Readers familiar with this blog will know what I mean when I observe that these piles are somewhat evenly spaced and in lines, will know that I often report about such things. Let's look at some individual piles:
....hmmm....they look pretty vertical sided. Does that ring a bell with any readers?In addition there are a number of damaged piles:
For example, we have heard of the plan to excavate piles already damaged by percolation test pitting:
And other types of structures:
Now we see hese pictures it is possible to guess that this is a marker pile site. It may be related to the famous King Philip's War battle but it is very unlikely that these piles are burials (at least not the vertical sided ones). In fact these piles match well with the physical description given by Mavor and Dix in Manitou, describing the one rock pile they excavated in Freetown.While I am over here dis-agreeing with everyone, let me add that I was told by Curtis Hoffman that Ted Ballard had counted the same number of piles (was it 24?) as warriors reported to have died in the famous King Philip's battle that took place there. At the time I heard this it sounded too good to be true. It still does. As I look at how water is seeping out of the ground everywhere at this site, it surprises me anyone would believe there are bodies buried there. I don't think bodies were placed in the water supply. What is my point? It seem great that the town of North Smithfield is preventing development - but there is a lot of mythology being created about this site and it will inevitably color how other sites are perceived - for better or worse people will be operating with false assumptions. And what is this site if not a burial ground? I believe marker pile sites may have been created as memorials but function as connecting a viewer to points on the horizon. So a recommendation is: try to locate a position where you can look down the lines of piles (a place where the lines converge) and explore the compass bearings in those viewing directions.
5 comments :
I just want to add that, according to what Dr. Meli has told me, several experts who have surveyed and/or visited the site believe there are many ceremonial structures in addition to the burial mounds. Furthermore, the Nipsachuk site includes both a swamp and a hill - it is a large site which is not completely comprised of just wetlands.
Could we please stop calling them burial mounds?
I won't do that. Burial mounds are what the Seaconke Wampanoag historians believe are there, and I have absolutely no reason to doubt them. In fact, I take emphasizing their conclusions very seriously.
I never implied any of these photos depicted any of the burial mounds. I don't know which features they are talking about, and neither do you. Frankly, I don't know how you can be so positive in your opinions about a site that you've never explored in person.
You are right that I should not sound so certain. My statements are based on what I see and I can identify it, compare it with other known locations and make a reasonable statement.
Well It seems that I have the proof, that many of the mounds in the Nipsachuck Area, are in fact burials.......
1/28/08 Dr. Meli.
Post a Comment