If anyone should ask me, “What is the
oldest known documented and archaeologically proven stone structure in Massachusetts?” I would probably have to say that I at
least think it was the Flagg Swamp Rock Shelter Stone Wall.
As Eric S. Johnson of Amherst,
Massachusetts writes in Ancient Winters:
The Archaeology of the Flagg Swamp Rockshelter Marlborough, Massachusetts
(August 2011):
“Just beneath the ground surface, the
archaeologists encountered a stone wall. The wall followed the drip line from
the western end of the rockshelter east about twenty feet, where it turned
north to meet the rear wall of bedrock. It therefore enclosed the most
protected area of the shelter. If your image of a stone wall is a retaining wall
built by a landscaper or an old field wall built by some Yankee farmer, this is
not that kind of stone wall. For one thing, the wall turned out to be, at most,
only about two feet high. Another difference was that it was made not of
fieldstones, but from large rock spalls. Spalls are pieces that split off the
rock face when water seeps into cracks and freezes and expands, breaking off
pieces of rock. This is the same way potholes form in roads over the winter.
The archaeologists figured out that the stone wall was built after the shelter
had been used for some time. They figured this out by excavating beneath the
wall and finding features and artifacts there. That meant that those features
had been created and the artifacts had been used and deposited before the wall
was built. Based on the kinds of artifacts, the archaeologists estimated that
the wall was built around 4,000 years ago, not too long after people first
began to use the rockshelter. This is the earliest known stone structure in
Massachusetts.
So why did people build this wall? Why not
just toss all the large rock spalls farther away from the protected area (as
most of them were)? Why build the wall so low? Why not build a higher wall to
make the rockshelter more weather-tight? The most likely answer is that the
wall served as a foundation. Wooden poles cut from saplings could be set
securely against the base of the wall. The wall wouldn’t have to be
particularly high for this. In fact, the reason the wall was as high as two
feet was that as sediment accumulated inside the wall (and outside too), people
added new rocks to the top of the wall to keep it above ground. The tops of the
poles were leaned against the rock ledge at the rear of the protected area.
These poles formed a framework over which people attached a covering of bark
slabs, hides, or woven mats. The Native people of southern New England used
bark slabs or woven reed mats secured to a framework of poles to make a wetu
(dwelling). With bedrock shielding the northwest, north, and northeast, and a
weathertight shelter wall to the south, people could be warm and cozy even
during the worst weather of winter. A practical feature of this shelter was
that it was adjustable. When the weather was relatively mild and sunny, the
people could easily remove and set aside the mats and poles to take advantage
of the rockshelter’s natural solar collecting properties. If the weather
changed (as it famously always does here in New England), they could quickly
reassemble the shelter to keep out the wind, rain, snow, and sleet that have
always challenged New Englanders.
(Blogging
editor’s note: The "artist and craftsman" is a long time friend named Jeff Kalin.
Visit him and his wife Judy here at their website:
Inside the stone wall the archaeologists
found dark brown or black soils rich in organic material. Within this living
area were a wide variety of artifacts including dozens of stone tools and
hundreds of stone flakes, the waste products of stone tool making. The tools
included several varieties of spearpoints, knives, scrapers, drills or awls,
hammerstones, and a fishing line sinker. There was pottery (broken pieces
called ‘sherds’), and hundreds of animal bones, whole and fragmented. There
were items made of shell, including a fishhook and a bead, and pieces of what
might have been a shell spoon or an ornament. There were hundreds of fragments
of nut shells, many of which were charred. There were many other bits of
charcoal, left from cooking fires, and evidence of the hearths in which those
fires were kindled.”
Since the results of the second phase of testing showed that the
Flagg Swamp Rockshelter was a very important site, an
important decision had to be made. The Highway Department
and State Historic Preservation Office had to decide whether
the site should be preserved and built around, or excavated and
built over. Rerouting the road was not going to be easy. On one
site was Flagg Swamp. Building the road through the swamp
would be expensive and would destroy the swamp, which was
a valuable natural resource for water quality, flood control, and
wildlife habitat. Moving the road to the north would bring it
through even more rugged terrain, greatly increasing the cost of
the project. Since the Flagg Swamp Rockshelter was a small
site, thorough excavation would not be prohibitively expensive.
Because the archaeological study was done early in the
planning process, the final dig would not delay the building of
the road. But building the road through the Rockshelter would
mean the end of the site forever. In the end, it was agreed that
the site would be excavated and its information retrieved
before it was destroyed. Archaeologists have mixed feelings
about this kind of decision. While they would prefer to save the
site for future archaeologists, they are thrilled to have the
chance to excavate it themselves...In September (1980), as summer turned to fall, the archaeologists
finished the fieldwork. A large portion of the site had been
excavated—almost all of the area under the overhang and
much of the immediate surroundings. Because the rockshelter
was so small and was slated for demolition, it was feasible to
excavate a large part of it. That fall, as highway construction
began, the Flagg Swamp Rockshelter was dynamited..."
The entire article can be read here:
No comments:
Post a Comment