Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
1
/mitchell/investigations
Archeological Investigations
K: might need to add a few more later, but space these out as best you can within the
subsections as indicated.
icon-investigations: [icon image] Panoramic view of the Mitchell Ridge site as it
appeared in the 1970s and 1980s looking southwest across Eckert Bayou. The site is
concentrated along crest of the ridge, which is marked by the larger trees seen in the
background on the left. Assembled from photos taken by Lou Fullen in 1989.
[These next three images are a “nested set:” standard –sm linked to enlarged image page
as usual, but the enlargement page should have a link to a further enlargement page
“complete map.” Note that there are slightly different captions for each/
GV66-1970s-map-east-sm: The 1970s investigations at Mitchell Ridge were
concentrated in three named areas at the eastern end of the site: the Cross Area, the CC
Area, and the Burial Area. Adapted from unpublished map, TARL Archives. Enlarge to
see details and complete map. [link to:
GV66-1970s-map-east: The 1970s investigations at Mitchell Ridge were concentrated in
three named areas at the eastern end of the site: the Cross Area, the CC Area, and the
Burial Area. Adapted from unpublished map, TARL Archives. Enlarge to see complete
map [link to:
GV66-1970s-map-full Complete map. The 1970s investigations at Mitchell Ridge were
concentrated in three named areas at the eastern end of the site: the Cross Area, the CC
Area, and the Burial Area. Adapted from unpublished map, TARL Archives.
gv66-c114: Test excavations in progress at the Mitchell Ridge site in 1974 in an area
overlooking Eckert Bayou that would become known as the Cross Area. The crew
included archeology students from Rice University and members of the Houston
Archeological Society. TARL Archives.
GV66-collecting-sample-Fullen-2-1977: Medical student and avocational archeologist
John Faggard collects samples during the removal of a burial in February, 1977.
Several highly trained medical personnel assisted in the investigations of the Cross Area
cemetery. Photo by Lou Fullen.
GV66-1970s-Cross-Area: Plan of the Cross Area features uncovered in the 1970s. The
“shell floor” was likely just a small midden accumulation – a pile of discarded food
refuse -- oyster shells. The Cross Area contained the largest concentration of burials
found during the 1970s work. Unpublished map, TARL Archives.
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
2
The Mitchell Ridge site was first documented in the spring of 1974 by avocational
archeologist Lou Fullen at the request of Charles Magan, the manager of surveying and
drafting for the Mitchell Development Corporation in advance of the planned
development of an upscale residential area known as Pirate’s Cove. Magan had
recognized that prehistoric and historic artifacts were visible on the site’s surface and in
places where the land was disturbed. Fullen searched the area and realized that a very
large archeological site existed along the raised terrain that became known as Mitchell
Ridge. He knew the site needed to be investigated before the area was developed. Fullen
enlisted the help of several fellow members of the Houston Archeological Society (HAS)
and they continued exploring the site and dug several test pits.
Realizing that the site merited more thorough research, Fullen contacted professor of
archaeology Frank Hole at Rice University. In the fall of 1974 by archeology students
from Rice began more systematic testing of the site with the permission of Mitchell
Development. Over weekends during the fall of 1974 and spring of 1975, the Rice
University students tested various accessible areas of the site with the assistance of the
HAS. Rice graduate student Barbara Burger (later Barbara Bruce Atkins) took charge of
the investigations with the hope that the work might become her dissertation research.
At the time very little was known about the archeology of Galveston Island. In the early
1960s, a prehistoric cemetery had been discovered by accident during construction work
by the Jamaica Beach Development Company only five kilometers (2 miles) down (west)
the island. The archeological site encompassing the cemetery eventually became known
as Jamaica Beach site (41GV5). Most of the site was destroyed by heavy machinery,
however, the construction work did stop when human bones were struck. Local artifact
collectors quickly began digging into the burial area and the finding of human remains
quickly became known to the public through newspaper articles in Galveston and
Houston papers. Thousands of interested people were said to have come to see the
excitement. Fortunately, members of the Houston Archeological Society led by geologist
Raymond Ring were able to salvage some information and some of the burials, at least 17
of which had been encountered. Some of these were later studied by researchers and
reported by Lawrence Aten, the first professional archeologist to really concentrate on the
Galveston Bay area.
By the early 1970s a few other sites had been recorded on Galveston Island, but little else
was known about the native occupations of the island except by intriguing historical
accounts including those of the infamous pirate, Jean Lafitte. The earliest and in many
ways the most important account was that of the Spaniard Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca,
who was shipwrecked on Malhado, or Island of Misfortune, in 1528. As discussed in the
Ethnohistory section, Malhado is argued by many historians to have been Galveston
Island. Cabeza de Vaca lived first with either the Han or the Capoque Indians, two groups
speaking different languages that were said to live on the island. Some researchers have
argued that the Han were one of the groups later known as the Karankawa.
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
3
The identify of Malhado and the Han are still debated, but in the 1970s most Galveston
Island history buffs as well as many historians and Houston-area archeologists were
convinced that the island had been inhabited by the Karankawa among whom Cabeza de
Vaca had first lived on Galveston Island. In a 1976 article in the Rice University Review,
Burger expounded on this idea and argued that the Mitchell Ridge remains were those of
the Karankawa (Download PDF). [Burger-1976-Mitchell-Ridge.pdf].
In the early summer of 1975 the Houston Archeological Society held a two-week field
school at the site to assist Barbara Burger. That summer a small grant from the
Galveston-based Harris and Eliza Kempner Fund covered the cost of a 10-member
student archeological crew from Rice to investigate the site for six weeks. The next
spring (1976) funding from the Mitchell Corporation allowed Burger to bring an
archeological crew for an additional three weeks.
During the sporadic 1974-1976 investigations various areas of the large site were
explored and tested. Most excavations were done by hand using 1-x-1 meter units, but
shallow trenches were dug using heavy machinery in open areas of the site as well. The
overall site area was plotted as over 600 meters in length and some 50-300 meters in
width, with the main axis along the ridge. A site grid was established that was oriented
such that E-W ran along the axis of the ridge and the island. This followed the local habit
of referring to Galveston Island as having a West end (San Luis Pass) and an East end
(facing Bolivar Peninsula). The Gulf side of the island is known as Island North, while
the West Bay side is known as Island South. Thus, in true cardinal directions the grid ran
Northeast-Southwest.
Testing and excavation was carried out in seven widely separated areas of the site given
convenient mnemonic names such as the Cutbank Area and the Cross Area. These areas
were chosen to concentrate on those areas where artifacts were common on the surface as
well as to take advantage of the few cleared areas of the site and access routes (unpaved
roads). In several areas where dense deposits or features were encountered, small
irregular blocks of conjoined 1-x-1 meter excavation squares were excavated. The sandy
deposits containing archeological materials were thin, generally less than 50 centimeters
(20”) and averaging about 30 centimeters. The finding of hearth features, shell deposits,
and several burials led to the recognition that the site had considerable research potential.
1978 TAS Field School
[place first in image column, arrange others across page in two rows, separated by the 2nd
paragraph in this subsection].
GV66-1978-TASFS-EMD-5: Excavations in progress during the Texas Archeological
Society’s annual field school in June, 1978. Photo by E. Mott Davis, TARL Archives.
1st Row
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
4
GV66-Flaigg-C161: A TAS member uncovers a section of a dense oyster shell layer in
the Cross Area excavations in 1978. This feature was labeled as a “shell floor,” and was
hypothesized to represent the floor of house. Later work suggested it was more likely an
ordinary shell midden, a refuse deposit from the consumption of oysters. Photo by
Norman Flaigg, TARL Archives.
GV66-1978-TASFS-EMD-8: Aerial view of the tent camp of the 1978 TAS field school.
With a recorded attendance of 326 members, the 10-day effort ranked as the Society’s
largest annual field school of until well into the 1980s. The tent camp was located at the
west end of the site. Photo by E. Mott Davis, TARL Archives.
GV66-1978-TASFS-EMD-4: TAS member catalogues the contents of an excavation
“unit level” bag, one that has many shells and shell fragments and what seem to be small
fragments of iron and glass. There were several historic houses on the site and much
evidence of 20th century activities. Photo by E. Mott Davis, TARL Archives.
2nd Row
GV66-1978-TASFS-EMD-2: TAS members cutting back the eroding edge along Eckert
Bayou to identify stratified deposits in the “Cut Bank” area. Photo by E. Mott Davis,
TARL Archives.
GV66-Flaigg-C153: Dog skeleton uncovered in the Cross Area during the TAS Field
School. Although several such animal burials were suspected of being prehistoric
features, they proved to be pets buried by area residents earlier in the 20th century. Photo
by Norman Flaigg, TARL Archives.
GV66-Williams-C1477: Excavation units in progress during the TAS Field School in
the Cross Area overlooking Eckert Bayou. Photo by Wallace Williams, TARL Archives.
In June of 1978 the Texas Archeological Society (TAS) held its 17th annual field school
on Galveston Island with a major emphasis on excavating the Mitchell Ridge site.
Barbara Bruce Atkins (formerly Barbara Burger) served as field director. With a
recorded attendance of 326 members, the 10-day effort was the Society’s largest field
school until well into the 1980s. Although some TAS crews worked on site
reconnaissance and on certain other sites, most worked at Mitchell Ridge. Based on the
results of the 1974-1976 work, excavations were concentrated in three areas of the site
the Cross Area, the CC Area, and the Burial Area.
With the conclusion of the TAS field school, the first period of site investigation ended.
Overall, the 1970s work resulted in the excavation of over 350 square meters, a sizeable
figure made possible because of the sandy soil and because most of the units were
shallow. A large sample of cultural materials were recovered including over 15,000
aboriginal sherds and numerous stone tools, animal bones, and shells. Thirteen human
burials were documented.
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
5
Galveston Historical Museum Fiasco
GV66-Atkins-Fullen-4-1976: Barbara Atkins photographs an oyster shell concentration
in April, 1976. This photo affirms that during the 1970s investigations that discrete
features were carefully documented. Unfortunately, most of the field records, project
photographs, and many of the artifacts were lost during the “Galveston Historical
Museum Fiasco.”
Following the conclusion of the TAS field school and some additional field work that
took place in the summer of 1978, the large volume of artifacts, samples, and records
amassed during the 1970s investigations were stored at the Galveston Historical Museum,
where Atkins had been given work space and hoped to do her analysis. Regretfully and
inexplicably, while Atkins was away from Galveston for an extended period in the
following year, untrained museum personnel removed many of the artifacts from the
labeled sacks, losing or stealing some items, and mixing together other materials,
resulting in the loss of a great deal of information.
The Texas Historical Commission stepped in 1980 to remove the Mitchell Ridge
collection from the museum and these were turned over to TARL for curation.
Fortunately, during the Galveston fiasco, the burials were being safeguarded by members
of the HAS. These too were later turned over to TARL. Some of the 1970s field and
laboratory documentation – field notes, drawings, photographs, and catalog sheets – were
turned over to TARL, but not most of the most critical records, including Atkins’ field
journal, original field maps, and drawings, feature records, and burial records. The loss
of these records has never been explained.
The Galveston Historical Museum fiasco helps explain why Atkins did not complete her
analysis (nor her graduate studies). She did write an unfinished manuscript of a site report
that provides an overview, but little meaningful detail of the 1970s work. After 1980 the
results of the first major phase of site investigations languished. A short summary of the
TAS field school appeared in the 1985 Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society.
(Download PDF). [Richmond-et-al-1985-TASFS-1978.pdf].
1992 Excavations
Ricklis-1994-Fig.5.1: Site map of 1992 excavations showing the areas of investigations.
Adapted from Ricklis 1994, Figure 5.1. Enlarge to see full map. [enlarge statement goes
on -sm only:].
GV66-c111: 1992 investigations in progress in Area 4 looking northeast. In the
foreground are several flagged anomalies yet to be excavated, while archeologists work
to document others. TARL Archives.
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
6
GV66-c112: Feature cluster in Area 4 looking northeast. These were flagged as
anomalies during machine stripping and then investigated by hand. They proved to be a
group of burial pits mainly dating to the Early Historic period. This photo was taken
part way through the investigations when the burial pits have been exposed down to the
top of the light-colored shell/hash deposits. Subsequently, each pit was carefully
excavated and documented. In the background is one of the boat canals that had been
dredged out after archeologists had cleared the area. TARL Archives.
GV66-RR-F9: Archeologists excavates a complex of overlapping pits uncovered in Area
3. These dark-stained pits were full of refuse, however the original function of the
purposefully dug features was never determined. They may have served as storage pits
that were later used for trash disposal. Photo by Robert Ricklis.
GV66-block-RR: Excavation Block in progress, late spring 1992. This area produced
abundant evidence of Late Prehistoric domestic occupation including hearths, a small
pit, a probable house floor, activity areas, and large samples of artifacts and animal
bones. These were found to date to Final Late Prehistoric period between the late
thirteenth and early fifteenth centuries (late 1200s to early 1400s). Photo by Robert
Ricklis.
The 1970s data strongly suggested that the cultural materials and intact deposits,
including human burials, were concentrated at the eastern end of the site. The Woodlands
Corporation (an offshoot of the Mitchell Development Corporation) agreed to donate that
portion of the site to the City of Galveston so it could be preserved as a State
Archeological Landmark. A small portion of the site lying between the Cross and CC
Areas was also placed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Subsequently, the Corps of Engineers issued a permit to the Woodlands Corporation for
the development of an area that included the western portion of the site, where cultural
debris was noted as being extremely sparse. There, “pilot” canals would be dug leading
inland from the West Bay side of the island to provide boat access to planned residential
units.
Soon after the dredging of the first canal began in January, 1992 human remains were
encountered and work was immediately halted. Corps of Engineers archeologists
accompanied by author Ricklis, then head of the consulting firm Coastal Archaeological
Research, Inc., carefully examined the scene. They soon recognized that intact burials
were present. This area of the site had an upper dark brown sandy soil 30-50 centimeters
thick. Grave pits were found to extend downward into the underlying tan-colored sand
and shell hash deposits, making the pits easy to detect.
The extent of the burial ground (cemetery area) needed to be determined before decisions
could be made concerning the need for extensive excavations. Ricklis took on this job.
Given that the burials seemed to have been dug well below the upper soil, he realized that
the darker soil could carefully stripped off using a large hydraulic excavation machine
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
7
known as a Gradall in order to search for additional burials. This was done along the
planned route of the first pilot canal, resulting in the identification of additional burials.
It was determined that all burials seemed to be confined to the higher area on the ridge
which lay above the 8-foot contour line (elevation above mean sea level). Since the
planned development would impact a sizable area above the 8-foot contour line of the
western part of the Mitchell Ridge site, the Corps of Engineers required that the entire
impacted area be machine-stripped in search of additional burials and other aboriginal
features.
In lieu of a Gradall, which is a relatively heavy and slow machine, a lighter and faster
machine called a “maintainer” with a wide blade was used to carefully scrape off the dark
sandy soil over a series of strips across the site. This work was closely monitored by the
archeology team, who quickly examined and flagged off any potential archeological
feature, such as a possible burial pit.
Over the course of several weeks, approximately 18,000 square meters ( 4.5 acres or 1.8
hectares) were exposed at the level of the surface of the light-colored sand/shell hash.
Over 100 “anomalies” were documented, of which 50 proved to be definite or probable
aboriginal (Native American) features, such as burial pits. Other non-aboriginal features,
such as historic fence posts, modern trash pits, and burial pits containing historic farm
animals and pets (such as goats, horses, and dogs) where also encountered. Several large
areas 30-50 meters in length were also encountered within which the sediments had been
severely disturbed by modern activities, such as land clearing.
The archeologists carefully exposed and excavated the aboriginal anomalies by hand
using trowels and brushes. The aboriginal features included 22 burial pits, 12 non-burial
pits of apparent aboriginal origin, 15 hearths (cooking features), two clusters of post
molds representing small circular huts, and a small concentration of cultural debris.
During this phase of work the Mitchell Ridge site was a very busy place. The stripping
and hand investigations took place more or less simultaneously, with several
archeologists monitoring the stripping operation, while others excavated the flagged-off
anomalies by hand. The researchers also dug “shovel tests” (small holes dug quickly by
shovel) in advance of the machine stripping in areas where intact upper deposits might be
present. RR: we really need picts of canal work, gradall, maintainer.
Sure enough, the easternmost area scheduled to be developed was found to contain a
layer of relatively dense cultural debris some 15-20 centimeters thick about 20
centimeters below the surface within the dark brown upper sediments. This area
coincided with the western edge of the concentrated debris as revealed by the 1970s
work.
Here the archeologists excavated by hand a series of contiguous 2-x-2-meter units
totaling some 74 square meters dubbed the “Block Excavation” area. The conventional
Mitchell/Investigations
draft 2/12/2016
8
hand excavations were intended to sample the upper deposits as well as those intruding
into the underlying shell/hash layers. This area produced abundant evidence of Late
Prehistoric domestic occupation including hearths, a small pit, a probable house floor,
activity areas, and large samples of artifacts and faunal remains (animal bones). These
occupational features were found to date to Final Late Prehistoric period between the late
thirteenth and early fifteenth centuries (late 1200s to early 1400s).
Following the completion of the field work in July, 1992 the Pirate’s Cove development
was allowed to proceed and the analysis phase began. Over the next two years Ricklis
and his colleagues analyzed their findings and wrote a 559-page technical report. Several
outside consultants carried out specialized studies. These included a thorough
bioarcheological study of human skeletal remains by Joseph F. Powell, assisted by Barry
W. Baker; a study of the shell artifacts by Meredith L. Dreiss, and a stable isotope
analysis by Jeffery A. Huebner that helped reconstruct dietary practices of the individuals
buried at the Mitchell Ridge site. These results are discussed in the following sections.