Native American Rock Carvings in Pa? ..lots of pictures....looking for any info.

[DocBeav]

I came across this rock while detecting where I'm originally from in Bucks County. I had been on a friends land that I had detected a couple of times before and found a rock carving there which I had posted in the "treasure marks and signs" forum:

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/treasure-marks-signs/351817-indian-carving-colonial-quarry-marks.html

Never heard much on that one but it was in close proximity to an area that was quarried but I never found out much about it. Basically a diamond shape with what looks like "fringe" around it. Could be some kind of quarry marks or something but I just don't know.

Now, this rock is a bit different. I was moving up a small creek tributary to access another section of land (un-used township land, just adjacent to my friend's property) anbd I saw this stone sticking up straight out of the ground and from a distance it looked like a marker or headstone. Of course I made a beeline for it as it just looked out of place (there are rocks all over but this one looked "placed" or something the way it was in the ground). It was right next to the creek bank which was eroding away so I scanned it real quick with the detector and visually (didn't wanna be messing with any old graves or burial sites!) but didn't notice anything. When I looked at the rock though, I could see some distinct shapes that didn't look natural. I took pictures of the rock as it was, then after I poured some water on it to make the pictures stand out. (Thank you Ben Gates from "National Treasure Book of Secrets"!) Took several close ups and a couple of the back side (which may have some pictures there but it was hard to see). (Some of the pictures in preview mode are pretty clear but others may not be so clicking on them may help.)

Front:


Back:


I highlighted or traced out the lines that stood out more than the others. One of the "figures" that was more easily seen than the others had a triangle shaped body showing arms and legs and a neck and bow shaped head. There are several representations of this same figure but the others were had to see and of varying sizes. Another one seemed to be a head and shoulders with the arms above the head.



I also found what looked like a grinding stone near the creak and a piece of a broken one in the water. I say looks like it but I'm not really knowledgeable about any of this so I'm hoping you are.



Take a look and tell me what ya think. I sent the photos to a professor in Pa but have had no response. The Leni Lenape Indians were the tribe that was present in the area (part of the Delaware tribes) when the first trappers and colonists arrived but I don't know if this is something they would have done or something much earlier. Didn't find much while detecting out there (other than Pa's answer to the aluminum pull tab, which is shotgun shells! They are EVERYWHERE! LOL The deer don't stand a chance!) but at least the dog had fun!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[GatorBoy]

What's happening is your brain is filling in gaps and creating imagery that doesn't totally exist on the stones what's most likely happened to those stones is evidence of glacial movement in the past many of the lines you outline actually continue across the stone if you look closely

 

[arrow86]

I have to agree with gator .... I only see natural materials with normal wear from nature

 

[Buckleberry]

Yep, these are geofacts.

 

[DocBeav]

Unfortunately you can't see it in the photos, but there are several representations of the same figure (or at least partials in diff sizes) in different spots on the rock. Maybe next time I'm up that way I can figure out a way to get a rubbing or something of the stone.

 

[BIGSCOTT]

That's Buck county for ya!

 

[RGINN]

DocBeav I am the worst in the world at recognizing symbols and carvings in rocks. I have studied a lot of Indian petroglyphs, and the things you have outlined don't really resemble anything I've seen used by them.

 

[rock]

There is a section of the forum that believes in rocks like that as messages from the past. You can always post the pics there and see what they say about them.

 

[mcb66]

I am a rock art researcher here in SC. What you have may well be natural or not. Your climate is not conducive to the preservation of these type glyphs. A lot of surface erosion due to rain, ice, and snow. A few hundred years ago your site may have looked significantly different. I would suggest going out at night or taking a black tarp and trying to photograph with lantern light. For some reason it works best. While doing this you can also mix up a thin paste of water and talcum powder and use an artist brush to trace the lines. Once it is all marked up, come back the next morning and take your pics in the daylight. This washes off easy and doesn't damage the site. I have recorded a BUNCH of real sites that look worse than this in the daylight. We usually find our best sites near water sources. Oh yeah, look around and get some good GPS data. Good luck.

 

[RGINN]

mcb66 I've always been told not to put any type of foreign material on petroglyphs to enhance them as anything, chalk, etc., does indeed damage them. If they catch you doing any artificial enhancement of petroglyphs on federal land you can go to jail. So is the talcum powder water mix really non-damaging? If so, that's good to know.

 

[mcb66]

Like what was posted earlier, in SC our rock art is so eroded this is about the only way to adequately photograph a lot of them. Granted a lot of the western researchers don't like the method but they are not dealing with the same issues we are. Rock art and moist wet environments don't go well together. We don't get the desert varnish that protects the drawings. If the rock art photographs well then this method is not needed. However, we do use it when the glyphs are heavily worn and night work is required. There is no abrasion and the powder will wash off with water or the next rain will remove it. No harm done. It is a non-damaging method but expect haters to hate!

 

[GatorBoy]

I'd be more concerned with the pH level of the powder

 

[Charl]

mcb66 I've always been told not to put any type of foreign material on petroglyphs to enhance them as anything, chalk, etc., does indeed damage them. If they catch you doing any artificial enhancement of petroglyphs on federal land you can go to jail. So is the talcum powder water mix really non-damaging? If so, that's good to know.

I was not aware of the damage done by chalk. Glad you brought it up. Did a little research and came up with this:


https://books.google.com/books?id=W...EwAA#v=onepage&q=chalking petroglyphs&f=false

Apparently, chalking makes it impossible to use new dating methodologies on rock art. Learned something new.....

 

[mcb66]

It's has a ph of around 7. Should not be an issue.

 

[DocBeav]

Hey, that was all a really good discussion, thanks for passing on some new info! I'll see what I can do next time I'm back up in Pa. Most likely sometime this summer. I may just sling the detector on my back for a bit next time and really take a much harder look around and push a bit further into another section I still haven't looked at yet.

This area was pretty heavily quarried in days past (most of the 1700's-early 1900's homes in this area were built from the stone here) and if it really is something worth documenting then I'd like to give it a try, just to get better images that will help make a determination either way (geofact or man made).

I can just imagine all of the past carvings and artwork that may have been destroyed by our ancestors as they carved out large hunks of stone from the cliffs and river banks to build their homes and barns.

Thanks again for the ideas and info!