The author was a member of the excavating team that carried out preliminary
excavations at 8DA12 or the "Miami Stone Circle Site" (sometimes, "Brickell
Point Site," as it has also popularly been called). Work was summarily halted in
mid-February 1999 by a local Court injunction, while an effort was extended to resolve
various disputes concerning ownership of land and artifacts. Certainly more questions than
answers about 8DA12 have been forthcoming to date. Assuming that valid scientific
investigations can someday resume at the site, the author comments on some of the data now
in hand, and suggests numerous questions that might be addressed in additional work here.
B. W. Powell ©
DURING THE Summer of 1998, building site preparation
"rediscovered" evidences of aboriginal occupation on a level, roughly 2-acre
site on the S side of the Miami River at its mouth, where it empties into Biscayne Bay.
The finds were not wholly unanticipated: the area has long been known to historians as a
site of such occupancies, not only in prehistoric times, but it also figured in the
visitations of some of the first Spaniards to this part of Florida. Their chroniclers,
perhaps including Ponce de Leon himself (Kleinberg, 12/98; others), noted a then-occupied
Tequesta village on the immediate N shore opposite, though these records indicate no
coeval occupancy on the S side.
Later, Whites settled here, too, and Brickell’s famous trading post and other
structures stood within a stone’s throw of the Circle itself.
The investigations (to date) have been under the direction of the Miami-Dade Historic
Preservation Division, a city agency. Informal comments on the work by participants have
appeared from time to time on the Web and elsewhere, and the Dig Director, Robert Carr,
has given several talks. His organization, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy,
Inc. carried a brief synopsis on the dig status earlier (Florida Antiquity, Spring 1999).
Other than these, most coverage has been via a voluminous popular press – worldwide
– which has reported on the site and suppositions about it in sometimes grandiose
fashion.
The Legal Issue
It might be in order to present a chronology of the political and legal disputes which
have (for now) curtailed further work at the site. Initially, the work went forth with the
agreement of the landowner, Michael Bauman, who ultimately acquired (though not at the
outset) a city permit to build anew here. As the fact of the Circle’s discovery
became known, however, through the press coverages late last year, a popular unrest began
to grow over the seeming inevitable destruction of the site that would ensue once building
began.
A scan of article headlines chronologically arranged from the local Miami Herald,
covers in capsule form much of the flavor and the trend of events here:
1/3/99 Hints of an ancient culture excite
Miami
1/5/99 ….curiosity seekers swarm ancient
site
1/12/99 South Florida is treasure trove of
early human
habitation
1/17/99 The Past in Peril – Deadline
looms for development…
1/20/99 Bids to save stone circle underway
1/27/99 City considers saving mystery Miami
Circle
1/29/99 City can’t halt an
archaeological site
1/30/99 Miami Oks building over mystery
circle
1/31/99 Developer closes archeology
‘circle’
2/3/99 A Plan to Save Miami’s Mystery
Circle –
Archaeological feature to be moved
2/3/99 Circle unites all Miamians
2/4/99 New Age view focuses on Miami Circle
(and inside) Mystic theories of the
New Age…
2/5/99 It’s history vs. taxes: Circle
sitting on site that would generate millions
2/6/99 Penelas suggests buying circle site
2/9/99 Smithsonian curator weighs in on
Circle
2/10/99 Developer gets tough about
‘dig’ – No further delays, officials are told
2/11/99 Discovery points to Circle’s
sacred use
2/12/99 Developer of Circle site won’t
extend deadline
2/13/99 Mason called on to remove Circle
– Delicate job could begin Monday
2/14/99 Protesters bristle as backhoe moves
in at Circle site
(and inside) the holes, the eye, the
axes: Mysteries may go
unsolved Solar sophistication
2/15/99 Stonemason declines job…
2/17/99 County, city jockey over saving
Circle
2/17/99 Park archaeologist urges preservation
of Miami Circle
2/17/99 Many united in move to save Circle
2/18/99 County may seize Circle –
Penelas racing builder’s crews
2/19/99 Miami Circle safe for now –
County, judge bring site work to a halt
2/19/99 Circle developer attracts controversy
2/20/99 Dade needs money fast for Circle
2/20/9 Whispers, roars unite for Circle
2/21/99 Taino tribe thankful for rescue of
Circle
2/21/99 Let this circle remain unbroken
2/28/99 How much will saving Circle cost?
– Experts doubt owner will get $50 million
(and inside) Jury will set value of
Circle property
2/28/99 The Miami Circle: A giving, not a
taking – Buy it, fair and square
3/9/99 Miami Circle may be almost 2,000 years
old
3/10/99 The state will help in buying the
Circle – Up to half the cost will be covered
3/22/9 Indians’ old customs welcome new
spring
3/30/99 Graham’s plan for Miami Circle
4/6/99 Miami River’s pot of gold yet to
be found
4/11/99 Artifacts all around – Miami
Circle changes ideas on preservation
4/14/99 Miami Circle ax heads attributed to
Central America
4/15/99 Indians can file, not talk, in Circle
case4/15/99 (in other) "Historic strains between science and religion flared
recently in South Florida…"
4/24/99 County wins first round on Circle
4/26/99 Fight to preserve Miami’s
historic sites an uphill climb
5/26/99 State gives priority to purchase of
Circle site
5/27/99 County drops challenge to legality of
city’s building permit on Miami Circle property
6/17/99 For Miami Circle, it’s back to
invisibility
6/20/99 Miami circle solstice celebration
planned for today
6/21/99 Rally to save Circle draws small
crowd
6/29/99 County wins right to buy Circle from
developer
7/12/99 Tunnel under river to get new
hearing…
8/13/99 Panel to weigh using park bond
interest
Judge Feder's restraint was to allow time to determine a fair price for the property by
jury trial. This trial is now slated for 04/13/99. (Later: the hearings indeed have gone
forth this past two months). In the interim, Governor Jeb Bush announced on 03/10/99 that
the State of Florida would cover half the cost of acquisition; this was reconfirmed in a
5/26/99 local press announcement. And in a related development, it was reported on
03/30/99 (Miami Herald), that U.S. Senator Bob Graham had introduced legislation to add
the Miami Circle as an adjunct to nearby Biscayne National Park. Presumably, any future
events are now waiting the April hearing…(and on into as late as October according to
some sources).
So much for the current status of the Great Stone Circle. The immediate
furor that marked the closing days of the dig has died down, and perhaps in imitation of
the Great Circle itself, all parties to the issue are themselves "circled" - and
waiting….
Will Science Prevail?
Perhaps the central "research" problem to be answered here at all costs is
what are the prospects for further scientific research at the site?
This, of course, is problematical. Any guesstimate as to this would, in my opinion,
have to recognize the following:
1.None of the claimants (factors) involved here (builder, press, state agencies and
individual politicos) have publicly stressed modern scientific archeological
investigation here to finish up what has been done to date, and to make a final
determination on the "Circle" per se and any other most likely related phenomena
which lie yet undisclosed under the 2.2 acre site. The positions of the archeological
groups of course, and the Dade County Heritage Trust might be held exceptions, but the
other contenders all turn on accommodating earnings potentials (owner/developer), tax
revenues (city, county), and "sanctity/memorialization /and recreational" uses
even (state, federal, and activist groups) for the site.
2.The Park Service is one of several Federal agencies (Bureau of Land Management, Corps
of Engineers) adopting a generally pro-Indian (i.e., non-archeological) stance (cf.
Kennewick Man for instance; case files of ACPAC, others) toward archeological remains such
as fall within its boundaries, and recognition of a variety of muzzy "claims" as
to "rights", ownership of recovered objects, sanctity of same and of the very
ground in which they lie, etc. as advanced by (often) dubious claimants.
The upshot then is that the deck may be seriously stacked against real scientific study
here (free, untrammeled) in the future if any of these several factors acquire the site or
become its guardians. One would like to see at the very least a public, concise, clear,
up-front statement of intent by spokesmen for any of the claimants here as to what
specifically are their respective plans regarding further scientific studies on the site.
The author's interest in the site and its phenomena turn solely on this issue, and it is
his current and past belief, that the hype and hyperbole, and the obvious underfunding and
lack of logistical support the original directors suffered under, have possibly acted - to
date at least - to inhibit attainment of some scientific goals.
Having said that (a personal opinion), I would like then to comment
briefly on what might be some of the basic yet-unresolved research problems here, again
from my point of view. The following is most easily understood by reference to the
"Masterplat" overhead view of the site, to which many readers here have access.
Midden Contents
It is clear that an aboriginal midden attributable to the Tequesta Indians overlies the
Great Circle basins. Its internal fabric and artifactual content suggest it is for the
most part in situ. The midden proper showed incipient physical stratification and
trampling layers and horizontal shell and bone fragment lenses here and there, but not
well enough to control excavation at least in the eyes of the dig directors. Vertical
control was largely maintained through the recognized strategem of arbitrarily assigned
layers – here assigned at 20 cm each and numbered Layers 1,2, and 3 successively
downward to bedrock. The possible role of wind, water, or other natural agents in either
primary or secondary deposition of the midden bulk was not remarked onsite during the
investigations to the best of my recollection, though such agents in a tropical
environment might be supposed to be of some significance in distribution and sorting of
materials. (For instance, Wanlass sand analysis comments onsite, personal comm., n.d.).
At a few loci in the uppermost part of the midden and also out of context in backhoe
spoil piles from mechanical removal of overburden, occurred some cultural detritus
provisionally attributable to Spanish contact sources. Part of the artifact inventory also
includes even later historic items, probably 19th Century or even early 20th
Century items, but there these were not clearly associated with the primary midden deposit
in most cases, and occurred as scattered out-of-context finds at or on the surface of the
midden where it contacted a very badly disturbed modern overburden associated with the
current building demolition practices that preceded the dig. Included are pieces of modern
glass, rusted wire nails, fired ceramic tile fragments, early beverage bottles, late date
coins, kaolin pipe fragments, etc.
The following is illustrative only of items from this layer, and lists either items
seen personally or recovered by me (no easily referable general listing of finds is
available to me at this time): thin greenish glass shards provisionally said to be Spanish
(Carr, onsite, n.d.); one "pony" size opaque green bead, which I believe to have
been glass and irregularly mandrel-wound (but which was disputed onsite as
"copper"); some small, badly rusted, square-cross-sectioned, forged iron nails
(too deteriorated to determine whether from tapered rod stock (early) or rolled plate
(late) the author is an avocational traditional smith); lead spalter and cast two-piece
mold large musket (possibly grape?) balls; (also recovered were some flattened
"musket balls" which had very tiny copper flecks in them when I examined them,
and to me suggest they are modern copper-jacketed slugs). An interesting yarn onsite was
that in Depression years CG patrol boats would chase rum-runners to the mouth of the River
here but could go no further and would often fire in exasperation at their fast
disappearing quarry. Perhaps some of the latter slugs are richochets from building walls
hereabouts…?. And just possibly, there are some early nondescript glazed earthenware
sherds from here too.
There have been several reported bottle "kicks" and applied necks, too but
their exact provenience is unknown to me. A 19th Century torpedo-type beverage
bottle (marked "Belfast, "Ginger Ale, " and "1826") was found by
me in a disturbed area beyond the NW quadrant of the Circle; a possibly related late
historic find was a kaolin pipe bowl marked "Erin" and showing harp-and-shamrock
design motifs. (This bowl, its bore diameter, and its heelmark, IMO, should be carefully
reviewed after the techniques of the late acclaimed authority, H. Geiger-Omwake and his
successors in Delaware).
Prehistoric artifacts seen personally, or excavated by me (no general list ever
provided) are "typical" Tequestan: shell columellae "fishing weights"
and/or plummets or personal adornment bobs; polished bone splinters (gorges; awls; or
possibly septum-piercing ornaments?); socketed bone point; stingray tail
"point"; shell and columellae tools including picks and celts; and at least one
nicely pressure-flaked, whitish, chert projectile point ("birdpoint"). Also at
least two whole "Maya axes" and spalls from a third (said to be basaltic,
although expert opinion (Coe, personal corres., 4/26/99) holds that the Maya rarely, if
ever, utilized basalt). The spalls are undergoing analysis to determine a likely source
for the stone. Preliminary results (J. Dixon, pers., n.d.; R. Carr, 4/14/99; others)
suggest a Central American locale at this date. And of course, a quantity of fired clay
sherds: mostly an anomalous undecorated gritware, and notably (mostly rim) sherds of St.
John's Check-Stamped, Deptford Check-Stamped, (I believe some check-stamped wares here are
said to date most probably from 800 to 1200 ybp), Ft. Drum Incised, Opa-Lock Incised, and
Key Largo Incised. I think there was one fired clay weight, too.
The midden (and its penetration as deposit into the basins and the many
smaller holes, which underlay it) might be said to be generally homogenous as to these
contents, with exception of some possible ceramic anomalies, and the minority Contact
items as noted. My own notes record a certain tendency to a very thin, very dense, very
patchy and compacted bottom contact layer (<3 cm) of whole and broken valves of a thin-walled clam species which were "plastered" hard onto the oolite surface proper in many places being often "cemented" to same with a presumably invisible calcareous or limey incipient "lamination" deposit (about which see further).
Midden soil in the last few centimeters above
contact here was often crumbly and granular - by contrast to its finer, particulate nature
higher in the column. Perhaps this is some anomaly from redeposited calcareous materials
(?). An independent onsite examination by a geologist (Wanlass, previous) suggests that
the angular wear of grains in the gritty, sandy component throughout the midden, is result
of transport by episodic hurricanes and storms, and cannot have been transported far from
the beaches from which it came..
Faunal Remains
The midden was rich in faunal scrap from presumptive food preparation and use: marine
turtle bones, carapace fragments and claws being exceptionally common, marine whelks, many
reef fishes (trunk, parrot, 'cuda, etc.) and plentiful sharks teeth - many of the latter
with centrally-drilled holes. Mammalian and other long bone scrap was recorded too as well
as deer teeth, toe bones and phalanges. A number of adult human molars and/or premolars
were recovered. Several varieties of shellfish were noted: clams, oysters, and occasional
broken tips and pieces of crustacean appendages. A minority recovery of 'gator scrap may
be present. Rodent jaws provisionally thought to be Rattus rattus by a
zoologist (Kries, personal comm.) are being examined again at my request as a check
against presence of Norvigecus, since this rodent species, as I understand,
can only be post-Contact in N.A. It’s presence at depth in the midden would
presumably be of some interest; attribution to "burrowing" would be an assertion
not a demonstration where recorded vertical profiles are wanting.
Presumably future lab work will assess representative faunal materials in more detail;
in the interim, and with the director's knowledge (Carr onsite, n.d.), I sought zoological
review elsewhere (Kreis) of discard samples from the sifters with a view if possible to
species identification, age and gender ratios, migratory or non-migratory forms, diseases
and anomalies, extinct or species no longer resident in the area, and any other pertinent
data that might be had from such review. (A "First Approximation" chart to
species present at 8/DA/12 is part of this report, and has been derived from data provided
by K. Kreis and colleagues, based on osseous discards from a site sifting station).
It is hoped the same might be undertaken for the varied invertebrate
species recovered here, too. Additionally, there have been some charred seeds and other
plant remains (charcoal) retained here and these might provide interesting clues at as to
past events on, and uses for, the site. (A co-worker at the site, Warren Z., told me once
onsite that he had expert comment upon one or more charred seeds recovered here: I do not
recall the species at this time). On 03/09/99, it was announced in the Miami Herald
that a radiocarbon date of "1800 to 2100 ybp" had been derived from a piece of
charcoal found within one of the basins. Hopefully, a series of cores, plus whole
balk-pedestal removals, and numerous bagged soil contents of entire features will provide
material for both macro and micro lab examination at a future date. (At the termination of
field work on 2/18/99, dig bags were still in storage underneath the Brickell Avenue
bridge abutment).
Problems to Address
The central issue would seem to turn on the basin circle itself. Who made it? And how?
And when? And why? To this end, it has been my contention that a thorough geological
review of the many cavities is mandatory. Several geologists did indeed, at my
initial invitation, visit the site (notably the group from RSMAS). They have contributed
valuable insights in general as to how cavities of various types form in such marine
limestones as the oolite here and have suggested several approaches.
There is nothing, then, as I understand it, culture-wise to set this shoreside Tequesta
midden apart from many other similar middens here in South Florida, as familiar to the
directors of the dig site.
Nothing that is, save the ring of basins - next to be described:
Ring Described
There are in all (depending on who does the counting!) about 26 recognizable basins
which make up the circle, given as 38 feet in diameter. They are generally ovoid in plan
with some notable rectanguloid and also irregular shapes as exceptions. The ovoid cavities
often have elongate appendages (extensions) at one end. In an aerial view, almost all the
basins in the northern half of the circle show this peculiar appendage extending westward
or counterclockwise if the circle is viewed with north at top. There are numerous
exceptions and variations, and much irregularity in placement and execution but this
"overall" conceptual pattern for the basins may show through. In size, these
basins average (from memory, roughly) about two feet long in their long axis and about 1
to 1.5 feet wide. The extensions are much more restricted: perhaps being 1 to 1.5 long and
often no more than .5 to .75 ft. wide. These are general estimates.
Not often mentioned is fact that about 15% of the ring on the E side was
destroyed or disrupted by intrusive backhoe digging for footing trenches and soil lines
attendant the erection of apartment buildings here perhaps 50 years ago. Other intrusives
are a large septic tank at the S point with attendant (mild?) disturbance of adjacent
basin portions, and an intrusive footing wall left in situ (by us) in the E half of the
circle interior and roughly parallel to the aforementioned backhoe trench scar. At the
southern terminus of this wall starts a diffuse area I call the "Chaotic Zone":
it is internal to the Circle mostly and terminated by the arc of basins on the SE
perimeter. This presents a peculiar mix of natural and anthropogenic features and openings
with the deepest midden sounding to date. The impression overall is of natural dissolution
and maybe even wave or mechanical working but with extensive human modifications too.
There is a fenestration or "natural bridge" arch in the limestone in this
quarter, too.
Depth
In depth, the basins are even more variable. I do not have depth data at hand either as
I write, but in recall, I would say the basins "averaged" .75 ft. to 2 ft. deep
- with some much shallower and one or two others running to three or even four feet deep.
It is difficult to say with some basins (many) because they often have additional
smaller-diameter holes in their bottoms.
Where this is the case, they may be just one or two shallow dimples really - but in
others there is a clear alignment of the holes along the long axis of the basin. It is
interesting to speculate why this is so. Are these holes that were started in again after
the basins proper were formed… or are they terminal ends of holes that were
originally in aligned "runs" at the surface, examples of which may be seen
currently? In some (perverse?) fashion, I cannot also help wondering if these latter
deeper holes might be some kind of natural weathering phenomenon and not de novo
anthropogenic creations after "completion" of the basins…
Perhaps a third of the basins contained isolated "clutches" of
up to a dozen or even more unmodified limestone cobbles, or in other cases, one or two
significant sized cobbles. There is some tendency for this to be more noticeable along the
SE perimeter. The basins and the contained stones show no signs of fire reddening, nor
indeed any wear marks or uses at all. Some basins show fairly smooth sides and bottoms.
Continue To
Part 2