I have finally been successful in deciphering the Peterborough Petroglyphs in entirety and have uploaded the decipherment as
peterborough.tif - excellent quality picture
peterborough.gif - rather poor quality but less memory required and
less download time
to the LexiLine Files at the new folder for Canada at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LexiLine/files [new URL at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/LexiLine/files/]
The Peterborough Petroglyphs are spectacular and contain an ancient map of the north of North America, surveyed by astronomy, and clearly showing the St. Lawrence Seaway, for example, as well as Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac.
My rather rough drawing of the Peterborough Petroglyphs is based on a very large drawing found in the back map pocket of the The Sacred Art of the Algonkians: A Study of the Peterborough Petroglyphs by Joan M. Vastokas and Romas K. Vastokas, Mansard Press, P.O. Box 443, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, K9J 6Z3, a book which cost me a fortune to buy used, but it was worth the Vastokas map of the glyphs.
Of course, the Vastokas had no idea that the petroglpyhs were an ancient geodetic map surveyed by the stars - including the southern stars, and their analysis is confined to the normal ethnological remarks about signs and symbols, but the making of the map was a gargantuan task which the Vastokas did beautifully.
Also spectacular at Peterborough is the presence of four signs on the glyph reading GNOMON and these four signs are the same as those found for the identical astronomical positon at Lewes, England. We thus have an absolutely certain connection of the Peterborough Petroglyphs to the megalithic peoples of Ancient Britain (and surely the Baltic and Scandinavia), so that I date this map to ca. 3117 BC, as all neolithic megalithic sites seem to stem from approximately that era.
[Update, September 8, 2002]
Steve Burdic sent me the following questions regarding the Peterborough Petroglyphs and I have added many answers.
>Your Peterborough Petroglyphs decipherment was very exciting "to me but
>raised many questions about the image itself, the pictographs, their
>relationship to the stars and geography. I will simply list the questions
>and trust they will guide you to explanations either to this email or in
>your future work. Keep in mind that I am a supporter and that some of these
>questions come from the perspective of those who are skeptical or not
>knowledgeable about geodetic/astronomical relationships.
>1. There are so many petroglyphic images that do not seem to relate to
>stars. Are the glyphs in groups that generally stand for constellations or
>are the individual stars depicted?
I think most of the glyphs (300 clearly redrawable and ca. 600 vague ones) represent stars. But what I have drawn there is very meager. I may try to upload some scans of the very large original map - this would have to be done in at least 10 parts, but then you would have a clear picture – the map is copyrighted by the Vastokas but I
think "fair use" would permit me to reproduce it on LexiLine. I will try to contact the Vastokas first.
Some of the rock art figures do not represent stars but are in my opinion clearly symbols of the so-called Tifinag script. The Ojibwa Algonkians also had a symbolic script.
Found at the site also were 30 gneiss hammer-stones (ca. 2 pounds each) used for carving. NOTHING ELSE at the site has been found from the original era except for some small pieces of clay pottery which could have been put there at any time. On the other hand, small stones with an origin in this Great Lakes region were found at the Miami Circle in Florida (see the LexiLine files) – a site which I date to ca. 3117 BC.
Modern experiments have shown that a smaller glyph could be pecked out of the limestone in about 30 minutes - so that the makers of the petroglyphs did not have to stay long to finish their work, although perhaps half-a-day's work might be required for some of the larger figures.
(but they may also have used copper – see below) Material in quotes from the Vastokas book....
The rock exposure for the glyphs is "roughly rectangular and is sectioned by several fissures, seams, and a series of pits."
The "north half of the decorated surface is divided by a deep fissure, almost a foot wide, at the bottom of which runs an intermittent underground stream [this in my analysis represents the
St. Lawrence Seaway]. Several other narrower fissures and seams subdivide the surface into smaller panels within which are contained the engraved figures. "
How old is the site?
"One remarkable [neighboring] Archaic site, east of [Algonkian Park], on Allumette Island in the Ottawa River, has a radiocarbon date of fifty-two hundred years ago and has yielded over a thousand copper artifacts."... "
"One site nearer to the petroglyphs [a so-called Laurentian hunter site] about 2 and 1/2 miles SE at the mouth of Jack Creek produced finds dating to ca. 5000 years ago." These will be our ancient Peterborough stonemasons.
These sites would put our Peterborough petroglyph makers around 3117 B.C.
Vastokas conclude the petroglyphs date to 900 to 1400 AD. This of course is wrong. Virtually NOTHING at all supports that date. Quite the contrary, "It seems that the very deep glyphs were engraved over eroded or shallower earlier forms."
The map on page 28 of Vastokas book shows a map of the distribution of Algonkian language speakers in North America - and this pretty much corresponds to the map formed by the rock drawing - it is again, as we know from the megaliths, a map defining territorial borders. As Vastokas write "... the Peterborough Petroglyph site would have been situated at the borderline between Algonkian and Iroquoian territory."
>2. The geographic background is broken up into color bands: light green,
>green, gray, blue; what do they depict?
I have added the colors to my rough redrawing of the map to show possible divisions and to much better show the glyphs - black on white is harder to distinguish (download the map and remove the colors in your drawing program and you will see) - otherwise the original map is simply black and white. "The rock is white crystalline limestone, ground smooth and flat by the ice of the last ice age." To get good contrast, the Vastokas darkened figures with black chalk or crayon for purposes of photography.
The added colors are intended to show more clearly the demarcations on the rock drawing on the ground. As you can see, the map is divided - as I view it - into two halves left and right with a middle section of creation at Hydrus - which I imagine was regarded to be the fountain of the deep, and also two halves north and south, with the St. Lawrence being the dividing line. In Algonkian belief Midewiwin (viz. Midewegan – location of the first Midewiwin "lodge", i.e. house) - the "hole in the sky" at the center of the universe between the earth and sky – is born in the bowels of the earth and then rises – we see this hole in the sky at Peterborough. The Algonkian cosmic axis runs along the upward-growing cedar tree – i.e. the Norse Irminsul – which is also pictured at Peterborough. The Ojibwa also had Midewiwin bark scrolls and Mide songs, used as
mnemonic devices. The head of the figure I identify as the pole star has twelve spokes as hairs on its head – the division of the zodiac into twelve regions. This figure is erroneously identified by the Vastokas as a "sun-figure" or as "the Great Spirit".
Does Algonkian retain traces of Latvian? Of course [speculative]….
Algonkian muzzinabikon "history" = Latvian muzina
("life" diminutive form) plus bija- "what was", pagaj- "past"
Algonkian saeawin "love" = Latvian sievina ("wife"
Algonkian kekewin "pictographs" = Latvian kuoku "wood" vina "those"
The blue color enables easier location of the St. Lawrence Seaway and Chesapeake Bay (I forgot to mark this latter on my map drawing, but see if you can find it in the blue region), I made this portion blue, but of course the blue is not all water - and I do not know how far the rock drawing viz. rock actually extends beyond the Vastokas map. The original map color is black and white.
>3. The blue color seems to depict water; what is the actual outline of the
Just ignore the colors to get the original rock drawing. I have added the color for easier identification.
>4. The orange color was explained as it related to the original rock
>drawings. Are there geographic features that would correspond to them
>(lakes, rivers, glacial scour marks) or an explanation of why the sky would
>be divided in that manner. There is a typo on the word divided in the
>explanation. (should be divide)
Sorry for the typo. The orange color shows deep - in part man-made, in part natural fissures - cut into the original rock. These are deep ridges which no one has been able to explain up to now.
Geographic features: It is clear that Peterborough near Stony Lake was near a major prehistoric artery of communication and travel (so Champlain in describing Huron trails in 1615), being on a waterway connecting Georgian Bay and the Bay of Quinte.
>5. Do the ethnographic explanations in the book ever relate to star
>knowledge? Do the petroglyphs relate to known (indian or other) star
>knowledge? The argo, centaurus, lupus grouping is particularly evocative.
The Vastokas book has some general reference to alleged "solar symbols" on the map e.g., for the two major symbols in the center of the rock drawing. Of course, that is completely wrong. This is the NIGHT sky.
Interestingly, the regional native American Indians had NO KNOWLEDGE of this rock drawing - either in person, legend or ancient written records - prior to its discovery in the modern era. If this had been a sacred native American Indian site, that would be quite strange. It actually looks as if the rock drawing were once made by someone long ago - as I allege, by people not from that region - and then left there for posterity to discover.
The site was only discovered in the year 1954 by mining company employees.
Moreover, as the Vastokas note, some of the glyphs are quite unique to North America - but as I might add - find comparables in the Old World. The Vastokas allege in the introduction that "external and internal evidence will readily show that the Peterborough Petroglyphs were carved by native Canadians before the coming of the Europeans to southern Ontario. Less easily determined, however, are ... which particular Indian group made them, when, and to what
purpose." The fact is, there is little external or internal evidence at all that some aboriginal Canadians ever made them and as Vastokas subsequently admit "[r]econstruction of the meaning behind prehistoric forms of art ... is a difficult task, and in no small danger of
Vastokas write, "There is nothing on the site... to suggest European contact". This of course is not true. All one has to do is to compare some of the rock drawings on this site with those found
in Norway and Sweden which the Vastokas do - e.g. the boats at page 123 – only to conclude that "there is no need for comparison", in spite of the fact that these boats look Scandinavian to almost everyone and surely not like canoes. This mainstream blindness to early European contact to the Americas is widespread.
>6. A more general question-what is the effect of the skymap/earth based map
>distortions caused by different projections. I am familiar with distortions
>with different land based projections but not skymaps.
What distortion are you referring to? The Heifetz planisphere for example stretches the constellations at the horizon so that they look on the sky map just as these constellations appear to the actual earth observer. Software programs such as Starry Night Pro do not correct for this.
>7. Have you dealt with the mirror image effect of viewing the stars from
>the ground or from above. Most skymaps depict the stars as seen from the
>ground but I have a star globe that views the stars as if looking down on
>them from outer space.
Yes, of course.
>I hope you find these questions stimulating. Please keep up the good work.
>Steve Burdic< <<<<<<<<<<<<
UPDATE MARCH 7, 2003
In a message dated 3/4/2003 11:08:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, Joe
Fortin email@example.com writes:
> I had an opertunity to read over your stuff on the petroglyphs. I
> must say, that you look like you've put a lot of time into this.
> However, I do have some questions.
> 1. How did the carvings survive from 3117BC until the present? I
> can't remeber if it was the Vastokas or Paul Sweetman (1954) who
> stated that the site was a located on a soft marbel. This soft
> marbel is easily scratched by a thumb nail, so how could it survive
> for 5000 years?
Geoglogy is not my field so I can only make some speculative
comments about it. One must always remember, perhaps my dating
could be wrong, though I doubt it - but it is possible.
Vastokas in their book, Sacred Art of the Algonkians, which I have at hand, at p. 10 give an estimate by Sweetman of the University of Toronto who "suggested that the forms could be as old as thirty-five hundred years or as recent as four hundred years," so another 1500 years may not make that much difference. The Vastokas say the stone is very high quality white crystalline limestone, i.e. white marble - and refer at p. 19 to comparable rock drawings in southern Minnesota 3/4 of an inch deep - so that if the original petroglyphs at Peterborough
were similarly deep, as I think they may have been, even if they had eroded quite a bit
in the interim, their outlines might still be visible, even after 5000 years. The Vastokas could only make some outlines visible by using black chalk and running their fingers over the rock surfaces.
Also, there used to be pine forests there and perhaps the needles covered the rock and protected it, also from discovery. After all, the site was only found in 1954 and was unknown to the local Native-Canadian tribes, so it must have been covered in some manner all these years and perhaps only recently exposed? Again, this is out of my field, just speculation.
There is substantiated evidence of nearby occupation dating to that era and as the Vastokas write at p. 21, it was "from about seven to three thousand years ago, during which man established himself in the deciduous forests of northeastern North America...."
It also appears possible that the "hammers" used in the "Miami Circle" in Florida - which have been traced to Canada - could come from this region. I also date the Miami Circle to 5000 years ago.
> 2. That is a beautiful map of the carvings, however I am unclear of
> a few points. First off, how could you have the Southern Triange and
> Orion on the site? Are you suggesting that both were visible in the
> night ski at such a northern latitude (or is it longditude?) 5000
> years ago? As well, you've labeled one carving "Telescopium".
> Telescopium was named by Abbé Nicolas Louis de Lacaille in the mid
> 1700's. How could ancient peoples use the term, when it hadn't been
The map is based on a wonderful and much better and maybe 10 times larger map in the back pocket of Vastokas book which of course I could not reproduce for copyright reasons - and which is far too large for the internet anyway. My map is at best an approximation. The book cost me a fortune to buy but you can still probably find a copy at http://www.abebooks.com, where I bought mine. Be sure to get a copy where the map is still intact in the back pocket, but it will cost you about a hundred and fifty dollars - at least mine did. That is quite a bit for a book.
The constellations mean that the ancients were seafarers and knew of these stars through their voyaging. I have deciphered several sites worldwide that show the stars of Telescopium usually as two eyes of a human head. Obviously, the ancients did not call these stars Telescopium in prehistoric days, but these stars were still there in the sky nevertheless and their relative
isolation as a duo does make them the "eyes" of that part of the heavens.
> 3. Just out of curioity, have you ever visited the Peterborough
> Petroglyphs? It might be worth your time to investage the site using
> the racked-lighting system that has been installed. I found it to be very useful.
I have never been there and it is on my maor list of things to do especially since I have friends in the Finger Lakes District of New York and that is not that far away (by US standards).
I have no doubt I will accomplish this in coming years. Travelling is always a matter of cash and time - all of which are always in short supply. The original sites are always fabulous beyond compare to visit because I do not go as a tourist but with the eyes of the men who were there many thousands of years ago.
But for now, thank goodness for the Vastokas and their book. If you find any gross errors in my drawing let me know. I have only the Vastokas map to go by.
And welcome to LexiLine - I will be affirming your membership right after I send this letter.
Do you want this correspondence submitted to the list? I think it would interest the members.
In a message dated 3/6/2003 3:46:02 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> Please, my all means, feel free to post my questions.
UPDATE March 15, 2003 by JOE FORTIN
Subj: The Peterborough Petroglyphs: More Questions
Date: 3/11/2003 2:23:43 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: "Joe Fortin"
I have some more questions for you in regards to your work on the
Peterborough Petroglyphs. However, before I go on, I'd like to
share with you a bit of my background.
I am a Natural Heritage Educator (interpreter) with Petroglyphs
Provincial Park, the park in which the Peterborough Petroglyphs are
protected. Part of my job as an interpreter is to make sure I am up
to date on just about every piece of information I can find about
the site. I have read not only Vastokas' work, but also that of Dr.
Barry Fell (Bronze Age America), and Paul Sweetman (Preliminary
Report...). Each of these individuals have brought their own
theories and ideas to light about the petroglyphs. I hope you view
my questions as belonging to someone who merely is trying to expand
upon their current understanding.
1. At the bottom end of your map, you have the notation "count of
60". I am wondering to what this count is refering to. What is the
significance of '60'? Which glyph is this in reference to (the
upside-down 'U' with two dots below)?
2. I am confused to what the 'chin', 'mouth', 'nose' and 'eye' are
in reference to. Are you suggesting that there is a face in the
3. The majority of the orange sections of your map occur in
naturally occuring fisures and fractures of the marble. Our park
geologist has told us that the calcite marble naturally forms
straight cracks at sixty and ninety degrees. What evidence to you
have to suggest that they are man made?
4. I am wondering how you were able to assign names to the different
carvings. For example, the constellation Orion doesn't look
anything like the glyph that you have labed with that name.
5. What is 'GNOMON'? Is it a place?
6. Am I correct in assuming that the Reticulum Horologium refers to
the super-cluster of galaxies?
7. If natives did not make the majority of the carvings, who are you
suggesting did? Current park theory suggests that the carvers (most
likely a member of the Algonkian group) would have traveled to the
site and stayed for only a short period of time. The closest
settlement to the petroglyphs is at Quackenbush, representing an
Iroquoian village, about ten kilometres from Petroglyphs and does
not fall into our timeline.
8. You spoke of a camp of Laurentian hunters. Was this something
you got from the Vastokas or another source?
I have also included some websites that have images of the
petroglyph site. I assume that these are all are least four or five
years old, as the park has established restrictions on photography
(at the request of the Curve Lake First Nation).
http://www.canadianheritage.org/reproductions/20632.htm <-- this one
gives a good feel for how shallow some of the carvings are now. The
large birdcarving (I belive you have it labeled 'Virgo') is perhaps
the deepest carving at the site, and you can get a feel for how
shallow even it is.
Please feel free to post these questions and your responses to the
One last quick question. What is your degree in from the University
of Nebraska, and what does "J.D. Stanford University" mean?
If you have any questions, please feel free to email me. I would be
more than happy to help foster a better understanding of this
Natural Heritage Education
Petroglyphs Provinical Park
UPDATE March 15, 2003 by Andis Kaulins
My answers to Joe Fortin's questions about the Peterborough
Petroglyphs are as follows:
>1. At the bottom end of your map, you have the notation "count of
>60". I am wondering to what this count is refering to. What is
>the significance of '60'? Which glyph is this in reference to (the
>upside-down 'U' with two dots below)?
The Vastokas interpret these symbols as "moose tracks" and other
symbols next to them as "bear tracks" and still others next to them
as "deer or rabbit tracks".(Sacred Art of the Algonkians, pp. 114-
116). These symbols are found in the lower right hand corner of the
Peterborough Petroglyphs. "Animal tracking" is not my field, so I do
not know whether these symbols were originally animal tracks in
conception or not - they could be, why not - but the "bear track"
symbols are not always in pairs and are found in many places on the
Petroglyphs, also just to the right and above of the "moose track
symbols" where I identify this region of the Petroglyphs with
Aquila. There the bear tracks could easily be seen as individual
stars along the left axis of Aquila. Since they are not all paired -
the "tracks" theory is not probable.
Each upside down "U" is in my opinion a 10 (as in Egyptian
hieroglyphs - see http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi66.htm) -
and each pebble is "1" - the Vastokas had pictured five of these
symbols ("U" plus "2 pebbles"), so I thought this was 5 x 12 = 60,
but I had no idea what it meant, so I gave no explanation previously.
Upon reviewing the actual photograph of the "moose tracks" at Plate
23 in Vastokas book (p. 114), however, I find the Vastokas have left
one such "moose track" out of their map drawing, and there are
actually 6 such symbols, with one still higher yet than the topmost
symbol shown on the Vastokas map.
Hence, we actually have 6 x 12 = 72 as a number marked there and
that now makes sense at this location since this number line is
directly below the back of Pegasus and the front of Capricorn, a
position which marks the Winter Solstice in ca. 3117
BC. Every 72 years the position of the solstice moves one degree
within the stars - we call this "precession" of the equinoxes and
solstices. The precessional circle of 360 degrees is thus traveled
in 25920 years. This position is thus the GNOMON of precession.
According to Peter Tompkins, Secrets of the Great Pyramid, p.
372, "most usually [Greek] gnomon means "pointer of the dial" and
the "geodetic gnomon" (p. 387) is "a vertical pillar whose shadow
can be used to determine time, distance, and latitude." Even the
Australian Aborigines also had "pointer stars" (see my answer
to 6 below).
Hence, the makers of the petroglyphs are telling us that the pointer
of the dial of heaven is the winter solstice point and that this
dial is moved one degree every 72 years. [In modern times, we adjust
for this problem by adding leap years to your calendar.]
>2. I am confused to what the 'chin', 'mouth', 'nose' and 'eye'
>are in reference to. Are you suggesting that there is a face in
Yes, perhaps this is chance, but the right side of the Petroglyphs
does clearly resemble a face. I have not been on site and do not
know what is beyond the border's edge of that face or whether there
is any geologic evidence that that stone's edges have been worked by
hand to be that way. It is not critical to my analysis. I merely
note what I see (or think I see).
>3. The majority of the orange sections of your map occur in
>naturally occuring fisures and fractures of the marble. Our park
>geologist has told us that the calcite marble naturally forms
>straight cracks at sixty and ninety degrees. What evidence to you
>have to suggest that they are man made?
I would turn the question around. For slabs of marble anywhere else
on the ground in Canada or elsewhere, are there other locations or
photos you can refer me to where such intermittent and wide fissures
and fractures have a similar shape, depth, extension and roundness
of edges? I do not know if this is so - I am asking the geologist
for photos of one similar site showing such fissures.
In any case, it is not critical to my analysis whether these
fissures are purely natural, "man-improved" natural or man-carved.
Surely many fissures are natural to rocks. Indeed, there would be no
problem with admitting that all are natural originally and
suggesting that the ancients then selected this particular slab of
rock especially because the already previously existng "lines" were
well suited and thus adaptable to the ancient's astronomical purpose
and design. I stated "man-made" however because it seems to me -
based on the photos that I have seen - that the fissures
appear "rounded" at the surface level and some - especially the
short fissures and rounded holes - appear to be "carved" into the
rock. But I am no geologist and will have to abide by what the
geologists tell us. I have a good friend who is a university
professor and whose field is geology - he tells me my questions
about the carving of rocks are difficult to answer.
>4. I am wondering how you were able to assign names to the
>different carvings. For example, the constellation Orion doesn't
>look anything like the glyph that you have labed with that name.
I have deciphered a number of ancient artifacts which show ORION as
a large rotating wheel in heaven - just as at the Peterborough
Petroglyphs - see in our LexiLine files under
(note that Yahoo will cut off the URLs below so you have to enter
the full link by hand or go to the URL above and find the graphics
under "Utah Indians North America" or "Egypt-Norse Connection" etc.)
Essentially, the three stars of Orion's Belt are the middle of the
wheel and the other stars circulate around, originally as animals
driving the wheel.
>5. What is 'GNOMON'? Is it a place?
See my answer to question Nr. 1 above.
>6. Am I correct in assuming that the Reticulum Horologium refers
>to the super-cluster of galaxies?
These are constellations in the southern skies, not visible at
Peterborough, but with which the ancients were familiar as
prehistoric sea voyagers. Ancient legends - see Richard Hinckley
Allen, Star Names, Dover Publications - recount that an ancient king
had the southern skies mapped in a manner comparable to that already
known for the northern skies. Of course, our current names for the
constellations of the southern skies are "modern". For example,
Hydrus is a modern constellation named by Johann Bayer and published
in his 1603 atlas. Horologium is a southern constellation mapped out
by Nicolas-Louis de Lacaille circa 1750. Reticulum was mapped by
Nicolas-Louis de Lacaille about 1752.
where it is written as follows:
"La Caille (1713–62) can be regarded as the
Hevelius of the southern hemisphere, the man
who completed the earlier surveys by Keyser
and de Houtman and the first person to
systematically observe the whole sky. During
11 frenetic months of observation in Cape Town
(1750–1754), La Caille charted over 10,000
stars with a half-inch telescope. The names of
his constellations leave little doubt as to what
dominated his thoughts:
ANTLIA (the air pump),
CAELUM (the engraver's tool),
CIRCINUS (the geometer's compass),
FORNAX (after Lavoisier's chemical furnace),
HOROLOGIUM (the clock),
MICROSCOPIUM (the microscope),
NORMA (the carpenter's square),
OCTANS (Hadley's octant),
PICTOR (the easel),
RETICULUM (the telescope reticule, used for
SCULPTOR (the Sculptor), and
TELESCOPIUM (the telescope).
In addition, La Caille honored Table
Mountain with the constellation MENSA, a
constellation perpetually enshrouded in the
Large Magellanic Cloud just as Table Mountain
is so often wreathed in clouds.
Not content with having invented 13 new
constellations, mainly named for tools and
instruments, La Caille also saw fit to break up
the expansive classical constellation Argo
Navis, in turn creating CARINA (the keel), VELA
(the sail), PUPPIS (the poop deck), and PYXIS (the
ship's compass house)." [end of quote]
But of course, these southern stars existed long before these modern
men lived, and the southern stars were known to ancient peoples of
the south and to seafarers, who shaped them somewhat differently
than we do today, but not that far differently apparently, since
certain star groups appear as natural "pictures" and are grouped
together by different peoples in similar ways.
(the above is very interesting to our discussion since it shows rock
carvings as constellations of the southern sky)
Moreover, American Indians saw the Northern stars quite similarly to
>7. If natives did not make the majority of the carvings, who are
>you suggesting did? Current park theory suggests that the carvers
>(most likely a member of the Algonkian group) would have traveled
>to the site and stayed for only a short period of time. The
>closest settlement to the petroglyphs is at Quackenbush,
>representing an Iroquoian village, about ten kilometres
>from Petroglyphs and does not fall into our timeline.
Obviously, all ancient peoples had an "astronomy" in the sense that
they observed the stars and gave different groups of stars different
names. However, more sophisticated astronomy involving precession of
the solstices and equinoxes, plus an understanding that there is a
north ecliptic pole and a north celestial pole, and applying this
astronomy to geodetics is a different matter. In my opinion, the
people who made the Peterborough Petroglyphs are the same people who
made the Miami Circle, i.e. ancient seafarers who were surveying the
Earth ca. 3117 BC. Perhaps these are also the forefathers of some of
the Indian Tribes now found there - and maybe not - this is not my
field. I personally doubt that the native Indian tribes made these
drawings, they do not look Indian but rather Scandinavian.
Especially the boats depicted are very similar to Norse and
predynastic Egyptian boats as found in graphics cited above in my
answer to question 4. As to originating original origins, the
geneticists will be able to answer that question in due time. (See
also the Vastokas discussion
>8. You spoke of a camp of Laurentian hunters. Was this something
you got from the Vastokas or another source?
Vastokas write at p. 24 "What supplementary archaeological evidence
is available is limited to seven small fragments of pottery [in my
opinion these are much younger and thus useless - AK] and, possibly,
two nearby sites. One of these sites, two and a half miles southeast
of the petroglyphs, at the mouth of Jack Creek, produced some worked
flint chips, a stone gouge, and a ground slate point, finds that
would date the presence of Laurentian [sic] hunters in this vicinity
at least five thousand years ago." [Note: it is probably an
error to call these Laurentian hunters - they seem to be the People
of the Shield, as explained below]
The much younger Iroquois Quackenbush settlement that you refer to
is also referred to by the Vastokas (p. 24) where they write "The
second site, five miles southeast of the petroglyphs, at the very
edge of the Canadian Shield [this was the ancient geodetic border]
is a sizeable Iroquois village that flourished some five hundred
The "People of the Shield" were the culture, as the Vastokas write
(p. 21) which involved "tools and ornaments of stone and copper as
well as red ochre...." [red ochre was used to bury the shaman at
Paviland in the United Kingdom] "They were ... fishermen .. who
located their campsites along the major rivers, interior lakes, and
islands accessible only by watercraft."