Monday, January 09, 2017

"New England Megaliths"

Added a new blog link to the list of permanent links to the right. For short:


Tim MacSweeney said...

This disturbs me: "These are not pictured here, but many burial mounds (I believe) litter the base of the mountain. I have dug a bit into one of these, which was made of small stones and earth, and found a very strange piece which is explored in the next post."
Of course it turns out to be a quartz alien...

Tim MacSweeney said...

Matthew Howes said...

Ah yes, the "alien" stone. I didn't notice that part until you mentioned it, Tim, and I went back to the site and noticed that post. Looks like an oblong piece of cloudy quartz- a very nice stone but perhaps not an "alien." However, it may be a "special" hand-held stone, in which case the author is right to notice that it is special. Jumping to the conclusion about aliens is far-fetched, but at least the author is open-minded enough to notice something "ethereal" (like a spiritual reverence) about his find (although I agree, he shouldn't have been digging an ancient mound!)

Some good pictures on this site. Although, yes, some disturbing things. The header under the blog title reads "Creepy Big Rocks in the Woods." I don't know about "creepy." More like "sacred." Also, he states that American Indian culture is not responsible, that Native people themselves told the colonists that an "older" race built these megaliths. Sorry, but that just isn't true. As Jim Porter points out there is enough evidence once you find the research that points to the mound building/ stone building tradition of Native people in this region. Also, for Native people to tell a colonist that "we didn't build this, it was the old ones" is like being in New York City 200 years in the future from now and asking a New Yorker in the future who built the Empire State building. "It wasn't us," they would say, "the ones that came before us built that." To put that in perspective.

I think the author of the blog is open minded, probably a nice guy and has the bug to investigate these sites, which is healthy, but lacks the understanding of some sensibilities from a Native perspective. For instance he would rather listen to the English researcher Hugh Newman (who I must admit has some good material out with his Megalithomania project- well let's just say the good, the bad and the ugly) instead of finding research that points to more local sources of research, or perhaps he just doesn't know where else to find info. My 2 cents.

Matthew Howes said...

Also I just noticed the guy brandishing a machete in one of the pics. I say if you are truly "tuned in" to these sites, there is no need for that. Too disruptive! Makes the mind impure for tuning in!

Tim MacSweeney said...

Those words, "These are not pictured here, but many burial mounds (I believe) litter the base of the mountain. I have dug a bit into one of these, which was made of small stones and earth, and found a very strange piece which is explored in the next post," have disappeared from the site. How is the excavation of archaeological resources restricted in this state?
Section 155-E:2 Permit Required
A permit is required for any excavation of earth. Such a permit may be waived if the excavation is part of an earlier excavation or if the excavation relates to public highways.
Division of Historical Resources
The New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources issues permits for archaeological projects on state lands or under state waters. It also oversees the treatment of unmarked human burials discovered during land-altering activities.
Section 227-C:7 Permits Issued for State Lands and Waters
The state, acting through the commissioner of the department of cultural resources, reserves to itself the exclusive right and privilege to conduct, or cause to be conducted, field investigations of historic resources that involve the alteration of the surface or subsurface of the resource and removal of any surface or subsurface objects.

Matthew Howes said...

You are right that this is disturbing Tim. Knowingly digging into what he believes to be a burial mound. Crazy.

Also, about the machete thing. To elaborate. Sometimes I have carried a small folded blade in my back-pack with saw teeth, if I have to cut a branch away that is intrusive to a trail or another feature. Speaking from a male perspective, men like tools, and we like to use them. Always have. However, I had to look sideways at that pic of him holding the machete, I cannot grasp why he thinks he needs to use one when looking at stone sites. I get peeved when I notice branches that are snapped in place for no reason, when one can just as easily gently deflect the branch away from themselves without breaking the branch. Be like the wind, like riding on a cloud, and leave no trace. Why have swash-buckling machetes? To look cool? It just seems like more of that Euro-centric "conquer the wilderness" mentality to me. It isn't like we are in the jungles of Hawaii, or Costa Rica.

pwax said...

Shall I remove the link?

Bob Daniells said...

Hi all,

Author of New England megaliths here. Happy to answer any questions you might have.

1. Digging: this was a bad choice of word by me, the alien stone was poking out from under some rocks, which I moved to attain it. As to the image of me digging in the dirt, I was not digging into a mound, but rather the forest floor to get a sense of the soil composition.

2. Removing rocks: I see the point that these sites are sacred, and that any changes to a site are permanent. However, these sites are destroyed constantly by encroaching civilization, and my goal is to preserve and grow awareness and respect for them. I do not bandy about removing stones willy nilly, and those that I have I did so for the purpose of study and documentation.

3. "Alien theory": I do not claim that this rock IS and alien or was MADE by an alien. Skull elongation is a common practice by indigenous cultures worldwide, including in North America by the flat-head Indians. So I don't find it far fetched that a piece of crystal was shaped to mimic this shape.

4. "Races before us". Simply saying that these may have been built thousands of years before tribes known to us today is not saying that "Native Americans DIDN'T" build these stone structures, but rather that EARLIER than is ASSUMED MAY have.

5. Machete: I am not marching around the woods with a sword chopping down trees and kicking over grave stones, stabbing animals willy nilly. I purchased and carry the machete because I am hiking in a large wilderness preserve, and I would like to have some form of self defense should an animal charge me, or should I get lost and need to depend on myself for survival. I find it a bit nuts that simply holding a tool in one's hand is seen as disrespectful. Yes, I also find carrying a machete fun, and like guns and other "boyish" tools. Tough luck, ladies.

6. That's all for now, please enjoy my blog, I have some amazing massive structures to post soon.

Bob Daniells said...

Another follow up point on broken nearby branches. This area of forest is extremely thick, it is impossible to navigate without breaking some branches...which I have noticed the Moose in the area do at much greater efficiency than I can. This is an area in a nature preserve on a mountain range which doesn't have a name, not a well walked forest off of a major highway.

Tim MacSweeney said...

Tread with Respect around those Stones,
You may never fully understand the “Why?”
Only know some Human hands respectfully created that Prayer in Stone.
Tread with Respect around those Stones
Observe and Wonder in a Respectful Manner
And respectfully leave them alone, just as you found them...
(Inspired by our good friend James David Porter, 1/14/2017)

Matthew Howes said...

I was trying to point out something respectfully. I agree there is nothing wrong with tools/ guns/ etc. I tried to make that point clear. I too am a man. A very strong and brave man.

But, when looking at these sites, especially knowingly-- there should be certain sensitivities at stake. We don't know all the history surrounding these sites. But many of them are Native. If we look at surviving traditions, say from the Creek in the SouthEast (see Richard Thornton's work) we know that before the breakdown of Native civilization, hunting was not permitted within a 2 mile radius of the stone sites (such as Georgia's Track Rock Gap). You may not understand this, and it takes certain sensitivities, such as being part Native yourself (such is the case with my family's ancestry) to get this point across to non-Native people. It is like the seal of the state of Massachusetts. There is a Native man standing, and above his picture is an arm wielding a sword. So the Native man IS UNDER THE SWORD- that is what that picture conveys to Native people, and it is not a very good or pretty picture.

Native people believe in Spirits, and that places have Spirits. Please be aware of this. I think people are concerned you will come to a site like a swash-buckling pirate for the loot. You are probably an alright guy though, you are open minded. Sorry to get your defenses up if it wasn't necessary.

Matthew Howes said...

To cut through all the fluff I wrote. I am talking about TRACKING skills. If you cut branches off with a machete, people will know you have been there. But if you don't care or that's not your thing, never mind. Every opportunity is a good opportunity to hone skills imo. I have been in vegetation just as thick w/ no need for a knife. Also, I approach these sites more like a pilgrimage, but that is my mind-set and not everyone will have that mind set I realize. Your concern about predatory/ rabid animals is legitimate, probably more so in your area than in mine (MA.) It's not my main thing but I can get into tools/etc. Cool.

Also about the "alien" stone. I probably shouldn't have criticized it the way I did. There is a large boulder in my area that is in the shape of a skull. Where the "pituitary gland" is (energy center of the brain) is a concavity that has been dug out by ancient hands, forming a rock shelter into the cavity of the skull-boulder. I think this structure in my area is a larger representation/idea of your smaller hand-held quartz stone. I have noticed hand-held stones before, such as pyramidal/ conical stones with grooves for the fingers to grip, as well as animal effigy stones (snakes, birds), but they were always sticking out of the mud along trails and such. When you "tune in" you start to notice these stones.

I think people criticized you because you said you were digging. Well, I hope you weren't. You have some good material on your blog.