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.
Clearly there are many stone enthusiasts out there! I myself have loved stone walls my whole life and only recently began reading up on them, I just read Robert Thorsen's Stone by Stone and then found this blog. I've also taken a few photos of split boulders in different parts of the country.
Is there a finer-grained version of this map? It's rather difficult to spot specific site locations on it. I have the Cooke/DeLong data, but a lot of their sites are speculative - they have heard of a site in the area, but when you use their coordinates they bring you to the center of the town named in the database, but not to the location of the structure.
At present I have 941 sites in the Merrimack drainage and 528 in the Connecticut, the most common drainages for these sites in the Northeast, so that confirms the impression you got! But there are also large numbers in other drainages: 334 in the Hudson, 242 in the Pawcatuck, 205 in the Thames, and 100 in the Taunton. These 6 drainages contain 52% of all sites in the inventory!
This map, even if it is inaccurate, has scientific value and is something could have published by people who know the correct locations. Apparently these locations are pretty public anyway, but lack of publication holds back the possibility of getting an overview.
Clearly there are many stone enthusiasts out there!
ReplyDeleteI myself have loved stone walls my whole life and only recently began reading up on them, I just read Robert Thorsen's Stone by Stone and then found this blog.
I've also taken a few photos of split boulders in different parts of the country.
I just noticed: it is the Connecticut River valley and the Merrimac River valley - a distribution which is without a "European" hypothesis.
ReplyDeleteIs there a finer-grained version of this map? It's rather difficult to spot specific site locations on it. I have the Cooke/DeLong data, but a lot of their sites are speculative - they have heard of a site in the area, but when you use their coordinates they bring you to the center of the town named in the database, but not to the location of the structure.
ReplyDeleteAt present I have 941 sites in the Merrimack drainage and 528 in the Connecticut, the most common drainages for these sites in the Northeast, so that confirms the impression you got! But there are also large numbers in other drainages: 334 in the Hudson, 242 in the Pawcatuck, 205 in the Thames, and 100 in the Taunton. These 6 drainages contain 52% of all sites in the inventory!
Following the link, I was able to click in for higher resolution.
ReplyDeleteTheir UFO and Giants info is pretty interesting as well...
ReplyDeleteThis map, even if it is inaccurate, has scientific value and is something could have published by people who know the correct locations. Apparently these locations are pretty public anyway, but lack of publication holds back the possibility of getting an overview.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the link? I tried clicking on anything which was clickable and just got this list of comments, or a copy of the map at the same scale!
ReplyDeleteThe word "this" is a link to https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?msa=0&mid=zGMEs_rY3tA0.ka9r_yVGIS48
ReplyDeleteIt is a Google map.