI eagerly joined AECOM’s Cultural Resource Department in Burlington, New Jersey, as the historic glass specialist almost five years ago. I knew that working on the I-95 Project was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to study thousands of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century glass artifacts, and I was ready for the challenge. Transitioning from academia and museum education to the world of archaeology, however, proved to be a real surprise and continues to be an enlightening experience. I had never considered the variety of experts and depth of research required for an accurate archaeological study. After digging, literally and figuratively, for every strand of evidence, archaeologists strive to weave a realistic picture of daily life in the past—going far beyond lists and timelines. The articles in our third issue of River Chronicles demonstrate a bit of this complex process. We’ve made many surprising discoveries that help us understand the past, including a Native American adze almost 4,000 years old. But not all treasures are found in the field. Following clues in a published history of Philadelphia, we located a charming sketch at the Library Company of Philadelphia that not only illuminates our understanding of the Pegg’s Run archaeological site, but also ranks as an outstanding work of folk art. In this issue, we share how we are integrating the sketch, field archaeology, and geomorphology as we begin to interpret the site. Two articles in this issue focus on the work of macrobotanical and faunal specialists, who analyze the remains of plants and animals. The average person digging in their backyard probably would never notice tiny plant seeds, fish scales, or partial bones that are indeed critical evidence. Our specialists can identify the plants and animals that were present on the landscape at a particular point in the past. This information, along with artifacts and other remains, helps us understand how people lived—their foodways, medicinal practices, social customs, occupations, and much more.Our archaeological excavations along I-95 and undaunted research efforts are continually providing clues to Philadelphia’s early industrial history. In addition to exploring the sturgeon industry along the Delaware River, this issue presents important evidence regarding the production of ceramics—specifically, Philadelphia queensware. We are also sharing the artifacts and the paper trail that document the mysterious, short-lived mid-nineteenth-century Eagle Glass Works, situated on the Delaware River in the former Richmond District before the area was incorporated into Philadelphia. We will continue to explore these industries—fishing, ceramics, and glassworking—along with many others in future issues of River Chronicles.We hope you find Philadelphia’s waterfront heritage and archaeology as fascinating as we do. You can learn more about the I-95 Project and read back issues of River Chronicles at www.diggingi95.com. - Mary C. MillsRiver Chronicles and the I-95 Improvement ProjectProduced by AECOM’s Cultural Resource Department in Burlington, New Jersey, River Chronicles explores the deep cultural history of Philadelphia’s Delaware River waterfront through the lens of archaeology. The impetus for the journal is an intensive ongoing archaeological investigation sponsored by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration in support of their efforts to improve Interstate 95 (I-95) through the city of Philadelphia. Working on their behalf for over a decade, AECOM has recovered more than one and a half million artifacts dating from 3600 B.C. to the early twentieth century. The NeighborhoodsThese artifacts provide a remarkably rich and detailed record of life in the historic communities of Port Richmond, Kensington-Fishtown, and Northern Liberties. Fishtown is actually an unofficial neighborhood within what was, between 1820 and 1854, the Kensington District. After 1854, when the city of Philadelphia was consolidated, Fishtown and Kensington became neighborhoods in Philadelphia. As the location of many of the archaeological sites in the I-95 project could be described as either Kensington or Fishtown, depending on the era or even the person making the determination, we have decided to refer to the project area within the boundaries of the former Kensington District as Kensington-Fishtown.2 | Vol 3 | 2018 | River ChroniclesFeaturesPEGG’S RUNAn archaeological excavation, a three-part storyFINDING QUEENSWAREDiscovering pieces of Philadelphia’s ceramic history739INTRODUCTION Stephen W. TullPEGG’S RUN PART I: THE SKETCHPEGG’S RUN PART II: EXCAVATIONPEGG’S RUN PART III: GEOMORPHOLOGYEAGLE GLASS Samuel A. Pickard Thomas J. KutysHOMEGROWN HISTORY Daniel King Alexandra Crowder Matthew OlsonKNOBBED ADZE Jack CressonQUEENSWARE BEYOND PHILADELPHIA George Cress Thomas J. Kutys Rebecca L. WhiteGRITTED QUEENSWARE Thomas J. KutysCOLLAR BUTTON Madelaine PenneyQUEENSWARE IN ART Rebecca L. WhiteSTURGEON Teagan SchweitzerENDNOTES, CITATIONS, & REFERENCES482013263237525760596468(Background) A Map of the County of Philadelphia from Actual Survey, 1843. Courtesy of Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division.George Cress Samuel A. PickardRebecca L. White George CressDaniel B. Eichinger III Elisabeth A. LavigneThomas J. Kutys Meta JanowitzAs professional archaeologists, we are first trained as anthropologists. Some written history based only on paper documents can be published using incorrect logic and unvetted data. Archaeologists attempt to see everyday life in the past the way it occurred on the ground, not only through the lens of written accounts. The practice of archaeology brings together different types of data (written history, the remains of structures and artifacts, natural history, etc.) to understand how societies or cultural groups functioned in the past and changed overtime—and there are many diverse theoretical perspectives throughout the profession of archaeology. The relationships between these theories, and often the theories themselves, are not politically neutral. One theory can be more dominant than another at any given time, at any given lecture, at any given professional meeting, and yes, in any given current political climate.Archaeological Theories of InterpretationThe historical past exists independent of our knowledge or interpretation. All of us, in some way, attempt to reclaim the past—by restoring antique cars, reading diaries, listening to family stories, refinishing grandparents’ furniture, watching old movies, etc. Archaeologists try to reclaim the past largely by excavating and analyzing artifacts. Once excavation is complete and artifacts are recovered, theory is applied to help create plausible (or scientifically acceptable) abstract thought that may become a general principle. Such a principle is then offered to explain observed phenomena—the excavated artifacts and other archaeological remains. Debates over these theories and principles, old and new, are ongoing and contribute greatly to our notions of the past. Scientific Approach to Archaeological TheoryFor some scientifically oriented archaeologists, the archaeological record is the object of inquiry; that is, the verification of past events is determined through the scientific study of observed objects. These observed objects—the things we actually see in the ground—are pieces of the archaeological record and include features (pits, hearths, and privies), artifacts (pottery, glass, and stone tools), organic remains (plants, bones, and shells), and the very soils containing such objects. Scientifically based archaeologists, often noting only typed objects, place archaeological sites into contexts of time and place to create archaeological “facts.” The scientific approach assumes that nature and human societies can be studied in the same way, thereby creating universal cultural laws. Most of the analysis of archaeological data is modeled on biological systems, which perceive the maintenance of equilibrium or balance within a given system as an indicator of success. The scientific unit of analysis can be whole societies, the regions within which they interact, or simply an archaeological site itself. Social-Scientific Approach to Archaeological TheorySocial-scientific archaeologists make the reconstruction of past societies the object of inquiry and consider the scientific collection of technological and environmental data to be insufficient. Human interactions cannot be reduced to a system that oversimplifies the lives of a particular group of people, the social-scientific schools argue; some past events can be observed beyond the archaeological record. Social-scientific approaches also focus on raw materials humans transformed into objects of societal value, considering how a given object or artifact may have been handled to understand its meaning rather than simply identifying or measuring it. Cultural strategies are used to transfer raw materials into useful items or tools, and the organization of labor directs the individuals who use this material—concerns that can occupy an enormous amount of a group’s time, and all closely tied to issues of meaning within a society and culture. Putting Archaeology to Work Mapping the Way Forward4 | Vol 3 | 2018 | River ChroniclesRiver ChroniclesVolume 3 | 2018EDITOR Mary C. MillsADVISORY CHAIRPERSON Stephen W. Tull, RPACOPY EDITOR Paul ElworkLAYOUT DESIGN Chester CunananRiver Chronicles is published annually. Visit us online at www.riverchronicles.com.CONTRIBUTORSGeorge CressJack CressonAlexandra Crowder Daniel B. Eichinger IIIBrett S. HarteMeta JanowitzDaniel KingThomas J. KutysElisabeth A. LavigneMatthew OlsonMadelaine PenneySamuel A. PickardTeagan SchweitzerRebecca L. WhiteCORRECTION TO VOLUME 2|2017In “The History of Dyottville Glass Works,” we mistakenly printed that Seybert made bottles for Henry Roussell instead of Eugene Roussel.I-95 Archaeology Center at Penn TreatyOur archaeologists have attempted to fill a void in drawing from these various scientific and social-scientific theoretical approaches that link archaeological data to human behavior. The I-95 Archaeology Center at Penn Treaty, located directly across from Penn Treaty Park in Philadelphia, will reveal this interpretation process to the public. Our written language, exhibits, artifact-processing stations, interactive whiteboards, and augmented reality displays will be used to conceptualize archaeological observations. The Center will help decipher collective individual behavior and community activities that Native Americans, colonists, immigrants, and later generations performed at various points in the past, creating a portrait of their everyday life along the Delaware River. However, we will need your assistance in decoding human behavior from the archaeological record. The past creates the present. And we, in turn, influence the future through our actions and how we interpret the past. We are preserving the neighborhoods’ heritage and want input from our neighbors, educators, and colleagues. A shared civic space can help us transcend our differences. We can’t tell you what to think about the past, but we can present historical facts as trained archaeologists and help show how societal factors make and influence interpretations. Archaeology matters! We are putting archaeology to work at the I-95 Archaeology Center at Penn Treaty. The Center will be open to all in the fall of 2018, so please look for upcoming announcements. We hope to see you there! - Stephen W. TullRiver Chronicles | Vol 3 | 2018 | 5The Play Place Here at River Chronicles, we are always pursuing new avenues to put the intersection of analog and digital technologies into your hands. This latest issue incorporates augmented reality technology, so you can view certain artifacts using your mobile Android device. On some pages in this journal, you’ll find the AR symbol shown above. Using the Google Play App Store link provided below, you’ll be able to download an augmented reality viewer using your Android device.Running the app and viewing the marked page through it will allow you to view an augmented reality 3D model of the artifact.Tapping on the artifact in your app will bring up some additional historical and archaeological information. Feel free to spin or physically move the journal page around while you’re viewing it through the app to “spin” the augmented reality artifact on your device screen.We hope this new addition to River Chronicles helps create a more immersive experience. We look forward to bringing you more! - Brett S. HarteIntersections in TechnologyAugmented RealityDownload the AppScan the QR CodeOr find us on Google PlaySearch “I95 AR”The Play Place 6 | Vol 3 | 2018 | River Chronicles Play Place of Our Early DaysPhiladelphia has seen enormous change to the urban landscape since its founding in the late seventeenth century. In his book, Annals of Philadelphia, published in 1830, John F. Watson meticulously describes his own and others’ personal experiences and memories of these changes—but his preface to the Pegg’s Run narrative warns readers of its complexity and serves as a caution for present-day historians to compare multiple historical sources: No part of Philadelphia has undergone such great and various changes as the range of commons, water-lots, &c. ranging along the course of this run, primarily known as Cohoquinoque [the Lenape name for Pegg’s Run]. A present beholder of the streets and houses now covering those grounds, and the hidden tunnel now concealing the former creek, could have no conception of things as they were, even only 30 years ago. The description is unavoidably complicated.1 The following three-part article offers insights into Watson’s description of the Pegg’s Run stream basin, both physical and nostalgic. The complex evolution of this small portion of the urban landscape in Philadelphia is not only reflected in the physical features revealed by archaeological excavation, but also in the fond memories of someone who witnessed the natural playground that was Pegg’s Run prior to urban development. As the Annals draws heavily from the recollections and reminiscences of many people, the accuracy of some of the accounts must be considered questionable at best.How John F. Watson’s Sketch of Eighteenth-Century Pegg’s Run Assisted an Archaeological Excavation Play Place of Our Early DaysRiver Chronicles | Vol 3 | 2018 | 7Next >