Four Corner - Texas Water Development Board

up of at least five tribes (Aten, 1983). There were three other related native groups on U1e upper Texas coast at Umt
time; U1e Akokisa who occupied U1e Galveston Bay area norUnvard to Conroe and east to approximately Beamnont;
the Atakapa who occupied U1e area east ofBeamnont into western Louisiana; and U1e Bidai who occupied U1e territory
norU1 ofU1e Akokisa which included the Huntsville and Liberty areas (Aten, 1983). From the eUmohistoric records as
well as the archaeological infonnation, U1e groups were hunting and gaU1ering peoples (Hester, 1980; Aten, 1983;
Story, 1990). From ca. 3000 BC to AD 100, no important teclmological or social advances have been identified among
the Native American groups. From AD 100 to AD 800, ceramics were being used, U1e bow and arrow was introduced
and U1ere was some recognition of territorial boundaries indicating social structure. From AD 800 until contact, U1ere
was refinement in ceramic production and increased use of U1e bow and arrow.
At U1e time of contact, U1e sociopolitical structure of U1e groups would be classified as tribes (Aten, 1983). During U1e
wann seasons, they were dispersed in band sized groups. They gaU1ered into villages during U1e colder seasons with
populations ranging from 400 to 500. Cabeza de Vaca's accom1t of U1ese groups was Umt U1ey lived in a state of
starvation U1e year around even U10ugh U1ey lmd access to all of U1e marine resources of a coastal envirorunent. Cabeza
de Vaca lived in Utis area for six years and becan1e a trader for U1e Native Americans, bartering sea shells and oU1er
coastal products for !tides and liUtic resources from inland groups (Newcomb, 1961). The arclmeological record
indicates Umt cerantics appeared wiU1 U1e Atakapa in 70 BC, wiU1 U1e Akokisa in AD 100, wiU1 U1e Karonkawa in AD
300 and with the Bidai in AD 500. The origin ofthls cerantic teclmology would appear to be U1e Lower Mississippi
Valley and was adopted from east to west over time (Aten, 1983).
Some ofU1e project areas in Fort Bend County were part ofU1e original Stephen F. Austin colony. Their location along
the Brazos River was advantageous, as it was easily navigated which gave ready access to U1e Gulf of Mexico.
METHODOLOGY
BCAD conducted arcltival research on U1e project areas prior to field surveys at U1e Texas A.rclmeological Research
Laboratory (f ARL) and the General Land Office in Austin, Texas; at U1e Fort Bend County Musemn; and at U1e Texas
Room ofU1e Houston Public Library. The files of National Register of Historic Places, National Register of Eligible
Sites and U1e Texas State Archaeological Sites were reviewed. The General Land Office provided infonnation on U1e
original Spanish land grants and owners of U1e project areas. Early Texas history was reviewed as well as U1e
biographies of the original owners of U1e land tracts. Aerial photographs were studied to detennine more recent land
use.
BCAD conducted reconnaissance surveys of the project areas on September 22, 1998 to U1e extent of ready
accessability to U1e areas. Natural drainage chatmels were located because U1e banks of watenvays were frequently
preferred for campsites by prehistoric peoples.
The arcltitecture of U10se existing buildings that could meet the requirements for inclusion in U1e National Register of
Historic Places was examined. The structure must be fifty years old and meet one or more of U1e following
requirements:
1. The structure is associated with events Umt have tnade a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of ltistory.
2. The structure is associated wiU1 the lives of persons significant in our past.
3. The structure is important to a particular cultural or eU1nic group.
4. The structure is U1e work of a significant architect, master builder, or craftsman.
5. The structure embodies the distinctive characteristic of a type, period, or method of construction,
2