This pile is in excellent shape while surrounded by many piles that are in different states of decrepitude. That it remains in good shape seems suspicious and I wonder if it might have been re-built. If so, by whom? It's shape reminds me of other piles shown by Norman Muller, from Vermont and from Pennsylvania.
Other mentions of this pile [here] by Jim P and [here] from Norman Muller.
skip to main
|
skip to sidebar
This is about rock piles and stone mound sites in New England. A balance is needed between keeping them secret and making them public. Also arrowheads, stone tools and other surface archaeology.
statcounter
I would disagree with the description of the cairns in the vicinity of this large cairn as being "decrepitude." I would also disagree with the repair theory. This cairn has survive in an excellent condition due to several factors. First, it was built on bedrock giving it a solid foundation. Second, it was constructed with a well built exterior retaining wall. There is no evidence of repairs on this cairn. Repairs are generally noticeable by looking for differences in pattern of stones. It is extremely difficult for someone repairing a structure to match exactly "style" and "pattern" of rock layering used by the original builder. The result is repaired portions do not match of original stone work.
ReplyDeleteAs for surrounding cairns, they are for the most part built on the ground and lack the exterior retaining wall construction method of the large cairn. The result is the surrounding cairns are smaller and less dramatic in construction. This in no way suggests they are inferior or in a poorer state of preservation.These large dramatic cairns represent less than 3% of all the cairns at the site. This suggests these large cairns were specialized features rather simply the few cairns that survived in a better state of preservation.
James Gage
www.StoneStructures.org