|
Stone was taken or used by two different cultures on site; Native American Indians and Euro-Americans. Native Americans split and pried off surface stone to use as building material for their structures. Euro-Americans split off and/or removed stone used in these structures to sell. Examples of each culture’s splitting methods will be presented. However, emphasis in this article is being placed on Euro-American splitting and removal. Native American’s use of stone will be forthcoming in a new book called, America’s Stonehenge Deciphered.
Native American Stone Quarrying
An example of Native American stone quarrying is seen in bedrock on west side of Tall Wall. Along edge of raised bedrock is a length where a large slab was split off and pried loose. Edge has marks where it had been pounded on to deepen a probable natural fracture line. (Fig. 1) This large slab became the roof slab on the Sundeck Chamber next to the Tall Wall.
Another example of Native American stone quarrying can be seen under the wooden platform where the Grooved Stone slab was taken from the bedrock. This slab was likewise pried loose from surface bedrock and moved a short distance to below the ramp.
An excavation west of the ramp where more stone was quarried had charcoal still in situ that is still in its original place from where stone was heated to make it easier to remove. The charcoal was C14 dated to 2120 B.P. (NEARA Bulletin v. 6 no. 1 pp. 20) The date correlates with the late Early Woodland period which places Native Americans on site and quarrying stone at that time. Another C14 date acquired from charcoal found mixed into soil behind the collapsed chamber dates to 2995 B.P. This charcoal was mixed in with “numerous fired-burned sharp-edged spalls from granite quarrying, as well as, charcoal flecks. Associated with the spalls were three stone tools; a broken pick, a hammerstone and a handscraper.” (Early Sites Bulletin v. 5 no. 1 pp. 24) This pushes Native American stone quarrying of granite back to late Terminal Archaic period.
Historic Stone Splitting Methods*
Circa 1803-5 two stone splitting methods took hold and became the industry standards. One was a new method developed in Quincy, Massachusetts it was the flat wedge method. Second was a revised method of the small round hole. This method also made it debut in Quincy, Massachusetts. Within twenty years these two methods were in wide spread use throughout New England. They were used by commercial stone quarrymen and by farmers looking to supplement their income in splitting surface ledge or large boulders on their farms.
Flat wedge method consisted of narrow trapezoid holes placed every four inches across whole face of stone, covering area to be split from top to bottom. (Fig. 2) Half a wedge hole is flat with a wider top usually with flared out corners and a slightly narrower bottom edge. (Fig. 3) The tool used to make this type of hole is a cape chisel. (Fig. 4)
Revised round hole method drilled small ¾” to 1” diameter holes every six to seven inches apart, across whole face of stone, covering area to be split from top to bottom or edge to edge if on a bar. (Fig. 5) This was an upgrade from the two-hole method which placed holes irregularly on a stone. (Fig. 6) The old late 1700’s method actually used one to three holes on boulders and were placed where the person thought the stone might split. The method was only used on boulders it was not used on long bars or large slabs of stone.
*For a full history see The Art of Splitting Stone (2nd Edition).
Types of holes at America’s Stonehenge
Two types of drilled holes from post 1805 were found on site the flat wedge and round hole. Flat wedge is on a single slab. Round holes are more common. They were used to split slabs, for pegs, and guy wire tie downs. Several sizes were encountered 1/2 inch, 5/8 inch, 1 inch, and 1½ inch. There was no consistency in round hole size. One round hole was chiseled out to create a small square hole. It is found in a stone bar inside the Sunken Courtyard.
A third type of hole called a derrick post hole was used on site. (Fig. 7) Derrick post holes were created by chiseling out a three-sided square-shaped hole. Fourth side was left open presumably to slide the tall derrick shaft into the hole. Sizes varied from hole to hole, 9”x9”x9”x3”, 8”x4”x1½”, 8”x10”x10x1”, 7”x16”x4”, and 10”x?x12”x2½”. There was no consistency in derrick post hole size.
Placement and Layout of Derrick Post Holes and Round Holes (used to support derricks)
Two derrick post holes were carved out of bedrock twelve feet from East-West Chamber. One of those derrick holes (#5 on sketch map) is thirty inches (under 3 feet) from corner of split off stone slab (Mensal stone) which juts out. Prior to being split off the slab jutted out further. On the split off section are three small round holes spaced 7 inches apart. (Fig. 8) Overall the slab is 9 feet 10 inches long. That places three holes across only 14 inches of its overall length. The three drilled holes placed together would not have been enough to split a nearly ten foot long slab. Those three holes would have been capable of splitting off a small section that probably jutted out farther and interfered with derrick placed beside end of slab. A second derrick hole (#4 on sketch map) is east of first hole and nearer the Tall Wall.
Several round holes can still be found in the bedrock to either side of derrick holes. One is at base of Tall Wall adjacent to derrick hole #4. Three other round holes are found near NW corner of Mensal Stone structure. The placement of these round holes suggests they were used for pegs to hold guy wires holding derricks.
Derrick post hole #3 is in middle of plaza south of hole #4. Derrick post hole #2 was carved into bedrock and what was thought to be bedrock but was a stone slab which moved slightly out of place. The back of hole is no longer square, it is angled. Hole #2 is next to a half-circle enclosure southwest of derrick post hole #3. Derrick post hole #1 is behind half-circle enclosure and west of derrick post hole #4.
In this area round holes are spread out. One round hole made into a small square hole and two small round holes are found inside Sunken Courtyard. (Fig. 9) A set of three round holes placed touching each other chiseled into a slot is below half-circle enclosure (east side) on bedrock. Adjacent to the chiseled slot is a line of drilled holes. A single hole was drilled into a stone slab next to derrick post hole #5. Just beyond is another large boulder with a hole drilled at two angles completely through the stone. West of that boulder is another boulder with a large bore hole that completely split the boulder. These round holes are all in proximity to derrick post hole #5 where stone was loaded into wagons. Most of the holes appear to be for pegs while angled hole through boulder was most likely used for a heavy rope or guy wire tie down.
The derrick post holes line up with each other to facilitate the moving of stone from the middle of plaza area to area on top where stone was loaded into wagons for transport.
Euro-American Stone Removal
Between 1850 and 1863 stone slabs were removed from the hilltop. (Daivd Goudsward, America’s Stonehenge: The Mystery Hill Story, 2002, pp. 60) Some appear to have been removed whole while others were split apart. Two derrick post holes were chiseled into bedrock twelve feet south of East-West Chamber, one being next to the Tall Wall. This is where confirmed stone removal took place.
A before photograph taken of East-West Chamber circa 1938 shows a single wall slab missing. There is a wall slab in place on west end and another on east end and a hole where the middle wall-slab once stood (Today it is filled with layered stone.) It can not be determined if any roof slabs are missing as chamber’s middle section had collapsed. (Fig. 10)
The Tall Wall had two large stone slabs that originally extended beyond east side of wall on its northeast end. These two slabs have half-hole quarry marks that show they were split. (Fig. 11) Top stone slab has five round holes irregularly spaced across whole length. Round holes were used in top slab after top of wall was removed. Round hole drills need to be turned after each time they are hit with a hammer. This could only be done on top slab that had an exposed surface. Slab below needed a different method. Three flat wedge holes were cut into the slab. A cape chisel used to cut flat wedge holes has a flat surface and is held upright or angled from side to side. It is not turned so the cape chisel was used to cut holes in slab below which still had the top half of other slab on top of it. Hence, the two different types of holes in each slab one on top of the other.
The placement of both round and flat wedge holes show the men had some limited knowledge of quarrying. The limited number of holes may have been a lack of equipment. The poor workmanship indicates lack of knowledge and skill.
Three stone slabs can be confirmed as having been removed from the site. Why then were the two half of slabs left in the Tall Wall? Also, why was the so-called Mensal Stone left after the tall wall above it was dismantled? What other stones slabs were left on site?
Stone Slabs Left Untouched
All together four stone slabs were left in place in the East-West Chamber. The two half slabs remain in the Tall Wall. The Mensal Stone was left in place. A good quality very large slab in roof of Sundeck Chamber plus three more slabs on top were not touched. The Grooved Stone was left untouched. A large slab standing up beside the Sundeck Chamber was left alone. A large slab standing upright beside the Sunken Courtyard and fallen roof slab in collapsed chamber remain on site. Two smaller slabs over alcove of Oracle Chamber were left alone. Sixteen large stone slabs were left on site. Several were abandoned after much work and effort had gone into getting the stone ready for removal. Why?
Stone Removed From Site Rejected
Surface stone that these structures were constructed of was being rejected in the mid 1800’s by commercial quarry operations. This type of stone is poor quality with poor splitting ability. It is often called bastard or rotten granite. The author feels once the first stone was delivered to the buyer it was rejected. At that point stone removal was abandoned on site.
Second Attempt to Remove and Sell Stone
Circa 1916 another attempt was made to salvage stone. This time the men went after stone bars. A circa 1900 photograph shows the alcove to Oracle Chamber had stone bars in top section of wall and roof slabs. (William Goodwin, Ruins of Greater Ireland in New England, 1946, pp. 81&82) Another photograph on page 71 shows the alcove with a roof slab slanting down and resting on top of wall without stone bars. The same height it is today. Since one of the two roof slabs was left in place, it suggests the bars were the intended material. These were not the only stone bars on site. Another bar is still in place in side wall of Sundeck Chamber. Other bars are on surface of bedrock out at the cliff. Again, the scenario appears to have been that stone removed from site was rejected by the buyer.
Conclusion
No stone structure on site with exception of one on west side of half-circle enclosure was completely destroyed. That structure may have been in the way of wagons used to transport stone. Tops of two large thick walls were torn down yet their slabs were left in place. A long chamber with multiple stone slabs used to construct walls has only one missing stone slab. Two excellent large thick stone slabs one in roof of Sundeck Chamber and other in the open with easy access, the Grooved Stone were never touched.
Altogether three stone slabs and a few stone bars can be confirmed as removed from the site. Those few pieces of stone represent an extremely small percentage of overall stone originally used to build the site as having been removed.
Copyright Text & Images © 2005, Mary Elaine Gage. All Rights Reserved.
|
