In Search of Rhode Island's Lost Stony Fort (by JimP)

by JimP

"LAYING OUT OF A HIGHWAY.

The following laying out is believed to have been about 1703. It is recorded in the L.E. in the Secretary's office.

. . . until it comes to an old pair of barrs and the road to run to the eastward of Samuel Tifft's fence, until it comes to William Knowles NE corner and so by marked trees or bushes until it comes to the stony fort and then by marked trees through Ebenezer Shearman's farm, till it comes to a great rock not farr from a brook and so to untill it meets with marked trees in a corner of Jeremiah Harzard's farm . . ." (Collections 1835:224) 

COLLECTIONS of the Rhode Island Historical Society, Vol. III. 1835. Pg. 224. Providence, RI: Marshall, Brown and Company.

   Growing up, I heard local legends about the Narragansett Indian's "stony fort complexes". Certainly I have made dozens of visits to Queen's Fort, which is on the National Register of Historic Places and includes a complex of stone walls, standing stones, talus caves, and other features in and around a hill of enormous boulders. I knew about the Great Swamp Fort and Fort Ninigret with their contemporary accounts of partial construction with stone walls. I have also visited the Rolling Rock site with its interesting stone walls, possible use of quartz symbolism, stone-lined springs, and nearby "poor" graves. I am also familiar with the Gungywamp site in nearby Connecticut and its possible connection to a colonial account of a stony fort, "neare Pequot". But could there possibly be more?

One of two green epidote standing stones leaning against a boulder in the western wall at Queen's Fort.

There had also been some scant evidence of another stony fort. I have never been able to track down descriptive accounts in local histories, but I have found another piece to the puzzle -- the aforementioned quote found in the 1835 book from the Rhode Island Historical Society.

First, let me fill you in about what initially led me to believe there may be a lost stone Indian fort in Rhode Island. The screenshot below from Google maps shows two placemarks. The first, to the north, is the site of Queen's Fort -- the only stone Indian fort in New England that is recognized as a historic landmark. But more than six miles to the south -- lined in blue -- is a road named Stony Fort Rd. I had always found this curious. I thought Stony Fort Rd. would have been named after Queen's Fort. There is no stone fort that I know of within six miles of Stony Fort Rd. How can there be a connection to Queen's Fort if Stony Fort Rd. is six miles to the south?

The exact spot where the placemark for Stony Fort Rd. sits is on railroad tracks that run north/south. To the east of the placemark/tracks the road is called Stony Fort Rd. To the west of the placemark/tracks it is Wolf Rocks Rd.

Google Map showing the site of Queen's Fort to the north,
and Stony Fort Rd./Wolf Rocks Rd. six miles to the south.

It has been a mystery to me for decades -- but very recently I found the reference to the "stony fort" that I quoted at the top of this post and it has given me an important new piece to the puzzle. Although I am not entirely certain, it appears that the highway that is being laid out is what is today called the Old North Rd. to the south and Shermantown Rd. to the northeast.

But whatever that old highway is called today, the stony fort described in the entry cannot be Queen's Fort. The entry refers to the farm of William Knowles. From town records we know William Knowles owned land at a place called Little Rest Hill. In 1726, the Village of Little Rest was renamed Kingston, and today it is home of the University of Rhode Island as well as one of only two Amtrak stations in the state. Then, according to the entry, after reaching the stony fort the highway ran through Jeremiah Hazard's farm. Again, from town records, we know Jeremiah Hazard lived not far from Little Rest. At no point does the road laid out go six miles to the north where Queen's Fort is situated. So I can now, for the first time ever, rule out Queen's Fort as the origin of the name "Stony Fort Rd."

So now that we know the "stony fort" in the entry is definitely not Queen's Fort, what stony fort is being referenced? Since Stony Fort Rd. is also named Wolf Rocks Rd. to the west of the train tracks, could the entry be referring to Wolf Rocks? Wolf Rocks is a geological wonder in Rhode Island - a large 50-foot deep ravine filled with giant boulders. At one time, Wolf Rocks was a popular place for visitors. But since the 1970's, local landowners surrounding the site have discouraged visitors. As far as I know, Wolf Rocks has become all but forgotten except to locals.

The 50-foot deep ravine filled with boulders known as Wolf Rocks.

Queen's Fort is certainly a natural geological wonder itself. Most of it was made entirely by nature. Humans have embellished the site by building stone walls and other features. Could Wolf Rocks have been regarded as a stone fort in early colonial Rhode Island simply because it was an important place to the Narragansett Indians? Could the early colonists have called Wolf Rocks a stony fort simply because it reminded them of Queen's Fort to the north? Or is there another stone fort somewhere nearby, lost, forgotten, hidden in the North Kingstown woods?

An unknown collection of boulders between the site of Wolf Rocks and Wolf Rock Rd. Could this be the lost stony fort?

Of course, I still have more questions than answers. But I have a solid lead. Now all I need is a volunteer in or near Rhode Island to search a few land records and pin down an approximate location for the lost "stony fort". I need someone to help me poke around town records for the origin of the name Stony Fort Rd. Who wants to help this poor Arizonan solve a mystery and find the lost stone fort? Shoot me an email if you're interested! jimtheump@cox.net

Gungywamp Society - Just Plain Wrong

posted by JimP

"There are no 'ancient Indian temples' in the Gungywamp area since it is a well known fact that nomadic and semi-nomadic Native Americans in the region did not construct temples of hewn or field stone . . ." gungywamp.com

This is one of the most irresponsible and incorrect statements regarding Native Americans in New England that I have read in at least a couple of years. It angers me as much as the .Massachusetts Historical Commission's racist pamphlet about stone structures. "It is a well-known fact," to whom? To ignorance, perhaps. To someone who hasn't bothered to do the research.

FACT: Indians in New England in both pre- and post-contact New England did indeed use sacred sites featuring structures built of field stones. Furthermore, at least one early English colonist -- a Puritan -- actually drew comparisons between these sites and ancient Greek temples.

FACT: In Rhode Island there exists what has been called by some historians the Narragansett stony fort complexes. Queen's Fort, Wolf Rocks, Fort Ninigret, Great Swamp, Rolling Rock, and Shumunkanuc Fort are six examples. These sites were all either described historically as having been built using stone, or are still intact enough to this very day to actually see the stone structures. One of these forts -- Queen's Fort -- is on the National Register of Historic Places as a Narragansett site. If it is a well-known fact that Indians in the region didn't construct temples using field stones, no one told the Narragansetts. Of course, it isn't the use of the word, "temple," that is at issue.

FACT: There is at least one contact-period reference to a similar stone fort in Pequot territory in Connecticut -- in the area of Gungywamp itself. Sadly, the report is too vague to draw any conclusions about its exact location. And while I'm not willing to say that the 17th century writer was referring to Gungywamp itself, he was certainly referring to a stone fort erected by Indians in Connecticut.

FACT: The historical evidence strongly suggests that Indians in New England built their sweat-lodges out of field stones. Often, they walled up the opening of a natural talus cave or rock shelter. But sweat lodges built entirely from field stones were not out of the realm of possibility whatsoever. In fact, it's the only thing that makes any sense if one examines the historical data from the region. (I can even give you a historical reference that explains the purpose of the holes we find in stone chambers, and not an astronomical explanation either, and one that pre-dates modern interest in such structures.)

FACT: I can prove everything I've said to the satisfaction of any historian. Gungywamp Society, the opinions expressed on your website do this field of research, and the effort to preserve such sites, a tremendous disservice.

A visit to Queen's Fort in Exeter, RI

Reader Ted writes:

Visit to the Queen's Fort, Exeter, RI

I am very new to this subject, so please forgive any gaffs or naive mistakes. I have been researching the usual sources. I stumbled (sorry) on the rock pile blog recently and have enjoyed reading the posts. My wife and I have been looking around as time permits, and visited the Queen's Fort in Exeter, RI this past weekend.

Our GPS got us there alright, following coordinates from Fredrick Meli's article posted on the NEARA website. I have to admit we passed it the first time, distracted by the mega-mansion across the street, but we backtracked and found a pull off. Walking up the hill and orienting ourselves, we found the spiral enclosure. We could not help but notice the difference between the appearance of the structure compared to the photo in Mavor and Dix.[here is a scan from p98 of Manitou - PWAX]
The terminus of the foreground wall seems to be missing. We also noticed the recent construction of a fire pit/grill made from stones similar in size and shape to the ones used to construct the spiral structure.Hmmm... Perhaps this is old news, but the recent scattered beer cans and relatively fresh ash and smoke coating inside made us think that might be a recent repurposing of the stones originally in the spiral. Might I ask for some advice from this experienced group? Should the Rhode Island Historical Society, owners of the property, be contacted? Or is the risk tat they might close access too great if that is done? I honesty don't know.

Overall, I had to agree with the idea put forth in the Meli article that this is unlikely to be a defensive fort as the boulder field on the top of the hill makes an impossible area for settlement or occupation. As we explored the walls and nooks we saw something along the east side that looked like a Manitou stone sticking up from a wall. Anyone have an opinion about this:
It was very thin, about 24-26 inches above the rest of the wall. I am beginning to realize we should carry a tape measure and be more careful about taking notes of our visits.

I took some black and white large format panoramic negatives of some of the same views and will be printing them soon.

A view from Exeter: A sacred place, possibly from the time of glaciers

post by JimP

From the Providence Journal article:

As Brown University anthropology professor William Simmons tells it, tensions in 1675 “had begun to build between Plymouth and the Massachusetts Bay Colony over interest in acquiring Narragansett land.” The Colonists feared the Narragansetts were so numerous that they could overpower the English. They formed an army of about 1,000. “The Narragansetts fortified two places,” Simmons said. “One, that hill in Exeter and another, an island in the Great Swamp.” 
http://www.providencejournal.com/news/content/20141207-a-view-from-exeter-a-sacred-place-possibly-from-the-time-of-glaciers.ece

I am sorry, Professor Simmons. While I have a great respect for your body of work, there is scant evidence for you to draw the conclusion that the Narragansett fortified, "two places" in preparation for war. First and foremost there is absolutely no evidence that the stone walls at Queen's Fort were built for defensive purposes or even in preparation for King Philip's War.

You are further perpetuating the myth of Stonewall John -- the idea that the Narragansett did not build stone walls until the English taught Stonewall John how to lay dry stones. Furthermore, you are basing your entire premise on a single reference through the filter of Nathaniel Saltonstall who wrote in 1676:

. . . Stonewall, or Stone-Layer John, for that being an active ingenious Fellow he had learnt the Mason's Trade, and was of great Use to the Indians in building their Forts, etc. (Saltonstall [1676]1913:96) 

But in 1674, during the same period of tensions leading up to the war, Daniel Gookin wrote:

But yet let me add this by way of commendation of the Narragansitt and Warwick Indians, who inhabit in the jurisdiction, that they are an active, laborious, and ingenious people; which is demonstrated in their labours they do for the English; of whom more are employed, especially in making stone fences, and many other hard labours, than of any other Indian people or neighbours. (Gookin [1674]1968:37)

So which was it? Was there only one Narragansett man who had, "learnt the Mason's Trade," and was responsible for building the stone walls at Queen's Fort and the Great Swamp Fort as tensions rose? Or were there many Narragansett and neighboring Indians who learned how to lay dry stone walls from the English? Or was masonry a skill the native people already possessed? (Did they build fish weirs from stone walls before the English taught them how? Did they build stone walls for game drive systems? Is it even logical to conclude that for thousands of years of working with stone that the Narragansett never figured out how to stack them into a wall until the English showed them how?)

Until a preponderance of the evidence finally gives us a solid date for the construction of the walls at Queen's Fort, it is simply inaccurate to conclude who built them or even that they were built anywhere near 1675. I hope someday soon you will help correct the record. The history of Narragansett masonry has been misunderstood for far too long.

Regards,
Jim Porter

GOOKIN, Daniel. [1674] 1968. Historical Collections of the Indians in New England. In Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society,  For the Year 1792. Vol. 1. Reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation.

SALTONSTALL, Nathaniel. [1676] 1913. A New and Further Narrative of the State of New-England. In Narratives of the Indian Wars, 1675-1699. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Queen's Fort Article On NEARA Website

by JimP
The photograph above was taken by Dr. Frederick F. Meli and it shows a boulder worked by stone tools from the Queen's Fort site in Exeter, RI. This photo, with several others, accompanies a new article by Dr. Meli that was published last week on the NEARA website. The article is titled A New Interpretation of the Queen's Fort; Exeter, RI.

Read the article here:
http://www.neara.org/meli/queensfort.htm

Thanks to James Gage for bringing this to my attention.

Rolling Rock - North Kingstown, RI

by JimP

Above - the, "twin whales," of Rolling Rock in North Kingstown. Along with Queen's Fort, the Town of North Kingstown counts Rolling Rock among its landmarks which, " indicate the strong presence and tradition of Narragansett Indians in Rhode Island."

Below - The outcropping, which is the main focal point of the area, has a huge split in it.

Below - A stone row leads to the outcropping.

Below - Stone rows like this one seem to define the perimeters of the area. It is reminiscent of the walls at the Queen's Fort complex.

Below - A small stone structure built over a spring.

Below - a piece of quartz in a stone row.

Queen's Cairns

Newly-opened conservation lands in Southern Rhode Island continue to yield treasures. These cairns were found in Exeter, RI on a knoll of conifers that sits to the northwest of what was once a large swamp. Today, beavers have done their work to turn the swamp into a large pond full of dead and dying trees.

This site is a little over 3-1/2 miles from Queen's Fort, made famous by the book Manitou from authors James Mavor and Byron Dix. The waters here feed the Queen's River, the most pristine in all of Rhode Island, and this site is also home to one of the largest known concentrations of fresh-water mussels in the state.

Only a small handful of people have ever seen these rock piles. I guess that has all changed now. I have named them the Queen's Cairns. It seemed a fitting descriptive title. So I introduce to the world -- The Queen's Cairns.

There are colonial and modern features not far from these cairns. There are two cellar-holes, a small cemetery, and huge slash piles from a sawmill that operated here for 40 years. I don't think that necessarily means anything, but I thought it pertinent to disclose nonetheless. Sites in Rhode Island like Parker Woodland, for example, also feature colonial cellar holes and sawmill ruins.

Native American Sites on the Penobscott River and Maine Coast

From reader Teig Tyrson:
Hi Mr. Waksman, my 3 year research into the stone sites found in Bucksport, Maine is finally done and compiled into a research book with 3 other lost French and Native American sites on the Penobscot River and Maine Coast.  I believe I have successfully tied in Rhode Island to the lost city of Arembec,(Norumbega) and the Great Chief Basheba assassination, as Chief Nanepashemet sent a large war party up to aid the Penobscots being overrun by the Tarratines after their chief was killed.  This allows for a connection between the stone walls of Queen's Fort to my claimed stonewalls of Norumbega, dismissed as sheep walls by the preservation.  The book and bio can be viewed here:http://www.amazon.com/Search-Norumbega-Emeric-W-Spooner/dp/1516880455/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447908299&sr=8-1&keywords=In+search+of+Norumbega

More about Queen's Fort

From Charles M. Devine (for other posts on this topic, click here):

 

 First two photos date 1978.

 By 1979, SW bastion had been rebuilt and a spiral was added to it. In Manitou, Dix would only say it "might" have been rebuilt. No "might" about it.

As seen in second photo here, there is no spiral arm passing in front of the tree to the left in the photo. In the first photo, it would have been extending off the far right. Photo needed to cover that area better then it does, but I can attest that there was no spiral, or remnants thereof, that I ever saw prior to the rebuild. I do not know who was responsible. Neighborhood kids did like riding their dirt bikes there all the time in the 70's and 80's. Should you chose to use these photos and info, please send me a link at that time so I don't miss it. It is important that future researchers understand these changes, so the spiral extension on the SW bastion is not misinterpreted as original to the feature. I do not believe it is.

Rock Piles Built Into Walls

by JimP
We spend so much time looking at independent rock piles on this blog that I thought I'd do something a little different - look at rock piles built into stone walls. The one thing common to all these structures is that they appear in walls directly on sites with other features that we regularly discuss here, or sites that are verified by experts to be Native American in origin. I'll let the reader be the judge of what these may mean, if anything.The above construction caught my eye at Rolling Rock in North Kingstown, RI. It is very much unlike the construction of the rest of the stone wall it sits in.
The above is another example from Rolling Rock, this time a large piece of quartz is incorporated into the wall.
Here's a stone wall that can be found at Parker Woodland in Coventry, RI.
The above is from Queen's Fort in Exeter, RI, and it's home to this stone wall with incorporated standing stone.
The above photo was taken by Larry Harrop and it depicts a structure in a stone wall at the Miner Farm in Tomaquag.
The above example is most impressive. It's another Larry Harrop photo, this time from a site near Watemoonsuck in RI called Canonchet.

Queen's Fort in Rhode Island - a gallery from Jim Porter

[Click here]