Fortified position for lost village????

View attachment 1463988

This one was brought to my attention my prospectormikel his info came from old dog. Orangeman I understand that you have a similar picture please compare and tell me what you think

MIKEL suggested stopping by. That makes my visiting his fault!

Anyway....this pic is the only one that bothers me.
I am not suggesting anything more than what it looks like to me which is a " Crux - Ansata". Or in non Latin ,"Ankh". Or " Cross with a handle". Or " Life".
Of course I am influenced by some one suggesting to keep an eye out for such.....

No idea of who or why regarding the site.
Could have been a place to corral stock for the night after watering. Or a wind break ,or shelter.
Water would need to be near or closer to be a defensive site for long. Leaving the wall = risk.

If the view allows watching a former most likely trail ,or river , ect. it would have been a benefit as a defensive site. Or a seasonal camp site depending on what is around during varied seasons....and travel routes.

It may have become a landmark in time. Someone ,or a group traveling near it ,or looking to lay low if the site is remote( a days ride from a number of homes or a town ect?) could have used it over the years to camp during the dark(?)..
 

Releventchair it's great to see you!!! There is a small waterfall coming out of the wall not far from what they are calling the tombstone. Also yes much water and bout a mile or so down there is hand dug wells
 

OK guys here is another hole close to the other hole Screenshot_2017-06-27-19-42-06.pngScreenshot_2017-06-27-19-42-03.png
 

Definitely seems to be a very interesting site. Can you tell if there are any old trails leading to/from the site?
 

Walking thru the woods one day found an old rock wall maybe for protection some, openings that look like hallways, couple of old home sites and many marks on rocks. Now I need help to desifer all the clues to what I hope is treasure!!!! Credit for this thread goes to PROSPECTORMIKEL



Uktena.

Horned Serpent Uktena
 


That's a southern New England site. Settler clearing activity or Native American are the two theories at present. Some are known to be Native, and some local First Nation people do support that from their traditional knowledge.

Also, many recent discoveries closer to Arkansas, thousands of sites believed to be found in Alabama, and described here:

https://www.newswire.com/news/thous...ounds-recently-discovered-in-alabama-19593273

Hilltip stone forts have long been known from the Southeast, and Native in origin. In Tennessee for example. The site in this thread could be Native American. Still in the early stages of recognizing this type of ancient stonework in the eastern US.

Illustration shows a snake effigy wall from an Alabama site. And photo of stone platform cairn in RI.

IMG_8061.JPGIMG_8062.jpg
 

You beat me to it, Charl, perfect examples. There are a couple of threads here on Tnet regarding the Native American/KGC connection. I'll try to dig 'em up and post links. Thank you! :icon_thumright:
 

Here's a good one for starters. Warning...it's heavy with historical references and quotations from those materials. Mikel, you should enjoy this, and take note of the first page in this thread, it mentions the importance of the "Star" symbol to the KGC and Native Americans. I had this in mind when I questioned you about the Star on your own site.

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/kgc/151933-ix-lll-o-ndn-o-777-xi.html


More later....:coffee2:
 

I can not thank you all for the information you have gave!!! I'm going to check all of this out in the mean time I'll post what is about a quater mile down the road it's the next thing that I have no clue what it could be . A special thanks again to ditlihi and charl for all the new info
 

With all that is going on at that site, I'd be inclined to do a preliminary walk around with a two box or at least a large coil. Maybe concentrate on the walls & any rocks that appear to be placed. I might be thinking all bass akward, but it'd really stink to find out you're walking over goodies trying to read the signs. Not that I've done that before...............
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2017-07-01-22-59-39.png
    Screenshot_2017-07-01-22-59-39.png
    260.2 KB · Views: 153
  • Screenshot_2017-07-01-22-59-47.png
    Screenshot_2017-07-01-22-59-47.png
    288.3 KB · Views: 135
  • Screenshot_2017-07-01-22-59-56.png
    Screenshot_2017-07-01-22-59-56.png
    345.8 KB · Views: 153
View attachment 1463988

This one was brought to my attention my prospectormikel his info came from old dog. Orangeman I understand that you have a similar picture please compare and tell me what you think

Well, Orangeman. This has been drug out long enough. I seriously believe that the copy that Nwaher posted is authentic, but it looks to be just a different and better explanation, it will stay put, and the similarities are much more. Alike than I thought. They are exactly the same.
I regret that I suggested that she should put it up.

#/;0{>~
 

Tried cleaning up those pics, dragging out whatever details I can ... are you uploading the actual images, or just "screen shots" of the images?

Anyhow, here's a bit of cleanup.

First image (left image) was bad out of focus, but I tried to fix it.
Image1.jpg

Second (center image)
Image2.jpg

Third (right image) ... this one has more "information" but still lots of "noise" like it was just a screenshot.
Image3.jpg
 

What more " information" would you need, that you couldn't get from a screenshot? :icon_scratch:

I'd advise anyone against uploading pics directly, any location information can easily be obtained through such carelessness. :wink:
 

What more " information" would you need, that you couldn't get from a screenshot? :icon_scratch:

I'd advise anyone against uploading pics directly, any location information can easily be obtained through such carelessness. :wink:

No, the photo has more "information" ... but since it is shrunk down to the size of a smart phone screen's resolution, it isn't visible or something that could be reliably pulled from the image.

i.e., more pixels give you more ACTUAL information, fewer pixels give you junk when looking for details.

I could process it so much that something would be visible, but the lack of pixels to define what it actually is would be quite misleading. That is because shrinking an image that much distorts the pixels and removes detail. It can make the image appear to contain things that are not there as much as it can cause details that are actually there to be lost.
 

Last edited:

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top