Anyone know of Stone Circles found in northern Minnesota? I found this while hunting in 2003. It is about 25' diameter circle of 5 stones with a smaller stone in the center.

Okay, I see some moss-covered stones, but nothing to suggest that they were placed there intentionally.

Yeah I suppose a glacier may have deposited the 5 similar sized stones in a geometric pattern with a smaller stone in the center. I also did forget to mention they are atop a low mound.

well all i see is a bunch of moss covered stones that look naturaly placed or formed, accauly theres a vary similar rock circle thing near my house has a big rock in the middle and 5 smaller stones around it.

~Thanato

First of all...I don't see anything remotely interesting...secondly, why would an ancient culture built a stone circle on a slope?

If anyone is actually interested in archaeology in Northern Minnesota, send me a pm as I have no intention or desire to exchange information with disinterested folks.

I'm very interested in this area...I just don't see anything of interest in that photo.

Going to answer my question as to why a tribe or civilization would even build a structure on a slope? Makes no sense.

So the blood from the human sacrafice would flow down hill and not make a mess of the circle? Just a thought.

The circle is actually on a low mound with fairly level surrounding terrain. My father took the photo and apparently was not holding the camera level.

Fair enough...is it possible for you guys to get another shot? Perhaps get a bit closer? The branches are covering most of the stones so they're hard to make out...

funny i was just talking to Insight today aboot stonhenges and stone circles.. he said that they were all placed for a reason a long long LOGN time ago by the Celts an other various religions.. he said they're placed on teh power lines.. or some call tehm teh 'Ley lines" and people have foubnd it easier to do spiritual workings and things on the power lines.. he also said most stonehenges and things were placed strategically and on a point where two or more lines interesected.. there my bit or more or less Insights bit

What you may have found a manitu spot or mound. Then again maybe some hunters 30 to 40 years ago made a spot to sit around and tell stories. Either way, you need better pictures.

This site discuss's a lot of reasons for stone circles in special places, including Minnesota, just read carefully and you'll find it...

http://www.moundbuilders.org/iroquois/iroq...one-circles.htm

I've contacted the State Archaeologist and within a matter of minutes received his determination of the site. His comments without investigation or review of the photos, were "have heard of stone circles here and there in the northland before. Historic features, often quite recent" and "Small, at-surface stones, neatly arranged are invariably historic".

Well these stones are not exactly small as I've calculated their weight to be in excess of 5000 lbs and a couple of them probably much more. And they aren't particularly neatly arranged though were defintely placed by man, whether historic or not is yet to be determined.

They could of been pushed to a certain area or arranged in a circle for a meeting place of hunters possibly?

My question is how were the stones moved to their present location. 5000+lbs of rock is not easy to move without modern construction equipment. I just found the site to be very interesting as there is no evidence of how they may have been moved, no visible grapple or gouge marks on the stones and no dragmarks on the ground near them. The stones appear to have been placed a long time ago.

You just stated that their are no dragmarks on the ground near them. The rocks were probably moved thousands or maybe hundreds of years ago. You don't think nature itself would cover any traces left. Windblown soil and leaves cover tracks. Rain and erosion destroy and remove marks. This could be the case of Stonehenge.

Just happened upon this post while browsing through Google for stuff in Northern MN.
I am actually seeking ley lines in the forests up here and around Lake Superior. There is a great deal of....something...I am not sure what. But it's pretty heavy.
Where abouts did you see these stones? And I have been scouring the web for resources on things in the lands up here. Anyone know of a good site or place to go to talk with people?

Oh, those are mine. Sorry, I was wondering where I left those stones.

JK. Seriously though, your asking the same kinds of questions that have been asked about Stonehenge for hundereds of years. People say that these things are places of power, and that you can feel it when you are there. Well, I've been to Stonhenge, and other rock circles around the world. The only thing odd about them is the fact that someone would go through so much trouble to put big rocks in a big circle. I'm sure there was a reason for it thousands of years ago, but anyone nowadays who claims to know what they were for is just a kook taking a wild guess at it.

Well...that was somewhat anti-climactic.
The reason I ask is because a few years back I was at a mound in the mountains of western North Carolina in a small city along the trail of tears called Nantahala. The place was called Wayah Bald.
Truth be told...I have never felt so at peace and so...alive. I was told that it rests along a ley line. Of course...that was probably just some crazy kook spouting off that had a bit too much moonshine.
I was just looking to see if I got the same "feeling" twice.

name='BIGK1974' date='Jan 9 2008, 09:42 PM' post='2086062']
Oh, those are mine. Sorry, I was wondering where I left those stones.
.


This article i found is very comprehensive.




It's a calendar, except instead of pictures of shapely women in bikinis, it's got big chunks of rock. Alignments of different stones mark various solar or lunar events (or so some have argued). The best known alignment, and the one we can be surest isn't mere coincidence, is for the summer solstice, a date of significance to many cultures. Stonehenge is a favorite of New Age enthusiasts, who imagine it to have been a Druid temple in the days of the early Britons. It may have been a temple, and conceivably the Druids used it as such (much as wannabe Druids do today), but the Druids didn't build it. As an archaeologist who has studied and worked briefly on excavations at Stonehenge, I can say the significance of the monument goes well beyond the puerile Druid crystals-and-spirits story.

Impressive though it is, what we see at Stonehenge now is only a fragment of what it was in its heyday. When the final phase of construction concluded, it was a near-perfect astronomical calculator (or, again, so some have argued). Not only is Stonehenge aligned with solar and lunar events, it can be used to predict eclipses, although whether that was the intention of the builders remains controversial (see resource 3 below). But why would someone want to build it? And who built it, and when, and how?

In the early 1990s the English Heritage Scientific Dating Service assembled a group of scientists to measure, date and corroborate evidence brought to light over the previous three centuries to determine when Stonehenge was built. The scientists established that the site had been built in three phases over a period of two millennia.

The first phase of Stonehenge was the outer ditch, which lies far outside the iconic stone structure. The ditch forms a nearly complete circle with an earthen bank on the inner side. (Now the bank is almost level with the ground due to age.) Radiocarbon dating of material found in the ditch in 1993-94 suggests it was built more than five thousand years ago, somewhat before 3000 BC (see source 1). Just inside the earthen bank are 56 small pits known as Aubrey holes after their discoverer, 17th century British antiquarian John Aubrey. It's uncertain what was in the Aubrey holes. Speculation ranges from timber posts to sacrificial ornaments.

Organic remains in the ditch have enabled us to date it:

The main Ditch at Stonehenge was dug in a series of segments, at the base of which were deposited large numbers of antlers, many of which had been used as picks or rakes and showed heavy wear. Since these artifacts had no primary silt beneath them; they must have been deposited very soon after the Ditch was dug. It is considered that antlers would not have been kept for long before use, especially as over half (57%) came from slain deer (perhaps because a large number of antlers were needed quickly?). Consequently the digging of the Ditch can be dated to very soon after the last of the antlers was collected. (See resource 2)

As a celestial clock-tool the Henge was far from complete. The inner stone circles are where the real mystery comes in.

Phase II of construction is somewhat sketchy. Radiocarbon dating makes it reasonably certain that the second phase extended from 2800-2260 BC (92% confidence for you statisticians; see resource 1). During Phase II, after the creation of the ''Avenue," a pathway located at the northeast corner of the circle, the builders placed a ''Slaughter Stone'' just inside the confines, surrounded by four "Station Stones" set in a rectangle. A hundred feet away they positioned a ''Heel Stone'' weighing 35 tons and measuring almost 20 feet in height. This stone holds particular significance--each summer on the longest day of the year, June 21st, the sun rises directly in line with this stone when viewed from the center of the monument, giving the appearance that the sun is resting on it. On most other days of the year, one cannot see the sunrise from the center of Stonehenge (resource 2).

Two centuries after the placing of the Heel and Slaughter stones, some eighty blocks of bluestone from the Preseli Mountains in Wales were brought to the site. These stones were the lightest of the lot, but came the greatest distance. Most likely they were brought by raft around the coast of Wales to the river Avon in Bristol, then floated upstream. Once ashore, the big slabs were conveyed the relatively short distance to Salisbury plain by rolling them on timbers to the Avenue. (Some dispute this scenario, saying bluestone of the kind found at Stonehenge was available locally. Local stone and stone from the Preseli Mountains has been dated to the Pliocene Era som 650,000 years ago.) The bluestones were placed in two concentric circles at the monument's center.

Phase III began around 2000 BC, with work continuing episodically until 1100 BC. During this time Stonehenge assumed the form we know today. Construction was complicated and I won't attempt to recount it in detail here. The bluestones were taken down and re-erected as a smaller circle dwarfed by the larger sandstone trilithons--two large pillars with a top lintel stone--which formed a horseshoe at the center of the monument. Surrounding the trilithons were some thirty other sarsen (sandstone) stones placed upright, all capped and connected with lintels making a larger outer circle enclosing the inner horseshoe. It's worth noting the way in which the lintels were fastened together. They were connected using tongue-and-groove joints, which still hold the lintels in place today. Amazing to think this all took place before the introduction of the wheel.

How did ''they'' do it? Here scientists including myself generally agree. When the stones were brought on site, no small feat in itself, they were laid perpendicular to holes dug into the chalk. Large wooden timbers were used to lever each stone up, whilst surely close to a hundred men pulled from the other side with ropes, slipping the stone into place. The challenge was the sheer mass of the huge stones, some 45 tons. One would think they would crush the earth on their way upright into the foundation holes. Perhaps timbers were placed beneath the stone to distribute the weight. Once the uprights were in place, each lintel was placed next to a pair of pillars, then hoisted up using wood levers and ropes, centimeter by centimeter. Scaffolding was placed underneath at each increment until the lintel was brought to the top of the pillars and slid into place. Clearly thousands of people worked on Stonehenge--it may have been the center of a large village..

As for who built Stonehenge, let's start by dispelling the myth that it was the Druids. An early champion of that idea was John Aubrey, the first to do a meticulous study of the site in the early 17th century. Julius Caesar and others had written of a Celtic priesthood dwelling near Stonehenge at the time of the Roman conquest of Britain around 55 B.C. But the Druids had arrived a few centuries earlier at most. At that point Stonehenge had been standing for nearly two and a half millennia and was already a ruin (resource 2).

There are several theories on who built Stonehenge. During the Neolithic period, around 3000 B.C., the ancient Britons lived in small communities. They used tools to a much greater extent than their semi-nomadic ancestors. A people called the "beaker folk" because of their use of pottery drinking vessels resided near Stonehenge around the time construction began, and some contend that Stonehenge was their handiwork (reference 4). However, archaeological evidence for this view is scant. Others looking at the ancient tools found close to the site have surmised that the builders came from continental Europe, not Britain. A more recent school of thought holds that the people were indigenous to the area and simply started using more complex tools (resource 3). It's possible Stonehenge was initially built to monitor the seasons for agricultural purposes, but its eventual scale and complexity suggest a highly organized culture that would have had more in mind than merely marking the beginning of planting season. Today we rely on clocks and calendars to track the passage of time. The ancient Britons had Stonehenge.

It's likely Stonehenge had religious significance. To have built Stonehenge over a span of two millennia at considerable cost in terms of resources required an idea and a commitment shared by many. Religion has been the traditional source of such commitments. Christianity has been around less time than Stonehenge.

Whatever religious purpose if any Stonehenge may have served, an impressive amount of scientific knowledge and engineering skill went into its construction, even if you take the conservative view that the only celestial event it commemorates is the summer solstice. The builders had a sound grasp of astronomy. Before they began their work they had determined exactly where the midsummer's sun would rise, and possibly when a great many other astronomical events would occur, and they expressed that knowledge in stone. Stonehenge is a tool, a celestial pocket watch if you will, built by a people driven by a passion to be precise.

Ah, well, I live in southern Minnesota, and there is a local legend here about a place called "Stone Circle" somewhere in the woods right behind our largest cemetery. Supposedly, occult rituals and sacrifices are preformed there. I've seen it, it lays on a small mound, but it really looks like someone just put a bunch of rocks in a circle and made a campfire. No bloody animal remains, scary people in black robes, twisted roots, alien sightings, ect, ect.

Other than here, I haven't even heard about this "phenomenon".

Vikings

Well, see, that is my point, about the key lines. There are alot of people claiming that these things are there because they are intersections in key lines. But, there are a bunch of other people who claim they are an ancient type of calander. Then, others who claim they were sacrificial "power" spots.
The point is, nobody knows for sure. Their are alot of guesses as to what they were, but anyone who claims to "know" what they are can be dismissed as an idiot in my book.
Whatever they are, they are interesting. To stand next to these things, and try to picture what they looked like ages ago, or how or why they were built just boggles the mind. To think that these things were built so long ago, that they were considered ancient before most places that exist today were even thought of is amazing.

Exactly! I am more interested in the "what the heck is that! " effect than anything else. I think it's pretty damned amazing that things of this nature still exist in such a tainted, overpopulated, pollution ridden cement & glass forest. Maybe it's just the inner child in me still wanting to believe. Who knows.
But if I get taken through a fairy ring...I am SO going to do a happy dance of joy.


Or maybe it IS just Vikings. >.> hehe

how about
a. some settlers setting up these stone circles around their wagons ??
b. or the native americans arranging these stones around the tepees?

edited..corrected indians to native americans!

Indians prefer Indian to Native American. It was never offensive to us. That Native American crap was cooked up by stupid PC white folks..

Lapiche

Indians come from India. Not from Americas.

A lot of unnecessary conflict is caused by stupid PC white folk, but didn't you realise you need these people to tell you how to live your life, it's for your own good, now there there be a good little native American and do as your told.

Or what? You gonna come to Milsboro and give my family smallpox infected blankets???? I am only part Native American. My Grandmom was Nanticoke-Lenape. My Grandfather was 6 Nations Lenape which makes me part Canadian First Nation Person. Or is it Aborgdian? Matter of fact they met at one of those wonderful little schools (Haskill) to make them into nice little PC caucasian acting 'Persons of Color'.


Lapiche

X2 cousin. They don't seem to realize the term American in NA is offensive to some of the more militant, (for lack of a better word), Indians I know. Some people are just looking for something to gripe about though. Some of us say indigenous people, there are the First Nations, the more blood and they just call themselves by tribal affiliation. Everyone is different.




ROFLMAO. You better not say something like that in Oklahoma though.

I'm a enrolled Nanticoke and part of the Delaware Confederation but we all call ourselves Lenaa'pe or Waabanakii. But I pefer Nanticoke. Then again, most of my family is AIM so you called that right.


Lapiche

You need to get up to date, i'm smearing a duvet with clamidia as we speak, i'll drop it over if you promise not to scalp me, i know we started it.

LMAO To late, 1/4 of my tribe has it, but since they are crackhead welfare cases we don't care that their sterile.....


Lapiche

OMG! LOL!

1/4 of my tribe has it, but since they are crackhead welfare cases we don't care that their sterile.....

I take offence!
I am an Indian from India and i am going to Sue all the native americans for copyright infrigment!!

Okay, this has become my new favorite thread.