In 2008, TRC’s Atlanta office has been working on a stream of large pipeline projects across the Southeast and into the Great Plains, continuing with the kind of projects that kept us busy in 2007. In addition to survey and testing for the various pipelines, TRC has carried out a number of other out-of-state projects with interesting findings to be published when client confidentiality restrictions are lifted. Locally in Georgia, smaller survey projects have taken crews to various parts of the state from Gwinnett County in the northeast to Taylor County in the south.

One notable project in Georgia in February was a Phase I archaeological survey of 375 acres proposed for a gypsum disposal area for Georgia Power’s Plant Scherer in Monroe County, Georgia, followed by test excavations at two sites. The study area included a rock pile site (9MO485) on Berry Creek originally recorded by Dean Wood. The site was revisited in 1992 and tested within a narrow area of impacts by Christopher Espenshade with negative results. However, in view of recent discussions about the possible significance of rock piles in the Georgia Piedmont, the site was again recommended potentially eligible for the NRHP. TRC was authorized to test the site once more in March.

Under the direction of Jim D’Angelo, the site was tested and remapped using a Trimble Geo XT GPS unit in order to show any obvious patterns from which a hypothesis of design could be inferred as Dick Jefferies and Paul Fish had done with Plant Scherer sites 9MO152 and 9MO153. The piles are located along a 10-20 degree slope between a logging road and the level floodplain of Berry Creek. Although not all the piles were measured, they range from as small as about 1 √ó 1 m to about 3 √ó 1.5 m and stand from 0.5 to 1 m high as measured from the downslope ground level.

Sterling Howard and Elizabeth Stipek excavating a rock pile at 9MO487, with other piles visible in the background.

Three rock piles were selected for partial excavation, and two 50-cm diameter shovel tests were excavated on a boulder outcrop associated with the site. No artifacts or associated features were found, and the boulder outcrop was determined to be natural. TRC concluded that there was no apparent pattern to the distribution of the rock piles that would suggest a ceremonial purpose as had been suggested for 9MO152 and 9MO153. Rather, the size and location of the piles suggests that they represent wagonloads of rock that were dumped in connection with the clearing of fields, most probably from the upper part of the ridge just east of the site.

Tom Gresham talking about rock pile sites at the February GARS meeting.

The Gwinnett Archaeological Research Society has moved their monthly meeting date to the first Wednesday of the month, but is still meeting 7:30 to 9:00 PM in the Gwinnett County Justice and Administration Building, 75 Langley Road, Lawrenceville. In February we had a stimulating presentation by Tom Gresham of Southeastern Archeological Services, Inc., on north Georgia’s enigmatic rock piles, the epicenter of which, we learned, is Gwinnett County. The March 5 speaker was Jack Wynn who spoke to the group on archaeological methods. For programs and updates on archaeological projects visit our web site at: www.thegars.org.

Work at Fort Daniel resumed in February with an expansion of the site grid onto the adjoining property. Results of metal detection survey on these additional 6000 square feet were meager with only four artifacts that could be from the period. As the tract that contains the archaeological site is again for sale, a committee to “save” Fort Daniel has been formed in cooperation with the Gwinnett Historical Society (GHS), and others. The effort includes descendants of Major General Allen Daniel, a militiaman who served at the fort. The Southeast Region of the Archaeological Conservancy (TAC) will be helping with the effort.

For Archaeology Month, GARS, in cooperation with GHS, will conduct a public archaeology excavation May 3 at the historic Elisha Winn property in Dacula, at the Creekside Rock Shelter. The Winn House will also be open for tours and there will be an exhibit of artifacts from GARS’ survey and excavations on the property.

If you want to have some fun trying to identify mystery artifacts visit our website here.

Introduction

The current owner of a 700-acre ranch on Pigeon Mountain, Walker County, bought the property in 1948 from a Euro- American family that owned it since the late 1830s. This family had a tradition that there were already stone piles on the land when their ancestors first took possession of it. Taken at face value, this tradition implies that Cherokee Indians that lived in the area prior to removal could have piled the stones. This short article presents ethno-historic eyewitness accounts and tentative archaeological evidence that historic period Cherokee Indians could indeed have piled these stones.

Historic eyewitness accounts

In the mid-eighteenth century, the trader Adair (1930:193– 194) observed, “every Indian traveler as he passes that way throws a stone on the place…In the woods we often see innumerable heaps of small stones in those places, where according to tradition some of their distinguished people were either killed, or buried, till the bones could be gathered.” Adair’s statement that “they continue to raise and multiply heaps of stones” suggests that this practice was still in vogue as he traveled through the southeastern United States between 1735 and 1775. At a place along the trading path in North Carolina where General Middleton killed a great number of Cherokee warriors, the eighteenth century naturalist Bartram (1955:283) “observed on each side of the road many vast heaps of these stones.” From these two independent sources it would appear that stone piles occurred close to Indian trails.

In the light of these accounts, ascribing the stone piles on the Walker County property to the former Indian inhabitants of the area might seem reasonable were it not for the fact that Euro-American farmers are also known to have piled stones (e.g., Gresham 1990). Euro-Americans piled stones for a variety of reasons, chief among these being clearing land for agricultural fields or for stockpiling building material. Unless stone piles contain in situ Native American Indian artifacts and/or features, archaeological identification normally depends on dates; AD 1800 being a general dividing line. Unfortunately, severe fluctuations in atmospheric radioactive carbon—roughly between 1700 and the present—make this a difficult period to date by means of the radiocarbon dating method (i.e., when calibrated against the annual tree ring curve, the “raw” radiocarbon count typically intersects the curve at two or more points). In the absence of artifacts and/or features covered by the stone piles then, dating is at best only an inconclusive alternative, leaving us with equivocal results. Nonetheless, we thought it prudent to present the dating results here as part of a growing database on stone piles in Georgia.

The site, the excavations, and the results

Open hardwoods currently cover the steep slopes on which the 28 stone features (one is a short wall) occur. As can be seen on Tommy Hudson’s sketch map, most piles occur on a slope with a northeastern aspect. All the piles are down slope from two springheads. The biggest pile occurs on the edge of the landform where it drops down to the confluence of to creeks. An empty area (indicated as “void” on the sketch map) occurs on the steep slope within a ring of piles. Most of the piles have been disturbed in one way or another.

We decided to excavate a 2 by 1 meter trench through one of the more intact piles, known as Stone Pile 8 (sketch below). Even this pile, unfortunately, has been disturbed. A depression occurred near the center of the pile and many stones from the pile were scattered on its down slope side. Excavation proceeded by first carefully removing individual stones from the pile and placing them in a “mirror-like” fashion on a ground sheet next to the trench (after excavation these stones were carefully replaced to their original positions). Removal of soil occurred in 5-centimeter thick levels. All dirt was screened through a quarter- inch mesh to facilitate artifact and charcoal recovery.

Charcoal fragments from roughly 7 centimeters below the actual ground surface were collected for identification and dating (Table 1). Leslie Raymer, ethno-botanist at New South, identified both partially and fully carbonized pine and fully carbonized hardwood in the sample. Only the fully carbonized hardwood charcoal pieces were submitted to Beta-analytic for radiocarbon dating (the small sample was dated directly via Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, or AMS). The charcoal came from a reasonable context, considering that the sample moreor- less corresponded with the deepest stones of the pile that were embedded within the dirt (in fact the charcoal came from the transition between light brown clayey loam to light gray loamy clay). Two soils samples were also collected for Oxidizable Carbon Ratio (OCR) dating (one from 5 cm deep within the clayey loam and the other from 10 cm within the loamy clay).

In terms of depth below ground surface, the two OCR samples sandwiched the AMS sample. Given that this stratigraphic succession is not the result of disturbance, it can be expected that the lowest OCR date would be earlier than the AMS date and that the upper OCR date would be the most recent. As can seen from Table 1 this expectation has been met. From the south profile it looks as if the OCR samples come from well below a stone resting on the ground surface. It is worth mentioning that this stone fell off the main pile some time in the past and is not occupying its original location. When viewed in relation to the core of the pile, as shown in the west profile, the upper OCR sample is slightly higher than the lowest stones. In terms of stratigraphic association, the charcoal came from a context related to roughly when the pile was stacked (i.e., directly in line with the very lowest stones). For this reason the AMS date is probably the best estimate of when the stones were first piled. Although the intercept of the AMS date with the calibration curve is AD 1670, other possible dates within the 1 Sigma range are equally likely. Overall, however, given the evidence presented here, we propose that a pre-Euro-American date is most likely (i.e., between AD 1660 and 1800). This would place the stone piles roughly within the time period that Adair and Bartram saw similar piles during their travels through Georgia and neighboring states.

Implications

We submit that due to the vagaries of radiocarbon dating for the late-eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the date ascribed to the stone pile is not conclusive. Moreover, the stone pile showed signs of disturbance and it is indeed possible that charred tree roots were dated that might not have much to do with the time when the stones were stacked. Unfortunately, in the absence of features and artifacts from the stone pile, assessment of its authorship remains equivocal. There is nevertheless the tantalizing possibility that these piles indeed date to a time when they were ethnographically linked to the Southeastern Indians. Similar to the eyewitness accounts that suggest stone piles occurred next to Indian trails, the stone pile concentration recently investigated in Walker County occur on an old trail that runs through a nearby gap through Pigeon Mountain. This trail links a big Woodland and Mississippian period site at the eastern base of the limestone ridge with a desolate plateau to the west. The trail passes a prehistoric pecked rock art site in cliffs overlooking the gap and the stone pile site reported here. In other parts of Georgia, prehistoric pecked rock art and stone pile sites also occur in or near mountain gaps through which old trails passed. Viewed in terms of Southeastern Indian beliefs, such locales are very likely transition points on the landscape between the world of the living to the east and the world of the dead to the west (e.g., Mooney 1982:18).

References cited

Adair, J.
1930 Adair’s History of the American Indians. Edited by S.C. Williams. Promontory Press, New York.

Bartram, W.
1955 Travels of William Bartram. Edited by M. Van Doren. Dover Publications, Inc. New York.

Gresham, T.
1990 Historic Patterns of Rock Piling and the Rock Pile Problem. Early Georgia 18(1-2):1-40.

Mooney, J.
1982 The Cherokee Ball Play. The Journal of Cherokee Studies 17:10-24.

Acknowledgements

We thank the current ranch managers for allowing us to dig on their land. We deliberately left out their names and the location of their property in order to help preserve the stone piles and rock art on the ranch. Joe Joseph, President of New South Associates, Inc., is thanked for allowing Jannie Loubser the time to conduct the excavations and write-up. Marilyn Moore and Tommy Hudson from Geo-Enviro Engineering, Inc. initiated the work, provided accommodation, and paid for the dates. Leslie Raymer is thanked for identifying the charcoal samples. Jack Wynn is thanked for his badgering and Brian Thomas for his editing.

The 1990 issue of Early Georgia (volume 18) featured Thomas H. Gresham’s article “Historic Patterns of Rock Piling and the Rock Pile Problems.” In the introduction, Mr. Gresham notes:

Rock piles, a term that can be broadly applied to a wide array of prehistoric and historic features, have long been of interest to the archaeologist and the general public. Rock piles occur in many parts of the world and appear to have great time depth. Since rock piles are often one of the most conspicuous aspects of a past society (the great pyramids of Egypt being an ultimate example), they persistently provoke general curiosity and scientific interest. Although I have not attempted even a cursory cross-cultural review of rock piling or archaeological investigation of rock piles throughout the world, I believe it true to say that most rock piles that have provided evidence of function have been determined to be mortuary or funerary.

He adds that the goals of this article are:
1) formally defining categories of piled rock features;
2) discussing uncited or rarely cited studies of rock piles;
3) presenting unpublished archeological data on historic rock piles;
4) presenting documentary and ethnographic data on historic patterns of rock piling;
5) introducing new ideas on the historic origin of rock piles; and,
6) critiquing some prevalent assumptions on historic rock piling.

Mr. Gresham concludes that Georgia rock piles date to at least three major chronological periods, including, Woodland, protohistoric Cherokee, and historical, and some rock pile clusters date to more than one period. He concludes that most rock piles made during the historical period date to the early, frontier days when the land was being cleared and improved to make agricultural fields. He believes that apparent distribution patterns of rock pile in clusters can be subjective and very misleading. Nevertheless, Mr. Gresham thinks most rock piles in Georgia were constructed in prehistory, although some excavated rock piles certainly have firm evidence of historic period construction.

To download a PDF of this article, Historic Patterns of Rock Piling and the Rock Pile Problems, click here.