Battered Boulders All That Remain Of Famous Boundary

 

Carven Field Stones Amid Woodbridge Thickets Stand as Silent Guardians of Line Established by First Colonial Surveyors — Penalty Prevents Removal

New Haven Register November 26, 1933

 “It seems that back in 1933 lifelong Woodbridge resident S. J. Peck had finally uncovered a bit of Woodbridge history he had been searching more than 20 years to find — one of the boundary stones set out in 1672 to mark the border between what was then the Milford Colony and the New Haven Colony. These two colonies each held claims to the land that would one day be joined together to become the Town of Woodbridge when it was established in 1784. 

http://www.townhistory.org/ancient-boundary-markers/

 Looking at my photos, I observe that the 1933 newspaper image has been reversed when I match it up with my looking in a southerly direction capture: 

https://wakinguponturtleisland.blogspot.com/2009/05/aka-lodge.html

Some commentary on aggressive grooming of stone structures - from Mark Starr

I was forwarded a Facebook exchange on the subject of "aggressive" rock pile grooming. By "aggressive" I mean removing all the organic material that has accumulated on top of a stone structure - leaving only bare ("sweaty") rocks. I occasionally see pictures of piles that have been groomed like that and I refuse to publish the pictures and write the sender that they should stop doing that. This is not the only sort of vandalism that is done under the umbrella of destroying things in order to preserve them. Anyway, the following, from Mark Starr, is extremely well said: 

When you strip all of that material from the boulders you leave all those stones highly vulnerable to sliding off the next time a branch hits it or ice and rain coat it, or even from squirrels hopping across them, especially the ones on slopes as in your photos. All that moss and lichen not only help define their antiquity, but act as glue, holding them in place. What you learn by doing that is almost nothing, as the stones have undoubtedly shifted already over time, and their position can be modeled without removing everything holding them in place. You also ruin the possibility for modern dating techniques such as OSL to be used. It may satisfy your personal curiosity but ruins the science to be done in the future. Nearly everything you show are simply stones placed by human hands randomly on the boulder. The significance was the act of placing them. While some were undoubtedly placed in significant patterns, nearly all of your photos simply show random placement, which is obvious without removing moss, lichen, leaf clutter, etc.. If your photos survive, all we will have is what they once looked like. I really wish you would stop doing this to satisfy personal curiosity. Removing everything around the stones no matter how carefully or respectfully still leaves them highly vulnerable, and non-destructive documentation techniques exist that don't cause this harm. I can always tell where you've been in the woods, and the cairns stripped of their patina give modern hikers the impression they should get in on the fun by adding to them or restacking them. I know you mean well and are doing it for what you feel are the right reasons, but you are nonetheless leaving a trail of destruction the future won't be able to study. Science isn't served in any way by showing the stripped surfaces you leave behind.

[here some back-and forth, then continuing....]

I am only interested in the long-term preservation of the stonework. As XXX is working on his own property he can do as he wishes. I don't think that gives him the right to do what he wants wherever he goes. Right or wrong, even the tribes don't have a say in the matter off their own property. So that's one thing.

The more important thing is still the long term preservation of these objects. Archaeologists were taking cairns apart for years trying to find the prize inside. They were eventually stopped from doing this because first off, there was no prize inside, and secondly, no real science was being done. They learned the lesson at least If you clean off 12,000 boulders to see randomly placed stones on top and you can't figure out what's going on by then, perhaps you should stop doing it, at least until you can figure it out. In most cases, all you can do is speculate with the info supposedly gathered. what little has been learned from all of this was largely known a long time ago. Yes, a ton of speculation has been produced. So that's the second thing. Even archeologists leave much of any site undone for the future - for more advanced techniques and technology to come along and do a better job. How many times have we regretted past archaeological digs that destroyed evidence they didn't think possible to analyse? Is 12,000 examples not enough?

Thirdly, there are ways of gathering what little info that has been gathered without resorting to what is being done. There is a difference in removing branches, sticks, and this year's dropped leaves from a cairn (or any other structure) and stripping off all of the materials as seen in his photos. Everything that may have been measurable and provided clues in the future has been erased. They never thought of studying seeds or pollen in the past because they couldn't imagine the future. What don't we know now that's just around the corner? DNA is now pulled from once unimaginable sources. Those opportunities are now gone with his work. Okay, you want to try and figure out something. How many chances do you get? If what you are learning is that people placed stones on boulders you can do that without destructive techniques. If its buried, and you absolutely must know there are buried stones there and how they were placed, yes, you might have to uncover them. But what protected them for you to get that opportunity, and more importantly can it be done in other ways that leave them in the best state currently possible for the future? I think we should always be looking to preserve as much as we can for the future. With these particular cases, the ratio of knowledge gained to possible loss is unreasonable. We can scan these structures and get far more information about them than he is collecting without touching them.

So is this practice causing harm? Simply looking at the photos he posts makes it more than obvious. All of the glue that has held them together - moss, lichen, leaf clutter, etc., etc., is now gone. Just look at the stones on the sloping edges and tell me they are less vulnerable than they were. Yes, they were falling apart even with the glue, but now it will be far more rapid. My original post was because I came home that day having seen this in action. Someone had cleared out a vertical split in a boulder and after the last big rain storm we had you could see all of the washout of materials at the bottom. (I'm not saying YYY did this - it could be a copycat now that it's okay to do this). The split had been filled with many small stones that were now distributed all over the ground. Had the glue still been there so would they. Now I can see all of the stones that were once there, but I could have seen a whole lot of them by pulling a few leaves. What did I learn? There were a lot of types of stones placed in the split. I pretty much knew that without having to see them spilled out, and would have known that by pulling a few leaves. The future will not know this. So there are photos of it. And when the hard drive fails that stored them goes or someone tosses it out who didn't think they were important then what? I've worked in museums and I know what happens to ephemeral information. I worked for a museum for 20 years producing 3d models of objects in the collection. They paid a lot of money for me to do so, and shortly after I left they threw out my computer as IT didn't know what it was!

So what are the proper channels he's gone through? I know Doug Harris has repeatedly said in public not to touch them, as have the other tribal preservation officers I know. If he would let me with who has cleared him to do this that represents all the tribes I'd be satisfied and I can take it up with them. But in the long run, what is the goal? He states he is trying to hopefully reacquaint the tribes with their ancestors stone creations (see his full quote above). A nobel cause I'm sure, but does what he's doing do anything more than simply photographing them and sending those to them do? I know nothing I say or write is going to change what he does. Its always easy to justify what we want to do - just look at the fate of the indigenous peoples since the arrival of Europeans. Now however, with the internet, everyone and who feels they need to know what's under those leaves now has a license to do the same, and it doesn't bode well for these structures future.

Ceremonial Stonework

 The Enduring Native American Presence on the Land with Markham Starr

November 22, 2022 @ 6:30 pm – 7:30 pm

    Markham Starr will present his slideshow that takes the audience on an extended walk through the woods to see the ceremonial stonework left behind by the indigenous population that occupied New England for 12,000 years. While Native American stonework is widely recognized in other sections of the United States, New England’s stonework remains obscure, having blended back into the woods. This slideshow  contains photographs of objects and ceremonial sites in Connecticut and Rhode Island and information on how to find them.

https://www.lymepl.org/event/ceremonial-stonework-the-enduring-native-american-presence-on-the-land-with-markham-starr/

Stone "ring" at Quissett

A good day in coastal Rhode Island

Chris Pittman was kind enough to share some of the sites he has located. Locating the sites is the hard part. Looking straight down at the ground is the easy part and I had a good day. Nonetheless I feel that these are really his arrowheads:

He calls the material of the upper right, stemmed point "Attleboro Rhyolite". I call it, more vaguely, "Wamsutta Formation". 

The quartz triangles are very common in this area, and I was wondering if triangles aren't the easiest thing to make from a crystal with hexagonal cleavage.

We're all grifters now

 

Ethics of private collecting (of fossils)

Eerily parallel with the ethical issues surrounding making rock pile sites public. The main difference is that you can sell fossils but you cannot sell rock piles. [This is New Zealand:]

Bones of contention: The West Coast whale fossil and the ethics of private collecting (phys.org)

Video of previous Acton Library Talk

They recorded last night's talk, and I am looking forward to seeing it when it appears on YouTube. Meanwhile, it is not easy to find the video from Acton TV, with my previous talk; because that is in "Acton TV Archive". Here is the link, it is a better talk than the one I gave last night, but it is context for it and contains more details. Click Here

(3) Native American Stone Structures 10/20/14 - YouTube

Peter Waksman to Talk in Acton - November 3rd

I was invited to give a talk at the Acton, MA Library. The title is 

"The History of the Ceremonial Stone Landscape Movement - a Local Perspective".

The talk is at 7:30 PM on Thursday November 3. I am told this will also be available on ZOOM as part of the "Friends of Pine Hawk" Lecture Series. Note: to join via ZOOM, you have to register. See:

2022 Fall Programs – Friends of Pine Hawk

I intend to tell the story from my point of view, and spend about half the time speaking about ethical issues that surround the topic - for instance: who has the moral authority and who has the intellectual authority to determine how sites will are treated by society.

Roadside Segment of Stones (Watertown CT)

 Indigenous Stonework, a Qusukqaniyutôk, in the Paugussett Homeland

https://wakinguponturtleisland.blogspot.com/2022/10/roadside-segment-of-stones-watertown-ct.html

Red Wing MN - The Goodhue County Historical Museum

We went to the museum as a follow up to visiting some of the "cairns". I wanted to see info about the geology of the area, maybe an arrowhead or two, and perhaps more info about the rock piles. I was well served.

Apparently there were more mounds in Red Wing than anywhere else in the US. This map, although wrong, has some important details:

Later on, I looked at this pretty carefully. The little "stars" represent "cairns" and I count 12 of them in the lower portion of the diagram. 

My guess is that after visiting this museum, a visitor will be more confused about the Indians than before they visited. To my mind, the way the rock piles are all on one (western) side of the river; the way they are all up on bluffs but few of the earthen mounds are up there; the way some of them are clearly much older than others, says to me that this is not all the same Indians - the past is not all one, white-washed, uniformity. What he have here, along the Mississipi, is: earlier people, replaced by mound builders, replaced by the Dakota Sioux. They use the label Silvernale and manage to mix together [or at least fail to create meaningful boundaries between] just about everybody who ever happened to paddle by on the river. In more recent times this was a place somewhat between the Athabascan Sioux, the Algonquian Chippewa, and the people from down south (not sure "Natchez" is the right term). Today, I wonder if the Sioux are happy to be confused with the people who made the many mounds, shown dotting the map.

Another thing I would quibble with is the idea that these "cairns" are all the same. I found three distinct types of structures on that one hill (not counting the 'alignment'). None of them could have ever looked like that fat 'biscuit' that we see in the old black and white photo. Behold the entire poster:

Two details:

Wow, those earthen mounds must have really been something. Quoting the poster, quoting Edward Schmidt in 1939: 

What shall we say of a state that allows such a display of prehistoric monuments to be utterly destroyed?

It might as well be Massachusetts, as far as that goes.

As for arrowheads, the display furthers the confusion about the variety of people from the past, with a photo of an old gentleman proudly holding his best paleo point. But they displayed the results of more recent digs.

What I am seeing is mostly side-notched points from the same style as mound builders and Mayans. Presumably these are the "Middle Mississippian" arrowheads. Ignoring the curious expertise that allows them to date rocks while ignoring the archaeological context they are found in, I can still say - why did they mung it all together? Adding, that the lighting was such that, if you bent over to look closely, you blocked the light and could not see anything. 

In spite of my bitching, it was a gorgeous little exhibit, within a beautifully appointed County Museum. They had dollars to spare. 

When I look carefully at the red dots and stars on the map, although it is hard locating the landform of the "Spring Creek Prairie" conservation land, I don't see any sign of 5 (or six) piles close to each other, nor any sign of the lone mound at the end of the ridge. In fact it is somewhat impossible to match the bluffs shown on the survey map with today's topographical map. But it sure does leave me wanting to go back and try to get some things right. 

Visiting Red Wing MN - finding the cairns

We woke up in Lake City, south of Red Wing, to a day with the first snowfall. Trying to decide whether to go walking outside, we had nothing to do except drive back to the Twin Cities for dinner. So we decided to forgo the hunt for Tundra swans that were said to be migrating through at the time.

What the heck - we decided to hike in spite of it raining and spitting snow. As it turns out my wife and I have good luck when out in the rain by ourselves.

There is some tourist info, and a couple of YouTubes, but the best info available for locating the famous "Red Wing Cairns" was something I linked to long ago, that came from Norman Muller:

https://rockpiles.blogspot.com/2008/04/red-wing-cairns.html

With this in hand, and a local map showing a bona fide conservation land, we went to "Spring Creek Prairie". There was a road that took us up to the top of the bluffs [that is the geology of Red Wing, where the land along the Mississippi is several hundred feet lower than the surrounding country]. 

After a few steps down the main trail, I headed left into the woods to see what I was dealing with. I thought I would come to the edge of the bluff but the land slopes more gradually on the western side of these bluffs.

So I came to the first rock I saw on the surface since arriving in Minnesota. What do you know, it was part of an "alignment" - a curved course of evenly spaced rocks. Just like "marker piles", the basic layout is familiar to me. 

There was an old trail back in there which we followed until I got worried we were getting too far from the main trail. We got back to it and followed it down and over to a high hill. You kind-of knew you were getting to the place. 

A beautiful side valley, not visible from the Mississippi. And there are the rock piles in the bushes:

I don't know if anyone cares about my observations but there seems to be quite a lot of misinformation out there - starting with the original surveys from 1903. One bit of misinformation is that these cairns are completely vandalized. I am not so sure because there is no sign of other rocks lying around the damaged cairns. What you'll see in these videos is five tightly grouped "cairns" around a central hole - that is dug into the bedrock - and a possible sixth pile that is completely gone. I always kick myself later for not paying attention to the exact details that I went there hoping to see. Ah well! With videos, at least we can take a better look around:

And 

I will say that these "cairns" were faintly donut-like. Yet I do not want to believe these are burials. There is another possibility - that building a small rock piles, you do not need to fill the center as you build up a 'circle" of walls.

There was a distinctly astronomical feel to the place. I have never seen such closely spaced piles. AND I found another of those curved - "marker pile" - alignments, hiding in the grass there. Here is five "in a row", quite similar to what I found at the start of the walk:

According to (me), this only works to mark the passage of time if there is a shadow source that casts its shadow, more or less perpendicular to the 'alignment'. Only thing up there that would make such a shadow is the "cairns" at the top of the hill. So burials - maybe - or part of an astronomical arrangement. 

In fact there were lots of other little rock piles around that have not been noted:

Let me call your attention to the sharp little "bump" at the end of the ridge on the left. On closer inspection, it was the largest "cairn" around. But old and covered with grass and flowers:

Sadly, I could not find this on the 1903 survey or on the more recent poster from Norman.

It is a totally beautiful spot. Rock piles at the edge of the prairie. The grass/flower combo is natural prairie. But all other places have been erased. This is just a little patch of what used to be everywhere.

Looking back, this is the hilltop with the "cairns":

Here, we have scrub oak in the foreground, other oaks in the background, and a tiny peek at the distant highpoint with the small birch tree.

What a place. A couple other pics:

Look at the "line" of ridge and pile, aiming away towards the southwest.

It is so tempting to go back and look for the other cairn sites. According to the poster, there are seven other places with rock piles. According to the 1903 survey (coming up next when we visit the local county museum) there are 10 cairns located around Red Wing. 

My sense is that no-one has looked that closely for things. Except where it has been plowed [apparently nearly everywhere] there are very likely to be small piles on all the bluffs around here. The 1903 survey was busy looking for village sites and earthen mounds. They did a mediocre job with the "cairns". [To be continued.]

We found some of the Red Wing Cairns - appetizer

There is more to come, but this is my best picture. The mound at the end of the ridge my wife is standing on, is another larger, undisturbed rock pile - with grass on it. I wonder if other people noticed it and, frankly I cannot reconcile this with a map of mounds I'll show later:

That is the original prairie.

Retaining Walls (and a Woodbridge CT mention)

    The sentence in bold, italicized letters - also in parentheses - is my own editorial addition. -Tim

“To know New England well, one must know its stone walls,” claims Robert M. Thorson, author of the definitive history Stone by Stone (2002).”

  “According to Thorson, New England’s soil wasn’t rocky enough to support the building of stone walls before the arrival of colonists, who clear-cut the land.  That exposure, coinciding with a period of colder, drier winters in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, caused the ground to freeze to a greater depth. Conditions “worked together to accelerate the heaving of stones from the soil,” Thorson writes. Combine those circumstances with a dearth of wood for fencing—since forests had been cleared for farms and fuel—and the stone wall was born…”

   (Thorson believes, without evidence other than folklore about Yankee Exceptionalism, that:)

  "Most of our stone walls were built between the American Revolution and the advent of the railroad, when settlers moved from the coast into the rocky uplands and property ideals shifted from the communal to the private, Thorson explains. However, some stone walls in southern Connecticut date to the colonial era. Early on, Thorson says, farmers simply rolled stones into piles in the middle of their fields…The strongest kind, “disposal walls,” were constructed of two parallel walls with stone fill between them. Then there were “walking walls” with “broad capstones… laid flat, like a sidewalk,” Thorson writes."

“English-style” is the way one Woodbridge resident describes that same type of wall. I meet him one icy afternoon while I’m taking photographs and he’s walking with his dog. He rebuilt his own wall, he tells me, from the tumbledown remnants lining his small stretch of Sperry Road. He points east toward the Glen Lake reservoir, just over the rise. When the water is low, he says, old stone walls can be seen in the flooded valley.

“Left untended, every wall will come apart,” Thorson tells us. Some are even plundered, with or without landowners’ permission, to be sold at rates around $200 per ton, according to an Internet search. While Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Rhode Island have protected their stone walls with legislation, Connecticut hasn’t, though they “may be protected under historic preservation laws,” the General Assembly’s website says.

Facts may help us get to know the old walls, as Thorson insists we should. But perhaps the best way is to bundle up and walk into the woods. Rounded and flat, bramble-covered and exposed, green with moss or white with snow, you can find them there, no longer keeping cows from corn or neighbors from one another. It seems we may love them more than those who built them ever did, which makes you wonder: What casual constructions of ours will our descendants value?

Written by Kathy Leonard Czepiel. Photographed by Dan Mims. Image features a fallen tree meeting a stone wall along Route 69. This story was originally published on March 9, 2018.

https://dailynutmeg.com/2022/03/02/retaining-stone-walls-redux2/

Passing Red Wing MN, light snow.... should we go look for damaged cairns?

We have a morning to kill on the way through this part of Minnesota. But should we plan a short hike in a light snow? 

So, then...

[More later]. 

Am I crazy or is that an arrowhead made from a bottle?

I was looking very carefully at the gravel on Ram Island today. This just looks man made to me:

I am particularly suspicious of the serrations on each edge of the point, but not present on the other edges.

It is a pretty little thing. I think I'll keep it with my growing collection of broken arrowheads from Ram and Devil's Foot islands. Someday, oh yes! someday, I will find a complete, un-broken and unimpeachable point. In the meantime, it is always fun looking at the gravel on the corner of Ram that is closest to the gut. I have been finding broken bases of Merrimack points there and larger, axe-like, items on the opposite side of the island.

Two thousand year old hunter's blinds from the Yukon

(From Alan P) I wrote to you a while back about the effort to protect the Archaic site in Northampton where the city and state intended to construct a roundabout and I want to thank you for taking up the issue with your readers.  The project's now on hold as you know, hopefully permanently but we will see. Anyway I thought of you and your blog again recently when I noticed something interesting in this video (though perhaps you've already seen it?):

The Mystery Of The 2,000-Year-Old Tools Frozen In The Yukon | Secrets From The Ice | Timeline - YouTube

It shows horseshoe shaped stone constructions positively known to have been used as hunting blinds by caribou hunters in the Yukon up until recent times. To my eye they resemble similar structures found in the hills here in New England. Given that this land was also caribou country thousands of years ago, with the same landscape and ice features present, it may point to the function of at least some of those found here imo. They're briefly discussed starting about the 11 minute mark but I think you'll find the whole video fascinating, especially while keeping possible clues about post-glacial lifeways in our area in mind. Take care,

Stemmed Point (broken) from Woods Hole

A nice material, a bit of almost pure feldspar, from the "pink" granite we have around here. It is actually a single feldspar crystal. I found three broken bases on Ram Island today of different materials. This was the nicest.

(Sorry about the background blues lesson)

In the footprints of Mavor and Dix - but ending up in a different place

I have been trying to find the place in Freetown that they write about in Manitou. Those familiar with the book will recall they excavated one rock pile there, under the theory that destroying one was justified if it helped protect the others. I think they did succeed in protecting the sites. But where are they? The only clue I have was that the "Bolton Cedar Swamp" was to the southeast. Turning this around, northwest of the Bolton Cedar Swamp is a pretty big area of woods. So I have been dipping my toes into various woods over there - about 45 minutes drive from home. I keep finding sites this way. But they do not match what is described in Manitou.

A couple of things make this chapter of my exploration different from previous ones. Following in someone else's footprints takes away some of the triumph of discovery and adds a burden of secrecy that I am not used to. I believe that whoever first discovers a site has, by definition, the right to keep it secret. And you don't go telling other people's secrets, if you happen to discover them. Also, a quick look at the map of Freetown State Forest shows there is a Wampanoag Reservation and a Watuppa Reservation on the western side of the forest. I imagine local Indians wanting to keep these sites to themselves. So I am inclined to keep quiet about where these Freetown sites are located. But the one I just visited is several miles east of those reservations, and it is clearly different from what Mavor and Dix described

The pile they excavated had large amounts of red ocher (hematite) incorporated in the pile. They also found some rather mysterious, semi religious, objects, like an quartz "owl" effigy. I come away with a strong sense of secrecy, privacy, and spirituality surrounding these sites. All of which makes we think I should tread carefully - which is very contrary to the impulse to communicate and share these sites. So much so, that I take a moment to wonder: are they right to take on a cloak of spirituality in their report? Consider the title "Manitou" itself. Is this appropriate? Are they discussing someone else's spirituality or are they appropriating a bit of it to make their point? 

It doesn't matter so much except that I have to decide what to report and what to keep quiet about. The site I explored in eastern Freetown is several miles away from the Wampanoag Reservation, and did not match the hints provided in Manitou. Here are some mismatches: (1) They describe an area of small cedar swamps, interrupted by higher ground. (2) The sites are facing southeast, located at the southern ends of the little swamps. (3) They show a photo of what must have been a good sized, tall, rock piles. (4) They report that these are not burials.

The mismatches are: (1) I have yet to see any cedar swamps, or white cedar trees. (2) The sites I have found (especially the one reported below) are not facing southeast. (3) I am seeing some similar, good sized piles, but I am also seeing quite a lot of other things; most notably (4) Oh yes some of those are burials.

So, I will keep quiet about sites nearer to the Wampanoag Reservation, and you can let me know in comments if you feel the world would be better off knowing about the following place or not. Mavor and Dix did not find this place. It is along Rt 140, northwest of the Bolton Cedar Swamp. It is a small woods, circled by private property, bordered by the highway and a bit inaccessible. I snuck in from the south via a solar panel array.

Walked north, along the left side of the array and, wanting to get into the woods, I dove in near the top of the array. Of course there were hints of ceremonialism, right there in the woods:

Looking back towards the opening of the solar panel array: we see two "rock-on-rock" lining up with a larger boulder in the background. 

There were a few other things here and there but I was hoping to find what was discussed in Manitou so I continued north following the easier footing of an old road. My expectation was that any site that had been visited a few times would have some kind of a trail leading to it. So when I spotted a footh path heading east up the outcrops, I followed in up and northeast over towards the traffic sounds from Rt 140. But after a few minutes the trail disappeared and I was disappointed with what was to be seen along the higher ground, so I headed back downhill (west) and, started seeing rock piles along the foot of the slope, just before the ground became lower, wetter, swampier. 

Here we are looking south, with the slope to the left and the swamp to the right. You can see it is pretty old and tumbled down. It must have been quite "busy" at some point:

Come to look around a bit, this almost looks as "busy" as Parker Woodland.

I proceeded north and another collection of ruins appeared. This was all around an old "foundation", as follows:

Seen from the other direction:

There were two "holes" with a collapsed central structure - a chimney and hearth?

All around the foundation were a variety of features, including large piles along the slope - more or less evenly spaced:

Linear features - in this case ending in what I took to be a mound with hollows, and perhaps a standing stone:

Speaking of standing stones, I saw several examples of "manitou" stones propped against piles. I usually do not credit this idea but I have to admit, it seems real, when you see enough examples:

In the last example, the pile itself is curious. A kind of "dented trapezoid"; with no hollow. That is not familiar to me. Maybe the 6th picture from this Parker Woodland report (click here).

As for there being "burials", you know what I think about this:

Later, as I walked around, I saw a number of things that I think of as the oldest kind of burial: a place between rocks, covered with a bit material - now gone. For example:

And this, which seems unmistakeable.

I believe the remnants are very long gone from these places and it only makes sense to honor them. 

Plenty of nicely preserved old piles:

and at least one pile that looked like it might be an effigy, with a pointy head, nearest to the camera:

As I walked back out, I saw a few other things scattered about in the low lands:

And who doesn't like to see an occasional boulder arrangement:

All and all an interesting place.