Twenty Years Studying Native American Stonework
Peter Waksman’s fascinating recent essay on his blog Rock Piles (October 1, 2018), reflecting on his decades-long experience studying Native American stonework near his home in Concord, MA, made me think of my own experiences on the same topic, and so I decided to write some of them down.
I came to this serious pastime from a background in classical
archaeology and geology as an undergraduate at Boston University in the late
1950s-early 60s, and then in graduate school in the mid=1960s, focusing on the
scientific examination of art, and art conservation, which became my life’s
work for the next fifty years.
While employed at the Worcester Art Museum in Massachusetts
in the mid-1970s, I came to meet Malcolm Pearson, the photographer and former
owner of the Upton Chamber and Mystery Hill in NH. We lived near one another. Malcolm was an active member of the Early
Sites Research Society, and a close associate of Jim Whittall; he took me to
the Morrill Point Mound in Newbury, MA, where Whittall was excavating, and also
to the kiva-like underground chamber in Putney, VT, another of Whittall’s
projects. I also attended a couple of
meetings of the ESRS, but never really embraced the organization, one reason
being that I was skeptical of some of the so-called artifacts I was shown at
the Putney site.
Moving to Princeton, NJ in 1981 and to a job at the
Princeton University Art Museum, I left the ESRS and Native American stonework behind
me for the next sixteen years. Then, around 1995, I was contacted by Steve
Ells, a Thoreau scholar and resident of Lincoln, MA, who wanted me to show him
a log structure I had seen in Estabrook Woods in Concord when I lived in MA for
a year in 1969. So, one spring day in
1995 I drove to Concord, met Steve, and the two of us hiked through Estabrook
Woods to where I remembered the log structure having been located. Now, twenty-five years later, it was pretty
much dilapidated. At one point after
seeing the log structure, Steve asked me if I’d be interested in seeing an
above-ground stone chamber. Always
intrigued by new discoveries of this sort, I enthusiastically agreed, and so
the two of hiked to the base of Hubbard Hill, where, along a colonial stone
wall, we came upon this fascinating stone structure. Steve told me that Mark Strohmeyer had
studied it and had written a report on it for Harvard University, which owned
the property. I obtained Mark’s phone
number from Steve, and once I got back to Princeton, I called him.
I never met Mark, but we had some long and intense talks by
phone on Indian stonework, about which I knew very little at the time; Mark did
most of the talking. At one point during
our first telephone call, Mark told me to buy a copy of Manitou and read it. And once
I had read it, I should call him back, which I did. During this second call, he told me to
contact a high school friend of his in Pennsylvania, Fred Werkheiser. Fred was a shoe store owner in Nazareth, and in
1996 he kindly showed me several interesting sites near the Delaware Water Gap.
The following year, in November, he took me to the Oley Hills site in Berks
County, a day after an early November ice storm had covered everything with
about a half inch of ice. The effect on
the remarkable stonework was beautiful and spellbinding, and from that point
on, I was determined to learn as much about the site as I could, and try to
determine whether the stonework (which consisted of large platform cairns, a
Terrace, and stone walls) was Colonial or Native American. The former landowner claimed the stonework
was Celtic, but Fred said it was Native American. I sent photos of some of the cairns to the
state archaeologist, who wrote back saying the features looked “Industrial.”.
With that, I knew that trying to determine who built the stonework and when would
prove a daunting task. For the next
several years I made many trips to the Oley Hills site, and to Reading and
Harrisburg, studying deeds and collecting information. All of this resulted in an article published
in British Archaeological Reports
(BAR) in 2008, which is available on the NEARA website.
Beginning in the late 1990s, Manitou was my main source to the mysteries of American Indian
stone constructions, the information in it often supporting what I had seen on
my own in the woods. But as I became
more familiar with the stonework scattered in the woods of the Northeast, I
also became more critical of what Mavor and Dix had written. For example, their emphasis on
archaeoastronomy and alignments, particularly in reference to the Upton Chamber,
which was one of the main focus points early in their book, I found
unconvincing. While archaeoastronomy is certainly a valid field of study,
particularly for those areas of the country that are more plains-like or arid than
the Northeast, this discipline must be applied carefully, and the evidence
checked repeatedly, before results can be accepted. With regard to the Upton Chamber, I still
have some basic questions about the chamber having been used as a sighting
platform that have not been answered satisfactorily, in my estimation. The first one is, what was the main or
primary purpose of using the chamber as a sighting platform? And why build a massive beehive-shaped
chamber simply to view some stars setting over a hill a mile away? Couldn’t an outdoor spot on the ground,
perhaps marked by some stones, have sufficed?
The chamber as a viewing location
doesn’t make practical sense. So what if
certain stars set over Pratt Hill in 710? What practical purpose did this have?
Is it possible, using only one’s eyes,
to actually see the stone mounds on Pratt Hill from deep inside the chamber on
a moonless dark night? And does one have
the visual acuity to perceive certain stars setting over Pratt Hill a mile away? What about trees getting in the way, plus the
problem of cloud cover in the Northeast, which amounts to about half the days
of the year? So, until someone can
answer these simple questions, I will remain skeptical of the actual function
of the Upton Chamber.
In Lucianne Lavin’s excellent book, Connecticut’s Indigenous Peoples, New Haven & London, 2013, she
discusses archaeoastronomy briefly on page 283, focusing in part on King
Philip’s Cave and King Philips Rocks in Sharon, Massachusetts. With regard to these sites, she writes the
following: “Some have used astronomical theory, coupled with the use of global
positioning and geographic information systems, in attempts to make the case
that such rock clusters and caves form sight lines in the direction of
important solar events, such as summer and winter solstices, usually around
June 21 and December 21, marking the longest and shortest days of the year… In
contrast Onkwe Tasi, a Native American and longtime resident of Dracut,
Massachusetts, reported that ‘indigenous New Englanders did not construct stone
structures to calculate celestial , solar or lunar change.’ Instead they relied upon the variety of
predictive faunal, floral, and climatic cues, marking transitions between
seasons. Tasi claimed his ancestors had
no need for elaborate stone calendars, and that he knew of no contemporary Native
groups using sites with stone piles, stone walls, outcrops, or boulders for
ceremonial purposes. Trudie Lamb
Richmond has echoed Tasi’s comments regarding local indigenous use of natural
phenomena rather than stone calendars.
The Agawam calendar supports this claim, and many professional
researchers agree. Still, this does not
negate the fact that some stone formations reflect the spirituality and ideology
of local First Nations. And there is
always the possibility that in the distant (and now forgotten) past some
indigenous peoples did use stone sight lines to mark important celestial
events. Patrician Rubertone refers to
these cultural stone monuments as ‘memory keeping places,’ mnemonic devices
that link tribal members to their ancestral history and to each other.”
I think the presence of alignments is real and can be demonstrated. It is just that I do not think it is the "be all/end all" of ceremonial stonework.
ReplyDeleteI think alignments are real, too. I just don't believe that Mavor and Dix made a good case for it with the Upton Chamber.
ReplyDeleteOnkwe Tasi, who is a Mohawk (not local to New England) is not necessarily a reliable source on these matters. The Hammonassett Line, which follows a solstice alignment very precisely, is quite convincing!
ReplyDeleteBut the overwhelming majority of stone structure sites in my inventory do not have discernible archaeoastronimical orientations.
Curt, I am not convinced of the Hammonassett Line. I know of no research where off-line locations were systematically eliminated.
ReplyDeleteHerman Bender had some interesting thoughts about some cultural landscape alignments that included stars and stones. Rather than a calendar, it was a way of being "centered in the universe." You don't have to be witnessing the events at the moment they happen to be "centered," natural features and placed stones letting you know where to stand or sit. In the "orchard" that I suspect to be the burial grounds there's a group of stones that includes a standing stone at about where summer solstice sunset lines up when viewed from another boulder while the equinox sunsets happen above yet another boulder that marks the triangulation. I'm going to guess that something like that in a burial ground may have something to do with ceremony related to death rather than when is a good time to plant corn.
ReplyDeleteOne page 133 of the Kreisberg book just out, he shows a map of the supposed line emanating from "near Montauk" to Devil's Tombstone in the Catskills, a push pin at about the halfway point, presumably a standing stone on Bethlehem Rd. in Woodbury CT. If there was a significant standing stone, I'd know about it, and probably would have shown you three when you were here or shown you a photo after all these years. He may be referring to something else in my yard or the Line is extremely wide. He says the width varies, which sort of ruins the whole line concept for me. You are missing a whole lot of stonework if you are looking at that single line.
Great read. Thanks for this.
ReplyDeleteI have proposed for quite some time an experiment in which people placed on the line walk off it perpendicularly in both directions and record all the stonework they find. That will give us a better idea of how real the line is. But from what I've seen, there are about 50 sites very directly on the line and rather few off it.
ReplyDeleteSo, do you believe the Hammonasset Line is a Ley line that people just sense when they're on it? And if the line begins at Montauk, Long Island, how did the Native Americans plot it across Long Island Sound, without the aid a compass, etc.? We're so used now to maps, Google Earth, etc to plot alignments.. But the Native American inhabitants a thousand or so years ago, had only their eyes to plot a point in the far distance. I'd just like an explanation of how the Hammonasset Line supposedly works.
ReplyDeleteNorman: playing devil's advocate, you might line up the end of Long Island (Montauq Point) with something, if you are high enough up to see it. I think that might get a "line" started.
ReplyDelete