ghost- I would like to apologize, I was only trying to help you by giving you accurate information, I was not trying to say you don't have anything or that you don't know how to research or anything of the sort. I am very quickly finding out that giving accurate information is not nearly as important as telling people what they want to hear though. I'll tell you a few things about this site you have and I will try to explain why I say what I say in hopes that it gives my words more credibility. After I get done talking about what I think you have I'll give you some background information on myself and my training. Once again, I tell things like I see them- I don't believe in beating around the bush or telling people "yeah maybe" when there is no chance. I'm not trying to belittle you at all, I of course don't want to sound like an arrogant %&*@#% but would rather sound that way than to spread missinformation.
The split tree in the picture has nothing to do with Indians. Like I posted earlier there hasn't been much Native American action in your area since 1850's. There were some but not many. That tree is no more than 50 years old at the most, a full hundred years too late for some of the last Natives to have messed with it when it was a seedling. It's just not possible. Evidence for authentic "marked" trees is very rare anywhere in the U.S. by the way. There are probably thousands upon thousands of people today who believe they know where there are some but the vast majority are not even old enough to be and of the ones that are old enough many end up being damaged by lighting or wind storms or something of that nature and were in fact never touched by a human hand. The Native Americans were exceedingly skilled woodsmen and really didn't need to mark things very often. (They didn't normally get lost) While I know there are instances of "marked' trees by the Natives the examples are very rare and to tell you the truth I can't think of a single one off the top of my head.
As far as the stones go... well.... Can you get better pictures of the "carved" stones? I could be wrong here and would LOVE to be proved wrong but my suspicion here is that the rocks are also nothing. "Carved Indian Stones" is a problem I face almost daily- often times ending up with people not hearing what they want to and getting mad at me. Many untrained people through no fault of their own misinterpret naturally occurring rocks as being "carved". Until I can see a better picture of these rocks I will have to assume they are just that, rocks.
I do have some good news for you though.. You mention that this is on a hill and there is water on the other side... this all but guarantees that at some point through history you have had some Native American activity on the hill, maybe a village, maybe a seasonal campsite, maybe just a temporary campsite of a hunting party passing through, but at some point I will almost guarantee you had at least some activity there. When I was is college I worked on a project to develope a computer program that could accurately predict where archaeological sites would occur. We had to figure out what variables were most important in locating sites, you know what number one was? Proximity to fresh water. I have found that every bit of high ground next to natural water source has had some activity at some point, of course there's a huge difference between a village site and a temporary campsite... which one you have is impossible to say without further investigation. Somebody here mentioned putting in test holes and I think that is a great idea. Take a sifter and dig twenty or thirty test holes, no need to dig too deep as most everything in your area in terms of artifacts will be located within the top 20" or so. Sift it out and see what you come up with, even if it was just a seasonal camp you should come up with some pottery fragments.. by the way if you do you should scan them and I will probably be able to date them for you.
As bar as it being a burrial spot.. maybe but I really doubt it. Before I get into this I need to go back on something I said earlier, I said the Natives never used stones in Wisconsin for construction- that's not true, I remembered two things... one was a form of burrials and the other was.... well, it would require a whole new thread. ANYWAYS back to the possibility of this being a burrial. There are three basic types found in Wisconsin with some slight variations amongst each one. 1)The mound (or effigy mound) This is clearly not that because there is no mound. 2)Log/Stone tomb. This type of burrial was used and while your area is a bit south of where we would expect to find them it's possible... this isn't one though, there would be a large pile of rocks in an oblong form if it were. 3) Plain in ground burrial (by far the most common). These can occur anywhere and often times can be detected by slight depressions in the ground in the shape and size of a coffin. They also normally occur in groups on high ground. Could you have some on this property- yes... I would look around some more, what I see in the picture doesn't point in that direction but it's still possible none the less.
I would like to see pictures of the 1)"sitting" stone and also 2)the boulders that were brought here in ancient times. I'm not aware of any case in which Native Wisconsinites transported boulders for anything. 3) The marking tree at the other burrial ground you talk about. I guess this is a good point to remind people.. I'm not trying to be rude - I'm just telling the truth. Jus tout of curiosity what tech college does this "archaeologist" teach at? Doesn't he or she teach anthropology? I know of most of the state archaeologist and am wondering if this is somebody I might know. Also, for future reference if you want to get some top quality professional archaeological opinions try going to one of the regional archaeological centers- they wont' come out and take your stuff or anyting like that but they will be able to tell you if you have anything there or not. The regional archaeological centers are all located on University of Wisconsin campuses. Jeff Behm over in Oshkosh is one of the best in the state- give him a call. Lacrosee, Madison, Stevens Point all have really good archaeologists also.
Okay, lets get the point where you tell me I better look back at what I learned (you mean what I learned teaching, studying in college, or when I worked in the field?) I have a newsflash for you- there was Native American activity all over the state, not just the Arpin hill. (ok- I meant to be a jerk there- I don't like being attacked by people who don't know me) In fact the distance from your site to the Arpin Hill is pretty much completely irrelevant unless there's a source/quarry of lithic material there in which case the proximity of the site and the hill may have some importance. (although several miles is farther than what I would expect to find related sites) I would like to see some more of the ancient tools you have found, perhaps I can tell you what they are made of, when they were made, and what they were used for. You've been metal detecting for 20 years? me too. That doesn't really qualify you as being a better researcher of Native American history than anybody else.
This Jeff L. guy --- what are his credentials? I would like to speak with him, anybody who tells you a rock was put in a tree to sit on by Natives is not very professional at all. Think about if from your own perspective- when you walk through the woods and get tired do you stop and take a rest on a log, maybe a rock in the ground, maybe just sit right down on the ground at the base of some tree... have you ever had the thought... hmmmm I should find a rock and wedge it in a tree.. it'll be really wobbly at first but if I get tired while walking through here in a few years... I'll be set. Not to mention we have the whole age of the tree thing again!!! I think you will be hard pressed to find a tree old enough. Now for a Indian to have wedged (excuse me, an "ancient one") a stone in the tree it would have had to have been at least 50 years old when it was done- not going to wedge a stone in a sapling of course. So, let's say this is one of the very rare instances where we had an Indian living out in this woods all the way up to 1890 (The last "wild" Indian in recorded history was Ishi, found in California in 1911) If the tree was 50 years old in 1890 it was "born" in 1840. That means that under the most favorable of circumstances you would have to have a tree that is 166 years old. Now any archaeologist who is telling you that this is probably the case needs to go back to school. My guess is that this guy is an anthropologist with an emphasis in something completely different like cultural anthropology or linguistics and he taught an entry level archaeological course (like any anthropologist would be able to do after graduating) and now you think, or maybe even he thinks he's a professional archaeologist. Either you are missunderstanding what he is saying or he's not much of an archaeologist.
Not to tick you off even more but as long as I'm on the roll.. I'm going to tell you the truth about your ancient one hide scraper in the just rocks photo you posted. I know I'm going to catch all kind of flack for being honest. It's not a scraper at all, it's just a rock. Like I said, go to a real archaeologist at one of UW places and they will tell you the same thing, I guarantee it. Enough ranting... ghost, PLEASE don't take offense to the things I tell you.. I want to help you learn. I could lie to you and send you on a wild goose chase with visions of ancient ones building stone tombs and grand villiages all over this property and then leaving bent trees and carved rocks as clues to their treasure. Maybe that's what I should be doing, it would be a lot easier than reading and dealing with the next 20 nasty posts/emails telling me what an #$^#@$ I am and how I probably don't know anything.
Atlantis, I would be glad to help you if I can.. I know more about Wisconsin Archaeology than other places but some rules are universal so let me know what you have..
My background... I studied anthropology with an emphasis in archaeology at the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point. I have actually studied it my entire life, I started scouting sites when I was about ten. When the regional archaeologist seen my work when I was in high school he begged me to come to school there.. I did, I have completed all the classes for a major in anthropology and geography. I too taught classes in college, I taught "Introduction to Archaeological Lab Techniques and Artifact Identification." I worked on sever digs. If you ever have been to Hartman Creek State park you will see a sign there with info on the Natives that lived there- I excavated that site and drew the pictures/info on that sign. I was crew leader on one site on Lake Du Bay- you may have even seen me interviewed on channel 7. I go to local schools and give talks about Wisconsin history a lot. I am published (sort of ) University press, one of my old professors wrote "Paleolithic settlement patterns" and I did all the lithic identification for the book (my name is in the credits for such) although I'm not sure that qualifies as being "published". I also wrote something similar although only published at the University call "Pre-Historic Settlement Patterns of the Former Glacial Lake Wisconsin." I can show/get you a copy if you are interested. I don't think I need to go on here tooting my own horn- I just want you to know that I do know what I'm talking about that's all.
I don't work in the field anymore.. I got fed up with government policies, laws, and tons of political red tape. I changed directions in life and never looked back but I haven't forgotten. I still go out arrowhead hunting like I used to when I was a kid- I still enjoy it to.
Okay- Here's the point where everybody gets to slam me for being a jerk. Sorry.. I'm not going to lie to people, I'll tell them the truth in hopes that they don't waste there time on a dead end.
Ghost- if I can help you with mapping out your potential site or you need reference material or I can help you in any way just let me know and I will do whatever I can. In the meantime you may want to try and find a different archaeologist.
!!
Oh yes! Thank you for your honesty!
