Recall that the unusual feature at the earlier site was "mound with hollow" that was triangular and, so, a bit different from all the other examples of mounds with hollows that I have been looking at. The hollow was not all that clear - as much something I wanted to see as it was real. So I am poking down towards the lowland's edge and see a rock pile that, upon inspection, seemed to be crescent shaped:
And:
And:
This is unfamiliar - a crescent shaped rock pile - perhaps 3 feet high, 20 feet long.To my surprise, I found another, slightly smaller, a few yards away:
And:
Near these, as I poked around within an area no more than 50 feet across, I saw a couple of other piles. Perhaps more could be seen without the snow:
Another:
Let's remember that a triangular "mound with hollow" is pretty unusual (actually, unique in my experience). With these other unfamiliar geometric shapes (crescents) occurring no more than -say- 70 yards from the first site, I wonder if this is not something new. Certainly it seems a bit "Wachusetts Tradition"-ey but still quite unique. Searching this blog for the word "crescent" (click here and scroll down) brings up a large crescent shaped pile Norman reported, and a couple of very scrappy things from Boylston. So what gives? Is this new?
1 comment :
At the end of March when there was no snow, I went back and found lots of other piles in the area but I think the "crescent" and "triangular" characterizations are premature. After seeing more without the snow, I think they are small mounds with hollows, representing the aqua-philic early Wachusett Tradition - a bit like rock piles with tails.
Post a Comment