Revisiting a 19th-century Flea Glass from the Southern Dispensary

by Patricia Samford, Director of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation (MAC) Lab

Since the theme of Maryland Archeology Month 2021 is  “The Archeology of Healing and Medicine,” I thought it would be a great time to revisit a rudimentary microscope called a “flea glass,” which I first studied in a February 2017 Curator’s Choice piece. The monthly Curator’s Choice series highlights significant or unusual artifacts from the Maryland Archaeological Conservation (MAC) Lab collections, and a 19th-century flea glass from the Southern Dispensary in Baltimore qualifies on both counts.

“The eye of a human being is a microscope,
which makes the world seem bigger than it really is.”
– Khalil Gibran (1883-1931)

Nineteenth-century physicians often required more than just the naked eye to assist them in offering quality health care to their patients. Using magnifying devices, like this simple microscope, also called a flea glass, allowed them to gain a better view of wounds or conduct routine visual examinations of ears, eyes, and throats.

An example of a handled Flea Glass Dating to the Second Quarter of the Nineteenth Century.
(Source: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/simple-microscope-flea-glass-245822098)

Invented in the 1500s, flea glasses were used primarily for studying insects and other small life forms rather than for medical purposes—hence the name. A small, convex lens held nearest to the eye and a larger, flat lens at the opposite end of a short metal tube allowed for magnification ranges of 6x to 10x.

The lenses and iron fittings of a flea glass or similar simple microscope were recovered from a circa 1850-1870 privy excavated at the Federal Reserve site (18BC27) in Baltimore. This magnifying instrument may have been originally mounted on a stand. A medical use for this scientific instrument was assumed because the privy fill also contained a number of other artifacts relating to medical care, including a mortar and pestle, a salve jar, a pill tile, a leech jar, a number of medicine bottles, and a possible stethoscope.

Flea Glass or Simple Microscope from the Federal Reserve Site (Top and Side Views).
Photo by Nicole Doub, MAC Lab.

Documentary records indicate that the privy was located near the Southern Dispensary, a branch of the Baltimore General Dispensary. A dispensary supplied free medicine and health care for citizens who could not otherwise afford medical services. The Southern Dispensary, funded by charitable donations and a small appropriation from the city, was incorporated in 1847 and remained in operation until at least 1889 (Woods 1847; Register 1890). The dispensary offered both clinic and in-home health care (Polk 1888).

Simple Microscope Mounted on a Stand.
Similar instruments were illustrated as early as 1685 in Oculus Artificialis by Johann Zahn

With large populations living in close proximity, it was critical for cities to provide medical services. At various times during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, cholera, yellow fever and smallpox, struck Baltimore (Mdmedicine 2017). Clinics like the Southern Dispensary played key roles in treating infected individuals and preventing widespread epidemics.

References

Bradbury, S.
1968 The Microscope Past and Present. Pergamon International Popular Science Series. Pergamon Press, Ltd., Oxford.

Mdmedicine
2017 Epidemics in Maryland. Website accessed January 13, 2017. http://mdhistoryonline.net/mdmedicine/index.cfm?action=epidemics

Polk, R. L.
1888 The Medical Directory and Register for Baltimore, Washington, Maryland and District of Columbia. R. L. Polk & Co., Baltimore.

Register
1890 Annual Reports of the Register of the City and the Commissioners of Finance. John Cox, Printer, Baltimore.

Woods, John W.
1847 The Act of Incorporation and By-laws, of the Southern Dispensary of Baltimore: Together with a List of Officers for 1847. Baltimore.

Zahn, Johann
1685 Oculus Artificialis Teledioptricus Sive Telescopium. Würzburg, Germany.

Erosion Threatens Cultural Resources at the 17th-century Calverton Site: Maryland’s Flood Awareness Month and Archeology Month Align

by Zachary Singer, MHT Research Archaeologist, and the Staff of Applied Archaeology and History Associates, Inc.

In addition to celebrating Maryland Archeology Month in April, Governor Larry Hogan proclaimed April 2021 as the first Maryland Flood Awareness Month. Although, April 2021 is the first official concurrent observance, 2017’s Archeology MonthAt The Water’s Edge: Our Past on the Brink addressed the effects of flood hazards on archaeological sites. In the 2017 Archeology Month Booklet, Jason Tyler of Applied Archaeology and History Associates, Inc. (AAHA) contributed an essay entitled “A Return to Calverton, or What’s Left of It”. In the essay, Jason described the results of a 2015 survey to document archaeological resources along the banks of Battle Creek in Calvert County and highlighted the impacts of shoreline erosion on the late 17th-century Calverton site (18CV22). Calverton was laid out in 1668 and served as the seat of government within Calvert County from 1668-1725. Jason concluded the chapter by advocating to protect the site from erosion and flood hazards and also to document the site through archaeology to learn about the threatened cultural resources at Calverton.

The Calverton Shoreline, 1682 vs. Today

Following Jason’s recommendation, the 2017 and 2018 Tyler Bastian Field Sessions with the Archeological Society of Maryland were held at the Calverton site to investigate the site before storm-surge flooding and the wind-driven waters of Battle Creek further eroded what evidence remained of the town. The field sessions focused on ground-truthing anomalies identified during a magnetic susceptibility survey by the MHT Office of Archaeology. The Field Session investigations identified a part of the Colonial town that had not entirely washed into Battle Creek, including intact sub-plowzone cultural horizons and features. In the summer of 2020, AAHA conducted supplemental archaeological investigations at Calverton to continue documenting those portions of the site at heightened risk from shoreline erosion and flooding caused by sea level rise. The 2020 work was supported by the Calvert County Government and a grant from the Maryland Heritage Areas Authority.

Magnetic Susceptibility Data Collected by the MHT Office of Archaeology

Prior to AAHA’s 2020 field investigations, the MHT Office of Archaeology conducted a ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey within 10 meters of the eroding bank overhanging Battle Creek to identify anomalies in the area of the site most at risk to further loss from wind and water action. The GPR essentially uses a 350MHz (megahertz) antenna to send radio pulses into the ground which bounce off of subsurface anomalies and return to the antenna. Through the use of special software, the data collected by the GPR operator can be used to create a detailed 3 dimensional model (called a 3D time slice) that reveals both the horizontal and vertical relationships amongst radar anomalies including potential cultural features (trash pits, cellars, privies), potential modern disturbances, and natural tree root systems.

MHT archaeologists identified seven likely anthropogenic features via examination of the radar time slices. There were two large rectilinear anomalies in the eastern portion of the survey area. A deep, roughly circular anomaly near the center of the survey area was interpreted as a possible well. To the west of the possible well was an irregular anomaly that corresponded with a magnetic aberration identified during a 2019 gradiometer survey. To the east of the possible well was another amorphous anomaly. One trench-like linear anomaly was identified running roughly north-south in the western portion of the survey area. Additionally, one irregularly-shaped anomaly appeared in the southwest corner of the survey area and roughly corresponded to the location of a feature identified in 2017: a cluster of artifacts partly eroding from the bank of Battle Creek. In addition, the rectangular footprint of a test unit from previous excavations was identified, confirming the projection of these anomalies in real space. All seven potential cultural features were recommended for ground-truthing during AAHA’s 2020 archaeological fieldwork.

In total, AAHA excavated eight Test Units during the 2020 fieldwork to assess the form and function of the GPR anomalies. The excavations resulted in the identification of ten cultural features and the recovery of 3,369 artifacts mostly dating from the late 17th and early 18th century including tobacco pipes, a Charles I sixpence coin (1639-1645), and sherds of tin glazed earthenware. Of the ten features identified and excavated by AAHA in 2020, seven are related to the occupation of Calverton most likely from the late seventeenth century and the first quarter of the eighteenth century. The largest and most artifact-dense features related to the colonial occupation of Calverton were identified in the central portion of the study area and represent a posthole/mold (Feature 15/22), a small cellar (Feature 14 – the anomaly originally thought to be a possible well), and a possible trash pit (Features 16 and 17). Also identified was a small trench or ditch feature for what was probably once a paling fence in the western portion of the study area (Feature 19).

The 2020 archaeological investigation at Calverton provided additional data crucial to understanding the colonial occupation of the town in the portions of the site most vulnerable to flooding and erosion. Most significantly, it identified a previously unknown cellar (Feature 14) and an associated post hole/mold (Feature 15/22) both of which likely reflect the location of a colonial structure. While the small window into this structure excavated to-date has allowed some preliminary conclusions to be drawn, additional excavations could further reveal the size, layout, and function of the former building. Additional excavation and GPR survey in the vicinity of the paling trench identified during the 2020 investigation (Feature 19) could also provide valuable data on lot divisions in Calverton and colonial towns as a whole.

Another important aspect of the 2020 project was to monitor the shoreline at Calverton to continue assessing the risk of the site to the destructive power of wind and water action along Battle Creek, which remains an imminent threat to the archaeological resources at the site. MHT map projections show that the town’s important public buildings, including the courthouse and chapel, have already been lost to Battle Creek. AAHA’s comparison of the 2020 location of the Battle Creek bank to the location recorded by a 2017 Calvert County LiDAR survey shows shoreline loss ranging from 0.0313 meters to 3.204 meters, with an average of 1.333 meters of loss over two years, or 60- 70 centimeters per year. Most alarmingly, seven of the 28 points taken for the analysis (25% of the total) show shoreline loss in excess of 2 meters and these points occurred over the entire length of the surveyed shoreline. At this rate, the late 17th/early 18th-century cellar feature (Feature 14) will be lost to erosion by 2028 without intervention. With climate change comes increasing numbers of catastrophic storms. Tidal surges during such storm events can wreak havoc on the shoreline, severely undercutting the bank at Calverton.

Map Depicting the Rate of Shoreline Loss at Calverton between 2017 and 2020

This reinforces the urgent need for additional archaeology at Calverton before the resource is entirely lost. Maryland Flood Awareness Month aligning with Maryland Archeology Month provides the perfect opportunity to discuss the impacts of flooding on archaeological resources. To learn more about planning efforts to protect archaeological sites from the impacts of flood hazards, please see the MHT’s guide for Planning for Maryland’s Flood-Prone Archeological Resources.

Introducing mdFIND: a Collector App for Unanticipated Artifact Discoveries

By Matt McKnight, Chief Archaeologist

A routine part of my job, and part of the job for most of the archaeologists at the Maryland Historical Trust, is fielding the occasional inquiry from an interested member of the public about an artifact (or possible artifact) that they’ve found on their farm, in their back yard, or while out on a hike. These interactions usually start with an email or phone call to our office from the interested party. That exchange leads invariably to a request from one of us for a photo. The photo often comes back with nothing for scale, making it hard for us to interpret, and requires several follow-up emails. The photos may elicit more curiosity and a request for a map of the find location from MHT (something the caller may or may not be able to provide). The process involves a lot of back-and-forth and we thought, “There has to be an easier way!”

Hand holding historic artifacts recovered in the field.

Historic Artifacts Recovered in the Field

Today, I’m pleased to share that we have one! Several months ago, my colleague, Dr. Zac Singer and I began discussing ways to develop a smartphone app that could streamline the process of reporting unanticipated artifact discoveries in the field. To be clear, this app is not meant to replace completion of our standard Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties (MIHP) Archaeological Site Form for reporting newly discovered sites. Rather, we envisioned it as a supplemental tool, not meant for sites, but for individual artifact finds. This tool could be used by professional archaeologists for reporting isolated finds, but what we really wanted was something that could be used by an ASM member, a property owner, a metal detectorist, an arrowhead collector, or even just a hiker who found something interesting on their trek.


While I certainly have my qualms about some of these activities and the damage that can be caused to archaeological sites when they are done in an irresponsible or uncontrolled manner (I’ll be speaking in a Maryland Archeology Month webinar on the topic of “relic hunting” later this month), there may be instances where responsible admirers of the material culture record wish to record and report such finds to the state. MHT is the “home” of the MIHP, which includes nearly 14,000 archaeological sites and over 43,000 historic and architectural resources. For us (and by “us” I mean the collective body of Maryland’s residents) to learn about our shared history and cultural heritage, we need to have an accurate record of not just the known sites, but also isolated finds. These are often the first clues that lead to the discovery of new sites. And since it’s not just professional archaeologists that wander the fields and forests, hobbyists, hikers, beachcombers, and others needed a tool that would allow them to be a part of this discovery and documentation project. We also thought such a tool might be useful for “citizen scientists” to conduct coastal surveys for cultural resources after major storm and flooding events. After all, April is not just Maryland Archeology Month, it’s also Maryland Flood Awareness Month!

Image of a smartphone with the mdFIND app loaded.

To that end, today we are releasing mdFIND, a crowdsourcing app that allows any member of the public to record and photograph unanticipated artifact discoveries in the field, and report those findings to the MHT Office of Archaeology. The app is built on ESRI’s Survey123 technology. Though the app presents you with a sign-in screen in case you have an ESRI account, no account is necessary, and you can click to simply continue without signing in. You can download the app for free at https://arcg.is/1PnOL10 or by scanning the QR code in the handy mdFIND flyer available at https://mht.maryland.gov/documents/PDF/research/mdFIND.pdf. The app will even work directly from a web browser with no download needed: just follow the simple prompts to report your find to MHT.

The app allows you to upload or capture up to five images of the object(s), report the location using your phone’s GPS, specify the broad artifact type or the diagnostic artifact name (if you know it), and report your name and contact info (if you wish) for any follow-up. Easy-to-use drop-down menus and links to external webpages (such as JPPM’s Diagnostic Artifacts Page) make filling out the form a breeze. If you use the app (as opposed to the web browser), mdFIND will even allow you to keep a record of your own personal submissions to the database on your phone (within the app). You can edit these previous finds and resubmit them later if new information comes to light.

We hope you find this new tool as useful as we do. Getting out into the warmer weather and recording some exciting new discoveries seems to me like a great way to spend some of Maryland Archeology Month. How about you?

April IS Maryland Archeology Month

By Charlie Hall, State Terrestrial Archeologist

Every April since 1993 Marylanders have celebrated Archeology Month. Officially proclaimed by the Governor as a celebration of the remarkable archeological discoveries that provide a tangible link to at least 12,000 years of human occupation here, Maryland Archeology Month has annually provided the public with opportunities to become involved and excited about archeology.  With a variety of events offered statewide every April, including exhibits, lectures, site tours, and occasions to participate as volunteer archeologists, Archeology Month elicits the gathering of interested Marylanders at various occasions to share their enthusiasm for scientific archeological discovery.

Did I say “gathering”?  Well, we seem to have a conflict this year between our desire to gather together and do some archeology, and our shared responsibility to observe an appropriate social distance in groups not to exceed 10, and now to stay at home, in an attempt to slow or stop the spread of COVID-19.  How can these two disparate callings be reconciled?  Like the heroes who are working hard to manufacture M95 masks and respirators, we have been working – albeit with perhaps not the exact same sense of urgency – on how Maryland Archeology Month might carry on in this time of careful isolation.  There is a will, and we have found a way.

This year’s Maryland Archeology Month theme – Partners in Pursuit of the Past:  50 Field Sessions in Maryland Archeology – lends itself to digital sharing.  The Field Sessions in Maryland Archeology are 11-day intensive archeological research investigations held every spring in partnership between the Archeological Society of Maryland, a State-wide organization of lay and professional archeologists, and the Maryland Historical Trust, a part of the Maryland Department of Planning and home to the State’s Office of Archeology.  While these two partners host the event every year, others are required to make the Field Sessions happen, including researchers/Principal Investigators, archeological supervisory staff, property owners, and volunteers from the public.  Each of these partners is essential.  Without any one of them the Field Sessions don’t happen.  Maryland Archeology Month 2020 is a chance to shine a grateful spotlight on all these necessary partners in the Field Session program.

2020 Maryland Archeology Month Poster

2020 Maryland Archeology Month Poster

Here is your first digital opportunity to engage with Maryland Archeology Month:  you can access downloadable versions of the Archeology Month 2020 poster and booklet online at the Archeological Society of Maryland’s website (https://marylandarcheology.org/, scroll down and click on the poster image to access the Maryland Archeology Month website).  The poster depicts a lively scene from the 2015 Field Session, held at the Biggs Ford Native American village site in Frederick County, and highlights the various kinds of partners present.  The booklet contains 40 pages that are jam-packed with information about the Field Session program, organizations doing or promoting archeology in Maryland, and volunteer opportunities in Maryland archeology.  This year the booklet features 13 essays written by Field Session partners, including three by researchers/Principal Investigators, two by archeological supervisory staff, four by officers of the Archeological Society of Maryland, one by a property owner, and four by volunteer archeologists.  These short, non-technical essays relay the authors’ recollections and reflections on their Field Session experiences.

Filling different partnership roles, the different individuals bring different life and professional experiences to the Field Sessions, and take different experiences from them.  As research endeavors, the Field Sessions must be under the direction of a qualified researcher with an anthropological interest in the site being studied who is responsible for designing the investigation and ensuring that it is properly carried out.  Researchers can come from universities, state and county agencies, and consultancies, and each meets strict professional standards.  Each site is owned by someone, and the property owner’s willingness to welcome a small army of sunburnt, dusty, and exuberant professional and volunteer archeologists on to their property is critical to each Field Session.  The sites of past Field Sessions have been owned by state agencies, county agencies, private individuals, and organizations.  While involving many sophisticated scientific techniques and instruments, archeology is at its core low tech and labor intensive.  It requires a lot of patient people wielding small hand excavating tools and carefully moving a lot of soil.  The labor pool powering the Field Sessions is the public.  In classic Tom Sawyer fashion, the public is enticed to pick up shovels and trowels and work for anywhere from a partial day to all 11 days excavating in the hot sun, often on their hands and knees.  Many volunteers take vacation time to participate in the Field Sessions.  They are the backbone of the Field Sessions, and they seem to really enjoy themselves.

With the first Field Session occurring in 1971, this year’s represents the 50th.  (Mark you calendars for May 22nd through June 1st and plan to join us at the Billingsly site in Prince George’s County.  Watch the Archeological Society of Maryland’s website for registration materials and updates.  We’re still crossing our fingers . . . )  The forty-nine previous Field Sessions have been held on 36 sites in 14 counties across the site. Twenty-five of the sites were Native American occupied (prehistoric), ten were historic aged, and one had both prehistoric and historic components.

Here is your second opportunity to connect digitally with Maryland Archeology Month:  Want to know more about the past Field Sessions?  Do you wonder where they occurred, or which were prehistoric and which historic?  Are you curious about the research conducted at each?  A team of talented professional archeologists have created a StoryMap of the 50 Field Sessions.  This map-based app is interactive, informative and entertaining.  Visit https://mdarchaeology.github.io/Annual-Field-Sessions/ or scan the QR code printed on the cover of the booklet and on the poster, or click the link on the Maryland Archeology Month website, to investigate the distribution of Field Session sites across the state, learn details of the archeology found on each, and see pictures from the past!

50 Field Sessions StoryMap

50 Field Sessions StoryMap

It is my hope that these digital experiences will connect you virtually to other Marylanders as you collectively, yet individually and at home, celebrate Maryland Archeology Month!  Several of the events planned for April will be rescheduled, and at them you will be able to pick up physical copies of the poster and booklet.  Watch the Maryland Archeology Month website for updated information.  I wish you an engaging, and healthy, Maryland Archeology Month!

 

The Journey Home

By Rebecca Morehouse, Curator of State Collections, Maryland Archaeological Conservation Lab

In 1980, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funded a project to build townhouses in the block between what is now City Gate Lane and Dean Street in Annapolis. Excavation of the townhouse basements disturbed a portion of what was later identified as a 19th-century African American family cemetery. When archeologists at the Maryland Historical Trust heard of the discovery, they went to the site to rescue the human remains that had been exposed. They carefully mapped, photographed, and removed what turned out to be the partial remains of two individuals. In the event of this kind of inadvertent discovery, an archeologist’s priority is to identify what remains of the burials, document as much of the site as possible, and transfer any human remains to another location for protection. In the case of these two individuals, they were placed in the custody of MHT, and cared for at the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Lab (MAC Lab) at Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum (JPPM), a unit of MHT.

Figure 1: Asbury United Methodist Church in Annapolis
Figure 1: Asbury United Methodist Church in Annapolis.

Little was known about these two individuals until research conducted by Janice Hayes-Williams in the early 2000s indicated their remains were likely removed from what had been the family cemetery of Smith Price. Price, formerly enslaved, came to Annapolis as a free man. He owned the property where an 1860s plat indicated his family cemetery was located, as well as the land where the Asbury United Methodist Church now stands less than a block away. Smith Price was a founding member of the African Meeting House in Annapolis, which eventually became the First African Methodist Episcopal Church in 1803, Asbury Methodist Episcopal Church in 1838, and then the Asbury United Methodist Church in 1968 (Figure 1).

While attending a meeting at the MAC Lab in April 2019, Janice Hayes-Williams asked me if the human remains from the Smith Price family cemetery were curated at the MAC Lab. When I told her they were, she asked if the remains could be returned to Annapolis and reburied there.  A flurry of correspondence soon followed, as MHT staff worked with the Office of the Attorney General to chart a course for the permanent transfer of the remains that would satisfy State regulations. 

The official request for transfer came from Asbury UMC in June 2019 and was quickly approved by the MHT Board of Trustees. The transfer took place on July 24, 2019 in a ceremony at Asbury UMC. In preparation for their trip to back to Annapolis, Janice Hayes-Williams wrapped the boxes which held the remains with Kente cloth and adorned them with sunflowers (Figure 2). I had the honor of assisting.

Figure 2: Boxes containing human remains from the Smith Price family cemetery are shown wrapped in Kente cloth. Photo credit: Janice Hayes-Williams
Figure 2: Boxes containing human remains from the Smith Price family cemetery are shown wrapped in Kente cloth. Photo credit: Janice Hayes-Williams

Once in the custody of the Asbury UMC, the church transferred the individuals to Dr. Julie Schablitsky, Chief Archaeologist at the Maryland State Highway Administration.  Dr. Schablitsky took the lead on coordinating the analysis of the remains, which included a detailed examination and inventory by Dr. Dana Kollmann, Forensic Anthropologist at Towson University, and facial reconstruction by forensic artist Detective Eve Grant (Figure 3). Dr. Schablitsky also arranged for DNA testing at DNA Labs International in Florida. Unfortunately, the extracted DNA was degraded and, while the scientists are still trying, they have been unable to match it to living descendants.

Figure 3: Conjectural drawing of the man whose remains were removed from the Smith Price family cemetery. Sketch by forensic artist Detective Eve Grant of the Baltimore County Police Department.
Figure 3: Conjectural drawing of the man whose remains were removed from the Smith Price family cemetery. Sketch by forensic artist Detective Eve Grant of the Baltimore County Police Department.

Analysis by Dr. Kollmann showed that the remains belonged to a man and a child of African ancestry. The man likely died sometime in his late forties or early fifties. Associated coffin nails dated to the late 18th to early 19th centuries. Though no personal artifacts were recovered with the skeletal remains, blue-green discoloration on the man’s left wrist indicates the presence of a copper alloy burial shroud pin, button, or cufflink. His skeleton showed evidence that he was muscular and would have participated in heavy physical labor. He had a minor injury to his left shin, which, while not resulting in a break, would have been painful. He also had arthritis in his right arm and shoulder, which would have also caused significant pain and hindered his movements. His teeth had  a well-defined pipe facet from carrying a tobacco pipe between his teeth on the right side of his mouth. The cause of the man’s death could not be determined.

The child, of unknown gender, likely died between the ages of 5 and 6 years. Copper alloy staining on the left temple suggests the child may have been wrapped in a burial shroud held in place with a copper alloy pin. The teeth show evidence of malnutrition or a significant illness, such as influenza. However, this did not contribute to the child’s death.

Figure 4: Procession from Asbury UMC to the St. Anne’s Cemetery for reburial. Photo credit: Janice Hayes-Williams
Figure 4: Procession from Asbury UMC to the St. Anne’s Cemetery for reburial. Photo credit: Janice Hayes-Williams

On November 1, 2019, Maryland’s Emancipation Day, following a community ceremony at Asbury UMC, these two individuals were laid to rest for a second time in St. Anne’s Cemetery in Annapolis (Figures 4 and 5).

While MHT does not encourage the excavation of human remains, there are times when burials are threatened and must be removed, as with the case of the Smith Price family cemetery. Today, unlike in 1980, immediate relocation or reburial of disturbed human remains is now the preferred course of action, rather than being placed in the care of the State. On the occasion that human remains do end up in MHT’s custody, they are placed in a specially designated area, known as an appropriate place of repose, apart from the State’s other collections. This area is only accessible by MHT staff and is not visible to the public.

I consider the care of these individuals a sacred responsibility and one of the most important duties I have as Curator. However, if I am given the opportunity to help facilitate the return and reburial of human remains in MHT’s custody, I am honored to do so. Being able to participate in the preparation of the human remains, as well as the transfer and reburial ceremonies, was an experience which I will not soon forget.

Figure 5: Smith Price family cemetery remains returned to the earth at St. Anne’s Cemetery in Annapolis. Photo credit: Janice Hayes-Williams
Figure 5: Smith Price family cemetery remains returned to the earth at St. Anne’s Cemetery in Annapolis. Photo credit: Janice Hayes-Williams

Welcome, Zachary Singer!

The Maryland Historical Trust is pleased to welcome Dr. Zachary Singer as Research Archeologist in the Office of Research, Survey, and Registration. Zac will primarily be responsible for maintaining the Maryland Archeological Synthesis Project, summarizing Phase II and III compliance archeology reports in MHT’s library. Zac will also participate in grants management, archeological fieldwork, and will conduct research on collections entrusted to MHT’s care.

Research Archeologist, Dr. Zachary Singer

Zac’s interest in Maryland archeology was first piqued as a student at Towson High School, when he interned with Dr. Bob Wall of Towson University, studying his Paleoindian assemblage from the Barton site. Zac went on to earn his B.A. at the University of Maryland, College Park and gained field experience under the direction of Dr. Stephen Brighton and Dr. David Gadsby. Zac took a hiatus from Maryland archeology to earn his M.A. and Ph.D. at the University of Connecticut where he excavated and analyzed New England Paleoindian sites under the guidance of Dr. Kevin McBride, Dr. Jonathan Lothrop, Dr. Daniel Adler, and the late Dr. Brian Jones.

After receiving his doctorate, Zac returned to Maryland to teach and conduct research, once again, in the archeology of his home state. Prior to joining MHT, Zac taught and conducted research through a Visiting Assistant Professorship at Towson University, as an adjunct professor at Washington College, as a 2016 and 2017 Gloria S. King Research Fellow at the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory, as a contractual archeologist for Anne Arundel County’s Cultural Resources Division, and as Public Programs Coordinator for the Lost Towns Project, Inc.

Zac’s major research interest is Maryland’s prehistoric occupations with a particular focus on studying the Paleoindian period to refine interpretations of Maryland’s earliest inhabitants. Zac is also keen on collections based research, analyzing (or re-analyzing) artifact collections generated by both professional and avocational archeologists in order to glean information about Maryland’s past.

Zac may be reached by telephone at 410-697-9544 or by email at zachary.singer@maryland.gov.