| Home | Archeology | Art | Blacksmithing | Nautical | Writing | General | Contact | Back |
A Demurrer onThe "Sacred Turtle Find" at 8/DA/12 The facts... A large quantity of other faunal and osseous remains, including a few articulated elements, occurred throughout the surrounding matrix of the midden, and are interpreted as evidences of butchering in food preparation. Yet this view that the turtle carapace is somehow "unique," is heard again and again in discussions of the Circle, and its ultimate implications. I mentioned this matter of the carapace in passing in my "Rejoinder to J.T. Milianich", (see elsewhere on this Website) but have since thought perhaps it might be pertinent to offer a verbatim copy (below) of my own supplement done at the time to the Official Dig Field Notes of 02/02/99on this find (referred to therein as "Feature A" in Unit 64), and have moreover prepared (partly from memory and partly from my notes) an "excavator/illustrator's" simplified block diagram of the find - as encountered - to help in visualizing it. The widest public pronouncement of the Marine Turtle carapace find from Unit 64 , to my knowledge, was in a Miami Herald article dated 02/11/99. I offer below a verbatim of the opening paragraphs of this article, as well. The reader may be the judge. The find... 8DA12 Date 02/02/99 Recorder BWP (Supplement to Unit 64 Field Notes)
Marine Turtle EnBloc Removal During excavation of this Unit, some ventral rim portions of a large marine turtle carapace, lying mostly dorsally with the anterior end (no cranium recovered) generally to the E, were disclosed in the SW quadrant. (See my field drawing filed with original Field Notes). A probable related piece of carapace was found by Curtis McKinney near the SW Unit datum pin just over the line into the adjoining Unit, when he was clearing this latter Unit some days earlier. I urged we try an en bloc removal of this turtle. (This entire feature was provisionally called "Feature A" Unit 64, in my field notes). On Sunday, 01/31/99, the turtle remains were reliefed from their original point of contact in Level 1 just under the surface thereof and down to bedrock at the base of Level 2. (Surface and bottom elevations for the pedestal may be ascertained from the field notes: they are not at hand at this writing). The approximate field measurements for this block on exposure were about 22 in. square (NB: A-C and C-D in the later drawing) and not over a foot in height (A-B). On the W face of the exposed block was clearly visible the cutaway arc of more of the posterior carapace end - strongly suggesting the remainder of the undisturbed carapace was yet within the block and that its deepest penetration cleared the bedrock (oolite).
I recorded in the Field Notes a ferrous-like stain and "encrustation" (i.e., disintegrated iron object?) on and near the bottom-most exposed fragments here, but left all intact. (NB: the locus of this stain is indicated by "X" in my later drawing; "Y" suggests only that the dorsal segment portion of the carapace may have been cut-through or damaged when the aluminum sheet was driven beneath the pedestal. The aspect of the carapace in toto is generally from memory at this date (9/99), but I believe it was rotated about in the fashion shown, with the anterior end elevated to the East.) The block was encased in a wood jacket made on the spot. A large 4x4 ft.sheet of about 3/16-in. aluminum, improvised in the field, was then driven by sledge hammer taps from the W side of the block clear through underneath it. Aiding in this was a supplementary sheet of aluminum stock, into which I hand-filed saw-tooth serrations (after the manner of timber cross-cut saws) and this was used to initially "saw" part way through the pedestal and (finally) as an additional sheet driven through along with the 4x4. (NB: for future reference, it might be noted that driving two sheets this way, one upon another, greatly reduces overall friction and stoppage by obstructions (rocks, etc.) as versus use of just one sheet). I also sprayed the sheets with silicone spray first and this doubtless reduced frictionas well. To help stabilize the specimen, exposed portions were first covered with several sheets of dry newspaper, and then a bucket of wet mud (midden soil) was dumped into the jacket and troweled over the covered specimen (this, an expedient, in lieu of Plaster-of-Paris in the field). After the pedestal had been cut through, a length of 1-in. steel pipe was driven through under the E side of the pedestal and judiciously lifted from both ends, permitting insertion of a length of 2x4 protruding from either end (north and south) as "handles" for later carrying. This was done with minimal flexing - but is a dangerous part of any such procedure: soil in this condition is nothing if not extremely heavier in such concentrations than most would believe, and having no rigidity at all so subject to displacement at the slightest movement. Another 2x4 was got in place parallel to the first and cross braces were nailed between the two 2x4's to stabilize them. A man on each handle (four) then lifted in unison, and with the help of two or three additional "carriers" around the edges, this impromptu pallbearers' setup staggered some 100 yards or more with this burden to the shelter of the Brickell Avenue bridge where it was temporarily stored with other dig inventory. Having done several such "en blocs" in the field before, I would say this was largely successful here. With more preparation and greater "endorsement" of the whole undertaking, I would have done a few things differently myself: if such reclamations are worth doing at all (as with any undertaking on a site under excavation), they are worth doing with attention to every detail, for my experience is that about half of them will fail of their purpose in any event. At the outset, requisite materials should be at hand. My further caution, for what it is worth, is that dirt, even in "small" volumes is much heavier to handle and transport than most workers surmise, and it is critical that the under-skids and carrying rails for the block be adequate to the job - and correctly inserted and used. (We were simply lucky the 2x4's did not break as they were incorrectly placed for weight-bearing (an unseemly haste over-rode my counsel) and were inserted flat-side-to, and not edgeways. (Interestingly, a professional builder was present duringall this activity.) A related detail is to adjust the length of
the protruding handle portions so they are equal and thus the weight of the transported
load equally distributed - (as it was not here, due to an undue haste to remove the object
"real fast" from its resting place). Equally inexplicable, in my opinion, is
that despite the presence of vans and pickups onsite owned by members of the team here, no
offer was made or effort expended to move the block in any of them under better and safer
control this substantial distance. There was no reason to expose it to the additional
risks of being carried over rough ground by hand. It is hoped that a useful final report
will be forthcoming on this recovery, and that a well-stabilized exhibit might be derived
from it for whatever is planned for the future for this interesting site. I would be happy
to undertake or to work on such an exhibit prep myself, if requested. The announcement .... "Discovery points to Circle's sacred use"
Under this four-column head with a two-column sub-head following("Volunteers found the shell of a sea turtle placed squarely on the circle's east-west axis."), on the front page of the Miami Herald's Section B Local, Thursday, February 11, 1999, and an attendant full page measure inside screamer for the story run-over ("Discovery of sea turtle shell points to sacred use of Circle, expert says"), here is how bylined Herald Staff Writers Martin Merzer, and Don Finefrock described this find: "Scientists examining the endangered archeological dig in downtown Miami have discovered additional evidence that the Miami Circle resonated with sacred significance for its ancient occupants, the project leader said Wednesday. "Robert Carr, director of the Miami-Dade Historic Preservation Division, said volunteers found the shell of a sea turtle placed squarely on the Circle's east-west axis. Developer Michael Baumann, who has blocked archaeologists from widening their search, was present when the discovery was made. "Archaeologists previously found a stone carving of a human eye, the remains of a five-foot shark and other artifacts left in significant spots on or near the 38-foot-diameter Circle - a formation that has aroused curiousity (sic) and controversy in South Florida and elsewhere. "Field
director John Ricisak said the turtle shell was discovered two weeks ago inside the
Circle, with its head pointing directly east. "'There are things you do as offerings,' Carr told more than 300 scientists, students and others gathered at the University of Miami's Learning and Instructional Resources Center. 'I think this was a sacred site, a temple.'....."
END | Home | Archeology | Art | Blacksmithing | Nautical | Writing | General | Contact | Back | |
