AN ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY AND OVERVIEW OF

PIPESTONE NATIONAL MONUMENT, MINNESOTA

By

Douglas D. Scott

Thomas D. Thiessen

Jeffrey J. Richner

Scott Stadler

Midwest Archeological Center

Occasional Studies in Anthropology

No. 34

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Midwest Archeological Center

Lincoln, Nebraska

2006
PIPESTONE
This volume provides an overview of the history of archeological investigations conducted at the famous 

catlinite quarries that constitute one 

of the primary resources of Pipestone 

National Monument, Pipestone County, 

Minnesota. It also provides an inventory of the 43 identified archeological localities or, in Archeological Sites 

Management Information System 

(ASMIS) terms, subsites that comprise 

the monument, the entirety of which is 

officially recorded as archeological site 

21PP2. Euroamerican knowledge of the 

catlinite quarries since the seventeenth 

century is summarized and nineteenthcentury antiquarian interest in them is 

reviewed. Professional archeological 

investigations of the quarries, which 

began in 1882 and have continued to 

the present day, are summarized and 

archeological inventory investigations 

conducted in 1993, 1994, and 1997-1998 

are described. The latter investigations 

were conducted under the aegis of the 

National Park Service’s Systemwide 

Archeological Inventory Program (SAIP), 

and were synchronized with prescribed 

fire burns to reduce vegetative fuel load 

and encourage the growth of native 

prairie vegetation. The SAIP inventory 

was facilitated by the development of 

a photogrametrically-produced, georeferenced base map with 50-centimeter contour intervals. Test excavations 

were conducted at the Richner site, an 

extensive prehistoric artifact scatter, and 

at a stone circle site discovered in 1994.

Catlinite as a geological substance 

is also summarized in the report and past 

chemical and mineralogical studies designed to characterize catlinite and other 

pipestones, as well as to correlate archeological artifacts of catlinite with geological material sources, are reviewed.

The 43 archeological localities, 

or ASMIS subsites, are comprised of 

stone quarries, petroglyphs, mounds, 

stone circles, artifact scatters representing temporary habitation and catlinite workshop sites, a group of presumed tool sharpening grooves, and 

historic graffiti. Historic and archeological clues to the existence of a small 

cemetery for students of the Pipestone 

Indian School, used around the turn 

of the twentieth century, exist but this

feature is not considered an archeological resource and its existence remains to 

be confirmed through non-invasive geophysical methods such as ground-penetrating radar. The monument’s Native 

American rock art, found both in situ 

and on slabs of quartzite removed from 

their original location near the Three 

Maidens boulders during the late nineteenth century, was also documented as 

part of the 1990s inventory efforts. Test 

excavations and observations of the extent of ground surface disturbance due 

to the actions of burrowing rodents suggest that the monument’s soil mantle 

is experiencing on-going bioturbation 

which leads to repeated cycles of burial, 

exposure, reburial, and reexposure of 

archeological artifacts and features. It 

is recommended that archeological inventory investigations and total station 

transit mapping continue to be synchronized with future prescribed burns 

to increase knowledge of the monument’s archeological resource base as 

this burial/exposure cycle takes place.

ABSTRACT
PIPESTONE

ii

Pipestone National Monument 

in its entirety is a property listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places. In 

addition, the rock art sites of the monument, both those that occur in situ and that 

represented on the displaced slabs, are 

contributing elements of a multiple property National Register of Historic Places 

district based on the theme of American 

Indian rock art in the state of Minnesota.
iii

This study is respectfully dedicated to the memory of

Paul L. Beaubien and John S. (“Steve”) Sigstad,

whose pioneering studies of the archeology of Pipestone

National Monument opened the doors for our research.
PIPESTONE

iv
Many people contributed in numerous ways to the research reported 

in this volume. Foremost among them 

is Alan R. Woolworth of the Minnesota 

Historical Society, who repeatedly shared 

his extensive files and knowledge and 

offered wise counsel on many occasions. 

Dr. Don Stevens of the National Park 

Service’s Midwest Regional Office generously shared information gathered during his on-going historical research relating to Pipestone National Monument. 

Dr. Jean Prior of the University of Iowa 

advised us of the Samuel Calvin photos, and Julie Golden provided prints 

of them. Steven R. Schulze, Court 

Administrator of Pipestone County, 

furnished a copy of Charles Bennett’s 

will. Dr. David Breternitz, formerly of 

the University of Colorado, shared his 

personal file on John S. Sigstad’s 1965 research. Paula Flemming of the National 

Anthropological Archives and anthropology collections manager Deborah 

Hull-Walski of the National Museum 

of Natural History, Smithsonian 

Institution, assisted our search for archival and artifact holdings relating to 

early research at the Pipestone quarries. 

Marni Schlesinger-Harris of the Library 

of Michigan, Barbara Louie of the 

Detroit Public Library, Russell Martin 

of the American Antiquarian Society, 

and Miriam Touba of the New-York 

Historical Society helped locate issues of 

the Norris Suburban newspaper containing information about the catlinite quarries; in addition, Ms. Touba transcribed 

part of one of Philetus W. Norris’ The 

Great West columns in that newspaper. 

Roberta W. Williamson, Director, Moody 

County Historical Society, Flandreau, 

helped search for information about 

former Flandreau resident, George 

A. Perley. David Rambow and Chris 

Roelfsema-Hummel, past directors of 

the Pipestone County Historical Society 

made the resources of the Society available to us. Rambow generously shared 

many of his personal research files, 

which contained much information 

new to us. Rambow, Robert Kolbe of 

Sioux Falls, South Dakota, and Donald 

Schwarck of South Lyon, Michigan, 

kindly shared copies of Illingworth 

stereographs from their personal photograph collections. Mr. Rambow also 

shared with us information concerning the identity of the individual who 

made the “TOOPSATA” inscription on a 

petrogylph slab from the Three Maidens 

area of the monument; shared a previously unknown (to us) published account of the quarries by Rudolf Cronau; 

and offered invaluable comments on an 

earlier version of this report. Physicists 

Dr. Michael Glascock of the University 

of Missouri and Dr. John Weymouth 

of the University of Nebraska critiqued 

John S. Sigstad’s pioneering study of 

the mineralogical characteristics of catlinite and other pipestones. Dr. Dale R. 

Henning, Dr. Scott Anfinson, and Craig 

M. Johnson all applied their expert 

knowledge to a re-evaluation of the prehistoric pottery from Pipestone National 

Monument. Dr. Scott Anfinson, formerly of the Minnesota State Historic 

Preservation Office and now the present State Archaeologist, and Mark 

Dudzik, former State Archeologist, facilitated access to the site records maintained by their respective offices. Dr. 

Fred Finney made us aware of certain

literature concerning non-cultural 

“mounds” created through bioturbation. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
PIPESTONE

vi

Dr. Linea Sundstrom called our attention to an interesting ethnographic reference regarding the rock art at Pipestone. 

David Hughes and Dirk Loëbenbruck of 

Wichita State University shared Dirk’s 

translation of Rudolph Cronau’s text. 

Rock art enthusiast Charles Bailey stimulated Thiessen’s interest in the rock art 

at Pipestone. Dr. James N. Gundersen 

shared the results of his x-ray powder 

diffraction studies of catlinite, and ultimately donated his personal collection of catlinite and pipestone samples 

to the monument. The many archeologists identified in Table 5-2 furnished 

references on the cultural context of 

sites that have yielded confirmed catlinite artifacts. Dr. Leigh Syms of the 

Manitoba Museum of Man and Nature 

shared information on confirmed catlinite artifacts from a site in Manitoba.

Pipestone National Monument 

staff supported our research in many 

ways, including with their patience. 

These include Palma Wilson and 

James LaRock, past and current monument superintendents, respectively, 

as well as Todd Suess, Kristin Legg, 

Glen Livermont, Alice Erickson, Gia 

Wagner, and Betty McSwain. Former 

monument Chief of Maintenance Chuck 

Derby at various times shared information about the monument’s resources.

Last but not least, several 

Midwest Archeological Center staff 

members deserve acknowledgement for their excellent assistance 

with the project. Scott Stadler, Harold 

Roeker, Lisa Stanley, Bill Volf, and Ron

Marvin ably conducted test excavations 

at the monument. Glen Livermont and 

Bruce Bessken, detailed from Badlands 

National Park, assisted Stadler and his 

crew. Robert K. Nickel and Forest Frost 

conducted geophysical investigations at 

two locations within the monument. Alan 

Smith and Ann Bauermeister helped sort 

out the museum collections that resulted from earlier archeological research, 

and Alan also assisted with fieldwork 

and photography. Dr. Mark Lynott, Dr. 

William Hunt, Bruce Jones, and Peter 

Topping of the Royal Commission on the 

Historical Monuments of England (also 

known as English Heritage), as well as 

the writers, mapped the South Quarry. 

Mr. Topping produced the map which 

appears on the cover of this volume.
vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract.............................................................................................................................. i

Dedication .......................................................................................................................iii

Acknowledgements......................................................................................................... v

List of Tables..................................................................................................................viii

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. x

Introduction ......................................................................................................................1

History and Background of the Monument..................................................................9

Environmental Setting...................................................................................................31

Regional Culture History ..............................................................................................31

Catlinite and Other Pipestones.....................................................................................45

Early Knowledge of the Quarries, 17th Century - 1880s ...........................................67

Previous Archeological Investigations, 1870s-1980s.................................................105

Archeological Inventory Investigations of the 1990s ...............................................151

Inventory of Archeological Resources.......................................................................175

Analysis of Selected Artifact Categories ...................................................................205

Rock Art.........................................................................................................................225

Conclusions and Recommendations..........................................................................291

References Cited ...........................................................................................................307

Appendix A. Selected Portions of Philetus W. Norris’ Letters

Published in the Norris Suburban Newspaper..................................................359

Appendix B. P.W. Norris’ Report on Archeological

Investigations at the Catlinite Quarries, 1882.....................................................365

Appendix C. Transcription of Theodore Hayes Lewis’ Notes

relating to the Three Maidens Petroglyphs ........................................................375

Appendix D. The Pipestone Indian School Cemetery.............................................381

Appendix E. Earthen Enclosures in Pipestone County, Minnesota......................389
PIPESTONE

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Culture history nomenclature used by selected authors with

respect to archeological complexes in southwestern Minnesota,

northwestern Iowa, and eastern South Dakota. ..........................................................33

Table 2. Pipestone County archeological sites. ...........................................................42

Table 3. Reported sources of soft red pipestones other than the

catlinite quarries..............................................................................................................48

Table 4. Catlinite artifacts confirmed by x-ray diffraction and portable

infrared mineral analyzer spectroscopy analyses. .....................................................58

Table 5. Mounds investigated at the catlinite quarries by P.W. Norris

in 1882. ............................................................................................................................112

Table 6. Artifacts from Pipestone in the collections of the U.S.

National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.............................115

Table 7. Isolated archeological artifacts recorded by John S. Sigstad

at Pipestone National Monument, 1965. .....................................................................137

Table 8. Miscellaneous archeological activities at Pipestone National

Monument, 1970s-1990s. ...............................................................................................146

Table 9. Archeological inventory investigations at Pipestone National

Monument, 1993-2001....................................................................................................155

Table 10. Artifacts from Test Units 1-6 at the Richner Site (21PP2,

Locality 31, 1994-3).........................................................................................................164

Table 11. Artifacts from Test Units 1-3 at the Stone Circle Site (21PP2,

Locality 32, 1994-4). .......................................................................................................166

Table 12. Recorded archeological features, Pipestone National Monument.........181

Table 13. Mounds reported at Pipestone National Monument...............................199

Table 14. Pipestone National Monument archeological collections at

the Midwest Archeological Center..............................................................................208

Table 15. Locations at Pipestone National Monument where prehistoric

ceramics have been found. ...........................................................................................219

Table 16. Concordance of classifications of prehistoric ceramics from Pipestone 

National Monument......................................................................................................222 
ix

Table 17. Comparison of Pipestone National Monument pottery

attributed to general chronological periods by different analysts..........................224

Table 18. Pipestone National Monument rock art recording events. .....................229

Table 19. Concordance of published and unpublished petroglyph

illustrations, Pipestone National Monument. ............................................................239

Table 20. Three Maidens petroglyph motifs recorded in rubbings and

tracings made by W.H. Holmes at Pipestone National Monument, 1892...............246

Table 21. Concordance of Bennett petroglyph photographs, Lewis motifs,

museum numbers, and figure numbers.....................................................................254

Table 22. Native American petroglyphs presently at Pipestone National 

Monument. .....................................................................................................................257

Table 23. Lost or unidentified Lewis/Winchell petroglyph slabs from

the Three Maidens at Pipestone National Monument..............................................275

Table 24. Theodore H. Lewis’ categorization of petroglyph motifs at

Pipestone National Monument....................................................................................281
PIPESTONE

LIST OF FIGURES

Cover: Beaubien’s South Quarry at Pipestone National Monument as drawn 

by cartographic conventions used by the Royal Commission on the Historical 

Monuments of England (courtesy of Peter Topping).

Figure 1. The location of Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone County, 

Minnesota..........................................................................................................................1

Figure 2. Aerial photograph of Pipestone National Monument with selected labeled features....................................................................................................................7

Figure 3. Late nineteenth or early twentieth century view of an active quarry at 

Pipestone National Monument..................................................................................... 17

Figure 4. Long disused quarry pits along the quarry line at Pipestone National 

Monument. ...................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 5. Native American tipi camp at the catlinite quarries, 1892....................... 18

Figure 6. White craftsman fashioning objects from catlinite, 1892. ........................ 18

Figure 7. A catlinite quarry pit drawn by W.O. Williams, 1859. ..............................25

Figure 8. Winnewissa Falls drawn by W.O. Williams, 1859.....................................25

Figure 9. W.H. Illingworth photograph of the catlinite quarries, 1870...................27

Figure 10. W.H. Illingworth photograph of a portion of the Sioux quartzite

ledge at the catlinite quarries, 1870. .............................................................................27

Figure 11. Schematic cross-section of a catlinite quarry pit, showing

relationship of the catlinite and Sioux quartzite deposits and the dip

of the catlinite beds. .......................................................................................................45

Figure 12. W.H. Holmes’ 1892 map of the catlinite quarries and nearby

archeological features. .................................................................................................122

Figure 13. Excavation units at Locality 16c, Sigstad’s “sweat lodge” site.............. 138

Figure 14. Prescribed burn in progress at Pipestone National Monument,

October 1997. ................................................................................................................. 153

Figure 15. Jeffrey Richner, Chuck Derby, and Betty McSwain examining the Stone 

Circle Site, 1994. ............................................................................................................ 159
xi

Figure 16. Test Unit 97N 105W showing the edge of Feature 1 at the

Stone Circle Site, October 1997. ................................................................................... 172

Figure 17. Archeological base map developed for the 1997-1998 inventories....... 179

Figure 18. Projectile points from various episodes of archeological

investigations at Pipestone National Monument. .................................................... 212

Figure 19. Late Middle Woodland pottery from Pipestone National

Monument. .................................................................................................................... 218

Figure 20. The Three Maidens glacial erratics, 1892................................................228

Figure 21. 1859 drawing by W.O. Williams of a Native American

contemplating the Three Maidens petroglyphs. ......................................................235

Figure 22. “Perley’s Chart” of the Three Maidens petroglyphs, 1876...................235

Figure 23. Examples of individual Three Maidens petroglyph motifs

drawn at different times by different recorders....................................................... 237

Figure 24. Three Maidens petroglyphs recorded ca. 1878 by

Newton H. Winchell. ...................................................................................................238

Figure 25. Three Maidens petroglyphs recorded in 1881 by Rudolf Cronau.......244

Figure 26. Rudolf Cronau drawing of petroglyphs published in a

Die Gartenlaube article of unknown date................................................................. 245

Three Maidens petroglyph motifs recorded by W.H. Holmes, but not

by T.H. Lewis (Figures 27-33).

Figure 27. Rectilinear pattern associated with Lewis motif 58.............................. 247

Figure 28. Connected bisected circles....................................................................... 247

Figure 29. Possible zoomorph associated with Lewis motif 23. ............................ 248

Figure 30. Upper portion of a thunderbird or anthropomorph motif.................. 248

Figure 31. Small pecked circles or “dimples” encircling Lewis motif 50. ............ 249

Figure 32. Small pecked circle or oval “dimple” beneath feet of

Lewis motif 58...............................................................................................................250
PIPESTONE

xii

Figure 33. Small pecked circles or “dimples” in the palms and

abdominal region of Lewis motif 14. ......................................................................... 251

Figure 34. Three Maidens petroglyphs recorded in 1889 by

Theodore H. Lewis. ......................................................................................................253

Charles H. Bennett’s photos of petroglyph slabs with chalked motifs,

ca. 1904 (Figures 35-51).

Figure 35. Lewis Slab 1, bearing motifs 1-10. ........................................................... 261

Figure 36. Lewis Slab 2, bearing motif 11 plus “BUCK SKIN JIM” and 

“E GEORGE”. ................................................................................................................ 261

Figure 37. Lewis Slab 3 (lower), bearing motif 12, part of 13, and the feet

of anthropomorph motif 43; and Slab 20 (upper), bearing part of motif 43

plus two bird tracks and the pair of bisected circles that were not

recorded by Lewis. ....................................................................................................... 262

Figure 38. Lewis Slab 4 (left), bearing motif 13; and Slab 5 (right),

bearing motif 14............................................................................................................ 262

Figure 39. Lewis Slab 6 (right), bearing motif 15 plus three(?) bird tracks;

and an unidentified slab bearing three(?) bird tracks. ............................................263

Figure 40. Lewis Slab 7 (lower), bearing motifs 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and a bird

track; and an unidentified slab (upper) with two or more(?) bird tracks..............263

Figure 41. Lewis Slab 8 (right), bearing motif 22; and Slab 15(?) (left),

bearing motif 36 and an unidentified motif. ............................................................264

Figure 42. Lewis Slab 11(?) (right), bearing motif 27; Slab 19 (left lower),

bearing motifs 41, 42, 52(?); and Slab 26(?) (left upper), bearing motif 56

(motif 57 is not apparent or may be on an undepicted fragment of this slab)......264

Figure 43. Lewis Slab 13 (lower), bearing motifs 31 and 32; and an

unidentified slab with a bird track, which was formerly designated Slab B........265

Figure 44. Lewis Slab 18, bearing motifs 39 and 40, plus an

unidentified motif. .......................................................................................................265

Figure 45. Lewis Slab 22 (upper), bearing motifs 46 and 47, plus initials

“HC”(?); and Slab 23 (lower), bearing motifs 48 and 49. ..........................................266
xiii

Figure 46. Lewis Slab 24 (lower), bearing motifs 50, 51, 52, encircling

“dimples,” and “TOOPSATA”; and an unidentified slab (upper)

bearing two bird tracks and a zoomorph(?) motif. ..................................................266

Figure 47. Lewis Slab 25 (right), bearing motifs 54 and 55; and Slab 21(?)

(left), bearing two bird track motifs. ..........................................................................267

Figure 48. Lewis Slab 29, bearing motifs 65 through 70.........................................267

Figure 49. Lewis Slab 32 (upper), bearing motif 73; and two unidentified

slabs (lower, left and right), bearing a bird track, an axe(?), and a bird.................268

Figure 50. Unidentified slab bearing three zoomorph, anthropomorph,

and bird track motifs. ..................................................................................................268

Figure 51. Two unidentified slabs, one bearing a single bird track and the

other several unidentified motifs...............................................................................269

Figure 52. Charles H. Bennett posing with his “collection” of quartzite

slabs bearing petroglyphs from the Three Maidens area, 1906..............................269

Figure 53. Petroglyph Slab A in the Pipestone National Monument

museum collection. ......................................................................................................277

Figure 54. Page 17 from the notebook kept by W.H. Holmes during

his 1892 visit to the catlinite quarries. .......................................................................277

Figure 55. The Derby petroglyph panel at Pipestone National Monument.........278

Figure 56. The Noble bird track petroglyph at Pipestone National

Monument. ....................................................................................................................279

Figure 57. Possible circular petroglyphs recorded in 2001 at Pipestone

National Monument.....................................................................................................279

Figure B1. Profile and plan view of P.W. Norris’ Mound 1 at the catlinite

quarries, 1882. ...............................................................................................................369

Figure B2. Profile and plan view of P.W. Norris’ Mound 3 at the

catlinite quarries, 1882. ................................................................................................369

Figure D1. Locality 17, the reputed historic burial mound recorded

by Sigstad.......................................................................................................................384
PIPESTONE

xiv

Figure D2. Partially exposed stone alignment bordering southeast edge of 

Locality 17, the reputed historic burial mound recorded by Sigstad.....................384

Figure E1. Map of the circular enclosure and mound east and north

of the catlinite quarries, observed by J.N. Nicollet in 1838 and investigated

by P.W. Norris in 1882. .................................................................................................391
A Brief Historical Perspective

The famed pipestone quarries of 

southwestern Minnesota (Figures 1 and 

2) that constitute the core of Pipestone

National Monument have fascinated 

scholars and the public ever since the 

first eyewitness description of them was 

published over 160 years ago. Likewise, 

the quarry vicinity has been the subject of sporadic archeological investigations for over 120 years. Although 

many early visitors to the catlinite 

quarries commented on the quarries 

themselves and nearby archeological 

features, primarily the petroglyphs or 

rock art found there, the first detailed 

documentation of these features did 

not appear in print until 1884. Newton 

H. Winchell, the Minnesota state geologist from 1872 until 1900 (Nute and 

Ackerman 1935:81; Merrill 1964:469), 

may have visited the quarries as early as 

1877 or 1878. A short description of the 

geology and topography of the quarries 

appeared in the annual report of the 

Geological and Natural History Survey 

of Minnesota the latter year (Winchell 

1878). In 1884 Winchell published four 

plates depicting 40 of the “most conspicuous and important” of the petroglyphs 

around the Three Maidens boulders 

(Winchell and Upham 1884:555-561; 

reprinted in Woolworth 1983:15-18).

INTRODUCTION

Figure 1. The location of Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone County, Minnesota.
PIPESTONE

The next researcher to document the archeology at the quarries was

Philetus W. Norris, a colorful individual 

who had traveled widely through the 

American West and had served as the 

second superintendent of Yellowstone 

National Park from 1877 to 1882 

(Chittenden 1900:303-305; Binkowski 

1995). Norris claimed to have visited the quarries four times: in 1842 or 

1843 (Appendix A; Thomas 1894:44); 

1857 (Appendix A; Thomas 1894:42); 

1877 (Appendix A; Norris 1877; Thomas 

1894:42); and 1882 (Appendix A; Thomas 

1894:42-43; Mallery 1893:87). On the 

last occasion, he was employed by the 

Smithsonian Institution’s Division of 

Mound Exploration as an archeologist 

(Brown 1981; Smith 1981, 1985; Perttula 

and Price 1984). During the summer of 

1882, Norris excavated in seven mounds 

near the falls and the quarries, as well 

as in three mounds associated with an 

irregularly circular earthwork located 

about two miles northeast of the quarries.

Sometime in the early 1880s, the 

quarries were visited by a German traveler in the United States, Rudolf Cronau. 

He published the nineteenth-century 

equivalent of a “coffee table book” 

based on his travels (Cronau 1886), 

with one page of text about the quarries and a single, full-page drawing of 

the falls. He published a more detailed 

narrative, entitled Im Wilden Westen, 

in 1890. In the latter (Cronau 1890:85) 

he illustrated 15 of the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs and remarked that he had 

recorded only “40 to 50” of the thousands of petroglyphs that Catlin is 

said to have observed. Cronau’s illustration of the petroglyphs was reproduced by Mallery (1893:88, Figure 50).

During the summer of 1889, another Smithsonian researcher, Walter 

James Hoffman, visited Pipestone “to 

copy the petroglyphs upon the cliffs 

of that historic quarry.” Unfortunately, 

no information about Hoffman’s visit is available other than brief mention of it in the annual report of the 

Bureau of Ethnology for the 1888-

1889 fiscal year (Powell 1893:xiii).

A second archeologist also visited Pipestone in 1889. Theodore Hayes 

Lewis was employed by Alfred J. Hill of 

St. Paul, Minnesota, to conduct archeological surveys within several northcentral states, including Minnesota, between 1880 and 1895, the year of Hill’s 

death. They called this undertaking the 

Northwestern Archaeological Survey 

(Lewis 1898; Keyes 1928; Dobbs 1991). On 

August 14, 1889, Lewis made tracings of 79 

petroglyphs on 35 Sioux Quartzite slabs 

which had been removed from the Three 

Maidens vicinity at the behest of a local 

Pipestone resident, Charles H. Bennett 

(Appendix C; Winchell 1911:Plate VIII).

In 1892, yet another Smithsonian 

researcher visited the quarries for the 

purpose of investigating the archeology 

there. William Henry Holmes, also of 

the Bureau of Ethnology, spent ten days 

at Pipestone in June of that year, drawing and mapping the historic quarries 

and other nearby archeological features 

(Powell 1896:xxviii). The results of his 

visit were first described in print in an 

abstract published in the proceedings of 

the forty-first meeting of the American 

Association for the Advancement of 

Science, a scientific conference held at 

Rochester, New York, the following 

August (Holmes 1892a). He presented 

more information about the quarries in 
INTRODUCTION

his description of catlinite which was 

published in 1907 in the first volume of 

Frederick Webb Hodges’ monumental 

Handbook of American Indians North 

of Mexico (Holmes 1907). His most 

complete description of the quarries, 

however, was not published until 1919. 

In a chapter in Part 1 of the Handbook 

of Aboriginal American Antiquities, 

entitled “The Red Pipestone Quarry,” 

Holmes (1919) summarized what was 

then known about catlinite, its geological occurrence at Pipestone, and 

the quarries. Homes is reported to 

have made a plane table map while 

at Pipestone (John Wesley Powell to 

the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 

April 12, 1898, in Gurley n.d.:16-19), 

and a detailed map of the quarries and 

Winnewissa Falls area appears in his 

1919 article (Holmes 1919:Figure 123). 

An interesting feature of Holmes’ published map of the quarries is the location of eight mounds and more than 300 

small unlabeled circles, the latter presumably circular alignments of stones 

often called “tipi rings.” Several sketch 

maps in his unpublished notebook depict circles that are labeled as “lodges.”

On April 24-25, 1905, the quarries 

were visited by a Minnesota Historical 

Society archeologist, Jacob Vradenburg 

Brower. He drew general maps of the 

quarry area on four pages of his field 

notebook, depicting such features as 

the Three Maidens, various roads, the 

falls, some of the quarries, the Nicollet 

inscription rock, Pipestone Creek, and 

a feature labeled “Jumper’s Mound,” 

possibly a reference to the newly-made 

mound observed by Catlin and which 

Norris believed he had dug into in 1882.

More than 40 years lapsed before 

the quarries again received archeological attention. In 1949, Paul L. Beaubien, 

Regional Archeologist of the National 

Park Service’s Region Two office in 

Omaha, spent five days (June 14-18) visiting the quarries, by then a national 

monument, and assessing the archeology of the area. His report of that 

visit (Beaubien 1949, 1955, 1957, 1983) 

reviewed the history of the quarries as 

recorded by various Euroamericans, 

described the archeological surface 

features of the monument, and offered 

recommendations for further work. In 

general, he noted that much of the archeological evidence earlier observed 

by archeologists had “melted away, or...

been removed or destroyed.” In particular, he noted that no mounds were 

to be seen, the surviving petroglyphs 

(only 14 of Bennett’s slabs were known 

to Beaubien) had only recently been returned to the monument, and only four 

stone circles or tipi rings, whose condition he described as “broken,” could be 

found. In walking cultivated fields, he 

reported finding scattered rocks that 

once could have been part of circular 

stone alignments, a portion of a grooved 

maul, an ovate scraper of quartzite, and 

numerous pieces of worked catlinite. He 

offered two recommendations: 1) “archeological exploration” (i.e., excavation) of the quarries at several locations 

along the quarry line to obtain samples 

of catlinite from different portions of 

the quarries and artifacts that might 

help to understand the use of the area 

in prehistoric times; and 2) the development of an archeological base map in 

conjunction with civil engineering surveys of the monument land. Beaubien 

also offered a more implicit recommendation that the monument bound-
PIPESTONE

ary be expanded to protect adjoining 

lands which contained archeological 

evidence pertaining to the quarries.

Despite the long-term interest in 

Pipestone’s archeology only one attempt 

to inventory the entire monument occurred. In 1965 and 1966 John S. “Steve” 

Sigstad conducted a visual inventory of 

the monument and undertook a limited 

site testing program (Sigstad 1970a). He 

was hampered by thick vegetation that 

obscured the ground surface, yet he managed to identify and record 22 sites in the 

monument. Sigstad’s work ultimately 

led to a pioneering study of the age and 

distribution of catlinite (Sigstad 1973).

The research conducted by 

these various individuals is reviewed in more detail in Chapter 7.

The Current Study

Like all Federal bureaus, the 

National Park Service (NPS) is obligated 

by the National Historic Preservation Act 

(particularly through section 110[a][2]), 

Executive Order 11593, and section 14 of 

the Archeological Resources Protection 

Act to identify, evaluate, preserve, and 

protect historic properties, of which one 

type is archeological sites. However, 

a 1991 Management Control Review 

of the Service’s archeological program 

identified a critical high risk material 

weakness in the basic inventory information about archeological resources 

on National Park System lands. In 

short, the review indicated that the NPS 

simply does not know what its archeological resources consist of - their numbers, their locations, their significance, 

their condition - and consequently NPS 

officials cannot make informed judgments about their proper management.

Sigstad’s 1965 inventory exceeded professional standards of the day, yet 

the monument could not be considered 

fully inventoried because survey and 

recordation standards had changed by 

the 1990s. Under a national archeological survey initiative, an NPS task force 

created the Systemwide Archeological 

Inventory Program, or SAIP (Aubry et 

al. 1992), a long-term strategy to inventory archeological resources on NPS 

lands. The program is intended to 

provide a framework for systematic,

scientific research that locates, evaluates, and documents archeological resources. The importance of SAIP is that 

it emphasizes research within a cultural 

resources management framework. The 

purpose, structure, and requirements of 

the SAIP have been published and each 

NPS Region is required to develop a 

general plan to implement this program.

The Midwest Region developed 

a SAIP plan that identified the need to 

conduct a full inventory of Pipestone 

National Monument. It had been nearly 

four decades since the last in-depth evaluation of the monument’s archeological resources. Obviously the regional 

knowledge of prehistory has advanced 

in the interim, and it was appropriate 

to revisit the Pipestone resources and 

re-evaluate them within these new archeological paradigms and increased 

understanding of the regional culture 

history and overall human use of the 

landscape. Another factor that helped 

stimulate the Pipestone inventory project was that it was complemented by a 

study of the monument’s rock art started in 1994 (Thiessen and Bailey 2000) 

and by a review of the archeology and 

ethnohistory of the nearby Blood Run 

site initiated in 1996 (Thiessen 1998). 
INTRODUCTION

The information resulting from these 

efforts provided a valuable perspective 

for assessing the archeological resources of Pipestone National Monument.

It was obvious from a perusal of 

the current archeological literature that 

many additional archeological resources have been identified in Pipestone 

County and in the region in general 

since Sigstad’s survey. Several syntheses for nearby regions had recently 

become available and helped place the 

monument’s resources in a broader perspective (Anfinson 1997; Alex 2000).

Another issue confronting the 

need was that while Sigstad had recorded his sites on site forms and given 

them sequential trinomial archeological site numbers, he had never formally 

submitted the forms to the state archeologist for official registration. Thus, 

his site numbers were not recognized 

by the state and there arose confusion 

over the use of official and unofficial 

site numbers in the professional literature and databases. A goal of the 

re-inventory project was to clarify and 

rectify these numbering problems.

SAIP funds were made available 

in fiscal years 1997 and 1998 to conduct 

the project. The overall objective of the 

two-year study was to complete a pedestrian examination of the monument, 

synchronized with the monument’s prescribed grass burn program. By scheduling the inventory efforts to follow 

the prescribed burns, greater ground 

visibility would be achieved, thus allowing greater archeological resource 

visibility as well. Once sites, locales, 

and findspots were identified they 

could be recorded, assessed, and evaluated in the context of the monument’s 

National Register of Historic Places status as contributing or non-contributing 

resources. In addition, all of the monument’s land could be examined within a 

two-year program of prescribed burns, 

and the two-year study cycle allowed 

evaluation of selected sites/locales by 

means of test excavations. The methods and results of the 1998-1999 inventory efforts are detailed in Chapter 8.

The project research design 

also called for a review and evaluation 

of prior archeological studies of the 

monument. Combining the new inventory effort, site testing, and the review of previous research allowed for 

a total reassessment of the significance 

of the park’s archeological resources.

An area of particular concern 

was the need to re-evaluate Sigstad’s catlinite age and distribution study, which 

he undertook following his survey of 

the monument. Since he completed his 

dissertation on the subject, much research with similar goals but different 

methods (x-ray powder diffraction and 

x-ray florescence, as well as neutron activation analysis) had been performed 

on catlinite artifacts as well as artifacts 

made of other pipestones. The services 

of two physicists, Dr. John Weymouth 

of the University of Nebraska and Dr. 

Michael Glascock of the University of 

Missouri, were obtained to critique 

and evaluate Sigstad’s research in light 

of current knowledge of the methodology and instrumentation he employed. 

This is summarized in a later chapter.

Another component of the 

Pipestone study was the reorganization of the monument’s archeologi-
PIPESTONE



cal collections housed at the Midwest 

Archeological Center. Over the years 

the Beaubien and Sigstad collections 

had become intermixed. The original 

records and photographs also needed 

reorganization and a finding aid developed so that their potential for research 

could be realized. The expert opinions of 

three regional specialists were solicited 

with regard to the typing, age, and taxonomic affiliation of the prehistoric pottery recovered at Pipestone by Beaubien 

and Sigstad and the few sherds found 

during the course of the current inventory effort. Dr. Scott Anfinson of the 

Minnesota Historical Society, Dr. Dale 

R. Henning of the Illinois State Museum, 

and Mr. Craig M. Johnson independently studied the prehistoric pottery from 

Pipestone and provided separate reports 

of their research during the course of 

the project. These re-evaluation studies 

are also summarized in a later chapter.

Complementing this collections 

reorganization effort was the accessioning and cataloging of an extensive group of Sigstad’s photographs 

which were donated to Pipestone 

National Monument in July of 1996 by 

William and Marcia Tate of Aurora, 

Colorado. A finding aid for this image 

collection was developed (Dale 1997).

The final field study was an

add-on to the project. Peter Topping, an 

archeologist with English Heritage (the 

former Royal Monuments Commission 

of the United Kingdom), was a guest 

at the Midwest Archeological Center 

in 1998. Center Manager Mark Lynott, 

William Hunt, Bruce Jones, and Scott 

and Thiessen visited Pipestone on May 

5-8, 1998, to allow Topping to train 

the team in a small-scale mapping

technique employed by English

Heritage archeologists. Portions of 

the South Quarry pits were mapped 

during this training exercise. The resulting map, finished by Topping 

after his return to England, appears on the cover of this report.

The research undertaken as part 

of the 1997-1998 SAIP inventory effort 

has been supplemented by observations during subsequent brief visits 

to the monument made by Midwest 

Archeological Center personnel for 

various purposes, such as those made 

in 2001 by Thiessen (Thiessen 2001) and 

in 2005 by Scott and Ann Bauermeister 

(Scott 2005). Later, post-inventory research has also augmented the body of 

knowledge about the monument’s archeological and ethnographic resources, and the use made of them by native peoples (Toupal 2004; Zedeño and 

Basaldú 2004; Scott and Thiessen 2005).

This Report

This report accomplishes several 

purposes. In addition to reviewing the 

history and environmental setting of 

the monument and the culture history 

of the surrounding region (Chapters 2, 

3, and 4, respectively), it summarizes 

catlinite as a geological substance and 

reviews past and on-going studies of 

the chemical and mineralogical characteristics of catlinite to distinguish it 

from other pipestones and to attempt 

to determine its use by native peoples 

through time and space (Chapter 5). 

Particular attention is paid to the pioneering “age and distribution” study of 

catlinite that was conducted by John S. 

Sigstad. The report reviews the state of 

knowledge about the quarries during 
INTRODUCTION

Figure 2. Aerial photograph of Pipestone National Monument with selected labeled features 

(adapted from monument-wide photogrammetric map, 1997).
PIPESTONE



the early nineteenth century and earlier 

(Chapter 6), as well as the history of archeological investigations conducted at 

the quarries since the latter part of the 

nineteenth century (Chapter 7). It describes the methods and results of the 

1993, 1994, and 1997-1998 archeological field inventory efforts at Pipestone 

National Monument (Chapter 8), and 

presents an inventory of the archeological localities that comprise site 21PP2 at 

the monument. It revisits the archeological artifact collections of the monument 

and assesses the temporal and cultural 

implications for occupation or use of 

the immediate vicinity of the quarries, 

particularly as inferred from prehistoric chipped stone projectile points and 

ceramics (Chapter 10). It also summarizes available information about prehistoric Native American rock art that 

occurs within the monument (Chapter 

11), a complementary study that was 

initiated in 1994. And finally the report 

offers recommendations for both informed management of the monument’s 

archeological resources and future research studies of them (Chapter 12).
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OF THE MONUMENT

History of the Pipestone Indian 

Reservation

The area that today surrounds 

the red pipestone quarries of southwest Minnesota has been known to 

humans for at least 5000 years. Native 

Americans certainly used the area for 

hunting and foraging as early as the 

Late Archaic era (Alex 2000:73-84; aka 

the Middle Prehistoric Period in the 

nearby Prairie Lake Region to the north 

and west [Anfinson 1997:42-88]) which 

began around 3000 BC. By at least the 

Middle Woodland period (circa 200 BC 

to AD 400 [Alex 2000:115]; aka Fox Lake 

Phase of the Middle Prehistoric Period 

in the Prairie Lake Region, 200 BC - AD 

700 [Anfinson 1997:47-75]) the native inhabitants of the region were digging, 

using, and trading the red argillite that 

became known as pipestone or catlinite. The quarries were alluded to in the 

writings of seventeenth and eighteenth 

century Europeans, but it was not until George Catlin visited the quarries in 

1836 that they became more generally 

known. The earlier history of the quarries is discussed in a subsequent chapter. Presented here is a brief history of 

the quarries and the surrounding land 

from the mid-nineteenth century until 

the locale became a national monument 

in 1937. Much of the information presented here is drawn, largely verbatim, 

from histories written by Murray (1965) 

and Rothman and Holder (1992). Other 

general sources of information about the 

history of the quarries and Pipestone 

National Monument include Davis 

(1934), Murray (1961), Corbett (1980), and 

Kelley (1997). Information about the 

founding and development of the city 

of Pipestone can be found in Rose (1911), 

Pipestone County Centennial Committee 

(1958), Pipestone County Historical 

Society (1984), and Amato (2002a-b).

In the treaty signed at Traverse 

des Sioux, Minnesota Territory in 1851, 

the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands of 

Sioux ceded to the U.S. government 

their lands in southwestern Minnesota 

(Kappler 1972:588-590). The Yankton 

Sioux also claimed much of this land but 

were not signatories to the treaty (Davis 

1934:47; Murray 1965:19; Corbett 1976:20).

Because of the dissatisfaction of 

the Yanktons with this land cession, a 

separate treaty with them was signed 

on April 19, 1858, and ratified by the 

Senate on February 16, 1859. Article 8 

of the treaty reserved land around the 

quarries and addressed the Yanktons’ 

rights to them (Kappler 1972:779):

The said Yankton Indians shall be 

secured in the free and unrestricted 

use of the Red Pipestone Quarry, or 

so much thereof as they have been 

accustomed to frequent and use for 

the purpose of procuring stone for 

pipes; and the United States hereby stipulate and agree to cause to 

be surveyed and marked so much 

thereof as shall be necessary and 

proper for that purpose, and retain 

the same and keep it open and free to 

the Indians to visit and procure stone 

for pipes so long as they shall desire.

To comply with the treaty, the 

General Land Office was ordered to 

conduct a survey of the land to be reserved by this clause. The reservation 
PIPESTONE

10

was to be one mile square, centered 

on the rock bearing the inscription of 

the Nicollet-Fremont party (Corbett 

1978:101-102). The reservation was also 

to be closed to public land surveys at 

this boundary. C.H. Snow and Henry 

Sutton completed the survey in August 

1859. The 1859 survey established the 

boundaries of the reservation, portions of which coincide with some of 

today’s monument boundary (Murray 

1965:9-11). Two slightly different versions of the 1859 survey map exist. One 

is at the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) in Washington, 

D.C. (Record Group 75, Central Map 

File, No. 53, Pipestone Quarry Reserve, 

Hutton and Snow, Surveyors, 1859; and 

also Record Group 49, Map Enclosures 

Removed from Volumes: Case F-Field 

Notes, Entry 128[22]) and the other is 

in the Alfred J. Hill Papers, Box 5, at 

the Minnesota Historical Society. The 

narrative report filed by Snow and 

Hutton is at NARA (Record Group 

49, Map Enclosures Removed from 

Volumes: Case F-Field Notes, Entry 

128[23]), and the Society also has a copy.

During 1870, public land surveys in the Pipestone area were completed, but the General Land Office 

instructions were ignored and the surveys extended into the Pipestone reservation tract. This led to the filing of 

questionable homestead claims for land 

within the reservation (Murray 1965:23).

By July 1872 the General Land 

Office ordered a resurvey of the reservation and its boundaries to be marked 

on public land plats. The resurvey was 

completed in late July. It was found that 

the reservation occupied part of sections 

1 and 2, Township 106, Range 46 West, 

and a small strip of sections 35 and 36, 

Township 107, Range 46 West. It was also 

found that the reservation boundaries 

were not aligned parallel to public land 

survey directions, resulting in small 

portions of sections 1 and 2, Township 

106, being outside the southern boundary of the reservation (Murray 1965:23). 

The report of the 1872 resurvey is on 

file at NARA (Record Group 49, Map 

Enclosures Removed from Volumes: 

Case F-Field Notes, Entry 128[24]).

By late 1875, all of the filings on 

the reservation had been canceled except 

that of August Clausen. A questionable 

patent was issued to Clausen for the 

southwest quarter of section 1, Township 

106. By late 1877, this tract was in the 

possession of Herbert M. Carpenter 

of Minneapolis, and by 1880, quartzite for building stone was being quarried from this land (Murray 1965:24-25).

More settlers arrived in the area 

after “Pipestone City” was platted in 1876. 

By 1878 the village was a small but growing trading center. With the increased 

population in the area, other encroachments on the reservation land sprang 

up. A two-story house was built on reservation land in 1883, and other structures soon followed (Murray 1965:25-26).

In a July 20, 1882, letter to one 

of the town’s founders, the Yankton 

chief Strike-the-Ree complained about 

Carpenter’s asserting a right to reservation land and stated that the Yanktons 

understood that a township of land was 

to be reserved for them, not merely a 

section (Pipestone County Star, August 

3, 1882). As a result of complaints 

from Yanktons and some of the local 

Pipestone citizens, the Commissioner of 
11

HISTORY

Indian Affairs sent an agent to Pipestone 

to investigate. The agent reported back 

that the intruders lacked legal title to 

the land they occupied and offered: “I 

will take pleasure in removing them 

and in tearing down their buildings 

if you so direct” (Murray 1965:25-26).

The matter was referred to the 

Secretary of the Interior, but no action was 

taken during the Arthur administration. 

The 1884 election of Grover Cleveland to 

the Presidency brought into the government officials who were more sympathetic to native concerns. In the meantime, more people illegally settled on 

the reservation lands. The Yanktons became increasingly angry about this situation, and petitioned the Commissioner 

in November 1886 to take action.

The Commissioner of Indian 

Affairs and the Secretary of the Interior 

favored removal of the settlers, forced if 

necessary. The squatters ignored written 

notices to voluntarily remove themselves 

from the land, so assistance was sought 

from the U.S. Army at Fort Randall, 

South Dakota (Murray 1965:25-40).

A detail of 10 soldiers commanded 

by Captain J.W. Bean arrived in Pipestone 

in October of 1887. The presence of the 

Army persuaded the squatters to move 

by the following Monday, October 17, 

and to remove their buildings by March 

1, 1888. In the meantime Lieutenant 

W.N. Blow surveyed and re-marked the 

reservation boundaries, the third survey 

on reservation land (Murray 1965:27).

A considerable body of highly 

pleased Yanktons witnessed the removal 

(Murray 1965:27-28). A local agricultural 

association negotiated an agreement with 

the Yanktons present which allowed the 

association to rent the fenced portions 

of the land for use as a fair grounds, 

which represented the first use of any 

of the reservation land for anything like 

the purpose of a park (Murray 1965:27).

A railway track had been laid 

across the reservation in 1884 by the 

Burlington, Cedar Rapids, and North 

Railway in violation of the treaty rights. 

To deal, in part, with this intrusion, 

Congress passed a law entitled “An Act 

for the Disposition of the Agricultural 

Lands Embraced Within the Limits of the 

Pipestone Indian Reservation” (25 Stat. 

1012). It provided 1) that a board of appraisers should evaluate all lands on the 

reservation, including the right-of-way 

claimed by the railway; 2) that the former settlers might have priority to purchase lands from which they had been 

removed, if agreeable to the Indians; and 

3) that the consent of a majority of the 

adult men of the tribe must be obtained 

and that the Indians might give their 

consent to the entire proposal or to either part individually (Murray 1965:28).

The lands were appraised in May 

1889 in accordance with the provisions 

of the Act. The board of appraisers produced an itemized appraisal of individual parcels of the reservation land, 

and set a value, including damages 

for the railway land (Murray 1965:28).

A commission was appointed 

to negotiate with the Yanktons as a 

tribe, and discussions ensued between 

August 3 and August 21. The Indians 

agreed to accept payment for the railway right-of-way, which was received 

from the railway company by 1890. 

However, they refused to sell the other 
PIPESTONE

12

lands. Traces of the railway roadbed 

and the site of a railroad water tank can 

still be seen east of the quartzite ledge.

In 1891, Congress passed legislation that authorized the building of 

an Indian boarding school on the reservation land at Pipestone. The school 

opened in 1893, despite protests from 

the Yanktons (Murray 1965:33). In 1897 

the Yankton tribe asked for compensation for the land used for the school, and 

lengthy litigation followed to determine 

if the Yanktons indeed “owned” the 

reservation land and if they were entitled to compensation for it. A Supreme 

Court decision on November 22, 1926, 

ruled that the United States had taken 

648 acres of land from the Yanktons, 

who were therefore entitled to compensation. The Court of Claims set a 

value on the land and the tribe received 

$328,558.90 in 1929 (Murray 1965:33-39).

About 1910, an important land 

alteration occurred on the reservation. 

To alleviate periodic backing up of water and flooding of the Pipestone Indian 

School’s agricultural land, Congress appropriated $4,000 in 1909 for certain “improvements.” Some of the land was to 

improve the condition of the road leading south toward the city of Pipestone, 

but the majority of it (estimated at $3,200) 

was to be used to straighten the channel 

of Pipestone Creek between the railroad 

bridge and Winnewissa Falls. The channel would also be lowered by nine feet. 

A contract in the amount of $2,900 for 

the channelization work and $600 for 

the road work was awarded on March 

14, 1910, to a firm named Gross Brothers, 

and presumably this work was accomplished soon thereafter (U.S. Senate 

Committee on Indian Affairs to the 

Acting Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 

June 7, 1909; R.M. Pringle, Supervisor of 

Engineering, Pipestone Indian Training 

School, to the Commissioner of Indian 

Affairs, November 11, 1909; Abstract 

of Proposals Received at Washington, 

D.C., February 25, 1910, for Removal of 

obstructions, etc.; and Superintendent, 

Pipestone Indian Training School, to 

the Commissioner of Indian Affairs; all 

in the National Archives and Records 

Administration, Record Group 75, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Central 

Classified Files 1907-1939, Box 26, File 

Pipestone 54743-1909-39; see also the 

“Days Gone By” column in the Pipestone 

County Star, May 2, 1984; Murray 1965:44).

Lands that currently comprise Pipestone National Monument 

are within Sections 1 and 2 of 

Township 46 West, Range 106 North. 

Creating the National Monument

The idea of the Pipestone quarries as something of national significance is not new to the twentieth century. The writings of Catlin, Schoolcraft, 

and Longfellow were nationally renowned. During the late nineteenth 

century many early settlers and visitors 

wrote about the quarries. All of these 

works served to publicize the quarries 

and the community of Pipestone, drawing widespread attention to the area.

Interest in setting aside the quarries as a national park existed as early 

as 1886 (Corbett 1976:41). Before 1890, 

local advocates drew up four petitions calling for establishment of the 

Indian school. These also contained 

language asking that a “National 

Indian Pipestone Park” be created. A 
13

HISTORY

bill introduced in the Congress contained such a provision. However, an 

entirely different bill was passed in its 

stead, which did not authorize a park 

to be established (Murray 1965:42).

In November of 1895, another 

bill was introduced in the House of 

Representatives (Murray 1965:42-43), 

which contained the following language:

That the Pipestone Indian 

Reservation, in Pipestone County, 

Minnesota as heretofore bounded 

by treaty and legislation, be, and 

the same is hereby, set apart and 

designated “The Indian Pipestone 

National Park,” and is placed 

as such under the supervision 

of the Secretary of the Interior.

The bill died in committee 

(Murray 1965:42-43; Corbett 1976:41).

In 1916, a plan was written by 

Ralph J. Boomer (1916) for development 

of a recreational park on the reservation. 

Boomer’s plan, which was written as a 

Bachelor of Science thesis in engineering 

at the Iowa State College of Agriculture 

and Mechanic Arts (now Iowa State 

University), prescribed a “highly improved, developed” park containing concentrated recreational facilities. Though 

this plan itself was never implemented, 

it influenced local thinking through the 

1920s, according to Murray (1965:44).

Beginning in 1919, steps were 

taken by local interests to develop a 

small part of the reservation land into 

a city park. A bathhouse and graveled beach were proposed. The bathhouse was built near one of the natural lakes along Pipestone Creek, but 

cloudy land title problems precluded 

acquisition of the land (Murray 1965:46). 

In 1923, the Minnesota 

Commissioner of Highways directed the 

Highway Commission to create a plan 

for a small State park on the reservation (Commissioner of Highways 1924). 

While this was underway, the local post 

of the American Legion organized a volunteer force which cut weeds around the 

falls and improved the first small lake 

below it. Despite the passage of legislation for this purpose in the Minnesota 

legislature in 1925, the problem of 

cloudy land title again precluded acquisition of the land (Murray 1965:44-46).

In 1925 the Catlinite Chapter of the 

Daughters of the American Revolution 

(DAR) installed a bronze plaque on the 

stone bearing the Nicollet inscriptions. 

Encroachment of the quartzite stone 

quarry south of the reservation threatened destruction of the Three Maidens, 

so in 1926 the DAR also sought to protect 

the Three Maidens boulders by erecting 

a fence between them and the quarry 

(Pipestone County Star, September 3, 

1926). In 1928, the DAR purchased a 

purported title to this tract from the 

Staso Milling Company of Chicago and 

subsequently transferred the land to the 

city of Pipestone in 1928 (Murray 1965:44-

46; Pipestone County Star, May 18, 1928).

After the question of Native 

American ownership of the reservation land was settled by payment to the 

Yanktons, local individuals and groups 

renewed their interest in establishing a 

park. In November 1929, the DAR passed 

a resolution favoring the establishment 

of a national park or monument (Murray 

1965:47; Pipestone County Star, December 
PIPESTONE

14

3, 1929). A meeting at the Calumet 

Hotel in Pipestone in January, 1932, 

was attended by representatives of 53 

governmental and local organizations, 

who endorsed the idea of promoting 

the creation of a national park (Murray 

1965:47; Pipestone County Star, January 

19, 1932). This ultimately resulted in 

the formation of the Pipestone Indian 

Shrine Association (Murray 1965:48).

The result of this meeting was 

the drafting of a bill to establish a park 

of 81.75 acres. The bill would also 

grant quarrying rights to Indians of all 

tribes, since the quarrying rights granted by treaty were extinguished when 

the Government acquired land title 

from the Yanktons (Murray 1965:47).

Pipestone Indian School 

Superintendent James W. Balmer sought 

the opinion of the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs on the proposal during his next 

visit to Washington (Murray 1965:47). 

Despite the fact that bureau officials 

objected to the park concept, to promote further interest in the proposal 

the Pipestone Indian Shrine Association 

that same year produced and distributed a booklet entitled The Pipestone 

Indian Shrine (Murray 1965:48). The efforts produced results, as the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs sent a representative to 

a late April meeting of the Association 

to discuss the proposals. The result 

was a report, endorsed by the Bureau’s 

representative, that recommended 

the establishment of a park (Charles 

H. Berry, Field Representative, Office 

of Indian Affairs, and J.W. Balmer, 

Superintendent, Pipestone Indian 

School, to the Commissioner of Indian 

Affairs, May 14, 1932, in the National 

Archives and Records Administration, 

Record Group 75, Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, Central Classified Files 1907-

1939, Box 18, File Pipestone 11113-

1932-307.2 lot 2; Murray 1965:48).

In July 1932, the National Park 

Service reviewed the issue and an administrative assistant to the Secretary of the 

Interior visited Pipestone to personally 

investigate the proposal (Murray 1965:48).

In October 1933, Winifred 

Bartlett, president of the Association, 

lobbied the Director of the National 

Park Service and the Commissioner 

of Indian Affairs regarding the 

park proposal (Murray 1965:48).

About this time, local improvements began to be made under the aegis of New Deal work relief programs. 

Late in 1933 and early in 1934, the Civil 

Works Administration began development of the roads bordering the reservation, including a road from the junction 

of Hiawatha and Reservation Avenues 

west to the Three Maidens area. The 

Indian Emergency Conservation Work 

(IECW) program began improvements 

on the reservation in January 1934, using Indian labor (Mitchell 1934; Murray 

1965:49). Road construction, fencing, 

tree and shrub planting, and construction of a dam along the creek outside 

the proposed park was accomplished. 

A stone obelisk monument was also 

constructed to mark the purported location of a small cemetery where several 

students from the Indian School were 

buried (see Appendix D). The monument bore the inscription “PEACE FOR 

EVER,” which years later led to some 

confusion in the monument’s interpretive program over whether the concept 

of “rest in peace” for the deceased was 
15

HISTORY

intended or the idea of peace among all 

native peoples who visited the quarries.

Beginning in 1934, several legislative efforts were made to create a 

national park on reservation land. One 

such bill was introduced in the Senate 

in May 1934,, but no action was taken 

on it (Murray 1965:49). On January 22 

of the following year, another bill, S. 

1339, was introduced in the Senate. The 

Senate passed the bill, but the House 

did not act upon it (Murray 1965:49-50).

A third bill was introduced in the 

Senate in January 1937. S. 1075 passed 

the Senate on August 6, the House on 

August 21, and on August 25, 1937, it 

was signed into law by the President. 

The bill authorized Pipestone National 

Monument, prescribed its boundary 

to encompass approximately 116 acres, 

and reserved quarrying of catlinite to 

Indians of all tribes (Murray 1965:46-51).

Boundary Changes

The first caretaker or custodian of 

the monument was the Pipestone Indian 

School Superintendent, J.W. Balmer. He 

volunteered his time to watch over the 

unmanned monument and insured that 

only Native Americans quarried the pipestone (Rothman and Holder 1992:77-80).

In 1940 Albert Drysdale was appointed the first seasonal superintendent 

(then called “custodian”) and a plan was 

developed by the Park Service’s regional 

office to build a museum, residence, utility building, roads, trails, and other infrastructure to accommodate the growing visitation (Rothman and Holder 

1992:80-82). However, World War II 

intervened and all plans were set aside

until the national emergency was over.

During the war years Pipestone 

suffered from neglect. It was not until 

1946 that plans were made to upgrade 

the management and infrastructure at 

the monument. The first full-time superintendent, Lyle Linch, reported for 

duty in 1948. It was Linch who reinvigorated the monument and was directly responsible for having Regional 

Archeologist Paul Beaubien begin 

a new round of archeological studies after a hiatus of more than forty 

years (Rothman and Holder 1992:88-

90; Beaubien 1949, 1955, 1957, 1983).

During the early years of the 

monument’s existence, the Service 

recognized that the Three Maidens 

site should be a part of the monument. After years of wrangling and 

prolonged negotiations with the City 

of Pipestone, the Three Maidens Tract 

was added to the monument in 1951 

(Rothman and Holder 1992:92-95, 100).

When the eventual closing of 

the Pipestone Indian School began to 

be anticipated in the late 1940s, transfer 

of the school’s land to the monument 

began to be considered by National 

Park Service and Bureau of Indian 

Affairs officials (Murray 1965:55-56; 

Rothman and Holder 1992:97-98; see 

also “Recommendations for Boundary 

Adjustments at Pipestone National 

Monument,” by Weldon W. Gratton, 

Park Landscape Architect, February 

14, 1951, in the National Archives and 

Records Administration, Central Plains 

Region, Kansas City, Missouri, Record 

Group 79, Records of the National Park 

Service, Region II (Midwest), Pipestone 

National Monument, Decimal Codes 

501-03 through 630, Box 194, File 602, 

Boundaries-General). Paul Beaubien’s 
PIPESTONE

1

archeological investigations of Pipestone 

National Monument help to justify plans 

for eventual expansion of the monument (Murray 1965:55; Rothman and 

Holder 1992:99). In 1949, he inspected 

Indian School land outside the monument and determined that not all of 

the historic quarries and archeological 

features were within the monument’s 

boundary. He concluded that additional land, much of which was controlled 

by the Pipestone Indian School, should 

be added to the monument (Beaubien 

1949). After closure of the Indian School 

in 1954, 164 acres were added to the 

monument in 1957 (Murray 1965:56; 

Rothman and Holder 1992:100). Much 

of the remainder of the school land was 

transferred to the State of Minnesota 

as a wildlife refuge and for educational purposes (Rothman and Holder 

1992:96-100). Today the monument 

lands total 281.78 acres owned in fee.
17

HISTORY

Figure 3. Late nineteenth or early twentieth century view of an active quarry at Pipestone

National Monument. Photograph by Samuel Calvin (negative 258, Calvin Photographic 

Collection, Department of Geoscience, University of Iowa)

Figure 4. Long disused quarry pits along the quarry line at Pipestone National Monument (view 

to the north from the South Quarry).
PIPESTONE

1

Figure 2-4. White craftsman fashioning objects from catlinite, 1892 (W.H. Holmes papers, 

National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, photograph 72-3247).

Figure 5. Native American tipi camp at the catlinite quarries, 1892 (W.H. Holmes papers, 

National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, photograph 72-3245).
19

Introduction

Pipestone National Monument 

lies in the Northeastern Plains subarea at the northeastern edge of the tallgrass prairie in the region known as the 

Coteau des Prairies (Gregg et al. 1996:77-

78; Anonymous 1988). The Coteau is situated on the western slope of the landform that divides the Mississippi River 

drainage from that of its main tributary, 

the Missouri River. Pipestone Creek, 

which runs through the monument, 

flows into Split Rock Creek, then into 

the Big Sioux River and thence into the 

Missouri River. The water of the creek 

cascades over the Sioux quartzite ledge 

at Winnewissa Falls, a landscape feature 

that has often been photographed for its 

scenic beauty. The channel of Pipestone 

Creek above Winnewissa Falls was 

straightened in 1910, resulting in relocation of the falls to the southward and the 

creation of a straight upstream channel 

extending approximately 250 feet between a former railroad bridge and the 

new location of the falls (R.M. Pringle, 

Supervisor of Engineering, Pipestone 

Indian School, to the Commissioner 

of Indian Affairs, November 11, 1909, 

in National Archives and Records 

Administration, Record Group 75, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Central 

Classified Files 1907-1939, Box 26, File 

Pipestone 54743-1909-39; and Abstract 

of Proposals Received at Washington, 

D.C., February 25th, 1910, for Removal 

of obstructions, etc. in same file).

The land is usually characterized 

as gently rolling with numerous outcrops of Sioux quartzite bedrock. This 

simple description belies the relatively 

complex geology that gave rise to the 

Coteau and exposed the interbedded 

catlinite layers which, in turn, led to the 

catlinite exploitation and created the 

archeological record of the monument. 

Because the bedrock Sioux quartzite outcrops so extensively in the monument 

and the overlying mantle of soil is generally thin (three meters or less) in most 

of the monument, much of the land has 

never been cultivated. The exception to 

this is the rising land west of the quarry 

line, sometimes referred to as the “West 

Ridge” area, which was cultivated well 

into the first half of the twentieth century.

Geology

Catlinite or pipestone, for which 

the park is known, is an argillite. 

Argillites are a relatively soft compacted rock derived of shale or mudstone. 

Essentially they are a transitional rock, 

in terms of hardness and permeability, 

between slate and shale. Argillites used 

by Native Americans for the fashioning 

of pipes and other artifacts are found 

in many different areas of the United 

States. Pipestone National Monument’s 

variety is known as catlinite, named in 

honor of the nineteenth century artist, 

George Catlin. The monument’s catlinite 

is found interbedded between layers of 

Sioux quartzite. It is generally characterized by its red color which is the result of 

the presence of hematite. However, the 

color of catlinite varies from red to maroon, brown, orange, yellowish orange, 

green-gray, blue-gray, cream, and white.

The layers of catlinite were 

formed from a red clay that was compressed by stream deposited sands as 

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
PIPESTONE

20

they were formed by various geologic 

processes into Sioux quartzite. Sioux 

quartzite is regarded as Pre-Cambrian 

or early Ordovician in age (Baldwin 

1949:10). A generalized and simple explanation of the process is that the red 

clay substratum was covered by stream 

deposited sands. These sands became 

sandstone and compressed the clay into 

a mudstone. Glaciation played a role 

in the formation of catlinite by removing some sediment and sandstone, with 

the weight of the ice layer further compressing and raising the temperature of 

the remaining sandstone and mudstone 

to a point that they eventually formed 

the very hard and dense Sioux quartzite and the much softer catlinite layers. 

Various geologic processes also 

caused the catlinite and quartzite to dip 

to the east. This left discontinuous Sioux 

quartzite outcrops at ground surface 

throughout the Coteau area. In some 

places the catlinite seams were also exposed at or near the surface, which allowed them to be discovered and exploited by prehistoric Native Americans. 

Catlinite occurs in layers or seams up to 

about 35 to 45 centimeters thick. Most 

catlinite suitable for carving comes 

from a 5 centimeter-thick layer within 

a thicker layer, the remainder being too 

friable for use. Through time the surface catlinite exposures have been quarried away. Today, it is not uncommon 

to remove several feet of Sioux quartzite 

to reach the catlinite layer. Eighty-three 

quarry pits or quarrying spaces are 

currently designated within Pipestone 

National Monument, numbered, from 

south to north, 1 through 83. Quarries 

1, 2, and 3 are located on the south side 

of the entrance road and have not been 

worked in years. These were designated by archeologist Paul Beaubien as the 

“South Quarry,” though park staff do 

not presently refer to them by that name. 

Quarries 4 (north of the entrance road) 

through 35 (near the visitor center) are 

presently called the South Quarry Line 

by the park staff. The North Quarry 

Line begins with Quarry 36 and extends 

northward through Quarry 46. Quarry 

spaces 47 through 68 are not active quarries and are reserved for future use, as 

needed. The Sun Dance Quarry Line, 

formerly referred to by Beaubien as the 

“North Quarry,” consists of Quarries 69 

through 83. Of these, Quarries 69 and 

70 are not active quarries, and Quarry 

83 is reserved for use by Sun Dance participants (Jim LaRock, Superintendent 

of Pipestone National Monument, email 

communications to Thiessen, June 9, 

2003, and January 27, 2005). Forty-seven 

pits were allotted to individual quarriers by permit as of July, 2002 (Jim 

LaRock, Superintendent of Pipestone 

National Monument, email communication to Thiessen, July 10, 2002).

Catlinite was named and chemically characterized by Charles T. Jackson 

in 1839. His initial study of the stone 

(Silliman 1839) identified it as a sericite 

or muscovite. Berg (1938) was the first 

to examine catlinite microscopically and 

by means of x-ray and chemical analyses to determine its constituent components. Berg’s analysis characterized 

catlinite as being composed of sericite, 

hematite, diaspore, pyrophyllite, pyrite, 

and possibly rutile. He also suspected 

it contained quartz, but this has not 

been borne out by subsequent research. 

Jackson’s and Berg’s work, conducted 

nearly one hundred years apart, characterized catlinite for archeological purposes for many years. However, their 
21

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

research on the mineralogical characteristics of catlinite has been superceded 

by Gundersen’s (1991, 2002) later work 

using x-ray powder diffraction analysis.

It was often assumed by many 

researchers that all pipestone could be 

attributed to a source within or somewhere near what became Pipestone 

National Monument. The first to recognize and publish on the fact that all pipestone is not catlinite was the legendary 

Minnesota geologist Newton Winchell 

(1884). Subsequent work by Howell 

(1940) and Sigstad (1973) determined 

there were numerous pipestone sources 

around the country. Beginning in the 

early 1980s, Gunderson (1991, 2002, and 

others) continued research on the sources of pipestones and has identified nearly thirty different quarries or pipestone 

sources. While all pipestones are similar in chemical makeup, they are individually minerologically distinct, which 

can be determined by x-ray powder diffraction, x-ray florescence, or neutron 

activation analysis. Catlinite is pipestone, but not all pipestones are catlinite, is perhaps the simplest way to define 

the uniqueness of the soft red argillite 

found at Pipestone National Monument.

In the monument overlying the 

catlinite layers and the Sioux quartzite is a thin unsorted and unstratified 

layer of gravel and sands laid down by 

the Kansan glacial advance of about 

100,000 years ago. There is also some 

additional glacial till present that is ascribed to the Wisconsin glacial age of 

about 20,000 years age (Baldwin 1949:14).

Today’s soil that overlies the 

bedrock and glacial till is composed of 

one to two centimeters of humus at the 

surface below which there is a layer of 

gray silty loam about three centimeters 

thick, then one or two centimeters to 

two meters of yellow wind-blown loess. 

The soils within the monument are generally characterized as the BrookingsHildewood association in the valley, the 

Kransburg-Vienna association on the 

west side of the park, and the Ihlen-Rock 

association on the east ridge (Hokanson 

et al. 1976). Direct observation of excavation units and soil exposures in 

Pipestone National Monument confirm 

this soil deposition sequence. The soils 

within the monument’s boundary are 

extensively and heavily bioturbated by 

very active and widespread rodent burrowing. No clear soil stratification appears to remain in the areas observed or 

tested within the monument. Elevation 

within the monument varies from 

about 1650 feet along the lower reaches 

of Pipestone Creek to 1720 feet on the 

eastern side of the park, a total elevation change of only 70 feet (21.3 meters).

Climate

The glacial episodes that created the gently rolling landforms of the 

Coteau des Prairie established the base 

on which the tallgrass prairie took root. 

Today the weather is characterized by 

marked seasonal variation. Winters are 

generally cold with mean lows around 

10 degrees and highs around 20 degrees 

(Fahrenheit) in January, although temperatures can reach extreme lows around 

50 degrees below zero. Snow generally 

begins to fall in November and extends 

through early April. The first frost-free 

days are normally seen in late April or 

early to mid-May. Summers are warm 

with July highs reaching the 100-degree mark. The annual precipitation is 
PIPESTONE

22

around 19 inches, with over three-quarters of it occurring between April and 

September (Strub 1960; Kuehnast 1974).

The paleoecology of the Pipestone 

area is not well understood. The shallow bioturbated soils are poor candidates for yielding reliable information 

on the paleoclimatic sequence of the 

Coteau region. Anfinson (1997:16-17) 

provides a general model of the prehistoric climatic sequence that likely fits 

the Coteau region. At the end of the last 

glaciation, about 13,500 years ago, the 

area experienced a warming trend that 

allowed the development of an open deciduous forest with numerous and large 

prairie openings. This regime lasted 

until about 7,000 years ago and was 

followed by a continued warmer and 

dryer climate until about 5,500 years 

ago. The forested areas retreated during this period, establishing the Prairie 

Lake and Coteau des Prairie regions 

much as they are seen today. With minor fluctuations in the climate, a warm 

dry trend between AD 1200-1400 and 

a cool period beginning around AD 

1550, the area remained relatively stable until the advent of intensive farming and land use in the historic period. 

Flora

Historically, virtually all visitors 

to the Pipestone area during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries 

comment on the absence of trees, suggesting that the flora and appearance of 

the landscape changed greatly during 

the twentieth century. Although the 

historical landscape of the quarries has 

not been formally studied, how much 

change has occurred can be roughly 

measured by examination of botanical 

notes made by the botanist of the Nicollet 

expedition, Carl Andreas Geyer, and 

drawings and photographs of the area 

made during the nineteenth century.

Geyer (1838) recorded the vegetation at the catlinite quarries as a participant in the Joseph Nicollett expedition. 

Geyer’s journal (1838) lists the grasses, 

flowers, and other common native prairie plants that dominated the vegetation 

of the area in the late 1830s. His notes, 

almost exclusively, describe the plants 

in terms of the Latin nomenclature of 

the day. Most of the names are recognizable today, and it is abundantly clear 

that Geyer rarely noted the presence of 

shrubs or trees at Pipestone. Four pencil sketches of the Sioux quartzite ledge, 

produced by members of the expedition, 

generally corroborate the impression 

gained from Geyer’s notes and show only 

a few small shrubs and low trees at the 

base of the ledge (see discussion below).

Dr. J. Fraser Boughter, the post 

surgeon at Fort Dakota in 1869, also 

provides a list of flora present in the region in his description of Fort Dakota 

and vicinity (Rambow 2003:31-40).

The catlinite quarries and nearby landscape features have often been 

depicted in drawings, paintings, and 

photographs, especially after the turn 

of the twentieth century when local interests increasingly promoted them as a 

tourist attraction. Several of the earliest depictions, made during the nineteenth century, have not been published 

or are scarce today in published form. 

These early illustrations generally do 

not depict quarries and other features 

of archeological interest, but primarily serve to pictorially document the 
23

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

environment, particularly the general 

lack of trees and other woody vegetation at the quarries in the years after 

they were first visited by white men.

The earliest depiction was made 

by George Catlin in 1836, who sketched 

and painted the general landscape in 

the vicinity of the quarries. Although 

distorted in perspective, Catlin’s artwork and romantic description of the 

quarries have greatly contributed to the 

lore and fame of the place. Catlin’s Pipe 

Stone Quarry was first published in 1841 

(Ewers 1956:490) and has been republished many times since (e.g., Holmes 

1919:255; Heilbron 1958:18-19; McCracken 

1959:177; Catlin 1973, 2:facing page 165; 

Rambow 1989:8; Dippie 1990:41; Troccoli 

1993:157; and others). Usually reproduced as a painting, sketch versions of it 

have been published (Holmes 1919:255; 

Dippie 1990:41). Catlin copied and recopied many of his works, so original 

paintings of his quarry scene exist in 

more than one repository. These include the U.S. National Museum, where 

it is cataloged as Catlin painting number 

337 and U.S. National Museum number 

386334 (Ewers 1956:510, Plate 19.2; Halpin 

1965:26), and the Gilcrease Institute in 

Tulsa, Oklahoma (Troccoli 1993:157). 

Catlin’s picture is most notable for the 

comprehensive range of features that it 

depicts. Although the perspective has 

been foreshortened, Catlin’s depiction 

shows the approximate relationships 

between Pipestone Creek, Winnewissa 

Falls, the quarries, the Sioux quartzite 

ledge, the Three Maidens, the Leaping 

Rock, and the burial mound of a young 

Sioux man said to have died while attempting to jump to or from the Leaping 

Rock. Catlin’s view of the quarries, and 

cross-sectional and plan view sketches of 

two mounds made by P.W. Norris in 1882 

(see Appendix B), are the only pictorial 

representations of aboriginal mounds 

that once existed near the quarries (see 

Winchell 1911:109). Catlin’s illustration 

may also have served as the inspiration 

and basis for a similar but much romanticized and highly inaccurate view of 

the quarries and the quartzite ledge that 

appears as the frontispiece in Norris’ 

1884 book, The Calumet of the Coteau.

After Catlin, the next nineteenth-century pictorial renderings of 

the vicinity of the quarries were four 

sketches produced during the 1838 visit by the exploration party headed by 

Joseph N. Nicollet. One of these drawings, credited to either the Viscount de 

Montmort, a French embassy official 

from Washington, or to Nicollet himself, has been published (Bray and Bray 

1976:80). It shows a portion of the Sioux 

quartzite ledge, including the Leaping 

Rock surmounted by the U.S. flag which 

John C. Fremont erected there on July 4, 

1838. Three other sketches, in the same 

hand, exist among the Nicollet Papers 

at the Library of Congress. These show 

additional segments of the ledge and 

are probably of most interest because 

they show little vegetation near the 

ledge other than some small brushy 

plants growing in rock crevices. The 

Montmort/Nicollet drawings do not depict features of archeological interest.

The next artistic renderings of the 

quarries and nearby features are three 

sketches made in 1859 by a man named 

W.O. Williams. Alan R. Woolworth, 

who called our attention to these drawings and provided copies of them, has 

suggested (letter to Thomas D. Thiessen, 

March 9, 1998) that Williams may have 
PIPESTONE

24

been a member of the General Land 

Office survey party that worked in the vicinity of the quarries that year. Williams 

drew separate views of a quarry pit 

with the Sioux quartzite ledge in the 

background (Figure 7; MHS SD4P/r41, 

negative 79767) and of Winnewissa Falls 

with the adjacent Leaping Rock (Figure 

8; MHS SD4P/r4, negative 79765). The 

latter sketch was redrawn by Chester 

Kozlak and was published by Nydahl 

(1950:204). Williams’ depictions of the 

ledge show no woody vegetation present. He also drew an interesting view of 

a Native American contemplating petroglyphs on Sioux quartzite bedrock about 

the base of the Three Maidens, which is 

discussed in Chapter 11 (see Figure 21). 

The Minnesota Historical Society possesses albumen prints of these three 

drawings. The reverse of each contains 

a notation that they were presented 

to Alfred J. Hill by W.O. Williams in 

September of 1859, and were given by 

Hill to the Society in August of 1862.

The earliest known photographs of the vicinity of the quarries 

are several stereograph views taken 

in May or June of 1870 by the noted 

Minnesota photographer, William 

Henry Illingworth (Murray 1961:15 

and note 37; 1965:21). Illingworth began his photographic career in St. Paul 

in 1863 (Wilson 1990:54) and continued 

to practice photography until the later 

1880s, dying by his own hand in 1893 

(Grosscup 1975; Wilson 1990). He is best 

known for the images he created during the Fisk expedition to the gold fields 

in 1866 and the Custer expedition to the 

Black Hills in 1874, both of which parties he accompanied (Grosscup 1975; 

Darrah 1964:83-85; Waldsmith 1991:35, 

41, 98-99). Although he operated from 

Red Wing, Minnesota, for a brief time 

(Wilson 1990:54; Schwarck 2002:272), 

Illingworth’s studio was located in St. 

Paul between 1867 and 1874 (Grosscup 

1975:44; Schwarck 2002:272), the time 

during which he visited the quarries.

Illingworth’s 1870 visit to the 

quarries is documented in articles in the 

Sioux City Journal newspaper for June 11 

and June 12 of that year.1 At the time, 

Illingworth operated with a partner 

in Sioux City, Iowa, under the name of 

Gurnsey and Illingworth. Apparently 

traveling alone, he departed Sioux City 

on May 28, 1870, and returned on June 

8, having photographed the falls on the 

Big Sioux River and the catlinite quarries. The Sioux City Journal article of 

June 12 mentions the four photographs 

that he made of the quarries and nearby 

landscape features, as described below. 

The weather during Illingworth’s trip 

was characterized as having been extremely rainy, with the result that “he 

was drenched through and through by 

the heavy drenching showers that were 

then prevalent, and had no opportunity of drying his clothing.” He was 

said to be so disheveled on his return 

to Sioux City that his partner preserved 

the sight by taking his photograph.2

The Illingworth photographs of 

the vicinity of the quarries have a complex publication history, due largely to 

the sale and swapping of negatives and 

publication rights among photographers, 

resulting in their multiple publication, a 

1

The authors are indebted to David Rambow for providing transcriptions of the text of these 

articles. 

2

Sioux City Journal, June 12, 1870.
25

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Figure 7. A catlinite quarry pit drawn by W.O. Williams, 1859 (courtesy of Alan R. Woolworth 

and the Minnesota Historical Society, locator SD4P/r41, negative 79767).

Figure 8. Winnewissa Falls drawn by W.O. Williams, 1859 (courtesy of Alan R. Woolworth and

the Minnesota Historical Society, locator SD4P/r4, negative 79765).
PIPESTONE

2

common practice of the day.3 It also appears that Illingworth, while based in St. 

Paul, at times entered into partnerships 

with other photographers to publish his 

images (Schwarck 2002:275). One photograph is a view of Winnewissa Falls, 

taken from slightly below the top of 

the falls and from the south (left) bank 

of Pipestone Creek (Murray 1965:22; 

Corbett 1980:87). It exists as a stereocard 

bearing the label, “Photographed and 

Published by Gurnsey & Illingworth, 

Sioux City, Iowa.”4 The obverse of the 

card bears the notation, “Ent’d according to Act of Congress in the year 

1870, by Gurnsey & Illingworth, in the 

Clerk’s Office of the U.S. Dist. Court, 1st 

Jud. Dist., Terr of Dak.” The same view 

also was published in stereocard form 

by E.H. Burritt, of 148 Third Street, St. 

Paul, with printed acknowledgement 

of Illingworth as the photographer.5 A 

second view is of the Leaping Rock and 

a portion of the quartzite ledge. It exists 

as a stereocard published by Illingworth 

alone from his St. Paul6 studio and also 

by Gurnsey and Illingworth at Sioux 

City.7 The same image was also published under the label of Hamilton and 

Hoyt, Sioux City, Iowa.8 The third view 

was taken from atop the falls, looking 

westward along Pipestone Creek as it 

descends from the falls (Figure 9). The 

pond is visible in the distance. It was 

also published by the firm of Hamilton 

and Hoyt of Sioux City, Iowa, with no 

acknowledgment of Illingworth as the 

photographer.9 The same image, in the 

collection of the Minnesota Historical 

Society (FS6.1/p1, negative 7580-A), is 

attributed to Illingworth but has been 

misidentified as a view of the falls 

on the Big Sioux River in 1870.10 The 

Minnesota Historical Society example 

appears to have been produced from 

an original Illingworth negative purchased by the Society from Edward 

A. Bromley in 1927 (Wilson 1990:56). 

Another Illingworth stereograph at the 

Minnesota Historical Society (SD4P/r26, 

no negative number) shows a segment 

of the quartzite ledge (Figure 10). It 

was published by Illingworth. Finally, 

a fifth Illingworth photograph may be 

another view of Winnewissa Falls, but 

the image is identified as a view of the 

Big Sioux falls (Minnesota Historical 

Society, FS6.1/p3, negative 7575-A). It 

too is from an Illingworth/Bromley 

negative. The four and possibly five 

Illingworth views show little of archeological interest, but appear to con3

We are indebted to David Rambow, formerly of the Pipestone County Historical Museum and the 

Siouxland Heritage Museums in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, for bringing the Illingworth photographs to our attention, and for providing a copy of a stereocard in his possession. We are also 

grateful to Robert Kolbe of Sioux Falls and Donald Schwarck of South Lyon, Michigan, for sharing copies of Illingworth images in their collections. Steve Nielsen of the Minnesota Historical 

Society facilitated our examination of photographs in the Society’s collection.

4

Rambow and Kolbe collections. An example is also in the photographic collections of the 

Minnesota Historical Society (SD4P/r, negative 5878).

5

Schwarck collection.

6

Schwarck collection.

7

Kolbe collection.

8

Minnesota Historical Society photographic collection, SD4P/r28, negative 4582. Darrah (1964:198, 

208, 229) lists J.H. Hamilton as a Sioux City photographer during the “Decline” period of American 

stereography (1878-1898).

9

Kolbe collection.

10

We are indebted to David Rambow for pointing out this misidentification.
27

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Figure 9. W.H. Illingworth photograph of the catlinite quarries, 1870. View is to the west from 

Winnewissa Falls. Quartzite spoil piles can be seen along the quarry line in the distance (courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society, locator FS6.1/p1, negative 7580-A).

Figure 10. W.H. Illingworth photograph of a portion of the Sioux quartzite ledge at the catlinite 

quarries, 1870. View is to the east (courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society, locator SD4P/r26, 

negative 96796).
PIPESTONE

2

firm the virtual absence of woody vegetation in the vicinity as early as 1870.

The Minnesota Historical Society 

also possesses three early stereographs 

taken in the vicinities of the catlinite quarries by F.O. Pease, a Pipestone, 

Minnesota, photographer. Though the 

stereographs themselves are undated, 

the Society’s records attribute the date of 

1885 to all three. One (SD4P/r32, negative 15843) is a view of Winnewissa Falls 

taken from below the falls and on the 

north (right) bank of Pipestone Creek. 

Another is a view of the quartzite ledge 

(SD4P/r25, negative 3285). The third 

(SD4P/r23, negative 4511) is a view of the 

Three Maidens; it may be the earliest photographic view of the glacial boulders.

Several other late nineteenthcentury drawings or photographs of 

features in the vicinity of the quarries 

exist. An undated, unattributed drawing of Winnewissa Falls appears as 

Figure 38 in Winchell’s (1884:534) early 

description of the geology of Pipestone 

and Rock counties. Two published 

drawings of the quartzite ledge made 

by a German magazine correspondent, Rudolf Cronau, probably during 

the early 1880s, also show no trees and 

very little brushy vegetation (Cronau 

1886:illustration 13; 1890:illustration 

between pages 84 and 85). Early photographs of the Three Maidens also 

portray a landscape devoid of trees and 

bushes (Holmes 1919:265; Beckering 

1989:24; Pipestone County Historical 

Society 1989:28; Pipestone Indian Shrine 

Association n.d.:32), as does a view 

of the quarries published by Holmes 

(1919:256). Photographs taken or obtained by Holmes during his 1892 visit to the quarries also show a general 

lack of woody vegetation (National 

Anthropological Archives, W.H. Holmes 

collection, negatives 72-3232, 72-3236, 72-

3239, 72-3242, 72-3245). The photographs 

dramatically illustrate the near absence 

of trees on the prairies surrounding the 

quarries (see following section on pictorial representations). However, the age 

and authorship of these photographs 

has not been established with certainty.

Early twentieth century depictions also show a virtually treeless 

landscape. Three undated photographic views of the vicinity of the quarries 

exist in the archives of the Department 

of Geoscience at the University of Iowa 

in Iowa City. Taken by Samuel Calvin, 

the Iowa State Geologist from 1892 to 

1904 and 1906 to 1911 (Jean Prior, personal communication to Thiessen, 

February 7, 2001), one (no. 257) depicts 

the “Building Stone Quarry” near the 

Three Maidens. The other two (lantern 

slides 2565 and 2566; also numbered 259 

and 258, respectively) show a quarry in 

the process of being worked by Indians 

and the same quarry without the 

Indians but with the tools left in place.11

A drawing of the Leaping Rock published by Winchell (1911:112) likewise 

shows no woody vegetation at the base 

of the quartzite ledge. The sketch is attributed to Herman Haupt, Jr., the son 

of Brigadier General Herman Haupt, 

who served as chief of the U.S. Military 

Railroads during 1862 and 1863 (Alan R. 

Woolworth, personal communication, 

April 5, 2000; Warner 1964:217-218). The 

11

We are indebted to Dr. Jean Prior of the University of Iowa for bringing the Calvin photographs 

to our attention. Image no. 258 has been published by Alex(2000:36).
29

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

label on Haupt’s sketch indicates that the 

Leaping Rock is 18 feet 10 inches high.12

No doubt other informative historic images of the vicinity of the quarries exist (e.g., see the circa-1890 photograph that appears on the cover of South 

Dakota History 8[2]). All of these early 

images of various geographic features 

near the catlinite quarries reveal virtually no trees and little shrubby or woody 

vegetation in the vicinity. It was not until the region became settled in the late 

nineteenth century and later that trees 

and larger shrubs began to have a significant foothold in the monument. An 

article published in the Pipestone County 

Star on June 24, 1880, noted the beginning of tree growth along Pipestone 

Creek and the Sioux quartzite ledge 

(Murray 1961:74; 1965:42). Tree growth 

on the Pipestone Indian School land was 

even encouraged by local residents. In 

1934 the City of Pipestone furnished elm 

trees, which were planted by the Indian 

Emergency Conservation Work project that year (Mitchell 1934:27; Murray 

1961:85-86; 1965:49). From at least 5,500 

years ago the area was tallgrass prairie. 

The dominant native vegetation 

is the Bluestem Prairie type (AndropogonPanicum-Sorghastrum). However, cultivation, and until 1974, a lack of periodic 

fire has allowed a variety of invader 

species and successional plants to become established to the point where the 

monument superintendent proposed 

in 1950 a plan to clear a portion of the 

quartzite ledge to restore its historic 

appearance (Memorandum from the 

Superintendent, Pipestone National 

Monument, to the Regional Director, 

Region Two, March 21, 1950, Subject: 

Historic Landmark, with cover sheet 

titled “Research (Vista Clearing),” copy 

on file at Pipestone National Monument; 

see also Becker et al. 1986:23-25).

Smooth bromegrass (Bromus 

inermis) and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa 

prantensis) predominate the western 

portion of the park which was under 

cultivation until it was acquired by the 

Service in the 1950s. Other invader 

species are present in the park and include yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis), white sweetclover (Melilotis alba), 

quackgrass (Agropyron repens), Canada 

thistle (Circium arvense), and red clover 

(Trifolium pratense). A variety of woody 

vegetation is present along the Sioux 

quartzite ledge and in the riparian habitat created by Pipestone Creek. The 

woody vegetation includes snowberry 

(Symphoicarpos occidentalis), European 

buckthorn (Phamnus cathartica), smooth 

sumac (Rhus glabra), wild black currant (Ribes americanum), chokecherry 

(Prunus virginiana), American plum 

(Prunus americana), sand cherry (Prunus 

besseyi), hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), 

green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), bur 

oak (Quercus macrocarpa), American elm 

(Ulmus americana), and, rarely, grey dogwood (Cornus racemosa)

13 (Stubbendieck 

and Willson 1986; Gia Wagner, email 

communication, January 27, 2005). 

12

Haupt’s sketch is to be found in a manuscript by him entitled “North American Indians. 

Ethnology of the Dakota,-Sioux,-and Ojibway,-Chippeway-Indians.” The original is in the Ayer 

Collection at the Newberry Library, Chicago, Illinois. We are grateful to Alan R. Woolworth for 

bringing this to our attention and providing a copy of the manuscript.

13

Occurs only as a rare species within the monument (Gia Wagner, email communication, January 

27, 2005).
PIPESTONE

30

Becker et al. (1986) provide a detailed 

list of 319 taxa from 76 vascular plant 

families they identified and collected in 

the park. Sixty-five species and varieties of lichens have been found within 

the monument (Vinyard 1984; Willson 

and Vinyard 1986). Ninety species of 

plants within the Monument that have 

significance for Native Americans have 

been inventoried (Toupal et al. 2004).

Fauna

Anfinson (1997:20-21) identifies 

about 50 animal species that were native 

to the Prairie Lake Region and adjacent 

Coteau around the time of contact.14 He 

identifies the majority as small burrowing prairie mammals. At the time the 

prairie became dominant, around 9,000 

years ago, the majority of fauna later 

identified by historic travelers were 

present in the region. The largest mammal of the area prior to white settlement was the bison. Bison dis­appeare

from the region in the mid- to late nineteenth centu­ry (Becker et al. 1986)  Th

last sighting of a bison in southwestern 

Minnesota occurred in 1879 (Amato et 

al. 2001). Elk (Cervus canadensis) were 

the second largest mammal found in 

the Prairie Lake Region in precontact 

and early contact times and have since 

disappeared from the region. Two species of deer were present in the Prairie 

Lake Region: mule deer (Odocoileus 

hemionus) in the west and white-tailed 

deer (Odocoileus virginiana) in the east. 

Large numbers of deer were not common in the south and west. Other 

mammals present were the white-tailed 

jackrabbit (Lepus townsendii), cottontail 

rabbit (Sylvi­lagus floridanus), woodchuc

(Marmota monax), raccoon (Procyon rotor), 

and possibly the grizzly bear (Ursus 

arctos). Amphibian and reptile species 

were not numerous in the Prairie Lake 

Region or the Coteau. Turtles, including the painted turtle (Chrysemys picta 

bell) and the snapping turtle (Chrysemys 

serpentina), and possibly others as well, 

were present. Frogs and other amphibians inhabited the available wetlands 

near creeks and rivers. Mussels and 

crayfish were locally avail­able in th

lakes and sloughs, with mussels being 

especially abundant in the Minnesota 

River, some 60 miles to the north. Today 

the animal species that predominate in 

Pipestone are the small mammals and 

over 100 species of birds (Becker et al. 

1986). The only larger mammal is the 

white-tailed deer. Reptiles recently observed include snapping and painted 

turtles, garter snakes, frogs, and lizards. Some fish inhabit the creek and 

nearby lake and include northern pike, 

white sucker, sunfish, bullhead, and 

bass, along with minnows and shiners. 

Over 100 species of birds have been observed at the monument (Snyder 1985).

14

Dr. J. Fraser Boughter, the post surgeon at Fort Dakota in 1869, provides an extensive list of fauna 

present in the region in his description of Fort Dakota and the vicinity (Rambow 2003:40-58).
31

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

Prairie Lake Region

Physiographically, Pipestone 

National Monument is located on a 

landform called the Coteau des Prairies, 

a prominent elevated plateau that extends from northeastern South Dakota 

into southwestern Minnesota (Wright 

1972b:573-574, 576-577; Ojakangas and 

Matsch 1982:223; Winham 1990:14-15). 

The monument is also located a few 

miles from the southern and western 

fringe of the Prairie Lake Region, an 

area archeologically defined as the eastern margin of the Great Plains, and the 

northern fringe of the Prairie Peninsula 

(Anfinson 1982, 1987, 1990:146-147, 1997; 

Winham 1990:14-15; Wedel 1961:22-24; 

Wood 1998:9-13). The Prairie Peninsula 

largely coincides with today’s “cornbelt” region of the Midwest stretching 

from the eastern boundary of the Plains 

eastward into Indiana (Henning 1970:3-

4). Pipestone National Monument 

is within the Southwest Riverine archeologial region, the smallest of the 

nine Minnesota archeological regions 

posited by Anfinson (1990:145-146). 

Although Winham (1990) does not 

characterize archeological complexes 

in Minnesota, the Southwest Riverine 

region of Minnesota would be within 

an extension of Winham’s (1990:14-15) 

Upper Big Soux archeological region, 

which he defined within South Dakota.

Although little has been written 

of the prehistory of the region immediately surrounding the catlinite quarries, 

three excellent syntheses of the archeology of nearby areas will be used to 

frame the regional archeological context 

of the monument. One interprets the 

archeology of the Prairie Lake Region 

(Anfinson 1997), which lies a few miles 

to the north, west, and east of Pipestone, 

Minnesota. A brief publication by the 

same author (Anfinson 1999), based on 

Anfinson’s synthesis of the Prairie Lake 

Region, summarizes the archeology of 

southwestern Minnesota for lay readers. 

Another synthesis summarizes the archeology of the state of Iowa (Alex 2000), 

including the northwestern corner of the 

state, which lies about 35 miles to the 

south of Pipestone National Monument. 

The third (Winham 1990) describes the 

range of types of archeological sites 

found in the Big Sioux River drainage 

in eastern South Dakota, and their location on the landscape. Johnson (1988) 

provides a broad outline of the prehistoric culture history of the entire state 

of Minnesota, though very generalized 

and written for a lay readership. These 

and other sources are the basis for three 

subsequent sections of this chapter.

The nomenclature and dating 

used by the authors of these syntheses 

differ somewhat from one another and 

from culture historical terminology utilized in other regions where catlinite artifacts have been found. In particular, 

the culture history terminology used by 

Anfinson (1987, 1997) is markedly different from the more “standard” culture 

history sequences discussed by other 

authors. The culture history terminology and date ranges used by Anfinson 

(1997) and Alex (2000) are compared 

in Table 1, along with the nomenclature and ages used by Johnson (1988).

The quarries were used for catlinite extraction by native peoples 
PIPESTONE

32

beginning as early as the Early and 

Middle Woodland periods and continuing to the present day (Emerson et al. 

2002; Boszhardt and Gundersen 1996, 

2003). Occupation or other use of the 

Pipestone area for other purposes (e.g., 

hunting or camping) by archeologically 

defined cultures may have begun as 

early as the Prairie Archaic (Anfinson 

1997:35-39) or Middle Archaic (Alex 

2000:67-68) period of 5,500 years ago 

and continued on a sporadic basis until 

the present. There appear to be no longterm habitation sites or villages at or 

near Pipestone. Rather the area seems 

to have been used, possibly in a number of different ways, for temporary 

camps for hunting and other resource 

extraction activities, like the famed catlinite quarrying so well documented in 

the historic and modern eras. The cultural sequence and site types recorded 

in the archeological record are typical 

of the area and in general for western 

Minnesota, eastern South Dakota, and 

northwestern Iowa (Anfinson 1997; 

Winham 1990; Aufderheide et al. 1994; 

Benn 1990a, b; Alex 2000). The following section provides a brief summary 

of the culture history of southwestern 

Minnesota and its surrounding areas.

Anfinson (1982, 1987, 1997:121-

126) defines the Prairie Lake Region as 

a Plains region, both environmentally 

and cultur­ally  He describes the peoples who resided there through time a

partially dependent on bison hunt­in

for at least 9,000 years, with two periods particularly focused on bison hunting, one prior to about 5000 BC and the 

other in the Late Prehistoric Period (AD 

900-1650). During the Late Prehistoric, 

Anfinson concludes the region contained semi-sedentary settlements of 

Plains Village cultures closely related 

to the Middle Missouri Tradition of 

the Northern Plains. None of the village sites of these peoples exists close 

to Pipestone National Monument, 

however. By the time of contact with 

Euroamerican peoples, the Prairie 

Lake Region was occupied by nomadic Sioux peoples including the Dakota 

or Santee, Yankton, and Yanktonai.

Anfinson posits that the Prairie 

Lake Region and by extension, the 

Coteau des Prairies, did not witness 

the rise in sedentism that characterized the Middle Archaic lifestyle of the 

Mississippi valley. He holds that the upland resources of the Prairie Lake and 

Coteau regions became most important 

dur­ing the Archaic. Big game huntin

remained the basic way of life throughout most of the Archaic, as bison populations expanded eastward with the 

post-glacial warming trend. Changes 

in subsistence and presumably settlement patterns from the Paleoindian to 

the Archaic were probably not as pronounced as in other Midwestern areas. 

A similar contrast between Archaicperiod hunting-related sites in western 

Iowa vs. evidence for more intensively 

utilized base camps and more varied 

resource exploitation in eastern Iowa 

has been noted by Alex (2000:54-84).

In both the Coteau and Prairie 

Lake Region, there is very little evidence for Paleoindian occupation (ca. 

10,000-6,000 BC according to Anfinson 

1997, ca. 11,000-8,500 BC according to 

Alex 2000). Evidence of Paleoindian 

presence in an area often occurs in the 

form of a number of distinctive projectile point forms, usually found as 

isolated artifacts. Within Pipestone 
33

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

Table 1. Culture history nomenclature and dating used by selected authors with respect to 

archeological complexes in southwestern Minnesota, northwestern Iowa, and eastern South 

Dakota.

Anfinson 1997 Alex 2000 Johnson 1988

Early Prehistoric Period

10,000-3,000 BC

Paleoindian

11,000-8500 BC

Paleoindian Tradition

10,000 BC?-6000 BC

Paleoindian Tradition 

10,000-6000 BC 

Late Pleistocene Hunters 

11,000-10,500 BC

Early Holocene Hunters and 

Foragers

10,500-8500 BC

Archaic

8500-800 BC

Eastern Archaic Tradition

6000-800 BC

Early Archaic 

8500-5500 BC

Prairie Archaic Tradition 

5500-3000 BC

Middle Archaic

5500-3000 BC

Middle Prehistoric Period 

3000-AD 900

Late Archaic

3000-800 BC

Woodland

800 BC-AD 1200

Woodland Tradition 

800 BC-AD 1700

Early Woodland 

800-200 BC

Middle Woodland 

200 BC-AD 400

Late Woodland 

AD 400-1200

Late Prehistoric Period 

AD 900-1650

Late Prehistoric 

AD 950-post 1650

Great Oasis Phase

AD 900-1200

Great Oasis 

AD 95-1100

Cambria Phase 

AD 1000-1200

Mill Creek 

AD 1100-1250

Big Stone Phase

AD 1100-1300

Blue Earth Phase 

AD 1000-1650

Oneota

Late AD 1200s-post 1650
PIPESTONE

34

County only one Paleoindian projectile 

point is reported, and its origin to the 

area is in some doubt (Higginbottom 

and Shane 1996). Paleoindian projectile 

points exist in a private collection from 

the Pedersen Site at Lake Benton, about 

20 miles north of Pipestone National 

Monument, and other projectiles are reported from Rock and Nobles counties 

to the south and southeast of Pipestone 

County (Anfinson 1997:29, 33; Skaar 

et al. 1994:52-54). In general, however, 

there is a true scarcity of archaeological 

remains in the Coteau and Prairie Lake 

Region related to the Paleoindian use 

of the area. Paleoindian remains are 

scarce also in Iowa. An example of a 

fluted form of projectile point known as 

Clovis was recently found in Woodbury 

County, Iowa, about 100 miles south 

of Pipestone National Monument 

(Molyneaux 1998a, 1998b, 2000).

The Archaic period began in 

southern Minnesota by around 9,000 

years ago. This cultural adaptation appears to be in response to a stabilized 

environment and the emergence of a 

mixed grass prairie vegetation that indicated a warmer dryer climate than that 

of today. Anfinson (1997:122) suggests 

the subsis­tence resources of the Prairi

Lake Region became more stable and 

more abundant with bison and other 

ani­mals being hunted  Archeologica

sites appear to be located near the available water sources during this period. 

Water would have been present at these 

locations just below the sur­face or i

small waterholes. Anfinson believes 

that the warm-season sites may have 

been located on the bottoms of largely 

dry lake basins or on the lowest terraces 

in the major river valleys. He (Anfinson 

1997:122) suggests most of these sites are 

now covered with water or deeply buried in lacustrine or alluvial sediments.

By 5,000 years ago southern 

Minnesota saw the environment become somewhat cooler and wetter. The 

true tallgrass prairie of the Coteau developed at this time and, with minor fluctations, continues today. This fostered 

the development of a stable cultural 

tradition that was to exist in the region 

for more than the next four millenia, or 

until about 200 BC (Anfinson 1997:42, 

122). With the lakes full of water most 

of the time, the wetlands of the Prairie 

Lake region, coupled with the tallgrass 

uplands of the Coteau, offered a rich 

and diverse resource base that allowed 

a more sedentary lifestyle to develop. 

In the Prairie Lake Region there 

arose an archeological manifestation 

known as the Mountain Lake Phase 

(ca. 3,000-200 BC; Anfinson 1997:42-47). 

The phase was characterized by habitation sites on islands and peninsulas in 

lakes; more diverse subsistence based 

on upland and low­land species; heav

use of local lithic resources; and what 

Anfinson (1997:122) describes as “resistance to outside influences involving 

changes in the basic way of life, social 

interaction, and ideological expressions.” In sum, according to Anfinson 

(1997:122), “Middle Prehistoric changes largely are confined to technological improvements or stylistic forms. 

These markers differentiate phases but 

do not constitute significant cultural 

change with regard to ways of life.”

In Iowa, the last several centuries 

of the time spanned by the Mountain 

Lake Phase, i.e., ca. 800-200 BC, constitute the Early Woodland period (Alex 
35

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

2000:87-98). During this period, the 

first pottery, technologically unsophisticated, appeared and is a hallmark of 

the advent of the Woodland tradition 

in Iowa. In western Iowa, the pottery is termed Crawford ware (Alex 

2000:96-97). In both the Prairie Lake 

Region and western Iowa, cultural complexes lacked the technological sophistication, mortuary ritual elaboration, 

and presumed social complexity that 

arose in archeological cultures along 

the Mississippi valley and eastward.

The Midwestern Woodland 

Tradition appears in the region with the 

addition of pottery to the material culture assemblage of the Fox Lake Phase 

(ca. 200 BC-AD 700; Anfinson 1997:47-

75), which succeeded the Mountain Lake 

Phase. In southwestern Minnesota, 

the earliest ceramics comprise the Fox 

Lake type series (Anfinson 1997:55). 

Anfinson (1997:122) sees few other 

Woodland trappings being added to the 

lifestyle of those inhabiting southwestern Minnesota in this era. He suggests 

that the use of burial mounds appeared 

late in the Fox Lake Phase, but not the 

elaboration of mor­tuary ritual tha

characterized cultural complexes to the 

east (Anfinson 1997:71; Alex 2000:111).

In Iowa, the earlier part of the Fox 

Lake Phase timespan, ca. 200 BC-AD 

400, comprises the Middle Woodland 

period (Alex 2000:97-115). Mound building on a monumental scale plus elaboration of ceramic technology and certain 

other classes of material culture characterize complexes along the Mississippi 

and Illinois river valleys and through 

much of Ohio and Indiana. However, 

this degree of cultural sophistication 

did not arise in western Iowa or southwestern Minnesota. Alex (2000:111-112) 

characterized this as a time of cultural 

conservatism in the Prairie Lake Region.

The Lake Benton Phase (ca. AD 

700-1200; Anfinson 1997:75), which succeeded the Fox Lake Phase in the Prairie 

Lake Region, apparently had some cultural contacts to the northeast, as indicated by ceramic stylistic similarities to St. 

Croix-Onamia types and the introduction of crushed granite temper. Burial 

mound use became more widespread 

and the bow and arrow saw its introduction in this phase, although there is 

no evidence for a change in subsistencesettlement patterns. The Lake Benton 

Phase closed the Woodland tradition and 

marked the transition to Late Prehistoric 

cultures in the Prairie Lake Region. 

The Lake Benton Phase timespan coincided with much of the Late Woodland 

period in Iowa (ca. AD 400-1200; Alex 

2000:115-137), as well as the rise and fall 

of the Middle Mississippian stage centered on Cahokia near present-day St. 

Louis (ca. AD 1050-1350; Alex 2000:137).

Within the Prairie Lake Region, 

the transition from the Middle 

Prehistoric (ca. 3,000 BC-AD 900) to 

the Late Prehistoric (ca. AD 900-1650) 

is characterized by the appearance of 

horticultural villages. This cultural 

transition is evidenced by semi- or 

fully sedentary villages based on the 

raising of garden crops, new cultural 

contacts, and increased populations. 

Anfinson (1997:123) notes that the 

first horticultural vil­lage cultures appear to represent migrations into th

region since the indigenous terminal 

Woodland culture differs substantially 

in important subsistence and artifactual characteristics, especially ceramics. 
PIPESTONE

3

Interestingly, village sites of this period 

are not known in the Pipestone area.

The migration of horticultural 

villagers into the Prairie Lake Region 

had an effect on the indigenous population, but its extent is not well understood. This period is characterized by 

the Great Oasis and Big Stone phases 

in the region. They appear to have the 

closest relationship with the terminal 

Woodland peoples, but definitive Great 

Oasis and Big Stone associated sites are 

very limited and poorly understood 

in the region. It appears the area was 

shared (or disputed) by Woodland, 

Plains Village, and Oneota peoples for 

several centuries. At the time of the disappearance of Great Oasis and Cambria 

about AD 1200, evidence for ter­mina

Woodland peoples is scarce. Anfinson 

(1997:124) suggests that at least some of 

the Lake Benton peoples became part 

of the Big Stone Phase, a terminal Late 

Prehistoric Plains Village complex present in the northwestern Prairie Lake 

Region, primarily in the Minnesota River 

valley. He also suggests that the Prairie 

Lake Region may have been par­titione

by the horticultural villagers with the 

eastern region dominated by Oneota, 

the Minnesota River valley by Cambria, 

the southwest by Great Oasis, and the 

northwest eventually by Big Stone.

An intriguing assertion by 

Anfinson (1997:124) is that eastern 

groups may have traveled, on an intermittent basis, into the region’s western areas to hunt. He suggests this is 

evidenced by small camp­sites in southwestern Minnesota where mixed uppe

horizons contain terminal Woodland, 

Plains Village, and Oneota components. 

Environmental change in the 

form of a severe drought is postulated 

to have caused the demise of the Mill 

Creek Culture in the AD 1000 to 1300 

time period. Anfinson (1997:123-25) 

strongly disagrees with this tenet. He 

instead argues that the environmental 

changes were not so devastating as to be 

debilitating to the Mill Creek peoples; 

rather, the drier period may have increased the bison range, which allowed 

for a change in animal procurement 

practices. Emphasis was on hunting 

bison instead of deer. He also asserts 

maize-based horticulture was not abandoned in the northeastern Plains at this 

time. He notes that by AD 1300, Blue 

Earth Oneota flourished in south-central 

Minnesota, concentrated only one hundred miles northeast of the Mill Creek 

settlements. But, forty miles north of the 

Blue Earth concentration, Cambria peoples abandoned their major villages in 

the Minnesota River valley by AD 1300. 

Cambria subsistence patterns are very 

similar to Blue Earth with limited use 

of bison indicated in the major villages. 

He suggests the regional environmental 

setting in southern Minnesota, with its 

deep and broad river valleys, would not 

likely have been wholly depleted of soil 

and wood resources even in a time of 

drought. He notes that in the northern 

section of the northeastern Plains, horticulture apparently continued to flourish in the Late Prehistoric, and horticulture also flourished along the Missouri 

River valley in the Dakotas at this time 

as well. Anfinson (1997:124-125) attributes the demise of the Plains Village 

cultures of south­western Minnesota t

a deteriorating climate that may have 

contributed to other stresses on these 

cul­tures  He argues that as Oneota influences increased in the eastern Plain
37

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

around AD 1200, Mill Creek and other 

eastern Plains Village groups began to 

add fortifications to their main villages 

and abandon outlying settlements, suggesting that intergroup conflict may 

have been intense and widespread. 

Southwestern Minneso­ta appears t

have been partitioned with Great Oasis 

in the west; Cambria in the north; 

and Blue Earth Oneota in the east.

Anfinson’s (1997:124) “best fit” 

explanation for cultural change that 

occurred in the western Midwest at 

about AD 1200 is that Oneota expansion 

caused a great deal of resource competition and armed conflict in the area. He 

sees the Plains Village Tradition withdrawing to the Middle Missouri subarea 

of the Northern Plains (i.e., the Missouri 

River valley in the Dakotas) and abandoning the southern part of the northeastern Plains when the Oneota was 

experiencing its greatest expansion in 

the northeastern Plains and western 

Midwest. Anfinson (1997:125) sees this 

expan­sion and its concomitant conflict as the most plausible explanatio

for the abandonment of the southern 

northeastern Plains by Plains Villagers. 

It is difficult to improve upon 

Anfinson’s conclusion regarding the final phase of Native American use of the 

Prairie Lake Region and, by association, 

the Coteau. In his typically clear style, 

Anfinson (1997:124-125) summarizes his 

view of post AD 1200 use of the area:

Hickerson’s (1970) study of the historic Ojibwa Dakota conflict suggests that northern west-central 

Minnesota was virtually unoccupied 

in the last years of the Late Prehistoric 

because of intertribal resource competition. This may be a useful model 

to help explain the cultural situation 

in the Prairie Lake Region in Late 

Prehistoric and early contact times. 

With the increasing interest in bison hunting and maize cultivation, 

perhaps brought on by widespread 

population pressure, improved varieties of maize, and/or increased 

availability of bison in the eastern 

Plains, numerous groups expanded 

into the Prairie Lake Region. There, 

bison herds roamed and ideal maize 

growing areas existed. Initially, this 

expansion was relatively peaceful, 

but as resource competition and population pressure increased, so did 

hostility. Finally, around AD 1200, 

conflict was so intense that much of 

the Prairie Lake Region was abandoned for year-around settlement.

Northwestern Iowa

Northwestern Iowa comprises the 

final area with archeological sites that 

share similar environmental and cultural sequences for comparison to southwestern Minnesota. Northwestern Iowa 

is considered to be at the eastern edge of 

the Central Plains subarea as defined by 

Wedel (1961). It is also at the boundary 

of an area defined as the Western Prairie 

Peninsula subarea of Iowa and Missouri, 

and it is within the Big Sioux region as 

defined by Anfinson (1987:351-354).

Benn’s (1990a) discussion of the 

northwestern Iowa Rainbow Site’s cultural components provides a convenient summary of the area’s cultural 

sequence. Alex (2000) has recently reevaluated and summarized the archeology of Iowa. Both these works were 

used to summarize the Northwest 
PIPESTONE

3

Iowa cultural sequence that may reflect 

those prehistoric peoples who used 

the Pipestone area. They identify the 

Archaic period in terms similar to those 

used by Anfinson (1997). The Archaic 

peoples were mobile foragers relying on 

hunting and wild plant collecting for 

subsistence. Benn (1990a) sees no major 

cultural shifts in the Early Woodland 

period in this area, again agreeing 

with other assessments of the nature 

of cultural adaptation to the Big Sioux 

and Prairie Lake regions (Anfinson 

1997:122; Alex 2000:54-84). The Middle 

Woodland period is seen as a growth 

in the regional populations dependent 

on locally available resources; in essence, Middle Woodland represents a 

continuation of the foraging strategy, 

but with the introduction of pottery 

and a few other new artifact styles, and 

probably a growth or intensification of 

contact, and possibly trade, with other 

groups. Benn (1990a:223-224) and Alex 

(2000:54-84) also see elaboration of certain rituals and associated artifacts, especially concerning burial of the dead.

By the beginning of the Late 

Woodland period the prairie peoples 

were apparently staying in one place 

longer, developing a thinner-walled pottery, employing storage pits as a means 

to offset the meager results of hunting 

and gathering during the winter season, 

and perhaps developing or intensifying 

horticultural activities like planting or 

encouraging plants with starch-rich and 

oily seeds (Alex 2000:115-130). They also 

diversified their hunting and gathering 

strategies to include a wider range of 

animals, plants, and aquatic resources 

in the diet. By the Late Woodland, the 

major change was the introduction of 

maize horticulture and the continued 

elaboration of ritual and ceremonalism. 

Base camps were occupied for longer periods, possibly in response to the need 

to tend crops. Seasonal mobility is still 

very much evident in the archeological 

record, but it does not manifest itself 

as intensely as in the earlier periods. 

In the final prehistoric period 

the northwest Iowa peoples grew from 

the trappings of the Late Woodland into 

the Plains Villagers (Alex 2000:138-210). 

Sites were more intensely occupied and 

there seems to be the appearance of a 

strong leadership at the family, band, 

and other group levels. Agricultural 

intensification, principally based on 

maize horticulture, is argued to be a 

large factor in the formation of the archeological record. Residences are 

nearly permanent and there is significant development in storage pit technology. There is strong evidence for the 

intensification of trade and, possibly, 

intergroup conflict. Interestingly, at 

least some of the Oneota people in the 

northwestern Iowa area, possibly the 

ancestors of the historic Omaha, Ioway, 

and Oto tribes, may have shared a special relationship with the catlinite quarries. They may have quarried the stone, 

widely traded the stone, and controlled 

access to the quarries after AD 1200 

or 1300 until the advent of the historic 

period ca. AD 1700 (see Chapter 10).

The Big Sioux Drainage

The Big Sioux River drainage 

in South Dakota is differentiated from 

the Rock River and Split Rock Creek 

drainages and the Prairie Lake Region 

of Minnesota for convienence of discussion. The Big Sioux River, which 

Pipestone Creek ultimately flows into 
39

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

via Split Rock Creek, exhibits a similar 

geological and geomorphological history to the Pipestone area. Winham (1990) 

has developed a comprehensive review 

of the culture history, site types, and site 

locations for the Big Sioux drainage. The 

area of eastern South Dakota is not extensively inventoried, but it apparently 

exhibits about the same inventory coverage as southwestern Minnesota, although no extensive sampling or probability inventories have been done in the 

area. Winham (1990) notes that most of 

the site identification work in the drainage has been the result of one of two 

processes: random site discovery, often 

by amateurs; and cultural resource management-driven work, often focused 

on linear transects following pipeline, 

transmission, or highway corridors.

Winham (1990:58-108) reviews 

and identifies sites present in the drainage area dating to the Archaic period, 

Besant, Woodland (including numerous 

sites with mounds), Late Prehistoric, 

Great Oasis, Plains Village, Oneota, 

Historic Native American, and Historic 

Euroamerican eras. He suggests 

(Winham 1990:161-163) that the average 

site density of the drainage is about 8.9 

sites per square mile, although the lower 

reaches of the drainage may not have a 

density that high. Lithic scatters, mound 

sites, and a few village sites are found 

throughout the drainage, but stone circle sites and rock cairns are found only 

in the upper portion of the drainage. 

The lower Big Sioux River drainage has 

a higher density of village sites and sites 

dating to the Great Oasis Phase and sites 

affiliated with the Oneota tradition.

The availability of large numbers 

of bison in the eastern periphery of the 

Plains is seen as an an important reason for Oneota people to have spread 

westward, with the consequences of 

resource competition and armed conflict with indigenous local villagers 

(Henning 1998b:239-240; Fishel 1999:117-

118; Ritterbush 2002). The presence of 

the nearby catlinite quarries has also 

been suggested as a reason for the establishment of an Oneota occupation at the 

mouth of Blood Run Creek (Benn 1986, 

3:32; 1990b:82), an extensive Oneota occupation and burial site that straddles 

the Big Sioux River southeast of Sioux 

Falls, South Dakota, approximately 40 

miles southwest of Pipestone National 

Monument (Henning 1998a:383; 

2001:233; Henning and Thiessen, eds., 

2004). Oneota peoples are believed to 

have spread into the western periphery of the Prairie Peninsula during the 

Developmental Horizon of the Oneota 

Tradition (AD 1000-1350; Henning 

1998a:353) and established permanent 

villages in western Iowa around AD 

1250 (Henning 1998b:240). Most Oneota 

researchers have suggested that the 

Oneota peoples engaged in a widespread trading network in which catlinite was one of the important commodities of exchange, particularly during 

the Classic Horizon (Harvey 1979:209; 

Tiffany and Anderson 1993:303; Gibbon 

1995:190; Henning 1998a:356-360; 

1998b:242; 2003:213-214). The putative 

dates of AD 1500 to 1700 for Blood Run 

span portions of the late Classic (AD 

1350-1650) and Historic (AD 1650-1775) 

horizons of the tradition (Henning 

1998a:353, 383). Gibbon (1995:190) has 

suggested that catlinite pipes played 

an important role in prehistoric antecedents of the calumet ceremony after about AD 1200, which may be one 

of the reasons for widespread trade in 
PIPESTONE

40

the material. It has even been suggested that the Oneota controlled access to 

the quarries and that Blood Run was 

an important trade center from which 

catlinite, among other commodities, 

was disseminated (Henning 1998a:385; 

1998b:241-242; 2003:213; Fishel 1999:127; 

Alex 2000:204; Bray 2003; Henning and 

Thiessen 2004:597-598). Benchley et al. 

(1997:23) have observed that catlinite 

use becomes widespread after about 

AD 1200, which would generally correlate with the spread of Oneota peoples 

into the western prairies of northwestern Iowa. Henning (2003:213) believes 

that Oneota exploitation of the catlinite 

quarries began about AD 1450. Catlinite 

artifacts are said to be common at Blood 

Run (Harvey 1979:151, 188; Henning 

1998a:385, 2003:213-214; Henning and 

Thiessen 2004:598), and two pieces of red pipestone from there have 

been confirmed as catlinite through 

x-ray diffraction analysis (Table 5-2). 

Interestingly, while catlinite is abundant at the Blood Run Site, it appears 

to be rare in Blue Earth Phase components of the Oneota Tradition, which 

are found in the Prairie Lake Region 

as well as along the Little Sioux River 

(Henning 1998a:379; Anfinson 1997:112-

119). The occupants of the Blood Run 

Site, at least on the eve of documented 

contact with Euroamericans at around 

AD 1700, are believed to have been the 

Dhegiha-speaking Omahas/Poncas 

(combined) and the Chiwere-speaking Ioways and Otos (Thiessen 1998a, 

2004; Henning 2003:213; Henning and 

Thiessen, eds., 2004). Historical and 

traditional sources of information also 

suggest that the Omahas lived elsewhere in the Big Sioux River drainage 

by the advent of the historic period, 

ca. AD 1700 (Thiessen 1998a, 2004).

Site location in the lower Big 

Sioux area tends to concentrate on floodplain terraces, valley bluffs, hills, and 

ridges (Winham 1990:162). In the upper 

Big Sioux drainage sites tend to be located on lake edges, lake bluffs, and on 

hilltops and ridge slopes of the prairie/

plains area. The site locations appear 

similar to those observed by Anfinson 

(1987, 1997) and Gibbon and Hruby 

(1983) for southwestern Minnesota.

Site Location Patterns in the Study 

Area

The Minnesota Statewide 

Archaeological Survey ([Lofstrom et al.] 

1981) conducted a sample survey of portions of Minnesota between 1977 and 

1980. Sample units were drawn from 

a universe defined during the development of the survey model. The southwestern Minnesota counties of Rock, 

Pipestone, and Nobles were among the 

areas sampled. The sampling in these 

three counties was conducted during 

the spring of 1979 and was centered on 

the Rock River drainage and its tributaries. The inventory work did not include 

the monument or the Pipestone Creek 

drainage. However, inventory took 

place within five miles to the east of the 

monument. Sample units consisted of 

quarter quarter sections (40 acres each).

The sampling design for the 

Rock River survey identified four strata 

as the sampling universe. The first stratum was the Rock River and its valley; 

the second was defined as lands lying 

in the drainage of the Rock’s main permanent tributaries; stratum 3 included 

all sample units crossed by intermittent 

streams in the Rock River drainage; and 

stratum 4 comprised the remainder of 
41

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

the drainage’s landforms. The survey 

design identified 1,964 40-acre sample 

units in the drainage. Field investigators 

were able to inventory 207 of the sample units or about a 10 percent sample.

The Rock River drainage inventory determined that prehistoric archeological sites occur in the highest 

numbers and greatest density in the 

permanent river and creek valleys and 

on their adjacent blufftops. They found 

much lower site density in the uplands 

and along the intermittent streams.

Gibbon and Hruby (1983) conducted cluster and discriminate function analyses of the Rock River drainage 

sample data to generate a statistically 

based association between stone tool 

assemblages and spatial and functional 

patterns. The sites they used in the analyses were typical lithic scatters that more 

often than not contained few if any diagnostic artifacts. Their statistical analyses 

suggested that there were time and space 

patterns in the archeological record. 

They concluded that Archaic-period foragers used a variety of topographical settings for resource procurement, and 

Archaic peoples used a narrower range 

of lithic raw materials than did subsequent peoples such as the Woodland and 

Mississippian. The study determined 

that Woodland and Mississippian peoples used more Sioux quartzite than earlier peoples, a greater variety of lithic raw 

materials, and these later peoples tended 

to focus their food procurement activities in the Rock River valley (Gibbon and 

Hruby 1983:148). Finally they concluded 

that special activity sites from all periods 

are located in a variety of topographic 

settings within the Rock River drainage.

Recorded Archeological Sites in 

Pipestone County

The Minnesota Historical Society 

and the Office of the State Archeologist’s 

archeological site records were consulted during the project to determine the 

number and type of archeological sites 

recorded in Pipestone County. There 

are 31 archeological sites recorded in 

the county, with the majority located 

in the Rock River drainage (Gibbon 

1980a; 1980b; Lothson and Clouse 1985; 

Pederen 1989; Pedersen and Hudak 

1981; Dudzik and Nunnally 1995; 

Peterson 1994; Radford and George 1993).

Minnesota uses the Smithsonian 

trinomial system to designate sites. 

Minnesota is designated 21 in the system and Pipestone County is designated as PP. Site 21PP2 is the entire 

monument, as it is considered to be 

a single archeological site with multiple localities or, in Archeological 

Sites Management Information 

System (ASMIS) terms, subsites.

The remaining 29 sites in the 

county are identified in Table 2. As can 

be seen in the table 23 sites are identified 

as lithic scatters, one is an isolated find of 

a core, two are isolated finds of flaking 

debris and bone, one is a mound site, and 

one site consists of a series of stone circles, 

and one is identified as a habitation site.

No information on cultural affiliation or age is available for the majority 

of the recorded sites. They are simply 

the ubiquitous surface lithic scatters 

that indicate some past use of the area 

by some prehistoric inhabitants or visitors. The few datable sites are assigned 

a preliminary cultural/temporal as-
PIPESTONE

42

21PP1 Earthwork and 

mound

Unknown Unknown Historically

reported but not 

located 

21PP2 Quarry 2500 BP to 

present

Woodland to 

Modern

Pipestone

National 

Monument

21PP3 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP4 Lithic Scatter 5,500 BP to

600 BP

ArchaicMississippian 

habitation

Miss. projectile 

point, scraper, 

bifaces, core, 

shell fragment, 

flakes

21PP5 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes, possible 

house 

depressions

21PP6 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP7 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP8 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP9 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP10 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP11 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flake tool, flakes

21PP12 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Spokeshaves, 

flakes

21PP13 Mound Group 5,500 BP to 

150 BP

Archaic -

Historic

Ground stone, 

projectile point, 

flakes

21PP14 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Shell fragment, 

flakes

21PP15 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Adze, core, flakes

21PP16 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP17 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Pipestone 

fragment, end 

scraper, flakes

21PP18 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Scraper, projectile 

point, bison skull, 

flakes

21PP19 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Burins, flakes

21PP20 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Pipestone 

fragment, flakes

21PP21 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Core, biface,

flakes

21PP22 Lithic Scatter 2,500 BP to 

1,000 BP

Woodland Pottery, projectile 

point, flakes

21PP23 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

Site Number Type Date Affiliation Comment

Table 2. Pipestone County archeological sites.
43

REGIONAL CULTURE HISTORY

Site Number Type Date Affiliation Comment

21PP24 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Core, flakes

21PP25 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Scrapers, flakes

21PP26 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP27 Lithic Scatter Unknown Unknown Flakes

21PP28 Isolated Find Unknown Unknown Chert core

21PP29 Stone Circle 5,500 BP to 

2,500 BP

Archaic 4 stone circles, 

chopper, grooved 

mauls, stemmed 

point

21PP30 Lithic Scatter 2,000 BP to 

1,000 BP

Middle 

Woodland

Prairie Corner 

Notched point, 

flakes

21PP31 Isolated Find Unknown Unknown 2 flakes

Table 2. Cconcluded
PIPESTONE

44

sociation by the presence of diagnostic 

artifact types that have been dated elsewhere in other contexts. Site 21PP4 is 

identified as a habitation site dating to 

the Archaic and Mississippian periods 

of occupation based on the presence of 

tools, some shell fragments, and a projectile point. An undated prehistoric 

site (21PP5) is believed to have several 

house depressions of undetermined age. 

The Signal Hill Mound Group 

(21PP13) has a date range from Archaic 

to historic for the use of the site. Three 

mounds with associated projectile points, 

lithic debris and ground stone comprise 

the site assemblage. Site 21PP22 is dated 

to the Woodland period based on the 

presence of projectile points and pottery 

sherds, and 21PP30 is dated to the Middle 

Woodland period based on the presence 

of a single diagnostic projectile point.

One site, 21PP29, the Boulder Tipi 

Ring Site, has four stone circles that are 

associated with a stemmed projectile 

point, a chopper, and several grooved 

mauls that are thought to date to the 

Archaic period of occupation. Only one 

site, 21PP22, has yielded pottery outside 

Pipestone National Monument, two sites 

have contained shell fragments, 21PP4 

and 21PP14, and other than the monument only two other sites have yielded 

pipestone fragments, 21PP17 and 21PP20.

Archeological inventory investigations conducted by the Minnesota 

Historical Society in 1994 in advance of 

reconstruction of 17.87 miles of Highway 

23 from I-90 northward to the town of 

Jasper resulted in the identification of 

12 prehistoric archeological sites (Skaar 

et al. 1994). These sites, all of which occur in Rock County, were identified on 

the basis of lithic artifacts numbering 

from one (seven sites) or two (four sites) 

flakes or patterned tools to as many as 

71 flakes and tools (one site). A possible 

fragmentary Paleoindian or Archaic biface was recovered from the Gulseth Site, 

which yielded 71 artifacts to the surveyors (Skaar 1994:52-54). The investigators 

noted the presence of a wide variety of 

lithic raw material types at these and 17 

other prehistoric sites in Rock, Nobles, 

and Murray counties, some of them from 

distant source locations (Skaar 1994:79-

85). To account for this variability, they 

offered alternative hypothetical explanations that the exotic stone was 1) carried into the region by Native Americans 

who visited the catlinite quarries from 

afar or 2) was received from distant 

groups by local Native Americans in 

exchange for catlinite (Skaar 1994:84). 

The 12 sites were considered potentially eligible for the National Register of 

Historic Places and were recommended 

for further evaluation (Skaar 1994:iii).

It is interesting to note that if 

Winham’s (1990) site density projection 

of 8.9 sites per square mile throughout 

the South Dakota portion of the Big 

Sioux River drainage holds true for the 

Minnesota portion of the drainage also 

(and presuming that all of Pipestone 

County is within the Big Sioux drainage, both of which presumptions are 

questionable), the 464-square-mile 

Pipestone County could be expected 

to contain over 4,000 recorded archeological sites, in contrast to the 31 sites 

that have actually been recorded. It 

is evident that many more archeological resources exist in Pipestone 

County than have been found to date.
45

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

Pipestone National Monument 

lies over a vast geological stone formation known as Sioux Quartzite. Sioux 

Quartzite is a hard, cross-bedded orthoquartzite from Early Proterozoic times, 

dating back as much as 1.5 to 1.75 billion years ago, formed as a result of fluvial processes associated with a braided-stream river system (Baldwin 1949; 

Austin 1972; Bretz 1981:131-134; Morey 

1983:5, 12, 18; 1984:69). Underlying 

much of southwestern Minnesota, 

southeastern South Dakota, and northwestern Iowa, Sioux Quartzite outcrops 

at relatively few places within this 

large region. One of the places where 

it does outcrop prominently, however, is 

Pipestone National Monument, where 

it forms a west-facing escarpment that 

extends north-south through the monument (Morey and Setterholm 1987). It is 

believed to extend from 1,000 to 3,000 

meters (3,300 to 9,800 feet) in thickness, although the accuracy of this estimate has been questioned (Austin 

1972:450; Bretz 1981:131-133; Morey 

1984:72). Within the monument, the 

quartzite is overlain by a thin mantle of 

pre-Wisconsin glacial till (> ca. 35,000 

years old) that is generally three meters or less in thickness (Delin 1980:10; 

Morey 1983:5; Wright 1972a:518). Sioux 

Quartzite is composed of more than 90 

percent medium-to-fine quartz sand 

grains encoated with hematite which 

gives the stone a reddish to gray appearance (Delin 1980:10; Morey 1984:61-

62; Morey and Setterholm 1987:75). 

Within the monument, beds of Sioux 

Quartzite dip to the east at an angle of 

5 to 10 degrees (Morey 1983:5; 1984:60).

Encompassed within the Sioux 

Quartzite are discontinuous thin beds of 

finer-grained materials variously characterized as siltstone, mudstone, silty 

mudstone, clayey mudstone, and claystone (Austin 1972:452; Delin 1980:12; 

Morey 1983:16). At Pipestone National 

Monument, a claystone named catlinite 

occurs in discontinuous beds ranging 

from about an inch to 2 feet in thickness 

(Delin 1980:7; Morey 1983:1, 10; 1984:62-

63). Catlinite is named after the artist 

Figure 11. Schematic cross-section of a catlinite quarry pit, showing relationship of the catlinite 

and Sioux quartzite deposits and the dip of the catlinite beds. A, quartzite rubble; B, the catlinite 

layer; C, Sioux quartzite above the catlinite and as a spoil pile; D, earth overburden; and E, rubble 

pile of earth and rock.
PIPESTONE

4

George Catlin, who was the first to document the quarries in art and published 

narrative based on personal observation, and to bring samples of the material with him when he returned east 

(Silliman 1839). Mineralogically, catlinite 

is composed principally of pyrophyllite 

and muscovite, with lesser amounts of 

diaspore and kaolinite (Gundersen 1991, 

2002; Emerson et al. 2005:198). Unlike 

quartzite, mudstone, and silty mudstone, catlinite lacks quartz in its mineral composition, which gives it a relatively soft and carvable quality (Morey 

1983:11, 30; Morey and Setterholm 

1987:75; Emerson et al. 2005:198). Like 

the quartzite in which it is embedded, it 

generally appears reddish in color due 

to hematite, but its color may vary from 

dark maroon to near white (Gundersen 

1991:18-19; 2002:45). The paler colors of 

catlinite, often occurring as spots such 

as characterize much of the catlinite 

taken from the Spotted Quarry, are due 

to partial leaching of the hematite, not 

to replacement of hematite by pyrophyllite as is sometimes stated (Gundersen 

1991:18, 19; 2002:45). Catlinite is often 

said to be softer and more easily carved 

immediately following its exposure 

to the air (Brackenridge in Williams 

1992:196; Gardner-Sharp 1885:169; U.S. 

Court of Claims 1927:161, 189), but this 

is not true (McGuire 1899:572; Berg 

1938:262-263; Gundersen 1991:5; 2002:37).

Catlinite originated as mud deposited on riverine floodplains during 

major flooding episodes. It represents 

vertical accretion deposits that survived 

river channel meandering and interbraiding (Morey 1983:18; 1984:71). As such 

vertical accretion deposits in braided 

stream systems seldom survive, catlinite 

and other pipestones of similar composition are scarce and occur as patchy and 

discontinuous beds (Morey 1983:1, 18; 

1984:71; Morey and Setterholm 1987:76).

At one time catlinite outcropped 

in the Sioux Quartzite along a line that 

extended approximately north-south 

through the center of the monument, 

approximating the present-day quarry line. From this point, it dips eastward at angles of 5 to 10 degrees from 

horizontal (Delin 1980:9; Morey 1983:5). 

Through an exploratory drilling program undertaken by the U.S. Geological 

Survey and the Minnesota Geological 

Survey in 1979 and 1980, it has been determined that six separate catlinite beds 

were exposed in the quarry faces at that 

time, three each along the north and 

south quarry lines (Delin 1980; Morey 

1983; Gundersen 1991, 2002). The beds 

exposed in the north quarry line do not 

correlate with those in the south line 

(Gundersen 1991:22; 2002:46). Additional 

beds were also found to be present in 

the Sioux Quartzite but were not represented by surface or quarry outcrops. 

The outcropped beds extend to the east 

as much as 300 to 400 feet, but are increasingly deeper below the ground 

surface in that direction due to the dip 

of the formation (Morey 1983:1, 20).

Petrologically, catlinite and other 

similar claystones are classified as argillites (Gundersen 1988a, 1991:4, 2002:35; 

Gundersen et al. 2002:106-107). Although 

generally similar in nature, argillites 

from different provenances (i.e., source 

locations) can generally be distinguished 

from one another on the basis of mineralogical composition (Gundersen 1984, 

1991, 2002; Gundersen et al. 2002). The 

argillites found at Pipestone National 

Monument, although varying slightly 
47

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

from bed to bed, share sufficiently distinctive mineralogical attributes to warrant collectively referring to them as 

catlinite or in the plural form, catlinites 

(Gundersen 1991, 2002; Gundersen et al. 

2002). Howell (1940:57) and Gundersen 

(1991:4; 1993; 2002:35; see also Gundersen 

et al. 2002:107) have urged that the name 

“catlinite” be reserved exclusively for 

argillite from the quarries at Pipestone 

National Monument, which is the type 

locality for catlinite as originally chemically analyzed by Jackson (Silliman 

1839). Gundersen suggests that argillites from other localities be referred 

to by the more generic term “pipestone.” Hence, in his research, he refers to these other materials as “Kansas 

pipestone” (Gundersen 1981; 1982a, 

b; 1989; 1991; 2002; Gundersen et al. 

2002:109-110; Gundersen and Blakeslee 

2002; Penman and Gundersen 1999), 

“South Dakota pipestone” (Gundersen 

1985, 1988b), “Wisconsin pipestone” 

(Gundersen 1983, 1987), and so on. 

“Flint clay” is another term, although 

perhaps inappropriate (James N. 

Gundersen, personal communication to 

Thiessen, 2002), that has been applied 

to pipestones from various sources in 

Missouri, Illinois, Ohio, and Kentucky 

(Farnsworth 1996; Berres 1996; Emerson 

and Hughes 1996, 2000, 2001; Hughes et 

al. 1996, 1998; Moore and Hughes 2000).

Claystones that exhibit color and 

characteristics generally similar to catlinite are known to occur at a number 

of widespread locations in the United 

States. Although not all such locations 

have been verified through systematic geological study, these locations 

reportedly include places in Arizona, 

Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, 

Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, 

South Dakota, and Wisconsin (see Table 

11). These sources include claystones 

that are in situ within geological bedrock formations as well as claystone 

fragments transported from their original locations by glaciers and deposited 

in glacial till. Stone materials from many 

of these locations have been used for aboriginal artifacts in prehistoric and historic times. Pipestones from Wisconsin 

and Illinois appear to have been used 

for making artifacts as early as 5,000 

years ago (Broihahn 1996; Hughes et 

al. 1998:711), some 3,000 years before 

the earliest evidence of catlinite artifacts (Boszhardt and Gundersen 1996).

The fact that catlinite and red 

pipestones from different locations, 

though of generally similar appearance, 

can be distinguished on the basis of 

their mineral composition has important implications for our understanding of prehistoric and historic trading 

connections and other cultural interactions, as well as for determining the 

earliest use of true catlinite. Argillites 

that have been carved into pipes and 

other artifacts are often termed catlinite 

in the archeological literature, but without supporting compositional analyses 

it should not be presumed that they are 

from the Minnesota quarries and not 

from some other location (Gundersen 

1993; Gundersen et al. 2002:107). A 

number of researchers have attempted 

to distinguish catlinite from argillites 

of similar color and appearance; to 

identify source formations and deposits for other pipestones; and to relate 

archeological artifacts of catlinite or 

other pipestone material to their original geological sources. Several methods 

have been used experimentally to distinguish the chemical and mineralogi-
PIPESTONE

4

 

Source Reference 

 

ARIZONA

 Del Rio argillite, upper Verde valley Bartlett 1939

 near Prescott, Yavapai County Howell 1940

Sigstad 1973:14-15

Spendlove 1986

Gundersen & Elson 1991

Elson & Gundersen 1992

 Deer Creek argillite, southern side of Gundersen & Elson 1991

 Deer Creek in the Upper Tonto Basin Elson & Gundersen 1992

 Pine Creek-Oak Spring argillite, along Gundersen & Elson 1991

 Pine and Oak Spring creeks north of Elson & Gunderson 1992

 Payson 

 Tuscon Mountain Redbed argillite, Gundersen & Elson 1991

 within Saguaro National Monument, Elson & Gunderson 1992

 west of Tucson 

 Near Silver Bell, Pima County DiPeso 1956:xxiii, 84-85

Sigstad 1973:15

ARKANSAS

 South bank of Arkansas River in Little Rock Sigstad 1973:15

 Bauxite in south-central Arkansas Emerson and Hughes 2000

ILLINOIS

 Neda Formation in northwestern Illinois Farnsworth 1996

 (“Sterling pipestone”) Hughes et al. 1996, 1998

Berres 1996

Wisseman et al. n.d.:5-6

IOWA

 Glacial drift in O’Brien County Gundersen & Tiffany 1986

KANSAS

 Kansan-age glacial drift near Manhattan, Gundersen & O’Shea 1981

 Kansas Gundersen 1981

Gundersen 1982

Gundersen 1984?

Sigstad 1973:15-16

Table 3. Reported sources of soft red pipestones other than the catlinite quarries.
49

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

Source Reference 

 

 Medial and upper Kansan-age glacial drift Gundersen & O’Shea 1981

 in northern Kansas through east-central Gundersen 1984?

 Nebraska Gundersen 1988b

Gundersen 1989

Gundersen & Ludwickson 1982

Penman & Gundersen 1999

Boszhardt & Gundersen 1996

 Ninnescah shale, south-central Kansas Sigstad 1973:15

MINNESOTA

 Near Jasper, Pipestone/Rock counties Sigstad 1973:12

 Section 20, Rose Dell township, Rock County Winchell 1884:543

 Near Luverne, Rock County Winchell 1884:543

 Several locations in Cottonwood County Sigstad 1973:12

 Gundersen & Tiffany 

 1986:47, 55-57

 “on St. Peter’s [Minnesota] River” Maximilian in Thwaites 1966:321

MISSOURI

 Southeastern Missouri flint clays Hughes et al. 1996

Emerson & Hughes 1996,

 2000, 2001

Wisseman et al. n.d.:6-9

MONTANA

 Powder River Bradley 1917

OHIO

 Scioto County Mills 1916:107, 132-133

Shetrone 1930:178

Sigstad 1973:14

Holzapfel 1995

Britt 1995

Murphy 1996

Hughes et al. 1996

Hughes et al. 1998:715-717

 Perry County Sigstad 1973:14

 Location not specified West 1934, Part 1:331

Table 3. Continued
PIPESTONE

50

ONTARIO

 Along the north shore of Rainy Lake Lamb 1970:105

SOUTH DAKOTA

 Palisade State Park Winchell 1884:542

Gundersen & O’Shea 1981

 Near Sioux Falls White 1869

Howell 1940?

Gundersen 1984?

Gundersen 1988b

 Along Split Rock Creek, Minnehaha County Sigstad 1973:12-13

WISCONSIN

 On the banks of Ottaway Schoolcraft 1821:192

 (Pipestone or Lac Courte Oreilles) Brown 1906:293

 Lake at the source of the LaMauvaise River Schoolcraft in Williams 

 [Sawyer County] 1992:133

 Various places in Barron County, Wisconsin Schoolcraft 1851:383

 [Barron Formation] Strong et al. 1882

West 1910

West 1911:63

Brown 1906:194; 1914

Hotchkiss et al. 1915:37-38

Barrett 1926

West 1934, Part 1:330-331

Howell 1940

Sigstad 1973:13-14

Sinclair 1981

Gundersen 1983

Gundersen 1987

Broihahn 1996

 Hill n.d.

 Near Devil’s Lake, Sauk County, Wisconsin Woodman 1882

 [Baraboo Formation] Winchell 1884:542

Gundersen 1987

Boszhardt 1997

 Headwaters of the Cedar River, a Woodman 1882

 tributary of the Chippewa River, in

 Sec. 27, T. 35 N., R. 10 W.

 [Red Cedar River in Dunn County?]

Source Reference 

Table 3. Continued
51

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

 Near the Calumet or Painted Rock, about De la Ronde 1876:7, 348-349

 20 miles above the mouth of the Black River Brown 1906:297

 [Buffalo County]

 Marathon County Gundersen 1987

 Pipestone Creek quarry in Sawyer County Gundersen 1987

Penman & Gundersen 1999

West 1911:62-63

Brown 1912:182

 Chippewa River 8 km above Eau Clair Brunson 1975, 2:169-170

 [in Chippewa County?] Penman & Gundersen 1999

Source Reference 

Table 3. Concluded
PIPESTONE

52

cal characteristics of catlinite, including 

color streak comparison, neutron activation analysis, x-ray powder diffraction analysis, and x-ray fluorescence. 

Among those efforts, briefly reviewed 

below, the work of two men stands outJohn S. Sigstad and James N. Gundersen.

Efforts to distinguish the chemical elements that comprise catlinite began with the stone samples that George 

Catlin brought back from the quarries in 

1836. Catlin furnished those samples to 

Charles T. Jackson, a noted geologist of 

his time (Merrill 1964:120-121), who identified the basic chemical constituents 

of catlinite (Silliman 1839). Minnesota 

State Geologist Newton H. Winchell 

(1884:542) also subjected catlinite samples to chemical analysis. Samples 

were again taken from the quarries in 

1937 or 1938, and were microscopically 

and chemically examined and also xrayed at the University of Minnesota. 

Berg (1938) published a detailed mineralogical description of catlinite based 

on this work (see also a letter from H. 

Holmes Ellis, The Lithic Laboratory for 

the Eastern United States, to Edward A. 

Hummel, Acting Regional Historian, 

National Park Service, Omaha, 

Nebraska, November 15, 1938, copy on 

file, Pipestone National Monument). 

The earliest attempt to correlate 

archeological artifacts with the catlinite 

quarries and other pipestone sources 

occurred in the late 1930s when David 

H. Howell (1940), of Claremont Colleges, 

Claremont, California, obtained specimens of catlinite from Minnesota and 

other pipestones from South Dakota, 

Barron County, Wisconsin, and Del 

Rio, Arizona. He subjected them to 

spectrographic and petrographic analyses to establish the relative amounts 

of certain chemical elements present, 

which he used to establish a baseline 

for comparison with archeological artifacts made from catlinite and other 

pipestones (Howell 1940:49-50). He 

was able to make a gross distinction 

between the Arizona pipestone and 

the lumped samples from the northern 

states, among which the South Dakota 

samples were distinguished by minute 

traces of silver. His research was successful on a gross scale in distinguishing 

between the stone from the Southwest 

and the upper Midwest, but was not 

useful for correlating individual artifacts with specific geological sources of 

stone.1 He recommended continuation 

of these analyses with additional samples, and he also called for more precise nomenclature of catlinite and other 

pipestones, a recommendation echoed 

years later by James N. Gundersen.

National Park Service officials 

early encouraged compositional studies of catlinite to establish a compositional “standard” or signature by which 

it could be distinguished from pipestones from other sources, and thus 

open the door to studies of the age and 

geographic/cultural range of catlinite use. During the summer of 1949, 

1

Catlinite samples collected at the monument in 1962 were also examined by petrographic microscopy and x-ray spectrometer by Professor Aaron C. Waters of John Hopkins University. Although 

his results were communicated to the monument superintendent, the only documentation of his 

work that we have been able to locate is an April 30, 1963 memorandum from superintendent 

Carl R. Stoddard to the Regional Director, informing the latter of the general results of Waters’ 

examination.
53

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

Superintendent Lyle Linch corresponded with P.W. Bridgman of Harvard 

University to arrange for chemical analyses by the Mineralogy Department (see 

letters from Linch to Bridgman dated 

July 17 and August 13, 1949, copies on 

file, Pipestone National Monument; letters from Bridgman to Linch dated June 

17 and August 4, 1949, copies on file, 

Pipestone National Monument; and a 

letter from L.H. Abbot to Linch, August 

3, 1949, copy on file, Pipestone National 

Monument). Samples of catlinite and 

Wisconsin pipestone were submitted in 

1960 to G.F. Hanson, the State Geologist 

of the Wisconsin Geological Survey, to 

determine their mineralogical composition through x-ray powder diffraction analysis (see letter from Hanson to 

R.J. McMullen, Acting Superintendent, 

Pipestone National Monument, with 

results of the analyses attached, 

October 27, 1960, copy on file, Pipestone 

National Monument; letter from Robert 

A. Murray, Park Historian, Pipestone 

National Monument, to Hanson, 

April 27, 1961, copy on file, Pipestone 

National Monument; and a letter from 

Hanson to Murray, May 1, 1961, copy 

on file, Pipestone National Monument). 

A few years after Hanson’s initial 

experiment, a doctoral graduate student 

at the University of Missouri, John S. 

Sigstad, proposed an alternative methodology to accomplish the goals of correlating catlinite and pipestone artifacts 

with geological sources (Sigstad 1973:6). 

A major objective of Sigstad’s dissertation 

research, conducted in the late 1960s and 

early 1970s, was to establish the temporal and geographic parameters of catlinite usage among native North American 

peoples (Sigstad 1968b, 1973). As early 

as 1966, Harry A. Tourtelot of the U.S. 

Geological Survey offered to conduct a 

mineralogical study of catlinite samples 

for Sigstad, but the results of his work, 

if it was conducted, are not documented 

in the archives of Pipestone National 

Monument (letter from Tourtelot to 

Sigstad, July 18, 1966, copy on file, 

Pipestone National Monument; see also 

letters from Margaret Killgore, U.S. 

Geological Survey, to Robert H. Rose, 

National Park Service, Washington, D.C., 

dated April 28, 1966, and from Rose to 

Tourtelot, dated August 9, 1966, copies 

on file, Pipestone National Monument).

Sigstad (1973:20) initially experimented with microchemical means of 

determining the mineralogical constituents of catlinite and pipestone samples, 

but abandoned this approach because 

it required relatively large samples of 

stone, which was not feasible for sampling artifacts of relatively small size. 

He also attempted to distinguish different pipestones by the color of the 

residue that was left after a sample was 

rubbed across a streak plate (Sigstad 

1970b), but he later rejected this method 

as producing variable and unreliable results (Sigstad 1973:34-35). The method 

by which Sigstad ultimately chose to 

address these questions was neutron 

activation analysis, commonly referred 

to as NAA. With this method, powdered samples of stone were subjected 

to neutron bombardment to create artificial radioactive isotopes. The rate 

of radioactive decay of these isotopes 

was then measured by a detector over 

a period of time. This allowed the calculation of the half-lives of the radioisotopes present, and the subsequent identification of the original elements from 

which the isotopes were created (Sigstad 

1968b:6; 1973:21). The nuclear reactor at 
PIPESTONE

54

the University of Missouri-Columbia 

was employed for Sigstad’s research.

During 1966 and 1967, Sigstad 

(1973:11-16) visited the catlinite quarries 

and as many other known or suspected 

sources of other pipestones as was practical in order to obtain samples of stone 

for NAA analysis. In addition to several 

of the quarries at Pipestone National 

Monument, he obtained pipestone 

samples from near the town of Jasper 

in Pipestone County, Minnesota; several locations in Cottonwood County, 

Minnesota; Minnehaha County, South 

Dakota; Barron County, Wisconsin; 

Scioto County, Ohio; Yavapai County, 

Arizona; Pima County, Arizona; near 

Little Rock, Arkansas; in south-central 

Kansas (Ninnescah shale); and near 

Manhattan, Kansas (Sigstad 1973:11-

16). He also located hundreds of archeological artifacts in museum collections that were suspected to be 

made from catlinite or other pipestone 

material, and obtained powder samples from them. He sought to obtain 

samples that reflected a wide range of 

cultural and chronological contexts.

Sigstad presented his analyses 

and conclusions in a doctoral dissertation completed at the University of 

Missouri in 1973, which also was submitted to the National Park Service in 

that year in fulfillment of a contract 

which supported Sigstad’s research. 

Unfortunately, his conclusions about 

the mineralogical “signatures” of catlinite and other pipestones, and their use 

by Native Americans through time and 

space, have not borne up. As early as 

1986, Gundersen and Tiffany (1986:48) 

concluded that none of the methods 

tried by Sigstad “produced reliable results.” Two physicists recently independently re-assessed Sigstad’s dissertation research and, on different 

grounds, also judged the results of his 

research not to be reliable. Michael D. 

Glascock, who works in the same reactor facility which Sigstad utilized at the 

University of Missouri, has found several problems with the methods used 

by Sigstad, which invalidate the conclusions that Sigstad offered regarding the 

provenance of his irradiated samples:

Unfortunately, the NAA work reported by Sigstad (1973) is seriously 

flawed and his data should not be 

used in any way to interpret or attribute provenance to the samples of 

pipestone or catlinite he analyzed. 

The fact that Sigstad’s experiments 

were actually conducted with a NaI 

[sodium iodide] detector instead of a 

GeLi [lithium-drifted germanium] 

detector indicates that he was lacking in a technical understanding of 

nuclear radiation and nuclear radiation detection. The inconclusive 

results from Sigstad’s long irradiation experiment was based on a poor

decision and his lack of time to properly reconsider other alternative

irradiation measurement parameters. 

Finally, Sigstad’s misidentification of 

the gamma rays in his sample spectra 

led to calculations of several meaningless ratios which he unfortunately 

used to make provenance assignments 

for his artifacts. (Glascock 1997:8)

Glascock (1997:1) concluded that 

“Sigstad’s work was of limited value because the methods he used did not produce reliable results.” Glascock (1997:1, 

8) also concluded that, while Sigstad’s 

failed research discouraged research-
55

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

ers from further NAA studies of catlinite, NAA, properly utilized, remains a 

valuable tool for identifying the chemical constituents of a wide variety of 

archeological materials, including catlinite and other pipestones. Glascock 

and his colleague, A. Holly Mead of 

the University of Idaho, have undertaken limited NAA study of catlinite 

and pipestone samples and artifacts 

(Mead and Glascock 1998, Mead 1999).

Another physicist, John W. 

Weymouth of the University of Nebraska, 

evaluated Sigstad’s research and concluded, largely on statistical grounds, 

that “most all of the assignments of artifacts to source groups are unjustified” 

(Weymouth 1997:4). He also expressed 

concern that Sigstad’s analyses did not 

identify a large enough pool of chemical 

elements, and that the analyses failed 

to demonstrate the range of chemical variation present at different locations within the quarries at Pipestone 

National Monument (Weymouth 1997:4). 

Weymouth was unaware of the information available to Glascock at the reactor where Sigstad performed his work, 

and could not have arrived at the same 

conclusions regarding methodological 

shortcomings. While Sigstad’s research 

on the chemical composition of catlinite 

was methodologically flawed, the concept of his research has been described 

as “provocative” (Gundersen and 

Tiffany 1986) and has stimulated subsequent fruitful research by Gundersen 

and others.2 Sigstad, an anthropology graduate student, simply was not 

well served by his physicist advisors.

Weymouth (1981) earlier conducted an experimental x-ray fluorescence study of catlinite samples taken 

from bore holes within the monument. 

X-ray fluorescence identifies the chemical composition of samples subjected to 

irradiation by x-rays to excite “characteristic fluorescent X-Rays in the sample” 

(Weymouth 1981:2). The intensity or 

“count rate” of the resulting fluorescent 

x-rays is then compared to the intensities produced by a “standard of known 

composition” (Weymouth 1981:2). 

Weymouth (1981:6) “encountered a wide 

variation in elemental concentrations 

among different samples” from five 

bore holes at the monument. Weymouth 

(1981:5) noted that his x-ray florescence 

study examined different elements than 

those studied by Sigstad with NAA. 

James N. Gundersen, a geologist recently retired from Wichita State 

University, has successfully employed 

x-ray powder diffractometry over the 

past two decades to identify hundreds 

of artifacts made of catlinite and other pipestones, often in collaboration 

with archeologists (Boszhardt and 

Gundersen 1996; Elson and Gundersen 

1992; Gundersen 1981, 1982a-b, 1983, 

1984, 1985, 1987, 1988a-b, 1989, 1991, 1993, 

1996, 1999, 2002; Gundersen and Elson 

1991; Gundersen and Ludwickson 1982; 

Gundersen and O’Shea 1981; Gundersen 

and Tiffany 1986; Gundersen et al. 

2002; Ludwickson et al. 1993; Penman 

and Gundersen 1999; and Siemens and 

Gundersen 1982). X-ray powder diffractometry is one of a number of techniques 

of x-ray diffraction analysis (Gundersen 

2

Sigstad’s ideas about the age and distribution of catlinite are also discussed in Sigstad 1965a and 

1968b, and in Anonymous 1970. He died in 1989 (Krause 1990).
PIPESTONE

5

1988b:86; see also Tite 1972:285-287):

All x-ray diffraction analyses are 

concerned with measuring the internal structures of crystals. The 

structures are most easily visualized 

as orderly arrangements of regularly 

spaced planes of “atoms” that make 

up the crystal. Because minerals 

are crystals, they are also composed 

of these many, but unique, sets of 

parallel internal atomic planes. Xray diffraction methods measure 

the distances separating these sets 

of planes (i.e. the so-called “d-spacings”) in an unknown specimen, 

which are then compared with those 

of known standard materials for 

the identification of the unknown.

Gundersen (1991:10-11; 

2002:40) explains the objectives of 

x-ray powder diffraction analysis:

Essentially any mineral is composed 

of orderly arrangements of ions (or 

groups thereof) that are located at 

regularly repeated, fixed distances 

from one another in three-dimensional space such as to constitute 

their own specific internal crystalline structure. Each such internal 

crystalline structure is essentially 

unique to a given mineral species. 

This three-dimensional periodic distribution of ions, in a given mineral, 

also defines a number of differently 

oriented, internal sets of regularlyspaced, parallel planes of these ions 

for that particular mineral. The 

regular distance of separation of 

these parallel planes is the “d-spacing” for that particular set of planes 

within said mineral. Depending on 

its internal complexity, a given mineral can have a dozen or two sets of 

specific “d-spacing” planes of ions...

Because x-ray photons interact with 

the electrons of the ions of these internal parallel planes in a very specific 

manner, x-ray diffraction analysis 

of minerals is the standard method 

used to detect the presence of such 

internal ionic planes in a mineral 

(i.e. crystalline) sample...In order to 

detect the presence of as many as 

possible of the reflections from all of 

the many sets of internal d-spacing 

planes present in a given mineral or 

assemblage of minerals, a completely 

random oriented powder sample is 

placed in the incident x-ray beam...

Elson and Gundersen (1992:429) 

offer a “nontechnical” explanation 

of how the analysis is performed:

...X-ray diffractometry is a process 

by which a flat- surfaced, powdered 

sample is rotated about a predetermined axis through a fixed narrow 

X-ray beam. An X-ray detecting 

system is used to measure the angle 

of the scatter of the X-rays deflected 

from the sample. The resulting pattern of scattered X-rays is unique 

for each constituent mineral within 

a sample and therefore a unique 

mineralogical “fingerprint” can be 

determined. These data were then 

plotted using correspondence analysis, a multivariate data reduction 

technique...which displays the data 

matrix as points in low dimension 

geometrical space. This allowed 

for the linkage between an argillite 
57

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

artifact from a given provenience 

with its raw material source area.

Gundersen and Tiffany 

(1986:51) conclude that:

...After an XRD [x-ray diffraction] 

diffractometer analysis, the measured d-spacings of an unknown 

artifact material are then compared with the known d-spacings 

of known mineral standards...then, 

by structural analogy, the mineralogical constituents of the unknown 

pipestone [or catlinite] sample are 

thus determined and/or verified.

The method requires that a sample of each artifact to be analyzed first be 

transformed to powder, which requires 

a small sample of stone from to be removed from each artifact (Gundersen 

and Tiffany 1986:50; Gundersen 1991:12-

13, 2002:41-42; Wisseman et al. 2002:696).

Gundersen has extensively and 

successfully employed x-ray powder 

diffraction analysis to correlate archeological artifacts of catlinite and other 

pipestones with geological sources. 

His research has resulted in the identification of over 360 catlinite artifacts 

from more than 44 archeological sites 

in nine states and one Canadian province (Table 4). In addition, portable infrared mineral analyzer spectroscopy 

has confirmed catlinite artifacts from a 

tenth state, Ohio (Emerson et al. 2005). 

The sites from which catlinite artifacts 

have been identified range in age from 

prehistoric Early/Middle Woodland 

times well into historic time (Table 4). 

Certain catlinite artifacts from Iowa, 

Wisconsin, and Ohio sites may date to 

Early and Middle Woodland times (ca. 

500 BC to AD 500), suggesting that usage of the material may have begun perhaps as much as 2,500 years ago (see site 

13FT2 and Wisconsin listings on Table 

4; Boszhardt and Gundersen 1996, n.d.; 

Stevenson et al. 1997:158; Emerson and 

Hughes 2001:152, Emerson et al. 2005; 

Theler and Boszhardt 2003:121). The 

vast majority of confirmed catlinite artifacts, however, date within the past 

900 years (AD 1100 and later), attesting to intensive and possibly increasing 

catlinite quarrying during much of the 

past millennium. Clearly, catlinite was 

extracted from the Pipestone National 

Monument quarries for a very long 

time and was widely traded through 

much of the North American continent, some artifacts ending up as far 

away from the quarries as Alabama, 

Oklahoma, and northern Manitoba. 

In recent years, a group of Illinois 

archeologists and geologists have collaborated to investigate the geological 

sources of material used to make stylistically distinctive Middle Woodland 

pipes and Middle Mississippian figurines. The results of these studies have 

pointed to relatively local sources of 

pipestones, called flint clays by these 

researchers (Hughes et al. 1996; Moore 

and Hughes 2000), contrary to earlier 

interpretations that these items originated from distant sources and were 

traded into western Illinois (Hughes 

et al. 1998; Emerson and Hughes 2000; 

Emerson and Hughes 2001). In the latter stages of this innovative research, 

a non-destructive and low-cost means 

of identifying the mineral constituents 

of pipestones has been employed, the 

Portable Infrared Mineral Analyzer 
PIPESTONE

5

Table 4. Catlinite artifacts confirmed by x-ray powder diffraction and portable infrared mineral analyzer spectrsoscopy analyses. Compiled from data furnished to the Midwest Archeological Center by James N. Gundersen of Wichita State University, April, 1998, and selected written sources.State/province/ # of confirmed Archeological taxon/ Date Reference

 site no./name catlinite objects cultural affiliation

ALABAMA 1MB94 Old Mobile 34 French colonial town AD 1702-1711 Gundersen et al. 2002

 1MB147 1 Native American house AD 1702-1711 Gundersen et al. 2002

ILLINOIS Cahokia area 5 * * Emerson & Hughes  2001:154-155

Booth & Koldehoff 1999Emerson et al. 1983Walthall & Benchley 1987

* In a paper completed and published after April 1998, Emerson and Hughes (2001:154-155) indicate that seven catlinite artifacts from Cahokia area sites date from the 14th century or later. Four are from “Oneota/Historic” contexts and three are from the early 18th century River L’Abbe Mission.IOWA Cl-71 1 Unknown Unknown Pipe bowl found in  Clayton County,

6 miles southeast of Elgin; Keyes Collection.

 13FT2 Clermont or 1 Middle Woodland Keyes Collection; Sellars 1992 Krueger-Thompson  Mound Group
59

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

State/province/  site no./name 

# of confirmedcatlinite objects

Archeological taxon/cultural affiliation

Date Reference

 13LA1 McKinney 1 Oneota ca. AD 1500s-early 1600s Iowa Archeologivcal 

Society Newsletter 90:1 (1978); Tiffany 1988

 13LO2 Blood Run site

2 Oneota AD 1500-1700 Keyes Collection; Harvey 

1979

 Ly-55

6 Unknown Unknown Keyes collection from Lyon 

County

 Ly-65

3 Unknown Unknown Keyes collection from Lyon 

County

 Ly-145 Data Lost Unknown Unknown Keyes collection from Lyon 

County

 13PM1 Broken Kettle 1 Mill Creek AD 1100-1200 Keyes Collection; Orr 1939 

(in microcard)

 Worth County (Wh-289 and Wh-290?)

2 Unknown Unknown Keyes Collection; 2 pipes

 Unknown (“E.O.”)

2 Unknown Unknown Ellison Orr portion of the 

Keyes Collection

Contextual information provided by William Green, Iowa State Archaeologist, letter to Thomas D. Thiessen, August 3, 1999. The Charles R. Keyes Collection belongs to the State Historical Society of Iowa and is jointly curated with the Office of the State Archaeologist of the University of Iowa.KANSAS 14CO23 1 Invalid number; possibly 

14CO3?

 14CY5

2 White Rock Aspect Late Ceramic O’Brien 1976; Ritterbush 

and Logan 1991

 14DP2

2 Nebraska Phase & Kansa Late Ceramic Wedel 1959; Witty 1964; 

Slattery

Table 4. Continued
PIPESTONE

0

Table 4. Continued

State/province/  site no./name 

# of confirmedcatlinite objects

Archeological taxon/cultural affiliation

Date Reference

 14JW2 2 Great Bend Aspect Middle Ceramic Fenenga 1951; Neuman 

1963; Bradley 1984; Gunnerson 1987; Logan and Hedden 1991;Ritterbush 1999

 14KP8 1 Invalid number 14MN328 Marion 1 Great Bend Aspect Late Ceramic Reynolds 1982; Rohn and 

Emerson 1984; Lees et al. 1987, 1988, 1989

 14RC8 1 Great Bend Aspect Late Ceramic Wedel 1956, 1959; Thode 

1961; Witty 1977; Lees 1985; Manz et al. 1990; Loosle 1991; Wulfkuhle and Witty 1992; Slattery 1995; Zehnder 1998

 14RC9/14RC302 1 Great Bend Aspect Late Ceramic Wedel 1956, 1959; Manz 

et al. 1990; Loosle 1991; Slattery 1995

 14SH302 1 Grasshopper Falls Phase 

& Kansa

Early Ceramic &Historic (1820-1865)

 ? Brown County (?) 1 ? Lyon County, Hyde  collection

1

 ? Rice County surface  finds 

10

 ? Rice or Marion County surface

1
6

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

State/province/  site no./name 

# of confirmedcatlinite objects

Archeological taxon/cultural affiliation

Date Reference

 ? Cowley County surface finds

1

Contextual information provided by Anita Frank, Kansas State Historical Society, letter to Thomas D. Thiessen, August 10, 1999.MANITOBA HgLt-1 Nagami Bay

4 Cree ca A.D. 1665 Brownlee and Syms 1999

NEBRASKA 25BU1 Linwood 17 Pawnee ca. AD 1750-1853 Gundersen and 

Ludwickson 1982; Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; O’Shea 1989

 25BU4 Barcal 10 Lower Loup Phase/ 

Protohistoric Pawnee

ca. AD 1750-1770s Gundersen and O’Shea 

1981; Gundersen and Ludwickson 1982; Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; O’Shea 1989

 25CX1 Gray

2 Lower Loop Phase/ 

Protohistoric Pawnee

ca. AD 1600-1750 Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; 

O’Shea 1989

 25GA1 Blue Springs

2 Pawnee AD 1809-1825 Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; 

‘Shea 1989

 25HW1 Palmer

9 Pawnee ca. AD 1770s-1844 Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; 

O’Shea 1989

 25HW16 Stabaco

2 Pawnee AD 1720-1760 Holen and Peterson 1995

 25NC1 Burkett A.T. Hill Collection  specimens 

3 Lower Loup Phase/ 

Protohistoric Pawnee

ca. AD 1600-1750 Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; 

O’Shea 1989

 ES34

3

 ES36 1 ES36 1

Table 4. Continued
PIPESTONE

2

State/province/  site no./name 

# of confirmedcatlinite objects

Archeological taxon/cultural affiliation

Date Reference

 25NC20 Genoa 3 Pawnee AD 1859-1876 Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; 

O’Shea 1989

 25PK1 Clarks 7 Pawnee AD 1823-1849 Wedel 1936; Grange 1968; 

O’Shea 1989

 25SD1 Yutan 107 Oto ca. AD 1775-1837 Ludwickson 1994:137-138 25SD31 Woodcliff 1 Possibly Oto ca. AD 1700-1750 25SY116 Eagle Ridge 44 Oto? ca. 1730-1750? Gundersen 2001 25WT1 Hill 2 Pawnee ca. AD 1775-1809 Wedel 1936, 1986; Grange 

1968; O’Shea 1989

Contextual information provided by John R. Bozell, Nebraska State Historical Society, personal communication to Thomas D. Thiessen, August 1999.NORTH DAKOTA 32CS101 Shea site 1 Northeastern Plains 

Village Complex

ca. AD 1450 Michlovic and Schneider 

1993

 32WI117 Fort Union Trading  Post

25 Historic AD 1828-1867 J. Gundersen to W. Hunt, 

personal communication, July 2002; Barbour 2001

OHIO Tremper Mound, Scioto County 9 Middle Woodland 

(Hopewell) 

500 BC-AD 500 Emerson et al. 2002, 2005

OKLAHOMA 34GD16 Seltzer site, surface 1 Washita River Phase AD 1250-1450 Brooks 1989; Drass 1997 34KA3 Deer Creek 1 Protohistoric/ Historic 

Wichita

AD 1680-1750 Wedel 1981; Bell 1984; 

Vehik 1992

 34WA2 Duncan ? Wheeler Phase ca. AD 1450-1650 Drass and Baugh 1997Contextual information provided by Robert L. Brooks, Oklahoma State Archaeologist, letter to Thomas D. Thiessen, August 4, 1999.

Table 4. Continued
6

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

State/province/  site no./name 

# of confirmedcatlinite objects

Archeological taxon/cultural affiliation

Date Reference

SOUTH DAKOTA 39BF3 Talking Crow 34 Campbell Creek Phase,

 Initial CoalescentTalking Crow Phase, Post-Contact CoalescentHistoric Dakota

ca. AD 1425-1500AD 1725-1750ca. AD 1865-1950

Smith 1977

 39HE202 Cadotte 1 Felicia Phase, PostContact Coalescent ca. AD 1700 Smith and Johnson 1968:37-41 39LM47 Clarkstown 18 Extended Coalescent or 

Historic Dakota?

AD 1550-1675 or late 19th cent.

Lehmer 1971; Smith and Grange 1958:125-126

 39ST224 Cattle Oiler

3 Extended Middle Missouri ca. AD 1200-1350? Ludwickson et al. 1993

 Surface in Butte County 1 Late Prehistoric/Historic Unknown Gundersen et al. 2000WISCONSIN 47BF115 Maxi

3 Historic Native American Early 19th cent Gundersen 1989; Penman 

and Gundersen 1999

 47LC19 Midway 1 Oneota ca. AD 1330-1635 Gundersen 1989 Penman 

and Gundersen 1999

 47LC76 Olson 1 Oneota ca. AD 1321-1369 or 

AD 1387-1434

Gundersen 1989 Penman and Gundersen 1999

 47LC95 Tremaine

8 Oneota ca. AD 1283-1445 Gundersen 1989 Penman 

and Gundersen 1999

 47LC149 Filler

5 Oneota ca. AD 1640-1650 Penman and Gundersen 

1999

 47LC262 Ot

5 Oneota Two components between 

the range ca. AD 1450-1667

Gundersen 1989 Penman and Gundersen 1999

Table 4. Continued
PIPESTONE

4

State/province/  site no./name 

# of confirmedcatlinite objects

Archeological taxon/cultural affiliation

Date Reference

 47AS24 Marina/LMA 7306? 2 Historic Native American, 

probably Chippewa

ca. 18th-19th cent Birmingham and Salzer 

1984

 Unknown site, Sheboygan County

1 Early Woodland ca. 500 BC-AD 100 Boszhardt and Gundersen 

1996, n.d. Emerson and Hughes 2001:152

 Unknown site, Manitowoc  County

1 Early Woodland ca. 500 BC-AD 100 Boszhardt and Gundersen 

1996, n.d. Emerson and Hughes 2001:152

 47Tr-30 Nicholls Mound 1 Middle Woodland ca. AD 100-500 Boszhardt 1998 Boszhardt 

and Gundersen 1996, n.d Emerson and Hughes 2001:152

 Unknown site, Marquette County 1 Middle Woodland ca. AD 100-500 Boszhardt 1998 Boszhardt 

and Gundersen 1996, n.d. Emerson and Hughes 2001:152

 Unknown site, Outagamie  County

1 Middle Woodland ca. AD 100-500 Boszhardt 1998 Boszhardt 

and Gundersen 1996, n.d. Emeson and Hughes 2001:152

Table 4. Concluded
6

CATLINITE AND OTHER PIPESTONES

(PIMA) spectrometer (Hynes et al. 2001; 

Wisseman et al. 2002; Emerson et al. 

2005). As Emerson et al. (2005:194) state:

The Portable Infrared Mineral 

Analyzer (PIMA) uses the shortwave 

infrared (SWIR) portion (1300-2500 

nm) of the electromagnetic spectrum 

to measure reflected radiation from a 

sample surface. The signature of the 

radiation absorbed by the specimen 

reveals the inter-atomic bond energies 

that characterize specific minerals 

and displays them as PIMA spectra. 

What makes PIMA ideal for pipestone sourcing is that the instrument 

is especially sensitive to minerals 

that have hydroxol, water, carbonate, 

or phosphate bonds--such minerals dominate the pipestone groups. 

Additionally, we have demonstrated 

that the major pipestone groups, i.e., 

Missouri flint clay, catlinite, and 

Fuert Hill, Sterling, and Wisconsin 

pipestones, have distinctive mineralogical compositions and produce recognizably different PIMA spectra.

Hynes et al. (2001) summarize the practical aspects of 

using the PIMA spectrometer:

The internally calibrated, shoe-box 

size PIMA is a near-infrared reflectance spectrometer using radiation 

from 1300 to 2500 nanometers. The 

30 to 60 second exposure for each 

sample provides a safe, nondestructive method of analysis for use on 

valuable museum artifacts without 

concerns of residual radiation. PIMA 

can be connected directly to a laptop or 

desktop computer for laboratory use. 

Portability of the PIMA, with its 

attached palmtop computer, allows 

analysis of artifacts in the field or 

museum setting. Little to no sample 

preparation is required. Hand samples offer the best spectra, but powders, smears or sedimented slides, 

and thin sections can also be used. 

Surface roundness and curvature of 

the specimen exhibit only minimal 

problems in the resulting spectrum.

Experimentation of PIMA spectroscopy with catlinite samples is in its 

infancy (Emerson et al. 2002, 2005), but 

holds promise to be an efficient and economic means of sourcing presumed catlinite artifacts not previously available to 

Gundersen or Glascock and his associates because of concerns about partial destruction of artifacts for x-ray diffraction 

and NAA analyses. Thomas E. Emerson 

and his colleagues visited the Midwest 

Archeological Center on August 16 and 

17, 2004, and analyzed many of Sigstad’s 

and Gundersen’s catlinite and pipestone samples with two PIMA instruments; the preliminary results of this 

experimental research have been useful 

in confirming two varieties of catlinite 

from the Pipestone National Monument 

quarries, designated catlinite A and catlinite B (Emerson et al. 2005:201-202).

To date, the most successful and widely applied method of 

sourcing catlinite artifacts has been 

Gundersen’s x-ray powder diffraction 

analysis. Unfortunately, samples submitted to Gundersen for x-ray powder 

diffraction analysis have not been systematically selected to answer broad

questions about the distribution of 

catlinite in time and space throughout North America, which was one 
PIPESTONE

of the objectives of Sigstad’s research. 

Individual researchers have submitted 

samples to answer research questions 

of a local or regional nature, but not as 

part of an integrated, multi-institutional, collaborative effort to determine the 

age and geographic/cultural parameters of catlinite utilization in prehistoric 

times. It is hoped that a comprehensive 

sourcing and dating effort of this nature can be undertaken in the future.
6

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 1880

A brief review is here presented of early reports of the quarries 

and recorded visits to them by Native 

Americans and Euroamericans from 

the seventeenth century into the 1880s, 

when the first systematic archeological research began in the vicinity of the 

quarries. Early perceptions of the quarries and the stone that could be found 

in them kindled interest in the quarries 

and their antiquity, and ultimately led 

to visits by a succession of archeologists 

and avocational antiquarians during the 

closing two decades of the nineteenth 

century and later. This early history of 

the quarries and nearby landscape and 

archeological features stimulated the 

first scholarly research interest in the 

archeological resources in the vicinity 

of the quarries. Archeological research 

that began during the 1880s and continued intermittently for over a century is summarized in the next chapter.

French Reports, 17th and 18th

Centuries

The earliest Euroamericans to 

penetrate to the interior of the North 

American continent, Frenchmen and 

French-Canadians from New France, 

observed stone pipe bowls in use by 

virtually all of the native peoples they 

encountered. These bowls were often 

described as being made of a red stone. 

Although there is no way to establish 

if these were made of true Minnesota 

catlinite or pipestone from some other 

location, widespread archeological evidence from many locations distant from 

Pipestone National Monument confirms that catlinite was being extracted 

from the Minnesota quarries and widely diffused among North American native peoples long before the advent of 

the French. The French took particular 

note of these pipes because they were 

an integral part of a widespread ritual 

known as the calumet ceremony, by 

which fictive kin relationships were 

established between individuals in different cultural groups, who were often 

otherwise hostile to one another. By 

this means, intergroup trade took place 

under a temporary arrangement of 

peace. French accounts are replete with 

descriptions of the calumet ceremony 

performed by Native Americans, and 

bear witness to French use of calumet 

pipes to engender peaceful relationships with the peoples with whom they 

came into contact, thereby furthering 

their own commercial trading interests.1

A comprehensive survey of the 

calumet ceremony and its historic practice among North American Indians 

is beyond the scope of this study, and 

is not here attempted. However, brief 

review of selected French reports will 

establish the historical context for the 

use of red stone pipes long before the 

first recorded Euroamerican visit to 

the catlinite quarries. Paul Beaubien 

presented many of these references in 

the manuscript version of his report 

1

The term “calumet” is often reserved for the long, decorated wooden stems to which the bowls 

were attached. In some accounts these stems were regarded as ritually more important than the 

pipe bowl to which they were connected. Nevertheless, the entire ritual has come to be commonly called the calumet ceremony or, in contemporary terms, “dancing” or “singing” the calumet. 

Pipes used in the ceremony are sometimes called “peace pipes” or “pipes of peace.”
PIPESTONE

on archeological research at Pipestone 

National Monument (Beaubien 1955). 

This information did not appear in 

the published version of his report 

(Beaubien 1957), but was included by 

Alan Woolworth in a later republication 

of Beaubien’s report (Woolworth 1983).

References to “red” stone pipes 

occurred as early as 1637, when a Jesuit 

priest, Father Paul le Jeune, recorded that 

a Huron “medicine-man” or “Sorcerer” 

had demanded to be given “a pipe of red 

stone” and tobacco (Thwaites 1898:33).

In writing of his many adventures in the 1650s and 1660s, Pierre 

Esprit Radisson twice mentioned red 

stone pipes. While a prisoner of the 

Mohawk Iroquois in 1652-1653, Radisson 

observed that his Mohawk adoptive 

“father” possessed a “calumet of red 

stoane [sic]” (Scull 1943:57; Adams 

1961:23). On a later 1659-1660 “voyage” 

into Lake Superior with his brotherin-law, Médard Chouart, Sieur des 

Groseilliers, Radisson participated in a 

calumet ceremony among the Sioux (the 

“Nation of the Beefe”). He described 

the calumet as “a pipe...of a red stone, 

as bigge [sic] as a fist and as long as a 

hand” (Scull 1943:208; Adams 1961:134).2

Father Jacques Marquette, who 

traveled in the Upper Mississippi country in 1673, described a “Calumet” 

he received from the Illinois 

Indians as being “fashioned from 

a red stone, polished like marble” 

(Thwaites 1900a:131; Kellogg 1967:245).

Father Louis André observed 

“Red Calumets” among a group of 

Ioways who visited a Winnebago 

village near Green Bay, Wisconsin, 

in 1676 (Thwaites 1900b:203).

Father Louis Hennepin, who 

travelled with La Salle in 1678-1679 

and was held captive by the Sioux for 

a time in 1680, described an Illinois calumet as “made of a Red Stone like our 

Marble” (Thwaites 1903, 2:654). He also 

described a calumet given to La Salle 

by the Pottawatomi as “a large pipe; its 

bowl is of highly polished red stone” 

(Cross 1938:43). In his description of the 

calumet and its importance to Native 

Americans, Hennepin states that “it is 

nothing else but a large Tobacco-Pipe 

made of Red, Black, or White Marble” 

(Thwaites 1903, 1:125). Hennepin’s 

writings are somewhat controversial 

and he has been accused of plagiarism by some modern scholars (Rioux 

1969:281), so it is difficult to know if 

he borrowed the language of his calumet descriptions from other sources.

Nicolas Perrot, who spent much 

time among the native peoples of the 

Upper Mississippi country between 

1665 and 1699, is said to have observed calumets of red stone on more 

than one occasion (La Potherie in Blair 

1996, 1:325 and 2:96; Kellogg 1967:84).

The first French visitor to the 

Upper Mississippi region who left unequivocal information about the catlinite quarries was Pierre-Charles Le 

2

Though the scholarship of Grace Lee Nute (1978) and Arthur T. Adams (1961) often disagrees on 

the chronology of Radisson’s travels as interpreted from his memoir written during the winter of 

1668-1669, they agree on the dates of the two “voyages” during which Radisson noted red stone 

pipes among native peoples.
6

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

Sueur. Le Sueur, a Frenchman who 

traded for furs in the upper Mississippi 

River region at various times between 

the mid-1680s and 1701, spent seven 

years among the Sioux. During his 

last visit, in 1700-1701, he built a fort 

in the Sioux country, not far from 

the confluence of the Blue Earth and 

Minnesota rivers. He furnished much 

valuable information to French mapmakers of the period, which has been 

extensively analyzed and interpreted 

by the late Mildred Mott Wedel (1974).

Much information from Le 

Sueur is believed to be reflected on a 

1697 map drawn by Jean-Baptiste Louis 

Franquelin, the Royal Hydrographer 

and Geographer of the King of France 

(Wedel 1974). One of the locations 

shown for a group of the “Sioux of the 

West” (one of two gross divisions of 

the Sioux recognized by Le Sueur) is 

labeled “Hinhancton” or “Hehaneton,” 

“Nation de la Pierre,” and is so named 

“because of an outcrop of red stones 

which is near their home in the middle 

of a prairie” (Wedel 1974:166). This is 

the earliest probable reference to the 

source of the red stone so widely used 

for making pipes. Wedel points out 

that if this refers to the historic catlinite quarries, “the location is wrong,” as 

the “Hinhanctons” (Yanktons?) are depicted on or near the Minnesota River. 

The same village name also appears in 

the Delisle notes based on Le Sueur’s 

now-lost journal (Wedel 1974:166).

Another map that may reflect 

information ultimately from Le Sueur 

is Guillaume Delisle’s 1702 “Carte de la 

Riviere de Mississipi [sic] Sur le memoires de Mr le Sueur” (Wedel 1981:6; 

see also Wood and Birk in Wood 2001:

Plate 4 and pages 2-4; and Wood and 

Birk 2001), which carries the phrase 

“Carriere de pierre rouge” (quarry 

of the red stone) situated between 

the Minnesota (R. St. Pierre) and Des 

Moines (R. des Moingona) rivers. 

Shea (1861:111), in his translation of Le 

Sueur’s list of villages of the “Sioux 

of the West,” gives this name as “The 

Hinhanetons, (Ihanktonwan) village 

of the red stone quarry.” Thwaites 

(1902:14) translates this very nearly the 

same: “The Hinhanetons-`Village of 

the red-stone quarry.’ He identifies the 

“Hinhanetons” as the Yankton Sioux.

Antoine Denis Raudot, an 

Intendant (the third highest-ranking 

official of New France, below only the 

governor and bishop [Vachon 1969:xxi]), 

mentioned the catlinite quarries in a 1710 

letter describing the Sioux Indians: “It 

is from their country that the red stone 

is obtained for the calumets” (Kinietz 

1965:378). Raudot, however, took his 

information from other sources, generally from the writings of Louis de la 

Porte de Louvigny (Kinietz 1965:335).

The Jesuit priest Pierre-FrançoisXavier de Charlevoix, who sojourned 

in New France in 1705-1708/9 and 

1720-1722, and who descended the 

Mississippi River during the latter period, wrote that the calumet “is commonly made of a sort of reddish marble, very easy to work, and found in 

the country of the Aiouez, beyond the 

Mississippi” (Kellogg 1923, 1:304). At 

the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Ioway Indians are believed 

to have been living in the region of 

northwestern Iowa and southern 

Minnesota (Wedel 1981; 1986:48; Norall 

1988:108-109; Thiessen 1998a, 2004).
PIPESTONE

70

Throughout the life of New 

France, French officials and others 

wrote about “red stone” being used for 

Native American pipes. For example, 

in a December 12, 1758 listing of native peoples in French Louisiana and 

Illinois, Governor Kerlérec offered the 

following observation about the Kansa 

Indians: “It is on their lands that there 

are found quarries of red stone from 

which are made the calumets for all 

the nations” (Nasatir 1990, 1:52). If this 

is a reference to the catlinite quarries, 

Kerlérec is mistaken, as the Kansas did 

not at any time occupy the region of 

southwestern Minnesota. Ludwickson 

et al. (1993:161) have offered the plausible suggestion that this may be a 

reference to so-called “Kansas pipestone” from local glacial till sources.

The above quoted sources are 

not exhaustive on the subject of red 

stone pipes and catlinite as known to 

the French. Certainly many more mentions can be found in the seventeenth 

and eighteenth-century writings of 

Frenchmen and French-Canadians. 

However, this brief survey serves to 

illustrate the widespread occurrence 

of red stone, possibly catlinite, pipes 

among native peoples known to the 

men of New France. They also suggest 

that shortly before the beginning of the 

eighteenth century, and certainly during that century, Frenchmen possessed 

some idea of the general location of 

the catlinite quarries, although none is 

known to have personally visited them.

Jonathan Carver, 1766-1

Jonathan Carver, a Massachusetts 

native who fought as a colonial militia 

officer in the French and Indian War 

(Parker 1976), is not known to have personally visited the catlinite quarries but 

briefly mentioned them in a popular 

travel book first published in London in 

1778 (Carver 1974). The book was based in 

part on his 1766-1767 travels in the Upper 

Mississippi Region under the auspices 

of Robert Rogers, then commandant at 

Fort Michlimackinac at the Straits of 

Mackinac on eastern Lake Superior, and 

in part on the published writings of other travelers in the New World. Carver’s 

book has been much criticized for plagiarism, but recent research based on his 

original manuscript journals has suggested that his writings have more veracity than once believed (Parker 1976).

In his Travels Through the Interior 

Parts of North America, in the Years 

1766, 1767, and 1768, Carver provides 

what is probably heresay information 

about the quarries. In his discussion 

of the “River St. Pierre,” or Minnesota 

River, on the lower reaches of which 

he is believed to have spent the winter of 1766-1767 (Parker 1976:16-17), 

Carver (1974:101) stated briefly that

Near that branch which is termed 

the Marble River, is a mountain, from whence the Indians get 

a sort of red stone, out of which 

they hew the bowls of their pipes.

If Carver’s mention of the “Marble 

River” is a reference to Pipestone Creek, 

his geography is confused, as the latter 

stream is a tributary of Split Rock Creek 

and the Big Sioux River in the Missouri 

River drainage, not the Minnesota 

River in the Mississippi drainage. A 
71

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

map included in his volume (Carver 

1974; also reproduced in Temple 1975:

Plate LXXIII), entitled “A Plan of 

Captain Carver’s Travels in the interior [sic] Parts of North America in 1766 

and 1767, shows the “Red Marble R.” 

as a tributary of the “River St. Pierre.”

In his journals, which were 

unpublished until 1976, Carver also 

recorded the concept of the quarries as a peaceful meeting place 

for all tribes (Parker 1976:138-139):

On the plains between the river St. 

Piere [sic; Minnesota River] and 

Missouri is a large mountain of red 

marble where all the neighbouring nations resort for stone to make pipes of. 

Even those who hold perpetual wars 

in all other parts meet here in peace.

This same theme is also reflected 

on the above-mentioned map, which depicts a group of hill or mountain symbols 

south and east of the “Red Marble” river. These symbols are labeled “Country 

of Peace,” and the further explanation 

is offered that “In these Mountains are 

large Quarries of Red Marble where the 

Neighboring Nations resort to get their 

Calumets of Peace.” Carver’s notes 

are possibly the earliest recorded mention of the catlinite quarries as a place 

of peace among all who visit them.

Elsewhere in his book, Carver 

(1974:268-269, 359-362) discusses the 

use of pipes in the calumet, or peacemaking, ceremony. At one point in 

these discussions, he states that “the 

bowl of it [i.e., the calumet pipe] is 

made of red marble” (Carver 1974:359).

Spanish Reports, Late 18th - Early

19th Centuries

France ceded Louisiana to Spain 

in 1762, although most of the inhabitants 

continued to be of French extraction and 

it was several years before Spain established effective administrative control 

of Spanish Louisiana (Nasatir 1976:6 

et seq.; 1990, 1:58 et seq.). Spanish accounts of the Upper Missouri, especially from the 1790s to the purchase 

of Louisiana by the United States, contain occasional references to red stone 

pipes and the source of the stone.

Although no Spaniard is known 

to have visited the quarries, Spanish 

authorities possessed some fairly accurate information about their location. In a draft December 12, 1785 letter addressed to the comandante of the 

Provincias Internas in New Orleans, 

Spanish Governor-General of Louisiana 

Esteban Rodriguez Miró reported that

Thirty leagues above the Chato 

River [Platte River] on the left bank 

of the Missouri is the River of the 

Sius [Big Sioux River]. They claim 

that twenty leagues up this river is 

the quarry for the red stone of which 

the Indians make their pipes for their 

calumets. (Nasatir 1990, 1:123)

Writing in his “Description of 

the Upper Missouri,” ca. 1796, the trader Jean Baptiste Trudeau mistakenly referred to the red pipestone quarries as 

being on a tributary of the James River:

Forty-five leagues from there on 

the same side, goes out the river St. 
PIPESTONE

72

James, a beautiful river, very abundant in beaver and other wild animals. It has, according to the report 

of the savages, a course of more than 

a hundred leagues and comes also 

from the north. It disembogues [sic]

into several other little rivers, one 

of which is named the river of the 

red stone. It takes its name from a 

quarry of this stone that is found 

upon its banks. (Nasatir 1990, 

2:378; see also Abel 1921:161-162)

In writing of the period 1803-1804, 

another trader, Pierre-Antoine Tabeau 

wrote regarding the annual Sioux interband gatherings known as “trade fairs:”

Much trading is done there. Each 

man brings different articles, according to the places over which he has 

wandered. Those who have frequented the St. Peter’s River [Minnesota 

River] and that of the Mohens furnish guns, kettles, red pipes, and 

bows of walnut. (Abel 1939:122-123)

Meriwether Lewis and William 

Clark, 180

Meriwether Lewis and William 

Clark, leaders of the famed exploration 

expedition that ascended the Missouri 

River in 1804 and returned to St. Louis in 

1806, did not personally visit the catlinite quarries. However, they did record 

information about them in their journal 

and in some notes compiled during the 

winter of 1804-1805 at Fort Mandan and 

sent back east the following spring. In 

the former, William Clark recorded in 

his journal entry for August 21, 1804 

(Moulton 1986:498) that the expedition

...passed the Soues River S.S. this 

River is about the Size of Grand 

river and as Mr. Durrien our Soues 

intptr. says “navagable to the falls 

70 or 80 Leagues and above these 

falls Still further, those falls are 200 

feet or there abouts & has two princapal pitches, and heads with the 

St. peters passing the head of the 

Demoien, on the right below the falls 

a Creek Coms in which passes thro 

Clifts of red rock which the Indians 

make pipes of, and when the different nations Meet at [X: a Sort of 

asylum for all nations, no fighting 

there] those queries all is piece...

The “Mr. Durrien” here mentioned as the source of this information 

is the Canadian-born fur trader Pierre 

Dorion, Sr., whom Lewis and Clark encountered traveling down the Missouri 

River with a party of Sioux on June 12, 

1804. The officers hired Dorion to accompany them upriver as an interpreter, and 

he obviously shared geographical information with them (Moulton 1986:294 

and 195, footnote 3; see also Thwaites 

1904, 1:46-47, 115 and Munnick 1971:107).

In the notes compiled by the two 

officers at Fort Mandan during the winter of 1804-1805, Lewis reiterated some of 

this information (Moulton 1987:355-356):

...the 2nd The River of the Rock, passes the head of the River Demoin, and 

takes it’s rise in small lakes. the third 

is called red pipe Stone river, which 

heads with the waters of the River St. 

Peters. the country watered by this 

last river is remarkable for furnishing a red stone, of which the savages 

make their most esteemed pipes. the 

Indians of many nations travel vast 
73

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

distances to obtain this stone, and it 

is ascerted, tho’ with what justice I 

will not pretend to determine, that 

all nations are at peace with each 

other while in this district of country, or on the waters of this river.-

The theme of the quarries as a 

place where peace prevailed between 

Indian nations also appears on a map 

related to the expedition (Thwaites 

1905:Map 3; also described in Wheat 

1958:39, 204, as “Map 267”), which 

bears the following notation near the 

depiction of Pipestone Creek: “here 

the different Tribes meet in friendship 

to get stone for pipes”. The map was 

originally said to be a copy of a contemporary French or Spanish manuscript, but was not more specifically 

identified by Thwaites (1905:v). More 

recent analysis of the map has led to 

the conclusion that it postdates the 

Lewis and Clark expedition and was 

probably created in the ca. 1807-1810 

period (Chomko 1984-1985; Chomko’s 

description of Plate 14 in Wood 1983). 

Similar notations appear on other postexpeditionary maps (Coues n.d., 2:endpiece; Moulton 1983:Maps 125 and 126).

Antoine Soulard, 180

In a letter written in March 

1805, the cartographer Antoine 

Soulard (Mitchill 1806) briefly describes the catlinite quarries, probably on the basis of hearsay information. In speaking of geological features 

along the Missouri River, he states:

The rocks are generally calcareous; 

though there is one which is peculiar to this river. It is of a blood-red 

colour, compact, yielding to a tool, 

hardening in the air, and receiving 

the neatest polish. The natives make 

their pipes of it. The strata are so extensive that there is any quantity that 

may be wanted for other purposes.

In this letter, Soulard claims to 

have personally ascended the Missouri 

River “about 600 leagues” (Mitchill 

1806:309), but no other evidence is known 

to corroborate this statement (Wood 

1996:187-188; also W. Raymond Wood, 

email communication to Thiessen, May 

4, 2004). Consequently, the historical 

basis for Soulard’s description of catlinite and the quarries is not known.

Henry Marie Brackenridge, 181

Although he did not personally visit the quarries, the naturalist Henry Marie Brackenridge wrote 

of them, presumably based on information he read or heard from other 

sources (Brackenridge 1814:68-69):

...A beautiful serpentine of a red 

color, is found about three hundred 

miles west of the Mississippi, near 

the heads of la riviere des Moines 

and the St. Peters, and of which 

the Indians make their pipes. It is 

soft and easily cut, into any shape 

in the first instance, but soon assumes the hardness of stone. A 

curious circumstance is connected 

with this and noticed by several 

writers. The Indians of different 

tribes, no matter how inveterate or 

fierce their animosities, meet here, 

always in peace. In this sacred spot 

of general rendezvous, that most 

ungovernable of savage propensities, revenge, is completely subdued.
PIPESTONE

74

Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, 182

Henry Rowe Schoolcraft did not 

personally visit the historic catlinite 

quarries, but knew of them from other 

sources. In the capacity of geologist, 

he accompanied Lewis Cass’ expedition to Lake Superior in 1820 (Williams 

1992:ix-x). In his journal entry for July 

31, 1820, Schoolcraft (1821:299; Williams 

1992:196-197) wrote a remarkably accurate description of the quarries:

This river [i.e., the St. Peters or 

Minnesota River] has long been noted as the locality of that beautiful red 

stone of which the Indians manufacture the bowls of their pipes, but after 

all that has been said on the subject, 

by Carver, Breckenridge [sic], and 

others, it does not appear that it is 

found upon the immediate banks of 

this stream. The quarry is situated 

in the prairie country intermediate 

between the St. Peter’s and the Sioux 

River of the Missouri. It is said that 

the stratum does not exceed a foot in 

thickness, and that it is found two or 

three feet below the soil. The Indians 

go once a year to procure their supplies, and as it has been resorted to 

for a very long period, the excavations are said to be extensive, and if 

the accounts are to be relied on, cover 

an area of fifty acres. This stone is a 

red steatite, intermediate in its qualities, between the common soap-stone 

and serpentine. It yields very readily 

to the knife when first taken from the 

quarry, and as it has no grit, may be 

sawed without injury to a common 

hand saw, but it acquires a degree of 

hardness by long exposure to the air. 

It will not take a polish by the processes pursued in our marble-yards, 

as I have ascertained by submiting 

a piece of the stone to the experiment, but the Indian pipes assume 

a glossy appearance after long use...

Philander Prescott, 1832 and 18

The question of who was the first 

non-Native American to visit the famous catlinite quarries has been debated since the 1844 publication of Catlin’s 

Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, 

and Conditions of North American Indians. 

George Catlin claimed that he and a travelling companion, Englishman Robert 

S. Wood, had been told by the Sioux 

that they were the first Euroamerican 

visitors to the quarries, in 1836 (Catlin 

1973, 2:172), a claim that was hotly questioned by his contemporaries (Dippie 

1990:188-191). The historian Theodore 

L. Nydahl (1950:197, footnote 8) asserted 

that a white man named “Ratter” and 

six other men from Fort Snelling set out 

to visit the quarries in 1831 and William 

Warren claimed that non-Indians had 

visited the quarries for over a century 

before Catlin (Warren 1957:114). Warren 

cites no evidence for his assertion, and 

Nydahl offers support for his conclusion 

in the unpublished papers of Lawrence 

Taliaferro, Indian Agent at Fort Snelling 

in 1831. The Taliaferro journal entry 

in question, that for August 15, 1831, 

actually states: “The Ratler and Six 

men start for the Pipe Stone quarry & 

are to bring me specimens of the Stone 

for Several Cabinets of Curiosities” 

(Lawrence Taliaferro Papers, 1812-1868, 

Minnesota Historical Society microfilm 

publication, roll 3, volume 11, journal, 

part one, June-September 1831, entry 

for Monday, August 15, 1831). This is 

not a reference to a white man, but to 

a Mdewakanton Dakota man named 
75

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

Rattler, or Kahdaya (“He Who Causes 

a Rattling”), a member of the Kaposia 

band living near the Fort SnellingMendota area in the 1830s and 1840s and 

who died in 1851 (Williams 1876:123-

124, 257; Diedrich 1995:33, 37, 39-40, 48).

The first white man definitely 

known to have visited the catlinite 

quarries and to have left a written record of his presence was Philander 

Prescott, who visited the quarries twice 

before Catlin. Prescott worked as a 

fur trader and in other employment 

at various places in the Minnesota 

River valley from 1820 through his 

untimely death in 1862. He stopped 

briefly at the quarries in 1832 en route 

to the Big Sioux River and again in 

1833 upon his return to Mendota near 

present-day Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Prescott and a mixed-blood fellow trader, Joseph Laframboise (or La 

Framboise), had been assigned to establish American Fur Company wintering posts on the Big Sioux River in 

the fall of 1832. En route to their assignments in the company of a party of 

Sioux Indians, Prescott, Laframboise, 

and the Indians stopped at the quarries 

for one day (probably in September) to 

obtain stone for making pipes. This 

event is mentioned in two separate accounts by Prescott, which both give 

an incorrect date for the visit. The 

first account, written in response to 

an 1847 Indian Bureau inquiry about 

the customs of the Sioux Indians, 

was published in the 1852 volume of 

Henry R. Schoolcraft’s monumental 

six-volume work, Information Respecting 

the History, Condition and Prospects of 

the Indian Tribes of the United States

(Prescott 1852). One of the questions 

in the Indian Bureau inquiry related 

to aboriginal pipes, to which Prescott 

replied with a brief, one-paragraph description of catlinite and the quarries 

(Prescott 1852:176). He concluded the 

paragraph with the statement that “In 

1830 I found a 6 lb. cannon-ball here” 

(i.e., at the quarries). Later scholarship shows this date to be incorrect.

The same visit is described at 

more length in a memoir that Prescott 

wrote circa 1860 at the urging of the 

Governor of Minnesota, two years before his violent death at the outbreak 

of the Sioux uprising of 1862. The entire manuscript was edited by Donald 

Dean Parker and published for the first 

time in 1966 (Parker 1966). Prescott described the quarries as being 100 yards 

long, two feet deep at the north end, 

and ten feet deep at the south end. He 

and Laframboise tried unsuccessfully 

to assist the Indians of their party by 

blasting the overlying quartzite with 

gunpowder. The Sioux extracted catlinite by dropping heavy boulders 

on the quartzite, and then prying out 

pieces of catlinite with hoes and axes. 

Prescott again mentioned the cannonball (Parker 1966:139), which the 

Indians told him had been fired at the 

Arikaras on the Missouri River, probably an allusion to the shelling of the 

Arikara village near the mouth of the 

Grand River in 1823 by troops from 

Fort Atkinson in present-day Nebraska 

(Robinson 1902). He related the first 

recorded native lore of the quarries, a 

story about the famous Leaping Rock 

(Parker 1966:137-139), told to him by the 

Indians. After a stay of a day or less, 

Prescott, Laframboise, and the Indians 

continued their journey to the Big Sioux 

because the Indians were fearful that enemies were in the area (Parker 1966:139).
PIPESTONE

7

After an unsuccessful trading season at a wintering post on the Big Sioux 

above the falls of that river, Prescott 

returned to Mendota, the American 

Fur Company’s headquarters for the 

Minnesota River valley trade. During 

his return trip in the spring of 1833, he 

again stopped at the catlinite quarries 

for a day in order to dig for catlinite. 

However, little catlinite was obtained because Prescott’s party did not have proper tools for the work (Parker 1966:144).

Prescott’s first account (Prescott 

1852) incorrectly attributes his first visit 

to the year 1830, and the manuscript 

version of his second account wrongly 

states it as 1831. Using internal evidence from the latter account, Parker 

has convincingly corrected the date of 

the first and second visits to 1832 and 

1833, respectively (Parker 1966:134, 

footnote 11, and 142, footnote 21).

George Catlin, 18

The fame of the catlinite quarries is largely due to the romanticized 

description of them, and of their lore, 

publicized by the writings and paintings of George Catlin, a lawyer-turnedartist who visited the quarries in 1836 

out of a sense of curiosity and adventure (Catlin 1973). Although Catlin was 

not the first white visitor to the quarries (see above), he was, however, the 

first to publish an eyewitness account 

of the place. He also submitted samples of the stone from there for scientific analysis, for which he became the 

namesake of catlinite (Jackson 1839). He 

visited the quarries in late August and 

early September of 1836 in the company 

of an Englishman, Robert Serril Wood, 

and the American Fur Company trader, 

Joseph Laframboise, who had accompanied Philander Prescott to the quarries 

four years earlier (Minnesota Historical 

Society 1965:Lawrence Taliaferro 

Papers, 1813-1868, Roll 3, Volume 14 

(Journal, January-December 1836), 

Document 372, Frames 86 and 90; also 

manuscript pages 155 and 163; entries 

for Sunday, August 21, and Monday, 

September 5, 1836; Catlin 1973, 2:162, 177).

Catlin first described the quarries 

in an 1839 letter to a chemist, Dr. Charles 

T. Jackson, which was read before the 

Boston Society of Natural History on 

September 4, 1839 and subsequently published in The American Journal of Science 

and Arts (Catlin 1839; Ewers 1979:69-77). 

However, his most detailed, and also 

most romanticized, description of the 

quarries was contained in volume two of 

his monumental work, Letters and Notes 

on the Manners, Customs, and Condition 

of the North American Indians, first published in American and British editions 

in 1841. This work saw many subsequent editions (see a partial publication 

history in McCracken 1959:212-214), and 

is still in print today; the version relied 

on for this study is the 1973 reprint by 

Dover Publications (Catlin 1973), which 

is based on an 1844 London edition. 

Catlin’s Letters and Notes is a compilation 

of letters supposedly written during his 

wide-ranging western travels in the 

1830s. Letter No. 54 describes his visit 

to the quarries, but may not have been 

entirely written during his stay there, as 

it contains much of the language from 

the 1839 letter to Professor Jackson.

Although Catlin was motivated by a combination of curiosity and 

a sense of mission to record Native 

American culture prior to its disappear-
77

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

ance before the advance of the American 

frontier, his writings lack factual detail 

and are highly colored by a romantic and rambling style that has often 

been criticized. Many contemporaries 

challenged the accuracy of his claims 

(Dippie 1990), and even one-time supporters later criticized him severely, as 

for example in this portion of an 1856 

speech delivered before the Minnesota 

Historical Society by H.H. Sibley 

(1872:392-393), who as a fur trader had 

facilitated Catlin’s visit to the quarries:

...Of all those who have visited the 

wilds of the Northwest, no one was 

received with greater attention than 

George Catlin, by resident white 

men, and no one deserved it so little 

as he did...His object in coming here 

was to visit the Pipe Stone quarry, 

and I furnished horses, without 

charge, for himself and his companion, Mr. Wood, an English gentleman of intelligence, provided them 

with a trusty Indian guide, and gave 

them also letters to the gentlemen at 

the head of my trading posts on the 

route, which rendered it quite certain 

that they would meet with no impediment from the Indians...His letters 

abounded with mis-statements, and 

the voluminous work subsequently 

produced by him was equal to them 

in that respect. The people in this 

quarter were absolutely astounded at 

his misrepresentations of men and 

things. There is but one redeeming 

feature in his book, and that is, his 

sketches of Indian faces and scenes, 

which are sufficiently faithful, as 

he was skillful in that line, and his 

pencil could not, therefore, like his 

pen, vary much from the truth.

Sibley’s harsh words must be 

viewed in the light of his charge that 

Catlin’s writings “contained severe reflections upon the military and upon 

traders alike” (Sibley 1872:393), so perhaps the former fur trader and future 

army officer and governor of Minnesota 

overreacted to what he perceived as 

Catlin’s stinging criticism of his professional interests. Even Native Americans 

were skeptical when told of stories 

about the quarries that were published 

in the American press, according to 

Joseph Nicollet, who visited the quarries in 1838 (Bray and Bray 1976:75-76):

...the Indians have no other superstitions about the red rock that do not 

also pertain to other circumstances of 

their lives when they look for a plant, 

an animal, or an enemy. There 

have been stories written recently on this subject that, when 

we tell them, greatly amuse the 

Indians and those who have 

lived a long time among them. 

This is so even among the Sioux, 

who are of all the nations the most 

apt to take superstitions seriously 

and who profess a fanatical regard 

for tradition. (emphasis added)

Edmund and Martha Bray (1976:76, 

footnote 62), the editors of Nicollet’s 

journals, suggest that Nicollet’s remarks 

must have been in reference to Catlin’s 

series of letters, first published in the 

New York Daily Globe and Commercial 

Advertiser between 1832 and 1837. 

Nonetheless, regardless of the unscholarly and unfocused qualities of his writings, George Catlin must be regarded as 

the source of much of the lore that has 

grown up around the quarries and other features in their immediate vicinity.
PIPESTONE

7

What did Catlin observe in the vicinity of the quarries that has relevance 

to the archeology of Pipestone National 

Monument? He clearly was impressed 

with the Three Maidens boulders and 

mentioned the high regard in which 

they were held by Native Americans:

At the base of the wall and within 

a few rods of it, and on the very 

ground where the Indians dig for 

the red stone, rests a group of five 

stupendous bowlders of gneiss leaning against each other...That these 

five immense blocks...should have 

been hurled some hundreds of miles 

from their native bed and lodged in 

so singular a group on this elevated 

ridge, is truly a matter of surprise 

for the scientific world, as well as 

for the poor Indian, whose superstitious veneration of them is such that 

not a spear of grass is broken or bent 

by his feet, within three or four rods 

of the group; where he stops and in 

humble supplication, by throwing 

plugs of tobacco to them, solicits 

their permission (as the guardian 

spirit of the place) to dig and carry 

away the red stone for his pipes. The 

surface of these bowlders I found in 

every part entire and unscratched 

by any thing...(Catlin 1839:142; 

see also Catlin 1973, 2:202-203)

He did not mention rock art in his 

1839 letter, but did allude to the petroglyphs of the monument in Letters and 

Notes (Catlin 1973, 2:167-168); unfortunately he did not describe them in any detail:

...here are to be seen (and will continue to be seen for ages to come), 

the totems and arms of the different 

tribes, who have visited this place 

for ages past, deeply engraved on 

the quartz rocks, where they are to 

be recognized in a moment (and not 

to be denied) by the passing traveller, 

who has been among these tribes, and 

acquired even but a partial knowledge of them and their respective 

modes...The thousands of inscriptions and paintings on the rocks at 

this place, as well as the ancient diggings for the pipe-stone, will afford 

amusement for the world who will 

visit it, without furnishing the least 

data, I should think, of the time at 

which these excavations commenced, 

or of the period at which the Sioux 

assumed the exclusive right to it.

He also commented on bird 

track glyphs in the context of a 

Sioux tradition (Catlin 1973, 2:168):

Tradition of the Sioux.--”Before the 

creation of man, the Great Spirit 

(whose tracks are yet to be seen 

on the stones, at the Red Pipe, in 

the form of the tracks of a large 

bird) used to slay the buffaloes and 

eat them on the ledge of the Red 

Rocks, on the top of the Coteau des 

Prairies, and their blood running 

on to the rocks, turned them red...”

It is not known if this is an allusion to the bird track petroglyphs 

among the Three Maidens group, on 

the Derby panel, the Noble petroglyph, 

or other glyphs elsewhere in the monument that are presently unrecorded.

In a footnote on page 170 of volume two of Letters and Notes (Catlin 

1973, 2:170), Catlin recorded further lore about the Leaping Rock, 

which has archeological implications:
79

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

The medicine (or leaping) rock is a 

part of the precipice which has become severed from the main part, 

standing about seven or eight feet 

from the wall, just equal in height, 

and about seven feet in diameter.

It stands like an immense column of 

thirty-five feet high, and highly polished on its top and sides. It requires 

a daring effort to leap on to its top 

from the main wall, and back again, 

and many a heart has sighed for the 

honour of the feat without daring to 

make the attempt. Some few have 

tried it with success, and left their 

arrows standing in its crevice, several of which are seen there at this 

time; others have leapt the chasm 

and fallen from the slippery surface 

on which they could not hold, and 

suffered instant death upon the craggy rocks below. Every young man 

in the nation is ambitious to perform 

this feat; and those who have successfully done it are allowed to boast 

of it all their lives. In the sketch already exhibited, there will be seen, 

a view of the “leaping rock;” and in 

the middle of the picture, a mound, 

of a conical form, of ten feet height, 

which was erected over the body of 

a distinguished young man who was 

killed by making this daring effort, 

about two years before I was there, 

and whose sad fate was related to 

me by a Sioux chief, who was father 

of the young man, and was visiting the Red Pipe Stone Quarry, 

with thirty others of his tribe, when 

we were there, and cried over the 

grave, as he related the story to Mr. 

Wood and myself, of his son’s death.

This mound feature has been 

commented on and/or recorded by 

later visitors to the quarries, including 

Norris, Bennett (according to Storrs), 

and Brower. Interestingly, but perhaps 

not related to the death of the young 

man described by Catlin, a Yankton 

woman said to be more than 81 years 

old, testified in 1927 that her brother 

was buried at the catlinite quarries 

(U.S. Court of Claims 1927:163). She 

stated that her brother died at the quarries before she was born; her birth 

was estimated to have been ca. 1846.

Joseph Nicollet, 18

Less than two years after Catlin, 

an official government exploration party reached the quarries led by a French 

astronomer and cartographer, Joseph 

Nicolas Nicollet. Nicollet was a French 

scientist who came to the United States 

in 1832 with the goal of advancing geographical knowledge of the frontier; he 

conducted two expeditions in the region 

between the Mississippi and Missouri 

rivers in 1838 and 1839 under the sponsorship of the War Department (Bray and 

Bray 1976; Bray 1969, 1994; Smith 1977). 

The major products of his exploration 

were the first detailed maps of the Upper 

Mississippi basin (Bray 1994; Wood 1993).

Among Nicollet’s 17-man party at various times in 1838 were a 

young army officer, John C. Fremont; 

a German botanist, Charles A. Geyer; 

J. Eugene Flandin, the 17-year-old son 

of a prominent New York family; the 

Viscount de Montmort, an official of 

the French legation in Washington; 

another Frenchman, Captain Gaspard 

de Belligny; Joseph Laframboise, the 

American Fur Company trader who 
PIPESTONE

8

had guided Catlin and his companion 

to the quarries two years earlier; Joseph 

Renville, Jr., who served as a guide 

for Nicollet’s party; the son of Sleepy 

Eyes, a chief of the Sisseton Sioux; and 

eight voyageurs. Nicollet and his men 

reached the quarries in the early afternoon of June 29, 1838, and departed to 

continue their explorations on July 6, 

1838, after spending more than six days 

in camp at the quarries. The visit is detailed in Nicollet’s daily journal (Bray 

and Bray 1976:72-84) and his official report of the expedition (Nicollet 1843:14-

17). Fremont also briefly described 

the visit in his memoirs (Fremont 

1888:35-36; Jackson and Spence, 1:15-16).

Nicollet was joined at the quarries by three families of Wahpeton 

Sioux Indians, whom his men assisted 

in taking catlinite by using gunpowder 

to blast the overlying mantle of Sioux 

quartzite. Nicollet described the manner in which the Wahpetons mined the 

catlinite. He noted that the women of the 

party camped at some distance from the 

men while at the quarries and were prohibited from visiting the quarries while 

the Native American men were working there (Bray and Bray 1976:75-76; see 

also Nicollet 1843:15). He recorded that

The discovery of the red earth 

is due to the passage of animals 

which hollowed out a deep pathway...The pathway revealed the 

surface of the red rock...The pathway made formerly by the passage 

of the animals is still clearly visible 

for nearly a mile... [Bray and Bray 

1976:76; see also Nicollet 1843:16]

Nicollet (Bray and Bray 1976:84) 

also made slight reference to the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs in his description of the group of glacial erratics:

But the most extraordinary thing 

here is that the prairie of this valley 

contains a group of granite blocks 

toward the southern end which are 

larger than any I have so far seen. 

Two or three of them are 60 feet in 

circumference and 10 to 12 feet high. 

They lie right on the red crust which 

covers the red pipestone. These 

rocks, which appear to be rolled, in 

an isolated place where their strange 

characteristics contrast with everything around them, and the few small 

rolled stones of the same kind that appear in the valley are a very astonishing sight. One must ask where they 

came from. The situation is a mystery. It is on the red fragments 

which serve as paving stones 

for these rocks that the Sioux 

come to write their names as is 

their custom. They say, moreover, that three female spirits 

live in this mysterious place 

and that it is they who have engraved all of the characters that 

one sees on the red pavement 

and that one can hear them at 

work at night. Etc., Etc., Etc. (At 

another time rewrite these notes 

made at a gallop.) [Emphasis added.]

This description of the 

Three Maidens does not appear in his official report.

Nicollet also noted in his journal (Bray and Bray 1976:84) that “The 

tombs which cover the valley or are 

scattered about the open prairie by 

wolves. Bones of bison.”, but did not 

elaborate about these “tombs” despite 
8

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

his note to himself to rewrite this hurried portion of his journal at a later date.

Interestingly, Nicollet provided details about two earthen enclosures that he encountered during 

his approach to the quarries from the 

east. Located outside of the present monument boundary, these features are discussed in Appendix E.

More than merely observing the 

archeological features in the vicinity 

of the quarries, Nicollet’s party actually added to their number. The prominent members of the party (Nicollet, 

Fremont, Geyer, Laframboise, Flandin, 

and Renville) carved their initials into 

a flat quartzite surface atop the ledge, 

not far from the Leaping Rock, where 

they remain today. This is described in 

Nicollet’s journal entry for June 30, 1838 

(Bray and Bray 1976:73) and in an 1885 letter to Charles Bennett, an early resident 

of Pipestone (Rose 1911:255-256, footnote 

7). In a 1900 interview with South Dakota 

historian Doane Robinson, Renville’s 

widow is said to have exclaimed “Joe, 

my Joe” when shown a copy of the inscribed initials (Robinson 1928:517-518).

A party of Dakota Indians, 184

In a series of articles in the 

Minnesota Free Press and St. Peter Free 

Press newspapers in 1858 and 1859, 

the missionary Stephen R, Riggs published a series of biographical sketches 

of Dakota Sioux Indians with whom he 

was acquainted from his missionary 

endeavors at various places along the 

Minnesota River (Riggs 1918). One of 

these sketches was about a man named 

Toonkanwechashta, translated as “Stone 

Man” by Riggs (1918:527-531), who was 

killed by lightning during a journey to 

the catlinite quarries in the late summer 

of 1842. Riggs (1918:531) related the journey of this unfortunate party as follows:

The summer of 1842 was passing. 

The autumn was coming on. The 

corn which they had planted and 

hoed was now yielding them food. 

An expedition to the Red Pipestone 

Quarry was got up. It consisted of 

quite a party, some fifteen or twenty 

of the principal men of the villages 

at Lac qui Parle, among whom was 

Big Walker, the present chief of one 

of the clans in the vicinity of the 

Yellow Medicine. They had made a 

day’s journey of thirty or thirty-five 

miles and encamped on the border 

of the Coteau des Prairies. Some, it 

appears, were sleeping under carts 

which had iron bound wheels, and 

others lay near by. A storm came 

up. But there was more thunder 

and lightning than rain. They lay 

there unconscious of danger, when 

suddenly the electric fluid smote 

them, stunning, scorching, burning, 

and killing. At first they thought it 

was the charge of an enemy. Those 

who were only stunned gradually 

recovered to a state of consciousness. Eagle Help and several others 

were a long time in coming to life 

and were found to be badly burned. 

Three men in all the meridian life, 

Toonkanwechashta, Wakenehdooza, 

and Tashoonka, and two horses were 

dead. In their language, the wakinyan, the thunder, had done it. We 

say it is the lightning that burns and 

splits the gnarled oak, that tears up 

the earth in its passage to and from 

it; but the Dakotas ascribe all these 

things to the thunder-bird. The very 
PIPESTONE

8

name wakinyan signifies a winged 

animal. Sometimes they see this 

veritable creature. And if they have 

not seen it for themselves, they have 

heard a hundred stories about it, and 

have learned to make its image with 

a piece of coal or carve it with a knife. 

And surely a bird so wonderful as this 

must be wakan. Near the head of the 

Coteau des Prairies there are rocks in 

which are seen the tracks of this great 

bird, and the locality has obtained 

the name of Thunder Tracks. This 

sad event frustrated the expedition 

to the Red Pipestone. They buried 

the dead and returned home bringing the scathed and injured ones.

Visitors in the 1840s and 185

Although details are scant, 

it is certain that other whites visited the quarries in the years that 

followed Nicollet’s presence there. 

Unfortunately, the details of these visits 

are typically sparse in the historic record.

Philetus W. Norris and several 

Ojibwa companions were driven away 

from the quarries by Sioux in 1842 or 1843 

(see later discussion and Appendix B). 

In a column titled “Local 

Mentions,” the Rock County Herald, 

December 7, 1877, page 8, makes 

brief mention of an 1845 visit to the quarries by a missionary:

Father Ravoux, a venerable old gentleman, is a native of France, and 

was one of the first Minnesota pioneers. He came to the United States 

as a missionary among the Indians in 

the year 1838, and proceeded to the 

missionary station of Dubuque, and 

after a brief visit went to his charge 

at Mendota, an Indian village about 

six miles from the present site of the 

city of St. Paul. In the year 1845, 

Father Ravoux, attended by a single 

white man, accompanied a party of 

Sioux Indians on an extended journey through the Western wilderness, 

visiting Redwood, the Pipestone 

Quarry, the Falls of the Big Sioux 

River, Vermillion, and Ft. Pierre, returning via Des Moines to Dubuque...

Upham and Dunlap (1912:628) 

identify this man as Augustin Ravoux, a 

Roman Catholic priest born in France in 

1815. They confirm that he came to the 

United States in 1838 and was ordained 

in 1840. They provide little detail about 

his life other than simply observing 

that he “Visited the Sioux in 1841-42 at 

Traverse des Sioux and Lac qui Parle.” 

Father Ravoux died at St. Paul in 1906.

A “Judge Swan,” a resident of 

Sioux City, Iowa, in 1894 apparently visited the quarries about 1853 and again 

in 1862, according to a brief article in the 

Pipestone County Star, January 19, 1894:

Among the most prominent guests 

in the city today was Judge Swan, of 

Sioux City, Iowa. The Judge was up 

on important business, but still he 

found time to tell of his former visits to Pipestone. Forty-one years ago 

[1853?] the Judge camped on the very 

spot where the Government school 

now stands. He was out on a hunting expedition with a party of Indians 

who passed through this section en 

route from Lake Shetek to Dakota. 

Again in 1862, Mr. Swan camped 

here, but this time he was with a 

party of 200 whites who were after a 
8

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

band of red men who were on the war 

path. He has also been here once or 

twice since that time and he is always 

pleased to note the rapid forward 

strides being made by our little city.

This man was probably Joseph 

H. Swan, as discussed later in this chapter in conjunction with visits by U.S. 

Army soldiers during the Civil War. 

Joseph H. Swan served as a first lieutenant and, later, captain in Company I of 

the Third Minnesota Volunteer Infantry 

in 1862 (State of Minnesota 1890:193).

Abbie Gardner-Sharp, 1857-1

Shortly after the Spirit Lake 

Massacre in the spring of 1857, a party 

of Santee Sioux camped at the catlinite 

quarries with several white captives, 

one of whom was a woman named 

Abbie Gardner. While camped there for 

one day, the Native Americans quarried 

catlinite, then resumed their westward 

journey toward the Big Sioux River. 

Gardner later wrote of her experiences 

in a memoir and commented on her 

forced visit to the quarries, including 

some remarks about the petroglyphs 

there, which she may have personally 

viewed (Gardner-Sharp 1885:168-172):

Our journey led through the famous pipestone quarry, in Pipestone 

county, Minnesota. It is situated on 

a small tributary of the Big Sioux, 

called Pipestone Creek. The surface 

of the country is broken and picturesque abounding in bluffs and cliffs. 

But its principal attraction, of course, 

is a layer of peculiar and beautiful 

rock, highly prized by the Indians 

and no doubt valuable to the whites. 

The cliffs here are similar to those at 

Luverne, but smaller. Beneath these, 

on a level tract of land, is found the 

precious pipestone. The stratum is 

about fourteen inches thick, and is 

overlaid by four feet of other rock, 

and about two feet of earth, which 

must be removed before the coveted 

rock is reached. It is softer than 

slate, entirely free from grit, and not 

liable to fracture. When first taken 

out, it is soft, and easily cut with 

ordinary tools, hardly dulling them 

more than wood does. On exposure 

to the air, it becomes hard, and is capable of receiving a high polish. It 

has already been used for mantels, 

table-tops, and the like, as well as for 

ornaments, and is doubtless destined 

to more extensive use. In color it 

varies from light pink to deep, dark 

red; while some of it is mottled with 

all these shades, giving great variety.

“The great Red Pipestone Quarry,” 

whence the North American 

Indians have, from time immemorial, obtained the material for 

their pipes, has become almost as 

famous among the white race, being celebrated in song and story, 

as among the Indians themselves...

Our captors rested themselves here 

for about one day, in which time they 

were engaged in the delightful task of 

gathering the pipestone and shaping it into pipes, which were formed 

in the manner foretold ages ago.

The smooth surface of the “Medicine 

Rocks,” are covered with Indian hieroglyphics, of various grotesque 

forms, representing persons, animals, and turtles, and very many in 

the form of the tracks of a large bird...
PIPESTONE

8

After six weeks of incessant 

marching over the trackless prairie, and through the deep snow, 

we reached the Big Sioux...

W.O. Williams, 185

Alan R. Woolworth, emeritus research fellow of the Minnesota 

Historical Society, has called our attention to three sketches of features in the 

vicinity of the catlinite quarries drawn 

by W.O. Williams, probably in 1859. The 

original sketches are not known to exist, but albumen photographic prints 

of them apparently were given by 

Williams to Alfred J. Hill in September, 

1859. According to a handwritten notation on the reverse of the prints, Hill 

later donated them to the Minnesota 

Historical Society in August, 1862. The 

prints remain in the Society’s collections under catalog number SD4P/r41.

Three different subjects are depicted on the prints. One is labelled 

“The Pipe Stone Quarry with the falls 

of the Pipe Stone in the distance,” and 

shows a view of a quarry pit in the foreground with the quartzite ledge in the 

background (Figure 7). Another depicts 

Winnewissa Falls, the pool of water at 

its base, and adjacent rock formations, 

including the Leaping Rock (Figure 8). 

It is labeled “The Falls of the Pipe Stone 

with the `Leaping Rock’ in front.” This 

sketch was redrawn by Chester Kozlak 

and published in Theodore Nydahl’s 

(1950:204) article, “The Pipestone Quarry 

and the Indians.” The third, and most 

interesting, sketch (Figure 21) shows a 

Native American seated by the Three 

Maidens, contemplating petroglyphs 

which are quite visible on the quartzite bedrock. It is labeled “The granite 

Boulders at the Pipe Stone Quarry.” The 

scene is a remarkable and scarce view of 

the in situ petroglyphs, although individual motifs are not fully discernible. 

The name “W.O. Williams” and the year 

“1859” appear as graffiti on one of the 

larger boulders of the Three Maidens 

group, a clever way for the artist to put 

his name and date on his production.

Unfortunately, the identity of 

W.O. Williams is not known. Alan R. 

Woolworth (letter to Thiessen, March 9, 

1998) has suggested that he may have 

been a member of the Henry Hutton 

and C.H. Snow party that surveyed and 

mapped the Pipestone Reservation in 

1859, but this remains to be confirmed.

Emmanuel Domenech, pre-18

In a two-volume work published 

in English in 1860, entitled Seven Years’ 

Residence in the Great Deserts of North 

America, the French Abbè Emmanuel 

Domenech wrote of the geography 

of North America. In volume two 

(Domenech 1860), he described the 

Coteau des Prairie, including the catlinite quarries, although it is doubtful from 

his text if he personally visited there. 

For example, he (Domenech 1860:344) 

describes the quartzite ledge as being on 

the west side of the quarries rather than 

as being situated to the east of them. He 

also (Domenech 1860:347) describes “the 

assemblage of several enormous cylindrical blocks”-a probable reference to the 

Three Maidens boulders-as being composed of “gneiss, felspar, mica, granite, 

and of blue, red, white, and black slate.” 

Consequently, his sparse remarks on the 

rock art and archeology of the area are 

of little value (Domenech 1860:344-345):
8

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

...The rocks are of a bright red, polished and shining. Some of them 

bear traces of ancient and modern hieroglyphics, which are cut or 

painted on the rock. They are mementoes left by the Red Skins, each 

time they went on a pilgimage [sic] 

to seek the materials with which they 

make their pipes, earrings, and other ornaments of this kind. Several 

tombs are also to be seen there, as 

also the ruins of monuments, which 

either served as fortifications or as 

sepulchres for illustrious warriors.

James W. Lynd, 18

It is ironic that some of the earliest knowledge of the catlinite quarries, a place of such special meaning 

to Native Americans, comes to us from 

two white men who met untimely and 

violent deaths at Native American 

hands during the Dakota uprising of 

1862 in Minnesota. Such was the fate 

of Philander Prescott, the first white 

man known to have visited the quarries, and of James W. Lynd, who had 

prepared a manuscript study of the 

Sioux Indians at the time of his death. 

In their collection of Minnesota biographies, Upham and Dunlap (1912:457) 

state that Lynd was born in Baltimore 

in 1830 and died at the Lower Sioux 

Agency on August 18, 1862. He came 

to Minnesota about 1853 to live among 

the Sioux and write a book about them, 

and also served in the state legislature 

in 1861 (Upham and Dunlap 1912:457).

Lynd may have had his study 

with him at the time of his death, as 

six bundles of the manuscript, entitled “History of the Dakotas and other 

North American Indians,” are reported to have been found by a U.S. Army 

soldier at the Lower Sioux Agency 

sawmill or near Little Crow’s nearby 

village in the spring of 1863 following the uprising (Riggs 1864:143). The 

soldier gave them to his commanding officer, Captain L.W. Shepherd, 

who in turn gave them to the wellknown missionary, Stephen R. Riggs. 

The manuscript as received by 

Riggs was incomplete. Its value was initially unrecognized by the soldiers at Fort 

Ridgely, some of whom used pages for 

cleaning their weapons (Riggs 1864:143). 

Six chapters of Lynd’s work survived 

in whole or in part. Riggs published 

one chapter in its entirety, entitled “The 

Religion of the Dakotas,” which makes 

no mention of catlinite or the quarries. 

Both, however, are described in an excerpt from the second chapter, “The 

Sioux and their Country,” which Riggs 

(1864:145) published in his introductory 

remarks about the Lynd manuscript:

The Pipe Stone Quarry is a place of 

great importance to the Sioux. From 

it they obtain the red stone clay--

Catlinite--of which their pipes and 

images are formed; and a peculiar sacredness is, in their minds, attached 

to the place. Numerous high bluffs 

and cliffs surround it; and the alluvial 

flat below these, in which the quarry 

is situated, contains a huge boulder 

that rests upon a flat rock of glistening, smooth appearance, the level of 

which is but a few inches above the 

surface of the ground. Upon the portions of this rock not covered by the 

boulder above and upon the boulder 

itself are carved sundry wonderful 

figures--lizzards [sic], snakes, otters, Indian gods, rabbits with cloven 
PIPESTONE

feet, muskrats with human feet, and 

other strange and incomprehensible 

things--all cut into the solid granite, and not without a great deal of 

time and labor expended in the performance. The commoner Indians, 

even to this day, are accustomed to 

look upon these with feelings of mysterious awe, as they call to mind 

the legend connected therewith.

A large party of Ehanktonwanna and 

Teetonwan Dakotas, says the legend, 

had gathered together at the quarry 

to dig the stone. Upon a sultry evening, just before sunrise, the heavens 

suddenly became overclouded, accompanied by heavy rumbling thunder, and every sign of an approaching 

storm, such as frequently arises on 

the prairie without much warning. 

Each one hurried to his lodge expecting a storm, when a vivid flash of 

lightning, followed immediately by a 

crashing peal of thunder, broke over 

them, and, looking towards the huge 

boulder beyond their camp, they saw 

a pillar or column of smoke standing upon it, which moved to and 

fro, and gradually settled down into 

the outline of a huge giant, seated 

upon the boulder, with one long arm 

extended to heaven and the other 

pointing down to his feet. Peal after peal of thunder, and flashes of 

lightning in quick succession followed, and this figure then suddenly 

disappeared. The next morning 

the Sioux went to this boulder, and 

found these figures and images upon 

it, where before there had been nothing; and ever since that the place has 

been regarded as wakan or sacred.

Before Lynd’s demise, George 

Catlin had published his now-famous 

account of the lore of the quarries, 

so that information would have been 

available to Lynd. However, the “legend” related by Lynd above does not 

closely parallel any of the several stories 

about the origin or discovery of catlinite presented by Catlin, and so probably 

derives from another source, possibly 

the Dakotas whom Lynd personally 

knew. The exaggerated and inaccurate 

description of the setting of the quarries, however, suggests that Lynd never 

visited that place in person but must 

have related secondhand information.

Lynd’s description of the quarries and the legend about them were 

published verbatim by W.P. Clark in 

his 1885 book, The Indian Sign Language

(Clark 1982), and portions of it appear 

in an unpublished tradition attributed 

in 1934 by James H. Cook to unnamed 

Sioux and Cheyenne Indians. The Cook 

story, which is contained in the Cook 

Family Papers, Archive & Manuscript 

Collection, Manuscripts, Box 91 (on 

file at Agate Fossil Beds National 

Monument, Harrison, Nebraska), was 

written by Cook and is dated April 

12, 1934 at Scottsbluff, Nebraska:

Sioux and Cheyenne Indian Legend 

of the Pipe Stone Quarry

in Minnesota

The quarry was discovered hundreds of years ago by some Cheyenne 

Indians who were told by an old beaver whose life had been spared by 

them, and who turned his form into 

that of a man while telling where 

the mystery stone could be found, 

with which they could make pipes 
8

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

in which to create the smoke that 

would carry a prayer to the “Great 

Mystery,” father of all life, and of 

the world. The “Wakan Tanka.”

Arriving at the place they were told 

to go, the Indians set up their hide 

lodges, they there held a council and 

prayed for further guidance. While 

so engaged a thunder storm came 

on. Bolts of lightning struck all 

about their camp and peals of thunder rent the air, crash after crash.

One bolt of lightning struck a huge 

boulder which lay just in front of their 

camp. Looking out of their lodges, the 

Indians saw a great column of smoke 

in the form of a man standing on that 

boulder. One of his hands was extended towards the sky, the other was 

pointing toward the rock at his feet. 

That column of smoke soon cleared 

away, and the storm passed on.

Going out to look at the boulder upon 

which the smoke figure stood, they 

saw that a big flat rock upon which 

the boulder rested had all sorts of figures carved upon it, some of which 

represented snakes, lizards, and others. Others represented rabbits with 

cloven feet and muskrats, or beavers, 

with human feet. Looking about 

them they soon found the red rock 

from which they could make the pipes 

which have since been used by many 

Indian tribes when making peace 

treaties with each other, or the peace 

commissioners who have represented 

the U.S. Government, when treaties 

have been made with hostile Indians 

who opposed the oncoming of the 

white Mila Haskan (Long Knives) 

people into their hunting grounds.

U.S. Army soldiers, 1862-

Part of the lore concerning the 

catlinite quarries is a story of U.S. Army 

soldiers having camped there during 

the Civil War. The soldiers are said to 

have dug up mounds in the vicinity of 

the quarries to purposely desecrate the 

graves of Native Americans in retaliation for Indian depredations during the 

Sioux uprising of 1862. During his 1882 

visit to the quarries, Philetus W. Norris 

apparently heard tales of this from local residents. He judged the soldiers’ 

activities at the quarries to have been 

the reason that so few human bones 

and artifacts were found in the mounds 

that he excavated. As explained in his 

preliminary report (see Appendix B):

...these mounds are the work of man, 

but I frankly admit are far short of 

my anticipations in Skeletons tools 

weapons and ornaments actually 

found in them. And here I venture a 

fact and a suggestion. I am informed 

by high authority that at different periods of the Sioux war in Minnesota 

during the Rebellion, detachments of 

troops (who had facilities for obtaining fuel) encamped for successive 

days or weeks at this Indian reservation. These were mainly residents 

of those regions, incensed alike at the 

guilty and the innocent, the living 

and the dead, if the detested race some 

of whom had perpetrated demonic 

atrocities upon their friends, and 

with such feelings, abundant time 

and tools, wreaking vengeance upon 

the race by upsetting their graves 

and burial mounds and securing relics was alike a pastime and a boast. 

From the fact of their being upon the 

reservation of a band ever mainly 
PIPESTONE

friendly, and semicivilized, these excavations were mainly refilled, and 

hence their external appearance, and 

the commingled situation of the material of the mounds and the want of 

relics found in them, which theory 

although not wholly satisfactory to 

myself is all I can offer until further 

researches sustain or disprove it.

Although Norris cited no supporting information, corroboration of 

the visits by soldiers is to be found in 

a reminiscent article by one of the participants in at least three such camping 

episodes, James Boyd Hubbell. In late 

1863, Hubbell had a government contract to deliver cattle and supplies to the 

Winnebago Indians who had recently 

been sent to what is today the Crow 

Creek Reservation on the Missouri River 

in South Dakota. Hubbell’s party, which 

set out overland from Lake Crystal, 

Minnesota, in early November, 1863, 

consisted of more than 150 wagons and 

was accompanied by an escort of companies D, E, and H of the Sixth Minnesota 

Volunteer Infantry, totaling approximately 175 soldiers (Hill 1899; Lass 1965). 

The expedition, which was informally 

referred to as the “Moscow Expedition” 

because it was made in the dead of winter, passed near the catlinite quarries 

sometime between November 19 and 

23, 1863 (Hill 1899:23; Lass 1965:237).

Hubbell, who was with the 

“Moscow expedition,” recalled that 

he had camped near the quarries on 

three occasions (Hubbell 1902:14):

The Minneapolis Times of 

Sunday has an article written by 

Bertha Lincoln, giving many interesting facts and legends relative to 

the red Pipestone quarry, new to 

me, although I had visited there several times years ago, having camped 

near there in December, 1863, with 

what the newspapers of that time 

called the Moscow expedition. I had 

taken a contract to deliver beef cattle 

and supplies for the Indians at Fort 

Thompson, on the Missouri river, 

and it was so late in the season, it was 

regarded as a rather hazardous undertaking, saying nothing of the supposed danger from hostile Indians. I 

had 153 wagons loaded with supplies, 

and over 800 head of cattle, and had 

a military escort of four companies 

of infantry, under command of Capt. 

Whitney, who, I believe, is now a 

resident of Minneapolis. The train 

was over a mile in length. The celebrated Anson Northrup was wagonmaster, a man of great courage, 

strength, energy, and endurance.

I camped at the Pipestone quarry 

with another expedition, July 4, 1864, 

and again with a third expedition the 

same year in the fall. While camped 

at the quarry in July, there was a terrific thunderstorm, and it seemed as 

if the lightning struck the rocks all 

about our camp. Some of the men reported seeing Indian paintings on the 

three large boulders and rocks near 

the quarry, to which the article in the 

Times refers, but I did not see them.

Although Hubbell is incorrect 

about some details, such as the month of 

December and the number of accompanying infantry companies, his description of lightning striking “the rocks all 

about our camp” suggests that the camp 

was very close to the quartzite ledge. 

The allusion to “Indian paintings” on 
8

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

the Three Maidens boulders and other 

rocks may refer to pictographs which 

have since disappeared, or it may allude to petroglyphs, although none 

such are known to have been made directly on the Three Maidens boulders.

In a letter to the commanding officer of the Sixth Minnesota 

Volunteers, one of the officers who accompanied the 1863 party, Lieutenant 

S.H. King, reported his arrival at the 

catlinite quarries and the crossing of 

Pipestone Creek, but, unfortunately, furnished no details (King 1865).

The quarries may have been 

visited a year earlier, in the late fall 

of 1862, when a detachment of about 

150 soldiers of the Third Minnesota 

Volunteer Infantry, under the command of Lieutenant Joseph H. Swan, 

camped about a mile east of the quarries 

(Murray 1961:13; Swan 1899:282c). It is 

possible that this same party of soldiers 

was mentioned in a January 19, 1894 

article in the Pipestone County Star, in a 

story attributed to one “Judge Swan,” 

who was probably the officer whose report is cited above: “Again in 1862, Mr. 

Swan camped here, but this time he was 

with a party of 200 whites who were after a band of red men who were on the 

war path.” Perhaps Lieutenant Swan 

and some of his men may have visited 

the nearby quarries out of curiosity.

Ferdinand V. Hayden, 18

Ferdinand V. Hayden was an energetic geologist who accompanied U.S. 

Army exploration and mapping expeditions that traveled widely through the 

Missouri River basin before the Civil 

War, including those led by Lt. G.K. 

Warren in 1855-1857 and Capt. W.F. 

Raynolds in 1859-1860 (Goetzmann 

1979). He later led geological exploring 

parties through much of the West in 

the 1860s and 1870s and is recognized 

as one of the major contributors to geological and paleontological knowledge 

of the West (Goetzmann 1979:422-426).

During one of these explorations in the eastern part of Dakota territory, Hayden made a sidetrip from 

Fort Dakota on the Big Sioux River to 

visit the renowned catlinite quarries 

in October of 1865. Shortly thereafter, he presented summary descriptions of this visit before meetings 

of the Academy of Natural Sciences 

of Philadelphia and the American 

Philosophical Society. Each of these organizations published an abstract of his 

remarks in their proceedings (Academy 

of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 

1866:291-292; American Philosophical 

Society 1866:274-275). A more complete 

report of his visit was published in an 

1867 issue of The American Journal of 

Science (Hayden 1867), and it was republished, with only minor punctuation 

changes, two years later (Hayden 1869).

In his fuller account, Hayden 

(1867:20) described the immediate environs of the quarries, including the 

quartzite “escarpment” and the falls:

On reaching the source of the 

Pipestone creek, in the valley of 

which the Pipestone bed is located, 

I was surprised to see how inconspicuous a place it is. Indeed, had I 

not known of the existence of a rock 

in this locality so celebrated in this 

region, I should have passed it by almost unnoticed. A single glance at 
PIPESTONE

90

the red quartzites here, assured me 

that these rocks were of the same 

age with those before mentioned at 

James and Vermillion rivers, and at 

Sioux Falls. The layer of Pipestone 

is about the lowest rock that can be 

seen. It rests upon a gray quartzite, 

and there are about five feet of the 

same gray quartzite above it, which 

have to be removed with great labor 

before the Pipestone can be secured. 

About 300 yards from the Pipestone 

exposure is an escarpment, or nearly 

vertical wall of variegated quartzite, 

extending directly across the valley. 

Each end of the wall passes from 

view beneath the superficial covering of the prairie. It is about half 

a mile in length. About a quarter 

of a mile further up the valley there 

is another small escarpment, so that 

the entire thickness of the rock exposed at this point is about 50 feet. 

Not a tree can be seen; only a few 

small bushes growing among the 

rocks. There is a little stream of 

clear, pure water flowing from the 

rocks, with a perpendicular fall of 

about 30 feet, forming a beautiful 

cascade. The evidences of erosion 

were very marked, and the question arose--how could all the materials which must once have existed 

here joined on to these walls, have 

been removed, except by a stream 

much larger and more powerful 

in its erosive action than the one 

at present flowing here? There 

is a slight inclination of the beds 

from 1° to 3°, about 15° S. of E.

While he mentioned the 

Three Maidens boulders, he did 

not write about the associated 

petroglyphs (Hayden 1867:20):

About 200 yards southeast of 

the quarry are five massive boulders, composed of a very coarse 

flesh-colored feldspathic granite, 

very much like that which forms 

the nucleus of the Black Hills.

As a geologist, Hayden was primarily interested in the catlinite layers 

and the quartzite which overlay them. 

He did, however, describe the quarries 

themselves and offer speculation about 

their relative age (Hayden 1867:20-21):

...A ditch from four to six feet wide 

and about 500 yards in length, extending partly across the valley of 

Pipestone creek, reveals what has 

thus far been done in excavating 

the rock. There are indications of 

an unusual amount of labor on the 

part of the Indians in former years 

to secure the precious material.

This rock has been used for many 

years past by the Indians of the 

Northwest for the manufacture of 

pipes, and it was formerly the custom of some of the tribes to make 

the locality an annual visit to secure a portion of the precious material. They placed a higher value on 

the rock, because they could make 

far more beautiful and showy pipes 

than from any other material known 

to them. Besides, this was and is 

now, the only locality from whence 

the true pipestone can be obtained, 

and the labor is so great in throwing off the five feet of solid quartzite 

that rests upon it, that the rock has 

always been rare. For a mile or two 

before reaching the quarry the prairie is strewed with fragments that 

have been cast away by pilgrims.
91

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

Nearly all of our writers on Indian 

history have invested this place with 

a number of legends or myths. They 

have represented the locality as having been known to the Indians from 

remote antiquity. All these notions, 

I am convinced, will disappear before the light of a careful investigation of the facts. It is quite probable 

that the rock has not been known to 

the Indians more than eighty or one 

hundred years, and perhaps not even 

as long a period. I could not find a 

trace of a stone implement in the vicinity, nor could I hear that any had 

ever been found; and indeed nothing 

could be seen that would lead one 

to suppose that the place had been 

visited for a longer period than fifty years. All the excavations could 

have been made within that time. 

There are many rude iron tools scattered about, and some of them were 

taken out of the ditch last summer in 

a complete state of oxydation [sic].

Again, it does not appear that in the 

mounds which have been opened in 

the Mississippi valley so extensively, 

any trace of this rock has ever been 

found. It is well known that the pipe 

is the most important of the dead 

man's possessions and is almost invariably buried with the body, and 

if a knowledge of this rock had extended back into the stone age, it is 

almost certain that some indications 

of it would have been brought to 

light in the vast number of mounds 

that have been opened in the valley 

of the Mississippi. Pipes and other 

ornaments, made from steatite, have 

been in use among Indians from the 

earliest indications of their history, 

and they are still manufactured from 

this material on the Pacific coast.

Interestingly, Hayden's addresses to the two learned societies included some remarks about 

the recent manufacture of pipes and 

other objects of catlinite by whites:

Dr. H. exhibited a number of ornaments manufactured from the 

Pipestone by the North-west Fur 

Company. They consist of pipes 

of various patterns and sizes, cups, 

candlesticks, etc. They are turned 

in a lathe. Within a year or two 

this company have made nearly two 

thousand pipes, which they send up 

to the Upper Missouri Indians, near 

the foot of the Rocky Mountains, 

and trade them for a robe a-piece. 

Hereafter some doubt will be thrown 

upon the genuineness of these 

Indian pipes. (Academy of Natural 

Sciences of Philadelphia 1866:292)

Dr. Hayden made some remarks 

on a short visit to the celebrated 

Pipestone Quarry, and exhibited 

some specimens of the rock, as well 

as some pipes and other ornaments 

that had been made from the rock 

with a turning lathe. The Northwest 

Fur Company have manufactured 

nearly two thousand pipes within the past two years, and traded 

them to the Indians on the Upper 

Missouri. This fact will throw a suspicion on the genuineness of Indian 

pipes in the future. (American 

Philosophical Society 1866:274)

Hayden's report of pipes being 

made for the Northwest Fur Company 

finds remarkable corroboration in a later 

statement by one of the concern's principals, James Boyd Hubbell (1902:15-16):
PIPESTONE

92

Referring again to the red pipestone, I venture to say the residents 

of Pipestone city and that beautiful 

section are not aware of the fact that 

a large quantity of the pipestone was 

hauled to Lake Sheteck and manufactured into Indian pipes and other 

things by machinery. It was not considered safe for the men to work at 

the quarry, hence the vacant houses 

at Lake Sheteck, which were deserted 

by the settlers during the outbreak, 

were utilized. The owners that had 

escaped had not at that time ventured 

to return. Gen. Sully had expected 

to be ordered to make a treaty with 

the Sioux, and, as the red stone pipes 

were prized highly by them, he engaged with me for 5,000 pipes at $5 

apiece. I employed men to make them 

under the supervision of A.B. Smith, 

one of the earliest settlers of Dakota.

Gen. Sully did not make the treaty as 

expected, but the pipes were no loss, 

as we traded them to good advantage with the Indians all along the 

Missouri, receiving a well dressed 

buffalo robe or its equivalent in other 

skins for a pipe. Robes at that time 

were worth over $10 on an average.

Interestingly, this manufacture 

of pipes by whites may have a longer 

and more complex history than Hayden 

and Hubbell intimate. Dr. J. Frazer 

Boughter was the post surgeon at Fort 

Dakota, on the site of present-day Sioux 

Falls, in the late 1860s. As the post's 

medical officer, Boughter was also responsible for recording observations on 

weather, geology, fauna and flora, and 

other aspects of local natural history. 

He compiled a descriptive commentary 

that dealt with various natural history 

subjects, which has been transcribed 

by David Rambow (2003).3 After remarking on a local source of pipestone 

close to Fort Dakota, Boughter comments on it and its use for pipe-making:

This pipestone is not of such a uniform redness as that found at the 

[catlinite] Quarry, it is much lighter in color, very frequently mottled 

and contains a much less quantity 

of per-oxide of iron; although equally as good and as easily wrought, 

it is not prized so highly by the 

Indians for the manufacture of pipes. 

Considerable quantity has been dug 

from this spot by a company organized in connection with the Northwest Fur Company, who had located 

at Sioux Falls City previous to its 

destruction by the Indians a factory 

for the manufacture of pipes and various articles used in trade with the 

Indians for furs. (Rambow 2003:25)

The destruction of Sioux Falls 

mentioned by Boughter refers to the 

town's being burned by Indians following its abandonment in about 

September 1862 (Rambow 2003:2).

Charles A. White, 1

Dr. Charles A. White, the Iowa 

State Geologist from 1866 to 1873 (Merrill 

1964:435), traveled up the Big Sioux River 

from Sioux City, Iowa to Fort Dakota at 

the falls of the Big Sioux (present-day 

Sioux Falls) in July, 1868. From there, he 

3

The authors are indebted to David Rambow for graciously making available his transcription of 

Boughter’s commentary.
93

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

and four companions, accompanied by 

a Sioux Indian guide, traveled overland 

to visit the catlinite quarries. His account of the trip, published in an 1869 

issue of American Naturalist (White 1869) 

and subsequently reprinted (White 1983, 

1989), relates that between the Big Sioux 

River and the quarries, no trees were observed “save a single elm by the side of 

a small creek” (White 1983:13; 1989:21).

At the quarries White was 

somewhat disappointed to find that 

the quartzite outcrop was not as imposing as he had expected (White 

1983:13; 1989:21). After being shown 

the quarries by the guide, White and 

his companions inspected the quarries, the quartzite ledge, and the vicinity of the Three Maidens. He described 

the Three Maidens and the nearby 

petroglyphs (White 1983:14; 1989:22):

...The “Medicine Rocks,” (C) [this 

symbol appears on an accompanying 

sketch map made by White] towards 

the southern end of the plain, rest 

directly upon the glacier-smoothed 

surface of the quartzite. We see the 

distinct striae beneath and around 

them, and feel almost as if we had 

caught them in the very act of making their tracks, for they are granite 

strangers from the northward, and 

we have visited the place where they 

were born, and know them and their 

generation. The two largest of these 

boulders are some twelve to fifteen 

feet in diameter, and are the ones believed by the Indians to cover the two 

squaws mentioned in the legend...

Many square yards of the glaciersmoothed surface at the Medicine 

Rocks are covered thickly with 

Indian hieroglyphics, made by pecking the hard surface with sharppointed stone. These are of various grotesque forms, intended to 

represent persons, animals of the 

region, turtles, and very many also 

in the form of the tracks of a 

large bird... [emphasis in original]

The following morning the 

party collected specimens of catlinite “from the rejected pieces strewn 

upon the ground,” and resumed 

their return journey to Fort Dakota. 

At their departure, the guide made 

a brief visit to the Three Maidens:

...Mazachistina mounts at the same 

time, but starts off towards the 

Medicine Rocks, around which he 

makes a rapid turn and overtakes us 

upon the road. He is utterly silent 

when we ask him why he went there, 

but we should doubtless be thankful 

that we got away with our Pipestone 

in safety from the wrath of the guardian spirits of the Medicine rocks.

One of White’s companions was 

Dr. J. Frazer Boughter, the post surgeon 

at Fort Dakota mentioned above. In his 

description of Fort Dakota and its environs, Boughter also commented on 

the catlinite quarries. Soon after his 

return to Fort Dakota from the visit 

to the quarries, Boughter recorded on 

August 31, 1868 (Rambow 2003:59):

...The Great Red Pipestone Quarry 

thirty-five (35) miles north-east 

of this Post, is a point of annual 

pilgrimage of many hundreds of 

the Sioux. At this time no other 

tribes or band visit this vicinity.
PIPESTONE

94

Writing again on March 

5, 1869, he commented at greater length (Rambow 2003:24-27):

Another locality in this vicinity, 

interesting both from a geological 

and legendary point of view, and 

of which not a great deal is generally know[n] is the celebrated “Great 

Red Pipestone Quarry” immortalized by Longfellow in his “Song of 

Hiawatha,” the spot where “Gitche 

Manito” smoked his peace pipe.

Being fortunate enough to visit this locality with a geological party in the month of July 

1868, from personal observation 

the spot can be described...[he 

goes on to comment on a source 

of pipestone local to Fort Dakota]

The Great Red Pipestone Quarry 

is within the State of Minnesota 

about thirty (30) miles in a direct 

line from its south-western corner, 

and three (3) or four (4) miles from 

its western boundary, its direction from this Post is about north, 

north-east, a road or tepe [sic] trail, 

not very distinctly marked is found 

leading to it and is the road generally used by the bands of Indians 

from the Missouri River who visit it.

The large exposure of Quartzite extending north and south is visible 

for a considerable distance as you 

approach, for the general prairie 

surface rises continuously until you 

reach a distance of three (3) miles, 

when it slopes gently to the rocks.

The annexed diagram drawn by 

Dr. White, gives the relative position of the principal points 

of the locality.4 D.E. Principal 

Exposure of rocks, extending a 

mile in length from north to south.

A. Greatest perpedicular height, 

abouth [sic] seventy (70) feet, 

over which the brook flows.

B. A shallow ditch, a quarter of 

a mile long in which the pipestone is found.

C. Granite boulders, known as 

the “Medicine Rocks

The only rock found here is 

the red quartzite and the granite boulders drifted from their 

home in the Minnesota River 

Valley as above mentioned. 

The pipestone is found exposed 

in a ditch, a quarter of a mile 

long, west of and lying parallel to the principal exposure of 

red quartzite forming the ledge. 

The pipestone is in thin and shaly layers, in aggregate thickness, 

and has been removed at very 

great labor by the Indians, who 

use but the rudest implements, 

to obtain the coveted treasure. 

The surface of the ground rises here 

very greatly to the westward “To the 

land of the Setting Sun,” and also to 

the eastward, here interrupted by the 

ledge of quartzite already mentioned.

4

This diagram is published in White (1869:650; 1983:13; and 1989:__).
95

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

 The dip of the quartzite is very considerable, the total thickness of the 

strata is about one hundred and fifty 

(150) feet, the surface ledges disappearing very rapidly to the eastward.

The granite boulders mentioned 

and known by the Indians as the 

“Medicine Rocks” rest directly 

upon the surface of the quartzite, 

smoothed and polished by the action 

of the glaciers and whirling sand.

The largest boulders are twelve (12) 

or fifteen (15) feet in diameter, and 

are supposed by the Indians to cover the remains of two squaws, who 

must be propitiated whenever they 

would take any pipestone away. The 

smooth surface of the quartzite upon 

which rest the “medicine rocks,” 

is covered with rude and fantastic 

Indian hieroglyphics, pecked upon the 

hard surface with some sharp pointed instrument or stone. Pipestone is 

chemically a clay (silicate of alumina) 

colored brick-red with the per-oxide 

of iron; geologically it is metamorphic 

clay, as the quartzite is metamorphic 

sandstone. once a layer of clay intercalated between layers of sandstone, 

the same metamorphic action that 

changed the latter to a quartzite, also 

converted the clay into a pipestone.

A small stream coming from the eastward and flowing through the marsh 

to the east of the quartzite ledge falls 

over it at the centre and at its highest 

point a distance of twenty (20) feet, it 

then flows to the westward and finally empties into the Big Sioux River.

Along this stream were found a few 

stunted Common Willow (Salix 

longifolia), and the Reed grass 

(Phragmilies communis) a few 

botanical specimens were also collected. (Rambow 2003:24-27)

Ernest V. Sutton, 187

Ernest V. Sutton, an early resident of southwestern Minnesota, late 

in life wrote about a visit to the catlinite quarries when he was a boy in 

1873 (Sutton n.d.:35-36). He made particular mention of the Three Maidens:

In the summer of 1873 father took 

me on a visit to this quarry. The 

surrounding country, as well as the 

quarry itself, then looked far different 

from what it does today. There were 

no houses, highways, railroad tracks 

or piles of rubbish and tin cans; the 

prairie was just as God made it...

At the old quarry (a number of new 

ones have since been opened) a few 

Indians were slowly and patiently 

prying out the stone with wooden 

wedges the same as their fathers 

had done for centuries. We watched 

them as they laboriously worked 

to pry the stone loose. After carefully inspecting the specimen it 

was dipped in water to see if any 

white spots showed up. When this 

did happen the stone was thrown 

away and a new piece dug out...*

Out on the prairie, not far away, lay 

three enormous boulders, looking exactly as if they had fallen from the sky.

I was climbing up onto one of these 

rocks when the Indians saw me and 

stopped their work. Presently they 

came toward where I was and began 
PIPESTONE

9

pointing and jabbering away, which I 

couldn’t understand. Finally one old 

man pointed to the rock and shook his 

head, as much as to say, “you must 

not go up there.” Father told me to 

come down, then shook his head to the 

Indians, thus assuring them he would 

see that I didn’t try it again. The 

Indians now returned to their work.

The referenced footnote concerned uses for discarded catlinite:

*This pile of rejected stone, the accumulation of many years, was later 

worked over by white men and made 

into napkin rings and other novelties to be sold as souvenirs. Pieces 

too small to be used were dumped 

in the street to serve as a pavement.

Interestingly, Sutton made no 

mention of the Three Maidens petroglyphs, which he may have personally observed in situ. However, 

he did comment on the rock art 

at the quarries (Sutton n.d.:34-35):

...Besides these early explorers others have left printed records in 

which all agree this place has always 

been a sacred spot to the Indians...

Among the ancient pictographs 

was one representing the tracks 

of the “Thunder Bird,” a mythical bird supposed to govern the 

weather. This and many other of 

these early etchings have been destroyed or carried away by vandals.

This last statement is probably a reference to the removal of the 

Three Maidens petroglyphs in 1888 

or 1889, as well as defacement of the 

Native American motifs by the carving of settlers’ names over them.

Charles H. Bennett, 1874-1900

Charles H. Bennett was one of 

the founding fathers and leading citizens of the community of Pipestone. 

He had a deep interest in antiquarian 

matters and is perhaps best known as 

the man who “collected” the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs. Several brief 

biographies of Bennett have been published (Anonymous 1889:651-654; Rose 

1911:659-661; Pipestone County Historical 

Society 1984:159-160; Beckering 1989; 

Pipestone County Genealogical Society 

1991:13; Pipestone County Genealogical 

Society and Pipestone County Historical 

Society 2000:19-20), and an obituary article appeared on the front page of the 

Pipestone County Star on August 24, 1926. 

His role in the founding and development of the city of Pipestone is detailed 

in a comprehensive county history 

(Rose 1911), to which he personally contributed much information. The brief 

biographical summary that follows 

has been gleaned from these sources.

Born in Michigan in 1846, Bennett 

served in the Civil War, then worked as 

a druggist in Sioux City, Iowa from 1866 

to 1869. In the latter year he established 

his own drugstore in Le Mars, Iowa. 

Drawn to the area by tales of the catlinite quarries, Bennett and several companions visited the quarries in 1873 and 

decided to found a community at the 

location of present-day Pipestone. He 

returned in 1874 and built a shanty to 

firm up his land claim. He returned in 

1876 to take up permanent residence in 

the fledgling community. Transferring 
97

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

his drugstore business to Pipestone, 

he became a leading member and promoter of the community until his death 

on August 23, 1926. In addition to 

apothecary supplies, Bennett also sold 

both raw catlinite and finished catlinite pipes and other objects at his store 

(Beckering 1989; Storrs 1916; Beal 1991:5). 

He was said to have at one time been 

“the owner of the largest stock of raw 

and manufactured Indian pipestone in 

the world” (Bennett obituary, Pipestone 

County Star, August 24, 1926, page 1).

Bennett’s attention was early 

drawn not only to the quarries themselves, but to the nearby archeological features as well. He was one of 

the first to comment on the many 

stone circles or “tipi rings” visible on the prairie near the quarries:

Among other things which attracted 

my attention were hundreds upon 

hundreds of places within a mile of 

here of circular form, surrounded by 

stones of from six inches to two feet in 

diameter, some of which were sunken 

in the ground so as to be scarcely visible, all indicating unmistakably that 

some time in the years or centuries 

gone by, they were the habitations 

of Indians, and that they constituted villages of considerable size.

This statement was made in 

1878, probably as part of a public address made by him on July 4th of that 

year (Rose 1911:245, 262). Although 

few such archeological features have 

survived more than a century of cultivation, bioturbation, sedimentation, 

and other disruptions, Bennett’s observation finds corroboration in the map 

of the quarries that was published by 

Holmes in 1919 (Holmes 1919:254), on 

which are shown more than 300 small 

“camp sites and lodge rings” in the 

immediate vicinity of the quarries.

As a Pipestone resident who was 

knowledgeable about the quarries and 

nearby archeological features, Bennett 

was consulted by many of the archeologists who possessed an interest in the 

quarries. Norris, for example, mentioned 

in the preliminary report of his investigation, that Bennett assisted him in his 

research (Appendix B). Lewis, Holmes, 

Winchell, Alfred J. Hill, Lewis’ collaborator and sponsor (Winchell 1911:114), and 

Edwin A. Barber (1883), who published 

a pioneering essay on the nature of catlinite and the distribution of pipes made 

from it and other pipestones, all personally met or corresponded with Bennett.

Norris’s notes indicate that 

Bennett and other persons had previously dug into many of the mounds in 

the vicinity of the quarries (Appendix 

B), which finds some corroboration in a 

later statement attributed to Bennett by 

Caryl B. Storrs, a Twin Cities newspaperman who received a guided tour of the 

quarries and nearby archeological features from Bennett in 1916. With respect 

to Norris’ mound no. 2, which Catlin 

identified as the grave of a young Native 

American who died at the Leaping Rock, 

Storrs (1916) quotes Bennett as saying:

“Do you see this little depression? 

That was the grave of an Indian boy 

who tried to jump from the cliff over 

to the top of the Great Spirit shaft. 

He was killed 80 years ago, and I dug 

some of his bones up 40 years ago.”
PIPESTONE

9

Bennett actively solicited information from persons knowledgeable 

about the archeology and history of the 

region. For example, he wrote to retired 

general John C. Fremont, who had been 

a member of Nicollet’s 1838 exploration 

party (Storrs 1916). Fremont’s September 

3, 1885, reply is quoted at length by Rose 

(1911:255-256, footnote 7). When a party 

of Yanktons visited the quarries in 1879, 

Bennett sought out two of the chiefs, 

Strikes-the-Ree and Fat Mandan, and 

interviewed them for information about 

the quarries and the nearby earthwork (Rose 1911:246, footnote 2; 248-

249, footnote 4; Thiessen 1998a:47-49).

Bennett is best known, however, 

for having removed and publicized many 

of the petroglyphs that surrounded the 

Three Maidens boulders. The petroglyphs originally existed on the surface 

of the Sioux quartzite bedrock that underlay the six Three Maidens boulders. 

They were observed and commented 

on by many early visitors to the quarries, beginning with George Catlin and 

Joseph Nicollet in the 1830s. As in situ 

petroglyphs, they were traced or drawn 

by several visitors in the 1870s and 1880s 

(Perley’s “chart;” Winchell 1884; Cronau 

1890; and Norris, in Appendix B, this 

volume). The images on the quartzite 

slabs, after removal from their original 

location, were traced, drawn, and/or 

described by Lewis in 1889 (Winchell 

1911:564, Plate VIII; see also Appendix 

C) and Holmes in 1892 (Holmes 1892e).

Sometime in 1888 or 1889-the 

exact date is not known-many of the 

petroglyphs were removed on 36 slabs 

of quartzite taken from their original 

locations about the Three Maidens by 

a local stone sculptor, Leon H. Moore, 

possibly at the instigation of Bennett 

(Pipestone County Genealogical Society 

1991:25; Beal 1991:7-8). On August 25, 

1902, Moore gave a signed receipt to 

Bennett for $20.00 for the slabs, on which 

he noted “removal being made by me 

from land owned by me-on years 1888 

or 1889-said stones taken from locality 

about one half mile south from Great 

Red Pipestone Quarry” (copy on file, 

Pipestone County Historical Society). 

Clearly, the slabs were in Bennett’s possession by August 1889, when Theodore 

H. Lewis recorded the motives on 35 slabs 

“owned by C.H. Bennett” (Appendix C). 

Why Moore provided Bennett with a receipt some 13 or 14 years after removing 

them is not clear. Possibly, Bennett had 

plans to display them in formal exhibitions and wanted no doubt as to their 

ownership at the time. Bennett’s original motivation for having the stones removed was to preserve them from being 

defaced by inscriptions being chiseled 

into the quartzite by recent visitors 

to the quarries (Bartlett n.d.:5; Gurley 

n.d.:13; Mitchell 1934:26; Beal 1991:42; 

Dudzik 1995:102, 103). For an example of 

such defacement, see the “BUCK SKIN 

JIM” inscription evident in Figure 36.

Bennett appears to have exhibited, or to have assisted with the display 

of, catlinite-related materials in at least 

two world’s fairs around the turn of 

the century. He is listed as having received an award for his display of “pipestone” at the Columbian Exposition 

that was held at Chicago, Illinois in 

1893 (Anonymous n.d.:68). Other examples of catlinite were also displayed 

at that exposition. A Mr. L.O. Pease of 

Pipestone received an award for his 

“miniature stationary engine made of 

pipestone,” and the Pipestone County 
99

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

World’s Fair Club (in which Bennett is 

likely to have participated) was rewarded for displaying a “mantel and hearth 

of pipestone and jasper” (Anonymous 

n.d.:56-57). The mantel may be preserved in the historic Pipestone County 

courthouse today (Alan R. Woolworth, 

letter to Thiessen, October 21, 1997).

Bennett displayed his rock artbearing quartzite slabs at the Louisiana 

Purchase Exposition at St. Louis in 1904, 

where he “was awarded a silver medal 

by the superior jury for this exhibit” 

(Rose 1911:244, footnote 1; Winchell 

1911:112). In fact, Bennett entered two 

displays in the Louisiana Purchase 

Exposition, and assisted the Pipestone 

County Women’s World’s Fair Auxiliary 

with the display of the same catlinite 

mantel that had been featured at the 

Columbian Exposition (Pipestone County 

Star, April 1, 1904). All three displays 

won awards. Bennett’s display of the 

Three Maidens rock art, termed “hieroglyphic stones” in the press of the day, 

earned a silver medal, while his catlinite display and the catlinite mantel both 

earned bronze medals (Pipestone County 

Star, September 4, 1905 and February 3, 

1906; Committee on Press and Publicity 

1904:48; Anonymous 1905:30, 32, 34, 58-

59). Bennett had 17 photographs taken 

of the quartzite slabs, in which at least 

31 slabs were depicted (Figures 35-

41). Bennett provided the Minnesota 

Historical Society with prints made 

from the original glass negatives, 

which today are in the collections of 

the Pipestone County Historical Society 

(Winchell 1911:112, 563, 564; Dudzik 

1995:102). An additional photograph 

shows Bennett posing outdoors with 

the slabs arranged along a fenceline 

(Figure 52; Dudzik 1995:103); at least 

33 slabs are visible in the photograph.

Caryl B. Storrs, who personally met Bennett in 1916, remarked that

...In his [i.e., Bennett’s] side yard is a 

magnificent collection of stone slabs 

graven with crude images of turtles, 

octopi, buffalo, elk, men, women and 

other objects by the mysterious race 

which antedated the Indians and 

which, according to his thoughtful 

speculation, throws great light upon 

their origin. But that is another story.

Unfortunately, Storrs wrote 

no more about Bennett’s collection of 

petroglyphs, although he did quote 

Bennett as saying, “Most of my mysterious carved stones came from the 

foot of the maidens” (Storrs 1916).

Bennett’s rock art collection was 

bequeathed to the Pipestone County Old 

Settlers Historical Society after his death 

in 1926. What happened to it subsequently is explained in the chapter on rock art.

Bennett was deeply involved in 

gathering and sharing information about 

the history and prehistory of the region 

in which he lived. Many of the archeologists and other early visitors to the catlinite quarries benefitted from information 

given out by him. Through his inquiring 

mind and propensity to immerse himself in local lore, much of the legacy of 

the catlinite quarries and the Pipestone 

community has been preserved.

George Amasa Perley, 18

One of the earliest attempts to record the Three Maidens petroglyphs is 

also the most enigmatic. A crude dia-
PIPESTONE

100

gram called “Perley’s chart” appears to 

depict at least some of the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs in a circular arrangement, 

probably around the massive glacial 

boulders (Figure 22). The original drawing is not known to exist, but two copies have survived. One of the two copies is among the Pipestone National 

Monument records at the Kansas 

City branch of the National Archives 

and Records Administration (Record 

Group 79, Records of the National Park 

Service, Region II (Midwest Region), 

Omaha, Nebraska, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files 

[1936-52], Pipestone National Monument, 

Decimal Code 503, Box 194). It bears two 

handwritten notations: “As the rocks 

were arranged in 1876 Perley’s chart” 

and “Pipestone-pictographs/Copied for 

HW Baker by Miss Winifred Bartlett8/15/46.” Bartlett was a Pipestone citizen and local historian, and Howard 

W. Baker at the time was Associate 

Regional Director of Region II of the 

National Park Service in Omaha. Baker 

had visited the monument on August 

14 and 15 of that year. His memorandum report stated that “While visiting with Miss Bartlett, we learned that 

she had a sketch map showing the location of these rocks before they were 

removed from the Three Maiden area. 

She made a tracing of this map which I 

have turned over to Mr. Hagen” (ibid., 

Decimal Code 200). Olaf T. Hagen 

was Regional Historian at the time.

A photocopy of “Perley’s chart” 

also exists in the archives of Pipestone 

National Monument. On the sheet 

on which the diagram appears is 

typed “Pipestone National Monument 

Petroglyphs at Three Maidens Site as 

arranged in 1876. Perley’s Chart.” The 

typed initials (LKL) of Lyle K. Linch, 

former superintendent of Pipestone 

National Monument from 1948 to 1954 

(Rothman and Holder 1992:242), and 

the date “1/13/49” appear in the lower right corner, suggesting that Linch 

was responsible for creating the copy.

The author of the original 

“Perley’s chart” is not known with certainty, although strong clues to the diagram’s probable authorship exist. A 

man named George A. Perley was deposed on September 30, 1927 in connection with litigation over the Yankton 

tribal claim to the quarries (U.S. Court 

of Claims 1927:216-221). Perley described 

himself as a retired farmer living in 

Flandreau, South Dakota, which is a approximately 27 miles west of Pipestone. 

When asked if he was familiar with “the 

history of the Pipestone Reservation,” 

Perley replied “Quite good.” Judging 

from his testimony, he seems to have 

had an interest in historical matters.

Additional information about 

this man exists in a published history 

of the Perley family (Perley 1906:598-

601) and in his obituary published on 

September 27, 1933 in the Flandreau 

Herald. George Amasa Perley was born 

in Wisconsin in 1849. After nearly completing seminary studies at Wasioja, 

Minnesota, he homesteaded near 

Flandreau, South Dakota in May of 

1876. He was a Moody County delegate 

to the constitutional convention of 1882 

and served in the South Dakota Senate 

in 1911-1912 (Perley 1906:599; Biographical 

Directory of the South Dakota Legislature 

1889-1989, vol. 2, p. 874). He possessed 

an interest in music and wrote several 

songs, a collection of which was published in a booklet titled Tune Touched 
101

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

Measured Musings (Perley 1906:598-599; 

letter from Roberta W. Williamson, 

Director, Moody County Historical 

Society, to Thiessen, October 22, 1998).

As yet, no documentation has 

been found to establish a definite connection between George A. Perley 

and “Perley’s chart,” but circumstantial evidence supporting his authorship of the diagram is strong. He was 

an educated, creative man with an interest in historical subjects. He took 

up residence in a community near the 

quarries in 1876, the year that “Perley’s 

chart” appears to have been created.

Though “Perley’s chart” (Figure 

22) appears crude in execution and conventionalized in its representation of 

petroglyphs in a uniform circle, it may 

represent a plan view of the in situ petroglyphs around the Three Maidens boulders. Together with Winchell’s petroglyph drawings that were published 

in 1884, “Perley’s chart” and Winchell’s 

drawings represent two of the earliest 

attempts to record individual motives 

in the Three Maidens petroglyph group. 

Moreover, “Perley’s chart” is the only 

known diagram that may show approximate relationships between individual glyphs before they were removed 

on quartzite slabs in 1888 or 1889 (see 

the previous discussion of Charles H. 

Bennett, as well as Chapter 11). Several 

of the individual motives shown on 

“Perley’s chart” clearly are the same images documented in more detailed fashion by later recorders, including Winchell 

(1884), Lewis (in Winchell 1911), Holmes 

(1892e), and possibly Cronau (1890) (see 

Table 19). Although its depictions are by 

no means precise renderings, “Perley’s 

chart” may ultimately satisfy some of 

the concerns expressed by W.H. Holmes 

and Garrick Mallery over what they 

viewed as Newton H. Winchell’s failure 

to record the full context and association 

of individual motives (Mallery 1893:88-

89; Winchell 1911:563-564). “Perley’s 

chart” is of considerable potential importance to more fully understanding the Three Maidens petroglyphs.

Rudolf Cronau, early 188

Rudolf Cronau (1855-1939) was a 

special correspondent for the German 

newspaper, Die Gartenlaube. His employer sent him to the United States in 1881 

to send back articles on life and landscapes in America, which he heavily illustrated with his own artwork.5

 In 1881 

and 1882 he traveled widely through 

many parts of the United States, including a visit to the catlinite quarries that 

probably took place in the summer or fall 

of 1881 (Trenton and Hassrick 1983:258). 

He produced two books about his travels in America (Cronau 1886, 1890). One 

of the books, entitled Von Wunderland zu 

Wunderland (Cronau 1886), is the equivalent of a modern-day coffee table travel 

book, offering one page of text and one 

full-page illustration for many of the 

places visited by Cronau. The Pipestone 

illustration that it contains shows a 

5

Biographical information about Cronau is drawn from two internet websites: that for the Balch 

Institute for Ethnic Studies of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania <http:balchinstitute.org/

manuscript_guide/html/cronau.html>, which houses some of Cronau’s papers; and that for 

the Philadelphia Print Shop, Ltd <http://www.philaprintshop.com/cronau.html>. Trenton 

and Hassrick’s (1983) book was especially useful in determining when he probably visited the 

quarries.
PIPESTONE

102

group of mounted Indians approaching Winnewissa Falls; neither the quarries nor the Three Maidens are visible, 

and the accompanying text is highly 

romanticized, with lengthy quotations 

from Longfellow’s “Song of Hiawatha.”

The later book (Cronau 1890), entitled In Wilden Westen, is more informative. It, too, is a romanticized account 

and repeats much information from 

Catlin and earlier authors.6 However, it 

occasionally offers details gleaned from 

Cronau’s personal observations at the 

quarries. For example, after relating 

Catlin’s tale of the Leaping Rock, and 

the young Indian who died attempting to jump to the rock and who was 

buried nearby, Cronau (1890:83) adds 

that he took one of the dead man’s molar teeth with him as a souvenir, “To be 

reminded of the person’s tragic death.” 

Cronau states that the tooth had “been 

found by a wolf.” Whether the tooth 

that he “souvenired” was actually a 

human tooth or was from some other 

mammal, is unclear from his account.

Cronau several times refers to information furnished to him by Padaniapapi, whom he describes as a 90-yearold chief of the Yanktons (which he 

calls Yanktonais). Padani-apapi told 

Cronau (1890:83) that “his people had 

repeatedly found the bones of warriors from other tribes at the foot of the 

medicine rock” (i.e., the Leaping Rock). 

Cronau (18990:82) quotes Padani-apapi at length regarding how catlinite 

was quarried during the chief’s youth: 

We visited the pipestone quarry annually in the months of July and 

August, when my fathers were still 

alive and I was a small boy. Working 

the mines was possible only during 

this time since its water had dried 

out. Before we approached the sacred 

ground, all of us followed a three day 

long purification of fasting, prayers, 

sacrifices, imploring the Great Spirit 

to expose the holy minerals, buried 

beneath the rocks. On the fourth 

day, we painted ourselves and began 

working. Each warrior picked up a 

block of stone and smashed it against 

the rocks until they crumbled. 

Hard and thick layers of rock sometimes made this work last days or 

weeks; rocks were often colored red 

by the blood of our hands and feet.

Cronau (1890:87) states that 

Padani-apapi led the Yankton treaty 

delegation that visited Washington, 

D.C. Consequently, Padani-apapi is 

none other than the famous Yankton 

chief, Strikes-the-Ree, who is known 

to have visited the quarries as late 

as 1879. “Pal-la-ne-a-pa-pe,” or “the 

man that was struck by the Ree,” was 

one of the signatories to the Yankton 

treaty of 1858 (Kappler 1972:776-781).

Cronau (1890:87) also comments 

on the earthen enclosure a short distance 

northeast of the quarries, which he states 

was “over 2,000 feet in diameter” and 

was still visible at the time of his visit. 

However, most of his discussion of this 

feature appears to be taken from Nicollet.

Of more interest are Cronau’s 

(1890:83-85) remarks about the 

6

We are indebted to Dirk Loëbenbrück for an English translation of Cronau’s text, and to Dr. David 

T. Hughes for providing the translation for our use. Both are of Wichita State University.
103

EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QUARRIES, 17TH CENTURY – 188

Three Maidens and the nearby petroglyphs, which probably 

were in situ at the time of his visit:

Of further interest are several blocks 

of stone which weigh thousands 

of tons. One of those measure approximately 60 feet in diameter and 

10 to 15 feet in width. Several totems and symbols, representing 

the Indian visitors, are hewn into 

the red rocks. Catlin assured that 

the number of such representations 

ranged into the thousands, yet I only 

recorded about 40 to 50 of these.

Cronau’s (1890) drawings of 14 

of the petroglyphs, labeled “Indian 

Totems,” appear on page 85 of his book 

and herein are reproduced as Figure 25. 

Although many of them appear fanciful 

and he may have embellished the diagrams of what he believed to be depicted on the quartzite, at least four or five 

of his glyphs appear to match glyphs 

recorded by later investigators, which 

lends a degree of credibility to Cronau’s 

renditions in general. Intriguingly, an 

earlier account of his visit to the quarries was published in Die Gartenlaube

circa 1882-1883 as one installment of 

the column “Um die Erde” (“Around 

the Earth”; Hogarth 1986:45; Cronau 

n.d.).7 A larger group of glyphs, drawn 

by Cronau, appears in the article (on 

page 86 of the magazine) and is comprised of 22 single glyphs or groups 

of possibly associated motifs (Figure 

11-7). Some of these glyphs appear to 

correlate with specific motifs depicted in the 1890 book, and some do not. 

Detailed comparison of the two groups 

of renderings should be undertaken, 

and such comparison should be expanded to petroglyph motifs recorded 

earlier and later than Cronau’s visit.

Richard Franklin Pettigrew and 

Frederick W. Pettigrew, 188

Two brothers, Richard F. and 

Frederick W. Pettigrew, who were 

prominent citizens of Sioux Falls, South 

Dakota, in the late nineteenth century, 

also possessed an interest in antiquarian matters (Hoskins and Rambow 

1987). Richard F. Pettigrew was a U.S. 

Senator and businessman in Sioux Falls 

(Olson 1982). His brother, Frederick 

W. Pettigrew, actively investigated and 

wrote about local archeological sites, 

particularly the ancient village and 

mounds at the mouth of Blood Run 

Creek on the Big Sioux River several 

miles southeast of Sioux Falls. However, 

he also visited the catlinite quarries at an 

unspecified date, probably in the 1880s.

In an 1891 newspaper article 

which focused largely on the Blood Run 

Site, he pondered some of the archeological remains he saw at the quarries, 

particularly relating to the age of the 

petroglyphs there, which he probably 

observed in situ (Pettigrew 1891:14):

7

David Rambow, personal communication to Thiessen, 2005. A photocopy of the article was graciously provided to the authors by Mr. Rambow, who purchased the newspaper excerpt in a 

Bavarian bookshop. Unfortunately, the date of publication and volume, issue, and exact page 

numbers are not known. Comparison of the yet-to-be-translated text of the magazine article with 

that in the In Wilden Westen book revealed an overall similarity between the two accounts, but 

some obvious differences in language as well.
PIPESTONE

104

...Several years ago I examined the 

ancient diggings at the great red 

pipestone quarry[,] have noticed also 

on later visits that the accumulation of vegetable mould in the pits as 

well as on the rubbish heaps denote 

great age, and both sod and vegetable 

mould are of the same thickness as 

that which covers the mounds in the 

village [a reference to the Blood Run 

site]. The picture writing cut into 

the smooth, weather-worn surface of 

overlying quartzite at the great red 

pipestone quarry exhibited many curious and grotesque forms, among 

which can be traced the turtle, fox, 

skunk and bear. Tradition gives us no 

explanation of this, neither can any of 

the present race of Indians enlighten 

us upon that subject. The peculiar 

dry moss that grows so slowly upon 

smooth rock surfaces has spread itself 

persistently over these picture writings, requiring undoubtedly the same 

lapse of time as the formation of the 

vegetable mould upon the mounds, 

in the pits and on the rubbish heaps. 

Whoever the people were that quarried the pipestone, made the pictures, 

built the mounds and the fort, I am 

unable to say; but I do believe it was 

all done by one and the same people 

at about the same time, and that 

they were the mound builders from 

the Ohio, or their kindred tribes...

The same article, virtually 

verbatim, was published ten years 

later in the Bulletin of the Minnesota 

Academy of Science (Pettigrew 1901).

Both men left extensive collections of personal and professional papers, which today are housed in the 

Siouxland Heritage Museums in Sioux 

Falls (Olson 1982). A search of these 

materials may reveal further information about F.W. Pettigrew’s visit to the 

catlinite quarries, and perhaps also correspondence with George Perley and 

Charles Bennett, educated contemporaries who shared an interest in antiquarian matters (Alan R. Woolworth, 

personal communication to Thiessen).
105

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S –1980

This chapter reviews the research 

conducted by professional investigators 

who visited the archeological resources 

in the vicinity of the catlinite quarries 

beginning in the 1870s. Their researches at the quarries are distinguished 

from the activities of men with avocational interest in the quarries, such as 

Perley and Bennett, by their legacy of 

systematically recorded information. 

American archeology was in its infancy 

during the latter part of the nineteenth 

century, but the fame of the catlinite 

quarries early attracted the attention 

of men who sought to investigate and 

record the quarries and the diverse archeological resources found near them. 

Early interest in the archeological resources at the quarries was intense, as 

evidenced by the visits of six investigators within the space of 30 years (between 1877/78 and 1905), three of them 

from the Smithsonian Institution within the space of 11 years. After 1905, the 

quarries and nearby features received 

little attention from archeologists for 

the next 44 years. In 1949, 12 years after 

the establishment of Pipestone National 

Monument, the first National Park 

Service archeologist visited the quarries. Since then other archeologists have 

intermittently visited the quarries for 

various purposes up to the present time.

Newton H. Winchell, ca. 1877-1

The earliest of these men, and the 

first to publish depictions of the rock 

art at the Three Maidens, was a professional geologist. Newton H. Winchell 

served as the Minnesota State Geologist 

from 1872 to 1900 (Nute and Ackerman 

1935:81). Winchell probably visited 

Pipestone County and the quarries 

sometime in 1877 during his official geological researches in the state (Winchell 

1884:542). In the annual report of the 

Geological and Natural History Survey 

of Minnesota for that year ([Winchell] 

1878), he published a description of the 

geology of Pipestone County and neighboring Rock County. In addition to describing the quarries in some detail, as 

well as the chemical composition of catlinite, Winchell ([Winchell] 1878:108-109) 

also commented on the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs, which he observed in situ:

On the surface of the glaciated 

quartzyte about these boulders [i.e., 

the Three Maidens], which is kept 

clean by the rebound of the winds, 

are a great many hieroglyphic inscriptions, which were made by 

pecking out the rock with some 

sharp-pointed instrument. They are 

of different sizes and dates, the latter being evinced by their manner of 

crossing and interfering, also by a 

difference in the weight of the instrument used. They generally represent some animal, such as the turtle, 

wolf, bear, badger, buffalo, elk, and 

the human form. The “crane’s-foot 

is the most common...The Indians 

regard the “Three Maidens,” represented by the three larger boulders, 

as the maids from whom the tribes 

sprung after the destructive anger 

of the Manitou had slain the people. 

It would seem as if any warrior or 

hunter who had been fortunate in 

the chase and happened to pass here, 

left his tribute of thanks to the Great 

Spirit in a rude representation of his 

game, and perhaps a figure of himself, 
PIPESTONE

10

on the rocks about these boulders. In 

some cases there is a connection of 

several figures by a continuous line, 

chipped in the surface of the rock in 

the same manner, as if some legend 

or adventure were narrated, but for 

the most part the figures are isolated. 

This is the “sacred ground” of the 

locality. There are hieroglyphics at 

no other place around here, though 

there is abundance of bare rock.

In a later geological report on 

Pipestone County, Winchell, assisted by 

Warren Upham (Winchell and Upham 

1884:555-560), repeated much of this information virtually verbatim, and added:

...The excavation of the surface of 

the rock is very slight, generally 

not exceeding a sixteenth of an 

inch, and sometimes only enough 

to leave a tracing of the designed 

form. The hardness of the rock 

was a barrier to deep sculpturing 

with the imperfect instruments 

of the aborigines; but it has effectually preserved the rude forms 

that were made. The fine glacial 

scratches that are abundantly 

scattered over this quartzyte, indicate the tenacity with which 

it retains all such impressions, 

and will warrant the assignment 

of any date to these inscriptions 

that may be called for within the 

human period. Yet it is probable 

that they date back to no very 

great antiquity. They pertain at 

least to the dynasty of the present Indian tribes. The totems of 

the turtle and the bear, which 

are known to have been powerful among the clans of the native 

races in America at the time of 

the earliest European knowledge 

of them, and which exist to this 

day, are the most frequent objects 

represented. The “crane’s foot,” 

or “turkey-foot,” or “bird-track,” 

terms which refer to the same 

totem-sign, the snipe, is not only 

common on these rocks but is 

seen among the rock inscriptions 

of Ohio, and was one of the totems of the Iroquois of New York.

Winchell and Upham’s report 

contains the first published depictions 

of actual glyphs, probably recorded 

during Winchell’s 1877 visit to the quarries. Forty glyphs are shown at onequarter size in four plates in his report 

(Winchell and Upham 1884:Plates I, J, K, 

L), and are reproduced herein as Figure 

24. These plates were reprinted in a collection of catlinite quarry-related articles 

edited by Alan R. Woolworth (1983:15-

18). Concerning these depictions, 

Winchell and Upham (1884:560) state:

The illustrations seen on plates I, J, 

K, L, are approximately one fourth 

the size of the inscriptions. There are 

others that are very indistinct, and 

some that are unintelligible from imperfect or designless cutting. Figure 

17 is deeply cut, and was partly hid by 

overgrowing turf. Figure 24, having 

its diametral lines agreeing with the 

cardinal points of the compass, may 

be intended to express the line of the 

horizon, and the points north, south, 

east and west; and it may be so recent as to have been suggested by the 

modern compass. Figure 31 was interpreted, according to Mr. Sweet, by 

a Sioux Indian from Flandreau, with 

these words, “Indian kill elk, three 

miles,” pointing toward the south. 
107

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Figure 33, which interferes with figure 37, is the earlier of the two, as indicated by the difference in cutting.

The “Mr. Sweet” mentioned 

here, is Daniel Sweet, who homesteaded 

in Pipestone County in 1874 and was 

one of the first white settlers in the region. He and Charles H. Bennett platted the Pipestone town site in 1876 (Rose 

1911:320; Pipestone County Genealogical 

Society 1991:31; Pipestone County 

Genealogical Society and Pipestone 

County Historical Society 2000:51-52).

Though Winchell’s illustrations 

of the Three Maidens petroglyphs appear somewhat fanciful and several 

cannot be matched with later, more accurate drawings of individual glyphs, 

several of them (Winchell’s figures 3-

4, 7-8, 12-13, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26-27, 30, 33, 

35-39, and possibly 5, 9, 11, 19, 22, 25, 34, 

and 40; see Table 19) do resemble later 

renditions, lending substantial credibility to Winchell’s early drawings.

Winchell later (1911) published a 

major compilation of information about 

Minnesota’s archeology entitled The 

Aborigines of Minnesota, based largely 

on the surveys conducted by Theodore 

Hayes Lewis and Alfred J. Hill between 

1880 and 1895. Included in that work 

are detailed drawings of 79 individual 

glyphs recorded by Lewis in 1889 after 

the petroglyphs were removed from 

their original location near the Three 

Maidens (Winchell 1911:Plate VIII). 

Winchell (1911:565), who had personally observed the petroglyphs in situ 

before their removal, remarked that 

they occur “on the quartzite only, at 

and around the base of the six boulders, mostly on the south side, but 

there are a few on the north side and 

on the quartzite between the boulders.”

In this later work, Winchell 

also defended himself from criticism 

earlier received from W.H. Holmes of 

the Smithsonian Institution, to the effect that though he had published individual glyph depictions in his 1884 

article, he had failed to record the spatial relationships between the in situ 

glyphs. Since the petroglyphs had 

since been removed from their original locations without careful recordation, Holmes maintained (Mallery 

1893:88-89), this potentially important 

relational information was lost forever:

The trouble with the figures copied 

and published by Prof. Winchell is 

that they are not arranged in the 

original order. It will now be impossible to correct this entirely, as most 

of the stones have been taken up and 

removed...The Winchell drawings 

were evidently drawn by eye and 

have a very large personal equation; 

besides, they are mixed up while appearing to be in some order. The few 

groups that I was able to get [during an 1892 visit to Pipestone] are, 

it seems to me, of more interest than 

all the single figures you could put 

in a book. There can be little doubt 

that in the main this great group of 

pictures was arranged in definite order, agreeing with the arrangements 

of mythical personages and positions 

usual in the aboriginal ceremonials of the region. It is a great pity 

that this original order has been destroyed, but the inroads of relic hunters and inscription cranks made it 

necessary to take up the stones. One 

large stone was taken to Minneapolis 
PIPESTONE

10

by Prof. Winchell. There area few 

pieces still in place. All were near 

the base of one of the great granite 

boulders, and it is said here that formerly, within the memory of the living, the place was visited by Indians 

who wished to consult the gods.

In defense, Winchell (1911:563-

564) pointed to his statement in the 

1884 article that “for the most part the 

figures are isolated,” asserting that 

this “relieves the onus of the complaint 

by Dr. W.H. Holmes.” Holmes visited Pipestone in 1892 and inspected 

the petroglyph slabs in Bennett’s possession. He wrote letters to Mallery 

from there, and Mallery’s quotation 

of Holmes is composed from the language of two such letters dated May 25 

and June 2, 1892 (Holmes 1892c, 1892d).

Though the tone of the argument between these two men appears to 

have been sharp, it is possible that each 

was unfair to the other. Holmes, perhaps, had excessive expectations about 

the information that could be gleaned 

from the spatial interrelationships of 

in situ petroglyphs, and Winchell, possibly, did not appreciate the potential 

value of recording the in situ petroglyphs in spatial relationship to one 

another when he had the opportunity.

Philetus W. Norris, 18

One of the most colorful figures 

to investigate the quarries and the antiquities associated with them was 

Philetus W. Norris. Norris’ checkered 

career included experience as a businessman, soldier, legislator, writer, poet, 

explorer, park superintendent, traveler, 

and archeologist (Chittenden 1900:303-

305; Haines 1977, 1:103 et seq.; Binkowski 

1995), Born in the state of New York in 

1821, Norris acquired a large tract of 

land near Detroit, Michigan, following the Civil War. There he established 

the town of Norris, where he published 

a newspaper, the Norris Suburban. 

Norris is perhaps best known to history as the controversial second superintendent of Yellowstone National 

Park (1877-1882) and as the recoverer 

of the remains of the famous scout, 

“Lonesome Charley” Reynolds, from 

the Little Bighorn battlefield (Gray 1963).

At various times, Norris traveled 

widely through the West (Binkowski 

1995). Through a column entitled 

“The Great West” in his newspaper, 

the Norris Suburban, and a book, The 

Calumet of the Coteau, and Other Poetical 

Legends of the Border, published in 1884, 

less than a year before his death, Norris 

published a great deal of information 

about his travels. However, his romantic disposition typically infused both 

his prose and poetry to the extent that 

even contemporary Victorian-era critics regarded his writing style as florid and tortuous at best (Haines 1977, 

1:259). An anonymous editorial about 

his book in The Word Carrier issue of 

November-December, 1886 (page 3), 

concludes that “no publisher in his sober senses would undertake the bringing out of such a collection” of writings.

Although they are not as factual 

as might be desired, it is fortunate that 

many of Norris’ writings appear to have 

survived. The Norris Suburban was in existence for only three years (1876 to 1878; 

see Binkowski 1995:9, endnote 8). Issues 

survive in at least three repositories (see 

Appendix A). A number of clippings 
109

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

from his “The Great West” column have 

also been preserved in a notebook at 

the Huntington Library at San Marino, 

California. He arranged and annotated 

the clippings, evidently in anticipation 

of publication in book form, but died in 

1885 before this could be accomplished. 

Appendix A reproduces excerpts from 

two 1877 letters from this collection 

that concern the catlinite quarries.

Norris visited the catlinite quarries at least four times, the last time as 

a practicing archeologist employed by 

the Smithsonian Institution. Little is 

known of his first two visits, other than 

brief mention of them in his writings. 

The first occurred in 1842 or 1843 when 

Norris, in the company of a party of 

Chippewas, visited the quarries to obtain catlinite. It is first mentioned in a 

published letter that Norris wrote while 

at the quarries in 1877 (see Appendix A):

Niccolet [sic] backed by the 

Government visited it [i.e., the quarries] in 1838 or ‘39; and in 1843 myself a Frenchman and five Chippewa 

braves reached it from the St. Peter’s 

river [i.e., the Minnesota River], 

but were surrounded upon the 

quarry by such numbers of Sioux 

warriors that we gladly escaped 

with our hair but no pipestone...

Norris again mentioned this visit 

in the report detailing his 1882 archeological researches at the quarries (see 

Appendix B), although he stated the date 

as 1842: “My first visit to this Quarry 

was for pipestone with a small party of 

Chippewa Indians in 1842...” In the same 

report (Appendix B) he elaborated about 

this visit slightly in his discussion of the 

earthwork northeast of the quarries, 

which he noted as a possible defensive 

position during his flight from the Sioux:

In 1842 then in ignorance of his visit 

[i.e., the visit of the Nicollet party] I 

was led by a Chippewa Indian comrade to the crescent shaped works and 

then to the large circular one with 

the view of judging their fitness for 

defense if necessary from the Sioux 

and noted them particularly, and not 

deeming them defensible with our 

small party, we did not in our subsequent retreat attempt to reach them 

or to make a stand in a similar circular work a mile or two Northerly 

of it, which I have not since seen, 

but learn that such a work in that 

direction is now under cultivation.

Norris commented on the difference in the height of the earthwork 

when seen in 1842-43 and again in 1882:

My observation was so careful, and 

recollection remains so clear that although I took no notes at the time of 

my first visit, I have no hesitancy in 

vouching that these embankments are 

now so much lower than they were at 

the time as to indicate they are modern work, but certainly older than 

claimed by an aged Yankton Sioux...

This is a reference to information provided in 1879 by the famous 

Yankton chief, Strikes-the-Ree, to 

Pipestone resident Charles H. Bennett, 

who had an interest in antiquarian matters (see Appendix E). Strikes-the-Ree 

believed the earthwork had been constructed some 90 or 100 years previous, 

during a war between the Omahas and 

the Sissetons for possession of the quarries (Rose 1911:246, footnote 2; Thiessen 
PIPESTONE

110

1998:47). Dubious that the earthwork 

was that recent in age, Norris added:

Some of the Chippeways of our 

party claimed to have been there 

during that war, and certainly well 

knew their location and character, 

and planned in reference to them in 

case of an emergency before leaving 

Mankato, but did not claim to know 

when or by whom they were built.

Thomas (1894:44), who later 

published much of the information in 

Norris’s 1882 report, briefly referred 

to Norris’ 1842 observation of one of 

the two enclosures earlier noted by 

Nicollet, but did not reiterate any of 

the meager details from Norris’ report.

Norris’ second visit to the quarries occurred in 1857, but little is known 

of it. He observed that the mound previously commented on by Catlin “but little 

exceeded 6 feet in height” at that time 

(Appendix B; see also Thomas 1894:42).

Norris again visited the quarries in 1877, en route to assume his post 

as superintendent of the newly-established Yellowstone National Park. The 

quarries were mentioned in two letters 

published in his “The Great West” column, herein partially reproduced in 

Appendix A. His visit is described in 

a letter written at the quarries on June 

4, 1877. Another letter, undated but 

numbered 52, provides Norris’ colorful version of the romantic lore about 

the quarries being the peaceable resort 

of all tribes of American Indians until 

the Sioux took control of them and prevented other tribes from visiting there.

The June 4 letter is the more informative of the two. It mentions his 

1842-43 visit, describes the geology of 

the immediate quarry area, tells the story of the quarries as the source of material for peace pipes, the “birth place” 

of the American Indians, and a place 

of peace among tribes. Most of this 

lore, of course, was available to Norris 

in the earlier writings of Catlin and 

Nicollet. The letter also provides some 

comments about Catlin’s earlier observations about the Three Maidens boulders and about a burial mound near 

the Leaping Rock. Norris reiterated the 

story that the tramping of buffalo over 

time revealed the catlinite deposit to 

American Indians. As to his own activities while at the quarries in 1877, Norris 

relates that he “and two assistants” secured 150 pounds of catlinite, and he 

personally jumped onto the famous 

Leaping Rock, finding that it required 

“no special effort or danger in the feat,” 

despite his age of 56 years at the time.

Norris also mentions observing the inscription made by members 

of the Nicollet party, as well as petroglyphs and, possibly, pictographs:

Near it [i.e., the Leaping Rock] is 

Niccollet’s [sic] record of his visit 

which nearly the only legible one, as 

the Indian certainly never possessed 

tools capable of carving the glazed 

surface upon which our steel tools 

received more impression than they 

made; still there are some faint etchings 

and paintings of former councils, and 

stalwart warriors of fable and famealso imprints upon the rocks that the 

credulous superstition of the red men 

have ever viewed as the footprints of 

the Buffalo eating war Eagle Manitau 

[sic] of the Legend days agone.
111

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Following his termination as superintendent of Yellowstone National 

Park, Norris was employed by the 

Smithsonian Institution as one of three 

permanent field workers in the Division 

of Mound Exploration, directed by Cyrus 

Thomas (Smith 1981, 1985; Brown 1981; 

Gibbon 1998a). It was the job of these 

field workers to visit various regions of 

the country, recording and often digging into aboriginal mounds at Thomas’ 

instructions. Despite his relatively advanced age (over 60 years), Norris pursued this work energetically until shortly before his death from malaria early 

in 1885 (Perttula and Price 1984:11). One 

of his first field destinations was the 

catlinite quarries, with which he was 

familiar from his three prior visits.

Norris visited the quarries in 

August of 1882, and “opened” ten 

mounds in their vicinity on August 29 

and 30. On February 10, 1883, Norris sent 

his “preliminary” report of this and other work to W.H. Holmes, who was then 

associated with the Bureau of Ethnology 

in an honorary manner (Meltzer and 

Dunnell 1992:xiv). This report survives, 

in part, in the National Anthropological 

Archives at the Smithsonian Institution, 

and is reproduced herein as Appendix 

B. Unfortunately, pages 10 and 11 of 

the report are missing and none of the 

listed enclosures have been located. 

Nevertheless, the report provides more 

detail about Norris’ mound excavations 

at the quarries than Cyrus Thomas, 

the director of the Division of Mound 

Exploration, included in his comprehensive report on the activities of the 

Division (Thomas 1894). In the published 

report, Thomas synopsized Norris’ description of the mounds he investigated 

near the quarries, but ignored Norris’ 

largely speculative and fanciful conclusions and interpretations of their origin.

Norris conducted the first systematic archeological research at what 

was later designated the Pipestone 

National Monument. He partially excavated ten mounds or mound-like 

features in the vicinity of the quarries, 

seven of which today would lie on monument land. The other three (which he 

numbered mounds 8, 9, and 10) were associated with the earthwork feature that 

once existed approximately two miles 

northeast of the quarries (see Appendix 

B). His preliminary report (Appendix 

B) provides detailed notes on his excavations and the contents of the mounds, 

and this information was synopsized 

in Cyrus Thomas’ published report on 

the activities of the Division of Mound 

Exploration (Thomas 1894:42-44). 

Norris’ manuscript preliminary report 

also contains plan and profile sketches 

of mounds 1 and 3, which are reproduced in Appendix B. The information 

resulting from Norris’ mound explorations within the present-day monument 

boundaries is summarized in Table 5. 

Unfortunately, the specific locations of 

these mounds are not known today, despite the fact that a map of “the Calumet 

Cliffs & Quarry” accompanied his report but has not been located. Perhaps 

the best clue to the location of these 

mounds lies on the detailed map published in 1919 by W.H. Holmes (1919:254), 

who visited the quarries in 1892, ten 

years after Norris’ visit, and who was 

the immediate recipient of Norris’ preliminary report. Holmes’ map shows 

the location of eight features labeled 

“mounds,” nearly the same number of 

mounds reported by Norris close to the 

quarries. Holmes certainly knew the 
PIPESTONE

112

Mound no. Location Diameter Height Contents Comments1 Not specified 28 ft 3 ft Dark colored soil mixed with 

quartzite fragments; several pieces of catlinite including one worked

No bones were found; mound was trenched (3 ft wide) from the south to the center, where the excavation was enlarged, then a narrower trench was contined to the northeast periphery (see sketch inAppendix B)

2 North of Pipestone 

Creek, according to Catlin painting

Not specified 10 ft 

(Catlin in 1836) 6 ft in 1857

Dark colored soil; wood fragments, including a whip handle; rock fragments piled into a cairn; a perforated bear claw and glass beads were taken by Norris

Catlin stated that it was built ca. 1834 and contained the body of an Indian killed by a fall from the Leaping Rock; trenched from the south to and beyondthe center; opened and looted prior to 1877

3 “amidst the large 

angular blocks of rock from the Cliff, and upon a slope towards the stream below the falls”

25 ft 3 ft dark soil; rock fragments; 

several catlinite fragments

A 4-ft trench was dug from the south “nearly across it” (see sketch in Appendix B)

4 “beside an ancient 

trail near its rocky ford of the creek”

58 ft longNE-SW;34 ft wide

4 ft dark soil; rock fragments; 

mixed human and animal bones; catlinite fragments (one numbered 45 in Norris’ collection

A 4-ft trench was dug “Southerly across the middle of the mound and Shafts sunk in several other portions of it;” Norris concluded the mound had been “thoroughly upturned and replaced at some recent period”

5 “near the South fork 

of the creek;” below the falls

25 ft 2.5 ft dark soil A 4-ft excavation was dug in the center 

to bedrock

Table 5. Mounds investigated at the catlinite quarries by P.W. Norris in 1882. Information taken from his preliminary report submitted to W.H. Holmes on February 10, 1883.
113

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Table 5. Concluded

Mound no. Location Diameter Height Contents Comments6 “upon the rock but 

turf covered margin of the Sloughy channel of the creek about 100 yards above the falls where the slight Easterly dip of the...bed rock allows a deep alluvial deposit nearly to the brink of the falls”

35 ft 6 ft dark soil; large rocks piled 

above charcoal or ashes; human and coyote catlinite fragments; stone perforator marked 94 in Norris’ collection

Trenched to the center, “and another crossing it in the center”

7 “across the sloughy 

stream and somewhat nearer the Cliff than No. 6”

30 ft 4 ft dark soil; rock fragments; 

catlinite fragments; traces of decayed bones

A 3-ft wide trench was dug from the south side to the center
PIPESTONE

114

details of Norris’ research at the quarries, and it is reasonable to surmise that 

he looked for the same mounds investigated by Norris, which may have shown 

evidence of Norris’ earlier digging. 

However, it is apparent from Norris’ 

report (Appendix B) that more mounds 

existed in the vicinity of the quarries 

than he dug into, and some of them had 

been previously looted by local people:

Neither the developments made or 

the time that I could properly spare 

justified opening the few remaining mounds below the falls and 

hence I ascended above them, and 

some mounds recently opened by 

Messers Bennett and George &c

Norris evidently tired of digging into what he concluded were 

previously disturbed mounds, so 

he went farther from the quarries to 

seek intact mounds (Appendix B):

As this [referring to mound 7] 

was also the result of the recent 

researches of Messers Bennett 

& George in adjacent mounds I 

went 2 miles North Easterly...

Norris collected several artifacts 

during his research at the quarries, 

which he sent back to the Smithsonian 

Institution. In November, 1997, Douglas 

Scott visited the Smithsonian’s Museum 

Support Center in Suitland, Maryland, 

where he located four catalog lots of artifacts collected by P.W. Norris during his 

1882 excavations at Pipestone (Table 6).

Although Norris’ activities at 

the quarries focused largely on mound 

features, the petroglyphs did not escape his attention. The letter he sent 

to W.H. Holmes in 1883 mentions that 

he “traced many of the totem etchings found upon the rocks,” and his 

preliminary report itself makes brief 

mention of this work (Appendix B):

The roll of full sized copies of etchings are from a few of the countless 

numbers found upon the vitreous 

flesh colored rocks around the huge 

granite boulders between which tradition and history alike the Indians 

believed was the residence of the 

two Genii guardians of the Sacred 

Quarry and to whom propitiatory 

offerings were always made before 

attempting to secure a fragment of 

this rock and hence the etchings, 

are doubtless the totem marks of 

the respective natives or clans, and 

are accurate as they [were] carefully 

copied by a far better artist than myself from the impressions upon thick 

soft paper well pressed upon them.

From this it is apparent that 

someone other than Norris, perhaps 

someone from the local Pipestone community, made a series of full-size tracings or rubbings of the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs, which would have been 

in situ at that time. Early in his report, 

Norris acknowledges the assistance “of 

Mr. H.C. [sic] Bennett of Pipestone [i.e., 

Charles H. Bennett], Miss Nellie F. and 

Mr. G.C. George,” one or more of whom 

may have created the tracings.1 The re1

We are indebted to David Rambow for pointing out that Gilman C. George was the father of 

Charles Bennett’s wife, Adelaide B. George, and that Nellie F. George was Adelaide’s sister. See 

also footnote 1 in Appendix B.
115

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

A071531 5 pieces of 

catlinite

Pipestone P. W. Norris 1883 1 frag. was cut by 

a stone tool

A071611 Large chert 

biface

Pipestone City 

mound

P. W. Norris 1883 Catalog records 

indicate collected 

projectile point and 

flakes are missing

A071612 Chert drill 

fragment

Pipestone City 

mound

P. W. Norris 1883

A071613 Large sidenotched chert 

biface/projectile 

point

Pipestone C. T. Thomas from

P. W. Norris 1883

A170303 Iron axe head and 

large chunk of 

Sioux quartzite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

852; quartzite has 

possible edge 

battering

A170303 3 Sioux quartzite 

hammerstones, 

and 2 pieces Sioux 

quartzite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

852

A170303 6 large quartzite 

hammerstones

Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. no. 

852

A170303 8 large quartzite 

hammerstones

Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. no. 

852

A170304 7 pieces of 

catlinite, 1 piece of 

Sioux quartzite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

853;

1 catlinite frag. is 

scored

A170304 11 pieces catlinite, 

5 pieces Sioux 

quartzite, 5 pottery 

sherds

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

853; sherds are 

not provenienced 

and may not be 

from the area.

A170304 19 large pieces

 of catlinite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. no. 

853

A170317 Large piece 

catlinite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

859

A170317 7 pieces catlinite, 

1 catlinite pipe 

blank

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

869; pipe blank 

Holmes 1919:261, 

Fig. 132a; catlinite 

pieces are worked

Table 6. Artifacts from Pipestone in the collections of the U.S. National Museum of Natural 

History, Smithsonian Institution, July 8, 1998.

Catalog No. Identification Find location Collector Comments
PIPESTONE

11

A170317 22 large pieces 

catlinite, 1 piece 

Sioux quartzite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. no. 

869; 2 catlinite 

frags worked with 

metal tools, 1 is 

depicted in

Holmes 1919:261,

Fig 132c

A170318 1 piece Sioux 

quartzite

Pipestone W. H. Holmes Old BAE cat. no. 

870; quartzite is 

scribed by metal 

tools, probably a 

compass

A170318 9 catlinite discs Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. No. 

870; hand inked 

with numbers. 

#5 is in Holmes 

1919:261, Fig. 

132e; #46 is in 

Holmes 1919:261, 

Fig 132b

A170319 4 large and 1 

small Sioux 

quartzite 

hammerstones

Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. no. 

871

A170319 8 large Sioux 

quartzite 

hammerstones, 

2 large grooved 

mauls

Pipestone W. H. Holmes 

1892

Old BAE cat. no. 

871

A417984 9 samples of 

pipestone

Pipestone 

National

Monument

Richard Slatter 

11/08/1957

All pieces show 

evidence of

working with

metal tools

Table 6. Concluded

Catalog No. Identification Find location Collector Comments
117

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

port also indicates that “1 Long roll of 

totem tracings” was enclosed, along 

with “11 Sketches of painted totems;” 

however, these enclosures have not 

been located. The reference to “painted 

totems” suggests that Norris may also 

have observed pictographs at the quarries, which is also suggested by the reference to “paintings” in his 1877 letter.

The earliest published mention 

of Norris’ recordation of the rock art 

at the catlinite quarries was made by 

Garrick Mallery (1886:23) in his study, 

“Pictographs of the North American 

Indians. A Preliminary Paper:”

Mr. P.W. Norris has discovered 

large numbers of pecked totemic 

characters on the horizontal face 

of the ledges of rock at Pipe Stone 

Quarry, Minnesota, of which he has 

presented copies. The custom prevailed, it is stated, for each Indian 

who gathered stone (Catlinite) for 

pipes to inscribe his totem upon 

the rock before venturing to quarry 

upon this ground. Some of the cliffs 

in the immediate vicinity were of 

too hard a nature to admit of pecking or scratching, and upon these 

the characters were placed in colors.

Mallery (1893:87) repeated this 

information almost verbatim in his later 

work, “Picture-writing of the American 

Indians,” and added that “Mr. Norris 

distinguished bird tracks, the outline 

of a bird resembling a pelican, deer, 

turtle, a circle with an interior cross, 

and a human figure.” Unfortunately, 

Mallery did not publish the tracings 

or rubbings supplied by Norris, nor 

is their present whereabouts known. 

The intriguing reference to colored 

characters, or pictographs, presumably is based on now-lost information provided to Mallery by Norris.

Norris (1884:176) himself published another reference to possible pictographs at the quarries, in connection 

with a florid and romanticized discussion 

of the burial of Indian dead in the earth 

or in cairns in the vicinity of the quarries:

The countless numbers of these cairns 

in the valley, upon the cliff, and for 

miles upon the surrounding coteau, 

literally form a sacred cemetery in a 

land of savages; and as these purpleor flesh-colored rocks are seemingly 

glazed too hard for carving with any 

tool known to these people, many 

of them and portions of the cliff are 

nearly covered with the fading painted totems of the pilgrims who have 

mouldered to dust beneath them.

If Norris or any of the other nineteenth century visitors to the 

quarries actually observed painted 

images, or pictographs there, they 

uniformly failed to record them or 

the records of them have been lost.

Norris’s preliminary report of 

his researches at the quarries may have 

stimulated interest in the famous pipestone quarries among his colleagues at 

the Smithsonian Institution. Within 

the decade that followed, two more 

Smithsonian researchers visited the 

historic quarries to investigate and 

record archeological features there.

Walter James Hoffman, 1

Walter James Hoffman was one 

of the archeological and ethnograph-
PIPESTONE

11

ic field workers of the Smithsonian 

Institution’s Bureau of Ethnology (later 

the Bureau of American Ethnology) in 

the late nineteenth century. He made 

a visit to Pipestone for the purpose of 

documenting the petroglyphs there, 

but little is known of his visit, which 

probably occurred in July or August 

1888. In his annual report of the activities of the Bureau of Ethnology 

for the fiscal year that ended June 

30, 1889, J.W. Powell (1893:xiii) simply observed that “On leaving the 

above reservations [i.e., Red Lake and 

White Earth Indian Reservations in 

Minnesota, which he visited in July], 

Mr. Hoffman proceeded to Pipestone, 

Minnesota, to copy the petroglyphs 

upon the cliffs of that historic quarry.” Efforts to locate Hoffman’s notes, 

drawings, or other documentation of 

this visit, have not been successful.

Theodore Hayes Lewis, 18

Theodore Hayes Lewis is responsible for creating the most extensive and most detailed documentation 

of the Pipestone petroglyphs that exists. 

In partnership with Alfred J. Hill, a St. 

Paul, Minnesota, civil engineer who financed his work, Lewis conducted the 

Northwestern Archaeological Survey 

between 1880 and 1895, the year of Hill’s 

death. During this time, Lewis visited 

and mapped hundreds of prehistoric 

mound groups and other archeological sites in much of the north-central 

United States (Lewis 1898; Keyes 1928; 

Finney 2001). The extensive maps and 

notes that he made are today housed 

at the Minnesota Historical Society 

(Northwestern Archaeological Survey 

1991; Dobbs 1991). The Society also 

possesses 16 sheets of Lewis’ original 

drawings, depicting a total of 80 motifs 

(Alan R. Woolworth, letter to Thiessen, 

November 10, 1998). Each sheet measures 20 by 30 inches (ibid.). In correspondence with a publisher, Lewis 

described the method by which he recorded images. This information has 

been published (current as of August 

3, 1998) on the internet at (http://www.

geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/2596/

lewisrubbings.html). He first pencilled 

an outline of the motif directly on the 

stone, then made a rubbing of the outlined image by laying greased tissue paper over it, and then re-outlined the rubbing for later reduction and publication.

Among the places Lewis visited 

was Pipestone, Minnesota, where he 

traced and described the petroglyphs 

that had recently been removed from the 

bedrock underlying the Three Maidens. 

The notes he made during his visit, 

which occurred between August 9 and 

14, 1889, are contained in two field notebooks. His notes on the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs, plus some miscellaneous 

observations about petroglyphs and 

the manner in which he recorded them, 

are contained in a notebook entitled 

“Record of Pictographs” (Northwestern 

Archaeological Survey 1991:Reel 7, 

frames 705-707, 727-731). A transcription of them appears in Appendix C.

At the time that Lewis visited 

Pipestone, the petroglyphs had already 

been removed from their original location near the Three Maidens and the 

resulting slabs of quartzite were in 

the possession of Charles H. Bennett, 
119

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

a prominent early citizen of Pipestone 

(Winchell 1911:564-565).2 Lewis carefully made notes and tracings of the individual glyphs on 35 of Bennett’s slabs 

(see Appendix C), which were later published by Newton H. Winchell (1911:Plate 

VIII). These drawings constitute the 

most detailed and accurate depictions 

of the Three Maidens petroglyphs published to date. In an August 11 letter to 

Hill from Pipestone Lewis (1889a) wrote:

During the last four days I have been 

copying pictographs. Also made 

a copy of the Nicollet inscription.

There are no pictures on the 3 

maids nor at the old pipestone quarries. They only existed on the rocks 

around the 3 maids. I have 3 hammers and 2 flat rocks with pictures 

on them and may get a large piece 

tommorow [sic] which I found yesterday, all of which I will ship in a 

few days. When I send the tracings, 

look them over, but please fold them 

back the same as when received.

From this letter, it appears that 

Lewis planned to ship possibly three 

petroglyph slabs to St. Paul. A letter dated the following day, August 12 (Lewis 

1889b), may also allude to one of these slabs:

If I get the new stone it will weigh 

75 or 100 lbs so I will ship it by 

freight via Manitoba Road, in your 

name. better have Dolan call at 

[the] manitoba [sic] depot saturday 

and take them direct to the house.

In his notes, Lewis divided the 

Three Maidens petroglyphs into three 

classes presumed to have been created 

in different ways (see Appendix C). 

Although these conclusions were later 

accepted and published by Winchell 

(1911:564), their validity has not been 

demonstrated and they must be regarded as speculation. Lewis also stated 

(Appendix C; see also Winchell 1911:565) 

that the petroglyphs were originally 

found in the Sioux quartzite “at and 

around the base of the 6 boulders [i.e., 

the Three Maidens] mostly on the south 

side, but there were a few a the North 

side and on the quartz between the 

boulders.” Since Lewis is not known to 

have personally observed in situ petroglyphs at the Three Maidens, this information may have been provided to 

him by Bennett or other local persons. 

Lewis’ chief contribution to knowledge 

of the Three Maidens petroglyphs lies in 

his detailed drawings of many of them.

William Henry Holmes, 189

Four years after Hoffman’s departure, the quarries were again visited 

by a Smithsonian Institution researcher, William Henry Holmes. Holmes 

2

Interestingly, a brief note in the Pipestone County Star newspaper for August 16, 1889, mentions 

Lewis’ visit:

Prof. T.H. Lewis...has been in the city the past week taking notes. He visited the sacred pipestone

quarries and spent a day or two in taking copies of the hieroglyphics on the rocks near the three

maidens and falls. He also dug into the Indian graves near the quarries and spent several days in

the vicinity of the old forts east of this city.

While this note seems to suggest that petroglyphs were still in situ at the Three Maidens at the 

time of Lewis’ visit, his description of them on individual slabs in Bennett’s possession (see 

Appendix C) testifies to their removal prior to his visit. The authors are indebted to David 

Rambow for pointing out this intriguing note.
PIPESTONE

120

worked during the 1870s as a scientific illustrator and geologist on the 

United States Geological Survey of the 

Territories and as an employee of the U.S. 

Geological Survey after its formation in 

1879 (Meltzer and Dunnell 1992; Gibbon 

1998b; Fernlund 2000). Although not 

salaried by the Smithsonian, Holmes 

conducted numerous archeological researches for the Bureau of Ethnology in 

the 1880s. In 1889 he was hired to supervise the Bureau’s “archeologic fieldwork” (Meltzer and Dunnell 1992:xiv-xv; 

Gibbon 1998b). It was in this capacity 

that he visited Pipestone, Minnesota, and 

the nearby quarries in 1892. His visit to 

Pipestone presented an opportunity to 

blend his professional interests in geology, Native American mining of stone, and 

anthropology (Fernlund 2000:130-132).

Unlike previous Smithsonian 

researchers who visited the quarries, 

Norris and Hoffman, Holmes observed 

a wider range of archeological features 

near the quarries and later summarized them in print. The map that he 

published served as the most detailed 

archeological base map of the quarries 

for nearly 80 years (Holmes 1919:254), 

and it continues today to provide the 

only known documentation for more 

than 300 features-mounds and circular stone alignments-that have largely 

vanished from the historical landscape 

of the quarries. He deserves recognition as one of the most important scientific chroniclers of the quarries.3

Holmes spent ten days visiting the 

quarries in May and June, 1892 (Powell 

1896:xxviii; Holmes 1892c, 1892d). His 

visit was briefly reported in the Pipestone 

County Star newspaper for June 3, 1892:

Prof. W.H. Holmes, of the bureau 

of Ethnology of the Smithsonian 

Institute [sic], at Washington, D.C., 

who has been here the past few days 

collecting data in regard to our historic quarries, has nearly completed 

his labors. Mr. Holmes is at present 

engaged in studying up the PreColumbian quarrying industries of 

the United States for the Smithsonian 

Institute. While here he has taken 

photographs of the quarries, the ledge, 

three maidens, falls, etc., and also 

etchings of the Indian hieroglyphics on the rocks on the reservation. 

Mr. Holmes also takes exact measurements of the elevations around 

the quarries and when he reaches 

Washington will make a bas-relief 

map of the reservation on a scale of 

100 feet to the inch. This map will 

be made in putty after which it will 

be cast in plaster and then painted 

in natural colors and when finished 

will be a perfect miniature of the 

quarries. This map will be on exhibition at the World’s Fair in Chicago 

next year, after which it will be kept 

at the Institute. Cuts of the quarries 

and falls will be made and published 

in a volume devoted to this subject 

to be issued by the government in a 

short time. Mr. Holmes has been aided greatly in his work here by C.H. 

Bennett, L.H. Moore and others.4

3

Despite this, his other notable scientific achievements often overshadow his catlinite quarries 

study. His visit to Pipestone, for example, is not even mentioned in a recent book-length biography (Fernlund 2000).

4

The authors are indebted to David Rambow for pointing out this newspaper article.
121

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

It is not known whether the bas-relief map mentioned 

in this article was ever made.

After his visit to Pipestone, 

Holmes presented a paper, in which he 

discussed the quarries, before the annual meeting of the American Association 

for the Advancement of Science the following August (Holmes 1892a). He also 

published expanded versions of that paper in later years (Holmes 1907, 1919). His 

most complete description of the quarries and associated features is presented 

in the 1919 article, which also contains 

his detailed map of the immediate vicinity of the quarries (Figure 12). In addition to the quarries (which he labeled 

as “ancient” and “recent”), the Nicollet 

inscription, the falls, and the Three 

Maidens with associated petroglyphs, 

the map depicts the locations of eight 

mounds and more than 300 small circular symbols that probably represent the 

“camp sites and lodge rings” mentioned 

in his text (Holmes 1919:254, 255). The 

last is probably a reference to circular 

stone alignments or “tipi rings” believed 

to have weighed down the edges of hide 

or canvas tipi coverings. Unfortunately, 

the accuracy and precision with which 

archeological features were plotted on 

the map are not known; no explanation 

of how the map was constructed exists and no manuscript version of it has 

been located. However, it is likely that 

Holmes took considerable care to make 

an exact map, which may be the basis 

for the published version. In an April 

12, 1898 letter to the Commissioner 

of Indian Affairs (quoted at length in 

Gurley n.d.:16-19), J.W. Powell, director of the Bureau of Ethnology, stated:

The locality was visited in 1892 by 

a collaborator of the Bureau, and extensive examinations and planetable 

surveys were made. The examinations and surveys were designed 

as the basis for a special report, the 

preparation of which has thus far 

been prevented by circumstances, including and [sic] unforeseen 

change in personnel. As shown by 

the plan-table [sic] sheets and accompanying photographs, the glen 

of Pipestone Creek is a most picturesque spot in a region of monotonous character, while it abounds in 

the most extensive aboriginal quarries in the country, which furnish 

a highly significant record of aboriginal industry and philosophy...

It appears that not only did 

Holmes produce a plane table map of the 

vicinity of the quarries, but it, or a copy 

of it, was provided to the Commissioner 

of Indian Affairs. An approximately 

96 cm by 66 cm vellum, finished map 

exists in the National Anthropological 

Archives (Holmes n.d.) and may be the 

map furnished to the Commissioner. It 

differs slightly from the version published in 1919. The published map 

shows a larger number of small circles 

or “lodge” rings, particularly a group 

of 17 near Winnewissa Falls, which do 

not appear on the larger map. Also, the 

published map bears notations of “ancient” and “recent” quarry pits, which 

likewise do not appear on the larger, unpublished map, and the northernmost 

mound shown on the published map is 

not so labeled on the unpublished version. The feature labeled as a quarry 

near the falls on the published map is 

not so labeled on the unpublished map, 

where it is depicted as a body of water.
PIPESTONE

122

Figure 12. W.H. Holmes’ 1892 map of the catlinite quarries and nearby archeological features 

(from Holmes 1919:Figure 123).
123

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Probably the most interesting 

product of his visit is the notebook in 

which he made sketches and notes concerning the quarries and nearby features (Holmes 1892b). Preserved in the 

National Anthropological Archives, it 

consists of diagrams and notations made 

on 57 non-consecutively numbered pages, plus three sides of two unpaginated 

sheets. For the most part, the sketches 

are not detailed, but are made in the 

rapid sketching manner often employed 

during the nineteenth century for hurried, on-the-spot documentation (e.g., 

see Verner 1889 for explanation of similar expedient techniques employed 

for military map-making purposes). 

Several of the sketches are rough maps 

of areas near the quarries, showing the 

locations of “lodge sites” and other features. Other sketches show the Three 

Maidens and may provide valuable 

clues to the locations of petroglyphs on 

the Sioux quartzite bedrock which underlies the boulder (see Figure 54 for 

an example). Two sketches are general 

views of the vicinity, one of which appears to show one or two of the “lodge 

sites” that appear in large numbers on 

his 1919 map. At least one sketch depicts petroglyphs that may have been 

in situ around the Three Maidens at the 

time of Holmes’ visit, and several are of 

the quartzite slabs that were in Charles 

H. Bennett’s possession by that time. 

Other pages are filled with narrative 

notes, including a list of 12 photographs 

that may have been taken by Bennett.

On three pages of the notebook, 

Holmes (1892b:51, 53, 55) reflected on the 

purpose of his visit and observed that visitors who earlier wrote about the quarries

gave but a hasty glance at the main 

features of the interesting phenomena of the arts & of the quarry. I now 

propose to review each and every important feature and in detail that a 

record of what is visible & known today will be available to future generations to whom the pipestone quarry 

and the whole Coteau des prairie will 

exist only in history. To map it and 

record it and picture it & to collect 

its antique relics. This work is not 

attempted any too soon, already the 

hand of the vandal has fallen heavily 

upon the treasures of the sacred valley. The ancient pits and trenches 

are being absorbed by the new, and 

the pictographic records, the rosters 

of the Dakota, pecked in the surface 

of the glacier scarred quartzite, are 

fast giving place to the elaborately 

cut names of thousands of thoughtless visitors...traces of the sacred calumet quarries will disappear forever.

Holmes collected a number of 

stone tools from the quarries and the 

nearby “lodge-shop sites,” which he 

speculates were probably used to extract the catlinite from the quarry pits, 

to work the removed catlinite, and to 

drive stakes into the ground (Holmes 

1892a:278; 1907:218; 1919:255). Five examples were illustrated in his 1919 

article, along with five catlinite artifacts (Holmes 1919:261-261). Douglas 

Scott relocated some of these artifacts at the U.S. National Museum of 

Natural History in 1997 (see Table 6).

Holmes seems to have paid 

considerable attention to the petroglyphs in the area, although they received relatively little attention in his 

published writings (Holmes 1919:264):
PIPESTONE

124

An important feature of the quarry 

site is a group of large granite bowlders called the maidens, brought from 

the far north by glacial ice, about the 

base of which, engraved on the glaciated floor of reddish quartzite, were 

formerly a number of petroglyphs, 

representing no doubt mythological 

beings associated with the locality.

A nearly identical description exists in Holmes’ 1907 article, 

which has the additional statement 

that “These have been taken up and 

are now in possession of Mr. Bennett” 

(1907:219). The petroglyphs are not 

mentioned in his 1892 publication.

Holmes must certainly have 

observed at least some of the rock artbearing quartzite slabs that had been 

removed from their original location 

three or four years before his visit, as 

well as petroglyphs that were still in 

place around the Three Maidens. In his 

June 2, 1892 letter to Garrick Mallery, 

concerning the Three Maidens petroglyphs, Holmes (1892d; see below) stated that “There are a few pieces still in 

place.” The Three Maidens appear in 13 

sketches in his notebook, and individual petroglyphs or groups of petroglyphs 

appear in 5 sketches. Four of the latter 

appear to portray slabs on which several 

of the motifs can be correlated with the 

earlier Lewis drawings, and one sketch 

appears to represent an in situ petroglyph. One of the petroglyph sketches 

(on pages 8-9) bears the notation, “This 

group is on the south side near the S.E. 

bowlder.” The notebook also contains 

further clues to the existence of in situ 

petroglyphs about the base of the Three 

Maidens. Two of the Three Maidens 

views (on pages 17 and 22; see Figure 

54) depict human figures pointing to or 

looking at the ground or bedrock beneath the huge boulders. Both of these 

sketches, plus two other views of the 

Three Maidens (on pages 7 and 16), contain small “x” marks about the base of the 

boulders, which may represent Holmes’ 

attempt to depict the locations of in situ 

rock art. If the perspective on the Three 

Maidens can be re-established today, it 

may be possible to conduct limited excavation in the thin mantle of introduced 

soil that surrounds the boulders and 

confirm the presence of petroglyphs in 

these locations. By the same means, it 

may also be possible to match the existing rock art slabs in the Pipestone 

National Monument museum collection to their original positions about 

the Three Maidens (Alan R. Woolworth, 

letter to Thiessen, November 10, 1998).

At the quarry, Holmes made 

rubbings or tracings of individual 

petroglyphs, which he provided to 

Garrick Mallery at the Smithsonian 

Institution. From Pipestone, he 

sent two letters to Mallery in which 

he discussed the petroglyphs:

May 25, 1892

My Dear Col. Mallery

I reached this place at noon today 

and have already seen all, or nearly all, of the Winchell pictographs 

and may be able to add to the list. 

The trouble with the published 

figures is that they are not arranged 

in the original order. It will now be 

impossible to correct this entirely as 

most of the stones have been taken 

up and removed. I will do what I can 

and send you the result in a few days.
125

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

I have already collected a pile of 

stone hammers & rejects from the old 

shops & quarries. I start in on my 

map today. It is cold & windy here.

Please say to Major Powell 

that I am getting on famously.

Yours truly, W.H. Holmes [1892c]

June 2nd 1892

My Dear Colonel Mallery

I send you under another cover 

all the tracings of petroglyphs I had 

time to make. It is a tedious work 

and difficult on account of the terrible cold winds that blow here constantly. These are enough for comparison with what is published. The 

Winchell drawings were evidently 

drawn by eye and have a very large 

personal equation-besides they are 

mixed up while appearing to be in 

some order. The few groups that I 

was able to get are-it seems to me-of 

more interest than all the simple figures you could put in a book. There 

can be little doubt that in the main 

this great group of pictures was arranged in definite order agreeing 

with arrangements of mythical personages and positions usual in the 

aboriginal ceremonials of the region. 

It is a great pity that the original 

order has been destroyed but the inroads of relic hunters & inscription 

cranks made it necessary to take up 

the stones. One large stone was taken to Minneapolis by Prof. Winchell. 

I will trace it tomorrow. There are a 

few pieces still in place. All were near 

the base of one of the great granite 

bowlders and it is said here that formerly-within the memory of the living-the place was visited by Indians 

who wished to consult the gods.

Please excuse this scribbling.

Yours truly, W.H. Holmes [1892d]

The tracings which Holmes 

made of more than 30 individual Three 

Maidens petroglyphs are preserved at 

the National Anthropological Archives 

(Holmes 1892e), and a set of drawings 

of the same motifs, probably made from 

the tracings, also exists at the National 

Anthropological Archives (Alan R. 

Woolworth, personal communication 

to Thiessen). These tracings closely 

resemble the tracings and drawings 

made three years earlier by T.H. Lewis. 

About two dozen of Holmes’ tracings 

can be viewed on the internet (as of 

January 28, 2005) at <http://www.tcinternet.net/users/cbailey/holmes.html>.

Although Holmes’ petroglyph 

tracings were never published, Mallery 

combined most of the text of the two above 

letters by Holmes, and published it as a 

Holmes’ quotation in his “Picture-writing of the American Indians” (Mallery 

1893:88-89) as a criticism of Winchell’s 

earlier renditions of the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs. In reply to this criticism, 

Winchell published Lewis’ drawings 

of the Three Maidens petroglyphs and 

defended himself in his monumental work, The Aborigines of Minnesota

(Winchell 1911:563-564 and Plate VIII):

Plate VIII shows drawings made by 

Mr. Lewis. They are in the main 

isolated and disconnected figures, 

though with some overlapping. This 
PIPESTONE

12

fact is apparent not only from the illustrations of R. Cronau, the figures 

published by the writer in 1884, the 

figures drawn by T.H. Lewis and reproduced on Plate VIII, but also by 

a set of seventeen photographs presented to the Minnesota Historical 

Society by Mr. C.H. Bennett, of 

Pipestone city, made from nature. 

This relieves the onus of the complaint by Dr. W.H. Holmes that by 

the writer, in 1884, the original order was destroyed, and that some 

presumed “arrangement of mythical 

personages and positions usual in the 

aboriginal ceremonials of the region” 

had thus been lost to archeology. The 

writer remarked in 1884: “In some 

cases there is a connection of several 

figures by a continuous line, chipped 

in the surface of the rock in such a 

manner as if some legend were narrated, but for the most part the figures are isolated.” This remark is 

all the evidence there ever was that 

would warrant the hypothesis of Dr. 

Holmes, and, in the light of everything that has transpired since, it is 

plain that that evidence is very slight.

The argument between the two 

men did not continue in print. Despite 

the numerous published and unpublished recordings of the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs, their precise spatial relationships to one another, including 

any “connections” between individual motives, remain undocumented 

other than in the enigmatic “Perley’s 

Chart.”. The original glass negatives 

of the 17 photographs mentioned by 

Winchell are preserved at the Pipestone 

County Historical Society (see further 

discussion under Charles H. Bennett). 

Interestingly, page 57 of Holmes’ 

notebook (1892b) contains a brief notation that “There were many pictographs on the flat rocks above the falls 

but they have all been removed or destroyed.” This is a further suggestion 

that rock art may once have existed at 

other locations near the quarries, although taken at face value, this statement means that Holmes could not 

have personally seen such glyphs and 

must have obtained the information 

from a local informant such as Bennett.

Jacob Vradenburgh Brower, 1905

More than 12 years passed before another archeologist visited the 

quarries. On April 24-25, 1905, the 

quarries were visited by a Minnesota 

Historical Society archeologist, Jacob 

Vradenburgh Brower.5 He drew general 

maps of the quarry area on four pages 

of his field notebook, depicting such 

features as the Three Maidens, various 

roads, the falls, some of the quarries, 

the Nicollet inscription rock, Pipestone 

Creek, and a feature labeled “`Jumper’s’ 

Mound,” probably a reference to the 

burial mound observed by Catlin and 

which Norris believed he had dug 

into in 1882.6 The Minnesota Historical 

Society has published a microfilm edi5

A brief biography of Brower was written by his friend, Josiah B. Cheney (1906), and was published shortly after Brower’s death in 1905. He died within a month and a half of visiting the 

quarries.

6

Brower was assisted in this work by H.J. Bernier, a “practical surveyor,” also from St. Paul 

(Pipestone County Star, April 28, 1905). The authors are indebted to David Rambow for pointing 

out this information.
127

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

tion of his field notebook (Brower 1976). 

The Pipestone entries are on pages 28-31 

in field notebook 25, volume 83, reel 3.

Gordon C. Baldwin and Paul L. 

Beaubien, 1948-194

More than forty years lapsed before the quarries again received archeological attention, during which time 

they were designated a national monument and came under the administration of the National Park Service. Soon 

after Pipestone National Monument 

was authorized by legislation, planning 

for development and management of 

the new park was begun. Apparently 

late in 1940, Edward A. Hummel, 

Regional Supervisor of Historic Sites for 

Region II of the National Park Service, 

compiled a “Preliminary Historical 

Development Report for Pipestone 

National Monument” (in the National 

Archives and Records Administration, 

Central Plains Region, Kansas City, 

Missouri, Record Group 79, Records 

of the National Park Service, Region II 

[Midwest], Omaha, Nebraska, Pipestone 

National Monument, Decimal Code 

501-03 through 603, Box 194, File 621, 

Construction Projects). This document 

outlined physical development as well 

as research needs of the new park. 

Among the research needs, reports on 

the following topics were identified:

1. Significance of pipe-smoking to the 

American Indian.

2. Materials used in the manufacture 

of aboriginal pipes and the importance of catlinite to the Indians...

3. An analysis of red pipestone pipes 

in the various museums to determine, if possible, which came from 

the Pipestone National Monument 

quarries and the preparation of 

a chart showing the diffusion of 

Minnesota catlinite throughout the 

American continent.

4. A compilation of all legends and traditions associated with the Pipestone 

National Monument area.

5. The manufacture of catlinite articles by the American Indian with a 

discussion and description of tools 

used, methods, etc.

6. The history of the Minnesota catlinite quarries...

7. The contribution of the American 

Indian to the world-wide custom of 

smoking.”

The report stated that these 

studies should be conducted “by someone who is trained in archaeology and 

who has studied the ethnology of the 

American Indian.” These research 

goals and development plans were offered as long-term prospects, as the report noted that “development of the area 

may not be initiated in the near future.”

More specific research plans coincided with the arrival of the monument’s first full-time manager, Lyle K. 

Linch, on March 1, 1948. “Custodian” 

Linch met with the Regional Director 

and other Regional Office staff on March 

1 and 2 of that year to review the full 

range of matters relevant to operation 

of the monument-planning, operations, 

interpretation, and facilities (agenda 

titled “Subjects for Discussion with 

Custodian Linch Pipestone National 

Monument March 1-2,” in Archeology 
PIPESTONE

12

Outside MRB, Minnesota file at 

the Midwest Archeological Center). 

Included in the discussions was the 

topic of “Interpretation and Research,” 

as well as the development of an archeological and historical base map for 

the monument. Regional Archeologist 

Jesse D. Jennings participated in part 

of these discussions. Jennings later resigned from the National Park Service 

on September 1, 1948, and it was left 

to his colleague Gordon C. Baldwin, 

an archeologist who also worked in 

the Regional Office but primarily in 

the administration of the Interagency 

Archeological Salvage Program, to follow up with arrangements regarding the 

initiation of an archeological research 

program for the monument (Jennings 

1994:140-141, 159; Thiessen 1992:7, 16).

Baldwin made plans to visit the 

monument as well as the Minnesota 

Historical Society and the University of 

Minnesota in early December of 1948, 

but the trip was delayed on account of 

weather conditions, car trouble, and 

illness (memoranda from Howard W. 

Baker, Associate Regional Director, 

to Superintendent Lyle K. Linch, 

November 12, 1948; and from Lawrence 

C. Merriam, Regional Director to Linch, 

December 6, 1948; both in Archeology 

Outside MRB, Minnesota file at 

the Midwest Archeological Center).

In the meantime, appropriate research goals and objectives were considered by Linch, Baldwin, and his supervisor, Regional Historian Olaf T. Hagen. 

After a visit by Linch to the Omaha office on November 29-30, Hagen documented the discussions between Linch, 

Baldwin, and himself, and outlined an 

ambitious research program in a memorandum to the files (December 9, 1948, 

in Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center):

...General discussions...suggest several topics should be thoroughly understood before much time is given 

to the pipe smoking subject which 

will be interpreted in the museum. 

To be sure of our facts concerning the 

chief assets of the area we will need 

a study bringing together the basic 

data about the geology of Pipestone, 

and the distribution of this material, and the use of other quarries 

(Ohio and Wisconsin, for example) 

by the Indians. Secondly, to know 

the truth about the importance of 

these quarries we should review the 

literature about and collections of 

objects, reportedly of catlinite, found 

in different parts of the country.

Other features of the area including Leaping Rock, Winnewissa 

Falls, Indian burials, and the Three 

Maidens should be the subject of 

research and possibly monographs. 

Some attention should also be given 

to the petroglyphs and pictographs, 

formerly near the Three Maidens, 

and apparently found in other places, in order that any interpretation 

of them reflect scientific knowledge 

available about these hieroglyphics 

which can be made the basis for mystifying but fruitless speculation...

To me it now seems that the subjects 

on which information is needed and 

to which research should give priority are: (1) geology of catlinite and 

the distribution of pipestone quarries and the extent of their use by the 

Indians (2) the distribution of arti-
129

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

facts made from material asserted 

to be of catlinite from the Minnesota 

quarries and the identification of 

those still found in collections to establish the extent of prehistoric and 

early historic trade in this pipestone 

(3) compilation of archeological, ethnological, and historical evidence 

concerning (a) the quarries and their 

location (b) the Three Maidens (c) 

the pictographs and petroglyphs of 

the area (d) fortifications in the general vicinity of the quarries possibly 

outside the monument (e) Leaping 

Rock (f) the burials in the area.

In a memorandum to Hagen dated December 14, 1948 (in Archeology 

Outside MRB, Minnesota file at the 

Midwest Archeological Center), Baldwin 

endorsed Hagen’s outline and additionally proposed a program of archeological field work on monument land:

...However, in addition I believe a 

thorough surface survey of the area 

should be made by an archeologist so 

that we would have an accurate inventory of all the archeological camp 

sites, burials, etc. on the monument. 

So far as I know this has never been 

done for Pipestone. Further upon 

laboratory study of whatever material is recovered and from the surface 

indications showing at the sites themselves, it is possible that at some future 

time a limited amount of testing or 

excavation would result in giving us 

a better understanding of the prehistoric occupation and use of that area.

Baldwin went on to suggest that 

Linch, who he described as “a trained 

geologist” (Rothman and Holder 

[1992:89, 177] state that Linch possessed 

a degree in biology), could proceed 

with the top research priority, a study 

of “the geology of catlinite including 

also a study of the differences if any between Minnesota catlinite and that from 

Ohio, Wisconsin, or other quarries.”

In a memorandum dated the 

following day (Howard W. Baker to 

Lyle K. Linch, December 15, 1948, in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center), 

Associate Regional Director Baker transmitted Baldwin’s memorandum to Linch 

and encouraged him to begin the recommended geological study. He also added:

You will also note that it is suggested 

that a thorough surface survey of the 

monument is desirable, and we hope 

that you will be able to accomplish 

it in a manner which will enable 

us to prepare for the master plan 

a reliable archeological base map.

What Baldwin thought about 

management’s assigning the archeological aspect of the research program to 

the park superintendent is not recorded, but it surely was not in agreement 

with his recommendation that the survey be conducted “by an archeologist.”

Baldwin’s visit to the monument was rescheduled for January 16-

21, 1949, and was preceded by a flurry 

of correspondence regarding the travel 

schedule and arrangements (memorandum from Howard W. Baker, Acting 

Regional Director, to Linch, January 6, 

1949; memorandum from Linch to the 

Regional Director, January 11, 1949; 

memorandum from Howard W. Baker, 

Associate Regional Director, to Linch, 
PIPESTONE

130

January 13, 1949; letter from Gordon C. 

Baldwin to Dr. Lloyd Wilford, University 

of Minnesota, January 14, 1949; all in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological 

Center). The visit itself was described in 

a memorandum that Baldwin submitted 

to Hagen (memorandum from Gordon 

C. Baldwin to the Regional Historian, 

January 25, 1949, in Archeology Outside 

MRB, Minnesota file at the Midwest 

Archeological Center). January 17th 

was devoted to an inspection of “the 

various features of the monument” by 

Baldwin and Linch, as well as a visit beyond the monument’s boundary to see a 

particular type of archeological feature:

...Upon information secured by 

Superintendent Linch from a local resident, search was made for evidences 

of Indian occupation just to the northeast of the monument and an excellent series of eight to ten historic and 

prehistoric tipi rings was located...

Unfortunately, no details of the 

“tipi rings” were recorded in Baldwin’s 

trip report. The day concluded with 

Baldwin giving a talk to the local 

Exchange Club about “the anthropological program of the National Park 

Service with particular emphasis on 

the Missouri River Basin Archeological 

Survey and Salvage Program.” January 

18 and 19 were spent in Minneapolis and 

St. Paul, where Baldwin and Linch conferred with Drs. George W. Schwartz and 

Lloyd Wilford, a geologist and archeologist, respectively, with the University of 

Minnesota and G. Hubert Smith of the 

Minnesota Historical Society. They also 

visited the Science Museum in St. Paul, 

which Baldwin described as “one of the 

best small museums I have seen.” After 

returning to Pipestone, Baldwin and 

Linch found a telegram and an airmail 

letter from the Regional Office awaiting them, with instructions to “make 

a study of possible boundary adjustments” at the monument, which they 

did on the morning of January 21. This 

boundary “study” was conducted in 

anticipation of the eventual closing of 

the Pipestone Indian School and transfer of its land to the monument and the 

state of Minnesota (“Recommendations 

for Boundary Adjustments at Pipestone 

National Monument,” report by 

Weldon W. Gratton, February 14, 1951, 

in the National Archives and Records 

Administration, Great Plains Region, 

Record Group 79, Records of the National 

Park Service, Region II [Midwest 

Region], Pipestone National Monument, 

Decimal Codes 501-0345-630, Box 

194, File 602, Boundaries-General).

Baldwin transmitted further 

thoughts about Pipestone National 

Monument archeology to Hagen in 

a March 25, 1949 memorandum (in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center):

Due to the relatively heavy snow 

cover on the monument area, I was 

not able to secure too good an idea of 

the resources and possibilities of the 

archeological features of the monument. However, I do feel that archeological sites exist in and adjacent to 

the area, and that Superintendent 

Linch could begin a surface survey 

for such features, and prepare an archeological base map of the area. This 

should include all aboriginal quarry 

sites, tipi rings, camp sites, petroglyph areas, mounds, or any other 

prehistoric or historic Indian feature.
131

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

He complimented Linch on 

the geological report he had written, and recommended that Linch obtain specimens of pipestones from 

known quarries in other states for 

eventual analysis to distinguish different sources from one another:

Superintendent Linch can also continue securing specimens of pipestone 

from other quarries in other states and 

can endeavor to contact some university, possibly the University of Iowa, 

as he has indicated to me, in assisting 

in the analysis of the various types of 

Pipestone and the eventual identification of prehistoric and historic objects manufactured from this stone.

Baldwin also recommended an 

excavation program “in connection with 

the refuse matter from several of the aboriginal quarry pits” in order to obtain 

“information on the early use of the area 

by the Indians and furnish a number of 

specimens for future exhibit purposes.” 

He suggested that a sum of “$5,000 or 

so” would be adequate for this purpose.

He closed the memorandum 

with the suggestion that he again visit the monument during the coming 

summer to better understand the archeological features there and plan future research with the superintendent.

Viewed collectively, these several 

plans and memoranda dating from the 

period 1940-1949 proposed a far-sighted 

series of archeological investigations to 

benefit Pipestone National Monument. 

Although not presented in a detailed 

manner, recommended investigations 

included an inventory of the surficial 

archeological features of the monument; an excavation program focused 

on the quarry pits; development of an 

archeological base map of monument 

land; documentation of rock art within 

the monument; distributional studies 

of catlinite artifacts; and compositional 

studies of catlinite and other pipestones 

to correlate artifacts with material 

source quarries. Such a comprehensive 

research program posed an ambitious 

undertaking, and efforts to implement 

most aspects of the proposed research 

have been initiated at different times 

over the years. Over 50 years later, in 

2002, some of the recommended studies 

have been completed while others are 

underway or have yet to be initiated. 

With varying degrees of success, progress has been made toward the realization of many of the research goals considered by Hummel, Baldwin, Hagen, 

and Linch. One notable exception is 

the recommended investigation of the 

“fortifications in the general vicinity 

of the quarries,” which lay outside the 

monument boundary, as proposed by 

Hagen in his December 9, 1948 memorandum. This fortification, observed 

at various times during the nineteenth 

century, is no longer visible and has not 

been located during twentieth-century 

visits by archeologists (see Appendix E).

Lyle Linch again visited the 

Region Two office in Omaha, on April 

1, 1949, and further discussions occurred about the comprehensive research program for Pipestone National 

Monument. By this time, another archeologist, Paul L. Beaubien, had entered the picture. Beaubien, a veteran 

National Park Service employee and 

former “Custodian” of two national 

monuments in the Southwest, was appointed Regional Archeologist in 1949 
PIPESTONE

132

(Steen 1964:486). In a memorandum 

for the files prepared by Olaf Hagen on 

April 4, 1949 (in Archeology Outside 

MRB, Minnesota file at the Midwest 

Archeological Center), Hagen remarked 

that Linch’s geological study “has been 

reviewed favorably by Archeologists 

Beaubien and Baldwin.” This appears to 

represent Baldwin’s last formal involvement with the archeology of Pipestone 

National Monument. Paul Beaubien, 

evidently newly arrived on the scene, 

was the first National Park Service archeologist to undertake field work at 

Pipestone National Monument, in the 

summer of 1949. For some reason which 

has escaped documentation, Linch was 

not charged with the responsibility to 

conduct archeological research at the 

monument, as had been earlier recommended. Aside from the fact that he 

was not a trained archeologist, this may 

have been because Linch, though enthusiastic about his supervision of the monument, sometimes had to be restrained 

from the overly-energetic discharge of 

his duties (Rothman and Holder 1992:90-

91, 177). He also was prone to romantic 

and inaccurate interpretation of the resources under his charge, as, for example, his claim of discovering an ancient 

Egyptian “ankh” symbol at the monument (Rothman and Holder 1992:91).

In his April 4 memorandum, 

Hagen again summarized the research that should be accomplished 

for the monument. Top priority 

should be given to completing the geological study undertaken by Linch. 

The next priority was archeology:

...A second topic should deal with archeology and provide for reconnaissance and excavation necessary to 

complete the base map for the area. 

Such study would include an examination of the literature on the burials 

and fortifications outside the monument, and also a study of artifacts in 

different museum collections labeled 

as Minnesota pipestone objects, and 

aim at dating so far as possible the 

earliest human use of the quarries.

Hagen went on to endorse 

Baldwin’s earlier estimate of $5,000 for 

the archeological research and requested that this amount be made available in 

the future. He also recommended investigations focused on historical research, 

the “legend and lore” of the quarries, and 

development of a museum prospectus.

Paul Beaubien spent five days 

(June 14-18, 1949) visiting the quarries 

and assessing the archeology of the 

monument and immediately adjacent 

land. His report of that visit (Beaubien 

1949), completed on September 20, 

1949, reviewed the history and lore of 

the quarries as recorded by various 

Euroamericans, described the archeological surface features of the monument, and offered recommendations 

for further investigation. In general, 

he noted that much of the archeological evidence earlier observed by archeologists had “melted away, or...been removed or destroyed.” In particular, he 

noted that only traces of the mounds 

could be found with the aid of maps, 

the surviving petroglyphs (only 14 of 

Bennett’s slabs) reposed in the basement of the Pipestone Public Library, 

and only four tipi rings, whose condition he described as “broken,” could be 

found, and they lay outside the present 

monument boundary. In walking cultivated fields adjacent to the monument, 
133

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

he reported finding scattered rocks that 

once could have been part of circular 

stone alignments, a portion of a grooved 

maul, an ovate scraper of quartzite, 

and numerous pieces of worked catlinite. He concluded that “The bulk of 

the [archeological] evidence, therefore, 

still to be had from surface reconnaissance is limited chiefly to work-shop 

refuse, the age of which is uncertain.” 

He offered two recommendations for further archeological work: 1) 

“archeological exploration” (i.e., excavation) of the quarries at different places 

along the quarry line to obtain samples 

of catlinite from different portions of 

the quarries and artifacts that might 

help understand the use of the area in 

prehistoric times; and 2) the development of an archeological base map in 

conjunction with the performance of 

civil engineering surveys of the monument land. Beaubien also recommended that the park boundary be expanded 

on the north and west to protect adjoining lands which contained archeological evidence of the exploitation of the 

quarries. This recommendation was 

probably an extension of the boundary “study” carried out by Baldwin 

and Linch the previous January.

Beaubien returned to Pipestone 

National Monument between October 

4 and 27, 1949 to conduct excavations at 

several locations within the monument 

(Beaubien 1955, 1957, 1983). The purpose 

of his work was “to recover data and materials for use in the National Park Service 

interpretive program and to supplement 

and verify the work of previous investigators” (Beaubien 1955:1). This investigation was not formally reported until 

a manuscript was produced in 1955 to 

provide information needed for eventual 

interpretive purposes (Beaubien 1955:3):

During the winter of 1954-1955, the 

National Park Service made plans 

to enlarge the present visitor contact station to provide additional 

space for office facilities and for the 

installation of temporary museum 

exhibits. Before attempting to complete plans for the exhibits, and as 

an aid to the area’s interpretive 

program, it was thought that an account of the 1949 archeological investigations should be available...

The 1955 report was published 

two years later (Beaubien 1957), but with 

only two of the 34 photographs that appeared in the manuscript version. It 

was also republished in 1983, with 

all photographs included (Beaubien 

1983), except for one, for which a line 

drawing was substituted. The 1955, 

1957, and 1983 versions contained 

much of the text of the 1949 report, as 

well as much additional information.

Beaubien excavated at three locations at or near the quarry pits, and at 

four other locations within the monument. He excavated an east-west, fivefoot-wide trench across the quarry line 

near its southern extent, “a few feet 

north of the south boundary fence” and 

recorded the profile of the north wall of 

the trench (Beaubien 1955:12-13, Figure 

1). From this excavation he recovered 12 

granite cobbles or small boulders, which 

he termed “hammer stones,” worked 

pieces of catlinite, and fragments of two 

large animal rib bones. Cut marks resembling saw marks appeared on some 

of the worked catlinite pieces, suggesting that the trench was worked in 
PIPESTONE

134

historic times, though no metal tools 

were recovered (Beaubien 1955:13).

Beaubien also excavated on the 

right bank of Pipestone Creek “immediately west” of the Spotted Pipestone 

Quarry (Beaubien 1955:17). This was in 

an area where catlinite strata occurred 

close to the ground surface, suggesting that it may have been near the place 

where catlinite was first discovered and 

quarried by Native Americans. He reported finding only catlinite of poor 

quality, “containing considerable sand.”

Beaubien’s third quarry excavation occurred at one of the pits in the 

north quarry line (Beaubien 1955:18). The 

rock strata evident here were measured 

and recorded (Beaubien 1955:Figure 2). 

The pipestone here was likewise reported to be of poor quality. The only artifact 

reported by Beaubien was a “modern 

steel hatchet,” indicating a relatively recent date for the quarrying that occurred 

here (Beaubien 1955:18). Beaubien’s 1949 

excavation was re-excavated by John S. 

Sigstad on August 1, 1966, who collected 

additional samples of catlinite (Sigstad 

1966:102-105; 1970a:13). Sigstad reported finding the inscribed names of P. 

Beaubine [sic], L.K. Linch, and G. Bryan 

and the date “Oct. 1949” on the face of 

the catlinite bed (ibid.; George Bryan 

was a renowned pipe-maker and monument employee). Sigstad added his 

name and that of Bill Bryan, his assistant and a son of George, to the inscription, along with the date “Aug. 1966.”

Beaubien also excavated a 

mound located “about midway between the Spotted Pipestone Quarry 

and the quartzite outcropping,” north 

of Pipestone Creek (Beaubien 1955:21-

22). Beaubien believed that the mound 

had been previously excavated, and he 

hoped to find archeological remains 

that had been overlooked. He was not 

explicit about who the earlier investigators were, but he believed the mound to 

be near the location of the one that appears in Catlin’s painting of the quarries. 

Consequently, it may be that Beaubien 

thought he was re-excavating mound 

“No. 2” trenched in 1882 by Philetus W. 

Norris (see Appendix B). Beaubien found 

only rock slabs in the mound, which 

he attributed to the Oneota Orr focus.

Beaubien dug test excavations in 

the monument’s picnic area, which at 

that time was located west of the quartzite ledge at an approximate location 

where today the southern portion of the 

Circle Trail exits the timbered area into 

the grassland nearly directly east of the 

visitor center. He reported the recovery of approximately 30 pottery sherds 

from that location (Beaubien 1955:23).

Because several pottery sherds 

had been found during construction 

of a trail near the base of the Leaping 

Rock, Beaubien excavated at locations 

immediately east of the Leaping Rock 

and also “a few yards” west of the 

rock column, which he designated as 

Leaping Rock Site No. 1 and Leaping 

Rock Site No. 2, respectively (Beaubien 

1955:24-27). He also collected approximately 40 potsherds from soil that had 

been removed from the Leaping Rock 

Site No. 1 area by the trail construction 

crew. As “all evidence of stratigraphy” 

had been destroyed at Leaping Rock Site 

No. 1 by the trail crew, Beaubien sought 

an undisturbed nearby location where 

deposits were intact. This he found at 

Leaping Rock Site No. 2, where he exca-
135

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

vated two feet of soil in arbitrary levels. 

This excavation resulted in the recovery 

of approximately 350 pottery sherds. 

Because fragments of the same pottery vessel were found in both the upper and lower levels of this excavation, 

and because the deposit contained fragments of historic phonograph records 

throughout, Beaubien concluded that 

“no importance could be attached to the 

depths at which the objects were found 

or to the association of catlinite artifacts 

with early ceramic types” (Beaubien 

1955:27). He also observed what he interpreted as a “water-worn appearance” 

to the sherds, and suggested that they 

may have been redeposited from a location above the quartzite ledge (Beaubien 

1955:27). His 1955 manuscript version 

concludes that this is an unlikely possibility because of “the limited area above 

the site” (Beaubien 1955:27; 1983:49), but 

this statement does not appear in the 

1957 published version (Beaubien 1957).

Beaubien’s investigations at 

Pipestone National Monument resulted 

in the recovery of a sizeable pottery collection. It is the first report of the occurrence of pottery at or in the vicinity of the 

monument, and Beaubien’s pottery collection is much larger than any ceramic 

assemblage recovered by later investigators. Because the varying attributes 

of pottery form, decoration, and temper 

often are culturally diagnostic, pottery 

can potentially reveal information about 

the age and cultural identity of prehistoric groups who occupied or visited 

the locality of the quarries. Beaubien 

and, later, Sigstad (1970a) attempted to 

identify ceramic types represented in 

the monument collection, but the most 

recent and up-to-date interpretation has 

been offered by three prehistorians who 

have the benefit of much more information than was available at the time of 

Beaubien’s and Sigstad’s work (Anfinson 

1998; Henning 1998; Johnson 1998).

Beaubien’s report concludes with 

only a few recommendations for further 

research (Beaubien 1955:43-44). He recommended continuing examination of 

archeological reports to help establish 

the age and distribution of catlinite artifacts, and he suggested that further 

research in historical sources may shed 

light on the quarries as the “focal point” 

of the “Peace pipe” concept. He recommended “Spectrographic examinations” of catlinite artifacts to help establish the distribution of catlinite in time 

and space outside the monument. He 

also recommended continuing efforts to 

locate within the monument sites with 

undisturbed stratigraphy. A statement 

about the importance of establishing 

“the direct connection of worked catlinite with the older Woodland pottery 

types” appears in the 1955 and 1983 

versions, but not in the 1957 publication 

(Beaubien 1955:43-44; 1983:57). Finally, 

he recommended documentation and 

mapping of a layer of catlinite discovered during waterline trenching “about 

midway between the Superintendent’s 

residence and the known quarry.”

Except for some of the pottery, 

the artifacts and catlinite samples taken 

from all three excavations were stored 

at the Regional Office in Omaha until 

April, 1954, when Beaubien transported 

them back to the monument (memorandum from Beaubien to the Regional 

Historian, April 27, 1954, copy on file at 

Pipestone National Monument). In 1981, 

much of the Beaubien collection, along 

with other archeological collections at 
PIPESTONE

13

Pipestone National Monument, was 

transferred to the Midwest Archeological 

Center, except for artifacts on display 

and other selected artifacts (accession 

records, Midwest Archeological Center).

At the time of Beaubien’s 1954 

visit to the park (April 19-24), Lyle Linch 

told him of the discovery of “a few artifacts four feet below the present surface while digging a deep post hole” 

above the quartzite ledge and south of 

Pipestone Creek, between Hiawatha 

Avenue and the former railroad roadbed (memorandum from Beaubien to 

the Regional Historian, April 27, 1954, 

copy on file at Pipestone National 

Monument). Beaubien recommended 

investigation of this possible site “sometime when funds and time permit” 

(ibid.; Beaubien 1955:44; 1983:57). In 1965, 

John S. Sigstad searched for this site but 

found no evidence of it (Sigstad 1970a:8).

John S. Sigstad, 1965-1

After Beaubien’s 1949 investigation, no archeological field work was conducted at Pipestone National Monument 

for 16 years. In 1965, the National Park 

Service contracted with the University of 

Colorado for a park wide archeological 

survey of the monument land, test excavations at selected sites, and production of an archeological base map. The 

investigation was conducted by John 

S. (“Steve”) Sigstad, a recently-graduated masters student in anthropology 

at the University of Colorado (Krause 

1990). Sigstad was assisted by his wife, 

Elizabeth, monument Historian Tom 

Roll, and occasionally by laborers hired 

from the local community (Sigstad 

1970a:2). Dr. David A. Breternitz of the 

Department of Anthropology served as 

principal investigator for the research. 

Sigstad returned to the monument in 

1966 to excavate for catlinite samples 

from several of the quarry pits, but 

this was a separately contracted project 

with the University of Missouri, where 

Sigstad had by then entered the doctoral 

program in anthropology. Dr. Dale R. 

Henning served as principal investigator for this later phase of research. The 

1965 and 1966 fieldwork was reported by 

Sigstad (n.d. and 1970a). That research 

and some of his subsequent searches 

for pipestone samples and artifacts are 

detailed in a series of field notebooks 

kept by Sigstad, now housed at the 

Midwest Archeological Center (Sigstad 

1965b, 1966, 1966-1967, and 1967-1968).

Under the direction of Richard A. 

Krause after Henning’s departure from 

the University of Missouri, Sigstad continued research related to the monument 

through the completion of his doctoral 

dissertation in 1973 (Sigstad 1973). The 

goal of this research was to determine 

the age and geographical extent of catlinite and other pipestone use throughout North America. This research, 

called the “age and distribution of catlinite” project, was contractually supported by the National Park Service, and 

the resulting dissertation served to fulfill the contract (Sigstad 1973). Sigstad’s 

age and distribution of catlinite study 

is discussed in Chapter 5 of this report

Sigstad’s interest in the temporal 

and cultural/geographical distribution 

of catlinite artifacts may have pre-dated 

his 1965 fieldwork at the monument. In a 

paper completed during the Spring 1965 

semester at the University of Colorado 

for a course entitled “Culture Historical 

Reconstruction” (Sigstad 1965a), he at-
137

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Number Description Location

pp0a Catlinite fragmnent worked 

with metal tool

30’ S of visitor center road & 60’ W of former 

railroad

pp0b Two catlinite fragments worked 

with metal tools

935’ N of visitor center road & 50’ E of former 

railroad

pp0c Worked catlinite fragment 905’ N of visitor center road & 50’ E of former 

railroad

pp0d Worked catlinite fragment 750’ N of visitor center road & 25’ W of former 

railroad

pp0e Worked catlinite fragment 450’ N of visitor center road & 1800’ W of E 

Monument boundary

pp0f Worked catlinite fragment

Bird bone fragments (recent)

Ceramic sherds?

600’ S of Pipestone Creek & 25’ W of former 

railroad

pp0g Worked catlinite fragment 50’ N of pp4

pp0h Two worked catlinite fragments 20’ S of visitor center road & 750’ W of Three 

Maidens

pp0i Worked catlinite fragment 1161’ N of S Monument boundary & 500’ E of 

visitor center road

pp0j Worked catlinite fragment 30’ due E of pp0i

pp0k Catlinite fragment

worked with metal tool

1405’ N of S Monument boundary & 530’ E of 

visitor center road

pp0l Worked catlinite fragment 15’ N of pp0k

pp0m Large worked catlinite fragment 1690’ N of S Monument boundary & 200’ E of 

visitor center

pp0n Two catlinite fragments worked 

with metal tools

1705’ N of S Monument boundary & 400’ E of 

visitor center

pp0o Two worked catlinite fragments 600’ N of S Monument boundary & 450’ E of W 

Monument boundary

pp0p Worked catlinite fragment 610’ N of S Monument boundary & 80’ E E of 

W Monument boundary

pp0q Small gray quartzite “blade” 370’ N of S Monument boundary & 225’ E of W 

Monument boundary

pp0r Catlinite fragment worked with 

metal tool

1580’ N of S Monument boundary & 405(?)’ E 

of W Monument boundary

pp0s Two worked catlinite fragments 

(one worked with metal tool)

750’ E of W Monument boundary & 1675’ N of 

S Monument boundary

Table 7. Isolated archeological artifacts recorded by John S. Sigstad at Pipestone National 

Monument, 1965.
PIPESTONE

13

pp0t Projectile point tip 1450’ S of N Monument boundary & 500’ E of 

W Monument boundary

pp0u Two worked catlinite fragments

Two bone fragments

Nodules of yellow ochre

600’ E of SE corner of visitor center & 450’ S 

of center of Lake Hiawatha

pp0v Worked catlinite fragment 60’ W of Lake Hiawatha on the N bank of 

Pipestone Creek

pp0w Worked catlinite fragment 100’ W of N end of visitor center

Number Description Location

Table 7. Concluded

Figure 13. Excavation units at Locality 16c, Sigstad’s “sweat lodge” site. Note the concentration 

of fire-cracked rock, presumably the result of heating rocks for sweat lodge ceremonies. (MWAC 

642/PIPE 180, 14-01:19)
139

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

tempted to survey the temporal and 

cultural range of archeological artifacts 

made of catlinite. Although he examined and summarized a great deal of relevant literature, he recognized the fact 

that most artifacts labeled by various investigators as being of catlinite had not 

been subjected to systematic compositional analysis to confirm those identifications, thus precluding any definitive 

conclusions about the use of catlinite in 

North America through space and time. 

This study may have stimulated his later doctoral researches toward this goal. 

Consequently, he probably possessed 

considerable interest in the quarries 

before being chosen to archeologically 

inventory them in 1965. See below for 

a discussion of confusion arising from 

Sigstad’s assignment of site numbers.

During his 1965 research at 

Pipestone National Monument, Sigstad 

recorded a total of 22 sites. These included four mounds; seven quarries, 

including the one stabilized for exhibit purposes; one workshop site; four 

workshop and/or occupation sites, including one that he believed contained 

evidence of a sweat lodge; three occupation sites; and two groups of pits that 

he concluded were not quarries (Sigstad 

1970; see Table 9-1.) He also recorded 

the Three Maidens boulders and associated petroglyph slabs as a single 

site. Twenty-three isolated single artifacts were also recorded (Sigstad 1970:

Table 4; see Table 7, this volume). No 

site number was assigned to the carved 

initials of the Nicollet party atop the 

ledge or to the other historic names and 

dates pecked into the nearby quartzite.

On the evening of June 13, 

1965, shortly after arriving at the 

monument, Sigstad conferred with 

Dr. Wilfred D. Logan of the Midwest 

Regional Office and monument 

Historian Tom Roll about the research 

strategy for the project. He recorded 

the following notes about that meeting in his daily log (Sigstad 1965b:3-4):

Wil thinks that there is a campsite 

somewhere between the houses [sic] 

of the Monument administrator 

and the railroad track. He also suggested that level areas immediately 

west of the quartzite ledge might be 

a good bet for testing for campsites.

Logan and I decided that I should 

test mounds for which there is no 

evidence of previous excavation 

or vandalism, and that unless tipi 

rings which I might encounter had 

some special feature, that there 

was no reason for testing these.

Logan also suggested that Tom Roll 

and I bring our pottery to Omaha to 

be identified which we will try to do.

Assisted by his wife, Sigstad 

systematically examined all monument land during nine workdays between June 14 and June 24, 1965 (Sigstad 

1965b:4-29; 1970a). To organize and facilitate the survey, the monument was 

divided into quarters and these were 

subdivided into 64 “roughly square” 

sections, each measuring approximately 1,000 feet on a side. Each section 

was walked in 10 to 15-foot transects, 

during which as much ground as possible was visually examined, often on 

hands and knees (Sigstad 1970a:8). The 

monument’s thick grass cover forced 

particular reliance on examination of 

rodent backdirt piles for evidence of 
PIPESTONE

140

Native American use or occupation:

...The vegetation is still so lush as to 

greatly inhibit surveying operations, 

and I sincerely hope that the gopher 

population has been more active in the 

northern portion of the Monument 

than it has been in the southern portion. (Letter from Sigstad to Wilfred 

D. Logan, National Park Service, 

Midwest Region, Omaha, Nebraska, 

June 18, 1969; copy in possession of 

David A. Breternitz, Dove Creek, 

Colorado; see also Sigstad 1970a:8)

Sigstad’s field notebooks do not 

explain the methods by which sites and 

isolated artifacts were plotted on the 

base map of the monument. However, 

site locations are described in terms of 

east-west and north-south distances, 

usually rounded to the nearest 5 or 10 

feet, from the monument boundaries or 

other landmarks. In the absence of notes 

about the use of surveying instruments 

or other precise, on-the-ground measuring devices, the resulting locations must 

be regarded as approximations only. 

An additional uncertainty, unknown 

to Sigstad at the time, is introduced by 

the fact that the base map provided by 

the National Park Service for his use, is 

not accurately drawn and has a northsouth distortion on the order of ten 

percent and an east-west distortion of 

about three percent (Douglas Scott, personal communication). Consequently, 

Sigstad’s archeological base map of 

the monument cannot be registered, 

or matched, with the base map that 

was photogrammetrically produced 

for the 1997-1998 inventory project.

Sigstad assigned numbers to 22 

archeological sites within the monument boundary. These numbers were of 

the trinomial form widely used by the 

Smithsonian Institution and other archeological researchers (Sigstad 1970a:8). 

For example, the site number 21PP1 is 

composed of three elements: “21” designates the state of Minnesota; “PP” 

designates Pipestone County; and “1” 

designates the first site recorded within 

the county. Site information was recorded on standard University of Colorado 

Museum Archeological Survey forms. 

Additional Archaeological Survey of 

Missouri Survey Sheet forms and notes 

were completed for nine sites that Sigstad 

revisited in 1966, mostly quarries (sites 

21PP3, 21PP5, 21PP7-12, and 21PP18).

There are problems associated with use of Sigstad’s site numbers. 

None of the numbers were ever officially registered with the Minnesota 

State Archeologist or the State Historic 

Preservation Office. The result is that 22 

unofficial site numbers exist for archeological resources within the Pipestone 

National Monument. These duplicate 

numbers officially assigned to archeological resources elsewhere in Pipestone 

County outside the monument, including the number 21PP2 which is the 

state’s official site number for all archeological resources encompassed within 

the monument boundary. To reduce 

confusion from this multiplicity of official and unofficial numbers, we have 

chosen to arbitrarily refer to Sigstad’s 

unofficial site numbers in binomial 

form with lower case letters. For example, Sigstad’s site 21PP13 will be referred 

to as pp13 in this report to distinguish it 

from officially-assigned state site numbers. Previously reported sites were 

not assigned numbers by Sigstad if they 

could not be relocated (Sigstad 1970a:8). 
141

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Isolated artifacts were each designated 

“21PP0” followed by a lower case letter, 

“a” through “w” (Sigstad 1970a:8). The 

present authors have chosen to regard 

Pipestone National Monument as one 

formally recorded archeological site that 

contains 43 defined archeological loci or 

subsites (see Chapter 9 and Table 12).

After completing his systematic 

examination of the monument land, 

defining site areas, and recording discoveries of isolated artifacts (principally 

worked fragments of catlinite), Sigstad 

turned his attention to selecting sites 

for test excavation. Between June 28 

and August 7, 1965, he conducted test 

excavations at a variety of sites, including a mound, four occupation or workshop sites, eight quarries or suspected 

quarries, and also in a non-site area. 

His excavation methods were more 

rigorous than those employed by previous investigators (Sigstad 1970a:15). 

Excavation units consisted of five-foot 

squares placed on a grid system established from a separate datum point 

for each site. Excavation proceeded 

by six-inch levels measured from the 

northwest corner of each unit. At least 

one excavation pit at each site was dug 

until bedrock was encountered. Soil 

from cultural deposits was screened. 

Observations were recorded in his daily 

log, profiles were recorded, and completed excavations were photographed. 

Four of the sites recorded by 

Sigstad were described as mounds. 

None of them appeared to correlate 

with any of the eight mounds mapped 

by Holmes in 1892 (Sigstad 1970a:10). 

In accordance with his earlier discussion with Logan and Roll, when he was 

advised to dig test excavations only in 

mounds that appeared undisturbed, 

Sigstad selected one of the four mounds 

that he recorded in the monument. 

From his test excavation in mound pp2, 

located south of one of the two park staff 

residences, he concluded that it was a 

refuse pile of quartzite fragments, probably of relatively recent origin (Sigstad 

1970a:9). Mound pp14 had been previously excavated and was not further investigated by Sigstad, and mound pp17 

was considered to be a twentieth-century grave associated with the Pipestone 

Indian School and likewise was not disturbed (Sigstad 1970a:10). The fourth 

mound he recorded (pp6) also was 

not excavated, and was judged likely 

to be a pile of debris from the nearby 

Union Quarry pit (Sigstad 1970a:10).

Sigstad also dug test excavations in three sites that he characterized 

as occupation sites and/or workshop 

areas associated with the extraction 

and processing of catlinite. The sites 

were selected principally because they 

yielded a few small potsherds on the 

surface, promising the possible discovery of additional, potentially diagnostic pottery through excavation.

Two five-by-five-foot excavation 

units were placed approximately 100 

feet apart at site pp13 (Sigstad 1970a:14-

16). They revealed sterile yellow clay at 

18 inches and Sioux quartzite bedrock 

at 42 inches below the surface (Sigstad 

1970a:15). Cultural materials recovered 

consisted mostly of a mixture of historic 

debris (particularly in the uppermost 

six inches), catlinite fragments (four 

of which exhibited evidence of being 

worked), 15 small bone fragments, two 

chipped stone tools, and 25 flakes resulting from the manufacture of chipped 
PIPESTONE

142

stone tools. None of these artifacts was 

diagnostic as to age or cultural affiliation.

At site pp16, Sigstad (1970a:16-23) 

placed test excavations in three separate 

areas, which he described separately as 

pp16 North, pp16 South, and the “Sweat 

Lodge” area. Three five-foot-square excavation units were dug in pp16 North. 

Sterile yellow clay was encountered at 

24 inches below the surface, and bedrock at 66 inches (Sigstad 1970a:17). 

Within the top two feet of soil were recovered 157 catlinite fragments; 26 of 

them were worked, including a disk, a 

pipe blank, and possibly two pieces of 

incised tablets. Other prehistoric artifacts recovered included two chipped 

stone projectile points, lithic flaking debris, two possible “rubbing” stones, and 

possibly several dozen small bone fragments, some of which had been burned. 

The relatively few historic-age artifacts 

were limited to the uppermost six inches of deposit. On the basis of the catlinite disk, pipe blank, two possible tablet 

fragments, and possibly one of the projectile points, Sigstad (1970a:18) tentatively posited an Oneota cultural affiliation for this northern portion of pp16.

At pp16 South, two adjacent test 

excavations partially overlapped a small 

surface depression that may have indicated a house structure (Sigstad 1965b:38; 

1970a:19-20). Bedrock was encountered 

in one of these units at depths ranging 

from about 47 to 82 inches below surface. 

In one of these units, a concrete slab was 

encountered between six and 18 inches 

below the surface; this slab, which was 

laid on sand, was believed to have been 

the base of an earlier monument erected to mark the location of a small cemetery for deceased students from the 

nearby Pipestone Indian School (Sigstad 

1965b:38-40; Mitchell 1934). Material recovered from the disturbed soil above 

the concrete slab included historic objects such as pieces of wire, barbed wire, 

nails, wire staples, tinfoil, bottle glass, 

firearm cartridge cases, and a bullet, as 

well as a chipped stone projectile point 

tip, lithic flaking debris, animal bone 

and tooth fragments, catlinite fragments, and two small shell-tempered 

prehistoric potsherds (Sigstad 1970a:19). 

No historic artifacts were found below 

the concrete slab, though additional 

prehistoric objects were found there, 

including the base of a concave-base, 

side-notched chipped stone projectile 

point, more lithic flaking debris, two 

unworked catlinite fragments, and one 

small bone fragment (Sigstad 1970a:19-

20). The adjacent excavation unit, which 

did not contain evidence of prior disturbance due to the construction of the 

monument, yielded two chipped stone 

projectile point tips, a convex-base unnotched projectile point, an end scraper, 

lithic flaking debris, worked and unworked catlinite fragments, bone fragments, and several historic artifacts (the 

last occurred only in the uppermost six 

inches). Sigstad (1970a:20) concluded 

that this area, like pp16 North, had been 

a workshop and/or temporary campsite. He tentatively suggested that the 

projectile points were similar to Oneota 

examples and to what would today be 

considered Late Archaic complexes, but 

cautioned against placing too much reliance on this interpretation. The location of the monument which formerly 

stood in this location was still visible 

in 1998 as a shallow depression, and 

has been marked by monument staff 

with an orange-painted iron pipe.

Five test units at the “Sweat 

Lodge” area of site pp16 were placed 
143

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

over a group of three small depressions 

that were discovered when the grass 

cover was removed (Sigstad 1970a:20-

23). Two of the depressions were found 

to be shallow basins that contained 

clay fill mixed with unidentified organic matter. The third depression 

contained a pile of cracked and apparently burned quartzite fragments. The 

top 18 inches of the soil in these test 

units yielded worked and unworked 

pieces of catlinite (including three fragments of catlinite disks), chipped stone 

tools (including seven projectile points), 

lithic flaking debris, two possible “rubbing” stones, and bone fragments, one 

of which was identified as being from 

bison. On the basis of the pits, the apparently cracked and burned rock, the 

organic material, and the distance at 

which these features were located from 

the quarries themselves, Sigstad offered 

the tentative interpretation that these 

represented activities associated with 

a sweat lodge. Sigstad’s excavations at 

this “Sweat Lodge” site were still visible 

in 1998, some 33 years after he dug them.

The third site excavated by 

Sigstad, pp21, was an area located about 

225 feet north of Beaubien’s “Picnic 

Area” site, which Sigstad designated 

as pp22. Among the meager artifacts 

collected from the surface in this location was a grit-tempered potsherd 

(Sigstad 1970a:24). Sigstad (1970a:24-25) 

placed two test units in this area. Two 

historic artifacts were found in the uppermost six inches, while the 24 inches 

of cultural deposits yielded the usual 

mixture of worked and unworked catlinite, chipped stone tools and flakes 

(including two end scrapers and a projectile point mid-section), and bone 

fragments. Sigstad (1970a:25) concluded 

that the site represented a workshop 

area and/or a briefly occupied campsite.

Sigstad also excavated two fiveby-five-foot test units in the western 

portion of the park informally called 

the West Ridge area. Although no sites 

had been formally defined in this area, 

he excavated there because numerous 

artifacts had been found there in the 

past, according to local people, and Paul 

Beaubien was believed to have intended to dig test excavations in the West 

Ridge area but did not do so (Sigstad 

1970a:25-26). Sigstad located his test 

units where isolated artifacts had been 

found. As generally elsewhere in the 

monument, culturally sterile yellow 

clay was encountered at about 18 inches below the surface. Excavation was 

continued beyond that depth in an effort to reach bedrock; however, the water table was encountered at 138 inches 

below the surface, which precluded 

further digging. The tests yielded 

very little in the way of artifacts, and 

Sigstad (1970a:26) declined to define 

the tested areas as an archeological site.

In 1966, Sigstad excavated in several of the quarry pits in order to obtain 

samples of catlinite for his subsequent 

age and distribution study. This work is 

described in his daily field log and summarized in his formal report (Sigstad 

1966, 1970a). Because the catlinite samples obtained in 1949 by Beaubien could 

not be located, Sigstad re-excavated in 

the pits that Beaubien had designated the 

South Quarry (pp3), the Spotted Quarry 

(pp12), and the North Quarry (pp11). In 

the North Quarry, Sigstad found the 

names of Beaubien, Lyle Linch, and 

George Bryan inscribed into the catlinite face that was exposed upon re-exca-
PIPESTONE

144

vation (Sigstad 1970:13; Sigstad 1966:102-

105). Sigstad collected catlinite samples 

from pp5, pp8, and pp10. He also dug 

test excavations into pits designated as 

sites pp9 and pp18, but found no catlinite 

in them and concluded that they had not 

been dug for the purpose of extracting 

that kind of stone (Sigstad 1970a:12, 14).

It is interesting to note that in all 

of his test excavations, Sigstad found 

no evidence of stratified cultural deposits other than the tendency for artifacts of historical age to occur in the 

uppermost several inches of each test 

unit. This agrees with observations 

made during the 1997 test excavations 

at the large workshop/occupation site 

north of Pipestone Creek and above the 

quartzite ledge (see later discussion).

Although Sigstad tried to systematically inventory the range of archeological resources at Pipestone 

National Monument, he gave little attention to the monument’s rock art. He 

briefly mentioned the Three Maidens 

petroglyph slabs in both his daily log 

and his formal report (Sigstad 1965b:6; 

1970a:8-9), but did not document them 

individually. Interestingly, Sigstad 

was told of in situ petroglyphs still in 

the bedrock under the Three Maidens 

and for a time planned to excavate in 

search of them near the end of the 1965 

project, but ultimately did not carry 

out this work (Sigstad 1965b:67-68):

We had tentatively planned to so 

some investigating in the vicinity of 

the three maidens. Former P.N.M. 

Historian Abelson advised that there 

were still petroglyphs in situ on the 

Sioux quartzite where it outcrops at 

the base of the glacial erratics. There 

are about 5 places where this situation occurs. Stratigraphic excavation here would be pointless, however, since the Hiawatha Pageant Club 

has done much earth moving here in 

order to construct the stage for their 

little production. We abandoned 

plans to work here, however, mainly 

because there are Hiawatha Pageant 

tipis and other distractions which 

would greatly hinder any sort of horizontal control. Sometime when the 

Pageant is not on, on the other hand, 

it might be worthwhile to probe for 

the pictographs. This probably would 

not entail a great deal of excavation.

A significant part of Sigstad’s 

research was his re-examination of 

the prehistoric pottery recovered from 

within the monument, mostly during 

Beaubien’s work at the Leaping Rock 

sites No. 1 and 2 (pp19 and pp20, respectively). Sigstad’s (1970a:27-29) interpretation of the potsherd assemblage was 

facilitated by type identifications suggested by Dale R. Henning, his mentor 

at the University of Missouri during 

analysis of his inventory data. Although 

Beaubien’s (1957:14-15) earlier analysis of 

the pottery suggested an approximate 

400-year prehistoric timespan for Native 

American presence at the quarries (ca. 

fifteenth into the eighteenth centuries 

A.D.), Sigstad (1970a:27-28, Tables 7a and 

7b) concluded that types from Middle 

Missouri, Mill Creek, Cambria, Great 

Oasis, and Oneota complexes were represented, along with generalized late 

Woodland pottery. Geographically, 

these kinds of pottery were found 

from central South Dakota into southern Minnesota and northwestern Iowa. 

Temporally, they potentially span the 

eighth to the eighteenth centuries A.D. 
145

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

Sigstad’s interpretation of the Pipestone 

pottery remained the basis for interpreting much of the culture history of the 

monument until the pottery was re-assessed in 1998 (Anfinson 1998; Henning 

1998; Johnson 1998; see Chapter 10).

In the history of archeological investigation of the catlinite quarries and 

nearby archeological features, John S. 

Sigstad’s research efforts deserve special acknowledgement and appreciation. He was the first to take a comprehensive, fine-grained look at the range 

of in situ archeological resources within 

the monument. He examined the monument’s land in a more systematic and 

thorough manner than any of his predecessors, documented the monument’s 

resources in a more systematic fashion 

than earlier investigators, and he excavated a greater variety of the monument’s archeological resources than did 

any of them. He was the first to attempt 

to establish the age and cultural affiliation of the monument’s archeological 

resources on the basis of carefully collected archeological data rather than 

relying on questionably-recorded and 

poorly-interpreted traditions and historical information. His pioneering 

fieldwork in the monument in 1965 and 

1966 laid the foundation for his subsequent study of the age and distribution of catlinite and other pipestones. 

Although the age and distribution 

study was not without substantial problems that limit it’s ultimate usefulness 

(see Chapter 5), it served to stimulate 

later studies by others sharing his goals 

but employing other methods of physical examination (see later discussion).

Post-Sigstad Investigations, 1971-199

During the years following 

Sigstad’s 1965-1966 field work, a variety of archeological investigations 

and activities took place at Pipestone 

National Monument. These are summarized in Table 8. Most of these investigations were small-scale, usually 

conducted in response to planned construction or development actions, or in 

response to the reported discovery of 

artifacts or faunal remains on monument land. Because of the small scale 

and brevity of most of these investigations, they are typically summarized in 

trip report memoranda, short informal 

reports, and other less formal means.

By the early 1970s, an archeologist, Roy W. Reaves III, was added to the 

monument staff. Between October 19 

and 28, 1971, Reaves ([1973]) conducted 

survey, monitoring, and excavation activities in connection with construction 

of two structures within the monument, 

an addition to the visitor center called 

the Upper Midwest Cultural Center 

and a six-unit apartment complex and 

parking lot near the eastern monument boundary, north of Pipestone 

Creek. His pre-construction survey 

and monitoring of construction work at 

the apartment complex revealed no cultural materials, although he did observe 

fragments of Sioux quartzite and catlinite which he concluded were deposited 

by water or glacial movement (Reaves 

[1973:2-3]). Most of the area planned 

for the Cultural Center had been previously disturbed by road construction 

and landscaping around the existing 

visitor center. However, the southeast 

corner of the structure would impact 

an historic quarry pit. Local quarriers 
PIPESTONE

14

 

1971 Roy W. Reaves, III Excavations at the location of the Reaves 1971

 Upper Midwest Cultural Center and

Six-Unit Apartment Complex

1973 John E. Ehrenhard Monitoring of the installation of Ehrenhard 1973

Thomas D. Thiessen two sewer lines to connect the park Ryan 1973

Wilfred M. Husted to the Pipestone city sewage system Husted 1973

1974 Roy W. Reaves, III Visit to Pipestone NM and Reaves 1974

 recommendations for mitigating the

impact of quarrying activities to

the Monument’s archeological resources

through an archeological research

program

1980 Robert K. Nickel Examination of the north quarry line Nickel and 

 Thomas D. Thiessen Thiessen 1980

1980 Robert K. Nickel Mapping of the north quarry line

1981 Robert K. Nickel Monitoring of the installation of

 underground powerlines

1981 Thomas D. Thiessen Investigation of the discovery of Thiessen 1981a

 W.E. Sudderth horse bones along the Circle Trail

1981 Mark J. Lynott Visit and inspection of the north Lynott 1981

 quarry line

1987 Susan M. Monk Shovel testing of areas affected by Monk 1987

 installation of a comfort station

1993 Caven P. Clark Inventory in connection with a Clark 1996

 prescribed grass burn

1994 Jeffrey J. Richner Inventory in connection with a Richner 1994

 Vergil E. Noble prescribed grass burn

1994 Timothy V. Gillen Investigation of the discovery of Hannus 1994

 animal bones in the Spotted Quarry

1997 Douglas D. Scott Inventory in connection with a This volume

 Thomas D. Thiessen prescribed grass burn

Table 8. Miscellaneous archeological activities at Pipestone National Monument, 1970s-1990s.

Date Archeologist(s) Activity Reference
147

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

1997 Kevin S. Stadler Test excavations at a stone circle This volume

 site and an extensive camp/workshop

site

1998 Douglas D. Scott Inventroy in connection with a This volume

 Thomas D. Thiessen prescribed grass burn

1998 Robert K. Nickel Geophysical surveys at the suspected This volume

 Forest Frost location of the Indian School cemetery

Table 8. Concluded

Date Archeologist(s) Activity Reference
PIPESTONE

14

were questioned about the pit, but none 

recalled ever seeing it actively worked 

(Reaves [1973:3]). Reaves supervised the 

excavation of a north-south and an eastwest trench through the pit and its adjacent spoil berm. Cultural materials recovered from the pit included tin cans, 

broken bottles, buckets and other metal 

containers, an iron axehead, quartzite 

fragments, hammerstones, and a fragmentary chipped stone tool (Reaves 

[1973:4]). These materials were not fully 

analyzed, but Reaves concluded that the 

historic artifacts dated in age from the 

late nineteenth century into the 1930s and 

he regarded only the chipped stone tool 

fragment as prehistoric (Reaves [1973:5]). 

Because of fiscal limitations, the excavations were halted before excavation of 

the pit was completed, although Reaves 

([1973:5]) noted that part of the pit was 

outside the limits of construction disturbance and was filled in as part of the 

landscaping surrounding the building.

The next archeological work at 

the monument was necessitated by the 

installation of two sewer lines to connect the monument with the city’s sewage system in the fall of 1973. Trenches 

were excavated to the visitor center from 

8th Avenue and to the apartment units 

from Hiawatha Avenue (Palmer 1973). 

The Northeast Region of the National 

Park Service requested archeological 

assistance from the Midwest Region 

(Brooks 1973). In response, Midwest 

Archeological Center Archeologists John 

E. Ehrenhard and Thomas D. Thiessen, 

in company with Park Technician Ray 

Mundell and Scientific Illustrator Jerry 

Livingston, all of whom happened 

to be traveling through Minnesota at 

the time, stopped at the monument 

on October 19, 1973. Ehrenhard and 

Thiessen examined the alignment of the 

sewer line that originated at 8th Avenue 

and extended through monument land, 

crossed the entrance road, and ended 

at the visitor center (Ehrenhard 1973; 

Ryan 1973). The portion west of the 

entrance road had been excavated and 

filled in before their arrival, and trenching east of the road had not yet started. 

A depression and a quarry pit existed 

near the alignment and were pointed 

out to the park staff, with the recommendations that care be taken to avoid 

them and that park staff closely monitor the rest of the construction work. 

After the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation later questioned why the 

trenching was not being monitored by 

an archeologist, the Northeast Region 

sent Archeologist Wilfred M. Husted 

to Pipestone National Monument to 

observe the remainder of the work, 

with the Midwest Archeological Center 

standing by to send additional archeological help if needed. Husted remained on-site for approximately one 

month (personal communication to 

Thiessen, June 27, 1997). On November 

14, 1973, he formally recommended that, 

because of the unexpectedly slow progress of the construction work, test excavations be conducted along the remaining portion of the alignment (Husted 

1973). It appears that no such excavations were ever conducted and that 

monitoring was the only archeological 

work performed, with negative results.

Roy Reaves, who had left the 

monument staff sometime after his 1971 

work to accept a position as one of three 

Executive Order 11593 consultants in the 

National Park Service, returned briefly 

in 1974 as part of his responsibility to 

advise Federal land managers about 
149

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

compliance with Executive Order 11593, 

which directed Federal agencies to inventory significant historic properties 

and nominate qualifying properties to 

the National Register of Historic Places. 

Following his visit, Reaves (1974) voiced 

concern that the legislatively-mandated 

quarrying activities were gradually destroying the primary archeological resources of the monument-the historic 

quarries. To mitigate this impact, he recommended consultation under Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation 

Act, implementation of an extensive program of test excavations focused on the 

historic quarries, and development of 

a resource management plan based on 

the results of the archeological research 

(Reaves 1974:2). He also suggested several research questions to be addressed 

through the testing program. The archeological research he recommended 

appears not to have been carried out. 

His concern about the impact of quarrying on the monument’s archeological resources, however, after protracted 

discussion, eventually led to agreement 

between the National Park Service, 

the State Historic Preservation Officer, 

and the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation. It was agreed that quarrying was the primary purpose for which 

the monument was created and would 

take precedence over quarry preservation in Section 106 compliance matters 

(Rothman and Holder 1992:189-194).

At the request of the monument 

superintendent, Archeologists Robert K. 

Nickel and Thomas D. Thiessen visited 

Pipestone National Monument on July 

2-3, 1980 to examine the north quarry 

line. The superintendent anticipated the 

need to open new quarries along the 

north quarry line in the future to accommodate growing Native American 

interest in obtaining catlinite, and he 

expressed concern about the resulting 

impact to historic quarries identified 

by Sigstad. Nickel and Thiessen examined the quarry line from the Spotted 

Quarry northward, and concluded that 

Sigstad’s designation of site 21PP11 was 

in error (Nickel and Thiessen 1980:1). 

There were no visible quarries between 

the Spotted Quarry and adjacent inactive quarries-collectively designated 

as 21PP10 by Sigstad-and the northern 

group of quarries north of an intermittent watershed that drained higher land 

to the east. This latter group had been 

designated by Sigstad as 21PP12. They 

experimented with several proton magnetometer transects across older, inactive quarry pits and noticed that magnetic values were consistently higher 

outside the pits than inside them (Nickel 

and Thiessen 1980:1-2). Two magnetometer traverses across the suspected location of 21PP11 revealed no comparable 

pattern of values. They recommended 

preparation of a transit map of the entire group of quarries that constitute the 

north quarry line, and a close-interval 

shovel testing program in the suspected 

location of 21PP11. If these measures 

failed to confirm the presence of quarry 

pits in the area that Sigstad designated 

as 21PP11, they recommended that new 

quarries be opened there and elsewhere 

along the north quarry line. Although 

they noted that no previous excavations 

in quarry pits at the monument had revealed any “clear-cut evidence of any 

significant antiquity,” they recommended that some of the older, inactive pits 

be preserved for future archeological investigation (Nickel and Thiessen 1980:2). 

They also recommended implementation of a multi-year program of “diverse 
PIPESTONE

150

investigations,” synchronized with the 

park’s prescribed grass burn program; 

that quarry permit holders be required 

to surrender any archeological artifacts 

they encounter during their quarrying 

activities; and that catlinite samples be 

periodically collected and documented 

from each active quarry to build up 

a collection of reference samples that 

could be used in the future to define 

the mineralogical diversity of the catlinite beds (Nickel and Thiessen 1980:3).

Two of these recommendations 

were ultimately acted upon. Nickel, 

assisted by Randy Bellomo and Janis 

(Emery) Dial-Jones, returned to Pipestone 

before the end of Fiscal Year 1980 to map 

the quarries along the north quarry line 

(Midwest Archeological Center n.d.a:45; 

see also Nickel 1980), but the resulting map has not been located at the 

Midwest Archeological Center. In 1982, 

Nickel and Thiessen conducted the recommended shovel-testing investigation 

of the area designated as 21PP11, and 

they also recorded one newly discovered site on monument land (Midwest 

Archeological Center n.d.c:14). This investigation has not been fully reported.

On June 19-20, 1981, Archeologists 

Thomas D. Thiessen and W.E. Sudderth 

investigated the reported discovery of articulated bones during trail 

work at Pipestone National Monument 

(Thiessen 1981a). Bones had been found 

in situ along the southern portion of 

the Circle Trail at the point where the 

trail emerges from the timber along the 

west face of the Sioux quartzite ledge. 

Thiessen and Sudderth began excavation of the bones which had been exposed by the trail workers. Some of 

the bones found by the maintenance 

workers had previously been sent to 

the Midwest Archeological Center for 

identification. While they were in the 

park, word arrived by telephone from 

the Center that the bones were those of 

a horse. Because there was no evidence 

of fire, deliberate burial, or any other 

cultural associations, it was concluded 

that the animal died a natural death 

(Thiessen 1981a; Midwest Archeological 

Center n.d.b:28). The remaining bones 

were left in place, and Thiessen and 

Sudderth returned to Lincoln with a 

number of boxes containing artifacts 

and catlinite from Beaubien’s 1949 work.

A few days after their visit, Midwest Archeological Center 

Archeologist Mark J. Lynott visited 

the monument on June 27, 1981 (Lynott 

1981). He examined the area designated 

by Sigstad as 21PP11 and also concluded 

that Sigstad’s base map is in error. He 

examined a possible mound-like feature 

that may have been mapped by Holmes 

and recorded by Sigstad as 21PP14. He 

collected three pieces of stone chipping 

debris and a glass bead from the surface 

of the mound, which he described as 

being 7-8m by 4-5m and 0.75-1.0m high.

During Fiscal Year 1981, Nickel 

also monitored the installation of underground powerlines at Pipestone National 

Monument (Midwest Archeological 

Center n.d.b:28), with negative results.

In addition to the discovery 

of the horse remains underlying the 

Circle Trail, additional bones and other 

artifacts have been reported by park 

staff from time to time. In 1965 Park 

Historian Tom E. Roll (1965a, 1965b) reported to both Wilfred D. Logan of the 

Midwest Regional Office and to John 
151

PREVIOUS ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS, 1870’S – 1980

S. Sigstad the discovery of a number 

of horse bones during the digging of a 

new quarry along the south quarry line 

and south of the Union Quarry. Roll 

suggested that possibly two individuals were represented, but did not report 

the presence of any cultural materials in association. In 1981 monument 

Maintenance Foreman Chuck Derby 

reported to the Midwest Archeological 

Center the discovery of an inscribed 

rock in backdirt from a underground 

powerline project north of the visitor 

center (Thiessen 1981b). The rock was 

described as being about 1.5 feet square 

and eight inches thick; it bore the name 

“ANDREW WILSON,” the date “1885,” 

a word that appeared to be “ONIO,” and 

the depictions of a tipi and a hatchet.7

Derby was advised to accession it into 

the monument’s museum collection and 

make a measured sketch map of the location of its discovery. In 1984, park 

staff found a bone, a rock, and a broken 

bottle fragment on the ground surface 

while clearing brush near the visitor 

center, and sent them to the Midwest 

Archeological Center for identification (McSwain 1984). The Center Chief 

identified the bone as a probable cow 

mandible; the stone as natural and not 

culturally modified; and the bottle fragment as dating to the early 20th century 

(Calabrese 1984). On October 28, 1994, 

two quarriers who were re-opening an 

inactive pit north of the Spotted Quarry 

found a number of bones, which they 

reported to park staff. The park staff, 

in turn, reported the discovery to the 

Midwest Archeological Center, and on 

the same day Timothy V. Gillen from the 

Archeology Laboratory at Augustana 

College visited the monument to investigate the find. Gillen concluded that 

the remains were those of a horse that 

pre-dated 1957, when the monument acquired the land where the bones were 

found (Hannus 1994). On May 11, 1995, 

a partial mandible was found during 

quarrying in the north end of pit no. 21 

in the south quarry line. The mandible 

was sent to the Midwest Archeological 

Center with a note regarding its discovery (McSwain 1995). It was judged 

to be probable bison by John R. Bozell 

and Amy Koch of the Nebraska State 

Historical Society (Bozell n.d.). At some 

date in the early 1980s, a suspected human skull was observed near the shore 

of the dammed lake within the monument. Midwest Archeological Center 

archeologists Robert K. Nickel and 

Thomas D. Thiessen were sent to examine the discovery, which turned out to 

be merely a bleached and disarticulated 

turtle carapace. Because no archeological resources were involved, no trip report was prepared to document the find.

In 1987, Pipestone National 

Monument was visited by archeologist 

Susan M. Monk of Mankato, Minnesota. 

Monk had been contracted by the 

Midwest Archeological Center to conduct a shovel test inventory of areas to be 

affected by construction of a new comfort station west of the Three Maidens, 

which she accomplished on September 

15. She visually examined and shovel 

tested an extensive area around the 

7

Though there is no way to demonstrate any connection with this stone, a man named Andrew 

William Wilson (born at Crystal Lake, Iowa, on March 1, 1871) moved with his family to Pipestone 

in 1883 at the age of 12. He was a merchant at Pipestone until 1917, when he moved to Los Angeles, 

California, where he died on July 4, 1928. See The Pipestone Leader, July 12, 1928, page 1, column 6, 

and the Pipestone County Star, July 6, 1928, page 1, column 6.
PIPESTONE

152

comfort station location, but did not 

find any cultural materials (Monk 1987).

As recommended in 1980, efforts began in the 1990s to coordinate 

archeological inventories with prescribed grass burns conducted periodically within the monument for vegetation management purposes. The 

objectives, methods, and results of the 

1990s inventory investigations are described in the chapter that follows.
153

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

Introduction

Pipestone National Monument is 

attempting to restore the native tallgrass 

prairie to a semblance of its historic appearance though the use of prescribed 

fire. The monument is surrounded by 

modern agricultural fields, an in-use 

cemetery, and residential areas. Modern 

agricultural practices and residential 

plantings of non-native plant species 

have caused the monument’s vegetation 

to become dominated by brome grasses, 

other non-native species, and a series of 

successional plants that have become 

established in previously disturbed areas. The monument uses some mechanical means to cut back unwanted plants 

like sumac. Other species, particularly 

the grasses and some weeds, require 

control by fire to allow the native tallgrass prairie species to re-establish 

(Kjellsen and Higgins 1990). Since 1973 

the monument has conducted a cyclical 

prescribed burning program to encourage the establishment and growth of the 

native tallgrass species (Stubbendieck 

and Willson 1986:88; Rothman 

and Holder 1992:187) (Figure 14).

Prescribed fire programs, such 

as that currently implemented on a 

cyclical basis at Pipestone National 

Monument, can serve as tools for the 

management of archeological resources 

in two ways. First, combustion of the 

grass and leaf duff cover may expose 

artifacts and archeological features that 

otherwise would be obscured. This 

presents the opportunity to systematiFigure 14. Prescribed burn in progress at Pipestone National Monument, October 1997. (MWAC 

729/PIPE 182, 3477)
PIPESTONE

154

cally record these discoveries and augment the state of baseline knowledge 

about a park’s archeological resources. 

In this sense, post-burn archeological 

inventories can facilitate discovery and 

recordation of archeological resources.

Second, post-burn inventories 

can serve as a means to assess the effects 

of fire to archeological artifacts that lie 

on or near the surface of the ground. An 

experimental study of the effects of prescribed fire on a variety of artifacts in a 

grassland setting was conducted by researchers from the University of North 

Dakota before the 1990s inventory efforts at Pipestone National Monument 

(Sayler et al. 1989; Picha et al. 1991). The 

study concluded that most classes of artifacts (stone, bone, glass, lead, etc.) experience relatively little alteration from 

the effects of grassland fires in subsurface contexts that are even a centimeter 

or less below the surface, while artifacts 

exposed at the surface can experience 

substantial alteration, depending on 

the type of material composing them 

(i.e., lithic cobbles, chipped stone tools 

and debris, glass, and lead artifacts will 

experience less alteration than artifacts 

of wood, bone, and shell). A more recent study of the effects on wildland 

and prescribed fire on archeological resources (Buenger 2003, n.d.a, and n.d.b) 

resulted in a similar conclusion, i.e., fire 

did not significantly affect most classes 

of surface and near-surface artifacts in 

grassland settings. Interestingly, 244 artifacts collected after the 1993 prescribed 

burn at Pipestone National Monument 

(see below) were examined during the 

study, which concluded that “the impact 

of the 1993 prescribed burn at Pipestone 

National Monument did not significantly affect surface collections from sites 

within the burn area” (Buenger n.d.b:2).

Due to the lush ground cover in 

the monument it has not been possible 

to conduct detailed archeological examination of the ground surface without 

the benefit of prescribed burns. With 

the implementation of the prescribed 

burn program the ground surface became available for inspection and three 

episodes of archeological investigation 

were undertaken in concert with the 

prescribed burn program for the first 

purpose mentioned above, i.e., the identification and documentation of archeological artifacts and features. In each 

case the procedure was to conduct visual 

inventories of the ground surface as soon 

after burn episodes as possible, usually 

within a week to 10 days. Ground visibility following individual burns varies depending on the completeness of 

combustion, but in general burns eliminate much of the vegetative mass and 

considerably enhance ground visibility.

A variety of archeological inventory investigations were conducted within the monument intermittently during 

the 1990s (Table 9). Caven P. Clark of 

MWAC conducted the first archeological 

burn inventory in 1993. Jeffrey J. Richner 

and Vergil E. Noble, also of MWAC, conducted the second inventory in 1994. In 

September 1994 Thomas Thiessen and 

Alan Smith visited the monument to 

document the petroglyphs there, particularly those from the Three Maidens 

area. When Systemwide Archeological 

Inventory Program funds became 

available in 1997, Pipestone National 

Monument was targeted partially in response to the fact that the monument’s 

prescribed burn plan called for nearly 

the entire monument to be burned over 

the course of a two-year period to manipulate and eliminate undesirable spe-
155

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

Date Participants Activities Conducted Reference AccessionMay 24-?, 1993 Caven P. Clark

?

Controlled burn tract inventory Rock art recordation

Trip report? Clark 1996 PIPE 176/MWAC 507

May 23-27, 1994 Jeffrey J. Richner

Vergil E. Noble

Controlled burn tract inventory Rock art recordation

Richner 1994 PIPE 177/MWAC 557

Sep 12-15, 1994 Thomas D. Thiessen

Alan Smith

Rock art recordation Thiessen 1994 PIPE 179/MWAC 588

May 10, 1997 Aerial Services, Inc

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Aerial overflight photography Lynott 1997

?

June 9-13, 1997 Douglas D. Scott

Thomas D. Thiessen

Controlled burn tract inventory Notes on file, MWAC PIPE 181/MWAC 704a

July 24-26, 1997 Thomas D. Thiessen Monitoring of bridge replacement Thiessen 1997

?

October 6-17, 1997 Scott Stadler

Harold RoekerBill VolfLisa StanleyRonald MarvinGlen Livermont*Bruce Bessken*

Test excavations at the Richner and Stone Circle sites

Stadler 1997 PIPE 182/MWAC 729

October 28-30, 1997 Douglas D. Scott

Alan Smith

Controlled burn tract inventory Scott 1997 PIPE 181/MWAC 704b

May 5-7, 1998 Mark J. Lynott

Douglas D. ScottThomas D. ThiessenWilliam J. Hunt, Jr.Bruce A. JonesPeter Topping**

Mapping of the South Quarry Thiessen 1998b

?

Table 9. Archeological inventory investigations at Pipestone National Monument, 1993-2001
PIPESTONE

15

Date Participants Activities Conducted Reference AccessionJune 1-4, 1998 Douglas D. Scott

Thomas D. ThiessenRobert K. NickelForest Frost

Controlled burn tract inventory

Thiessen 1998c Appendix D, this volume

PIPE 181/MWAC 704c

May 22-23, 2001 Thomas D. Thiessen Rock art recordation 

Inspection of Locality 17

Thiessen 2001 PIPE 188/MWAC 946

Table 9. Concluded* Detailed from Badlands National Park.** Of the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments of England.
157

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

cies and encourage the growth of native species. Inventory investigations 

were conducted at various times during 1997 and 1998. Presently, the monument’s prescribed burn cycle is three 

years, with one of the three burn areas 

within the monument being burned 

each year (Kristin Legg, email communication to Thiessen, August 9, 2002).

The 1993 Prescribed Burn Inventory

Synchronizing archeological investigations with the monument’s prescribed burn program was recommended in 1980 (Nickel and Thiessen 1980), but 

not undertaken until 1993. Clark (1996) 

was the first archeologist to survey a 

prescribed burn area for the monument. 

The burn, which was conducted in May 

1993, was located in the northwestern 

corner of the monument and covered 

about 30 acres, bounded on the west by 

a monument boundary fence and road, 

on the north by a boundary fence, on 

the south by a mowed strip, and on the 

east by an irregular line conforming to 

the wet lowlands. The entire burn area 

was walked in linear transects oriented 

north-south about 20 m (65.6 ft) apart. 

Artifacts located on the surface 

of the site were marked with pin flags 

and later mapped with a theodolite. 

Artifacts were collected with reference 

to single site areas but not in any smaller provenience unit than that. Field 

numbers used to identify archeological 

sites include the monument acronym 

(PIPE) followed by the year of investigation and the temporary, sequentiallyassigned site number (e.g., PIPE93-1). 

A similar numbering convention was 

followed by Richner and Noble during 

the 1994 investigation. After plotting 

artifact distribution on an archeological base map, some field numbers were 

combined into larger site designations. 

Five site-like areas were defined 

by Clark (1996) on the basis of surface 

finds in the burn unit. At the time of 

survey, the distribution of artifacts suggested that the five distinct areas were 

marked by concentrations of chipped 

stone and worked catlinite and were 

separated from one another by areas 

generally lacking artifacts. He characterized these as occupation or workshop locations. Spot finds were also 

recorded in the burn area not associated with any of the five larger sites. 

These include a single piece of worked 

catlinite and a chipped stone projectile 

point found in the lower-lying ground 

on the east edge of the burn area.

Clark (1996:9-10, Figure 7) also 

recorded a group of petroglyphs 

on a single quartzite outcrop located near the quartzite ledge north of 

Winnewissa Falls. These were not assigned a temporary site number, but 

were named the Derby Petroglyph Site.

The 1994 Prescribed Burn 

Archeological Inventory

The 1994 inventory was conducted by MWAC archeologists Jeffrey 

Richner and Vergil Noble from May 

23 to 27 (Richner 1994). They accomplished the inventory by walking the 

survey zones in linear (north-to-south) 

transects. Typically, spacing between 

transects was maintained at about 5 m 

(16.5 ft). All artifacts and features observed on the ground surface of a particular survey tract were marked with 

pin flags. After survey of the tract was 
PIPESTONE

15

completed, notes were made regarding each flagged item or feature, and 

plan views and site maps were drawn. 

Diagnostic or exotic materials were collected selectively, but most of the items 

noted were left in place. Each find spot 

or site was mapped relative to fixed 

points, such as property monuments or 

other relatively permanent landscape 

features. The identified archeological 

resources were plotted on an archeological base map used by Clark during his 

1993 survey of other prescribed burn 

units. Each survey tract and archeological resource also was documented with 

black-and-white and color photography.

The southwest corner of the 

monument, west of the entrance road 

and south of the area surveyed by 

Clark in 1993, was the first tract examined. It is a former agricultural field 

lying upon a gently sloping hill that 

crests near the west boundary fence; 

the high ground trends from NNW to 

SSE. Unfortunately, the burn was incomplete in this area, leaving a rather 

heavy, residual ground cover over most 

of the survey tract. Lush, green grass 

still covered much of the southern edge 

of the tract. Ground visibility was less 

than 20 percent for most of the area, 

though better visibility was afforded 

on the east and north edges of the tract 

where the burn was more efficient.

Two isolated artifacts of worked 

catlinite were found in this survey zone, 

both recorded near the crest of the slope 

on the side of the hill facing east. The objects were collected since the monument 

planned to harrow the area to prepare a 

seed bed. One of the catlinite objects is a 

flat, circular disc modified through cuts 

and striations on all surfaces. Richner 

(1994) believed it likely that additional 

archeological resources occur in the area 

where the isolated finds were made, 

but were obscured by ground cover. 

The second survey zone was 

a burn area north and east from the 

monument housing units. This survey 

zone is bordered on the west by the 

old road that formerly led north past 

the houses, on the north by the Circle 

Trail (below the quartzite ledge) and 

Pipestone Creek (above the ledge), on 

the south by the entrance road, and on 

the east by the abandoned railroad bed. 

Although the tract east of the former 

railroad grade was burned, time limits 

did not permit its survey. Most of this 

survey zone consists of a gently sloping 

upland where quartzite outcrops dominate the landscape. A small, flat area at 

the base of the quartzite bluff was also 

included in this burn. No cultural resources were recorded despite good 

surface visibility in the upland, quartzite-dominated portion of this tract. One 

site, 21PP2, Locality 21, the Beaubien 

Picnic Site, was relocated and reinventoried. The site was found to be larger and 

more linear than reported by Beaubien.

The final area surveyed in 1994 

was the upland zone north of Pipestone 

Creek and east of the quartzite ledge 

line. This area consists of a flat soil 

bench that gives way on the west to a 

sloping bedrock dominated area adjacent to the steep rock bluff edge. The 

tract is bordered on the north and east by 

a fence marking the NPS boundary line. 

An intermittent drainage cuts across 

this tract, effectively separating it into 

north and south segments. Two sites, 

a single petroglyph (21PP2, Locality 

30, 1994-2, the Noble Petroglyph) and a 
159

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

lithic scatter (21PP2, Locality 31, 1994-3, 

the Richner Site), were recorded south 

of the drainage, and one stone circle site 

(21PP2, Locality 32, 1994-4) was recorded north of the intermittent drainage. 

Here Richner and Noble recorded two 

circular stone alignment features similar to “tipi rings” of the northern and 

northwestern Plains (Kehoe 1958, 1960; 

Davis 1983), and a third circular stone 

pattern a short distance away which 

Richner (1994:4-5) suggests might represent a sweat lodge (Figure 15). These 

stone alignment features are potentially highly significant because they are 

among the few such features that have 

survived of the many recorded in the 

immediate vicinity of the quarries during the late nineteenth century. William 

Henry Holmes’ (1919:254) 1892 map, for 

example, depicts over 300 similar features. No such features were known 

to exist until the 1994 discovery of the 

features at 1994-4. Richner concluded 

the report of his visit with recommendations that the program of prescribed 

grass burn inventories be continued.

The 1994 Rock Art Documentation 

Project

Thomas Thiessen and Alan Smith 

visited Pipestone National Monument 

on September 12-15, 1994, to document 

petroglyphs on 17 quartzite slabs originally from the vicinity of the Three 

Maidens and on two other slabs from 

an unknown location. All of the slabs 

are in the monument’s museum collection. They were photographed under a variety of conditions (wet, dry, in 

natural and artificial light) and notes 

Figure 15. Jeffrey Richner, Chuck Derby, and Betty McSwain examining the Stone Circle Site, 

1994. (MWAC 557/PIPE 177, 3601)
PIPESTONE

16

were made about them (Thiessen 1994). 

The photographs are archived at the 

Midwest Archeological Center, and the 

petroglyphs and their history are reviewed in this volume (see Chapter 11).

The 1997-1998 Monument-wide

Archeological Inventory Following 

the Prescribed Burns

During Fiscal Years 1997 and 

1998, virtually all of the monument 

land was burned at different times, except for the grounds immediately surrounding the visitor center and other 

structures. Through funding from the 

National Park Service’s Systemwide 

Archeological Inventory Program 

(SAIP), pedestrian visual inventory, test 

excavations at selected sites, and a review 

and assessment of the monument’s archeological resources were undertaken.

The SAIP inventory fieldwork occurred in 1997 and 1998 following three 

episodes of controlled burning. The 

first burn occurred in late May 1997 and 

consisted of about 90 acres on the eastern side of the monument. The second 

inventory followed a late September 

burn, also of about 90 acres on the 

western side of the monument. The 

final burn occurred in late May 1998 

and the subsequent inventory covered 

the area from Pipestone Creek north 

of the visitor center to the west edge 

of the Sioux Quartzite ledge and north 

to the north boundary fence. With the 

exception of the area immediately adjacent to the visitor center, the parking 

lots, roads, and the Three Maidens area, 

the entire monument was inventoried. 

Each burn segment or tract was 

walked in parallel transects with spacing between individuals maintained 

at approximately 10 meters. Transects 

were walked north and south or east 

to west depending on the judgement of 

the investigators. Isolated artifacts were 

found throughout the monument. These 

ranged from isolated projectile points, 

other lithic tools and debitage, to worked 

and unworked catlinite pieces. The density of worked and unworked catlinite 

increased near the quarry line, which 

was not unexpected. The quarry line 

and the discontinuous but extensive artifact scatter associated with the extraction and manipulation of catlinite was 

considered a single locality and resource.

The SAIP inventory effort succeeded in relocating and mapping the 

Picnic Site (Locality 22), the Richner 

Site (Locality 31), Sigstad’s PP17 mound 

and the Indian School cemetery monument base site (Localities 17 and 

42), Sigstad’s pp16 sweat lodge excavation site (Locality 16c), the Derby 

Petroglyph Panel (Locality 28), and the 

Noble Petroglyph (Locality 30). In addition a lithic scatter (Locality 34) was 

discovered in the vicinity of Sigstad’s 

pp9 Quarry, two possible stone circles 

(Localities 16d and 40) were located near 

the Indian School cemetery monument 

base and nearby mound (Locality 17), 

and six mound-like features (Localities 

33, 35, 36, 37, 38, and 39) were also recorded. Between October 6 and 17, 

1997, a field crew under the direction of 

Archeologist Scott Stadler dug test excavations at the Richner Site (Locality 

31) and the stone circle site recorded 

in 1994 (Locality 32) (Stadler 1997).
16

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

Base Maps and Field Mapping 

Techniques

The first task undertaken in the 

project was to develop a new and accurate monument archeological base map. 

This was accomplished by contracting 

for low-altitude aerial photography that 

resulted in a photogrammetically-produced base map of the entire monument. Under contract to the Midwest 

Archeological Center, Aerial Services 

of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, produced aerial 

photographs and a monument-wide 

base map for the SAIP inventory. The 

baseline mapping data were used for archeological mapping and creation of an 

archeological resource base map. The 

data were also provided to the monument for use in creation of a geographic 

information system (GIS)-based electronic monument resources base map.

On May 10, 1997, Aerial Services 

overflew the monument taking aerial 

photographs at altitudes of 3,400 and 

6,600 feet. Stereoscopic photo pairs of 

the monument lands were produced at 

each altitude. They then produced and 

ground-truthed a contour map of the 

monument. The map depicted the location of all roads, trails, structures, and 

features visible from the photography, 

with contour intervals of 50 centimeters. The map was produced on mylar and electronically on CD-ROM in 

an ArcInfo-compatible format. Copies 

of the map, CD-ROM, aerial photographic prints, and original aerial photographic negatives were filed with the 

Technical Information Center of the NPS 

Denver Service Center (Lynott 1997).

Aerial Services georeferenced 

their ground control points with the 

metric state plane coordinate system 

based on the WG87 coordinates. They 

also established a series of georeferenced datums in the monument. Each 

datum was marked with a MAGNAIL 

and permanently set. Datum 1 is located at the edge of a sidewalk in the 

visitor center parking lot. Datum 7 is 

set at the northwest corner of the monument boundary fence and Datum 8 is 

set at the southwest monument boundary corner. Datum 9 was set along 

the monument entrance road near the 

Three Maidens area restroom. Other 

datums were set outside the monument 

boundary for georeferencing purposes.

All surface artifacts, site boundaries, features, excavation boundaries, 

and remote sensing grid boundaries 

were mapped during the 1997-1998 SAIP 

inventory using a total station transit. 

The instrument used was a Lietz SET4B 

total station transit with a SDR33 data 

recorder. Each transit shot was recorded on the data recorder and given a previously established identification code. 

The specific artifact number was provided by the SDR33 used in auto-generate point mode. The general procedure 

for field mapping was as follows: the 

instrument was set up at an established 

datum point, and distance, azimuth, and 

xyz coordinate point readings for each 

artifact location or shot were recorded 

electronically to the nearest millimeter.

At the completion of a given 

day’s work the recorded data were 

downloaded onto a laptop computer 

containing the SOKKIA software program MAP. The raw file was processed 

by the computer and a map of that day’s 

finds was then displayed. The MAP 

files were then transferred to AutoCad, 
PIPESTONE

16

a software package used to refine and 

complete the basic illustrations created with MAP. The completed series 

of maps provides a clear picture of the 

nature of artifact distributions and associations. The individual AutoCad 

files from the field work were converted to block drawings and transferred 

into the Pipestone electronic base map.

In order to facilitate the field 

mapping several temporary datums 

were established and shot in from one 

of the permanent datums set by Aerial 

Services. All temporary datums were 

set with wooden stakes. Temporary datums 31 and 32 are located south of the 

Richner Site. Temporary datum 40 is 10 

meters north of Datum 1, and temporary datums 45, 46, and 47 are located 

near the Indian School cemetery monument base site (Locality 42). Temporary 

datum 45 is an orange-painted iron pipe 

that denotes the former location of the 

memorial base. Datum 1 has the state 

plane metric coordinates of N215169.969/

E613494.9001 and an elevation of 

505.5537 meters. All temporary datums 

are registered to these coordinates.

Sigstad Base Map Rectification

John S. Sigstad placed his site 

locations from the 1965 monument inventory on a base map provided by the 

NPS. The base map is dated 1941 and 

was created by the Minnesota Highway 

Department. An effort was made to 

digitize Sigstad’s site locations and the 

base map boundary into ArcInfo for inclusion as a layer on the new electronic 

base map, and for correlation with the 

1997-1998 SAIP inventory data. It was 

impossible to register the old map with 

the 1997 map. It became apparent that 

the 1941 base map was improperly scaled 

and has an uncorrectable error. The map 

scale is in error by three percent east to 

west and ten percent north to south.

In an attempt to locate Sigstad’s 

sites on the new base map his field 

notes and records were consulted to 

determine how he plotted his sites. 

Sigstad apparently eyeballed the site 

locations as he discovered them and 

located them on his copy of the monument base map by observation. He later 

computed distances recorded in his site 

records and report by measuring from 

the plotted map location to some nearby 

feature such as a monument boundary fence, building, or other feature.

Using Sigstad’s notes, records, 

and plotted site locations, but ignoring his distance measurements, the site 

location data were transferred to the 

electronic base map. All Sigstad site locations must be considered approximations. However, the 1997-1998 SAIP inventory effort re-recorded Sigstad’s sites 

or features as they were encountered. 

The old locations plotted from Sigstad’s 

map showed moderate to good correlation with total station-mapped locations.

Fieldwork Schedules

The 1997 and 1998 monumentwide inventory field investigations followed the monument’s burn cycle (Table 

9). Douglas Scott and Thomas Thiessen 

conducted the inventory of essentially 

the eastern third of the monument between June 9 and June 12, 1997. Scott and 

Alan Smith conducted the inventory of 

the monument’s western and southern 

third between October 28 and October 

30, 1997. A Midwest Archeological 
16

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

Center crew under the direction of 

Scott Stadler conducted test excavations 

at two sites between October 6 and 

October 17, 1997. Scott and Thiessen 

returned to Pipestone on June 1, 1998, 

and completed the northern third after the grass burn in that area. They 

were accompanied by Robert Nickel 

and Forest Frost, who conducted magnetic and electrical resistivity surveys 

of the site of the former Indian “Peace 

Memorial” marker and the presumed 

site of an Indian School cemetery used 

in the 1890s and early 1900s (Locality 

42), as well as a magnetic survey at the 

Stone Circle Site (Locality 32). That 

geophysical work is summarized in a 

separate report (Nickel and Frost 2000).

During July 1997 Thomas 

Thiessen also monitored the replacement of two bridge spans over Pipestone 

Creek for the monument. No cultural resources were observed (Thiessen 1997). 

Tested Sites

21PP2, Locality 31, 19

Ric

The site is a dense scatter of 

worked catlinite, chipped stone debris 

and tools, and faunal remains first recorded by Richner and Noble in 1994 

(Richner 1994). The scatter covers most 

of the flat soil bench flanking the east 

property line and is about 120 m x 60 

m (400 ft x 200 ft) in extent. It probably extends east outside the monument 

boundary, but no attempt was made to 

confirm that speculation. The western 

edge is contiguous with the highest elevation of the field; artifacts do not occur in appreciable numbers downslope 

from the flat bench. Richner and Noble 

observed more than 30 artifacts on the 

ground surface on this site, including a 

variety of shaped and modified pieces 

of catlinite, two end scrapers, a biface, 

and various pieces of chipped stone 

debitage. Numerous fragmentary faunal elements that appear to be quite old 

were also observed. All of the bone 

fragments were too small and weathered to permit identification by element 

or species, and so were not further analyzed beyond noting their presence in 

test unit descriptions and Tables 10 and 

11. The bone fragments are not necessarily archeological in origin, however, 

and may represent animals who died 

natural deaths, whose remains were 

weathered and eventually mixed into 

the soil through bioturbation and other 

pedoturbation processes. A small collection consisting of three formal tools 

and six pieces of debitage representing 

different material types were collected 

for comparative purposes during the 

1994 inventory. This site is situated immediately north of a mound recorded 

on the Holmes (1919:254) map made 

in 1892. There is no indication of a 

mound in the area today. Pipestone 

Creek is located south of the site, and 

the creek has been extensively channelized in this area. The creek bank and 

surrounding land have been significantly altered in the area immediately 

south of the site, perhaps truncating its 

southern margin and destroying the 

mound, if Holmes’ location was correct. 

The site was redocumented in 

June 1997 (field notes on file, accession 

PIPE 181/MWAC 704a). The area was 

walked in two wide transects and all 

visible surface artifacts were flagged 

and mapped with a total station. Over 

90 artifacts including lithic debitage, 
PIPESTONE

14

Table 10. Artifacts from Test Units 1-6 at the Richner Site (21PP2, Locality 31, 1994-3).

Test Chipped Chipped Worked Unworked Bone OtherUnit Stone Stone Catlinite Catlinite FragmentsNo./Level Tools Debitage

TU 1/0-10 cm 1 (biface) 15 0 2 2

TU 1/10-20 cm 1 (biface) 26 0 3 0TU 1/20-30 cm 1 (biface) 27 1 4 4 1 (glass sherd)TU 1/30-40 cm 1 (retouched flake) 40 0 2 1TU 1/40-50 cm 0 5 0 0 0TU1/total 4 113 1 11 7 1TU 2/0-10 cm 2 (scraper + 14 1 3 0

 utilized flake)

TU 2/10-20 cm 1 (projectile point) 32 3 1 2TU 2/20-30 cm 0 53 3 0 0TU 2/30-40 cm 1 (biface) 53 0 0 1TU 2/40-50 cm 1 (scraper) 37 0 0 12TU 2/50-60 cm 0 4 0 0 2TU 2/total 5 179 6 4 17TU 3/0-10 cm 0 3 2 0 0TU 3/10-20 cm 0 7 0 2 1TU 3/20-30 cm 0 7 1 0 0TU 3/30-40 cm 1 (projectile point) 1 0 0 0TU 3/40-50 cm 0 5 0 0 0TU 3/total 1 23 3 2 1TU 4/0-10 cm 0 2 0 2 1TU 4/10-20 cm 0 5 0 2 4TU 4/20-30 cm 0 6 0 3 0TU 4/30-40 cm 0 11 0 0 0TU 4/50-50 cm 0 11 1 0 1TU 4/total 0 35 1 7 6
16

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s TU 5/0-10 cm

0 10 20 13 0

TU 5/10-20 cm 1 (projectile point) 15 6 4 0 1 (pottery sherd?)TU 5/20-30 cm

0 12 1 0 1

TU 5/30-40 xm

0 1 0 0 0

TU 5/total 1 38 27 17 1TU 6/0-10 cm

0 0 0 0 0

TU 6/10-20 cm

0 0 0 0 0

TU 6/20-30 cm

0 0 0 0 0

TU 6/30-40 cm

0 2 0 0 0

TU 6/40-50 cm

0 1 0 0 0

TU 6/total

0 3 0 0 0

Total of all TUs 11 391 38 41 32

2

Table 10. Concluded

Test Chipped Chipped Worked Unworked Bone OtherUnit Stone Stone Catlinite Catlinite FragmentsNo./Level Tools Debitage
PIPESTONE

1

Feature 1, Northernmost Stone CircleUnit 96N/105W0-10 cm 0 2 1 0 0 010-20 cm 0 4 0 0 0 1 (fire cracked rock)20-30 cm 0 6 0 0 0 0Unit 97N/105W0-10 cm 0 1 1 0 0 010-20 cm 0 12 0 0 0 2 (fire cracked rocks)20-30 cm 0 0 0 0 0 030-40 cm 0 0 0 0 0 0Unit 98N/105W0-10 cm 0 0 1 0 0 010-20 cm 0 12 0 0 0 020-30 cm 0 10 0 0 0 030-40 cm 0 1 0 0 0 040-50 cm 0 1 0 0 0 0Unit 99N/105W0-10 cm 0 0 2 0 0 010-20 cm 0 1 0 0 0 020-30 cm 0 10 0 0 0 030-40 cm 0 1 1 0 0 0Unit 100N/105W0-10 cm 0 0 0 0 0 010-20 cm 0 2 0 0 0 020-30 cm 0 3 0 0 0 030-40 cm 0 0 0 0 0 0Table 11. Artifacts from Test Units in Features 1-3 at the Stone Circle Site (21PP2, Locality 32, 1994-4).

Test Chipped Chipped Worked Unworked Bone OtherUnit Stone Stone Catlinite Catlinite FragmentsNo./Level Tools Debitage
16

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s Unit 101N/105W 0-10 cm 0 0 0 6 0 0 10-20 cm 0 3 0 2 0 0 20-30 cm 0 0 0 0 0 0 30-40 cm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unit 102N/105W 0-10 cm 0 0 0 7 1 4 (fire cracked rocks) 10-20 cm 0 1 0 7 0 0 20-30 cm 0 0 0 0 0 0 30-40 cm 0 1 0 1 0 0 Feature 3, Southernmost Stone Circle Unit 77N/110W 0-10 cm 0 13 1 3 0 0 Unit 78N/110W 0-10 cm 0 16 0 2 0 0 Unit 79N/110W 0-10 cm 0 14 2 3 0 0 10-20 cm 0 16 0 0 1 0 20-30 cm 0 14 0 0 1 0 Unit 80N/110W 0-10 cm 0 12 2 2 0 1 (curved glass sherd)

Table 11. ContinuedTest Chipped Chipped Worked Unworked Bone OtherUnit Stone Stone Catlinite Catlinite FragmentsNo./Level Tools Debitage
PIPESTONE

1

Natural Rock ClusterUnit 70N/118W0-10 cm 0 6 0 5 3 010-20 cm 0 2 1 0 4 020-30 cm 0 0 0 0 0 0Table 11. ConcludedTest Chipped Chipped Worked Unworked Bone OtherUnit Stone Stone Catlinite Catlinite FragmentsNo./Level Tools Debitage
16

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

worked and unworked catlinite, a few 

fragments of bone, and two pottery 

sherds were recorded. Several pieces of 

worked stone, the sherds, and a single 

piece of worked catlinite were collected.

Immediately prior to conducting 

the test excavations in October 1997, a pedestrian survey of the site area was again 

undertaken (Stadler 1997). The area was 

rewalked at roughly 5-meter intervals. 

All artifacts were flagged and then two 

test units (numbered 1 and 2) were established in the densest concentration. The 

surface collection which was plotted by 

Stadler using a total station yielded two 

projectile points, 30 worked catlinite 

fragments, four unworked catlinite fragments, and 22 pieces of lithic debitage. 

TU 1 was about 20 meters WNW 

of datum 32 (established during the 

1997 burn inventory). TU 2 was about 

34 meters NW of the same datum. The 

other four test units were judgementally 

placed in an effort to determine the extent of the site. TU 3 was set up about 5 

meters west of the east boundary fence. 

TU 4 was placed about 30 meters north 

of TU 3 and 30-35 meters west of the 

boundary fence. TU 5 was about 20 meters NW of TU 2. The last test unit (TU 

6) was placed across the drainage to the 

north but still between Locality 34 and 

the Richner Site. The unit was placed 

to test the hypothesis that the uplands 

was essentially a large lithic scatter with 

several areas of dense artifact concentration, and it was dug as a control unit.

The test units were excavated 

in 10 cm levels and screened with 1/4-

inch mesh. All artifacts were collected. 

Upon completion of excavations, all 

units were profiled and photographed 

before being backfilled. Abundant rodent disturbance was noted throughout the area. One very energetic rodent did his/her best to fill in one test 

unit whenever the excavators broke 

for lunch or at the end of the day. 

Soils at the Richner Site were 

very dark brown (black) from the surface to about 30 cm. From 30 cm to 45 

cm they changed to dark brown and 

were more compacted, dry, and blocky. 

The underlying layer began at about 40 

cm where it turned yellowish brown, 

which was the sterile layer. Bedrock 

was deeper at this site than at Locality 

32 (the Stone Circle Site). Several units 

were probed after completion of the 

excavation to try and find bedrock but 

were unsuccessful. Artifacts recovered 

from each test unit are listed in Table 10.

Test Unit 1

This unit was excavated to 50 

cmbs. The 0-10 cm level yielded one biface, 15 pieces of debitage, two unworked 

catlinite fragments, and two bone fragments. The 10-20 cm level yielded one 

biface (a possible projectile point fragment), 26 pieces of debitage, and three 

unworked catlinite fragments. The 20-

30 cm level yielded one pipe bowl fragment (catlinite), one biface, 27 pieces of 

debitage, four unworked catlinite fragments, four bone fragments, and one 

piece of flat glass, which is probably 

intrusive. The 30-40 cm yielded one 

retouched flake, one bone fragment, 

two unworked catlinite fragments, and 

40 pieces of debitage. The 40-50 cm 

level yielded five pieces of debitage.
PIPESTONE

170

Test Unit 2

This unit was excavated to 60 cm 

and then probed to bedrock. There was 

one piece of debitage on the surface. 

The 0-10 cm level yielded one scraper, 

one utilized flake, one worked catlinite fragment, three unworked catlinite 

fragments, and 14 pieces of debitage. 

The 10-20 cm level yielded one projectile 

point, three worked catlinite fragments, 

one unworked catlinite fragment, 32 

pieces of debitage, and two bone fragments. The 20-30 cm level yielded three 

worked catlinite fragments, and 53 

pieces of debitage. The 30-40 cm level 

yielded one biface, 53 pieces of debitage, 

and one bone fragment. The 40-50 cm 

level yielded one scraper, 37 pieces of 

debitage, and 12 bone fragments. The 

50-60 cm level yielded four pieces of 

debitage, and two bone fragments. The 

soil probing below this level revealed 

that at 75 cmbs the soil becomes a pure 

fine tan sand. This sand layer continues to bedrock which is at 150 cmbs.

Test Unit 3

This unit was excavated to 50 

cmbs. The 0-10 cm level yielded two 

worked catlinite fragments, and three 

pieces of debitage. The 10-20 cm level 

yielded seven pieces of debitage, two 

unworked catlinite fragments, and one 

bone fragment. The 20-30 cm level 

yielded only one worked catlinite fragment and seven pieces of debitage. The 

30-40 cm yielded one projectile point 

and one piece of debitage. The 40-50 

cm level yielded five pieces of debitage.

Test Unit 4

Test Unit 4 was excavated to 50 

cmbs and probed to 100 cmbs. The 0-10 

cm level yielded two pieces of debitage, 

two unworked catlinite fragments, and 

one bone fragment. The 10-20 cm level 

yielded five pieces of debitage, two unworked catlinite fragments, and four 

bone fragments. The 20-30 cm yielded 

six pieces of debitage and three pieces 

of unworked catlinite. The 30-40 cm 

level yielded 11 pieces of debitage, and 

the 40-50 cm level yielded 11 pieces of 

debitage, one piece of worked catlinite, 

and one bone fragment. The soil probe 

revealed that at 66 cm the soil turns 

to a solid yellowish brown clay. At 81 

cmbs calcium carbonate/caliche starts 

to appear in the clay and continues to 

100 cm, the bottom of the probing effort.

Test Unit 5

Test Unit 5 was excavated to 

bedrock which was encountered at 40 

cmbs. One piece of worked catlinite was 

found on the surface. The 0-10 cm level 

yielded 19 pieces of worked catlinite, 13 

unworked catlinite pieces, and 10 pieces 

of debitage. The 10-20 cm level yielded 

one projectile point, one possible pottery 

(burned clay?) sherd, six pieces of worked 

catlinite, four pieces of unworked catlinite, and 15 pieces of debitage. The 20-

30 cm level yielded one piece of worked 

catlinite, 12 pieces of debitage, and one 

bone fragment, and the 30-40 cm level yielded only one piece of debitage.

Test Unit 6

Test Unit 6 was excavated to 50 

cmbs and probed to 62 cmbs. The 0-10 

cm level yielded no artifacts as did the 

10-20 cm and 20-30 cm levels. The 30-40 

cm level yielded two pieces of debitage, 

and the 40-50 cm level only one piece of 

debitage. Only the south half of the 40-

50 cm level was excavated due to time 
171

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

constraints. The soil probe revealed 

that the yellow brown clay with caliche continued to 62 cmbs. The clay was 

very indurated and difficult to probe.

Interpretations

Due to the extensive rodent disturbance throughout the site area it is 

unlikely that the vertical proveniences 

provide any valid stratigraphic data. 

The horizontal distribution is undoubtedly compromised by rodent activity to 

some degree, but may at least provide 

an adulterated glimpse at the site’s artifact patterning. With the exception of 

the single piece of probable intrusive 

glass the artifacts recovered from the 

site are all prehistoric in origin, or at 

least bear no evidence of being worked 

with metal tools. The surface mapping 

of the artifact distribution and the excavation data suggest that worked and 

unworked catlinite concentrate in specific areas of the site. Some of the lithic 

debitage is associated with the catlinite concentrations and may reflect tool 

maintenance activities related to catinite processing. The single pipe blank 

may suggest that catlinite preforms 

were roughed out on-site for transport to other localities for finishing.

The absence of evidence for occupational features such as hearths, 

storage pits, and posts as well as the remaining lithic debitage and the paucity 

of tools and pottery sherds suggest the 

site was also a short-term campsite. The 

primary purpose may have been associated with the extraction and processing 

of catlinite, but the site was also used 

as a camp to support those activities.

The ceramics found on the site 

during the June 1997 burn inventory 

and the six projectile points found during the October 1997 excavations provide the only datable artifact types (see 

Chapter 10). They suggest the site was 

occupied in the Late Woodland to Late 

Prehistoric time frame, i.e., sometime 

within the AD 400 to 1650 time span.

21PP2, Locality 32, 19

Cir

The area north of the intermittent drainage was surveyed using the 

same methods previously described. 

A sparse scatter of chipped stone items 

was noted in this area, but no artifact 

concentrations were apparent. A single 

scraper was collected from the surface 

of this site during the 1994 inventory by 

Richner and Noble. However, toward the 

northwest portion of the flat soil bench, 

a short distance east from the rock outcrop zone, three cultural features were 

observed, mapped, and photographed 

by Richner and Noble. These features 

and their associated artifact scatters comprise Locality 32 (1994-4) (see Figure 16).

Features 1 and 2 are adjacent, 

roughly circular arrangements of 

quartzite rocks. The rocks, which are 

exposed only partly above the prairie 

earth, appear purposefully arranged to 

form circular alignments a single rock 

in width. Feature 1, the northernmost 

of the circular alignments, is about 5 m 

(16.5 ft) in diameter with a 2.5 m-wide 

(8 ft-wide) gap in the rock circle, facing 

due east. Richner and Noble mapped 

19 rocks in this circular alignment.
PIPESTONE

172

Feature 2, a second circular 

alignment located about 2 m south and 

slightly west of Feature 1, is somewhat 

smaller, but has the same configuration as Feature 1, including the break 

in the otherwise continuous pattern 

of rocks. Richner and Noble mapped 

eight rocks in this alignment. A single 

piece of chipped stone debitage was 

observed just inside the opening of 

Feature 1. At the opening of Feature 2, 

a piece of debitage and a fragmentary 

chipped stone bifacial tool were found. 

These three artifacts were collected.

A third rock cluster, Feature 3, is 

about 10 m (33 ft) south of Feature 2 and 

forms a smaller, roughly circular pattern 

3.75 m (12.3 ft) in diameter. Numerous 

rocks are present (28 were mapped), and 

they occur in a more complex grouping 

than in either of the single-rock circles. 

Further, the interior of the feature is disturbed by a large soil mound created by 

burrowing mammals. A small scatter of 

chipped stone debitage (all of the same 

raw material) was observed and collected on the surface near a possible opening 

or break in the feature, which faces SSE.

Features 1 and 2 appear to be 

rock arrangements commonly referred 

to as “tipi rings” in the literature (Kehoe 

1958, 1960; Davis 1983). Such features 

may have had multiple functions, but 

are commonly thought to represent 

a pattern of stones used to support 

poles and/or hold down hide coverings in the construction of a tipi. The 

facts that tipis historically were often 

Figure 16. Test Unit 97N 105W showing the edge of Feature 1 at the Stone Circle Site, October

1997. The stone concentration at the far end of the unit marks the circular stone alignment. 

(MWAC 729/PIPE 182, 3477) 
173

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

oriented to face generally east (Kehoe 

1960:444; 1983:336;Quigg and Brumley 

1984:12), and, when discernible, the 

gaps in these rock circles also face east, 

lends some additional support to interpretation of the features as tipi rings. 

The function of the third feature is less 

clear, though its position at a moderate distance from the presumed living 

quarters suggests the possibility that 

this rock cluster could represent a traditional sweat lodge. No evidence of 

fire hearths or other features was found 

during the test excavations at this site.

As noted above, the rocks forming all three features at Locality 32 

(1994-4) are partly buried in the undisturbed prairie soil. In placing pin 

flags around the perimeter of the features to assist photography it was noted 

that most of the rocks have perhaps 75 

percent or more of their mass under 

ground, with only small areas exposed 

on the surface. This fact, in combination 

with an apparent absence of historic 

items and apparent association of lithic 

materials with each feature, strongly 

indicates that the features and the site 

have considerable antiquity. Based 

upon surface indications, this would 

appear to be a significant site, especially rare in the eastern United States 

where such features have not usually 

survived modern agricultural activities.

Test excavations were dug at the 

site in October 1997 by a crew under the 

direction of MWAC archeologist Scott 

Stadler in order to determine the site’s 

function and age. As one of only three 

recorded stone circle sites, and the best 

preserved example, in the monument it 

was deemed worthy of testing. A site 

datum was established using a chaining pin that was left in 1994 by Richner 

and Noble, which is located east of the 

northernmost stone circle (Feature 1). 

An excavation grid was established with 

a Brunton, and the datum was designated as coordinate 100N/100W. The excavation units were also mapped using a 

total station. Features 1 and 3 were selected for investigation by digging a test 

trench through each. Feature 2 was not 

selected for test excavation because only 

three of the eight rocks noted by Richner 

and Noble were visible at the time of a 

revisit by Douglas Scott and Thomas 

Thiessen on June 11, 1997 (field notes 

on file, Midwest Archeological Center).

Two trenches and a single 1x1 

test unit were excavated. One trench 

extended through the approximate 

center of Feature 1, the northernmost 

tipi ring. It consisted of seven consecutive 1x1m units, one of which was excavated to bedrock. Soils are generally 

as follows: 0-30 cm is black silty loam 

which is followed by a much more 

compacted, dry, blocky lighter colored 

silty loam that appears to be sterile except for the occasional artifact in a rodent run. As a result, most of the units 

were excavated to a depth of 40 cmbs. 

Most artifacts were recovered in the 

upper black layer of soil above 30 cm.

The other trench was dug in 

Feature 3, the southernmost circle of the 

three suspected tipi rings. It consisted 

of four consecutive 1x1m units that began with 77N/110W and ended with 

80N/110W. The trench extended through 

the approximate center of the circle.

Each 1x1m unit is described below. All were excavated using 10 cm 

levels and all material was screened 
PIPESTONE

174

through 1/4 inch mesh. Evidence of 

rodent burrowing was present in almost every unit. The artifacts found in 

the excavations are listed in Table 8-3.

Feature 1, the Northernmost Stone Circle

96N/105W

This unit was excavated to 50 

cmbs and was believed to be outside the 

main rock alignment. A cluster of cobbles 

was located at the north end of this unit 

extending into the next unit at a depth 

of about 20 cmbs. These may be part of 

the circle itself. At 0-10 cmbs two pieces 

of debitage and one piece of worked catlinite were recovered. The level from 10-

20 cmbs yielded four pieces of debitage 

and one fire cracked rock, and the 20-30 

cmbs level yielded six pieces of debitage. 

No artifacts were found below 30 cmbs.

97N/105W

This unit was excavated to 40 

cmbs. The alignment cobbles are in 

the south wall of this unit and extend 

into the unit to the south. One piece 

of debitage and one worked catlinite 

fragment were found at 0-10 cm. The 

10-20 cm level revealed 12 pieces of debitage, and two fire cracked rocks. No 

artifacts were recovered below 20 cm.

98N/105W

This unit was excavated to bedrock as a control unit. Bedrock was located at 65 cm. The 0-10 cm level contained one worked catlinite fragment; 

the 10-20 cm level had 12 pieces of debitage; the 20-30 cm level had 10 pieces 

of debitage; the 30-40 cm level yielded 

one piece of debitage; and the 40-50 cm 

level yielded one piece of debitage. No 

artifacts were recovered below 50 cm.

99N/105W

This unit was excavated to 40 cm. 

The 0-10 cm level yielded two fragments 

of worked catlinite; the 10-20 cm level 

had 1 piece of debitage; the 20-30 cm 

level yielded 10 bone fragments; and the 

30-40 cm level yielded one piece of debitage and one worked catlinite fragment.

100N/105W

This unit was excavated to 40 

cm. The 0-10 cm and 30-40 cm levels contained no artifacts, although 

the 10-20 cm level yielded two pieces of debitage and the 20-30 cm level yielded three pieces of debitage.

101N/105W

This unit was excavated to 40 cm. 

The 0-10 cm level yielded six unworked 

catlinite fragments, and the 10-20 cm level yielded three pieces of debitage and 

two unworked catlinite fragments. There 

were no artifacts recovered below 20 cm.

102N/105W

This unit was excavated to 40 

cmbs. This unit is suspected to be outside (north) of the rock alignment. The 0-

10 cm level yielded seven unworked catlinite fragments, four fire cracked rocks, 

and one bone fragment. The 10-20 cm 

level had one piece of debitage and seven 

unworked catlinite fragments. The 20-30 

cm level yielded no artifacts, but the 30-

40 cm level yielded one piece of debitage 

and one unworked catlinite fragment. 

Feature 3, the Southernmost Stone Circle

77N\110W

This unit was only excavated 

to 10 cmbs because of the large number of quartzite cobbles present. The 
175

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVENTORY INVESTIGATIONS OF THE 1990s

soil was a dark silty loam with a large 

number of plant roots and inclusions of smaller stones. There were 

13 pieces of debitage and four pieces 

of catlinite (one worked and three unworked) recovered from this unit.

78N/110W 

This unit also was only excavated 

to 10 cmbs due to even more quartzite 

cobbles than the previous unit. Sixteen 

debitage and two unworked catlinite 

fragments were found. The soil is the 

same as described for the previous unit.

79N/110W

This unit was excavated to 30 

cm since there were far fewer quartzite cobbles here. This may be either 

the center of the rock feature or it was 

possibly excavated previously since the 

rocks appear to be piled on either side 

of this unit. The 0-10 cm level yielded 14 pieces of debitage, two worked 

catlinite and three unworked catlinite fragments. The 10-20 cmbs level 

yielded 16 pieces of debitage and 1 

bone fragment. The 20-30 cmbs level 

yielded 14 pieces of debitage and one 

bone fragment. The unit was stopped 

once very large naturally occurring 

cobbles were found in the soil matrix.

80N/110W

This unit was only excavated to 

10 cmbs due, once again, to a heavy concentration of naturally occurring quartzite cobbles. Artifacts recovered include 

12 pieces of debitage, two worked catlinite fragments, two unworked catlinite pieces, and one piece of curved 

glass. The glass appears intrusive and 

probably originated in a rodent burrow, 

although the stratigraphy is unclear.

The Third Test Excavation

70N/118W

An apparent cluster of rocks 

was observed by Scott Stadler approximately five meters west of Feature 3, 

and was selected for test excavation. 

This 1x1 m unit was excavated to 40 

cmbs. The 0-10 cm level yielded five unworked catlinite fragments, six pieces 

of debitage, and three bone fragments. 

The 10-20 cm level yielded two pieces 

of debitage, one worked catlinite fragment, and four bone fragments. The 

20-30 cm level yielded three pieces of 

debitage. There were no artifacts below 30 cm. Excavation was stopped at 

40 cm due to encountering large naturally occurring quartzite boulders as 

well as the realization that this was not 

a cultural feature as first suspected. 

Interpretation

Test excavations confirmed the 

likely cultural nature of two of the 

three stone features recorded in 1994 

by Richner and Noble. The presence 

of lithic debris in the features, as well 

as around the site in general, suggests 

the area was used as a short-term habitation and special use site. Feature 1, 

the northernmost stone alignment, appears to be a true cultural feature. It 

most strongly resembles a tipi ring. The 

presence of lithic debitage and catlinite 

in and near the stone alignment, as well 

as the presence of fire altered rock suggest the site was used as a temporary 

habitation and for the processing of 

raw catlinite. The lithic debris appears 

to be consistent with tool maintenance 

activities, and the catlinite fragments 

appear to be discards from the initial 

reduction and processing of raw mate-
PIPESTONE

17

rial. With the exception of one piece of 

intrusive modern glass probably introduced by rodent burrowing activity, the 

artifact assemblage is consistent with 

a prehistoric date. The absence of diagnostic tools or datable charcoal prevents an absolute date of use from being 

stated; however, the lithic reduction debris sequence represented is consistent 

with a late prehistoric occupation date.

Feature 3, the southernmost stone 

circle, is more enigmatic. The center of 

unit 79N/110W suggests this area was 

previously disturbed. It was initially 

suggested that this area may have been 

a sweat lodge, but the absence of fire altered rock, the absence of charcoal, and 

the lack of a discernible pattern to the 

excavated rock argue against this point. 

It seems more likely that this area of the 

site represents a previously excavated 

rock mound. This may be a remnant of 

one of the mounds excavated in 1882 by 

Norris or perhaps by Charles Bennett 

and his friends before the turn of the 

century. The lithic debris present in the 

“mound” fill may be fortuitous in the 

sense that it was deposited as backfill 

from the early excavations or it may be 

contemporary with the construction of 

the feature, if it is indeed a constructed 

mound. If the lithic material is contemporary with the feature construction then it seems likely it is associated 

with the stone circle alignment and the 

general lithic scatter noted in the area.

The third area investigated, with a 

1x1 m est unit, was not judged to contain 

any cultural features other than a few 

artifacts inadvertently mixed into the 

soil, probably the result of bioturbation.
177

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Introduction

In this chapter a complete listing 

of the recorded archeological resources at Pipestone National Monument is 

presented and summarized. As mentioned earlier, the entire monument has 

been assigned one official site number (21PP2) by the State Archaeologist. 

During his 1965 monument-wide survey, Sigstad (1970a) assigned trinomial 

numbers to 22 sites that he recorded 

within the monument boundary. He 

also completed University of Colorado 

(where he had graduated the semester previous to his work at Pipestone) 

Museum archeological site forms for 

each of these sites. Following his 1965 

Pipestone research, Sigstad began 

graduate studies at the University of 

Missouri. During his test excavations at 

quarry pits in the monument in 1966, he 

also completed Archaeological Survey 

of Missouri site forms for six quarries 

or groups of quarries (21PP3, 5, 7-10) 

and completed “freehand” site forms 

for three more quarries (21PP11-12, 18). 

Sigstad’s forms were never submitted to 

the State Archaeologist and so were not 

formally entered in the Minnesota site 

files. Consequently, while they appear 

similar to officially recorded trinomial 

numbers for Pipestone County archeological sites, his numbers duplicate official state numbers assigned to Pipestone 

County sites outside the monument.

The view of the site definition situation at Pipestone National Monument 

that is held by the authors is that the 

entire monument is a single archeological site, or rather complex, that is 

presently composed of 43 localities or 

“subsites” (Table 12). The Archeological 

Sites Management Information System 

(ASMIS), which is the National Park 

Service’s official database for archeological sites throughout the National 

Park System, defines a “subsite” as “a 

discrete, separately managed feature, 

unit or area within an ASMIS archeological site. Subsites have location and 

can be spatially differentiated from other subsites within a specific archeological site” (National Park Service 2001:8).

For the sake of simplification, 

and to reduce the potential for confusion arising from the unofficial numbers used by Sigstad, we recommend 

that for present and future reference 

purposes, the state designator (“21”) be 

omitted from Sigstad’s numbers and that 

the county designator be presented as 

lower case letters, i.e., “pp” rather than 

“PP.” Thus, for example, the 18th site recorded by Sigstad would be referred to 

as locality/subsite 18 or “pp18.” To preserve the utility and order of Sigstad’s 

numbers, the 22 sites he recorded 

should continue to constitute the first 

22 localities or subsites recorded within the monument. Sites recorded after 

Sigstad’s work are herein assigned locality or subsite numbers that continue 

the number series initiated by Sigstad. 

Site number “21PP2” should be used 

only with reference to the entire monument as a single archeological property.

The following are brief synopses 

of information about each archeological 

locality or subsite that has been recorded 

at Pipestone National Monument. All 

site designations that have been used in 

the past, including the Sigstad number 
PIPESTONE

17

(as applicable), temporary field number, 

and locality or subsite number assigned 

herein are identified, along with names 

given to subsites, where available.

Site/Subsite Descriptions

21PP2, Locality

pp1, T

The Three Maidens is a wellknown feature within Pipestone 

National Monument. It consists of six 

large glacial erratic boulders situated 

along the monument’s south boundary. 

The boulders are so named because 

Native American tradition holds that 

they are the abode of three (sometimes 

said to be two) female spirits who guard 

the quarries and must be propitiated 

before catlinite is taken from the pits. 

Today the boulders rest on a well-manicured grassy area, but during the nineteenth century there was apparently little soil development around them and 

the boulders rested on exposed Sioux 

quartzite bedrock. Petroglyphs were 

visible around the base of the boulders, 

many of which were removed in order to 

save them from destruction by vandals 

(see Chapter 11 for more history of the 

petroglyphs). The Three Maidens are 

an important part of Pipestone National 

Monument today, and have a transcendental significance to the quarriers and 

Native American visitors to the monument (Hughes and Stewart 1997:22-26). 

Offerings of food and tobacco are often 

left at the Three Maidens by modern 

quarriers (Hughes and Stewart 1997:25-

26). The Three Maidens were assigned 

site number 21PP1 by Sigstad, but that 

number is officially recorded for the 

earthwork that once existed northeast of 

the quarries (see Appendix E and Table 2).

21PP2, Locality

p

Locality 2 is a low circular mound 

located at the south side of the park 

housing complex. Sigstad (1970a:9) described the feature as roughly circular 

and about 1 meter high. Sigstad (1970a:9) 

dug a 5x5 foot test pit in the center of the 

apparent mound and concluded it was 

a man-made feature, but unlikely to be 

prehistoric in origin. He believed the 

feature is probably a refuse pile consisting of soil and Sioux quartzite with lithic debris inadvertently intermixed in the 

fill. The mound appears substantially 

the same today as described by Sigstad.

21PP2, Locality

pp3, Sou

Locality 3 is the South Quarry 

pits. In 1949, Beaubien (1957:7-9, Figure 

1; 1983:40-41, 43-45) dug a five-footwide trench across one of the pits, from 

which he recovered 12 ungrooved hammerstones, two possible bison rib fragments, and about 150 pieces of catlinite. Beaubien (1957, 1983) believed the 

hammerstones and ribs to be quarrying 

tools, although the catlinite he found 

in his excavations exhibited evidence 

of sawing with metal tools. Sigstad 

(1970a:10-11) also dug a test excavation 

in the southeast quarter of these pits, 

which he apparently regarded as one 

quarry. He found one hammerstone, a 

“few” pieces of catlinite, and a “china 

plate fragment.” The South Quarry pits 

are not used today and are overgrown 

with brush. Other than the vegetation 

they appear to be substantially the same 

as described by Beaubien and Sigstad. 

As a demonstration of mapping techniques used by the Royal Commission 

on Historical Monuments of England, 
179

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Figure 17. Archeological base map developed for the 1997-1998 inventories.
PIPESTONE

18
18

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

 

Minn. St.

Site No.

NPS

Locality 

No.

Sigstad or

NPS field 

number/name

Nature of site References Comments

21PP2 Loc. 1 1/Three 

Maidens

Glacial 

boulders and 

petroglyphs

Sigstad 

1970:8-9

Petrogylphs 

removed from site 

in 1888 or 1889

21PP2 Loc. 2 2 Mound Sigstad 

1970:9

Not recorded by 

WHH; excavated by 

JSS; refuse pile

21PP2 Loc. 3 3/South 

Quarry

Quarry Beaubien 

1955:12-16 

1957:7-8 

Sigstad 

1970:5, 10-11

Excavated by PLB; 

re- excavated by 

JSS

21PP2 Loc. 4 4 Workshop Sigstad 

1970:14

Should be 

considered part of 

21,22 & 29

21PP2 Loc. 5 5 Quarry Sigstad 

1970:11

21PP2 Loc. 6 6 Mound Sigstad 

1970:10

Not excavated. Not 

currently visible

21PP2 Loc. 7 7/Exhibt 

Quarry

Stabilized 

quarry

Sigstad 

1970:11

21PP2 Loc. 8 8/Outlaw 

Quarry

Quarry Sigstad 

1970:11

Not currently visible

21PP2 Loc. 9 9 6 shallow 

pits and 3-4 

petroglyphs

Sigstad 

1970:12

Scott 2005

JSS concludes 

these are not 

quarries

21PP2 Loc. 10 10 Quarry Sigstad 

1970:12-13

JSS may have 

tested

21PP2 Loc. 11 11/North 

Quarry

Quarry Beaubien 

1955:18 

1957:9-10 

Sigstad 

1970:5, 13

Excavated by PLB; 

re- excavated by 

JSS

21PP2 Loc. 12 12/Spotted 

Quarry

Quarry Beaubien 

1955:17 

1957:8-9 

Sigstad 

1970:5, 13-14

PLB tested near 

this quarry; 

excavated by JSS

21PP2 Loc. 13 13 Workshop or 

occupation

site

Sigstad 

1970:14-16

JSS tested; 

concluded this is a 

workshop or briefly 

occupied habitation 

site; ceramics

Table 12. Recorded archeological features, Pipestone National Monument.
PIPESTONE

18

Minn. St.

Site No.

NPS

Locality 

No.

Sigstad or

NPS field 

number/name

Nature of site References Comments

21PP2 Loc. 14 14 Mound Beaubien 

1955:21-

22 1957:10 

Sigstad 

1970:10

Possibly observed 

by GC; possibly 

excavated by PWN; 

appears on WHH 

map; excavated by 

PLB; Not currently 

visible

21PP2 Loc. 15 15 Occupation 

site

Sigstad 

1970:16

Loc.16a 16/north 

portion

Workshop or 

occupation

site

Sigstad 

1970:16-18

JSS excavated; 

concluded this 

is a workshop 

or temporary 

campsite; ceramics

21PP2 Loc. 16b 16/south 

portion

Workshop or 

occupation 

site

Sigstad 

1970:19-20

JSS excavated; 

concluded this is a 

workshop or brief 

occupation site; 

ceramics

Loc. 16c 16/Sweat 

Lodge

3 depressions Sigstad 

1970:20-23

JSS excavated; 

concluded this is 

remains of a sweat 

lodge

21PP2 Loc. 16d 98-1 Stone circle SAIP

Inventory

21PP2 Loc. 17 17/Indian

 Burial Marker

Mound Sigstad 1970:

Map 1

JSS does not 

discuss in text; site 

form indicates local 

informant identified 

this as the grave of 

an Indian School 

female student who 

died in 1910

21PP2 Loc. 18 18 Pits & heaps 

of broken 

quartzite

Sigstad 

1970:14

JSS excavated & 

concluded that this 

is not a quarry, that 

quartzite may have 

been brought here

21PP2 Loc. 19 19/Leaping 

Rock No. 1

Occupation 

site

Beaubien 

1955:24-43 

1957:11-15 

Sigstad 

1970:5, 23-24

Excavated by PLB; 

ceramics

Table 12. Continued
18

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Minn. St.

Site No.

NPS

Locality 

No.

Sigstad or

NPS field 

number/name

Nature of site References Comments

21PP2 Loc. 20 20/Leaping 

Rock No. 2

Occupation 

site

Beaubien 

1955:24-43 

1957:11-15 

Sigstad 1970:5-

6, 23-24

Excavated by PLB; 

ceramics

21PP2 Loc. 21 21/N of Picnic 

Area

Workshop/ 

occupation 

site

Sigstad 

1970:5, 

24-25

225’ N of picnic 

area tested by PLB; 

excavated by JSS

21PP2 Loc. 22 22/Beaubien’s 

Picnic

Ceramic site Beaubien 

1955:23 

1957:11 

Sigstad 1970:5, 

25

Tested by PLB; 

JSS (1970:5) 

erroneously refers 

to this as 21PP21; 

ceramics

21PP2 Loc. 23 PIPE93-1 Surface 

scatter

Clark 

1996:5

CPC interprets 

as a workshop/

occupation site

21PP2 Loc. 24 PIPE93-2 Surface 

scatter

Clark 

1996:6

CPC interprets 

as a workshop/

occupation site

21PP2 Loc. 25 PIPE93-3 Surface

scatter

Clark 

1996:7

CPC interprets as a 

workshop

21PP2 Loc. 26 PIPE93-4 Surface 

scatter

Clark

1996:7-8

21PP2 Loc. 27 PIPE93-5 Surface 

scatter

Clark 

1996:8

21PP2 Loc. 28 Derby Petrogylph 

Site

Petroglyph 

panel

Clark 

1996:9-10

21PP2 Loc. 29 1994-1 Surface 

scatter

Richner 

1994:2-3

May be 21PP4

21PP2 Loc. 30 1994-2, Noble 

Petroglyph

Petroglyph Richner 

1994:3

21PP2 Loc. 31 1994-3 Surface

scatter

Richner 

1994:3-4

21PP2 Loc. 32 1994-4 Stone 

alignments

Richner 

1994:4-5

21PP2 Loc. 33 1997-1 Mound SAIP 

Inventory

Possible Holmes 

Mound

21PP2 Loc. 34 1997-2 Lithic scatter SAIP 

Inventory

21PP2 Loc. 35 1998-2 (Mound 

B and C)

Mound SAIP 

Inventory

Possible Holmes 

Mound

21PP2 Loc. 36 1998-3 (Mound 

D)

Possible 

Mound

SAIP 

Inventory

Table 12. Continued
PIPESTONE

18

Minn. St.

Site No.

NPS

Locality 

No.

Sigstad or

NPS field 

number/name

Nature of site References Comments

21PP2 Loc. 37 1998-4 

(Mound E)

Possible 

Mound

SAIP 

Inventory

21PP2 Loc. 38 1998-5 

(Mound F)

Possible 

Mound

SAIP 

Inventory

21PP2 Loc. 39 1998-6 

(Mound A)

Possible 

Mound

SAIP 

Inventory

21PP2 Loc. 40 1998-7 Stone circle SAIP 

Inventory

Possibly depicted 

by PLB and JSS on 

maps

21PP2 Loc. 41 Nicolette 

Inscription

Petroglyph SAIP 

Inventory

Bray and Bray 

1976:73

21PP2 Loc. 43 Possible tool 

sharpening

grooves

Scott 2005

Table 12. Concluded

Key to initials: PLB = Paul L. Beaubien; GC = George Catlin; CPC = Caven P. Clark; 

WHH = William Henry Holmes; PWN = Philetus W. Norris; JSS = John S. Sigstad
18

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

the South Quarry was mapped on 

May 6-7, 1998, under the direction of 

Commission archeologist Peter Topping 

(Thiessen 1998b). The finished map 

appears on the cover of this volume.

21PP2, Locality

pp4, Beau

See Localites 21, 22, and 29 for 

a discussion of this workshop area.

21PP2, Locality

p

Locality 5 is the Union Quarry 

pit. The original site form completed 

by Sigstad in 1965 describes the feature 

as an excavation about 10 feet deep, 

60 feet long and 20 feet wide. Sigstad 

(1970a:11) refers to the locale as an area of 

several quarry pits including the Lone 

Tree pit, Indian Joe pit, as well as the 

Union pit. These pits were not entered 

during the current inventory effort as 

there is active quarry working on-going in this locale. They are now larger 

due to continued quarrying activities.

21PP2, Locality

p

Locality 6 is a mound located 

about 10 feet northeast of the Union 

Quarry pit (Locality 5) by Sigstad 

(1970a:10). He recorded the mound 

as being 40 feet long northeast to 

southwest, 20 feet wide northwest to 

southeast, and four feet tall. Sigstad 

(1970s:10) recorded no artifacts near the 

mound, and suggested it may be merely a humus-covered spoil pile of quarry 

debris. The mound is not observable 

today as it is under recent quarry spoil.

21PP2, Locality

p

Sigstad (1970) recorded the stabilized interpretive quarry pit near 

the monument visitor center as a site, 

now Locality 7. The feature has laid 

Sioux quartzite stairs leading into the 

pit. The walls are stabilized with Sioux 

quartzite as is the floor of the pit. In 

situ Sioux quartzite and catlinite deposits are visible in the east face of the pit. 

21PP2, Locality

p

Locality 8, also identified as the 

Outlaw Quarry pit by Sigstad (1970a:11), 

is a quarry pit located about 8 feet (2.5 

meters) south of Locality 7. Sigstad did 

not give the dimensions of the pit on his 

1965 site form, but did describe it in his 

report (Sigstad 1970a:11) as 10 feet long, 

slightly less wide with a depth of 15 feet, 

and with a northeast to southwest linear 

orientation. The pit is not visible today.

21PP2, Locality

p

A series of six shallow pits located west of Pipestone Creek and near the 

monument’s north boundary is designated Locality 9. Sigstad (1970a:12) tested the depressions and found no catlinite strata nor any artifacts. He concluded 

the features were not quarries and suggested that possibly they were dug by 

persons hoping to find a new catlinite 

source but failed to do so. Today the features are visible and essentially remain 

as described by Sigstad. During a 2005 

visit to assess archeological site conditions throughout the monument, archeologists Ann Bauermeister and Douglas 

Scott noted three or four petroglyphs 
PIPESTONE

1

on a Sioux quartzite outcrop about seven meters south of the main Locality 

9 quarry. They consider this rock art, 

called the Bauermeister Petroglyphs, 

to be within Locality 9 (Scott 2005).

21PP2, Locality 

pp

Locality 10 was the northernmost quarry when it was recorded in 

1965. Others have since been opened to 

the north of this locality. When Sigstad 

(1970a:12-13) recorded and test excavated the feature he noted it was about 

seven feet by 10 feet oriented north and 

south. When observed in 1965 the quarry was abandoned and filled with modern trash including broken concrete. 

Sigstad’s test excavation (1970a:12-13) 

yielded 33 worked catlinite fragments, 

a worked antler fragment, two cow or 

bison tibiae proximal ends, a fragment 

of glass, a tin can, and a steel file. The 

quarry pit has been subsequently reopened and is actively quarried today. 

21PP2, Locality 

pp11, Nor

The North Quarry pits were 

designated Locality 11. They were investigated by Paul Beaubien (1957:9-

10, Figure 2; 1983:40, 45), who cleared 

the pit of debris and found poor-quality in situ catlinite and a modern steel 

hatchet. The quarry is believed to have 

been in operation since the early 1900s. 

Sigstad (1970a:13) also tested the feature 

with a 5x5 foot excavation and recovered metal tool-modified catlinite fragments. Sigstad also exposed an inscription on the wall of the pit that contained 

the names of Paul Beaubien, Lyle Lynch, 

and George Bryan, dated 1949. Sigstad 

added his name to the list and took 

samples of catlinite. The quarry pits 

are actively quarried today. A discrepancy between the location of pp11 as 

shown on Sigstad’s (1970a:38) base map 

and the ground surface has been noted 

(Nickel and Thiessen 1980; Lynott 1981); 

no quarry pits are visible on the ground 

where pp11 is depicted on Sigstad’s map.

21PP2, Locality 

pp12, S

Locality 12 is the famed Spotted 

Quarry, known for catlinite that exhibits light-colored spots where hematite 

has partially leached from the stone 

(Gundersen 1991:19-20; 2002:45). Sigstad 

(1970a:13) considered the Spotted 

Quarry to be a candidate for one of 

the earliest quarries in the monument 

because of it’s proximity to Pipestone 

Creek and the presumption that stream 

erosion may have exposed the catlinite deposit. However, Beaubien’s 

(1957:7-9; 1983:45) investigations recovered only metal tools and metal-cut 

pieces of catlinite. Sigstad also took 

samples of catlinite from this quarry. 

21PP2, Locality 

pp

A large, circa 1000 square foot 

area lithic site, located near the northwest curve of the interpretive trail 

loop is designated Locality 13. Sigstad 

(1970a:14-15) stated he found two fragments of shell-tempered pottery on the 

surface of this site as well as four fragments of catlinite and various other 

lithic debris. He tested the site with two 

5x5 foot square test units placed 100 feet 

apart. He did not recover any diagnostic artifacts during his excavations. He 

did find that the upper 18 inches of soil 

matrix contained mixed historic and 
18

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

prehistoric materials, which is typical of 

the monument’s bioturbated soil deposition. The excavations yielded no additional pottery, although more lithic debris, catlinite, and an end scraper were 

recovered. No features were noted during Sigstad’s testing work. This locality 

was re-examined during the current inventory effort, but no artifacts were visible on the ground surface at that time. 

21PP2, Locality 

pp

Beaubien (1955:21-22; 1983:45-

49) excavated a mound located “about 

midway between the Spotted Pipestone 

Quarry and the quartzite outcropping,” 

north of Pipestone Creek, now designated as Locality 14. Beaubien believed 

that the mound had been previously 

excavated, and he hoped to find archeological remains that had been overlooked. He failed to find any artifactual 

material, but noted the presence of rock 

slabs which he suggested might denote 

an Oneota Orr focus affiliation. Despite 

the absence of human bone, Beaubien 

(1955:caption of Photo No. 7; 1983:caption of Figure 9) assumed the feature 

was a burial mound, an assumption not 

supported by any evidence. A photograph of the excavated feature appears 

in the 1955 draft report and the image 

appears as a drawing in the 1983 republication of Beaubien’s report, but 

neither illustration was included in the 

1957 publication. Beaubien was not explicit about who the earlier investigators may have been, but he believed the 

mound to be near the location of the 

one that appears in Catlin’s painting of 

the quarries. Consequently, it may be 

that Beaubien thought he was re-excavating mound “No. 2” trenched in 1882 

by Philetus W. Norris (see Appendix 

B). The mound is not visible today.

21PP2, Locality 

pp

Sigstad (1970a:16) considered the 

possibility that the lithic scatter designated as Locality 15 was nothing more 

than an extension of Locality 13. Sigstad 

observed a few fragments of catlinite, 

fourteen pieces of lithic debris, three 

small fragments of bone, and fourteen 

nodules of yellow ochre on the site’s 

surface. He recorded the artifact area as 

about 750 feet square. The current inventory effort noted a sparse scatter of lithic 

debris in this area. No diagnostic artifacts were found. The disturbed nature 

of the soils makes any clear definition of 

a site or locality boundary difficult, but 

the general belief is that Localities 13, 15, 

and 16 constitute a single large locality, 

probably used from time to time over 

many years. These are probably not discrete subsites or localities, rather artifact 

clusters of a larger subsite that manifests 

itself from time to time (due to bioturbation) as sparse scatters of lithic debitage.

21PP2, Locality 

pp

At Locality 16, Sigstad (1970a:16-

23) placed test excavations in three separate areas, which he described separately as pp16 North, pp16 South, and the 

“Sweat Lodge” area, now designated as 

Locality 16a, 16b, and 16c respectively. 

Three five-foot-square excavation units 

were dug in pp16 North. Within the top 

two feet he recovered 157 catlinite fragments; 26 of them were worked, including a disk, a pipe blank, and possibly 

two pieces of incised tablets. Other prehistoric artifacts recovered included two 
PIPESTONE

1

chipped stone projectile points, lithic 

flaking debris, two possible “rubbing” 

stones, and possibly several dozen small 

bone fragments, some of which had been 

burned. The relatively few historic-age 

artifacts were limited to the uppermost 

six inches of the deposit. On the basis of 

the catlinite disk, pipe blank, two possible tablet fragments, and possibly one of 

the projectile points, Sigstad (1970a:18) 

tentatively posited an Oneota cultural 

affiliation for this portion of Locality 16.

Two adjacent 5x5 foot test excavations partially overlapped a small 

surface depression that may have indicated a house structure (Sigstad 

1965b:38; 1970a:19-20) that defined pp16 

South. Bedrock was encountered in one 

of these units at depths ranging from 

about 47 to 82 inches below surface. In 

one of these units, a concrete slab was 

encountered between six and 18 inches below the surface; this slab, which 

was laid on sand, was believed to have 

been the base of an earlier monument 

alleged to mark the location of a small 

cemetery for deceased students from 

the nearby Pipestone Indian School 

(Sigstad 1965b:38-40; see also Mitchell 

1934). Material recovered from the disturbed soil above the concrete slab included historic objects such as pieces of 

wire, barbed wire, nails, wire staples, 

tinfoil, bottle glass, firearm cartridge 

cases, and a bullet, as well as catlinite, a 

chipped stone projectile point tip, lithic 

flaking debris, animal bone and tooth 

fragments, catlinite fragments, and two 

small shell-tempered prehistoric potsherds (Sigstad 1970a:19). No historic 

artifacts were found below the concrete 

slab, though additional prehistoric objects were found there, including the 

base of a concave-base, side-notched 

chipped stone projectile point, more lithic flaking debris, two unworked catlinite fragments, and one small bone fragment (Sigstad 1970a:19-20). The adjacent 

excavation unit, which did not contain 

evidence of prior disturbance due to the 

construction of the monument, yielded two chipped stone projectile point 

tips, a convex-base unnotched projectile point, an end scraper, lithic flaking 

debris, worked and unworked catlinite 

fragments, bone fragments, and several 

historic artifacts (the last occurred only 

in the uppermost six inches). Sigstad 

(1970a:20) concluded that this area, like 

pp16 North, had been a workshop and/

or temporary campsite. He tentatively 

suggested that the projectile points were 

similar to Oneota examples and to what 

would today be considered Late Archaic 

complexes, but cautioned against placing 

too much reliance on this interpretation. 

The location of the monument which 

formerly stood in this location was still 

visible as a shallow depression in 1998, 

and had been marked by monument 

staff with an orange-painted iron pipe.

Five 5x5 foot test units at the 

“Sweat Lodge” area of site pp16 were 

placed over a group of three small depressions that were discovered when 

the grass cover was removed (Sigstad 

1970a:20-23). Two of the depressions 

were found to be shallow basins that 

contained clay fill mixed with unidentified organic matter. The third depression contained a pile of cracked and apparently burned quartzite fragments. 

The top 18 inches of the soil in these test 

units yielded worked and unworked 

pieces of catlinite (including three fragments of catlinite disks), chipped stone 

tools (including seven projectile points), 

lithic flaking debris, two possible “rub-
18

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

bing” stones, and bone fragments, one 

of which was identified as being from 

bison. On the basis of the pits, the apparently cracked and burned rock, the 

organic material, and the distance at 

which these features were located from 

the quarries themselves, Sigstad offered 

the tentative interpretation that these 

represented activities associated with a 

sweat lodge. Sigstad’s excavations at this 

“Sweat Lodge” site were still visible in 

1998, some 33 years after he dug them.

During the 1998 investigations an 

area of lithic debris was identified and 

mapped. Associated with the lithic debitage is a series of quartzite stones that 

appear to form a partial circular alignment. This may be another tipi circle or 

ring, and it may be part of a cluster of 

four such features recorded on Sigstad’s 

archeological base map on the basis 

of observations made by Beaubien in 

1949 (1949:11; 1955:12; 1957:7; 1983:43). 

Sigstad (1970a:8) did not give the area a 

site number because he could not relocate the circles mentioned by Beaubien. 

Although the 1998 locale, designated 

16d, is not plotted in the exact place that 

Sigstad plots his 1965 stone rings, given 

the known base map errors inherent in 

the Sigstad archeological base map, it appears likely the two locales are one and 

the same. Most of the individual rocks 

were buried in the soil and were located through probing with pinflag wires.

The amount of rock material in 

this area is substantial as it is near the 

quarry line. Thus this may be a spurious 

site rather than a stone circle feature. It 

should be tested sometime in the future 

to determine if it is a true rock alignment. 

If so, it may be an indication that many 

more circular alignments or tipi rings 

remain buried within the monument.

21PP2, Locality 

pp

Locality 17 is an oblong to rectangular earth mound that was recorded by 

Sigstad (1965 site form, on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center) as being approximately 10 feet north-south by five feet 

east-west and about four feet in height, 

and also as being “roughly circular” 

and “approximately 15 feet in diameter” 

(Sigstad 1970a:10). Sigstad (1970a:10) described the mound as being “covered 

with rock slabs,” but it did not appear 

so when revisited in 1997-1998 and 2001. 

It is located 20 meters north of the iron 

pipe marking the location of the base 

of the former “Peace” monument (see 

Locality 42). It is heavily vegetated and 

is the second largest mound-like feature encountered during the inventory 

work. On the basis of oral history, it is 

said to contain a grave associated with 

the former Pipestone Indian School:

According to local informants, 

it marks the grave of a former 

student of the nearby Indian 

school. (Sigstad 1970a:10)

Local Indian source says mound 

contains 1910 Burial of Indian 

school girl. (1965 site form filled 

out by E.P. Sigstad, on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center)

The mound was revisited in 2001 

(Thiessen 2001) after another burn in the 

area. At that time the mound was clear 

of much of the vegetation that had partially obscured the feature during the 

1998 field work. An alignment of Sioux 

quartzite rocks was noted at the southeast corner of the mound’s base. The 

east-west segment was visible for 70 cm 
PIPESTONE

190

and the north-south segment for about 

1.4 meters. Some concrete was noted on 

a stone near the western extremity of the 

east-west alignment. This suggests the 

feature is historic in age and may be the 

only tangible evidence of the Indian cemetery site (see Appendix D). The mound 

has not been disturbed by excavation. 

The feature was referred to as Mound 

A during the SAIP inventory project.

21PP2, Locality 

pp

Locality 18 consists of two quarry pits located north of Pipestone Creek 

alongside the interpretive trail. Sigstad 

(1970a:14) only casually mentioned the 

pits and associated spoil heaps. His site 

form gives little additional information 

other than dimensions. He described the 

southern pit as 20 feet long east to west, 

15 feet north to south, and 8 feet deep. 

The northern pit had the same depth, 

but was 16 feet long east to west and 10 

feet wide north to south. The pits are 

essentially in the same condition today.

21PP2, Locality 

pp19, Beau

Site N

At the base of Leaping Rock is 

Locality 19, designated by Beaubien 

(1957:12; 1983:49-57) as Leaping Rock 

Site No. 1. Beaubien excavated in this 

area, already disturbed by monument 

trail development, and recovered some 

lithic materials as well as 40 pieces of 

prehistoric pottery (see Chapter 10).

21PP2, Locality 

pp20, Beau

Site N

Beaubien’s (1957:12; 1983:49-57) 

Leaping Rock Site No. 2 is Locality 20, 

located only a few feet from Leaping 

Rock Site No. 1. Beaubien’s work here, 

in what he believed was an undisturbed area, yielded lithic debris and 

over 350 prehistoric ceramic sherds. 

He also found fragments of modern 

phonographic records intermixed in 

the soil matrix. In his summary of the 

pottery, Beaubien concluded that the 

rounded nature of the sherds’ edges 

indicated they had been water abraded 

and had been water transported from 

above the ledge and redeposited during flooding episodes. Reanalysis of 

Beaubien’s pottery finds (see Chapter 

10) indicates that the sherds are not 

waterworn. It is likely that bioturbation, so common throughout the monument, was the cause of the intermixing 

of prehistoric and modern artifacts.

21PP2, Localties

SigstadSite

Beaubi

(see also Localities 4 and 29)

A relatively dense surface scatter of chipped lithic material was recorded on the lower, flat bench southeast of the visitor center. The lithic 

debris was originally identified as the 

Picnic Site by Beaubien (1957:11; 1983:49) 

and later as two distinct lithic scatters 

by Sigstad (1970a:14, 25), sites pp4 and 

pp22. Richner (1994) re-evaluated the 

Picnic Site and expanded its boundary 

significantly. The parkwide inventory 

effort again redefined the site boundary to be inclusive of localities 4, 21, 22, 

and 29. This large lithic scatter extends 

south from north of the paved trail 

along the face of the rock bluff to well 

south of the trail. Artifacts consist of 

chipped stone debitage and numerous 

modified pieces of catlinite. The catlin-
191

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

ite consists almost entirely of the “spotted” variety, all of which appears to have 

been worked with stone tools. A single 

prehistoric ceramic sherd typical of the 

Late Woodland period (ca. AD 700-1650) 

was collected from this artifact scatter. 

21PP2, Locality 23, P

This surface scatter was defined in the northwestern corner of the 

monument by Clark (1996). The area 

measures 140 m north-south and 65 m 

east-west. These are only partial dimensions, since the inventory stopped 

at the monument’s western boundary, 

and the artifact scatter continued at 

least up to the boundary fence line. No 

inventory was conducted outside of the 

monument boundaries. The site is situated on the level to gently sloping edge 

of an east-facing hill. Specific artifact 

locations were fairly diffuse across the 

site. The kinds of artifacts found at this 

site include only two pieces of worked 

catlinite, in contrast to a proportionately large number of chipped stone 

artifacts. This suggests that, in spite of 

proximity to the quarries, the main activities here were similar to those found 

on most occupation sites in the region 

and less focused on catlinite working.

21PP2, Locality 24, P

The second large area from 

which artifacts were recovered in 1993 

(Clark 1996) measures 160 m northwest by southeast and 70 m northeast 

by southwest and is truncated by the 

western monument boundary fence 

and road. The setting is analogous to 

that of Locality 23, from which it is divided by a small erosional feature. This 

site is almost exclusively prehistoric in 

terms of artifact content. There are a 

large number of chipped stone artifacts, 

with more worked catlinite than was 

found at Locality 23 (PIPE93-1). Again, 

the artifacts suggest a primarily domestic function of the site, with some 

processing of catlinite taking place.

21PP2, Locality 25, PI

This site consists of surface finds 

in an area 100 m square located near the 

western border of the monument nearly 

opposite the visitor center (Clark 1996). 

The ground is nearly level, sloping 

gradually to the east. There is very little 

to suggest a campsite. Rather, the predominance of worked catlinite indicates 

that the location served as a workshop, 

probably ancillary to occupation sites 

nearby. The proportion of stone-cut 

to saw-cut catlinite is roughly equal, 

which could be construed to mean that 

the location was used for similar activities over a long period of time, and that 

several reduction techniques were in 

use simultaneously in the historic period. Spotted catlinite is more abundant 

here; it also occurs at Locality 21/22, 23 

(where one piece was recovered), 29, 

and, of course, 12 (the Spotted Quarry).

21PP2, Locality 26, P

This site is located downslope 

and between Locality 24 (PIPE93-2) to 

the northwest and Locality 25 (PIPE93-

3) to the southwest (Clark 1996). From 

this area, Sigstad (1970a) recovered a 

single projectile point, which he designated 21PP0-t. The locality measures 

110 m north-south by 40 m east-west. 

Artifacts include several chipped 

stone items, including two large Sioux 

quartzite bifaces that likely served as 

digging and/or quarrying tools. No 

historic artifacts were recovered here.
PIPESTONE

192

21PP2, Locality 27, P

Where the ground slopes down 

to the east from the western boundary 

fence of the monument, Clark (1996) 

defined another surface scatter site, located 75 m east of Locality 25 (PIPE93-

3). Sigstad (1970a) reported finding a 

single piece of worked catlinite from 

this area in 1965. Artifacts located in 

1993 include a few chert and quartzite 

waste flakes, one projectile point, and 

three pieces of worked catlinite. An 

historic object, an earthenware cylinder with an open central core that has 

the number 2 stamped on the bottom 

(?) is of unknown origin or function.

21PP2, Localit

Petr

Leg

A group of petroglyphs on 

a quartzite outcrop was found by 

Maintenance Foreman Chuck Derby 

in 1992, who brought it to the attention of the MWAC crew in 1993 (Clark 

1996). Subsequently the site was expanded to include an additional bird 

track petroglyph discovered in 2001 by 

Kristin Legg, the monument’s Resource 

Specialist (Thiessen 2001). The locality 

is located approximately 360 m north 

of Winnewissa Falls on the west side of 

the Sioux quartzite ridge. The rock art 

panel is not on the main bedrock part 

of the ridge but is on horizontal exposures of red quartzite near the base of 

the ridge. Owing to the surrounding 

sod and grass cover, it was not possible to determine if the rock was detached or part of a bedrock feature.

The petroglyphs were photographed under both wet and dry conditions, and a scale drawing was made. 

The locality consists of one large panel of 

Sioux quartzite with a number of distinct 

elements including a bird motif, a turtle, 

two human foot motifs, three “turkey” 

tracks, and six zones of amorphous pecking. The Legg Petroglyph is a bird track 

motif located on a nearby outcrop about 

one meter south of the Derby panel.

21PP2, Locality 29, 1

Beaubien’

Localitie 4,

Richner and Noble (Richner 1994) 

noted an extensive scatter of chipped 

stone debitage and worked catlinite 

fragments over an area measuring approximately 85 m by 20 m, situated west 

of the quartzite ledge near or coincident 

with Beaubien’s Picnic Site (see also 

Localities 4, 21, and 22). Most of the catlinite was observed to be of the “spotted” variety and appeared to have been 

worked with stone tools. They collected 

one prehistoric pottery sherd judged to 

be Late Woodland in age (AD 700-1650).

21PP2, Locality 30, 19

P

Locality 30 (1994-2), consists of 

a single petroglyph on a roughly horizontal quartzite rock outcrop at the 

north edge of the intermittent drainage 

and east of the quartzite ledge (Richner 

1994). Approximately 6 to 8 meters north 

of the single bird track petroglyph are 

two more possible petroglyphs. Both 

are circular and were identified by Glen 

Livermont (Thiessen 2001). Positive identification of the two circular glyphs as 

definite petroglyphs has not been confirmed. The upper surface of the rock 

containing the bird track is polished 

smooth, possibly through a combination of glacial and more recent stream 
193

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

actions. The single figure on this rock is 

a pecked form that appears to represent 

the track of a bird, possibly a wild turkey. The feature is subtle, and is pecked 

lightly into the very hard rock surface. 

The petroglyph appears to have considerable antiquity. The track is depicted 

about 10 cm x 10 cm (4 in x 4 in) in size. 

Formal documentation included a measured, freehand drawing (actual size) 

in pencil, as well as photography under 

various light conditions. No direct tracings, rubbings, or other treatment of the 

feature was undertaken. It was noted, 

with considerable interest, that an offering tied in a piece of cloth had been left 

near this site sometime prior to the prescribed burn, possibly indicating that 

the rock art has spiritual significance 

to contemporary Native Americans. 

On the other hand, the placement of 

the offering near the glyph may have 

been purely coincidental, perhaps in 

connection with vision quest activities. 

Continued maintenance of the site’s integrity should be carefully considered 

relative to any future activities that might 

be proposed in this immediate area.

21PP2, Locality 31, 1

Ric

The site is a dense scatter of 

worked catlinite, chipped stone debris 

and tools, and faunal remains recorded 

in 1994 (Richner 1994). The scatter covers most of the flat soil bench flanking 

the monument’s east property line and 

is about 120 m x 60 m (400 ft x 200 ft) in 

extent. It probably extends east outside 

the monument boundary, but no attempt 

was made to confirm that speculation. 

The western edge is contiguous with the 

highest elevation of the field; artifacts do 

not occur in appreciable numbers down 

slope from the flat bench. This site is 

situated immediately north of a mound 

recorded on the Holmes (1919:254) map 

made in 1892. There is no indication of 

a mound in the area today. Pipestone 

Creek is located south of the site, and 

the creek has been extensively channelized in this area. The creek bank and 

other surrounding land has been significantly altered in the area immediately 

south of the site, perhaps truncating its 

southern margin and destroying the 

mound, if Holmes’ location was correct. 

The site was redocumented 

in May 1997. The area was walked in 

two wide transects and all visible surface artifacts were flagged and mapped 

with a total station. Over 90 artifacts 

were recorded, including lithic debitage, worked and unworked catlinite, 

a few fragments of bone, and two pottery sherds. Several pieces of worked 

stone, the sherds, and a single piece 

of worked catlinite were collected. 

Six test excavations were dug 

at the site in October 1997 and are described in Chapter 8 of this volume. The 

site is judged to have been extensively affected by long-term bioturbation, resulting in mixing of subsurface soil deposits. The site has been characterized as 

a short-term and/or repeated-use campsite that supported the quarrying and 

initial shaping of catlinite (see Chapter 

8) in late prehistoric times. The ceramics 

found on the site during the 1997 burn 

inventory and the projectile points found 

during the excavations provide the only 

datable artifact types. They suggest the 

site was occupied in the Late Woodland 

through Late Prehistoric time frame 

(circa AD 400-1650). Because none of 

the catlinite workshop debris observed 
PIPESTONE

194

at the site appears to exhibit modification by metal tools, the Richner Site may 

hold important clues to prehistoric catlinite artifact manufacturing processes.

21PP2, Locality 32, 19

Cir

A sparse scatter of chipped 

stone items was found in the area 

north of an intermittent drainage in 

the northeast corner of the monument 

in 1994 (Richner 1994). Three potentially cultural features-two apparent 

circular stone alignments and a stone 

cluster-were observed, mapped, and 

photographed. Test excavations were 

dug through two of these features in 

October 1997; the results of this work are 

reported in Chapter 8 of this volume.

Feature 1, the northernmost of 

the three features, appears to be a type 

of rock arrangement commonly referred 

to as “tipi rings” in the literature. Such 

features are commonly thought to represent stones that supported poles and/

or held down hide coverings used in the 

construction of conical tents called tipis.

Feature 2 was not test excavated. A test trench through Feature 

3, the southernmost feature, yielded 

inconclusive results, though the possibility was offered that the cluster of 

rocks may be the remnant of one of the 

mounds excavated in 1883 by Norris 

or perhaps by Charles Bennett and his 

friends before the turn of the century. 

The presence of lithic debris 

in the features as well as around 

the site, suggests the area was used 

as a short-term habitation and special use site in late prehistoric times.

Despite the absence of evidence 

for hearths or other subsurface features, 

the Stone Circle Site is highly important 

as one of the last vestiges of the once 

most numerous type of archeological 

features at the quarries-circular rock 

alignments. Holmes’ (1919:254) 1892 

map of a portion of the present Pipestone 

National Monument land shows over 

300 rock circles in the vicinity of the 

quarries. Except for the Stone Circle 

Site (Locality 32) and two other recently 

identified possible (but unconfirmed) 

circular rock alignments (Localities 16d 

and 40), evidence of such features has 

vanished from the archeological landscape of Pipestone National Monument. 

Tipi rings are a rare feature in the upper Midwest because most of them have 

been destroyed by modern agricultural practices. At Pipestone National 

Monument, where most of the monument lands have never been subjected to 

cultivation, the rocks comprising such 

rings could have been removed for use 

in quarrying catlinite and constructing buildings in the local community, 

or they could have been largely buried 

through the effects of bioturbation since 

Native Americans stopped camping 

at the quarries a century or more ago.

21PP2, Locality 33,

A low, irregularly shaped earth 

and rock mound 6.8 meters long and 

3.5 meters wide was found west of the 

visitor center and designated 1997-1. 

The mound is about .5 meters high and 

appears composed of large to moderate 

sized Sioux quartize boulders. The visible boulders exhibit significant weathering. This mound is about 70 meters northwest of a mound depicted on the Sigstad 

(1970a:Map 1) base map as the site of a 
195

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

probable mound plotted by Holmes in 

1892. In all likelihood this is the Holmes 

mound and Sigstad’s plot is in error due 

to the scaling errors present in the base 

map he used for plotting site locations.

21PP2, Locality 34,

A small lithic scatter was located between 40 and 60 meters north 

northwest of Locality 9 which Sigstad 

(1970a) recorded as six shallow pits. 

The lithic scatter was composed of 

three flakes and one triangular projectile point fragment that is described 

below as a Late Prehistoric point. The 

few bits of lithic debris were scattered 

over a roughly 20-30 meter wide area.

21PP2, Localities 35, 36, 37, 

2, -3, -4, -5, nd -6; Mounds B

E, n

The 1998 inventory focused on 

the burn area north of the visitor center 

and west of the Sioux quartzite ledge to 

Pipestone Creek and north to the monument boundary. Within this area scattered and isolated lithic debitage was 

noted and mapped as were six possible 

earth mounds. The possible mounds 

were designated A through F (mound A 

is discussed under Locality 17). Mounds 

B and C (Locality 35) are approximately 

2.5 meters in diameter and located 50 meters south of the Sun Dance circle. The 

mounds are circular and about 3 meters 

apart. They appear composed entirely 

of earth and are about 1 meter high. It is 

possible their origin is natural, but without testing it is impossible to be sure.

Mounds D, E, and F (Localities 

36, 37, 38) are located about 150 meters 

northwest of the iron pipe that marks 

the location of the Indian cemetery 

“Peace” monument base location. They 

are also earth mounds about 2.5 to 3 

meters in diameter and about 1 to 1.5 

meters high. These may also be natural in origin, the result of bioturbation; 

however, they are located in a zone were 

twenty-four pieces of debitage were 

found on the surface. Until testing can 

confirm or refute their origin it should 

be assumed they are of human origin.

21PP2, Loca

Locality 39 is a catlinite quarry 

pit that partially underlies the southeast corner of the cultural center addition to the monument’s visitor center. 

The pit lies to the north of the Exhibit 

Quarry and was described as being two 

to four feet deep and surrounded by a 

low berm of quarry spoil rocks (Reaves 

[1973:3]). Because of construction of the 

cultural center, the quarry is probably 

partially or wholly destroyed, though 

it is possible that some intact portion of 

it lies buried beneath fill placed around 

the building. Quarriers questioned in 

1971 did not remember the quarry ever 

being actively worked (Reaves [1973:3]).

Monument Archeologist Roy W. 

Reaves III [1973] monitored the construction of the cultural center and partially 

excavated the quarry pit in 1971 to salvage artifacts and data while other parts 

of the cultural center were under construction. Assisted by four excavators, 

Reaves dug two trenches of unrecorded 

width; both originated near the center of the quarry pit (Reaves 1973:Map 

2]). Trench 1 extended approximately 

west from the origin point and was 27 

feet long (Reaves [1973:4]). Trench 2 extended approximately north from the 

same origin point as Trench 1, and was 
PIPESTONE

19

32 feet long (Reaves [1973:4]). When the 

trenches were completed, the east face 

of Trench 2 was excavated in an eastward direction until available funds 

and time ran out (Reaves [1973:4-5]). 

Other than one chipped stone tool fragment and several hammerstones, the 

artifacts recovered were all of modern 

origin. Reaves ([1973:5]) judged the artifactual assemblage to date between the 

late nineteenth century and the 1930s.

21PP2, Locality 40,

Locality 40 is a partial stone 

circle. The stone alignment was noted 

during the remote sensing work at the 

Indian cemetery site in 1998. The largest diameter between the visible stones 

is six meters. It is located about 20 meters south of the iron pipe denoting the 

former location of the “Peace” monument. The rocks in the alignment appear to be Sioux quartzite. They are 

nearly buried in the soil, with only tips 

protruding. A steel rod probe was used 

to locate several other stones that may 

close the alignment, but only those 

with some surface indication were 

mapped. Fifteen pieces of lithic debitage were found within 25 meters of 

the alignment. None were diagnostic.

21PP2, Localit

I

In 1838 an official government 

exploration party reached the quarries 

led by a French astronomer and cartographer, Joseph Nicolas Nicollet (Bray 

and Bray 1976; Bray 1969, 1994; Smith 

1977). The major product of his exploration was the first detailed map of the 

Upper Mississippi basin. Nicollet made 

many observations during his sojourn 

in the Pipestone area, among them notations he made about several archeological sites. More than merely observing 

the archeological features in the vicinity of the quarries, Nicollet’s party actually added to their number. The prominent members of the party (Nicollet, 

Fremont, Geyer, La Framboise, Flandin, 

and Renville) carved their initials into 

a flat quartzite surface atop the ledge, 

not far from the Leaping Rock, where 

they remain today. This is described 

in Nicollet’s journal entry for June 30, 

1838 (Bray and Bray 1976:73). The inscription was recorded by Theodore 

Lewis in 1889 (Winchell 1911:565).

21PP2, Locality 4

Mon

A shallow depression of about one 

meter diameter lies in the prairie below 

the quartzite ledge north of Pipestone 

Creek, about 20 meters south of Locality 

17. The depression marks the former location of a stone and concrete obelisk 

monument erected in 1934 to commemorate the nearby graves of deceased students from the Pipestone Indian School 

(Mitchell 1934:28-29). While digging 

one of two test excavations at site pp16 

South in 1965, Sigtad (1970a:19) encountered a concrete slab that comprised 

part of the base of the “Peace” monument. Monument staff have marked its 

location with an orange-painted iron 

pipe. Although the location of this feature coincides with that of Locality 16b, 

it is given separate locality status because, along with Locality 17, it is one 

of two possible tangible clues to the location of the Pipestone Indian School 

cemetery, which has not been definitely 

located (see Appendix D). The obelisk 

was removed sometime between 1950 

and 1963 when its base was demolished 
197

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

(Betty McSwain, personal communication to Thiessen, October 31, 1994).

In 1998, magnetic and electrical 

resistivity surveys were conducted over 

and near the monument base location in 

an unsuccessful effort to detect the presence of grave shafts through these noninvasive methods (Nickel and Frost 2000).

21PP2, Localit

Sha

During a visit in August 2005 for 

the purpose of assessing the condition 

of the monument’s archeological subsites, archeologists Ann Bauermeister 

and Douglas Scott were shown an archeological feature by David Rambow 

of the monument’s staff. It consisted 

of several worn grooves in the Sioux 

quartzite ledge immediately north of the 

Picnic site, Locality 22. These grooves, 

which are of unknown age, “appear to 

be consistent with sharpening grooves 

for modification of ground stone tools” 

(Scott 2005). Scott concluded that they 

may be associated with prehistoric use 

of Locality 22. In the memorandum in 

which this feature is reported, Scott erred 

in recording the grooves as Locality 

42; they are actually at Locality 43.

Locality Observations and Summary

Pipestone National Monument 

is a complex archeological manifestation. It is appropriate to consider the 

monument as one large archeological 

site composed of a variety of subsites or 

localities for administrative purposes. 

The monument can be divided for administrative purposes into six subsites 

types: quarries, rock art, mounds, stone 

circles, lithic scatters, possible tool sharpening grooves, and historic features. 

The catlinite quarries can be defined as a single subsite type made up of 

many individual locales. The quarry pits 

are actively used and are a resource that 

is and will continue to be consumed by 

use as provided for in the monument’s 

legislative authorization. Spaces allotted to quarriers by official permits are 

numbered 1 through 83 along the quarry line, from south to north (Jim LaRock, 

email communications to Thiessen, June 

9, 2003, and January 27, 2005). Spaces 1 

through 46 and 69 through 83 are in existing quarry pits (though not all are active pits at the present time), with spaces 

47 through 68 reserved for the opening 

of new pits as needed in the future. As 

subsites or locales, the quarries are not 

static features, but ones that will change 

through time in configuration and 

depth, as quarrying activities proceed. 

Three episodes of archeological excavation of selected quarry pits by Beaubien 

(1949, 1955, 1957, 1983), Sigstad (1970a), 

and Reaves ([1973]) have yielded very 

little information about the time depth 

of quarrying activities or the manner 

of quarrying catlinite that cannot be 

obtained from other data sources. It 

is recommended, based on our present knowledge and the sacred reverence in which the quarries are held by 

Native Americans, that no additional 

archeological excavations be conducted within the quarry pits themselves.

A second subsite type is the rock 

art localities. To date, there are two 

in situ Native American rock art subsites in the monument, the Derby/Legg 
PIPESTONE

19

and Noble petroglyphs.1 All the in situ 

petroglyphs are difficult to see, except 

under optimum light conditions. Given 

that, it is entirely possible that other 

undiscovered petroglyphs are present 

in the monument, most likely located 

near the Sioux quartzite ledge and perhaps obscured by lichen growth, simply 

awaiting chance discovery. Another 

(and the largest) petroglyph group is no 

longer in place, but the remains of much 

of it are housed in the monument’s museum collection. These are the Bennett 

petroglyphs that were removed from 

around the Three Maidens in 1888 or 

1889. Seventeen of the 35 or 36 petroglyph-bearing quartzite slabs recorded by Theodore H. Lewis survive (see 

Appendix C and Chapter 11), but the 

present whereabouts of the remaining 

18 slabs is unknown. There is a possibility that some petroglyphs remain in situ 

near the Three Maidens boulders and it 

is recommended the area be managed to 

minimize any subsurface disturbance. 

In addition, the monument’s museum 

collection also holds two quartzite 

slabs that do not match Lewis’ descriptions; these are not confirmed as part of 

the original Three Maidens grouping.

Other rock art is reported to 

have existed or is known to be present 

in the monument, notably pictographs 

(painted images), for which very little documentation exists (see Chapter 

11). P.W. Norris (1884) reported seeing 

painted designs on rocks at Pipestone. 

Although not the first person to comment on possible painted designs or 

pictographs in the area, Norris was the 

last to make that observation. It is entirely possible that pictographs existed 

in the monument, but they may have 

been destroyed by exposure to the climate over time or obscured by algae 

growth on the Sioux quartzite outcrops 

and/or on the Three Maidens boulders.

Mounds constitute the third subsite type (Table 13). Despite the fact that 

they number in the thousands in the state 

of Minnesota (Arzigian and Stevenson 

2003), mounds are so poorly known at 

Pipestone National Monument as to be 

regarded as unconfirmed and dubious 

archeological features. They were noted by several nineteenth-century visitors to the quarries. The most famous 

mound was the so-called “Jumper’s 

Mound,” presumed to be the burial 

place of a young Sioux man. In 1836, 

Catlin (1973, 2:170) noted the presence 

of a 10 foot tall mound, which a Sioux 

chief told him contained the remains 

of his son, who had fallen to his death 

from the Leaping Rock two years previous. It is prominently depicted in his 

well-known painting of the quarries as 

being situated along the north (i.e., right) 

bank of Pipestone Creek approximately 

midway between the quarries and the 

quartzite ledge (Catlin 1973, 2:Plate 270; 

McCracken 1959:177; Dippie 1990:41; 

Troccoli 1993:157). The mound is reported by Storrs (1916; see also Chapter 

6, this volume) to have been dug into 

by local Pipestone resident Charles H. 

Bennett, possibly around 1876. Rudolf 

Cronau, a German visitor to the quarries in the early 1880s, was aware of the 

Leaping Rock legend and Catlin’s depiction of the mound in his painting of the 

quarries. Although he does not mention 

1

In addition, one other sub-site (Locality 9) contains three or four recently-observed in situ petroglyphs which have yet to be formally recorded (Scott 2005).
199

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Locality Investigator Size (ft) Height (ft) Partially 

Excavated(Yes/No)

Contents Conclusion

Norris No. 1 Norris, 1882 28 diam.

3 Yes Rock fragments Refuse heap?

Norris No. 2(Loc. 14)

Norris, 1882Brower, 1905Beaubien, 1949

35 diam.

4 Yes Rock fragments

Decaying wood

Burial mound observed by Catlin and dug up by Bennett

Norris No. 3 Norris, 1882 25 diam.

3 Yes Rock fragments

Few catlinite fragments

Refuse heap?

Norris No. 4 Norris, 1882 58 x 34

4 Yes Rock fragments

Human and animal bones (coyote mandible, deer cranium fragment) Catlinite fragments

Refuse heap?

Norris No. 5 Norris, 1882 25 x ? oval 2.5 Yes “Ethnologically nothing 

of value”

Refuse heap?

Norris No. 6 Norris, 1882 35 diam.

6 Yes Rock fragments 

Decayed human and coyote bonesStone drillCatlinite fragments

No conclusion

Norris No. 7 Norris, 1882 30 diam.

4 Yes Rock fragments 

Catlinite fragments

“a pile of angular stones”

Table 13. Mounds reported at Pipestone National Monument.
PIPESTONE

200

Locality Investigator Size (ft) Height (ft) Partially 

Excavated(Yes/No)

Contents Conclusion

Loc. 2 Sigstad, 1965 30 diam.

3 Yes Rock fragments 

Catlinite fragments Utilized jasper flakeRiver cobblesModern trash

Refuse pile

Loc. 6 Sigstad, 1965 20 x ? oval

4 No Not tested Pile of quarry 

debris

Loc. 17 Sigstad, 1965 10 x 5 oval

4 No Not tested Grave of Indian 

School student

Table 13. Concluded
201

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

observing the mound or any remnant 

of it, he claimed to have found one of 

the dead man’s molar teeth, which had 

“been found by a wolf” (Cronau 1890:83). 

Philetus W. Norris (Thomas 1894:42-43; 

Appendix B, this volume) reported the 

mound as about six feet high in 1857. 

When he again observed it in 1877 (ibid.) 

it had been partially excavated; he was 

told, perhaps by Bennett himself, that 

a human cranium and some “weapons 

and trinkets” had been removed from 

the mound. Norris retrieved a perforated bear claw and some glass beads 

from angular rock fragments in the excavated area, which was south of the 

center of the mound. When he again 

returned in 1882, Norris recorded that 

the mound had been further dug into 

and was then four feet tall and 35 feet 

in diameter (Appendix B). Norris excavated a trench from the south edge of 

the mound to a point beyond its center 

(Appendix B). He found “some mostly 

decayed fragments of wood,” one of 

which he interpreted as the remains of 

a Native American quirt (Appendix B). 

He also found a relatively large quantity of rock fragments, which he speculated had been a “cairn” raised over the 

corpse. Minnesota Historical Society archeologist Jacob V. Brower (1976:Volume 

83, Field Notebook 25) visited the quarries on April 24-25, 1905, and drew measured maps of some of the features there, 

including the “Location]. of `Jumper’s’ 

Mound.” It is not certain, however, 

whether any remnant of the mound was 

visible at the time, or whether Brower 

was informed of the location by a local 

resident, perhaps Charles H. Bennett. In 

1916, Bennett pointed out the mound’s 

location, described as a “depression,” to 

visiting newspaperman Caryl B. Storrs 

(1916). Perhaps the last recorded observation of this mound was made by Paul 

Beaubien in 1949. Beaubien (1955:21-

22, Map 1, Photo No. 7; 1957:10, Map 1; 

1983:45-49, Map 1, Figure 8) excavated 

a mound that had previously been dug 

into at an unknown date and by parties 

unknown. He found only a veneer of 

rocks over the mound and attributed an 

Oneota Orr Focus association to the feature. Unfortunately, he did not describe 

the appearance of the mound prior to his 

excavation of it, nor did he present much 

detail about his work there. Apparently 

from its location north of Pipestone 

Creek and approximately midway between the quarry line and the quartzite ledge, he suggested that it may have 

been the burial mound observed by 

Catlin. Sigstad (1970a:5) assigned site 

number pp14 to this feature; the number is incorrectly stated as pp4 on page 

5 of Sigstad’s report, but is correctly 

numbered on his published base map.

The other mounds reported as 

once existing at the quarries are enigmatic. In 1882 Norris (Thomas 1894:42-

43; Appendix B) partially excavated 

seven mounds that likely existed on 

land within the present-day monument 

boundary. One of these (his No. 2) he believed to be the burial mound noted by 

Catlin, as discussed above. Of the other 

six, Thomas (1894:42-43) concluded that 

four were probably refuse heaps (nos. 1, 

3-5), one was “little else than a pile of 

angular stones” (no. 7), and one was undetermined (no. 6). Two mounds (nos. 4 

and 6) were reported to have contained 

human and animal bone fragments 

(Appendix B), but no diagnostic elements of human bones were identified 

by Norris, whose training and experience in human osteology are unknown. 

Fragments of catlinite are reported as 
PIPESTONE

202

having been found in mounds excavated by Norris, as is one stone drill tool. 

However, worked and unworked catlinite fragments and chipped stone tools 

are widely distributed throughout the 

monument, and their deposition in the 

mounds or refuse piles could have been 

the result of bioturbation or other form 

of pedoturbation. In fact, Norris himself 

came close to this conclusion in his notes 

regarding Mound no. 4 (Appendix B):

This irregular intermixture of the 

contents of the mound, circular and 

ridge like elevations in various parts 

of it justify the inference that it has 

been pretty thoroughly upturned 

and replaced at some recent period.

During that same visit, Norris 

also excavated at three mounds or 

earthen features located a couple 

of miles east of the quarries. That 

work is described in Appendix E.

Holmes mapped archeological 

features near the quarries in 1892. His 

map (Holmes 1919:254) depicts seven 

mounds: one each on either side of 

Pipestone Creek above the quartzite 

ledge; four east of the quarry line and 

one to the west of it. He did not excavate 

any of the mounds or even mention them 

in his notes or the text of his most comprehensive publication about Pipestone 

(Holmes 1919). Only the “Jumper’s” 

mound is shown on Brower’s 1905 map. 

When NPS archeologist Paul Beaubien 

(1949:10; 1955:10-12; 1957:7; 1983:3) visited 

Pipestone National Monument in 1949, 

he recorded that “There are no mounds 

worthy of the name; with the help of 

maps, however, traces of the former existence of some can be found.” As mentioned above, he excavated a mound 

that may have been the one observed by 

Catlin, but found that it contained only 

rocks. Sigstad (1970a:9) excavated a 5x5 

foot test excavation in the center of site 

pp2, a mound close to the monument’s 

staff housing area. He dug until bedrock 

was encountered at 50 to 55 inches below the ground surface, but found only 

slabs of quartzite and sandstone, three 

fragments of worked catlinite, a utilized 

jasper flake, two river cobbles, and modern trash. He concluded that the mound 

was a refuse pile. He also assigned site 

numbers pp6 to an apparent mound east 

of the Union Quarry pit and pp17 to a 

mound near the former “Peace” monument location. He did not excavate in either feature, but concluded that pp6 was 

probably a pile of quarry debris and suggested, on the basis of oral history, that 

pp17 was the grave of a deceased former 

student of the Pipestone Indian School.

Of the seven possible mounds 

documented during the 1997-1998 inventory effort (Localities 17, 33, 35-38) 

the authors are comfortable with identifying only two (Localities 17 and 33) 

as probable mounds. Locality 17 is 

certainly a cultural feature, although 

it appears to be of late nineteenth or 

early twentieth century construction. 

Only one mound (Locality 33) currently exists that may be one identified by 

Holmes (1919). Locality 14, the mound 

observed by Catlin in 1836 and called 

the “Jumper’s” mound by Brower, appears to have been a true burial mound, 

judging from statements about its contents by Charles H. Bennett, who excavated and effectively destroyed the 

feature. This mound is no longer visible and its precise location is unknown.
203

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The other mounds should be categorized as mound candidates. They 

are heaps of earth, but their origin is 

open to question. Only excavation will 

answer the question as to whether they 

are human and prehistoric in origin or 

if they are the product of natural processes of bioturbation.2

 Norris (Thomas 

1894; Appendix B) faced essentially the 

same questions when he dug into several of the mounds that once dotted the 

area, as did Charles Bennett in the late 

nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. With one or two exceptions the 

early excavations failed to determine 

the mounds’ origins with any degree of 

finality. Yet the mounds are mentioned 

as a cultural component of the Pipestone 

quarries beginning with some of the earliest visitors. They remain as enigmatic 

today as they were to those early travelers 

and explorers of southwest Minnesota.

The fourth subsite type is represented by the stone circle locales. Stone 

circles or “tipi rings” remain another 

of the monument’s archeological enigmas. Circular alignments of stones are 

a common archeological feature of the 

Northern Plains and are believed to have 

functioned as weights to hold hide and 

cloth tipi coverings in place (Finnigan 

1982; Brasser 1982; Davis 1983; Quigg 

and Brumley 1984; Banks and Snortland 

1995). Stone circles and other stone 

alignments, though not numerous, have 

long been noted in western Minnesota, 

eastern South Dakota, and northwestern 

Iowa (Lewis 1889c, 1890, 1891; Hudak 

1972). Today they are a rare type of archeological feature in the upper Midwest, 

possibly because, in part, of the longterm destructive effects of agriculture.

Stone circles are reported to 

have once been extremely abundant 

near the quarries. Early Pipestone resident Charles H. Bennett, in an address 

on July 4, 1878, stated that “hundreds 

upon hundreds” of stone circles once 

existed in the vicinity (Rose 1911:245, 

262; see also Chapter 6, this volume). 

In 1892 Holmes (1919:254) mapped over 

300 stone circles near the quarry pits. 

Yet only three possible stone circles 

(Localities 16d, 32, and 40) were identified during the archeological inventory 

investigations of the 1990s. Bioturbation 

may have destroyed or buried many of 

the circles over the last 100 or so years, 

and, of course, many of the individual stones may have been carried off 

for other purposes such as quarrying 

and building construction. When the 

monument was visited by archeologist 

Gordon Baldwin in 1949, 58 years after 

Holmes’ visit, he reported observing 

“an excellent series” of eight to 10 stone 

circles northeast of what was then the 

monument boundary (Memorandum to 

the Regional Historian, January 25, 1949, 

in “Archeology outside MRB Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center). 

His successor, Paul Beaubien, eventually reported these as only four “broken” 

circles (Beaubien 1949:11; 1955:12; 1957:7; 

1983:43), which Sigstad (1970a:8) was unable to relocate during his 1965 survey.

9

There is a growing literature on mound-like landscape features that are the result of natural processes (cf. Scheffer 1947; Quinn 1961; Ross et al. 1968; Aten and Bolich 1981; Davis 1982; Cox 1984; 

O’Brien et al. 1989; Johnson et al. 1999; and others). They are often called Mima, prairie, or pimple 

mounds.
PIPESTONE

204

The archeological stone circles 

recorded to date, suggest that the circular rock alignments themselves are 

a very subtle form of cultural feature. 

Many are likely buried in the sod and 

soil that has built up in the years since 

Holmes mapped them with his plane 

table and alidade to essentially obscure 

these subtle features. If this supposition 

is correct then many more stone circle 

features lie buried just beneath the 

sod of Pipestone National Monument 

and care should be taken to ensure 

that any surface disturbing activities 

do not inadvertently impact a buried 

stone circle or any associated artifacts. 

The monument might easily be 

described as a very large dispersed 

lithic scatter. This fifth subsite type is 

the most common type of archeological manifestation to be presently found 

in the monument. In the course of the 

various inventory efforts within the 

Monument sixteen subsites or localities 

were identified as discrete lithic scatters. The parkwide inventory effort has 

suggested that Localities 4, 21, 22, and 

29 be considered a single large lithic 

scatter/workshop/campsite located at 

the base of the Sioux quartzite ledge 

east of the visitor center. Localities 13, 

15, 16, and 18 likewise should be considered as a large occupation area located 

on the north side of the interpretive 

loop trail and north of Pipestone Creek. 

It may also be advisable to consider the 

bench or terrace on the west side of the 

monument as one large prehistoric occupation area. There are six identified 

localities on the terrace and numerous 

isolated artifact finds. Both the localities and the isolated finds include lithic 

debris from tool maintenance as well 

as processed catlinite. Given the extent 

of bioturbation observed in the monument it may well be that any given surface manifestation of lithic debris or 

catlinite pieces, especially on the western terrace, is simply what is visible at 

any given moment and does not reflect 

the true extent or complexity of artifact 

distribution throughout the monument. 

For management purposes it is appropriate to continue to identify and plot 

isolated artifact finds as they appear. 

Over time the distribution of find plots 

may provide more insight into the true 

nature and extent of the prehistoric occupation of the monument and allow 

for discrete sites to be defined in terms 

of area, age, and function to a greater degree than can be accomplished 

with the information collected to date.

Another subsite type is represented by the possible tool sharpening 

grooves observed at Locality 43. Grooves 

like these, presumed to be the result of 

ground stone tool modification activities, 

are not common in the upper Midwest.

The final subsite type are features 

that are historic in age. This subsite type 

includes the Nicollet inscription and 

other historic and modern graffiti as discussed below. Other historic localities 

that may be included in this category, 

but were not a part of the park-wide inventory effort, include the historic railroad grade, the site of the railroad water 

tank (no evidence of it was seen during 

the current inventory work), abandoned 

roads and trails, and other more recent 

features relating to the use of the quarries and development of the monument’s 

infrastructure. Since several of these 

features were not over 50 years old at 

the time of the field work they were not 

included. However, as they reach that 
205

INVENTORY OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

magical age and become “historic” in 

nature, documentation of their extent 

and condition would be appropriate. It 

may not be necessary to preserve the 

features in toto, but recordation will be a 

means to document their role in the history of Pipestone National Monument.

Historic and more recent graffiti 

are to be found at various places within 

the monument. The Nicollet inscription 

and other late 19th century and 20th 

century graffiti represent a tangible reminder of the long history of visitation to 

the quarries. Only the Nicollet inscription was recorded during this inventory 

effort as a subsite or locality. The later 

visitor graffiti may not warrant detailed 

recording as archeological subsites, but 

photographs or sketches of the inscriptions as well as a GPS coordinate location for each should be recorded in order to preserve the information as part 

of the monument’s visitation history.
PIPESTONE

20
207

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

Introduction

The Midwest Archeological 

Center houses and curates all or portions 

of 31 archeological and archeologicallyrelated collections (e.g., stone samples) 

from Pipestone National Monument. 

The accession numbers, year in which 

the collections were made, and investigator responsible for making them are 

identified in Table 14. Small portions of 

several of these collections, principally 

those artifacts with value for exhibits 

or other public interpretation purposes, 

have been retained at the monument. 

Collections made before the establishment of the Midwest Archeological 

Center in 1969 were stored at the monument until their transfer to the Center 

sometime after that year. As part of the 

SAIP inventory program, the collections 

were reviewed and evaluated. Since 

several of them had become mixed over 

the years-particularly those made by 

Beaubien and Sigstad-the collections 

were re-sorted and cataloged in 1997 

and 1998, and some of the collections 

were subdivided to better maintain 

their physical cohesion and integrity. 

Currently (2004), 31 collections and subdivisions of collections are curated at the 

Midwest Archeological Center (Table 14). 

Although not fully cataloged at present 

(e.g., the very large Gundersen stone 

sample collection, received in 2002, has 

not yet been reorganized and cataloged), 

the monument collections at the Midwest 

Archeological Center comprise well 

over 11,000 individual artifacts, specimens, and associated archival records.

Certain of the collections-notably 

those made by Paul Beaubien in 1949 and 

by John Sigstad in 1965 and 1966-retain 

exceptional research value. For example, 

Beaubien’s 1949 collection (MWAC-53a/

PIPE-171) contains more than 90 percent 

of all of the prehistoric pottery found 

at the monument to date. It also represents the most thoroughly documented 

of the three episodes of quarry pit excavation that have occurred in the past, 

although admittedly little was found in 

the way of artifacts. Sigstad’s 1965 and 

1966 collections (MWAC-54a/PIPE-172 

and MWAC-54b/PIPE-172) represent 

the first monument-wide, systematic 

archeological inventory effort, and the 

second episode of quarry pit excavations. Moreover, another Sigstad collection (MWAC-120/PIPE-172) contains 

powdered catlinite residues that Sigstad 

used for many of his neutron activation 

analysis assays, and thus represents the 

potential for similar compositional studies in the future with neutron activation 

analysis or other methods performed 

on the same samples. Gundersen’s catlinite and pipestone specimen collection 

(MWAC-1000/PIPE-191) is an outstanding resource for future compositional 

studies, including, in particular, studies 

designed to explore the mineralogical 

variability within the several catlinite 

beds at the monument. It includes catlinite samples from most of the numbered 

quarry pits in the monument, plus chips 

from the 1979 and 1980 drilling projects conducted by the U.S. Geological 

Survey and the Minnesota Geological 

Survey. Apart from serving the needs 

of carefully formulated future compositional studies, the Gundersen catlinite 

samples from the monument should be 

maintained as a relatively comprehensive index collection of catlinite samples from many documented locations. 
PIPESTONE

20

 53a 171 1949 Paul L. Beaubien

 53b 171 Unknown Unknown

 53c 171 1949 PIPE superintendent

 54a 172 1965 John S. Sigstad

 54b 172 1965 John S. Sigstad? (Possibly

 collected by Superintendent

Lynch, photographed by 

Beaubien, restudied by 

 Sigstad,and intermixed with 

 Sigstad’s collection.)

 55 173 1973 Wilfred M. Husted

 56 173 1970 Unknown

 57 173 1971 Roy W. Reaves, III

 58 173 1974 Unknown

 59 173 1981 Mark J. Lynott

 60 173 1981 Thomas D. Thiessen

120 172 1967 John S. Sigstad

200 174 1982 Robert K. Nickel

268 183 Unknown Unknown

507 176 1993 Caven P. Clark

557 177 1994 Jeffrey J. Richer

562 -- 1994? Temporary accession returned

 to PIPE

583 178 1994 Timothy Gillen

588 179 1994 Thomas D. Thiessen

639 184 1966 John S. Sigstad

640 185 1987 Susan Monk

641 -- Unknown Number no longer in use

MWAC PIPE Year Made Investigator

Table 14. Pipestone National Monument archeological collections at the Midwest Archeological 

Center.
209

642 180 1960 John S. Sigstad

704a 181 1997 Douglas D. Scott and

 Thomas D. Thiessen

704b 181 1997 Douglas D. Scott

704c 181 1998 Douglas D. Scott and

 Thomas D. Thiessen

729 182 1997 Scott Stadler

781 186 1995 PIPE staff

783 187 1993 PIPE staff

946 188 2001 Thomas D. Thiessen

1000 191 Unknown James N. Gundersen

Last updated: August 19, 2003, by Karin M. Roberts

Table14. Concluded

MWAC PIPE Year Made Investigator
PIPESTONE

210

Many of the collections consist 

of one or a very few artifacts collected 

at various times (e.g., MWAC-55/PIPE173), and some consist only of notes 

and/or photographs made by monument staff or visiting archeologists 

(MWAC-946/PIPE-188 is an example). 

Some collections are problematic and 

their significance cannot be explained 

at present, as in the example of MWAC268/PIPE-183 which presumably relates to a site assigned a field number 

of 21PP23. The number presumably 

would indicate that the site represents 

an extension of the field number series 

assigned by Sigstad, but the investigator 

is unknown and no completed site form 

(official or unofficial) for site 21PP23 

in the monument is known to exist.

Chipped Stone Artifacts

The stone tool collection can be 

divided into two gross categories of 

chipped-stone tools and waste debitage, 

and worked catlinite. The bulk of the 

chipped stone includes a large variety 

of cherts, chalcedony, and quartzite, 

including the locally available Sioux 

quartzite. Lithic raw material types 

and sources have been reviewed for 

Minnesota by Bakken (1999) and for 

Iowa by Morrow (1994). Tools range from 

projectile points and scrapers to utilized 

flakes. Waste flakes or debitage, which 

are the by-products of the manufacture 

or resharpening of stone tools, are the 

most numerous form of chipped stone.

Formal chipped stone tools include projectile points, bifaces and biface fragments, and unifacial scraping 

tools. Sioux quartzite is ubiquitous 

since its source is immediately present at 

and near the catlinite quarries. Bakken 

(1999:63) has noted that Sioux quartzite 

exhibits poor flake morphology in artifact form. Consequently, it probably was 

not often used for activities other than 

for expedient pounding and bashing, 

which do not require much alteration of 

raw material into patterned tools. Much 

of the chipped stone was obtained from 

secondary sources, probably originating in stream beds or glacial features 

where the individual pieces were subject to natural weathering processes. 

The only identified non-local raw materials include plate chalcedony from 

western South Dakota, where it occurs 

over a wide area including the Badlands 

and Black Hills, and Knife River flint 

(KRF) from North Dakota (Ahler 1977). 

A brown translucent chert frequently 

misidentified as KRF is believed to originate in northern Ontario, north of Lake 

Superior (Griffin and Quimby 1961:98). 

Steinbring (1974:68-70), in his discussion of Pickerel Lake site artifacts from 

Quetico Provincial Park, suggests that 

the “pre-Cambrian algal domes in the 

vicinity of Schreiber, Ontario, northeast 

of Thunder Bay, might well yield comparable variations.” Indeed, chemical characterization of some of the KRF mimics 

by Julig et al. (1989) indicates that much 

of what has been identified as KRF clusters more closely with the Hudson Bay 

Lowland Chert samples than with KRF.

The discussion that follows 

focuses on two kinds of prehistoric 

artifact classes from which chronological implications may be derived, projectile points and pottery.

Projectile Point Typology

The 1997 and 1998 field investigations of Pipestone recovered 12 projectile 
211

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

points or point fragments. These projectile points are described and typed according to the regional typology. All fit 

within known regional types and show 

no significant variation from those types. 

Since the projectile point finds were either surface finds or found in test excavations with no evident stratigraphic association, dating relies entirely on dates 

determined from other archeological 

contexts in the region. At best this associative dating technique can only provide a probable range of dates of use for 

these projectile points and thus for their 

presence at Pipestone. Useful summaries of projectile point typology are provided by Morrow (1984), Higginbottom 

(1996), and Boszhardt (2003). Seventeen 

projectile points, representing various episodes of archeological investigation, are illustrated in Figure 18.

There is one stemmed projectile 

point and a possible base fragment in the 

collection. The complete point is catalog 

number 3240 (surface find; Figure 18). It 

is a medium-sized point (42mm long 

and 22mm wide) with moderate shoulder development and a tapering but 

slightly rounded stem made of a yellowish chert. The blade is overall triangular 

in shape with slightly sloping shoulders. 

It is most similar in style to a Waubesa 

point or a large Lost Island type point 

(Morrow 1984:53-54; Higginbottom 

1996; Boszhardt 2003:62-63). These are 

common Early and Middle Woodland 

era types and are commonly found in 

Iowa and Minnesota. They date from 

approximately 500 B.C. to 500 A.D. The 

possible base fragment (catalog number 

3326) is a biface made of gray chert from 

the Richner Site (Test Unit 1/0-10 cm), 

that may represent another stemmed 

projectile point. However, not enough 

remains to be confident of its attribution.

The majority of the projectile 

point collection, seven specimens, are 

of the side-notched variety. Four, catalog numbers 3223 (surface find), 3350 

(Richner Site Test Unit 2/10-20cm), 

3260 (surface find), and 3396 (Richner 

Site Test Unit 5/10-20cm), have shallow but wide side-notches with slightly rounded basal ears and are made of 

mottled gray chert, red quartzite, gray 

chert, and gray quartzite (Sioux) respectively. Specimens 3223 and 3260 have 

long blade lengths compared to widths. 

Both blades tend to parallel sides, but 

3223 is somewhat more rounded than 

the remaining segment of 3260. The 

complete specimen, 3223, is 38mm 

long and 18mm wide. The incomplete 

specimen is 19mm wide but broken at 

the mid-section. Specimen 3350 is the 

base, notches, and ears only. This point 

type is consistent with the Matanzas 

point that dates to the Late Archaic period, approximately 3000 to 1000 B.C. 

(Morrow 1984:65; Boszhardt 2003:49-50). 

The other three side-notched 

points (specimens 3221 [surface], 3217 

[surface], and 3292 [from the surface of 

the Richner Site]) are made of gray chert, 

black chert, and gray quartzite (Sioux) 

respectively. Specimens 3221 and 3217 

are complete while 3292 is broken at 

the mid-section. They were all surface 

finds. These points are of medium size 

(ranging from 42mm long to 28mm long 

and are 26mm [2] and 17mm wide). They 

are broad blades with convex sides. The 

shoulders are weak with shallow side 

notches and small, slightly rounded 

ears. These points appear to be consistent with the Besant type that date from 

Late Archaic to Middle Woodland time

periods (Morrow 1984:66; Higginbottom 

1996). The Besant complex is considered 

to be a Late Archaic to Middle Woodland 
PIPESTONE

212

Figure 18. Projectile points from various episodes of archeological investigations at Pipestone

National Monument. Top row, left to right: Nos. 2444 (Sigstad site pp16); 3265 (Richner Site, 

locality 31); 3376 (Richner Site, locality 31); 2359 (Sigstad site pp16); 3114 (isolated find, West Ridge 

area); and 3216 (Richner Site, locality 31). Second row, left to right: Nos. 3103 (locality 24); 3240 

(Richner Site, locality 31); 3211 (Richner Site, locality 31); 3111 (isolated find, West Ridge area); 2424 

(Sigstad site pp16); and 3095 (locality 23). Third row, left to right: 3102 (locality 24); 2070 (location unknown, collected by Beaubien); 3292 (Richner Site, locality 31); 3217 (locality 16); and 3260 

(locality 32). Fourth row, left to right: Nos. 3223 (locality 16) and 3221 (locality 16).
213

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

Plains adaptation. It essentially represents groups of people following a nomadic Archaic lifeway, but with cultural 

elements of Woodland peoples, such as 

pottery and mound burials, being added through time. Besant peoples ranged 

over a wide area of the northern Great 

Plains in both time and space (Frison 

1998:146-148; Johnson and Johnson 

1998:218-225; Frison et al. 1996:24-26).

The last three points are all small 

arrow-type projectile points. Specimen 

3216 (a surface find) is the base and 

mid-section of a triangular point, a 

surface find, made of white chert. The 

point base is 16mm wide and is nearly 

straight. Since the point is incomplete 

it is difficult to type, but it is probably post-Woodland and likely Late 

Prehistoric in age, about A.D. 800-1700 

(Morrow 1984:80-82). Specimen 3376 is 

a small triangular side-notched point 

of yellow quartzite which was found in 

Test Unit 3 (30-40cm) at the Richner Site. 

It is 13mm long and 10mm wide and has 

small notches worked into the sides. The 

base is straight and the sides are very 

slightly convex. It is consistent with a 

Des Moines style point that dates to the 

Late Woodland and Late Prehistoric periods or about A.D. 500-1500 (Morrow 

1984:83). Specimen 3265 is a cornernotched point made of gray quartzite and 

was found on the surface of the Richner 

Site. It is 24mm long and 13mm wide 

with the blade tending to convex sides 

and is triangular in outline. The shoulders are slightly barbed and the base is 

slightly convex. This type is consistent 

with the Koster Point (Morrow 1984:78; 

Higginbottom 1996; Boszhardt 2003:73-

74) that dates to the Late Woodland 

period from about A.D. 600 to 900.

The 12 projectile points recovered during the 1997 and 1998 investigations date from the Late Archaic 

period to the Late Prehistoric periods 

of occupation of the region. They are 

consistent in style with other points 

found in the region and there appear 

to be no previously unknown exotic 

manufacturing materials present. Most 

of the stone used to make the projectile points are locally available types.

A comparison of the recent inventory projectile point finds with 

those recovered by Beaubien (1957) and 

Sigstad (1970a) was made to ascertain if 

there were other types present that are 

not represented in the latest collection. 

Sigstad (1970a) did not type nor illustrate the projectile points he found. He 

does provide a descriptive table (Sigstad 

1970a:Table 5, 47) of his finds. MWAC 

houses most of Sigstad’s collection for 

PIPE. The collection records were reviewed and the projectile points and 

projectile point fragments were reanalyzed. Sigstad (1970a:47) lists 15 projectile points in Table 5. Only four of the 

pieces in the collection at MWAC could 

be definitively correlated with Sigstad’s 

Table 5 list among the 10 found in the 

collection. The four were all recovered 

during Sigstad’s work at Locality 16. 

Sigstad (1970a) concluded the site was a 

workshop or a temporary camp. The site 

also included an area Sigstad interpreted to be the remains of a sweat lodge.

Reanalysis of the available points 

and point fragments was undertaken as 

Sigstad had not typed the material he 

found, and there have been a number of 

refinements in the dating of projectile 

point types in the last thirty odd years. 

Catalog numbers 2376, 2400, and 2484 
PIPESTONE

214

are point fragments made of gray chert, 

gray quartzite, and tan chert respectively. The first two are point tip fragments 

and the third is a midsection. Specimens 

2314 and 2349 are listed in Sigstad’s Table 

5 (1970a:47). Specimen 2314 is a Knife 

River Flint biface with convex sides that 

is incomplete. It appears to be the tip 

of a projectile point. Specimen 2349 is 

a leaf-shaped biface of brown chert. It 

is 28mm long and 16mm wide. Sigstad 

(1970a:47) considered this a leaf-shaped 

projectile point, although its characterization as a biface is more accurate.

The other two projectile points 

present in the MWAC-held PIPE collection that correlate to Sigstad’s Table 5 list 

(1970a:47) are specimens 2424 and 2444. 

Specimen 2424 is a medium-sized tan 

chert projectile point with convex sides, 

shoulder side notches and a convex 

base. It is 39mm long and 22mm wide. 

The point is Turin-like (Morrow 1984:52) 

in appearance and probably dates to the 

Late Archaic period (ca 3500 to 2000 B.C.). 

The other point is 2444 which is a brown 

jasper or possibly Knife River Flint triangular-shaped point with well-developed side notches and concave base. It is 

30mm long and 13mm wide. It appears 

to be a Reed or Haskell point that dates 

to the Late Prehistoric period (Morrow 

1984:82, 84; Boszhardt 2003:73-74).

Three incomplete specimens 

(2359, 2388, and 2410) were also recovered by Sigstad at Locality 16. Specimen 

2359 is a small corner-notched and midsection of a point made of tan chert. 

The notching is deep on one side and 

shallow on the other with a convex 

base. The sides appear straight. The 

point is incomplete enough to defy typing, but it appears to be Late Woodland 

to Late Prehistoric in age. Specimen 

2388 is the base of a mottled pink and 

white chert side-notched point. It appears similar to the Des Moines Point 

style (Morrow 1984:83), which is Late 

Prehistoric in age dating A.D. 500 to 

1500. Specimen 2410 is a convex base of 

gray chert. It is too incomplete to type. 

Beaubien (1955:Photos No. 30, 31; 

1983:Figures 32, 33) illustrates 15 projectile points he recovered at the Leaping 

Rock sites (Localities 19 and 20) and 10 

projectile points probably recovered by 

Superintendent Lyle Linch during trail 

construction. Only six of those points 

(three identified from each group) are in 

the MWAC-held PIPE collection. Those 

six projectile points were reanalyzed.

Leaping Rock (Localities 19 and 

20) specimens 2026 and 2069 are both triangular point bases made of brown jasper or Knife River Flint and a gray mottled chert respectively. Neither can be 

specifically typed. They probably date 

to the Mississippian or Late Prehistoric 

period. The other Localities 19-20 point 

(catalog number 2070) is a corner-notched 

point of white chert. It is 36mm long and 

21mm wide with shallow notches creating a short straight stem. The shoulders are slightly barbed and the outline is overall triangular. The point is 

similar in form to many Early to Middle 

Woodland period projectile points. 

While it is a bit risky to type projectile 

points from photographs alone, the other eleven points in Beaubien’s Photo No. 

30 (1955; 1983:Figure 32) from Localities 

19 and 20 appear to be Matanzas or 

Lost Island, Wabesa, Des Moines, and 

possibly Klunk types (Morrow 1984; 

Higginbottom 1996; Boszhardt 2003). 

These types date from the Late Archaic 

to Late Prehistoric periods in the area.
215

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

The other three projectile points 

are illustrated in Photo No. 31 (Beaubien 

1955; 1983:Figure 33) as part of a group 

of points found during trail construction. Specimen 2536 is a stemmed point 

made of a yellow-tan chert and is 88mm 

long and 34mm wide. This a large 

point with pronounced and slightly 

barbed shoulders. The stem is narrow 

and straight with the blade roughly lanceolate in shape. The point is consistent with the Robbins style of the Early 

Woodland period, 1000-1 B.C. (Morrow 

1984:48; Higginbottom 1996). Specimen 

2540 is also a yellow-tan chert stemmed 

point and is 40mm long and 30mm 

wide. This is a medium-sized point 

with broad shoulders and a contracting 

straight-based stem. The point is triangular in outline and is consistent with 

the Dickson style point that dates to the 

Middle Woodland period, 500 B.C. to 

A.D. 350 (Morrow 1984:51; Higginbottom 

1996). The final point, specimen 2551, is 

a medium-sized, 50mm long, and 33mm 

wide point. It is a brown to tan chert 

with serrated edges. It has a broad triangular shape with shallow notching and 

an expanding stem and a slightly convex base. It is consistent with the Union 

type point of the Middle Woodland period, A.D. 1-500 (Morrow 1984:41). The 

other points in Photo No. 31 (Beaubien 

1955; 1983:33) appear to be Robbins, 

Kramer, and possibly Besant types 

(Morrow 1984; Higginbottom 1996).

Clark (1996) recovered several 

projectile points and point fragments 

during his post-burn inventory project. 

He did not assign site numbers to his 

finds, considering them instead to be 

isolated finds located in general localities. Clark’s PIPE93-1 locality yielded 

one complete reddish chert expanding-stem point with a subconvex base 

and barbed shoulders (Clark 1996:5). 

Locality PIPE93-2 (Clark 1996:6) yielded 

a fragment of another expanding-stem 

projectile point and a second nearly 

complete point with evidence of barbed 

shoulders, although the base was broken. PIPE1993-3 (Clark 1996:7) had one 

well-made point with an expanding 

stem and bilateral notching, while locality PIPE1993-5 yielded a point midsection, and find spot PIPE1993-10 yielded 

a triangular arrow point. The projectile 

point forms are typical of those found 

in and around Pipestone and southwestern Minnesota. The arrow points 

fall well within the Late Prehistoric 

period and the other points could 

date from the Late Archaic through 

the Woodland eras of occupation.

The stone raw material types 

used for the projectile points as well 

as the lithic debitage noted by Clark 

(1996:15-20) are typical of those noted 

in all the other archeological investigations at the monument. Most of the material consists of local varieties of cherts 

and Sioux quartzite. Non-local materials observed include Knife River Flint, a 

similar brown translucent chert of similar appearance believed to originate in 

Canada, and some chalcedony of types 

commonly found in western North 

Dakota. In essence, the lithic materials 

recovered by Clark (1996), and specifically the projectile points, confirm the 

findings of other researchers, but offer 

no new dating or feature associations to 

aid in refining our understanding of the 

prehistoric human use of the land that 

is now Pipestone National Monument.
PIPESTONE

21

Relative Dating Based on Projectile 

Points

The absence of absolute dates from 

archeological contexts in the monument 

requires that associative dating or relative dating be used. Most of the projectile points recovered in the monument, 

both on the surface and in excavated 

contexts can be typed to style and thus 

have an established datable range of use.

Paul Beaubien’s (1955; 1957; 1983) 

archeological investigations in PIPE 

yielded a variety of projectile points, 

the majority found in the Leaping Rock 

site excavations. The projectile point 

types represented in Beaubien’s report 

indicate a human use of Pipestone extending from the Late Archaic period 

to the Late Prehistoric as well as into 

the contact and modern periods. In 

real terms the dates of human use represented by the projectile points found 

by Beaubien are 1000 B.C. to A.D. 1700. 

By 1700 stone projectile points were replaced by iron arrowheads that were 

readily available through local trade 

networks with the Euroamericans.

John Sigstad’s (1970a) investigations also yielded a variety of projectile points, primarily from Locality 

16. Those points also suggest a human use of Pipestone that ranges 

from about 1000 B.C. to A. D. 1700. 

The recent monument-wide inventory yielded only 12 projectile points 

and only four of those were from excavated contexts, all from the Richner 

Site. But once again the date range established by this small series suggests 

human use of the area from the Late 

Archaic through the Late Prehistoric 

periods. Given that the modern archeological investigations of the monument 

are spread over a fifty year period there 

is a remarkable consistency in the range 

of projectile point styles and dates from 

the twentieth century archeological investigations. Each project has recovered generally similar types of lithic 

materials suggesting that those making and depositing the tools used local sources and raw materials found in 

the glacial drift deposits as their stone 

of choice. The only consistently reoccurring non-local material is identified 

as Knife River Flint, although a similar Ontario type cannot be ruled out.

In looking beyond the boundaries of Pipestone there is nothing remarkable in the archeological lithic 

record of the monument to differentiate it from that of the surrounding region. The prehistoric humans who 

used Pipestone may have begun to do 

so as early as the Late Archaic period 

of 3,000 years ago and continued on a 

sporadic basis until the present. There 

appear to be no long term habitation 

sites or villages at or near Pipestone. 

The area seems to have been used for 

temporary camps for hunting and other 

resource extraction activities, like that 

of catlinite quarrying. The cultural sequence and site types recorded in the 

archeological record are typical of the 

area in general for western Minnesota, 

eastern South Dakota, and northwestern Iowa (Anfinson 1997; Winham 1990; 

Aufderheide et al. 1994; Benn 1990a; 

Alex 2000). The projectile point styles 

do not reflect any evidence of non-local 

groups regularly using the area; rather 

they suggest that regionally-based people used the Pipestone locale repeatedly over a long period of time, at least 

3,000 years, albeit on a temporary basis. 
217

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

Prehistoric Pottery

Pottery is an extremely plastic 

medium for artists and craftsmen in all 

cultures that make and utilize ceramic 

vessels. It can be formed into many different shapes and decorated in a myriad 

of ways to achieve highly individualistic-or highly uniform-products. In nonliterate societies, pottery-making practices are handed down from generation 

to generation and are transmitted orally 

and by demonstration from skilled 

practitioners to novices. In this way, traditions of pottery making-i.e., accepted 

ways of making and decorating ceramic 

vessels-are maintained through time 

within individual cultures. Innovation 

and change within such pottery-making traditions occur, of course, but on 

the whole the knowledge of crafting 

pottery in certain ways persists. It is 

this continuity of knowledge and practice that provides archeologists with 

a valuable tool to distinguish one prehistoric culture from another largely on 

the basis of the pottery remnants that 

survive, usually in the form of pieces of 

broken vessels. By examining the range 

of variation exhibited in the manner of 

construction, temper, shape, size, and 

decorative styles within assemblages of 

potsherds, archeologists have developed 

elaborate classifications that allow comparisons between such assemblages.

Prehistoric pottery has been 

found in 10 locations within Pipestone 

National Monument (Table 15). 

Although the reports of these finds indicate that the recovered sherds total 

approximately 435, nearly 700 sherds 

today exist in the Pipestone collections that are housed at the monument and the Midwest Archeological 

Center. Several reasons probably account for this discrepancy, including 

breakage during handling and storage, 

differences in how sherds have been 

counted by various researchers, and 

inclusion of sherds not from Pipestone 

(Anfinson 1998:4). Ten sherds are on 

permanent display in the monument’s 

visitor center. Five sherds bearing decoration suggestive of Middle Woodland 

times are illustrated in Figure 19.

Paul L. Beaubien and John S. 

Sigstad, who recovered most of this pottery, discussed the pottery types represented in this assemblage, but did not 

attempt to describe the sherds individually or analyze them in detail. Their reports were published more than 45 and 

30 years ago, respectively. Consequently, 

the conclusions they based on the collective Pipestone pottery assemblage 

are out of date in terms of later archeological research conducted in regions 

surrounding the monument. To gain 

a more up-to-date perspective on the 

Pipestone pottery assemblage and what 

it can tell us about who lived at or visited the quarries in the past, and when 

this happened, arrangements were 

made for three researchers to independently assess the assemblage. Each researcher was chosen because of his expertise in the archeology of a particular 

nearby region. Dale R. Henning is a 

researcher of long standing on Oneota 

complexes in Iowa, as well as other late 

prehistoric complexes in the western 

Prairie Peninsula region. In his dissertation research, Scott Anfinson (1987; 

1997) revised the culture-historical taxonomy for a region that he terms the 

Prairie Lake Region, comprised of most 

of southwestern Minnesota and adjacent portions of Iowa and South Dakota. 
PIPESTONE

21

Figure 19. Late Middle Woodland pottery from Pipestone National Monument. Top row, left 

to right: Nos. 3201 (Picnic Site, localities 4/21/28/29) and 3205 (Picnic Site, localities 4/21/28/29). 

Bottom row, left to right: Nos. 2126, 2133, and 2135, probably all from Beaubien’s Leaping Rock 

sites (localities 19 and 20).
219

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

PP13 2 Surface of gopher 

backsoil

Sigstad 1970:15

Near PP13 

and PP15

1 Surface Husted 1973

PP16 7 Surface of gopher 

backsoil

Sigstad 1870:16

PP16 South 2 Excavated from 

secondary fill over 

concrete slab

Sigstad 1970:19

PP19 Leaping 

Rock #1

“more than 40” Screened from fill 

removed for trail 

construction

Beaubien 1955:24; 

1957:11-12

PP20 Leaping 

Rock #2

“approximately 350” Excavated from 

presumed disturbed 

context

Beaubien 1955:27; 

1957:12

PP21 Picnic Area 

North

1 Surface of gopher 

backsoil

Sigstad 1970:24

PP22 Beaubien’s 

Picnic Area

“some 30” Excavated Beaubien 1955:23; 

1957:11

1994-3 Richner site 2 Surface This volume

Isolated find 1 Ca. 10 inches below 

surface in east wall of 

quarry space 80

This volume

Table 15. Locations at Pipestone National Monument where prehistoric ceramics have been 

found.

Site No. of sherds Context Reference
PIPESTONE

220

The Prairie Lake Region extends to 

within 20 miles to the north of the catlinite quarries. Craig M. Johnson (1996) 

has completed a comprehensive review 

of Native American archeological complexes in the Middle Missouri Subarea, 

a large region straddling most of the 

Missouri River valley in the Dakotas 

and extending as far east as northwestern Iowa. Each of these scholars 

brought his unique regional archeological knowledge and perspective to bear 

on the interpretation of the pottery from 

Pipestone National Monument (Henning 

1998c; Johnson 1998; Anfinson 1998).

The largest portion of the 

Pipestone pottery resulted from 1949 excavations by Paul Beaubien in three locations: Leaping Rock Site No. 1 (Locality 

19), Leaping Rock Site No. 2 (Locality 

20), and the Picnic Area site (Locality 

22). Though exact counts are not presented in his report (Beaubien 1955, 

1957, 1983), approximately 420 sherds 

were recovered at these three locations. 

Investigations by Sigstad and later researchers have added only 15 more 

sherds to the Pipestone pottery collection. 

Unfortunately neither Beaubien’s 

field notes or artifact catalog have been 

located, so little information exists about 

the pottery excavated by him other than 

what appears in his report (Beaubien 

1955, 1957, 1983). The potsherds bear individual field catalog numbers, but the 

catalog is not known to exist; consequently, Beaubien’s large pottery assemblage 

cannot be sorted into lots representing 

original provenience associations within the monument. This is particularly 

unfortunate, as Beaubien’s assemblage 

accounts for more than 90 percent of the 

potsherds that have been found in the 

monument. Anfinson (1998:5-6) postulated a provenience scheme based on 

single-digit prefix numbers that appear 

as part of the numbering system used 

by Beaubien. However, correlation of 

Beaubien’s catalog numbers with proveniences stated in the captions of artifact 

photographs that appear in Beaubien’s 

1955 manuscript report does not support Anfinson’s interpretation (notes by 

Ann C. Bauermeister, on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center; Johnson 1998:17). 

The only pottery from Pipestone 

National Monument that can be associated with specific locales within the 

monument with any degree of reliability (see Table 15) are the 12 sherds 

collected by Sigstad, the single sherd 

collected by Husted, the two sherds collected from the Richner site, some of 

the sherds illustrated by Beaubien (1955:

Photos No. 13-17; 1983:Figures 15-19; 

notes by Ann C. Bauermeister, on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center), and a 

single rim sherd found by Chief Ranger 

Glen Livermont found on October 21, 

2001, while removing the soil overburden in the east face of quarry space 80 

in the northern quarry line (memorandum from Livermont to Thiessen, 

November 2, 2001).1 Livermont’s discovery (PIPE accession 190) appears 

to be a Late Prehistoric Initial Middle 

Missouri sherd and is, as far as we 

know, the only prehistoric sherd found 

in close proximity to the actual quar1

Beaubien’s pottery photographs do not appear in his published report (Beaubien 1957), but accompany his 1955 draft manuscript and are reproduced in the 1983 republication of his report 

(Beaubien’s Figures 15-19 in Woolworth 1983, pp. 53-54).
221

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

ries. The captions of Beaubien’s pottery photographs preserve much of 

what little information has survived 

about the provenience of those artifacts.

Although the three analysts do 

not agree in all respects about details of 

the Pipestone pottery assemblage, such 

as the nomenclature of pottery types 

represented, they do agree remarkably 

closely in many of their conclusions. 

An approximate concordance of their 

typological conclusions is presented 

in Table 16, and Table 17 presents a 

crude comparison of their dateable pottery lumped into general time periods.

Though their terminology differs somewhat according to their regional taxonomic perspective, all three 

agree that the earliest pottery yet found 

within the monument dates to what are 

generally regarded as Middle Woodland 

times, a period that lasted from the last 

few centuries B.C. to possibly as late as 

AD 500 or 700 (Johnson 1998:5-7, 11, 18; 

Anfinson 1998:10-11, 12, 15; Henning 

1998c:i, 3, 6). Pottery of this age is represented by only a relative handful of 

sherds, including 12 or 13 body sherds 

that exhibit a form of decoration or surface finish called rocker-stamping or 

roulette-stamping (Figure 19). Rockerstamping is a treatment characteristic 

that is more common in northeastern 

Iowa (Logan 1976) but is absent or rare 

in southwestern Minnesota (Anfinson 

1998:15, 17; Johnson 1998:11; Henning 

1998c:13). Two rim or near-rim sherds 

(nos. 1072 and either 5/337 or 5/332) 

are classified as Fox Lake Horizontal 

Cordmarked by Anfinson (1998:11), 

while only one of these sherds is so 

classified by Johnson (1998:6). Johnson 

(1998:7, Table A.3), however, assigns the 

other sherd to the type Arthur Cord 

Roughened, which he regards as coeval with the later part of the Fox Lake 

Phase in which Fox Lake ceramics are 

found, perhaps dating to ca. AD 500 

or later. Sherd no. 1072 is regarded by 

Henning (1998c:3, Table 2) as being of 

Late Middle Woodland age, though he 

declines to assign a type name to it. It 

was collected from the Richner site locality in 1997 and is one of the few 

clues to the age of that site (see discussion of the Richner site elsewhere in 

this volume). The other sherd was collected by Beaubien and its provenience 

within the monument is not known.

Anfinson (1998:18), Johnson 

(1998:18), and Henning (1998c:15-16) caution that the fact that Middle Woodland 

pottery has been found within the 

monument does not necessarily mean 

that Middle Woodland people visited 

the locale for the purpose of quarrying 

catlinite. They may have been present 

for other purposes, such as hunting or 

temporary camping in the shelter of the 

quartzite ledge. Ultimately, the answer 

to the question of when catlinite extraction began may be answered best with 

data about confirmed catlinite artifacts 

from dated cultural contexts outside the 

monument. It is interesting to note that 

pipes made of catlinite have recently 

been confirmed from early and Middle 

Woodland contexts in Wisconsin 

(Boszhardt and Gundersen 2003) and a 

Middle Woodland Hopewell context in 

Ohio (Emerson et al. 2005), suggesting that 

if Early and Middle Woodland peoples 

were not visiting the quarries to obtain 

catlinite, they were obtaining it through 

trade connections with other people.
PIPESTONE

222

Pottery ware/type Cultural taxon Date Beaubien Sigstad Anfinson Henning JohnsonWoodland (general) Woodland tradition xLate Middle Woodland (general)

Woodland tradition 200 BC-AD 500 x

Late Woodland (general) Woodland tradition AD 500-800 xRandall Incised “Upper Woodland” x x xFox Lake Horizontal Cordmarked

Woodland Fox Lake Phase

200 BC-AD 700 x x

Lake Benton Cordwrapped Stick Impressed

Woodland Lake Benton Phase

AD 700-1200 x x

Lake Benton Vertical Cordmarked

Woodland Lake Benton Phase

AD 700-1200 x x

Arthur Cord Roughened Woodland Late Fox Lake 

Phase

x

Loseke Ware, Missouri Bluffs Cord Impressed

Woodland x x

Foreman Plain Initial Middle Missouri AD 1000-1250 x x x xChamberlain Incised Triangle

Great Oasis/Initial AD 1000-1250 x

Chamberlain Incised Initial Middle Missouri x x xRandall Plain Initial Middle Missouri xMitchell Broad-trailed Cambria/Initial 

Middle Missouri

x x x

Cambria (general) Cambria/Initial 

Middle Missouri

x

Mitchell Modified Lip Mill Creek/Initial

Middle Missouri

x x x x

Table 16. Concordance of classifications of prehistoric ceramics from Pipestone National Monument.
223

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

Pottery ware/type Cultural taxon Date Beaubien Sigstad Anfinson Henning JohnsonGreat Oasis (general) Great Oasis/Initial 

Middle Missouri

x

Great Oasis High Rim Trailed*

Great Oasis/Initial Middle Missouri

x

Great Oasis High Rim Great Oasis/Initial 

Middle Missouri

x

Great Oasis Incised Great Oasis/Initial 

Middle

AD 1000-1250

x

Mill Creek (general) Initial Middle 

Missouri

x

Anderson Low Rim Initial Middle

Missouri

x

x

Anderson Everted Rim Initial Middle 

Missouri

AD 1000-1250

x

Anderson Tool Impressed Initial Middle 

Missouri

AD 1000-1250

x

Anderson Plain Initial Middle 

Missouri

AD 1000-1250

Sanford Ware Initial Middle 

Missouri

x

Plains Village (general) Plains Village tradition

x

Oneota (general) Oneota tradition AD 1350-historic

x

x

Allamakee Trailed Oneota tradition AD 1350-historic

x

Correctionville Trailed Oneota tradition AD 1350-historic

x

Coalescent tradition Coalescent tradition

x

Talking Crow Indented Post-Contact 

Coalescent

Historic

x

Table 16. Concluded

* Classified by Beaubien as Chamberlain Incised Triangle and by others as Chamberlain Incised.
PIPESTONE

224

Time Period Anfinson

n %

Johnson

n %

Henning

n %

Middle (Initial) Woodland 

500 BC - AD 500/700

 2 1 2 3.8 1 2.2

Late Woodland

AD 500/700 - AD 

900/1200

 29 17 23 43.4 5 10.9

Plains Village

AD 900/1000 - AD 1300 

or later

 82 49 16 30.3 31 67.4

Oneota

AD 1300 - AD 1700

 56 33 4 7.5 6 13.0

Unclassified rimsherds 8 15.1 3 6.5

Table 17. Comparison of Pipestone National Monument pottery attributed to general chronological 

periods by different analysts.

Based on data presented in Anfinson 1998; Johnson 1998; and Henning 1998. Anfinson’s 

figures are based on counts of all datable rim and body sherds, while those of Johnson and 

Henning are based on rimsherds only. Henning’s (1998:15) data on body sherds present a trend 

through time that is similar to his figures above.
225

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ARTIFACT CATEGORIES

From Table 17, one can see that all 

three analysts are in general agreement 

as to the relative frequencies of dateable 

pottery in the Pipestone ceramic assemblage. All three conclude that the earliest pottery is represented by a relatively 

small number of sherds attributable to 

the Middle Woodland period, perhaps 

AD 500/700 or earlier, followed by a notable increase in the number of sherds 

representing Late Woodland peoples. 

Two of the three analysts see this as being followed by a substantial increase in 

pottery of the Plains Woodland tradition; in contrast, Johnson notes a modest decrease in Plains Woodland pottery compared to that of the preceding 

Late Woodland period. All three agree 

that the frequency of Oneota pottery 

is substantially diminished from earlier Plains Village frequencies. These 

figures attest to the presence of successive prehistoric Native American 

peoples at the quarries from the Middle 

Woodland period to possibly as late 

as the advent of historic time (ca. AD 

1700-1750?). This suggests that Native 

Americans have used the quarry locale, probably for multiple purposes, 

over much of the past two millennia.

One problem that the three pottery analysts were asked to address is 

the reputed presence of water-worn 

sherds in the pottery excavated by 

Beaubien in 1949 at the Leaping Rock 

No. 1 and 2 sites. In his report of this 

work, Beaubien (1955:27; 1957:12; 1983:49) 

noted that fragments of modern phonograph records were found at all levels 

of his two-feet-deep excavations and 

he asserted that many of the potsherds 

from the Leaping Rock sites were waterworn. He suggested that they had been 

washed down from their original location atop the ledge and redeposited about 

the base of the Leaping Rock.2 Sigstad 

(1970a:28-29) accepted this conclusion 

uncritically. After examining all of the 

Pipestone pottery for evidence of water 

wear, including the nearly 400 sherds 

from Beaubien’s two Leaping Rock sites 

(which are only a few yards apart), all 

three analysts found little evidence of 

sherds having been abraded by being 

tumbled in water. Anfinson (1998:15-

16) and Johnson (1998:17) suggested that 

foot traffic and repeated re-use of the 

locale for various purposes contributed 

to the worn appearance of some of the 

sherds. Henning (1998c:2) attributed the 

slightly worn appearance of some sherds 

to zealous brushing and cleaning in the 

laboratory. Anfinson (1998:16) also suggested that some sherds were composed 

of a softer clay paste and were more susceptible of mechanical abrasion, while 

bioturbation likely caused the mixture 

of historic and prehistoric artifacts. It is 

notable that neither Beaubien, Sigstad, 

or more recent excavators at Pipestone 

National Monument have described 

any subsurface cultural stratigraphy; 

artifacts are reported as having been 

found at various depths not correlated 

with cultural strata. Bioturbation-the 

churning and mixing of soils through 

the actions of burrowing fauna-is a process that is recognized to affect the archeological record (Wood and Johnson 

1978; Bocek 1992). It may be that decades, if not centuries, of bioturbation of 

2

Beaubien himself seems to have doubted this conclusion, as his unpublished manuscript report 

concludes with the sentence, “However, the limited area above the site seemed to preclude this 

latter theory” (of redeposition; Beaubien 1955:27). This statement does not appear in the published version of his report (Beaubien 1957, 1983).
PIPESTONE

22

the soil mantle in the monument, which 

in most places is less than 10 feet deep (3 

meters), has eradicated most, if not all, 

evidence of cultural stratigraphy and 

has contributed to the worn or tumbled 

and abraded appearance of the sherds.
227

ROCK ART

Introduction

Among the diverse archeological resources of Pipestone National 

Monument are Native American petroglyphs, which are images or designs 

pecked into Sioux quartzite bedrock. In 

general, the petroglyphs at Pipestone 

have received little scientific attention, 

particularly during the twentieth century. They were recorded several times 

during the nineteenth century (Table 18) 

and the most complete record of them 

was published in 1911 (Winchell 1911:564 

and Plate 8). In an early survey of Native 

American rock art in the United States, 

Julian H. Steward (1937:415-417) briefly 

mentioned the Pipestone petroglyphs 

and reproduced three glyphs selected 

from previously published drawings. 

The petroglyphs at Pipestone 

are known from approximately 100 

glyphs, or individual motifs, from three 

locales within the monument’s boundary.1

 At two of these locales, the Noble 

and Derby petroglyphs (Localities 30 

and 28, respectively), the images are 

in situ, just as they were created. The 

petroglyphs from the third locale, 

around the Three Maidens glacial boulders (Locality 1; see Figure 20), were removed from their original location late 

in the nineteenth century as a series of 

35 or 36 Sioux quartzite slabs, each bearing one or more glyphs. Eighteen of 

the Three Maidens slabs are preserved 

at the monument today. As a result of 

repeated movement of the petroglyphbearing quartzite slabs among different 

places in the Pipestone community over 

the years, some of the petroglyphs were 

lost. Most of the surviving petroglyphs 

laid on the grounds of the monument’s 

visitor center for years until they were 

taken to more secure quarters within 

the visitor center in 1997. One additional 

slab is in the monument’s museum collection, but it is not definitely known to 

have originated at the Three Maidens.

In addition to Native American 

rock art, the monument contains pecked 

graffiti in the form of the names and 

initials of early American visitors to the 

quarries and residents of the Pipestone 

vicinity. These can be found at several locations on the Sioux quartzite outcrops, 

mostly atop the ledge near Winnewissa 

Falls and the Leaping Rock. The most famous and historic of these are the initials 

of several members of the Nicollet party 

who spent about a week at the quarries during the summer of 1838. Joseph 

Nicollet, John Charles Fremont, Charles 

A. Geyer, Joseph Laframboise, J. Eugene 

Flandin, and Joseph Renville, Sr. carved 

their initials and the date of “July 1 38” 

into the quartzite atop the ledge near the 

Leaping Rock (Bray and Bray 1976:22, 73; 

Robinson 1928:517-518; Rose 1911:255-

256, footnote 7; Winchell 1911:Plate 9).

The monument’s Native 

American petroglyphs are contributing elements of a multiple property 

1

In late 2005, a group of three or four petroglyphs were observed in a fourth location within the 

monument (Scott 2005). The motifs appear to be one bird track, one or two anthropomorphs or 

zoomorphs, and one of indistinguishable form. Called the Bauermeister Petroglyphs, they are 

considered a component of Locality 9 (pp9). Since they have not yet been formally recorded, they 

will not be further discussed in this chapter.
PIPESTONE

22

National Register of Historic Places district based on the theme of American 

Indian rock art in the state of Minnesota. 

The multiple property nomination 

form for this district was completed 

on March 18, 1995 by Mark J. Dudzik, 

and the property was formally listed 

on the National Register on November 

14, 1996. The nomination form subsequently became the basis for an article 

by Dudzik (1997) that surveys rock 

art throughout the state of Minnesota.

To place them in a broader regional context, the rock art locales at 

Pipestone National Monument comprise three of 55 American Indian rock 

art sites recorded in Minnesota (Dudzik 

1997:100). Thirty-two of the 55 sites consist of petroglyphs, i.e., designs created 

by pecking, abrading, or incising the 

stone to remove part of the rock surfaces, while 20 contain pictographs, or 

designs created by applying or painting natural pigments to rock surfaces 

(Dudzik 1997:100-101). Two of the 55 

consist of petroforms, or images created as boulder outlines, and the remaining site contains both petroglyphs 

and pictographs (Dudzik 1997:101).

The nearest concentration of 

Native American rock art sites occurs 

in Cottonwood County, a little over 

50 miles to the east. The most notable of these is the Jeffers Petroglyph 

Site, where an estimated 2,000 to 2,500 

glyphs occur on an extensive outcrop of 

Sioux quartzite (Lothson 1976; Callahan 

2001a). Many of the glyphs at Jeffers are 

different from those known at Pipestone 

National Monument, being images of artifact types dating from Archaic times.

Figure 20. The Three Maidens glacial erratics, 1892. For scale, note human figure standing on 

one of the boulders (W.H. Holmes papers, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, photograph 72-3236). View to the north.
229

Table 18. Pipestone National Monument rock art recording events.

Rock Art Site Recorder Date ReferenceThree Maidens Petroglyphs George A. Perley, Flandreau, South Dakota 1876 Thiessen and Bailey 2000; this

(“Perley’s Chart”) volume

Newton H. Winchell, Minnesota State Geologist 1878? Winchell and Upham 1884

Rudolf Cronau, German traveler 1881 Cronau 1890; n.d.Philetus W. Norris, Smithsonian Institution 1882 Norris 1883Walter J. Hoffman, Smithsonian Institution 1888 Powell 1893:xiiiTheodore H. Lewis, Northwestern 1889 Winchell 1911:564 and Plate 8;Archaeological Survey this volume Appendix C, William H. Holmes, Smithsonian Institution 1892 Holmes 1892eThomas D. Thiessen and Alan Smith, 1994 Thiessen and Bailey 2000; this

Midwest Archeological Center volume

Derby Petroglyphs Caven P. Clark, National Park Service, Midwest 1993 Clark 1996

Archeological Center

Legg Petroglyph Thomas D. Thiessen, National Park Service, 2001 Thiessen 2001

Midwest Archeological Center

Noble Petroglyphs Jeffrey J. Richner and Vergil E. Noble, National 1994 Richner 1994

Park Service, Midwest Archeological CenterThomas D. Thiessen, Midwest Archeological Center 2001 Thiessen 2001

Bauermeister Petroglyphs Douglas D. Scott 2005 Scott 2005
PIPESTONE

230

Pictographs

Although all of the existing rock 

art at Pipestone consists of petroglyphs, 

there are hints in the historical record 

that pictographs may once have existed 

there as well. George Catlin (1973, 2:168) 

observed “thousands of inscriptions 

and paintings...” (emphasis added) during his 1836 visit to the quarries. The 

French Abbé Emmanuel Domenech 

(1860:344-345) later wrote that “...The 

rocks are of a bright red, polished and 

shining. Some of them bear traces of 

ancient and modern hieroglyphics, 

which are cut or painted on the rock...” 

(emphasis added). Since he is not 

known to have personally visited the 

quarries, Domenech may simply have 

repeated Catlin’s information. James 

Boyd Hubbell camped near the quarries 

with a contingent of soldiers during 

the Civil War. Years later he recalled 

that “I camped at the Pipestone quarry 

with another expedition, July 4, 1864...

Some of the men reported seeing Indian 

paintings on the three large boulders 

and rocks near the quarry...but I did not 

see them” (emphasis added) (Hubbell 

1902:14). The reference to painted images on the Three Maidens boulders is 

interesting in light of the Dakota practice of sometimes painting large venerated boulders (Hovey 1887; Winchell 

1911:facing page 508; Steinbring and 

Buchner 1997; Callahan 2000, 2001b). 

Ernest V. Sutton (n.d.:35), who visited 

the quarries as a boy about 1873, recalled 

that “Among the ancient pictographs

was one representing the tracks of the 

`Thunder Bird,’ a mythical bird supposed to govern the weather. This and 

many others of these early etchings have 

been destroyed or carried away by vandals” (emphasis added). The fact that he 

referred to the rock images as both “pictographs” and “etchings” suggests that 

he was lax in his use of the term “pictographs,” which cannot be taken to mean 

that he observed paintings on the rocks.

In a deposition recorded in 1927, 

a Yankton elder named Simon Antelope 

spoke about visits he made to the quarries between about 1875 and 1887. He 

mentioned the creation of “paintings” 

and “declarations” on the rocks (United 

States Court of Claims 1927:169-170):

On one of my visits to the quarry I 

observed some ceremonies that were 

put on at the time. The Indians, after digging a hole in the ground and 

getting down to the rock they were 

intending to remove, would take 

some of their paints and do various 

paintings there and offer up a prayer. 

They were not praying to the rock 

itself but to the Great Master, the 

Great Spirit, God; in other words, 

that this rock they intended to get 

out, that it would be made easy to 

them and they would have no difficulties in getting it. In connection 

with their trip there they would 

put other declarations on the rock 

as an offering to the Great Spirit...

The most reliable suggestion that 

pictographs once existed at the quarries comes from Philetus W. Norris, a 

Smithsonian Institution archeologist 

who appears to have observed painted 

images at the quarries during visits in 

1877 and 1882. In a published letter dated 

June 4, 1877 (Appendix A), Norris alluded to “some faint etchings and paintings

of former councils” (emphasis added). 

The official report of his 1882 visit to the 

quarries (Appendix B) was accompa-
231

ROCK ART

nied by “11 Sketches of painted totems,” 

but unfortunately those drawings are 

not known to survive. Presumably 

based on these now-missing drawings, 

Garrick Mallery (1886:23) stated that 

Mr. P.W. Norris has discovered large 

numbers of pecked totemic characters on the horizontal face of the 

ledges of rock at Pipe Stone Quarry, 

Minnesota, of which he has presented copies. The custom prevailed, it is 

stated, for each Indian who gathered 

stone (Catlinite) for pipes to inscribe 

his totem upon the rock before venturing to quarry upon this ground. 

Some of the cliffs in the immediate 

vicinity were of too hard a nature to 

admit of pecking or scratching, and 

upon these the characters were 

placed in colors [emphasis added].

Mallery (1893:87) published a 

very similar statement a few years later, 

but unfortunately, he did not publish 

any of Norris’ painted “characters.”

Norris himself alluded to the 

Pipestone “painted totems” only once in 

print. In describing, very much inaccurately, the region around the quarries as 

one vast cemetery dotted with “countless” 

burial cairns, Norris (1884:176) stated that

...as these purple- or flesh-colored 

rocks are seemingly glazed too hard 

for carving with any tool known to 

these people, many of them and portions of the cliff are nearly covered 

with the fading painted totems of 

the pilgrims who have mouldered to 

dust beneath them [emphasis added].

Like Mallery, Norris failed 

to publish any of these “painted totems.” If pictographs did indeed 

once exist at the quarries, they have 

disappeared with the passage of 

time and exposure to the elements.

Petroglyphs

With the exception of three 

petroglyphs recorded at the Noble 

and Derby locales in 2001 and the 

Bauermeister Petroglyphs observed recently (Scott 2005), the rock art of the 

monument has been briefly reviewed 

by Thiessen and Bailey (2000; see also 

Thiessen 1999). Much of the information that follows is repeated and expanded from that source. Information 

about the petroglyphs in each of 

the three locales is discussed below.

Three Maidens Petroglyphs (Locality 1)

The first eyewitness description 

of the Three Maidens boulders was provided by the artist, George Catlin, who 

visited the quarries in 1836 as part of his 

self-imposed mission of portraying North 

American Indian cultures on canvas before those cultures disappeared forever. 

Although the perspective is distorted, 

Catlin’s famous painting of the quarries 

shows the Three Maidens boulders off to 

one side, some distance from the quarries (Catlin 1973, 2:facing p. 165). Catlin 

observed that the Three Maidens boulders were held in high regard by Native 

Americans, “whose...veneration of them 

is such that not a spear of grass is broken or bent...within three or four rods of 

the group.” He also stated that Native 

Americans regarded the Three Maidens 

as the guardian spirits of the quarries, and they offered tobacco to them 

before engaging in quarrying (Catlin 

1839:142; see also Catlin 1973, 2:202-203).
PIPESTONE

232

That the Three Maidens boulders 

were held in special regard by Native 

Americans is also attested by at least 

two other early accounts of visits to the 

locality. The geologist Charles White 

was among a party of white visitors to 

the quarries in 1868 (White 1869; 1983; 

1989). When the party prepared to return from the quarries to Fort Dakota 

on the Big Sioux River, their Sioux guide 

made a brief visit to the Three Maidens:

...Mazachistina mounts at the same 

time, but starts off towards the 

Medicine Rocks, around which he 

makes a rapid turn and overtakes us 

upon the road. He is utterly silent 

when we ask him why he went there, 

but we should doubtless be thankful 

that we got away with our Pipestone 

in safety from the wrath of the guardian spirits of the Medicine rocks. 

(White 1869:653; 1983:14; 1989:22)

A few years later, in 1873, a 

party of Native Americans, probably 

Sioux engaged in quarrying catlinite 

at the quarries, shooed a young white 

boy away from the Three Maidens, 

upon which he had been climbing:

I was climbing up onto one of these 

rocks when the Indians saw me and 

stopped their work. Presently they 

came toward where I was and began 

pointing and jabbering away, which 

I couldn’t understand. Finally one 

old man pointed to the rock and 

shook his head, as much as to say, 

“you must not go up there.” Father 

told me to come down, then shook his 

head to the Indians, thus assuring 

them he would see that I didn’t try 

it again. The Indians now returned 

to their work. (Sutton n.d.:36)

In addition to veneration of the 

boulders as the home of guardian spirits, many nearby petroglyphs were observed by early visitors. Catlin made 

only slight mention of the petroglyphs 

about the base of the Three Maidens 

boulders, by observing that “here are 

to be seen (and will continue to be seen 

for ages to come), the totems and arms

of the different tribes, who have visited 

this place for ages past, deeply engraved 

on the quartz rocks, where they are to 

be recognized in a moment...by the 

passing traveller” (Catlin 1973, 2:167-168; 

emphasis in original). Catlin alluded to 

the existence of “thousands of inscriptions and paintings,” but this was surely a great exaggeration of their number. 

Bird tracks are a common petroglyph motif in the upper Midwest. 

Examples occur at all the rock art locales at Pipestone National Monument. 

Interestingly, Catlin (1973, 2:168) commented on bird track glyphs in the context 

of a Sioux tradition about the quarries:

Before the creation of man, the 

Great Spirit (whose tracks are 

yet to be seen on the stones, at 

the Red Pipe, in the form of the 

tracks of a large bird) used to 

slay the buffaloes and eat them on 

the ledge of the Red Rocks, on the 

top of the Coteau des Prairies, and 

their blood running on to the rocks, 

turned them red... (emphasis added)

It is not known if this is an allusion to the bird track petroglyphs among 

the Three Maidens group, on the Derby 

panel, the Noble bird track petroglyph, 

or other glyphs that may exist unrecorded elsewhere in the monument.
233

ROCK ART

In an essay on Wisconsin rock 

art, Robert J. Salzer (1997:53) has differentiated between bird track-like glyphs 

that exhibit a claw-like element behind 

the three forward-extended “claws,” and 

glyphs that lack this presumed anterior 

extension. The former he labels “tridents” 

(also sometimes called “turkey track” 

motifs) and the latter “bisected angles.” 

Both forms occur among the Pipestone 

National Monument petroglyphs and 

are here characterized, for the sake of 

simplicity, as bird track petroglyphs. 

Other visitors to the quarries 

have also commented on bird track 

glyphs there. During her captivity 

with the Sioux Indians in 1857, Abbie 

Gardner spent one day at the quarries 

with her captors. Writing her memoirs years later, she recalled bird tracks 

among the rock art motifs at the Tree 

Maidens, which she called the “Medicine 

Rocks” (Gardner-Sharp 1885:171):

The smooth surface of the “Medicine 

Rocks,” are covered with Indian hieroglyphics, of various grotesque 

forms, representing persons, animals, and turtles, and very many in 

the form of the tracks of a large bird...

The missionary Stephen Riggs, 

writing in 1858 or 1859, may have 

meant the quarries when he wrote:

...We say it is the lightning that 

burns and splits the gnarled oak, 

that tears up the earth in its passage 

to and from it; but the Dakotas ascribe all these things to the thunderbird...Near the head of the Coteau des 

Prairies there are rocks in which are 

seen the tracks of this great bird, and 

the locality has obtained the name of 

Thunder Tracks. (Riggs 1918:531) 

Charles A. White, the Iowa 

State Geologist who visited the 

quarries in 1868, also wrote of 

bird track motifs at the “Medicine 

Rocks” (i.e., the Three Maidens):

Many square yards of the glaciersmoothed surface at the Medicine 

Rocks are covered thickly with 

Indian hieroglyphics, made by pecking the hard surface with sharppointed stone. These are of various grotesque forms, intended to 

represent persons, animals of the 

region, turtles, and very many also 

in the form of the tracks of a 

large bird... [emphasis in original] 

(White 1869:652; 1983:14; 1989:22)

James Lynd, who spent considerable time living among the Sioux 

and studying their traditions and customs (Upham and Dunlap 1912:457), 

wrote about the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs, though it is not known 

if he actually visited the quarries:

The Pipe Stone Quarry is a place 

of great importance to the Sioux....

Numerous high bluffs and cliffs surround it; and the alluvial flat below 

these, in which the quarry is situated, contains a huge boulder that rests 

upon a flat rock of glistening, smooth 

appearance, the level of which is but 

a few inches above the surface of the 

ground. Upon the portions of this 

rock not covered by the boulder above 

and upon the boulder itself are carved 

sundry wonderful figures-lizzards 

[sic], snakes, otters, Indian gods, rabbits with cloven feet, muskrats with 

human feet, and other strange and 

incomprehensible things-all cut into 

the solid granite, and not without a 
PIPESTONE

234

great deal of time and labor expended 

in the performance. (Riggs 1864:145)

Lynd’s description of the quarries and the legend about them were 

repeated verbatim by W.P. Clark in his 

1885 book, The Indian Sign Language

(Clark 1982), and portions of it appear 

in an unpublished tradition attributed in 1934 by James H. Cook to Sioux 

and Cheyenne Indians. The Cook 

story, which is contained in the Cook 

Family Papers, Archive & Manuscript 

Collection, Manuscripts, Box 91 (on 

file at Agate Fossil Beds National 

Monument, Harrison, Nebraska), was 

written by Cook and is dated April 

12, 1934, at Scottsbluff, Nebraska.

Ernest V. Sutton, as a young 

boy visiting the quarries with his 

father in 1873, wrote of a single 

bird track “pictograph,” by which 

he may have meant a petroglyph:

Among the ancient pictographs 

was one representing the tracks 

of the “Thunder Bird,” a mythical bird supposed to govern 

the weather. (Sutton n.d.:35)

The first drawing of the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs was made in 

1859 by a man named W.O. Williams 

(Figure 21). A copy was presented to 

Alfred Hill by Williams in September 

of 1859, and was given to the Minnesota 

Historical Society in August of 1862 

(Minnesota Historical Society, notation 

on reverse of albumen print, SD4P/r42, 

negative 79766). The drawing depicts a 

solitary Native American contemplating the boulders and the petroglyphs 

on the underlying Sioux quartzite 

bedrock. Williams’ identity has not 

been established, but Alan Woolworth 

(Woolworth 1999; also letter to Thiessen, 

March 9, 1998) has speculated that he 

may have been a member of a party of 

land surveyors known to have worked 

in the vicinity of the quarries during 

that year. The artist’s name and the 

date “1859” cleverly appear as graffiti on one of the boulders. This is the 

earliest depiction of the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs in situ, though individual 

motifs are not recognizable or correlatable with later drawings of them.

It was not until the decade 

of the 1870s that some of the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs were first individually recorded; in all, the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs were historically recorded by various parties a total 

of at least seven times (Table 18). The 

Derby and Noble petroglyphs were 

recorded only since 1993 (Table 18).

The earliest of these recording 

episodes is also the most enigmatic. A 

crude diagram called “Perley’s chart” 

appears to depict at least some of the 

Three Maidens petroglyphs in a circular arrangement, presumably around 

the massive glacial boulders (Figure 

22). The original drawing is not known 

to exist, but two copies have survived. 

The earlier of the two copies is among 

Pipestone National Monument records 

at the Kansas City branch of the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(Record Group 79, Records of the 

National Park Service, Region II 

[Midwest Region], Omaha, Nebraska, 

National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files [1936-52], Pipestone 

National Monument, Decimal Code 

503 folder). It bears two handwritten 

notations: “As the rocks / were ar-
235

ROCK ART

Figure 21. 1859 drawing by W.O. Williams of a Native American contemplating the Three

Maidens petroglyphs (courtesy of Alan R. Woolworth and the Minnesota Historical Society,

locator SD4P/r42, negative 79766).

Figure 22. “Perley’s 

Chart” of the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs, 

1876. Probably made 

by George A. Perley 

of Flandreau, South 

Dakota. From a copy 

at Pipestone National Monument (after 

Thiessen and Bailey 

2000:Figure 2).
PIPESTONE

23

ranged in / 1876 / Perley’s chart” and 

“Pipestone-pictographs / Copied for 

HW Baker by / Miss Winifred Bartlett 

- 8/15/46.” Bartlett was a Pipestone citizen and local historian (Beal 1991), and 

Howard W. Baker at the time was the 

Associate Regional Director of Region II 

of the National Park Service in Omaha. 

Baker visited the monument on August 

14 and 15 of that year, and met Bartlett. 

His August 27 memorandum report to 

the Regional Director stated that “While 

visiting with Miss Bartlett, we learned 

that she had a sketch map showing the 

location of these rocks before they were 

removed from the Three Maiden area. 

She made a tracing of this map which I 

have turned over to Mr. Hagen” (ibid., 

Decimal Code 200 folder). Olaf T. Hagen 

was Regional Historian at the time.

A photocopy of “Perley’s chart” 

also exists in the archives of Pipestone 

National Monument. On the sheet 

on which the diagram appears is 

typed “Pipestone National Monument 

Petroglyphs at Three Maidens Site as 

arranged in 1876. Perley’s Chart.” The 

typed initials (LKL) of Lyle K. Linch, 

former superintendent of Pipestone 

National Monument from 1948 to 1954 

(Rothman and Holder 1992:242), and 

the date “1/13/49” appear in the lower right corner, suggesting that Linch 

was responsible for creating the copy.

The author of the original 

“Perley’s chart” is not known with certainty, although strong clues to the diagram’s probable authorship exist. A man 

named George A. Perley was deposed 

on September 30, 1927 in connection 

with litigation over the Yankton tribal 

claim to the quarries (United States 

Court of Claims 1927:216-221). Perley 

described himself as a retired farmer 

living in Flandreau, South Dakota, 

which is a few miles west of Pipestone. 

When asked if he was familiar with “the 

history of the Pipestone Reservation,” 

Perley replied “Quite good.” From his 

testimony, he seems to have possessed 

an avid interest in historical matters.

Additional information about 

this man exists in a published history of 

the Perley family (Perley 1906:598-601) 

and in two newspaper articles (“George 

A. Perley Called by Death at Home 

Sunday,” Flandreau Herald, September 27, 

1933, p. 1; “Old Pioneer is Called Home,” 

Moody County Enterprise, September 27, 

1933, p. 1). George Amasa Perley was 

born in Wisconsin in 1849. After nearly 

completing seminary studies at Wasioja, 

Minnesota, he homesteaded near 

Flandreau, South Dakota, in May of 1876. 

He was a Moody County delegate to the 

state constitutional convention of 1882 

and served in the South Dakota Senate 

in 1911-1912 (Perley 1906:599; Biographical 

Directory of the South Dakota Legislature 

1889-1989, vol. 2, p. 874). He possessed 

an interest in music and wrote several 

songs, a collection of which was published in a booklet titled Tune Touched 

Measured Musings (Perley 1906:598-599; 

letter from Roberta W. Williamson, 

Director, Moody County Historical 

Society, to Thiessen, October 22, 1998).

As yet, no documentation has 

been found to establish a definite connection between George A. Perley and 

“Perley’s chart,” but circumstantial 

evidence supporting his authorship 

of the diagram is strong. He was an 

educated, inquiring man with an interest in historical subjects. He took 

up residence in a community near 
237

ROCK ART

the quarries in 1876, presumably the 

year that “Perley’s chart” was created.

“Perley’s chart,” though crude 

in execution and conventionalized in 

its representation of petroglyphs in a 

uniform circle, is the only known plan 

view of the in situ petroglyphs around 

the Three Maidens boulders before the 

glyphs were removed on quartzite slabs 

taken up in 1888 or 1889 (see discussion 

below). “Perley’s chart” represents the 

earliest known attempt to record individual motifs in the Three Maidens petroglyph group. Several of the individual 

motifs shown on “Perley’s chart” clearly 

are the same images documented in 

more detailed fashion by later recorders, 

including Winchell and Upham (1884), 

Lewis (in Winchell 1911), Holmes (1892e), 

and possibly Cronau (1890) (see Table 19 

and Figure 23). Although its depictions 

are by no means precise renderings, 

“Perley’s chart” may ultimately satisfy 

some of the concerns expressed by W.H. 

Holmes and Garrick Mallery over what 

they viewed as Newton H. Winchell’s 

failure to record the full context and 

spatial interrelationships of individual 

motifs (Mallery 1893:88-89; Winchell 

1911:563-564; see discussion below). 

The Three Maidens petroglyphs 

were next recorded in 1878 or somewhat earlier, when the Minnesota State 

Geologist, Newton H. Winchell, visited 

the quarries. Winchell’s visit resulted 

in two publications ([Winchell] 1878; 

Winchell and Upham 1884) in which 

the petroglyphs were briefly described. 

The later of these, the 1884 report by 

Winchell and his assistant, Warren 

Upham, contains the first published depictions of individual Three Maidens 

glyphs. Forty glyphs are shown at onequarter size in four plates in their report (Winchell and Upham 1884:Plates 

I, J, K, L; see also Woolworth 1983:15-18) 

(Figure 24). Though Winchell’s illustrations of the Three Maidens petroglyphs 

appear somewhat fanciful, a number of 

them can be correlated with more accurately drawn, later renditions, lending 

Figure 23. Examples of individual Three 

Maidens petroglyph motifs drawn at different 

times by different recorders (after Thiessen 

and Bailey 2000:Figure 3).
PIPESTONE

23

Figure 24. Three Maidens petroglyphs recorded ca. 1878 by Newton H. Winchell (after Thiessen 

and Bailey 2000:Figure 4).
239

ROCK ART

 1 Yes No 38 No No

 2 Yes No No No No 3 Yes No No ? No 4 Yes No No No No 6 Yes No No No No 8 No No 33 No No 9 & 10 Yes No 20 Yes No

 11 Yes Yes No No No 12 Yes Yes No No No 13 Yes Yes No ? No 14 Yes Yes No No No 15 Yes Yes No No No 16 Yes ? 40? No No 17 Yes Yes 35 No No Yes 18 Yes Yes 7 ? No

Table 19. Concordance of published and unpublished petroglyph illustrations, Pipestone National Monument.

 Lewis/  Winchella Drawings Tracings

Winchellc Cronaud Stewarde Perley’s Chartf Holmesb
PIPESTONE

240

 19 Yes Yes 11? No No 20 Yes Yes No No No 21 Yes Yes 34? No No ? 23 Yes Yes No No No

 (reversed)

 24 No No 36 No No 25 No No 37 No No 26 No No 8 No No 27 Yes Yes No No No 32 Yes No 25? No No

 (partial)

 40 No No 9, 12 (partial) No No

or 19

 41 Yes Yes No Yes Yes

 42 Yes Yes No No No 44 No No 23 No No 45 Yes? Yes 30 Yes No

Table 19. Continued

 Lewis/  Winchella Drawings Tracings

Winchellc Cronaud Stewarde Perley’s Chartf Holmesb
241

ROCK ART

 46 Yes Yes No No No

 (reversed)

 47 Yes Yes No No No ? 48 Yes Yes No No No Yes 49 Yes Yes 27 No No Yes 50 Yes No 26 No No Yes 51 No Yes 18 No No 54 No No 3 No No 55 No No 4 No No 57 No No 39 No No 58 Yes Yes No No No Yes 59 No Yes 22? No No

 (partial)

 61 No Yes No No No

 (partial)

 67 No Yes No No No

Table 19. Continued

 Lewis/  Winchella Drawings Tracings

Winchellc Cronaud Stewarde Perley’s Chartf Holmesb
PIPESTONE

242

 69 No Yes No No No

 70 No Yes No No No

 77 No No 5? ? ?

 12 (box-like) Box-like (partial) 13 (parallel Parallel bars Yes

 bars)

 16 (human) ? ?

Table 19. Concluded

 Lewis/  Winchella Drawings Tracings

Winchellc Cronaud Stewarde Perley’s Chartf Holmesb

Lewis/Winchell motifs that do not appear to have been recorded by other investigators include numbers 5, 7, 22, 28-31, 33-39, 43, 52-53, 56, 60, 62-66, 68, 71-76, and 78-79.a. Winchell 1911:Plate 8. Thirty-three petroglyphs illustrated in Winchell 1911 do not appear to have illustrated counterparts in other references.b. Holmes (1892e) unpublished drawings and tracings are among his papers at the National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.c. Winchell 1884:Plates I, J, K, L; see also Woolworth 1983:15-18. Eighteen petroglyphs illustrated in Winchell 1884 do not appear to have illustrated counterparts in other references. d. Cronau 1890:85. Seven of the 14 petroglyphs that appear in Cronau 1890 do not appear to have illustrated counterparts in other references.e. Steward 1937:415-417.f. This volume.
243

ROCK ART

credibility to Winchell’s drawings. One 

contemporary author, J.E. Todd (1886:3; 

see also Smith 1906:83), notes that he observed similar figures to those illustrated by Winchell and Upham, “but quite 

imperfect,” along Wolf Creek southwest of Bridgewater, South Dakota.

Years later, after the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs were removed 

on slabs of quartzite taken up from 

their original location, a minor controversy occurred when a Smithsonian 

Institution researcher, William Henry 

Holmes, criticized Winchell’s failure 

to record the spatial relationships of 

the individual glyphs to one another. 

Because the petroglyphs had since been 

removed from their original locations 

without careful recordation, Holmes 

maintained that potentially important 

relational information was lost forever:

The trouble with the figures copied 

and published by Prof. Winchell is 

that they are not arranged in the 

original order. It will now be impossible to correct this entirely, as 

most of the stones have been taken 

up and removed...The Winchell 

drawings were evidently drawn by 

eye and have a very large personal 

equation; besides, they are mixed up 

while appearing to be in some order...There can be little doubt that 

in the main this great group of pictures was arranged in definite order, 

agreeing with the arrangements of 

mythical personages and positions 

usual in the aboriginal ceremonials of the region. It is a great pity 

that this original order has been 

destroyed... (Mallery 1893:88-89)

These remarks were originally

stated in two letters written by Holmes 

(1892c, 1892d) to a Smithsonian colleague, Garrick Mallery. Mallery 

combined portions of the two letters and published them in the 

guise of a single document in 1893.

In defense, Winchell (1911:563-

564) later pointed to a statement in 

his 1884 article that “for the most 

part the figures are isolated,” believing that this “relieves the onus of 

the complaint by Dr. W.H. Holmes.”

Holmes, possibly, had excessive 

expectations about the information that 

could be gleaned from the spatial interrelationships of the in situ petroglyphs, 

and Winchell, perhaps, did not appreciate the potential value of recording 

the in situ petroglyphs in relationship 

to one another when he had the opportunity. “Perley’s chart,” which does 

not seem to have been known to either 

of these men, may someday help to reconstruct the spatial interrelationships 

between the glyphs, that Holmes considered to be so potentially important.

A German newspaper correspondent in the United States, Rudolph 

Cronau, visited the catlinite quarries 

in 1881 and published drawings of 14 

glyphs in an 1890 book about his travels 

(Cronau 1890) (Figure 25) and 22 glyphs 

in a magazine article that was probably 

published in 1882 or 1883 (Cronau n.d.:86; 

see discussion of Cronau in Chapter 

6, this volume) (Figure 26). Although 

Cronau’s depictions also appear fanciful 

and may have been embellished, several 

of his glyphs appear to match glyphs 

recorded by later investigators, which 

lends a degree of credibility to Cronau’s 
PIPESTONE

244

Figure 25. Three Maidens petroglyphs recorded in 1881 by Rudolf Cronau (after 

Thiessen and Bailey 2000:Figure 5).
245

ROCK ART

renditions in general (Table 19). Cronau 

stated that he recorded “40 to 50” of the 

Three Maidens glyphs, so perhaps additional drawings are preserved in his 

personal papers, if indeed such exist.

The Three Maidens petroglyphs were also recorded by Philetus 

W. Norris, Walter James Hoffman, 

and William Henry Holmes, three 

Smithsonian Institution researchers 

who visited the quarries in 1882, 1888, 

and 1892, respectively (Norris 1883 [see 

also Appendix B, this volume]; Thomas 

1894:42-44; Powell 1893:xiii; Holmes 

1892e). Neither Norris’ nor Hoffman’s 

tracings or drawings are known to exist.

Holmes, however, made both 

tracings and rubbings which survive in 

the National Anthropological Archives 

at the Smithsonian Institution (1892e). 

These two sets of documents largely, but 

not completely, duplicate each other. The 

sheets are of different sizes. Twenty-one 

sheets depict rubbings, while 26 sheets 

consist of tracings of individual motifs. 

Many are the same motifs earlier recorded by Theodore H. Lewis, but not 

all of the 79 motifs recorded by Lewis 

were also recorded by Holmes (see below and Tables 19 and 20). In a letter 

to Garrick Mallery dated June 2, 1892 

(1892d), Holmes referred to reproducing 

as many of the motifs as he “had time to 

make,” inferring that he did not render 

all of the motifs presumably made available to him by Charles H. Bennett. Both 

sets reveal a few other, subtle features 

not shown in Lewis’ drawings, including, in at least three instances, entire 

motifs apparently not recorded at all by 

Lewis (see Figures 27-33). For example, 

the rubbing sheet which depicts a portion of Lewis motif 58 also faintly shows 

a rectilinear pattern, possibly divided 

by internal lines into halves or thirds. 

This motif is apparently so faintly 

etched into the quartzite that it was not 

recorded by Lewis. Perhaps this is the 

rubbing interpreted by Grace Rajnovich 

(1994:150) as a “shaking tent,” a symbol used in the Algonkian Midewiwin 

rituals (see also Rajnovich 1989). Other 

glyphs shown on the rubbings and tracings but not recorded by Lewis include a 

Figure 26. Rudolf Cronau drawing of petroglyphs published in a Die Gartenlaube article of

unknown date.
PIPESTONE

24

 

 1

 2

 3

 6

 9 or 10

 11 11

 12 12

 13 13

 14 14

 15 15

 16 16

 17 17

 18 18

 19 19

 20 20

 21 21

 23 23

 27 27

 41 41

 42 42

 43 43

 44 

 45

 46 46

 47 47

 48 48

 49 49

 50 50

 51

 58 58

 59

 61 61

 67

 69

 70

Table 20. Three Maidens petroglyph motifs recorded in rubbings and tracings made by W.H. 

Holmes at Pipestone, Minnesota, 1892. Numbers refer to the Lewis motifs as published by N.H. 

Winchell in 1911.

Rubbings Tracings

From copies made by Ralph Coffman from the original 11 by 17-inch tracings and rubbings in 

the National Anthropological Archives and provided to Alan R. Woolworth, who shared reduced 

copies with the authors, July 22, 1998. Other glyphs, not recorded by Lewis, are evident in the 

depictions (see text).
247

ROCK ART

Three Maidens petroglyph motifs recorded by W.H. Holmes but not by T.H. Lewis (from

Holmes rubbings and tracings, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution).

Figure 27. Rectilinear pattern associated with Lewis motif 58.

Figure 28. Connected bisected circles
PIPESTONE

24

Figure 29. Possible zoomorph associated with Lewis motif. 

Figure 30. Upper portion of a thunderbird or anthropomorph motif.
249

ROCK ART

Figure 31. Small pecked circles or “dimples” encircling Lewis motif 50.
PIPESTONE

250

Figure 32. Small pecked circle or oval “dimple” beneath feet of Lewis motif 58.
251

ROCK ART

Figure 33. Small pecked circles or “dimples” in the palms and abdominal region of Lewis motif 14.
PIPESTONE

252

pair of connected bisected circles, a possible zoomorphic motif contiguous with 

Lewis motif 23, and the upper portion of 

a thunderbird or anthropomorph. Also 

shown on at least two sheets are curvilinear alignments of small, irregular circles or “dimples” (which Holmes labeled 

as “tracks” on the sheets) apparently extending around Lewis anthropomorph 

motif 50 and thunderbird motif 51 (see 

Figure 46), as well as single “dimple”-

like features under Lewis motif 58 and 

in the palms of the outstretched hands 

and in the abdominal region of Lewis 

motif 14. The Holmes tracings and rubbings have not been analyzed or described in published form, but some of 

them appear on a website created by 

Charles R. Bailey (http://www.pclink.

com/cbailey/holmes.html) and the 

Holmes rubbing of Lewis motif 48 has 

been published by Rajnovich (1994:149). 

Clearly, the Holmes petroglyph depictions deserve further analysis.

The man who most comprehensively recorded the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs, and whose depictions today constitute the basic “catalogue” of 

them, was Theodore H. Lewis. Lewis, 

however, did so in 1889, after the petroglyphs had been removed from their 

original location. His drawings of 

79 individual motifs, on 35 slabs of 

quartzite, were published in Newton 

Winchell’s monumental 1911 compilation entitled, The Aborigines of Minnesota 

(Figure 34). A transcription of Lewis’ 

notes on the individual quartzite slabs 

and the motifs that they bear appears 

as Appendix C. Much of Lewis’ information was presented virtually 

verbatim by Winchell (1911:562-566).

The date that the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs were removed from their 

original location is not known with certainty, but their removal occurred in 

1888 or 1889, according to a statement 

by the man who removed them, Leon 

H. Moore (receipt to Charles H. Bennett, 

August 25, 1902, copy on file, Pipestone 

County Historical Society, Pipestone, 

Minnesota). Moore, a local stonemason, removed the petroglyphs at the 

behest of Charles H. Bennett, one of 

the founders and early leading citizens 

of the town of Pipestone. Ostensibly, 

they were removed out of concern that 

they were being defaced by names and 

other inscriptions being chiseled over 

the petroglyphs as the Pipestone region became populated, a sort of early 

misguided attempt at historic preservation (Dudzik 1997:102-103). Indeed, 

five of the slabs known to have been in 

Bennett’s possession bear English language names or other words pecked 

over Native American motifs. Lewis 

Slab 2 bears the nickname “BUCK SKIN 

JIM” and the name “E. GEORGE,” while 

Slab 24 bears the letters “TOOPSATA” 

(Table 21; Figures 36 and 46).2 Slab 22 

(Figure 11-10k) appears to bear the 

crudely pecked initials “HC,” a slab for 

which Lewis’ slab number is not known 

bears names or initials (Figure 49, bottom left), and Slab 21(?) may also bear 

an historic inscription (Figure 47, left).

2

Based on information supplied by recent visitor to the monument, David Rambow (email communication to Thiessen, July 16, 2004) has informed us that the “TOOPSATA” inscription was 

probably made by Tollef O. Opsata, who settled in nearby Rock County in 1870 and visited the 

quarries in the mid-1870s (Rose 1911:433-434). 
253

ROCK ART

Figure 34. Three Maidens petroglyphs recorded in 1889 by Theodore H. Lewis (after Thiessen and Bailey 2000:Figure 6).
PIPESTONE

254

1 1-10 Y / #23 11-10a

2 11 Y / #33 11-10b

3 12, 13 (partial), 43 Y* / #21 11-10c (bottom)

4 13 (partial) Y / #17 11-10d (left)

5 14 Y / #18 11-10d (top)

6 15 + 3 bird tracks Y / #25 11-10e (right)

7 17-21 + 1 bird track Y / #19 11-10f (bottom)

8 22 Y / #22 11-10g (right)

11(?) 27 N 11-10h (right)

13 31-32 N 11-10i (bottom)

14 33-35 Y / #32 11-10p

15(?) 36 + anthropomorph(?) N 11-10g (left)

18 39-40 + linear motif Y* / none ???? 11-10j

19 41-42, 52(?) Y / #30 11-10h (bottom

 left)

20 43 + 2 bird tracks, N 11-10c (top)

 bisected circles

21(?) 2 bird tracks N 11-10m (left)

22 46-47 Y* / #34 11-10k (top)

23 48-49 Y / #28 11-10k (bottom)

24 50-52 + “dimples” Y / #20 11-10l (bottom)

25 54-55 Y / #24 11-10m (right)

26(?) 56 (57 not apparent) N 11-10h (top left)

29 65-70 Y / #31 11-10n

32 73 N 11-10o (top)

Lewis Slab Lewis Motifs In Monument Collection? Figure

Number (Y, N/Museum Number)

Table 21. Concordance of Bennett petroglyph photographs, Lewis motifs, museum numbers, and 

figure numbers.
255

ROCK ART

Lewis Slab 

Number

Lewis Motifs In Monument Collection? (Y, 

N/Museum Number)

Figure

Number 

unknown

2 bird tracks + 

dragonfly(?) or 3 bird 

tracks(?)

Y / #27 11-10e (left)

Number 

unknown

2(?) bird tracks + unid. 

motif

N 11-10f (top)

Number

unknown

1 bird track Y / #26 (Slab B) 11-10i (top)

Number

unknown

2 bird tracks + 

zoomorph(?)

N 11-10l (top)

Number 

unknown

1 bird track + axe/

hatchet(?)

N 11-10o 

(bottom left)

Number 

unknown

Bird N 11-10o 

(bottom right)

Number 

unknown

1 bird track N 11-10q (top)

Number 

unknown

Turtle(?), bisected 

circle(?), + 2 or 3 unid. 

motifs

N 11-10q 

(bottom)

Slab A 2 hand/feet prints, bird 

track, cross

(not recorded by Lewis or 

photographed

by Bennett)

Y / #29 11-12

Table 21. Concluded

* Denotes partial slab; slab has been broken since being recorded by Lewis and part of the 

original slab is missing.
PIPESTONE

25

Bennett kept his Three Maidens 

rock art “collection” in the side yard of 

his home for many years, and even exhibited the slabs at the Louisiana Purchase 

Exposition in St. Louis in 1904, where 

they earned him a silver medal from the 

judging panel (Figure 52) (Rose 1911:244; 

Winchell 1911:112). The proud Mr. 

Bennett had a series of 17 photographs 

taken of his prize-winning rock art collection (Table 22; Figures 35 through 

51). He provided a set of prints to the 

Minnesota Historical Society; the original glass negatives are presently housed 

at the Pipestone County Historical 

Society. Midwest Archeological Center 

employee Alan Smith photographed the 

18 surviving Three Maidens petroglyph 

slabs in the monument’s museum collection, plus another from an undocumented provenience, in 1994 (Table 

22); Smith’s color slides and black-andwhite photographs are on file at the 

Center (accession MWAC-588/PIPE-179).

At his death on August 23, 1926, 

Bennett willed to the Pipestone County 

Old Settlers Historical Society “...all of 

the pictograph and hieroglyphic stones 

now located in my lawn between my 

store building and my residence, conditioned that said Historic Society will 

properly care for, house, protect, exhibit and perpetuate the same for public use and benefit...” (Will of Charles 

H. Bennett, May 19, 1926, on file with 

the Court Administrator, Pipestone 

County, Pipestone, Minnesota; see 

also Bartlett n.d.a:5). By letter dated 

September 23, 1926, the president and 

secretary of the Pipestone County 

Historical Society acknowledged receipt 

of the slabs, and on December 24, 1928, 

Bennett’s estate provided the Society 

with Leon Moore’s 1902 receipt for 

purchase of the slabs by Bennett (copies of both documents are on file at the 

Pipestone County Historical Society).

The Pipestone County Old 

Settlers Historical Society did not have 

a building to house the petroglyph 

slabs. As late as about September 30, 

1927, the slabs remained in the yard of 

Bennett’s former home (U.S. Court of 

Claims 1927:194). The slabs were later 

moved to new locations from time to 

time as the matter of a public building 

to house them and other historical artifacts was considered by the Society. 

They first appeared to have been 

housed in the basement of the Pipestone 

County Courthouse, as stated in a report of two Bureau of Indian Affairs 

(BIA) officials to the Commissioner of 

Indian Affairs on May 14, 1932. BIA 

Field Representative Charles H. Berry 

visited Pipestone that year to look into 

the possibility of setting aside a portion of the Pipestone Indian School 

land as a “National Indian Shrine,” under the administration of the BIA. He 

and J.W. Balmer, the superintendent of 

the Indian School, met with representatives of over fifty area organizations 

on the evening of April 27 and reported their findings to the Commissioner 

of Indian Affairs in a lengthy letter 

dated May 14 (Rothman and Holder 

1992:59-60; National Archives and 

Records Administration, Record Group 

75, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Central 

Classified Files 1907-1939, Box 18, File 

Pipestone 1113-1932-307.2, 1 of 2). Berry 

and Balmer recommended that 81.75 

acres be set aside for the shrine, and that 

the Three Maidens also be included. 

Their letter contains some interesting 

remarks concerning the petroglyphs:
257

ROCK ART

Table 22. Native American petroglyphs presently at Pipestone National Monument. Lewis/Winchell Winchell MWAC Photographsc Bennett Photograph Approx. Approx.Slab Numbera/ Motif(s)b (Roll/Exp.) at Minn. Hist. Soc. Length/Width Thickness

Other Designation of Slab of Slab

(inches)d (inches)d

Slab 1 1-10 R4B/Exp. 13-15 SD4P/p21 35 x 25 5

R10B/Exp. 11-15R2C/Exp. 24-25R4C/Exp. 13-14

Slab 2 11 plus R6B/Exp. 13-15 SD4P/p30 25 x 20.5 7

“BUCK SKIN JIM” R8B/Exp. 11-13and “E GEORGE” R3C/Exp. 25-26

Slab 3e 12-13 R2B/Exp. 12-14 SD4P/p19 21 x 13 7

R3B/Exp. 6-8R1C/Exp. 19-20, 22

Slab 4 13 R6B/Exp. 7-9 SD4P/p24 24 x 20 4.5

R9B/Exp. 5-7R2C/Exp. 9-10, 33-34R3C/Exp. 31-32

Slab 5e 14 R1B/Exp. 7-10 SD4P/p24 45 x 23 7.5

R2B/Exp. 5-8R3B/Exp. 1-2R1C/Exp. 6, 8

Slab 6 15 R16B/Exp. 1-3 SD4P/p31 30 x 15 6.5

R10B/Exp. 8-10R2C/Exp. 27-28R4C/Exp. 10-11
PIPESTONE

25

Slab 7 16-21 R7B/Exp. 11-15 SD4P/p38 40 x 19.5 8.5

R8B/Exp. 1R3C/Exp. 13-14

Slab 8 22 R9B/Exp. 14-15 SD4P/p29 19 x 17 6

R10B/Exp. 1

Slab 14 33-35 R10B/Exp. 5-7 SD4P/p22 25.5 x 12 5

R4C/Exp. 7-8

Slab 18e 39-40 R1B/Exp. 1-6 SD4P/p28 17.5 x 15 5.5

R2B/Exp. 1-4R1C/Exp. 1-2

Slab 19 e 41-42 R8B/Exp. 5-7 SD4/p23 19 x 14 9

R3C/Exp. 19-20

Slab 22 46-47 R2B/Exp. 9-11 SD4P/p18 12 x 11 6

R3B/Exp. 3-5R1C/Exp. 12, 15, 16, 18

Slab 23 48-49 R6B/Exp. 10-12 SD4P/p18 23 x 18 5

R9B/Exp. 2-4R2C/Exp. 3-4, 36-37R3C/Exp. 16-17

Lewis/Winchell Winchell MWAC Photographsc Bennett Photograph Approx. Approx.

Slab Numbera/ Motif(s)b (Roll/Exp.) at Minn. Hist. Soc. Length/Width Thickness

Other Designation of Slab of Slab

(inches)d (inches)d

Table 22. Continued
259

ROCK ART

Slab 24 50-53 plus R6B/Exp. 4-6 SD4P/p26 23.5 x 15.5 4

 “TOOPSATA” R10B/Exp. 2-4 plus 4 “dimples”f R2C/Exp. 30-31

R4C/Exp. 4-5

Slab 25 54-55 R8B/Exp. 8-10 None 20 x 19 8

R3C/Exp. 34-35

Slab 29 65-70 R8B/Exp. 14-15 SD4P/p17 44 x 28.5 2.5

R9B/Exp. 1R2C/Exp. 6-7R3C/Exp. 28-29R4C/Exp. 1-2

Slab number not ? R8B/Exp. 2-4 SD4P/p31 31 x 16 8known R1C/Exp. 37

R2C/Exp. 1

Slab number not knowng N/A R9B/Exp. 11-13 n/A 16 x 16 8.5

(Slab B) R2C/Exp. 15-16

R3C/Exp. 22-23, 37-38

Unlisted slab Ag N/A R9B/Exp. 8-10 N/A 30 x 19 4

R2C/Exp. 12-13R3C/Exp. 34-35

Noble petroglyphsh N/A R3B/Exp. 9-10 N/A In situ in

R5B/Exp. 1 bedrock

Lewis/Winchell Winchell MWAC Photographsc Bennett Photograph Approx. Approx.

Slab Numbera/ Motif(s)b (Roll/Exp.) at Minn. Hist. Soc. Length/Width Thickness

Other Designation of Slab of Slab

(inches)d (inches)d

Table 22. Continued
PIPESTONE

20

Lewis/Winchell Winchell MWAC Photographsc Bennett Photograph Approx. Approx.Slab Numbera/ Motif(s)b (Roll/Exp.) at Minn. Hist. Soc. Length/Width Thickness

Other Designation of Slab of Slab

(inches)d (inches)d

Table 22. Concluded

Derby petroglyphsi N/A R2B/Exp. 15 N/A In situ in

R4B/Exp. 1-2, 4-6 bedrockR7B/Exp. 4-10R1C/Exp. 25-26, 29-32, 34-35R3C/Exp. 8-10

Bauermeister N/A Not yet formally recorded N/A In situ in

petroglyphs bedrocka. Lewis in Appendix C, this volume; and Winchell 1911:564.b. Winchell 1911:Plate 8.c. 35mm color slides and black-and-white photographs taken on September 13-14, 1994 by Alan Smith, Midwest Archeological Center. Accession MWAC-588/PIPE-179.d. Measured on September 13-14, 1994.e. Slabs 3, 5, and 19 have concrete adhering to their edges as a result of having been cemented into a wayside exhibit. Slab 18 is broken into at least five pieces and has an attached typewritten note that reads: “PETROGLYPH REMOVED FROM EXHIBIT AT THREE MAIDENS SUMMER/1991 DAMAGE SUSTAINED IN DEMOLISHING EXHIBIT.”f. Four round pecked areas of approximately one inch diameter partially encircle anthropomorph motif 50. Though not previously recorded on rock art at Pipestone National Monument, Sundstrom (1993:96) has labeled similar motifs “dimples” at rock art sites in eastern South Dakota.g. Slab A is not listed in the Lewis notes or in Winchell’s book. Slab B appears in Fig. 11-10i.h. Additional photographs, taken in 1994, can be found in accession MWAC-557/PIPE-177.i. Additional photographs, taken in 1993, can be found in accession MWAC-507/PIPE-176.
26

ROCK ART

Charles H. Bennett’s photos of petroglyph slabs with chalked motifs, ca. 1904. See Appendix C 

and Tables 21 and 22. Courtesy of the Pipestone County Historical Museum.

Figure 35. Lewis Slab 1, bearing motifs 1-10.

Figure 36. Lewis Slab 2, bearing

motif 11 plus “BUCK SKIN JIM” 

and “E GEORGE”.
PIPESTONE

26

Figure 37. Lewis Slab 3 (lower), bearing motif 12, part of 13, and the feet of anthropomorph motif 

43; and Slab 20 (upper), bearing part of motif 43 plus two bird tracks and the pair of bisected 

circles that were not recorded by Lewis.

Figure 38. Lewis Slab 4 (left), bearing motif 13; and Slab 5 (right), bearing motif 14
26

ROCK ART

Figure 39. Lewis Slab 6 (right), bearing motif 15 plus three(?) bird tracks; and an unidentified 

slab bearing three(?) bird tracks.

Figure 40. Lewis Slab 7 (lower), bearing motifs 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and a bird track; and an unidentified slab (upper) with two or more(?) bird tracks.
PIPESTONE

26

Figure 41. Lewis Slab 8 (right), bearing motif 22; and Slab 15(?) (left), bearing motif 36 and an 

unidentified motif.

Figure 42. Lewis Slab 11(?) (right), bearing motif 27; Slab 19 (left lower), bearing motifs 41, 42, 

52(?); and Slab 26(?) (left upper), bearing motif 56 (motif 57 is not apparent or may be on an undepicted fragment of this slab).
26

ROCK ART

Figure 43. Lewis Slab 13 (lower), bearing motifs 31 and 32; and an unidentified slab with a bird 

track, which was formerly designated Slab B.

Figure 44. Lewis Slab 

18, bearing motifs 39 

and 40, plus an unidentified motif.
PIPESTONE

2

Figure 45. Lewis Slab 22 (upper), bearing motifs 46 and 47, plus initials “HC”(?); and Slab 23 

(lower), bearing motifs 48 and 49.

Figure 46. Lewis Slab 24 (lower),

bearing motifs 50, 51, 52, encircling 

“dimples,” and “TOOPSATA”; and 

an unidentified slab (upper) bearing 

two bird tracks and a zoomorph(?) 

motif.
26

ROCK ART

Figure 47. Lewis Slab 25 (right), bearing motifs 54 and 55; and Slab 21(?) (left), bearing two bird 

track motifs.

Figure 48. Lewis Slab 29, bearing motifs 65 through 70
PIPESTONE

2

Figure 49. Lewis Slab 32 (upper), bearing motif 73; and two unidentified slabs (lower, left and 

right), bearing a bird track, an axe(?), and a bird.

Figure 50. Unidentified slab bearing three zoomorph, anthropomorph, and bird track motifs.
26

ROCK ART

Figure 51. Two unidentified slabs, one bearing a single bird track and the other several unidentified motifs.

Figure 52. Charles H. Bennett posing with his “collection” of quartzite slabs bearing petroglyphs 

from the Three Maidens area, 1906 (courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society, locator SD4P/

p15, negative 37042).
PIPESTONE

270

To further bring to your attention 

the sincerity of these local people 

they collected some years back quite 

a large number of pictograph stones, 

some of them with prehistoric markings, while others seem to have been 

placed there by Indians during religious festivals which formerly were 

placed in a circle around the “Three 

Maidens,” and if they had been left 

there they would certainly have 

either been destroyed or carried 

away by thoughtless curio seekers.

These stones are now stored in the 

basement of the Pipestone County 

Court House and are cared for by the 

Pipestone County historical society.

It is planned, should the Indian 

Shrine be given national significance, to replace these stones in 

their original positions. A diagram has been kept of the original settings of the stones so 

they can be replaced in their 

original positions by following 

the diagram. (emphasis added)

The “diagram” here mentioned is 

not known to exist, unless it is a reference 

to “Perley’s chart,” previously discussed.

The county historical society did 

not seem to have an adequate home for 

its museum collection in the 1930s. On 

December 24, 1934, the Pipestone County 

Star reported a meeting of the Pipestone 

County Old Settlers Historical Society 

at which the proposition was raised of 

“erecting a small structure for the purpose [i.e., to house Society property to 

be removed from a room in the county 

courthouse], near the Pipestone Indian 

Shrine park, and incorporate in the 

walls of such a building the historic 

hieroglyphic rocks.” The Society president appointed a committee to look 

into the matter. Two months later, on 

February 26, 1935, the Star reported that 

Society members considered “the idea 

of securing permission from the county 

commissioners for the use of the southeast corner of the court house grounds 

for a small historical building, having 

the same erected as a relief project.” 

Although the proposal was said to have 

been met “with great enthusiasm,” the 

building did not materialize, despite 

the fact that the possibility of seeking 

Works Progress Administration support was considered over the following five years (Pipestone County Star, 

September 6, 1935 and January 1, 1940).

With the appointment in early January 1940 of a seasonal manager, then titled “Custodian,” for the 

newly authorized Pipestone National 

Monument, the Society’s interest seems 

to have changed to encouraging the construction of a building at the monument 

which would house the Society’s collection, including the petroglyph slabs. 

Although the matter was by no means 

settled, Custodian Albert F. Drysdale 

reported to the National Park Service 

Regional Director in Omaha that he had 

“moved the stones with the hieroglyphic carvings on them to a place of safe 

keeping” while the Society’s officers 

continued to consider the matter (letter from Drysdale to Regional Director, 

Omaha, February 2, 1940; copy on file 

at the Pipestone County Historical 

Society). Drysdale’s letter went on to 

relate that “there is twenty three (23) of 

these stones and they run in weight from 

about one hundred pounds (100 lbs) to 

about seven hundred pounds (700 lbs.).”
271

ROCK ART

The Pipestone County Star 

reported on March 8, 1940 that

with...the probability that there will 

soon be some move toward the erection of a building at the park, officials of the county society feel that 

an effort should be made to have 

space provided for these historical 

relics in the government building. It 

is pointed out that some of the relics came from grounds adjoining the 

park and are closely associated with 

the history of the quarry region.

On June 18, 1940, the Pipestone 

County Star again reported that at a 

meeting of the Pipestone County Old 

Settlers Historical Society, Drysdale

stressed the desirability of a museum 

in which relics of Pipestone county can be preserved for posterity. 

Drawings of plans for a proposed museum were introduced. The building 

would be 40x60 feet with a ground 

floor and a full basement, at a cost of 

approximately $23,000. An attempt 

will be made by the society to secure a 

federal appropriation for the project.

World War II delayed any substantive action to develop the new national monument, but near the end of 

the war and afterward, the National 

Park Service seems to have taken a more 

active role in determining the location 

of the stones. The slabs appear to have 

been moved, under Service supervision, 

possibly twice during 1945 and 1946. 

In a June 4, 1945 memorandum to the 

Regional Director, Custodian Drysdale 

submitted a bill for $3.00 to pay the 

Hess Motor Express company “to move 

the rock from Mrs. Roe’s residence until 

such time as we can move them to a permanent place” (copy on file, Pipestone 

National Monument). Drysdale explained that the reason for the move was 

that “Mrs. Roe sold her home and the new 

owner requested that these rock[s] with 

the Hieroglyphics be removed from the 

yard as soon as possible.” Perhaps Mrs. 

[John S. (Ethelyn)] Roe’s home, which 

was at 911 3rd Avenue SW (Pipestone 

Telephone Directory, June 1941), was 

the “place of safe keeping” to which 

Drysdale had moved the stones in 1940.

No further documentation has 

been found regarding possible movement of the slabs in 1945. However, 

the files of the Pipestone National 

Monument contain an unsigned requisition dated July 15, 1946 to pay the Hess 

Motor Transfer to move the stones to a 

new, but unspecified location, at an estimated cost of $10.00. Bureaucracy being 

what it is, Drysdale may have been told 

that he had not followed proper procurement procedures in arranging for the 

movement of the slabs. Four days later, on July 19, Acting Regional Director 

Howard W. Baker sent Drysdale a memorandum (copy on file, Pipestone County 

Historical Society) in which he stated:

We have your memorandum and 

requisition of July 15 concerning 

the moving of certain stone exhibits belonging to the monument. 

Before approving this requisition, 

we should like to know if you have 

explored the possibility of having 

these stones stored at the Indian 

School; and if this has not been done, 

we desire that you do so and submit a new requisition accompanied 

by a statement showing the place at 

which these exhibits are to be stored.
PIPESTONE

272

Note that this communication 

refers to the stones as “belonging to 

the monument,” strongly implying that 

their ownership had transferred to the 

National Park Service before July 19, 1946. 

However, documentation of the actual 

change in ownership has not been found.

There is no indication of whether 

or not Drysdale looked into the suggestion of moving the stones to the 

Pipestone Indian School, but they appear 

to have been located at the residence of 

one “Mr. J.E. Peterson” by August of 

1946. John E. Peterson was not the party 

who purchased Mrs. Roe’s residence, as 

his address in the Pipestone Telephone 

Directory for May 1946 is stated as 

913 4th Avenue SW. On August 12, 

1946, another requisition (copy on file, 

Pipestone National Monument) anticipated the transfer of the stones from 

“there [sic] present location at Mr. J.E. 

Peterson of 913 4th Ave SW, to the new 

location of Mr. R.F. Gilmore of 215 2nd 

Ave SW” at an estimated cost of $10.00. 

Six days later, the Region Two office issued a purchase order to transfer the 

stones (copy on file, Pipestone National 

Monument). However, on the purchase 

order the destination address of 215 

2nd Ave. S.W. has been lined out and 

the word “Library” has been added by 

hand. For some reason that is not fully 

explained in surviving documentation, 

a decision was made to move the stones 

to the Pipestone Public Library rather 

than to the private residence at 215 2nd 

Ave. S.W. In an August 21, 1946 memorandum to the Regional Director (copy 

on file, Pipestone County Historical 

Society), Drysdale explained that

We now have permission from the 

Pipestone Library Board to place 

the stones, that are now in storage 

at Peterson’s home, in the basement 

of the library. The purchase order 

that I have reads that these stones 

will be moved from the Peterson 

residence to the Ed Gilmore residence. The distance from either 

the Gilmore residence or the library is the same. Let me know if 

I should use this purchase order for 

moving the stone[s] to the library.

In a September 12, 1946 memorandum (copy on file, Pipestone County 

Historical Society), Associate Regional 

Director Baker noted that the transfer to 

the library had already been accomplished 

and he approved the action after the fact.

Lyle K. Linch replaced Drysdale 

as superintendent of Pipestone National 

Monument in 1948, and supervised the 

temporary removal of the petroglyph 

slabs from the basement of the Pipestone 

Public Library during remodeling work. 

In an undated memorandum to the files 

(but probably dating to October, 1949; 

copy on file, Pipestone County Historical 

Society), Linch documented that

George Bryan & I hauled all but 

one of the 22 hieroglyphic stones 

out to the monument when library 

was remodeled and placed them 

about 10’ East of the east ditch of 

the Monument road just south of 

the Inkpaduta marker. The one best 

stone is stored in basement of library.

He further explained in his 

Superintendent’s Monthly Report 

dated November 1, 1949 (copy on file, 

Pipestone National Monument) why the 

stones had to be moved, and registered 

a complaint about the lack of storage 

space or a museum at the monument:
273

ROCK ART

Once again this area’s pertinent 

need for a museum was vividly demonstrated when the 22 historic old 

hieroglyphic stones stored in the city 

library basement (These huge slabs 

have been moved many times since 

they were removed the three maiden 

site) has to be moved out of the building during its remodeling. (They are 

comparatively safe in the back yard 

covered with dirt). They will again 

be moved back into the basement 

when the remodeling job is finished. 

Every such move damages and mars 

these irreplaceable stones. IT IS A 

SHAME THIS AREA HAS NO 

STORAGE SPACE OR MUSEUM!

How the “back yard” referred 

to in this report relates to their temporary deposition on monument 

land described in Lynch’s undated 

memorandum cannot be explained.

In a footnote in his 1950 article, 

Theodore Nydahl (1950:202, footnote 

14) stated that the petroglyphs were 

then stored in two locations, “at the 

Pipestone National Monument and in 

the local library.” This footnote was 

based on a November 11, 1950, letter (copy on file, Pipestone National 

Monument) from Superintendent Linch 

which stated that 22 petroglyph slabs 

had been moved to the monument 

and one had been left on display in the 

basement of the Pipestone City library.

It is interesting to note that the 

total number of petroglyph slabs generally diminished through time. Their 

number is stated as 36 by Leon Moore, 

who removed them from their original 

location in 1888 or 1889 (1902 receipt 

cited previously); as 35 in Lewis’ 1889 

notes (Minnesota Historical Society 

1991:Reel 7 [also see App. C, this volume]; Winchell 1911:564); as 23 in a 

1940 letter to the Regional Director of 

the National Park Service (letter from 

Albert F. Drysdale to National Park 

Service Regional Director, Omaha, 

Nebraska, February 2, 1940, copy on 

file at the Pipestone County Historical 

Society); and as 22 in two 1949 documents (letter to the files at Pipestone 

National Monument from Lyle K. Linch, 

[1949], copy on file, Pipestone County 

Historical Society; and Superintendent’s 

Monthly Report, Pipestone National 

Monument, November 1, 1949, copy on 

file, Pipestone National Monument). 

Twenty three slabs were said to exist in 1950 (letter from Lyle K. Linch 

to Theodore L. Nydahl, November 11, 

1950, copy on file, Pipestone National 

Monument). Their number was reported 

as 14 in 1949 (Beaubien 1949:11) and also 

in 1965 (Sigstad 1970a:8). Nineteen slabs 

are now in the museum collection of 

Pipestone National Monument. Clearly, 

there has been attrition in the survival 

rate of these stones over time. Eighteen 

of the slabs described by Lewis or photographed by Bennett, or about half 

of the number originally removed by 

Moore, are known to exist, and all are at 

Pipestone National Monument. None of 

the missing slabs are known to exist elsewhere, despite the report that Newton H. 

Winchell took one to Minneapolis prior 

to 1892 (Holmes 1892d; Mallery 1893:89). 

There is also an unsubstantiated report that another slab exists in a museum in one of the prairie provinces of 

Canada (letter from Alan R. Woolworth 

to Thiessen, March 9, 1998), possibly the 

Glenbow Museum, which acquired the 

local Roe collection of Indian artifacts a 

number of years ago (Chris Roelfsema-
PIPESTONE

274

Hummel, personal communication).3

The 17 missing slabs described by 

Winchell contained 34 of the 79 motifs recorded by him and published by 

Winchell (1911:564, Plate 8) (see Table 23).

Much of the development of 

Pipestone National Monument was 

linked to MISSION 66, a ten-year 

program for upgrading facilities in 

National Park System areas. MISSION 

66 was to be completed by 1966, the fiftieth anniversary of the National Park 

Service. One of the MISSION 66 facilities at Pipestone was a roadside exhibit 

built in 1959 near the Three Maidens 

(Murray 1961:108). Several of the petroglyph slabs were incorporated into this 

exhibit, one of which was inadvertently 

broken when the exhibit was dismantled years later. Also in 1959, 15 of the 

slabs were placed alongside one of the 

paths near the visitor center (Pipestone 

County Star, September 17, 1959, page 1, 

“Pictographs on Display at Monument”).

After the dismantling of the 

Three Maidens roadside exhibit, the 

four petroglyph slabs from it were kept 

in the visitor center, three in the south 

entry of the building, and the broken 

one in a Bally box structure within the 

cultural demonstration center, where 

the monument’s museum collection 

is stored. The other 15 slabs remained 

along a pathway on the visitor center 

grounds near the “exhibit quarry.” In 

1994, Supervisory Archeologist Jeffrey 

J. Richner of the Midwest Archeological 

Center recommended that the slabs 

along the pathway be “removed and secured” (Richner 1994:5-6). In October, 

1997 the 15 slabs that lined the exterior path were brought into the building, where they are presently exhibited 

on the floor of the cultural demonstration (Palma Wilson, personal communication to Thiessen, January 4, 1999).

Do any in situ petroglyphs still 

exist in the bedrock that underlies the 

Three Maidens boulders? William 

Henry Holmes’ correspondence and 

notes suggest that this is likely, although 

this has not been confirmed because the 

area is now covered with a soil mantle 

that has been introduced to eliminate a 

water drainage problem and make the 

area more suitable for park purposes. 

Holmes probably observed some 

petroglyphs that were still in place 

around the Three Maidens. In a June 2, 

1892 letter to Garrick Mallery, concerning the Three Maidens petroglyphs, 

Holmes (1892d) stated that “There are a 

few pieces still in place.” Holmes kept 

a field notebook during his 1892 visit 

(Holmes 1892b), in which he sketched the 

Three Maidens and other features in the 

vicinity of the quarries. One sketch appears to represent an in situ petroglyph. 

One of the petroglyph sketches (on 

notebook pages 8-9) bears the notation, 

“This group is on the south side near 

the S.E. bowlder [sic].” Two of the Three 

Maidens views (on notebook pages 17 

and 22; see Figure 54) depict human figures pointing to or looking at the bedrock beneath the huge boulders. Both of 

these sketches, plus two other views of 

the Three Maidens (on notebook pages 7 

and 16), contain small “x” marks about 

the base of the boulders, which may 

3

Mrs. Roe is said to have “felt entitled to 2 stones for having stored them so long.” These are said to 

have been found some years later in the basement of the public library (Bartlett n.d.b).
275

ROCK ART

Table 23. Lost or unidentified Lewis/Winchell petroglyph slabs from the Three Maidens at 

Pipestone National Monument.

Lewis/Winchell Lewis/Winchell 

Slab Number a Motif(s) b

 9 23

10 24-26

11 27

12 28, 29, 30

13 31, 32

15 36

16 37

17 38

20 43

21 44, 45

26 56, 57

27 58, 59, 60, 61

28 62, 63, 64

30 71

31 72

32 73

33 74, 75, 76

34 77

35 78, 79

a. Lewis in Appendix C, this volume; and Winchell 1911:564.

b. Winchell 1911:564 and Plate 8.
PIPESTONE

27

represent Holmes’ attempt to indicate 

the locations of in situ rock art. If his 

perspective on the Three Maidens can 

be re-established today, it may be possible to conduct limited excavation in 

the thin mantle of introduced soil that 

surrounds the boulders and confirm 

the presence of petroglyphs in these locations. By more extensive excavation, 

it may also be possible to match the 

existing rock art slabs in the Pipestone 

National Monument museum collection 

to their original positions about the Three 

Maidens (letter from Alan R. Woolworth 

to Thiessen, November 10, 1998).

In 1965, archeologist John S. 

Sigstad contemplated just such an 

excavation, but that work was not 

carried out (Sigstad 1965b:67-68):

We had tentatively planned to so 

some investigating in the vicinity of 

the three maidens. Former P.N.M. 

Historian Abelson advised that there 

were still petroglyphs in situ on the 

Sioux quartzite where it outcrops at 

the base of the glacial erratics. There 

are about 5 places where this situation occurs. Stratigraphic excavation here would be pointless, however, since the Hiawatha Pageant Club 

has done much earth moving here in 

order to construct the stage for their 

little production. We abandoned 

plans to work here, however, mainly 

because there are Hiawatha Pageant 

tipis and other distractions which 

would greatly hinder any sort of horizontal control. Sometime when the 

Pageant is not on, on the other hand, 

it might be worthwhile to probe for 

the pictographs. This probably would 

not entail a great deal of excavation.

Interestingly, in a report on the geology of the monument Superintendent 

Linch (1949:47) suggested that a museum be erected to house the in situ Three 

Maidens boulders and the petroglyph 

slabs “restored to their original resting 

places.” No such structure was built.

Derby Petroglyph Panel and the Legg 

Petroglyph (Locality 28)

In 1992, the monument’s longtime chief of maintenance, Chuck 

Derby, noticed a number of subtle 

petroglyphs on a Sioux quartzite outcrop below the ledge, in an area he 

had passed by hundreds of times during his lifetime (Pipestone County Star, 

July 16, 1992). This glyph panel was recorded in 1993 as the Derby petroglyph 

panel (Clark 1996:9-10, 27). It consists 

of a bird motif, a turtle, two feet, three 

bird tracks, and six “amorphous peckings” (Clark 1996:9) (Figure 55). In 2001, 

an additional single bird track, called 

the Legg Petroglyph, was observed on 

a quartzite outcrop approximately a 

meter south of the outcrop bearing the 

Derby panel (Thiessen 2001; Figure 56).

Noble Petroglyphs (Locality 30)

During a 1994 archeological examination of a portion of the monument 

land that was subjected to a prescribed 

grass burn, a single bird track petroglyph was observed atop the quartzite 

ledge, the most prominent topographic 

feature within the monument (Figure 

57; Richner 1994:3). The bird track glyph 

was subsequently called the Noble 

petroglyph (Dudzik 1997:102). In 2001, 

monument staff observed two possible 

petroglyphs in the quartzite outcrop 

approximately six to eight meters northnorthwest of the bird track (Thiessen 
277

ROCK ART

Figure 53. Petroglyph Slab A in the Pipestone National Monument museum collection. Photograph by Alan Smith, 1994 (accession MWAC 588/PIPE 179).

Figure 54. Page 17 from the notebook kept by W.H. Holmes during his 1892 visit to the catlinite 

quarries. The view is of the Three Maidens and the “x” notations may represent the locations of in 

situ petroglyphs about the base of the Three Maidens (W.H. Holmes Papers, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution).
PIPESTONE

27

Figure 55. The Derby petroglyph panel at Pipestone National Monument.
279

ROCK ART

Figure 56. The Noble bird track petroglyph at Pipestone National Monument

Figure 57. Possible circular petroglyphs recorded in 2001 at Pipestone National Monument. One 

circle is forward of the tip of the knife blade; the other is in the upper left corner of the photograph.
PIPESTONE

28

2001; Figure 11-17). Both are approximately circular, and one bears two 

short projections on its west side. These 

three glyphs are the only in situ Native 

American petroglyphs known to exist on 

top of the ledge, despite some suggestion 

in the historical record that other glyphs 

may once have been observed there.

Description of the Pipestone 

Petroglyphs

Although often the subject of 

comment by early visitors to the catlinite quarries, the rock art of Pipestone 

National Monument has received little 

attention from professional archeologists and rock art researchers. This is 

probably due to several factors. Most of 

the glyphs were removed from the Three 

Maidens vicinity during the nineteenth 

century, and many of them were subsequently lost. Prior to 1992, the Three 

Maidens petroglyphs were the only 

Native American rock art known to exist in the monument. The attention given to the more than 2,000 glyphs at the 

nearby Jeffers Petroglyph Site, located 

about 65 miles to the east-northeast, has 

overshadowed the smaller and less diverse group of petroglyphs at Pipestone 

(Lothson 1976; Callahan 2001a). 

In his summarization of 

Minnesota prehistoric rock art, Dudzik 

(1997:101) classifies individual motifs into three general categories: anthropomorphic, zoomorphic, and 

geometric/abstract forms. All three 

categories are represented among 

the Pipestone petroglyphs (Table 24).

Some of the motifs occur widely 

at rock art sites through the interior of 

North America, and have been given 

names. A prominent example of this at 

Pipestone is the so-called thunderbird 

motif, a stylized depiction of a mythological being said to control thunder and 

lightning (Keyser and Klassen 2001:187, 

213-214; Salzer 1997:62). Thunderbird is 

often depicted as a spread-eagle bird figure with a triangular body, sometimes 

abbreviated to a curve representing 

wings attached to a stick-like body. Bird 

tracks are also often assumed to associate with the Thunderbird being (Keyser 

and Klassen 2001:180, 188). Although 

subject to wide interpretation, there may 

be as many as six full-bodied (nos. 1, 17, 

22, 34, 51, and 56) and two stick-bodied (nos. 31 and 68) thunderbird motifs 

represented among the Three Maidens 

petroglyphs. The Three Maidens petroglyphs also contain four (and probably 

more, judging from Charles Bennett’s 

photographs; see Figures 35 through 

51) bird track motifs (nos. 16, 26, 44, and 

45), two of them clearly of the “trident” 

variety. Another recurring motif at the 

Three Maidens is that of the turtle, of 

which there are at least four examples 

(nos. 25, 39, 40, and 77). Slab A (Figure 53) 

bears two handprint or footprint glyphs, 

and is the only slab that has this type 

of motif; unfortunately, it is not among 

the slabs listed and described by Lewis 

(in Winchell 1911:564), so its association 

with the Three Maidens petroglyph 

group is not certain. Slab A also bears a 

trident bird track and a cross. The Derby 

petroglyphs contain a turtle, two footprints, four bird tracks, and a possible 

stick-bodied thunderbird motif (Clark 

1996:9, 27), while a single bird track and 

possibly two circle motifs are known at 

the Noble Petroglyph Site (Richner 1994).

The thunderbird, bird track, 

turtle, and hand/footprint are impor-
2

1

ROCK ART

Table 24. Theodore H. Lewis’ categorization of petroglyph motifs at Pipestone National Monument.Group Anthropomorphic Zoomorphic Geometric/AbstractThree Maidensa

2*, “man” 1*, “bird with hart” 5*, “circle”11*, “man” 3*, “6 leged beatle” 7*, “nondescript”14*, “man with outspread hands” 4*, “part of a bird” 9*, “shaped like pins”15*, “man” 8*, “rabbit?” 10*, “shaped like pins”36, “man with uplift hands” 12*, “animal” 20*, “nondescript”37, “man” 13*, “bird with hart, and also 28, “nondescript”43, “woman” snake attached to wing” 29, “nondescript”

46*, “man” 16*, “bird track” 30, “nondescript”48*, “man” 17*, “bird” 32, “nondescript”49*, “woman defending her 18*, “animal” 42*, “nondescript” virtue” 19*, “animal” 53*, “nondescript”50*, “man” 21*, “charging buffalo” 59, “nondescript”54*, “man” 22*, “bird with attachment 60, “nondescript”55*, “man or cross” to wing” 61, “nondescript”58, “man” 23, “animal” 63, “nondescript”71, “man with horns” 24*, “perhaps a lizard” 64, “nondescript”72, “woman” 25*, “turtle” 73, “shaped like a horse-shoe”79, “man” 26*, “bird track” 74, “nondescript”

27, “turtle” 75, “nondescript”31, “bird” 76, “nondescript”33*, “animal” 78, “nondescript”34*, “bird”35*, “animal”38, “animal”39*, “turtle”40*, “turtle”41*, “animal”44, “bird track”45, “bird track”47*, “dragon fly”
PIPESTONE

22

Table 24. Concluded

51*, “bird”52*, “bird track”56, “bird”57, “animal”62, “animal”65*, “animal”66*, “horned turtle”67*, “moose”68*, “bird”69*, “animal”70*, “animal”77, “turtle”

Derby Petroglyphsb

2 footprints 1 bird 6 “amorphous” peckings

4 bird tracks1 turtle

Noble Petroglyphsc

1 bird track 2 circles

Group Anthropomorphic Zoomorphic Geometric/Abstract

a. Motif numbers are from Winchell 1911:564 and the Lewis notes in Appendix C; descriptive names are quoted from Lewis notes; * denotes motifs that survive in the Pipestone National Monument museum collection.b. Clark 1996:9-10, 27; Thiessen 2001.c. Richner 1994; Thiessen 2001.
28

ROCK ART

tant recurring motifs in what Keyser 

and Klassen (2001) have called the 

Hoofprint Tradition of Plains Indian 

rock art. Although the focus of their 

study is on rock art in the Northwestern 

Plains region, they (Keyser and 

Klassen 2001:184-185) point out that

Northwestern Plains Hoofprint rock 

art is part of a much broader rock art 

macrotradition found throughout the 

eastern and central United States. At 

sites scattered from the upper Ohio 

Valley in Pennsylvania and West 

Virginia, through the central southeast in Kentucky, Tennessee, and 

Georgia, and into the midwestern 

states of Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin, 

and Minnesota, related rock art motifs include cloven hoofprints, trident bird tracks, and human handprints and footprints. Thunderbirds, 

occasional vulvaforms, bear tracks, 

and human faces also occur.

Pioneering rock art researcher Campbell Grant (1967:137) has 

stated that “Over the entire Eastern 

Woodland...the most abundant motifs are the Thunderbird, hands, footprints, animal and turkey tracks.” 

Although the age of rock art is 

difficult to establish, a gross estimation 

may sometimes be made on the basis 

of the subjects depicted as glyphs, or 

what is omitted (Keyser 2001:120-123). 

At Pipestone, for example, no subjects 

from recent historical time are depicted, such as horses or firearms. This 

would suggest a prehistoric age for 

the monument’s rock art. Also missing from the Pipestone petroglyphs are 

motifs that have been interpreted at the 

nearby Jeffers Petroglyph Site as dating from Archaic times. These glyphs 

depict spear throwers called atlatls, atlatl weights, tanged copper projectile 

points, and copper crescents-all artifacts restricted to cultures that existed 

during the Archaic period, i.e., prior 

to circa 200 BC (Anfinson 1997:42; see 

also Lothson 1976:31, Callahan 2001a:37, 

and Steinbring 1999:7-8). Steinbring 

(1993:24) believes that the triangularbodied anthropomorph and thunderbird motifs originated after about AD 

1. With these several clues, a guess can 

be ventured that the Pipestone petroglyphs were likely created between 

about 200 BC and the advent of historic time in the region, circa AD 1750.

Although the “hallmark” motif 

of the Hoofprint Tradition, bison hoofprint glyphs, are absent at Pipestone, 

the presence of other glyphs commonly 

occurring in Hoofprint Tradition rock 

art suggests that the creators of the 

Pipestone petroglyphs shared in the 

Hoofprint Tradition styles. It may be 

that bison hoofprint glyphs are more 

common in the western portion of the 

Hoofprint Tradition’s geographic distribution where bison were presumably most abundant, and other kinds 

of motifs predominate in the eastern 

portion of the tradition’s distribution. 

Keyser and Klassen (2001:184; see also 

Turpin 2001:395) date the Hoofprint 

Tradition rock art to the Late Prehistoric 

and Protohistoric periods (circa AD 

500-1800). They also suggest that the 

authors of Hoofprint Tradition rock art 

were members of the Siouan language 

family, whose speakers were widely 

distributed throughout the Plains and 

Prairie regions of the mid-continent. In 

historic times, these groups included the 

Dakota/Nakota/Lakota Sioux, Mandan, 
PIPESTONE

28

Hidatsa, Crow, Assiniboin, and Ponca, 

as well as other Chiwere and Degihan 

speakers such as the Omaha, Ioway, 

Oto, and Winnebago. Possibly some 

Algonkian-speaking groups that lived 

in the Plains, such as the Cheyenne and 

Plains Cree, also shared in this rock art 

tradition (Keyser and Klassen 2001:186). 

As mentioned before, petroglyph Slab A in the monument’s museum collection was not recorded by 

Lewis and thus its association with the 

Three Maidens rock art cannot be documented. Slab A bears two handprint 

or footprint glyphs (Figure 53), a motif 

unknown among the recorded Three 

Maidens motifs, although footprint images are reported at the nearby Derby 

Petroglyph Panel (Clark 1996:9, 27). Slab 

A also bears a trident bird track glyph 

and a cross glyph. The coloration of 

most of the surface of Slab A is unlike 

most of the documented surviving Three 

Maidens slabs. Another slab recorded 

in 1994 by Thiessen as Slab B, and first 

thought to be part of the Three Maidens 

rock art, was later seen to be depicted 

in one of Bennett’s photographs (Figure 

43, top); thus it likely associates with the 

Three Maidens group of petroglyphs.

One feature of the Three Maidens 

rock art not recorded by Lewis (but 

which appears on Holmes’ unpublished 

rubbings and tracings, and in one of 

Bennett’s photographs) is a curved alignment of circular pecked depressions, a 

motif called “dimples” by Sundstrom 

(1993:96), on Slab 24 (Table 21; Figure 46). 

The depressions are very shallow, which 

is why they may have escaped the notice 

of most earlier researchers, and each is 

approximately one inch in diameter. The 

six dimples, labeled “tracks” by Holmes, 

appear to form an arc around Lewis anthropomorph 50 and Lewis thunderbird motif 51 on Slab 24, and may have 

originally encircled these glyphs before 

the slab was removed. As mentioned 

above, a similar single dimple appears 

below the feet of Lewis anthropomorph 

58. Sundstrom (1993:96) states that 

such dimples are often associated with 

handprints or footprints, but this does 

not appear to be the case at Pipestone.

Petroglyphs can be made in a 

number of ways that include incising, 

scratching, and abrading in addition 

to pecking. Because the petroglyphs 

at Pipestone National Monument are 

cut into one of the hardest rocks on 

the North American continent, Sioux 

quartzite, pecking with another piece 

of quartzite or other hard stone is the 

most likely means by which they were 

made. Because of the hardness of the 

quartzite, the pecked images are quite 

shallow and not “deeply engraved” or 

“deeply cut” as some have asserted (cf. 

Catlin 1973, 2:168; Grant 1967:133). They 

are so shallow, in fact, as to be difficult 

to discern under flat or most ambient 

lighting conditions, and are best viewed 

under oblique lighting. In his notes 

(and repeated virtually verbatim by 

Winchell [1911:564]), Lewis placed the 

Three Maidens petroglyphs into three 

“classes,” depending on his assumptions about how they were made, what 

kind of implement was used to make 

them, and whether they were polished. 

He also inferred that one “class,” which 

he believed exhibited polish, was older 

than the other two classes. He did not, 

however, relate individual motifs to any 

of these “classes.” In the absence of 
28

ROCK ART

any analysis that supports his conclusions, these ideas must be regarded as 

speculation only and of no substance.

Rock art in general is subject to a 

wide latitude of interpretation. The best 

and most fully supported interpretations are usually based on ethnographic 

analogies, but interpretations are sometimes based on mere speculation which 

can be unorthodox, if not outright outlandish. Significance and meaning can 

be assigned at the whim of the researcher, without benefit of any supporting 

analysis. This has happened with regard to the Three Maidens petroglyphs. 

In 1950, a local avocational archeologist 

discovered a feature of the quartzite 

ledge that he claimed resembled the fabled Egyptian “ankh” motif. At first dubious of any purported connection with 

Egyptian iconography, superintendent 

Lyle K. Linch eventually succumbed 

to the romantic allure of such lore and 

publicly interpreted this as evidence 

of some sort of mysterious connection with ancient Egypt (Rothman and 

Holder 1992:91; see also various newspaper clippings and correspondence 

in the archives of Pipestone National 

Monument). The specific location of this 

rock feature has been lost over the years.

An even wilder interpretation of 

some of the Three Maidens rock art was 

offered by James Churchward (1933:242-

244) in his book, The Ancient Symbols 

of Mu. He asserted that several of the 

petroglyph motifs, particularly Lewis 

motif 3 (Figure 35) which he interpreted 

as an octopus, were evidence of ancient 

connections with the “lost” oceanic 

continent of Mu, a fictitious land that 

he literally invented in his writings.

Ethnographic Importance of the 

Petroglyphs

There is relatively little recorded historic or present-day testimony of 

Native Americans about the origin and 

traditional significance of the rock art at 

Pipestone National Monument. The tradition of the Great Spirit having stood 

on the quartzite ledge in the form of a 

large bird has already been mentioned.

Several accounts share a consistent theme of petroglyphs being mysteriously created at night, by spirits unknown or by the female guardian spirits 

who reside under the Three Maidens 

boulders. The earliest such tradition was 

recorded by Nicollet in his journal entry 

for July 5, 1838 (Bray and Bray 1976:84):

But the most extraordinary thing 

here is that the prairie of this valley 

contains a group of granite blocks 

toward the southern end which are 

larger than any I have so far seen...

They lie right on the red crust 

which covers the red pipestone...It 

is on the red fragments which 

serve as paving stones for these 

rocks that the Sioux come to 

write their names as is their 

custom. They say, moreover, 

that three female spirits live in 

this mysterious place and that 

it is they who have engraved 

all of the characters that one 

sees on the red pavement and 

that one can hear them at work 

at night... [Emphasis added.]

This description of the 

Three Maidens does not appear in Nicollet’s official report.
PIPESTONE

2

Another such tradition is related by Lynd (Riggs 1864:145):

...The commoner Indians, even to 

this day, are accustomed to look 

upon these [i.e., the petroglyphs at 

Pipestone] with feelings of mysterious awe, as they call to mind 

the legend connected therewith.

A large party of Ehanktonwanna 

and Teetonwan Dakotas, says the 

legend, had gathered together at 

the quarry to dig the stone. Upon 

a sultry evening, just before sunrise, the heavens suddenly became 

overclouded, accompanied by heavy 

rumbling thunder, and every sign of 

an approaching storm, such as frequently arises on the prairie without 

much warning. Each one hurried to 

his lodge expecting a storm, when 

a vivid flash of lightning, followed 

immediately by a crashing peal of 

thunder, broke over them, and, looking towards the huge boulder beyond their camp, they saw a pillar or 

column of smoke standing upon it, 

which moved to and fro, and gradually settled down into the outline of 

a huge giant, seated upon the boulder, with one long arm extended to 

heaven and the other pointing down 

to his feet. Peal after peal of thunder, 

and flashes of lightning in quick succession followed, and this figure then 

suddenly disappeared. The next 

morning the Sioux went to this boulder, and found these figures and images upon it, where before there had 

been nothing; and ever since that the 

place has been regarded as wakan 

or sacred. [Emphasis in original.]

Though not specifically referring 

to the petroglyphs at Pipestone, in a 

brief article about petroglyphs on boulders near Brown’s Valley, Minnesota, 

T.H. Lewis (1887:642) related a Dakota 

tradition about glyphs being created at night by a mysterious “object:”

In olden times there used to be an 

object that merked the boulders at 

night. It could be seen, but its exact 

shape was indistinct. It would work, 

making sounds like hammering, and 

occasionally emit a light similar to 

that of a fire-fly. After finishing its 

work it would give one hearty laugh, 

like a woman laughing, and then 

disappear. The next morning the 

Indians would find another pictured 

boulder in the vicinity where the object had been seen the night previous.

Lewis did not attribute this tradition to any specific source, but since 

he related it in connection with some 

boulders he observed near the SissetonWahpeton Sioux reservation, perhaps he heard it among those people.

In this context, it is interesting to 

note that in 1914 anthropologist Wilson 

D. Wallis recorded stories among some 

Wahpeton Dakota in Canada about a 

mythological being named Spider who 

made noise while working at stones 

during nighttime (Wallis 1923:39).

The authors are indebted to Linea 

Sundstrom for pointing out the intriguing connection between the Dakota/

Lakota perception of Double Woman 

and the rock art at Pipestone (personnel 

communication to Thiessen, February 

15, 2001; see also Sundstrom 2000:111-

112, 2001, and 2002:105). In 1935 the 
28

ROCK ART

anthropologist Ruth Landes (1968:182) 

recorded among the Prairie Island 

Mdewakantonwan Dakotas a Pipestoneconnected story that involves a mythological being named Double Woman, who is 

said to have made petroglyphs at night:

These mystic women [i.e., Double 

Woman] were harmless when left 

alone, but if a hunter became inquisitive or mocking they punished him, causing him to lose his 

orientation and die in the woods.

At Pipestone, Minnesota, in 1935, 

there was a stone called Standing 

Rock, which formerly served camping 

Indians as a windbreak. Here they 

saw Double-Women oftenest, not in 

her twin form but by the evidence of 

sparks flying where the women supposedly hacked pictures out of the 

rock. Early mornings, insolent little 

boys used to visit the rock and ridicule the mystic pictures with clumsy 

scrawls. Once, two “old men” did 

the same after they found incisions 

on the rock outlining two running 

deer pursued by two men with grass 

tied on their heads. The “old men” 

realized that these were drawn by 

Double-Woman, yet they scrawled 

offensive pictures over the rock.

Next day, the two men were hunting. 

Towards noon they saw two deer lying in the grass beyond the reach of 

bow and arrow. They ran and ran 

toward the deer but never reached 

them; they shot arrows, but the deer 

only raced north with the arrows. 

On and on the Indians pursued, 

growing so warm from exertion that 

they threw their blankets away and 

later their leggings until they were 

completely naked. (The story-teller 

laughed.) But they aimed steadily at 

the deer. Day ending, clouds gathering, sleet, rain, and snow falling, 

the Indians left off to search for the 

blankets and leggings. They could 

not remember where they had been. 

Naked, they hacked the frozen ground 

with knives and themselves froze 

to death on the prairie. Next day, 

people found them. It was DoubleWoman who caused them to lose their 

minds, punishing their mockery.

A Yankton tradition about the 

petroglyphs being made by the guardian spirits of the quarries was told by 

Philip Deloria at Lake Andes, South 

Dakota, in 1926 (Beckwith 1930:425):

In old days an old man came down 

to earth. He motioned to the medicine-men and chiefs of two rival 

tribes to come together and he told 

them how the world was big enough 

for all and the animals were given 

them to hunt, not man. But that had 

not been enough for them, they must 

kill one another. So they had fought 

and killed, and the blood that flowed 

down the river had come together 

and formed the red pipe-stone. The 

stone is the blood of Indians. He 

made the shape of a pipe and sent 

them down to the reeds for a stem 

and wove it about with porcupinequills of mixed colors-in old times 

a color for each direction. Where 

the old man stepped was formed a 

bluff, and there live two fire women who make figures on the bluff.

The Three Maidens petroglyphs 

were mentioned by three Yankton elders 

who gave depositions in 1927 in connec-
PIPESTONE

2

tion with the Yankton claim to the quarries which was then under litigation 

(United States Court of Claims 1927).

Julia Conger, a Yankton tribal 

member born in 1844, testified (United 

States Court of Claims 1927:157-158) that 

she had heard of the Three Maidens 

rock art from her grandmother:

...I have been to Sioux Falls, but 

never went to Pipestone Quarry. 

My grandmother told me that in 

olden times the Indians had that to 

worship and that they would make 

sacrifices when they went there. She 

said, “There is something there that 

you don’t see, something there they 

pray to and make sacrifices to.” I 

said, “When they go there what do 

they do there?” She says, “There is 

something there that they call `Twin 

Maidens.’” She said, “They make 

pictures on this rock. Nobody ever 

saw them with their eyes, but after it 

was done they could see marks, and 

they could hear them at night working on this rock, and if anybody went 

there the next day they could see the 

pictures on that rock of dogs, ponies, 

or whatever they had, their pictures would be marked there,” and 

she said, “That is kind of a sacred 

place.” I never went there myself.

Another deponent, Simon 

Antelope, a Yankton tribal member 

who was 79 years of age at the time, 

spoke of successive visits to the Three 

Maidens during which he may have 

witnessed the petroglyphs in situ, their 

subsequent defacement by vandals, 

and the aftermath of their removal 

(United States Court of Claims 1927:169):

...I first visited the Pipestone Quarry 

52 years ago [i.e., ca. 1875) and the 

things I saw at that time were somewhere right near where they had the 

quarry. It is within a quarter of a 

mile of it. There were several stones 

that were standing up in the nature of hills. At night I heard noises 

over there and I could see sparks fly 

from these stones that I have just 

described. The following morning 

I visited these stones and saw what 

was there, and I found pictures on 

the stones that were chiseled on, 

good pictures of buffalo, deer, and 

other animals, and they were very 

well done, and there were pictures of 

Indian men and women, and the pictures were very well done. Upon another visit to the Pipestone Quarry I 

looked at these stones again, and in 

addition to the pictures that were on 

there there were characters made on 

the stone which appear to be some 

sort of writing or printing. I couldn’t 

read it, but there was something 

there that wasn’t the pictures or animals. The third visit I made there 

all these picture writings and things 

I have just spoken of had departed. 

Apparently some white people had 

removed them, taken them away.

Antelope believed his last visit to 

the quarries had taken place approximately 40 years previous, or about 1887, which 

correlates remarkably well with Leon 

Moore’s statement of having removed 

the petroglyph slabs in 1888 or 1889:

I don’t remember the exact year, but 

it was somewhere about 40 years 

ago [i.e., ca. 1887]. The Yanktons 

considered these rocks and picture 
28

ROCK ART

writings and all that as being their 

property. When they were they taken away by somebody we were just 

robbed of that amount of property. 

We regarded it equal to the quarry 

that was there, that it was a part of it.

The final deponent who commented on the rock art was Many 

Dogs, a Yankton tribal member who 

was “about 67 years old” at the time 

(United States Court of Claims 1927:177):

I visited the Pipestone Quarry when I 

was about 13 years old [i.e., ca. 1873]...

I saw large rocks there. There were 

markings on them, pictures of strange 

animals, and writings on the rocks.

From these depositions and the 

tradition recorded by Beckwith, it can be 

concluded that the Yanktons, who had a 

close association with the quarries during the nineteenth century, were aware 

of the petroglyphs but did not know who 

had made them or for what purpose.

There are suggestions in the 

historic record that several non-Sioux 

groups may have made rock art at the 

quarries. A Mandan man told George 

Catlin the following in 1832 during 

Catlin’s visit to the upper Missouri 

River: “We left our totems or marks 

on the rocks-we cut them deep in the 

stones, and they are there now” (Catlin 

1973, 2:170; emphasis in original). A 

Sac chief told Catlin (1973, 2:171): “My 

mark is on the rocks in many places, 

but I shall never see them again. They 

lie where the Great Spirit sees them, for 

his eye is over that place...” The twentieth-century Ponca tribal historian, 

Peter Le Claire, wrote of his people that:

They came and lived in Pipestone, 

Minnesota...When they were in 

Pipestone they started marking 

their trail on the big boulders. This 

was done by the Medicine Men. It 

was a two-toned picture, part of 

the picture is already on the wall 

and it is finished and only a few 

Poncas an see it, make out what it 

is. We will come to more of these 

pictures later. (Howard 1965:17)

During ethnographic research at 

Pipestone National Monument in 1995 

and 1996 (Hughes and Stewart 1997), 

interviews were conducted with Native 

Americans who visited the monument 

for ceremonial purposes or who possessed knowledge of the past use of monument resources by Native Americans. 

Formal interviews were conducted 

with eight members of the Yankton 

Sioux, the Flandreau-Santee Sioux, 

and the Pipestone Dakota Community 

(Hughes and Stewart 1997:4-5). The latter group consists of Native Americans 

who have taken up residence in the 

Pipestone area for the purpose of quarrying catlinite and making pipes and 

other objects; its members are primarily from the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux, 

but Chippewa are also represented 

(Hughes 1995:41-48). Informal interviews were conducted with other Native 

Americans during the study as well.

During the formal interviews, 

questions were asked about the origin, purpose, and significance of the 

Three Maidens petroglyphs as well 

as the in situ Noble and Derby petroglyphs (Hughes and Stewart 1997:75-

76). The results revealed little knowledge about the petroglyphs on the 

part of present-day Native Americans 

(Hughes and Stewart 1997:27-28):
PIPESTONE

290

The general consensus among informants, both formally interviewed 

and in casual conversation, is that 

the meaning of the petroglyphs is 

forgotten. Five informants who 

live in the area attempted to make 

a guess or inject a personal opinion about what the petroglyphs 

might have meant including winter 

counts, graffiti, personal markers, 

spiritual guides, a mark left by one 

or more spirits, and landmarks or 

directions on the prairie. Two other 

informants argued that the original 

placement or arrangement of the 

petroglyphs at the Three Maidens 

might have had meaning, either 

spiritual or mundane, and that the 

ceremonies traditionally held at the 

Three Maidens with the petroglyphs 

present may have had some special significance in relation to those 

petroglyphs. Others simply refused 

to guess whether or not there is or 

was any spiritual significance or traditional meaning to the petroglyphs.

The researchers went on to explain that the petroglyphs may have 

taken on new meaning to some of 

the Native Americans interviewed:

Some people have found significance 

in certain petroglyphs. Second-hand, 

or anecdotal information suggests 

that certain individuals may be able 

to “hear” the petroglyphs in a spiritual sense. One petroglyph was requested from the Park Service for use 

in the 1995 Sun Dance at Pipestone. 

The person requesting the petroglyph 

said it was “calling” to be there or that 

the “stones were crying.” Another 

informant overheard a person who 

said a petroglyph was “speaking.”

The glyph mentioned above as 

being taken to the 1995 American Indian 

Movement-sponsored Sun Dance ceremonies refers to Lewis motif 12 on 

Slab 3 (Palma Wilson, email communication to Thiessen, January 23, 1999).

Interestingly, and perhaps coincidentally, a Native American tobacco 

tie offering was observed suspended from a small bush near the Noble 

bird track petroglyph when it was recorded in the spring of 1994 (Richner 

1994:3; Dudzik 1997:106). This association may simply be coincidental, 

however, as tobacco ties are a form of 

offering found often throughout the monument (Hughes and Stewart 1997:42-48).

The Three Maidens petroglyph 

slabs were also mentioned in a deposition taken on October 12, 1927 

from John R. Swanton of the Bureau 

of American Ethnology (U.S. Court 

of Claims 1927:186-187), though it is 

of little value as to the nature of the 

rock art. He responded only vaguely 

to questions about the scientific value 

of the petroglyphs as then perceived:

Redirect question. There is one 

thing I want to ask you. The evidence 

in this case shows that the petroglyphs that used to surround the 

Three Maidens have been removed 

from their original site, that they 

are in the backyard, a private backyard in Blackstone [sic], and were 

sold by a private individual to the 

Minnesota Historical Institute. Now, 

those petroglyphs were essentially of 

ethnological value, were they not?
291

ROCK ART

Answer. Yes.

Redirect question. Did the circular fortifications which have 

been disclosed there not possess a special scientific value?

Answer. May I modify my last 

answer to this extent? I am not familiar with those petroglyphs. I am 

answering under the assumption 

that there is no question of their being genuine aboriginal specimens.

Redirect question. But they 

were of special interest, were 

they not, because of their ethnological value over and above 

their historic use by the Indians?

Answer. Yes.

Redirect question. That is what 

you meant by both an historical and 

a special interest?

Answer. I had reference to things 

in general, not especially to the 

petroglyphs. I had reference to everything that is known regarding 

the significance of the red pipestone in the lives of the Indians 

and of special geological interest.

In summary, Native American 

rock art in the form of petroglyphs has 

been recorded at three locales within 

Pipestone National Monument. The 

most numerous glyphs once were situated in the quartzite bedrock around the 

group of glacial erratic boulders known 

as the Three Maidens, which are said 

to be the home of two or three female 

guardian spirits of the nearby catlinite 

quarries. Seventy-nine individual motifs of this petroglyph group were recorded by Theodore Lewis in 1889 (see 

Appendix C) and were published by 

Newton Winchell in 1911. Within the 

last decade, 14 motifs were discovered on 

rock outcrops below the quartzite ledge 

(the Derby petroglyphs) and possibly as 

many as three on top of the ledge (the 

Noble petroglyphs). Ethnographic and 

traditional accounts attribute the creation of the Three Maidens petroglyphs 

to a mythological being or mysterious 

spirits that work at night. The rock 

art of Pipestone National Monument 

is a contributing element to a multiple 

property district listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places in 1996.

It is highly likely that additional 

in situ petroglyphs exist at Pipestone 

National Monument, possibly obscured 

beneath the extensive lichens that have 

developed over much of the exposed 

rock surface. This possibility is affirmed 

by the discovery of three or four in situ 

petroglyphs as recently as 2005 (Scott 

2005). Some clues hint at the existence 

of additional rock art. The label “BIRD 

TRACKS” appears near a feature called 

the “Devil’s Cave” on a 1950s-era interpretive map, suggesting that presentlyunknown bird track glyphs were previously interpreted to visitors. Chuck 

Derby, former Chief of Maintenance at 

the monument, once observed a single 

large bird track glyph atop the quartzite ledge south of the feature called 

“The Oracle,” but was later unable to 

relocate this petroglyph (personal communication to Thiessen, June 14, 2002).

Most of the prehistoric petroglyphs at Pipestone National Monument 

have been recorded multiple times and 

by several different researchers, most 
PIPESTONE

292

notably Theodore Lewis and William 

Henry Holmes, among others. The 

methods used have most often been 

drawing, tracing, or rubbing. However, 

these depictions have been based on 

the limitations of human perception 

and judgement, and as a result renditions of individual motifs vary considerably. Some motifs were so subtle that 

they were not recorded, and possibly 

not even noticed, by those attempting 

to document the monument’s rock art. 

Emerging technology in the form of laser 

scanning offers the promise of producing accurate and non-invasive digital records of these petroglyphs in the future. 

Although applications of this technology to rock art are mostly experimental 

at present (Bednarik 2001:76; Simpson 

et al. 2004), it is possible that they can 

be used in the future to produce accurate documentation of the motifs on the 

Pipestone petroglyphs that can serve 

both museum collection documentation, 

research, and interpretive purposes.
293

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In an April 12, 1898, letter advocating the protection of the catlinite 

quarries, John Wesley Powell, director 

of the Bureau of American Ethnology 

at the Smithsonian Institution, wrote 

to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs:

...the ancient Pipestone Quarries 

are of great and unique interest, 

first, as embracing a type locality 

in geology; second, as an aboriginal 

gathering place in which the industrial and aesthetic characteristics 

of the Indians were developed and 

in which the tribesmen learned the 

lesson of peace; third, as a particularly appropriate and picturesque 

site for a park; fourth, as a datum 

point for national literature which 

is already immortalized in song and 

story; and, fifth, as a monument of 

our early history. (Pipestone Indian 

Shrine Association n.d.:18-19)

In writing these lines, Powell accurately touched on most of the reasons 

for which the famous catlinite quarries 

are renowned and important: their place 

in geology, ethnology, park landscapes, 

literature, and history. To this list we 

would add archeology as one of the 

essential values of Pipestone National 

Monument. This value has been realized not only by preservation of the area 

as a national monument, but also by the 

recognition given the monument’s archeological resources through listing in 

the National Register of Historic Places 

on two bases: as a monument-wide archeological complex consisting of multiple localities and as a contributing element to the theme of Native American 

rock art in the state of Minnesota.

The Progress of Archeological 

Research at Pipestone National 

Monument

In the years following the establishment of Pipestone National 

Monument in 1937, several long-term 

research goals for the monument were 

recommended by regional office and 

monument staff to obtain a variety of 

historical, ethnological, archeological, 

and mineralogical information, primarily to incorporate into the monument’s 

developing interpretive program. 

Formulation of these goals began in 1940 

and continued over the following decade 

(see Edward A. Hummel, “Preliminary 

Historical Development Report for 

Pipestone National Monument,” in 

the National Archives and Records 

Administration, Central Plains Region, 

Kansas City, Missouri, Record Group 

79, Records of the National Park Service, 

Region II [Midwest], Omaha, Nebraska, 

Pipestone National Monument, Decimal 

Code 501-03 through 603, Box 194, File 

621, Construction Projects); agenda 

titled “Subjects for Discussion with 

Custodian Linch Pipestone National 

Monument March 1-2 [1948],” in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological 

Center; Gordon C. Baldwin, memorandum to the files, December 9, 1948, in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center; 

Gordon C. Baldwin, memorandum to 

Olaf T. Hagen, December 14, 1948, in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center; 

Howard W. Baker, memorandum to 

Lyle K. Linch, December 15, 1948, in 

Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 
PIPESTONE

294

file at the Midwest Archeological 

Center); Gordon C. Baldwin, memorandum to Olaf T. Hagen, March 25, 1949 

memorandum, in Archeology Outside 

MRB, Minnesota file at the Midwest 

Archeological Center; and Olaf T. Hagen, 

memorandum to the files, April 4, 1949, 

in Archeology Outside MRB, Minnesota 

file at the Midwest Archeological Center; 

and Beaubien 1949). These research 

recommendations are summarized at 

greater length in Chapter 7 of this study.

Viewed collectively, these several 

plans and memoranda dating from the 

period 1940-1949 proposed a far-sighted 

series of archeological investigations to 

benefit Pipestone National Monument 

and ultimately the visiting public. 

Although not presented in a detailed or 

comprehensive manner, recommended 

archeological investigations included 1) 

an inventory of the surficial archeological features of the monument; 2) development of an archeological base map of 

monument land; 3) an excavation program focused on the quarry pits; 4) documentation of rock art within the monument; 5) distributional studies of catlinite 

artifacts to identify catlinite objects in 

widespread cultural and chronological 

contexts; 6) compositional studies of catlinite and other pipestones to correlate 

artifacts with material source quarries; 

and 7) investigation of the “fortification” 

reported by Nicollet as existing east of 

the quarries. Even pursued in a piecemeal and uncoordinated manner, such 

a research program posed an ambitious 

undertaking, and efforts to implement 

many aspects of the proposed research 

were initiated at different times over the 

years. More than 50 years later, in 2006, 

some of the recommended studies have 

been completed while others are underway or have yet to be initiated. With 

varying degrees of success, progress 

has been made toward the realization of 

many of the research goals advocated by 

Hummel, Baldwin, Hagen, and Linch. 

One notable exception is the recommended investigation of the “fortifications in the general vicinity of the quarries,” which lay outside the monument 

boundary, as proposed by Hagen in his 

December 9, 1948 memorandum. This 

fortification, observed at various times 

during the nineteenth century, is no 

longer visible and is not known to have 

been located during twentieth-century 

visits by archeologists (see Appendix E).

In general, what can we say about 

the progress that has been made, or not 

made, as the case may be, toward meeting these research goals? Considerable 

progress has been achieved toward 

meeting objectives 1 and 2, inventorying 

the archeological features of the monument and developing an archeological 

base map. The first fieldwork carried 

out after the research recommendations 

were made, was Paul Beaubien’s fiveday reconnaissance of the monument in 

June, 1949, and his return in October of 

that year to excavate several of the quarry pits and elsewhere in the monument. 

Those visits did not result in much progress toward achieving the identified research goals, except for the third one 

enumerated above, excavation of quarries (see discussion below). Beaubien did, 

however, reiterate two of the previously 

recommended research objectives after 

his June visit-archeological excavation 

of quarries and creation of a base map. 

He also recommended that the monument’s boundary be expanded to include additional archeological resources.
295

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Sixteen years later, John S. 

Sigstad systematically surveyed the 

monument’s land and recorded all the 

archeological resources for which he 

encountered surface evidence, thus 

substantially achieving the first and 

second goals. His investigation, which 

met the research standards of his time, 

suffered from limitations beyond his 

control: 1) the base map provided by 

the National Park Service for his use 

contained undetected dimensional errors along two axes, thus limiting the 

accuracy of the locational information 

which he plotted on it; 2) the monument had not adopted a prescribed vegetative burn program, which precluded 

the advantage of seeing large portions 

of the ground denuded of lush vegetative cover (he was restricted largely to 

inspecting rodent spoil piles); and 3) 

today’s high-precision surveying equipment, such as total station transits and 

electronic data recorders, was not available to Sigstad. Nevertheless, Sigstad’s 

survey was comprehensive, useful for 

many management decisions, and considerably advanced the state of archeological knowledge of the monument. 

By the 1990s, a long-term program 

of archeological resource inventory in 

coordination with the monument’s prescribed burn cycle was recommended. 

The first such inventory was conducted 

following a burn in 1993, and successive 

post-burn inventories were conducted 

in 1994, 1997, and 1998. As a result of 

these inventories, it was recognized 

that many of the monument’s archeological resources were repeatedly being 

greatly affected by processes of bioturbation caused by populations of burrowing rodents. Consequently, these 

bioturbation processes have created an 

on-going cycle of artifact burial, exposure, reburial, and re-exposure over 

time. A one-time inventory investigation, such as that of Sigstad, represents 

a glimpse of the resources within the 

inventoried area at that time only and 

not as they might appear at different 

times in later years during the on-going 

process of bioturbation. Consequently, 

post-burn inventories in the future offer the potential to document additional 

“glimpses” of the archeological resources at different times and thus contribute 

to a gradually increasing understanding of the monument’s archeological 

record. This work will be greatly aided by the availability of a photogrammetrically-produced monument-wide 

base map made in 1997. In addition to 

being the basis for an archeological resource base map of the monument, this 

map can serve other resource management and planning purposes as well.

As to the third recommended 

research goal-quarry excavations-the 

monument’s quarry pits have received 

three separate episodes of archeological 

excavation. The first episode consisted 

of Paul Beaubien’s 1949 excavations at 

three widely-separated locations ranging from the south quarry line to the 

north quarry line. The second episode 

of quarry excavations occurred in 1965 

and 1966 when John S. Sigstad re-opened 

Beaubien’s former excavations and dug 

at several other pit locations as well, often to obtain catlinite samples. The third 

episode happened in 1971 when monument archeologist Roy Reaves excavated trenches through a pit over which 

the cultural demonstration wing of the 

visitor center was to be built. Other 

than recovering a few hammerstones 

used to break up the overlying Sioux 
PIPESTONE

29

quartzite and the catlinite beds themselves, some fragmentary bone tools 

of speculative use, and an occasional 

metal tool used to work the pits, these 

excavations have produced only meager results. No insightful evidence of 

the technology of prehistoric quarrying 

was obtained from these investigations.

Little progress was made on the 

fourth recommended research goal, documentation of the monument’s rock art, 

until the 1990s. Prior to 1992, the only 

rock art known to be from monument 

land were the petroglyph-bearing Sioux 

quartzite slabs that Charles Bennett arranged to have removed in 1888 or 1889 

from the bedrock underlying the Three 

Maidens. Said to have numbered 35 or 

36 slabs shortly after their removal, Paul 

Beaubien observed only 14 slabs in 1949. 

Presently, the monument’s museum 

collection possesses 18 slabs known to 

have once been part of Bennett’s “collection,” and one more slab of undocumented provenience. In 1992, an intact 

panel of 13 glyphs on a bedrock outcrop 

was reported by Chuck Derby; this panel was documented by Caven Clark in 

1993. In 1994, a single bird track motif 

was recorded elsewhere on the Sioux 

quartzite bedrock. More recently, one 

more glyph was noted near the Derby 

panel, two more possible but unconfirmed motifs were recorded near the 

Noble bird track motif, a small group of 

three or four glyphs were observed at 

Locality 9 in 2005, and, as a result of historical research for the 1997-1998 SAIP 

inventory project, evidence was found 

that suggested the possible existence of 

additional but unrecorded petroglyphs 

in the bedrock that underlies the Three 

Maidens. In 1994, the 19 petroglyph slabs 

in the museum collection were photodocumented. With these documentation 

efforts, a published article by Thiessen 

and Bailey (2000), and the completion of the present report (see Chapter 

11), this 1949 research objective is substanially completed. Documentation 

of the Bauermeister Petroglyphs discovered in 2005 remains to be done.

The fifth and sixth recommended research objectives-distributional 

and compositional studies of catliniteare linked. Because argillites found in 

many places across the United States resemble catlinite in color and general appearance, it is necessary to establish the 

mineralogical character of true catlinite 

(i.e., from the quarries at the monument) 

for comparison with the mineralogical 

characteristics of stone material in artifacts that appear similar to catlinite. 

Artifacts of true catlinite confirmed in 

this way can then be studied to establish 

their cultural and chronological context, 

and the implications for catlinite extraction and/or trade in prehistoric and early historic times. Constituent analysis of 

catlinite was first attempted on Catlin’s 

original samples in the 1830s, but it was 

not until 1940 that compositional analysis was extended to other pipestones besides catlinite. In that year David Howell 

published the results of his successful 

comparison of the chemical elements 

present in catlinite and pipestones from 

a number of locations. While he was 

able to distinguish pipestone of Arizona 

origin from pipestone samples lumped 

from several sources (including catlinite) in the upper Midwest, his analyses 

did not distinguish catlinite from all 

other pipestones of similar appearance. 

As a graduate student in the 

1960s and 1970s, John S. Sigstad (1968b, 
297

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1973) attempted precisely that goal by 

subjecting stone samples from a large 

number of locations to neutron activation analysis to establish the presence 

of certain radioisotopes and identify 

the chemical elements they derived 

from. He attempted to use neutron 

activation analysis (NAA) to identify 

the chemical constituents (i.e., certain 

trace elements) present in catlinite and 

other pipestones from artifacts in museum collections and stone samples 

taken from source locations (Sigstad 

1973). Initially believed to be successful, Sigstad’s pioneering analysis was 

applied to archeological artifacts from 

many locations and interpretations as 

to the age and distribution of catlinite 

usage were offered. Although his methodology was later reviewed and judged 

to be flawed (Gundersen and Tiffany 

1986:48; Glascock 1997; Weymouth 

1997), his research stimulated the efforts 

of later researchers who were more successful in tracing the source locations of 

various argillites that resemble catlinite. 

Neutron activation analysis, it should be 

noted, remains a viable methodology for 

identifying the source of artifacts made 

from catlinite and other pipestones, as 

demonstrated by recent experimental studies of Michael Glascock of the 

University of Missouri and his associates.

The most notable of these efforts were the x-ray powder diffraction 

studies of James N. Gundersen, a nowretired geologist from Wichita State 

University. Over the course of more 

than two decades, Gundersen’s research 

confirmed more than 360 archeological 

artifacts as being made from catlinite 

from the quarries at Pipestone National 

Monument. These artifacts are from 

more than 44 archeological sites in nine 

states (expanded to ten states by studies 

using portable infrared mineral analysis 

spectroscopy) and one Canadian province (see Table 5-2). Chronologically 

the earliest of his confirmed catlinite 

objects date to the Early and Middle 

Woodland periods (Boszhardt and 

Gundersen 2003) and are thus, along 

with Middle Woodland pipes from the 

Tremper Mound in Ohio (Emerson et 

al. 2002, 2005), the earliest evidence of 

catlinite use by Native Americans, possibly dating as early as 2,500 years ago. 

The limitations of Gundersen’s research 

derive from the lack of an integrated 

framework of cultural and chronological criteria for systematic specimen selection before samples are subjected 

to x-ray powder diffractometry, i.e., he 

analyzed only samples received from 

archeologists who happened to know of 

his research interest and capability, and 

not from any systematic effort to identify artifacts to be analyzed because of 

their cultural and chronological significance. An inherent limitation of x-ray 

powder diffraction methodology is that 

it requires small amounts of powdered 

stone taken from artifacts subjected to 

analysis. This means that some museum 

artifacts of extraordinary historical or 

aesthetic value are often not made available for analysis by this method, regardless of whether their provenance is such 

that x-ray powder diffraction analysis of 

them would contribute to understanding the broader patterns of catlinite and 

pipestone use by Native Americans.

New technology in the form of 

infrared mineral spectroscopy holds 

great promise for future sourcing studies of catlinite and other pipestones. An 

instrument called a Portable Infrared 

Mineral Analyzer (PIMA) has recent-
PIPESTONE

29

ly confirmed catlinite from a Middle 

Woodland temporal context in Ohio 

(Emerson et al. 2002, 2005) and has added a tenth state to the list of states where 

catlinite artifacts have been confirmed 

(see Chapter 5 and Table 5-2). The PIMA 

instrument offers three major advantages over x-ray powder diffraction and 

neutron activation analysis: 1) it does not 

require a powdered sample of the specimen to be analyzed; 2) the operation of 

the instrument is fast, allowing multiple 

samples to analyzed in a matter of minutes; and 3) the instrument is easily portable and can be taken to museums and 

other collections repositories for use.

Thomas Emerson of the 

University of Illinois and his colleagues 

are presently experimenting with PIMA 

analysis of catlinite, a task which is 

greatly facilitated by James Gundersen’s 

recent donation of his collection of catlinite samples to Pipestone National 

Monument. Numerous samples in 

that collection, presently stored at the 

Midwest Archeological Center, are documented as to the location of the numbered quarry space where Gundersen 

originally collected them. Emerson 

and his colleagues visited the Midwest 

Archeological Center on August 16 

and 17, 2004, and used two PIMA instruments to analyze a large number 

of catlinite and pipestone specimens 

from the Gundersen collection. Some 

preliminary results of this experimentation have been used to support PIMA 

analysis of pipes from the Tremper 

Mound in Ohio (Emerson et al. 2005).

No progress has been made toward the seventh research goal recommended in 1948, that of investigating 

the reported “fortification” observed 

by Nicollet about two miles east of the 

quarries. Although Philetus Norris dug 

into this fortification and a possible associated mound feature in 1882, no archeologist since that time is known to 

have observed this site, despite attempts 

to locate it. It is possible that the longterm effects of cultivation (and bioturbation?) have eradicated all surface 

evidence of it that was once visible to 

the naked eye. Oral tradition shakily 

links this feature to the catlinite quarries. If it is of interest to National Park 

Service decision-makers in the future to 

pursue research focused on the “fortification,” aerial photography and geophysical methods may be able to detect 

its presence, though success with these 

methods is not a foregone conclusion.

The Archeological Resources of 

Pipestone National Monument

The entire monument is recorded 

as one large archeological site or property, comprised at present by 43 subsites 

(in ASMIS terms) or localities (our term). 

These subsites are of seven general kinds: 

1) quarry pits, where Native Americans 

extracted catlinite in prehistoric and historic time; 2) petroglyphs pecked into 

the Sioux quartzite bedrock; 3) mounds, 

even though none has been confirmed 

as being of man-made origin through 

recent (i.e., twentieth century) systematic excavation; 4) circular stone alignments, though very few are suspected 

to have survived from the hundreds 

that once dotted the nearby landscape; 

5) lithic scatters representing campsites 

and/or catlinite workshop locations; 6) a 

set of possible tool sharpening grooves 

on the Sioux quartzite; and 7) historic 

features resulting from Euroamerican 

visits and settlement of the area, most 
299

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

notably the initials of several members 

of the Nicollet exploring party of 1838 

carved into the top of the Sioux quartzite 

ledge. Of the last category, only the historic Nicollet party inscription has been 

documented as an archeological feature. 

In addition to these seven kinds 

of subsites, an eighth type of feature is 

reported to have existed in two nearby 

locations outside the monument. The 

closer example was about two miles 

east and slightly north of the quarries, 

and the second was a short distance 

north of that location. They consist of 

earthworks, possibly enclosing purported burial mounds. One of these 

features is described in Appendix E 

because oral history links it to the 

quarries. Another type of archeological feature that once may have existed 

at the monument, but no longer exists 

today, is pictographs or painted images on the Sioux quartzite or the Three 

Maidens boulders (see Chapter 11).

A cemetery containing the 

graves of several students of the former Pipestone Indian School is believed 

to exist within the monument, not 

far from Winnewissa Falls. The location of the cemetery has not been confirmed through either documentary or 

geophysical research (see Appendix D; 

Nickel and Frost 2000). The best clue 

to its location is the base of an obelisk 

monument erected in 1934 to commemorate the memory of the students 

buried in the cemetery. That location 

today is represented by a depression in 

the ground where the monument once 

stood. It may be possible to locate the 

cemetery in the future through noninvasive methods, such as magnetic, 

electrical resistivity/conductivity, and 

ground-penetrating radar surveys, although initial efforts to locate it through 

magnetic and resistivity surveys were 

not successful (Nickel and Frost 2000).

The monument’s archeological 

record has been greatly impacted by 

the cumulative effects of bioturbation, 

which is the displacement, churning, 

and mixing of soil through time by burrowing animals. This is a particularly 

disruptive process in a place where the 

soil mantle above bedrock is generally 

three meters or less, as at Pipestone 

National Monument. The result is the 

obscuration of stratigraphy in the buried soil horizons, and the repeated 

burial and exposure of archeological 

artifacts and features. Together with 

removal by human agents, bioturbation 

may partly account for the virtual disappearance from the landscape of one 

of the most abundant archeological features observed during the nineteenth 

century-stone circles representing the 

position of lodges or tipis occupied by 

Native American visitors to the quarries. Of the hundreds that once existed 

near the quarries, only one confirmed 

and two possible such features were 

identified during the archeological inventory investigations of the 1990s. 

Bioturbation may also account for the 

mound-like features observed by nineteenth-century visitors as well as by the 

present investigators; these “mounds” 

may simply be large rodent spoil piles. 

Despite the fact that no subsurface cultural stratigraphy has been observed in 

any of the archeological excavations in 

the monument, nor have any subsurface 

features such as firehearths, storage 

pits, or post holes been recorded, the 

archeological resources of the monument should continue to be inventoried 
PIPESTONE

300

in conjunction with the monument’s 

prescribed fire management program. 

Each prescribed burn episode has the 

potential to reveal artifacts that, when 

cumulatively mapped over a long period of time, have the potential to reveal 

more about prehistoric patterns of occupation of the monument and exploitation of catlinite. A growing body of 

literature about the effects of bioturbation on archeological sites (cf. Hansen 

and Morris 1968; Wood and Johnson 

1978; Erlandson 1984; Bocek 1986, 1992; 

Erlandson and Rockwell 1987; Johnson 

1989) should be reviewed and considered in future planning for the management of burrowing fauna and archeological resources within the monument.

In 1972 or 1973, the monument 

initiated a two- to three-year cycle of 

prescribed grass burns to encourage 

the elimination of exotic vegetation 

species and their replacement with native species, which has continued to the 

present day. What effect does this fire 

management program have on the archeological resources of the monument? 

Experiments in mixed grass prairie 

environments in other Plains locales 

(Sayler et al. 1989; Buenger 2003, n.d.a) 

have suggested that buried artifactseven those buried only a centimeter or 

so below the surface-are virtually unaffected by grass fires. However, experimental studies in mixed grass environments near Grand Forks, North Dakota, 

and at Badlands National Monument, 

South Dakota, have resulted in somewhat contradictory conclusions (Sayler 

et al. 1989; Picha et a;. 1991; Buenger 

n.d.a). The Grand Forks study (Sayler 

et al. 1989; Picha et al. 1991) concluded 

that grass burns, though of relatively 

low peak temperature and brief burn 

time, can result in significant thermal 

alteration of surface artifacts through 

heat stress-induced fracturing, spalling, melting, charring, and even combustion, particularly for artifact classes 

such as wood, bone, shell, and lead. The 

results of later experiments at Badlands 

National Monument, however, concluded that thermal alteration of surface 

artifacts is minimal and not significant 

(Buenger 2003, n.d.a). This conclusion is 

supported by experimentation (Buenger 

2003, n.d.a) as well as by examination 

of 244 artifacts from Pipestone National 

Monument and 1,357 artifacts from 

Homestead National Monument; both 

are parks in mixed grass prairie settings. In these collections, slightly over 

two percent and less than eight percent, 

respectively, of the artifacts were judged 

to exhibit evidence of thermal alteration, 

typically blackening with tar but almost 

no physical alteration (Buenger n.d.b). 

One difference between the studies, 

which may explain the higher degree 

of artifact alteration noted in the Grand 

Forks experiment, is the larger amount 

of fuel load in the Grand Forks experimental burn plots (Buenger n.d.a:18). A 

common but minor effect of fire noted in 

the Badlands study is the formation of a 

residual tar deposit on artifacts, which 

is believed to be removed by weathering over time and therefore is an impermanent change (Buenger n.d.a:18, 135). 

While fire (prescribed or natural) would generally have little effect on surface artifacts at Pipestone 

National Monument (except in those 

areas of the monument where the fuel 

load is augmented by woody vegetation), it can facilitate the identification 

and documentation of archeological 

resources because it results in the de-
301

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

nudation, or partial denudation, of the 

vegetative ground cover. As explained 

previously, post-burn archeological 

inventories present the opportunity 

to gradually augment knowledge of 

the monument’s archeological record.

The absence of absolute dates 

from archeological contexts in the park 

requires that associative dating or relative dating be used. The two types of 

artifacts available for this purpose are 

prehistoric pottery and projectile points. 

The projectile point types represented 

in collections made by Norris, Beaubien, 

Sigstad, and the current study indicate 

that human use of Pipestone extended 

from the Late Archaic period through 

the Late Prehistoric to the advent of historic contact with Euroamericans (circa 

1000 B.C. to A.D. 1700). Given that the 

modern archeological investigations 

of the park span a fifty-year period 

there is a remarkable consistency in 

the range of projectile point styles and 

dates from the archeological investigations conducted in the late twentieth 

century. Each episode of investigation 

(Paul Beaubien, John Sigstad, the inventories of the 1990s) has recovered similar types of lithic materials suggesting 

that those making and depositing the 

tools used local sources and raw materials found in the glacial drift deposits as their stone of choice. The only 

consistently recurring non-local material is identified as Knife River Flint, although an Ontario lithic type (Hudson 

Bay Lowland Chert) of generally similar appearance cannot be ruled out.

The results of a reanalysis of 

the prehistoric pottery in the park collections indicate that the earliest pottery yet found within the monument 

dates to what are generally regarded 

as Middle Woodland times, a period 

that lasted from the last few centuries 

B.C. to possibly as late as AD 500 or 

700 (Johnson 1998:5-7, 11, 18; Anfinson 

1998:10-11, 12, 15; Henning 1998:i, 3, 6). 

All three ceramic analysts engaged for this study are in general 

agreement as to the relative frequencies 

of dateable pottery in the monument’s 

ceramic assemblage. All three conclude 

that the earliest pottery is represented 

by a relatively small number of sherds 

attributable to the Middle Woodland 

period, perhaps A.D. 500/700 or earlier, followed by a notable increase in 

the number of sherds representing Late 

Woodland peoples. Two of the three 

analysts see this as being followed by 

a substantial increase in pottery of the 

Plains Woodland tradition; in contrast, 

Johnson notes a modest decrease in 

Plains Woodland pottery compared to 

that of the preceding Late Woodland period. All three agree that the frequency 

of Oneota pottery is substantially diminished from earlier Plains Village frequencies. The ceramic evidence attests to the 

presence of successive prehistoric Native 

American peoples at the quarries from 

the Middle Woodland period to possibly as late as the advent of historic time 

(ca. AD 1700-1750?). This suggests that 

Native Americans have used the quarry 

locale, probably for multiple purposes, 

over most of the past two millennia.

Sporadic archeological investigations at Pipestone over the last 50 years 

have consistently recorded the same 

types of sites and artifact assemblages. 

Previous investigators, Beaubien and 

Sigstad, have concluded, and it is clear 

from the 1997 and 1998 work also, that 
PIPESTONE

302

there were no extensive aboriginal occupations in the immediate vicinity of 

the quarries. Although there appear to 

be no permanent or long-term habitation sites in the monument there is evidence of use of the area for at least 3,000 

years. In the modern and recent historic 

period as well as the Late Prehistoric 

period, this use was probably focused 

on the extraction of catlinite. At least 

one site, the Richner Site, demonstrates 

that catlinite exploitation took place 

at least 1,500 years ago. Catlinite artifacts from distant places outside the 

monument date to the Early and Middle 

Woodland periods, attesting to catlinite use possibly as early as 2,500 years 

ago. Catlinite appears to have been 

most heavily used within the last millennium, spanning the late prehistoric into the historic periods (Table 4).

In looking beyond the boundaries 

of Pipestone National Monument there is 

nothing remarkable in the archeological 

lithic record of the park to differentiate 

it from that of the surrounding region. 

The prehistoric humans who visited the 

Pipestone area, for catlinite extraction 

or other purposes, may have begun to 

do so as early as the Late Archaic period 

of 3,000 years ago and continued on a 

sporadic basis until the present. There 

appear to be no long term habitation 

sites or villages at or near Pipestone. 

The area seems to have been used for 

temporary camps for hunting and other 

resource extraction purposes, like that 

of catlinite quarrying. The cultural sequence and site types recorded in the archeological record are typical of the area 

and in general for western Minnesota, 

eastern South Dakota, and northwestern Iowa (Anfinson 1997; Winham 1990; 

Aufderheide et al. 1994; Benn 1990; Alex 

2000). The projectile point styles do not 

reflect any evidence of non-local groups 

regularly using the area; rather they 

suggest that regionally-based people 

used the Pipestone locale over a long 

period of time, at least 3,000 years, albeit on a temporary and repeated basis.

On the basis of this and previous investigations a number of conclusions can be drawn about the archeological resources of Pipestone National 

Monument. First, extensive occupations 

of long duration are not in evidence. 

Second, much working of the quarried 

catlinite has taken place on the quarry 

grounds. Third, the nature of catlinite working in the quarry area was the 

removal of blocks and the rough shaping of items to be manufactured so as 

to eliminate from transport as much 

weight as possible. Clearly, the quarries were and continue to be the focus 

of extractive use. The park lands are 

littered with the debris of post-extractive processes in the form of catlinite 

discards and debitage. The general absence of finished catlinite objects on the 

monument, coupled with the presence 

of substantial quantities of catlinite detritus, indicates that considerable working of catlinite took place here, with the 

final finishing of objects apparently 

taking place elsewhere. Fourth, ritual 

considerations were probably a part of 

catlinite quarrying in aboriginal times, 

including perhaps ritual purification by 

sweat-bathing (Scott and Thiessen 2001, 

2005). And fifth, at least some non-local 

knappable stone was brought in or traded in from considerable distances as suggested by the presence of artifacts and 

detritus of Knife River Flint from westcentral North Dakota, and of Bijou Hills 

quartzite from central South Dakota. 
303

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

As mentioned before, from a cultural resource point of view the monument is recorded as a single archeological site with multiple subsites or 

localities. As a listed National Register 

of Historic Places site, Pipestone National 

Monument has 43 identified archeological localities. These can be considered 

contributing resources that support 

National Register of Historic Places status. Of particular importance are the 

three recently-discovered in situ petroglyph panels. These three rock art locales are the only petroglyphs known to 

remain in place, although the possibility 

is strong that additional, yet unrecorded, 

petroglyphs exist elsewhere in the monument, some of which may be obscured 

by lichen covering extensive portions of 

the exposed Sioux quartzite bedrock.

Mounds (or possible mounds) 

and stone circles indicating former tipi 

locations once were among the most numerous and visible kinds of archeological resources within the monument. Yet 

today they have virtually disappeared 

from the landscape for several reasons, 

including destruction during earlier 

archeological excavations, removal for 

agricultural and construction purposes, 

and bioturbation. Thus the few localities with these kinds of features (three 

possible stone circles and two probable 

mounds) take on added importance just 

by the fact they have survived the impacts of burrowing animals and earlier 

consumptive resource investigations. 

One of the interesting discoveries made during the current project 

is the presence of recently deposited 

broken and incompletely finished catlinite objects (several pipes and a pipe 

stem). These artifacts were observed in 

the less frequently used portions of the 

park, the areas infrequently visited by 

the public or park staff, and were found 

not far from the current park boundary 

fence. These unfinished objects were 

observed lying in the current grass mat 

and not embedded in the soil matrix, 

thus indicating a very recent origin for 

their deposition. In one instance an object was observed in proximity to an 

offering wrapped in cloth and tied to 

the boundary fence wire. We believe 

these unfinished objects are of very recent origin, were broken or damaged in 

some manner during the carving process, and symbolically returned by their 

carvers to the vicinity of the stone’s 

source of origin. Thus, in a sense, the 

Native American archeological record 

of Pipestone National Monument is 

still being formed through the addition of discarded catlinite artifacts.

Recommendations

Several recommendations can be 

offered for management of the monument’s archeological resources and for future studies designed to increase knowledge of the monument’s archeological 

resource base and the use of catlinite.

1. The post-burn inventories and precise mapping of isolated artifacts 

should be continued. With the 

process of bioturbation constantly 

underway in most of the monument, artifacts will be repeatedly 

buried and exposed, with the result that only a portion of them are 

visible at any given time following diminishment of grass cover 

by prescribed fire burns. By continuing to record artifacts as they 

undergo these cycles of burial and 
PIPESTONE

304

exposure, a more complete picture 

can be gradually developed of artifact distribution and different use 

areas within the monument. Such 

data should be added to the monument’s GIS data layers or themes.

2. Each archeological locality within the monument should be revisited and the condition of each 

subsite documented on Midwest 

Archeological Center Site Condition Forms, and ASMIS records 

should be subsequently updated 

with this information. This cycle 

of re-assessment of subsite condition should be conducted at intervals not exceeding five years, and 

ASMIS records should be updated 

promptly following each episode 

of condition reassessment. All of 

the monument’s subsites were visited for this purpose in August 

2005, so the next re-assessment 

episode should be completed by 

the end of July 2010. Photo documentation of resource condition 

may be useful in some instances to 

supplement the data recorded on 

the form. The initial assessment of 

site condition should be conducted 

by a qualified archeologist, but revisits to monitor condition changes 

can be conducted by non-archeologists possessing the site condition 

documentation generated from the 

initial assessment.

3. Mounds are a dubious feature 

of the monument. Most of those 

mentioned in the accounts of nineteenth-century visitors are gone, 

having been eroded or dug into by 

various parties. Some of those that 

appear to have survived have been 

judged to be refuse or rock spoil 

piles and others may be merely 

the result of rodent burrowing activities. Only one (Locality 17) appears to be a likely burial mound, 

probably of relatively recent origin. Park staff should carefully 

monitor the condition of the tentative mound-like features recorded 

in Localities 33 and 35 through 

38. If they are indeed the result 

of bioturbation, changes may be 

noted over the span of a few years. 

These changes might be increased 

or decreased height, enlargement 

of the lateral extent of mounded 

earth, or diminishment of mound 

“mass” through the natural processes of erosion and exposure to 

the weather.

4. Limited test excavations should be 

conducted to determine the nature 

of the stone circles suspected to exist in Localities 16d and 40. These 

two possible circles were detected 

by probing for shallowly buried 

rocks with wire or rod probes. If 

confirmed as deliberately patterned circular stone alignments, 

they may indicate that similar features, which once numbered in the 

hundreds near the quarries, may 

survive elsewhere within the monument in a buried state due to the 

long-term effects of bioturbation.

5. The natural and cultural features 

of the Pipestone landscape stimulated early interest and attracted 

frequent visitors; the graffiti these 

visitors left behind is a part of the 

record of historic visitation to the 

monument. The nineteenth and 

early twentieth century graffiti 
305

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

pecked or carved into the Sioux 

quartzite bedrock in various places before the monument was created in 1937 should be documented. 

This should include recording their 

locations with GPS technology and 

documenting their nature with 

photographs and transcriptions. It 

may be possible to identify some of 

the graffiti creators through names 

and initials. 

6. A study should be conducted of 

the technology of catlinite working as reflected in catlinite scrap 

collected from various archeological “workshop” localities in the 

monument. Based on the nature of 

marks left on the scrap pieces during the stone reduction or artifact 

manufacturing processes, it should 

be possible to distinguish between 

marks created by metal tools and 

those made by stone tools, effectively differentiating catlinite assemblages worked prehistorically 

from those worked during the historic era. To compare and contrast 

catlinite-working technology of 

the prehistoric and historic periods, it will be necessary to obtain 

scraps of worked catlinite from a 

confirmed prehistoric context. The 

Richner Site would have an important role in such a study because 

1) it is a workshop site that has 

yielded abundant pieces of worked 

catlinite; 2) sherds of late Middle 

Woodland age (ca. AD 500) have 

been found there; and 3) it lacks 

evidence of historic occupation.

7. Compositional studies of catlinite 

artifacts should be continued, as 

inspired by the research of John S. 

Sigstad and achieved by James N. 

Gundersen, particularly if a nondestructive means to do so are 

found. If the PIMA experimentation underway by Thomas E. Emerson and his associates proves 

consistently useful in distinguishing catlinite from other pipestones, 

catlinite in well-provenanced, critically-selected collections should 

be sought and subjected to PIMA 

analysis. The effort should be 

guided by a research design that 

identifies in detail the chronological, geographic, and cultural objectives and parameters of the research, and criteria for seeking out 

and selecting artifacts from appropriate chronological and cultural 

contexts.

8. At his retirement in 2002, James 

Gundersen donated his personal 

collection of catlinite and other 

pipestone samples to the museum 

collection of Pipestone National 

Monument. It is presently housed 

in 28 boxes at the Midwest Archeological Center (accession PIPE 191/

MWAC 1000). At the present writing (January 2006), the collection is 

being organized and re-packaged 

for permanent storage. It contains 

samples (often multiple) from most 

of the numbered quarry spaces in 

the monument, and, to our knowledge, is the only nearly comprehensive collection in that regard. 

The collection also contains catlinite samples from the drilling conducted in 1979 and 1980 to explore 

the extent of catlinite beds within 

the monument. The catlinite samples constitute an important reference collection for any study of 
PIPESTONE

30

the mineralogical variability of the 

catlinite within the monument, or 

comparison with pipestones from 

outside the monument. The collection also has stone samples relating 

to Gundersen’s important research 

on the so-called “Kansas” pipestone that occurs widely as glacial 

drift. In addition to solid stone and 

powder samples, the collection also 

contains diffractograms, or mineralogical “signature” charts, for 

many of the samples analyzed by 

Gundersen. A finding aid should 

result from the reorganizational 

effort.

9. The Bauermeister Petroglyphs that 

were observed at Locality 9 in 2005 

(Scott 2005) should be documented 

by GPS location, photography, and 

drawings.

10. Rudolf Cronau’s (n.d.) article about 

the catlinite quarries in the Die 

Gartenlaube newspaper should be 

translated into English and its content analytically compared with 

his later published description of 

them (Cronau 1890).

11. Because it is the only confirmed 

surficial clue to the location of the 

Indian School cemetery, the location of the depression that marks 

the former location of the “Peace” 

monument should be recorded 

through Global Positioning System 

(GPS) technology before it eventually fills in with sediment or the 

pipe marker is removed.

Archeological evidence stands 

in mute testimony to the quarrying and 

use of catlinite by humans for possibly 

as long as the past two and a half millennia. Artifacts of catlinite from the 

Minnesota quarries have been documented in dozens of archeological sites 

in ten states and one Canadian province, and that list will surely grow as 

pipestone sourcing studies continue. 

Today, catlinite continues to be quarried 

and made into pipes and a wide variety 

of other objects by Native Americans of 

many tribes. Hughes (1995) and Zeneñp 

and Basaldú survey a large volume of 

ethnographic literature that documents 

catlinite or other pipestone use among 

fifteen American Indian tribal groups 

and numerous subdivisions of the Sioux, 

representing seven linguistic stocks as 

well as several finer linguistic subclassifications. Hughes (1995:21-23) also summarizes data taken from a review of 

quarry permits issued between 1973 and 

1994. These data show that, in that period of time, 358 individuals from at least 

34 tribal groups in both the United States 

and Canada received permits to quarry 

catlinite. Clearly, catlinite has special 

importance to a great many Native 

Americans of diverse tribal affiliation.

Archeological remains, at 

Pipestone National Monument and 

elsewhere, constitute the physical record of this long history of use of and 

widespread regard for this relatively 

soft, carvable stone. As the archeological record connected with catlinite 

continues to grow clearer, whether incrementally as in future prescribed fire 

episodes at the monument, through the 

unearthing of catlinite artifacts during 

future excavation projects, or through 

material sourcing studies of artifacts 

from distant places and diverse cultures, the basis for informed management and interpretation of irreplace-
307

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

able resources that illuminate that 

record will increase. It is hoped that the 

present study contributes to that goal.
PIPESTONE

30
309

REFERENCES CITED

Abel, Annie Heloise (editor)

1921 Notes and Documents: Trudeau’s Description of the Upper Missouri.

 The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 8(1 and 2):149-179.

1939 Tabeau’s Narrative of Loisel’s Expedition to the Upper Missouri

University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia

1866 Summary of Remarks by F.V. Hayden. In Proceedings of the Academy of 

 Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1866, pp. 291-292. Philadelphia.

Adams, Arthur T. (editor)

1961 The Explorations of Pierre Esprit Radisson. Ross and Haines, Minneapolis

 Minnesota.

Ahler, Stanley A.

1977 Lithic Resource Utilization Patterns in the Middle Missouri Subarea.

 Plains Anthropologist 22(78):132-150

Alex, Lynn M.

2000 Iowa’s Archaeological Past. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Amato, Joseph A.

2002a The Red Rock: Inventing Peoples and Towns. In Rethinking Home: A 

 Case for Writing Local History, by Joseph A. Amato, pp. 143-167.

 University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

2002b Pipestone and the Red Rock: Inventing Peoples and Towns. Rural and

Regional Essay Series of the Society for the Study of Local and Regional

 History and the Center for Rural and Regional Studies. Southwest State

 University, Marshall, Minnesota.

American Philosophical Society

1866 Summary of remarks by F.V. Hayden. In Proceedings of the American 

 Philosophical Society 10(76):274-275. June, 1866. Philadelphia.

Anfinson, Scott F.

1982 The Prehistoric Archaeology of the Prairie Lake Region: A Summary

 from a Minnesota Perspective. Journal of the North Dakota Archaeological

 Association 1:65-90.
PIPESTONE

310

1987 The Prehistory of the Prairie Lake Region in the Northeastern Plains.

Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Minnesota,

 Minneapolis.

1990 Archaeological Regions in Minnesota and the Woodland Period. In The

 Woodland Tradition in the Western Great Lakes: Papers Presented to

 Elden Johnson, edited by Guy E. Gibbon, pp. 135-166. Publications in

 Anthropology No. 4. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

1997 Southwestern Minnesota Archaeology. Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology

Series, No. 14. Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul.

1998 Prehistoric Ceramics at Pipestone National Monument (21PP2). Report

prepared for the National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center,

 Lincoln, Nebraska.

1999 Prairie, Lakes & People: The Archaeology of Southwestern Minnesota. Society

for the Study of Local and Regional History, Southwest State University,

 Marshall, Minnesota.

Anonymous

1889 Illustrated Album of Biography of Southwestern Minnesota. Occidental

 Publishing Company, Chicago.

1905 Report of the Minnesota Board of Managers for the Louisiana Purchase

Exposition. Pioneer Press Manufacturing Departments, St. Paul.

1970 The Occurance of Catlanite [sic] in Northwest Iowa. Newsletter of the

 Northwest Chapter of the Iowa Archeological Society 18(1):5-7.

1978 Oneota Disc Pipe from the McKinney Site. Iowa Archeological Society

 Newsletter 90:1.

1988 Tallgrass Prairie: Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone, Minnesota.

Brochure. National Park Service, [Midwest Region, Omaha, Nebraska].

n.d. Final Report of the Minnesota Board of World’s Fair Managers. No publisher,

no place of publication stated. Copy of selected pages provided to the

 author by Alan R. Woolworth, Minnesota Historical Society.

Arzigian, Constance M., and Katherine P. Stevenson

2003 Minnesota’s Indian Mounds and Burial Sites: A Synthesis of Prehistoric and

 Early Historic Archaeological Data. Publication No. 1. Minnesota Office of

 the State Archaeologist, St. Paul.
311

REFERENCES

Aten, Laurence, and Charles N. Bolich

1981 Archaeological Evidence for Pimple (Prairie) Mound Genesis. Science

 213:1375-1376.

Aubry, Michele C., Dana C. Linck, Mark J. Lynott, Robert R. Mierendorf, and

Kenneth M. Schoenberg

1992 National Park Service’s Systemwide Archeological Inventory Program.

 Anthropology Division, National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Aufderheide, Arthur C., Elden Johnson, and Odin Langsjoen

1994 Health, Demography, and Archaeology of Mille Lacs Native American

 Mortuary Populations. Plains Anthropologist Memoir 28 39(149).

Austin, George S.

1972 The Sioux Quartzite, Southwestern Minnesota. In Geology of Minnesota:

 A Centennial Volume in Honor of George M. Schwartz, edited by P.K. Sims and

 G.B. Morey, pp. 450-455. Minnesota Geological Survey, St. Paul.

Bakken, Kent

1999 Lithic Raw Material Resources in Minnesota. Minnesota Archaeologist

 55-58:51-83.

Baldwin, Brewster

1949 A Preliminary Report on the Sioux Quartzite. Report of Investigations

 No. 63. State Geological Survey, University of South Dakota, Vermillon.

Banks, Kimball M., and J. Signe Snortland

1995 Every Picture Tells a Story: Historic Images, Tipi Camps, and

 Archaeology. Plains Anthropologist 40(152):125-144.

Barber, Edwin A.

1883 Catlinite: Its Antiquity as a Material for Tobacco Pipes. American

 Naturalist 17(7):745-764.

Barbour, Barton H.

2001 Fort Union and the Upper Missouri Fur Trade. University of Oklahoma

 Press, Norman.

Barrett, S.A.

1926 Field Studies for the Catlinite and Quartzite Groups. In Notes on the

 Museum’s Collecting Expeditions in 1924, pp. 7-20. Year Book of the Public

 Museum of the City of Milwaukee 1924, Vol. 4, October 9, 1926. Public

 Museum of the City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
PIPESTONE

312

Bartlett, Katherine

1939 A Prehistoric “Mine” of Red Argillite, Resembling Pipestone, Near Del

 Rio, Arizona. Museum of Northern Arizona, Museum Notes 11(12):75-78.

 June 1939.

Bartlett, Georgia Winifred (identified by the initials G.W.B.)

n.d.a The Pipestone Indian Shrine. In The Pipestone Indian Shrine, Pipestone,

 Minnesota, pp. 1-5. Compiled by the Pipestone Indian Shrine Association.

 Pipestone Leader, Pipestone, Minnesota.

n.d.b Oral history interview. Transcript in Winnifred Bartlett file, Pipestone

 County Historical Society, Pipestone, Minnesota.

Beal, Wanita

1991 I Have A Story to Tell About Pipestone. Dennis Hansen Associates,

 Pipestone, Minnesota.

Beaubien, Paul L.

1949 Report of an Archeological Reconnaissance at Pipestone National

 Monument. Report on file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological

 Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1955 Notes on Archeology of Pipestone National Monument. Manuscript on

 file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln,

 Nebraska.

1957 Notes on the Archeology of Pipestone National Monument. The

 Minnesota Archeologist 21(3):1-19 plus one map and two figures.

1983 Notes on the Archaeology of Pipestone National Monument. The

 Minnesota Archaeologist 42(1 and 2):37-80.

Becker, Donald A., Thomas B. Bragg, and David M. Sutherland

1986 Vegetation Survey and Prairie Management Plan for Pipestone National

 Monument. Ecosystems Management, Elkhorn, Nebraska. Manuscript on

 file, Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone, Minnesota.

Beckering, Sandy

1989 Charles H. Bennett, “A Man of Vision.” Coteau Heritage, Journal of the

 Pipestone County Historical Society 2(1):23-26.

Beckwith, Martha Warren

1930 Mythology of the Oglala Dakota. Journal of American Folklore

 43 (170):339-442.
313

REFERENCES

Bednarik, Robert G.

2001 Rock Art Science: The Scientific Study of Palaeoart. Brepols Publishers,

 Turnhout, Belgium.

Bell, Robert E.

1984 Protohistoric Wichita. In Prehistory of Oklahoma, edited by Robert E. Bell,

 pp. 363-378. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Benchley, Elizabeth D., Blane Nansel, and Clark A. Dobbs

1997 Physical Setting. In The Archeology and Bioarcheology of the Northern

 Woodlands, by Elizabeth D. Benchley, Blane Nansel, Clark A. Dobbs, Susan

 M. Thuston, Myster, and Barbara H. O’Connell, pp. 3-38. Arkansas

 Archeological Survey Research Series No. 52. Fayetteville.

Benn, David W.

1986 The Western Iowa Rivers Basin: An Archaeological Overview. Report No.

 CAR-677. Center for Archaeologial Research, Southwest Missouri State

 University, Springfield.

1990a Woodland Cultures on the Western Prairies: The Rainbow Site Investigations.

Report 18. Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1990b Depositional Stratigraphy, Site Context and Prehistoric Cultural

 Overview. In Holocene Alluvial Stratigraphy and Selected Aspects of the

 Quaternary History of Western Iowa, by E. Arthur Bettis III et al., pp. 75-85.

 Iowa Quaternary Studies Group Contribution No. 36. Midwest Friends of

 the Pleistocene, 37th Field Conference, Council Bluffs, Iowa,

 May 12-13, 1990.

Berg, E.L.

1938 Notes on Catlinite and the Sioux Quartzite. American Mineralogist

 23(4):258-268.

Berres, Thomas E.

1996 Flint Clay Utilization in Illinois: Provenance and Archaeological

 Interpretation. Program and Abstracts of the 54th Plains Anthropological

 Conference, Iowa City, Iowa, October 30-November 2, 1996, pp. 53-54.

Binkowski, Don

1995 Col. P.W. Norris: Yellowstone’s Greatest Superintendent-America’s Early

 Environmental Champion (1877-1882). C & D of Warren, Warren, Michigan.

Birmingham, Robert A., and Robert J. Salzer

1984 The Marina Site Excavations. Wisconsin Archeological Society,

 Monograph No. 1. Submitted to the National Park Service, Rocky

 Mountain Regional Office, Denver, Colorado.
PIPESTONE

314

Blair, Emma Helen (translator and editor)

1996 The Indian Tribes of the Upper Mississippi Valley and Region of the Great

 Lakes. Reprinted in one volume with original pagination retained.

 University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Originally published 1911-1912 by 

Arthur H. Clark, Cleveland, Ohio.

Bocek, Barbara

1986 Rodent Ecology and Burrowing Behavior: Predicted Effects on

 Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 51(3):589-603.

1992 The Jasper Ridge Reexcavation Experiment: Rates of Artifact Mixing by

 Rodents. American Antiquity 57(2):261-269.

Boomer, Ralph J.

1916 Pipestone Reservation Park: A Development of Pipestone Indian

 Reservation. Thesis in partial fulfillment of requirements for a B.S. degree,

 Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Ames, Iowa.

Booth, Donald L., and Brad Koldehoff

1999 The Emergency Watershed Protection Archaeological Survey Project. Illinois

 Transportation Archaeological Research Program Research Report 62.

 University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

Boszhardt, Robert F.

1998 Additional Western Lithics for Hopewell Bifaces in the Upper Mississippi

 River Valley. Plains Anthropologist 43(165):275-286.

2003 A Projectile Point Guide for the Upper Mississippi River Valley.

University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Boszhardt, Robert F., and James N. Gundersen

1996 Sourcing Red Adena and Hopewell Pipes from Wisconsin. Iowa City,

 Iowa. Program and Abstracts of the 54th Plains Anthropological

 Conference, Iowa City, Iowa, October 30-November 2, 1996, pp. 56-57.

2003 X-ray Powder Diffraction Analysis of Early and Middle Woodland Red

 Pipes from Wisconsin. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 26(1):33-48.

Bozell, Rob

n.d. Note to Tom Thiessen, Midwest Archeological Center, concerning

 identification of animal bone found along the south quarry line on May 11,

 1995. On file, Midwest Archeological Center.
315

REFERENCES

Brackenridge, H.M.

1814 Views of Louisiana; Together with a Journal of a Voyage Up the Missouri

 River, in 1811. Cramer, Spear and Eichbaum, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Bradley, James H.

1917 The Pipe-stone Quarries. In “Bradley Manuscript-Book `F’,” p. 229; in

 Contributions to the Historical Society of Montana 8:197-250. Montana

 Historical and Miscellaneous Library, Helena.

Bradley, Suzanne R.

1984 Cultural Resource Survey of Excess Real Property Below Lovewell

Reservoir, Kansas. Report prepared for the Bureau of Reclamation.

Brasser, Ted J.

1982 The Tipi as an Element in the Emergence of Historic Plains Indian

 Nomadism. Plains Anthropologist 27(98, Part 1):309-321.

Bray, Edmund C., and Martha Coleman Bray (translators and editors)

1976 Joseph N. Nicollet on the Plains and Prairies: The Expeditions of 1838-39

 With Journals, Letters, and Notes on the Dakota Indians. Minnesota Historical

 Society Press, St. Paul.

Bray, Kingsley M.

2003 Omaha Rendezvous: Ethnogenesis and Warfare at a Plains Indian Trade

 Center. In People of the Buffalo: Essays in Honor of John C. Ewers, Vol. 1,

 edited by Colin F. Taylor and Hugh A. Dempsey, pp. 40-52. Tatanka Press,

 Wyk auf Foehr, Germany.

Bray, Martha Coleman

1969 Joseph Nicolas Nicollet, Geographer. In Frenchmen and French Ways in

 the Mississippi Valley, edited by John Francis McDermott, pp. 29-42.

 University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

1994 Joseph Nicollet and His Map. Second edition. American Philosophical

Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Bretz, Richard F.

1981 Geology of the Sioux Falls, South Dakota Area. In Cretaceous

 Stratigraphy and Sedimentation in Northwest Iowa, Northeast Nebraska,

 and Southeast South Dakota, pp. 129-147. Iowa Geological Survey

 Guidebook Series No. 4. Iowa City, Iowa.

Britt, Claude, Jr.

1995 A Comparison of Ohio and Minnesota Pipestones. Ohio Archaeologist

 45(3):24-25.
PIPESTONE

31

Broihahn, John H.

1996 Recent Investigations at the Pipestone Quarries in Barron County,

 Wisconsin. Program and Abstracts of the 54th Plains Anthropological

 Conference, Iowa City, Iowa, October 30-November 2, 1996, p. 58.

Brooks, Chester L.

1973 Memorandum, Regional Director, Northeast Region, to the Regional

 Director, Midwest Region, National Park Service, October 12, 1973. Subject:

 Request for archeological assistance at Pipestone. Copy on file, Midwest

 Archeological Center. 

Brooks, Robert L.

1989 Village Farming Societies. In From Clovis to Commanchero: Archeological

 Overview of the Southern Plains, by Jack L. Hofman, Robert L. Brooks, Joe S.

 Hays, Douglas W. Owsley, Richard L. Jantz, Murray K Marks, and Mary H.

 Manheim. Research Series 35:71-90. Arkansas Archeological Survey,

 Fayetteville.

Brower, Jacob Vradenburgh

1976 Field Notebooks, 1897-1905. Minnesota Historical Society microfilm

 publication. St. Paul.

Brown, Charles E.

1906 A Record of Wisconsin Antiquities. The Wisconsin Archeologist 5(3 and

 4):289-427.

1914 A Wisconsin Catlinite Quarry. The Wisconsin Archeologist 13(1):80-82.

Brown, Ian W.

1981 Cyrus Thomas and the Mound Exploration of the Bureau of (American)

 Ethnology. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 24:54-57.

Brownlee, Kevin, and E. Leigh Syms

1999 Kayasochi Kikawenow: Our Mother From Long Ago. Manitoba Museum of

 Man and Nature, Winnipeg.

Brunson, Alfred

1975 A Western Pioneer. Two volumes in one. Arno Press, New York.

 Originally published in two volumes 1872 and 1879 by Hitchcock and

 Walden, Cincinnati, and Carlton and Lanahan, New York.

Buenger, Brent A.

2003 Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology,

 University of Kansas, Lawrence.
317

REFERENCES

n.d.a The Impact of Wildland and Prescribed Fire on Archaeological Resources. Final 

n.d.b Final Report: Collections Analysis, Midwest Archeological Center, National

Park Service, Lincoln, NE. Report prepared for the National Park Service,

 Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Calabrese, F.A.

1984 Memorandum, Chief, Midwest Archeological Center, to Chief,

 Interpretation and Resource Management, Pipestone National Monument,

 October 1, 1984. Subject: Identification of artifacts. Copy on file, Midwest

 Archeological Center.

Callahan, Kevin L.

2000 Minnesota’s Red Rock and Other Sacred Boulders of the Upper Midwest.

 In 1999 International Rock Art Congress Proceedings, edited by Peggy

 Whitehead and Larry Loendorf, Vol. 1, pp. 25-32. American Rock Art

 Research Association, Tucson, Arizona.

2001a The Jeffers Petroglyphs: Native American Rock Art on the Midwestern

Plains. Prairie Smoke Press, St. Paul, Minnesota.

2001b Dakota Sacred Stones and Spirit Island, Mille Lacs, Minnesota:

 The Boulder Island that Moves. The Minnesota Archaeologist 60:137-142.

Carver, Jonathan

1974 Travels Through the Interior Parts of North America, in the Years 1766, 1767,

 and 1768. Reprint of 1778 J. Walter and S. Crowder, London, edition. Cole

 Publishing Company, Toronto, Canada.

Catlin, George

1839 Account of a Journey to the Coteau des Prairies, with a description of the

 Red Pipe Stone quarry and granite bowlders found there; by Mr. George

 Catlin, in a letter to Dr. Charles T. Jackson. The American Journal of

 Science and Arts 38(1):138-146.

1973 Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Conditions of North American

Indians. Two volumes. Dover Publications, New York.

Cheney, Josiah B.

1906 J.V. Brower. Collections of the State Historical Society of North Dakota

 1:335-339. Tribune, State Printers and Binders, Bismarck.

Chittenden, Hiram Martin

1900 The Yellowstone National Park. Third edition. Robert Clark Company,

 Cincinnati, Ohio.
PIPESTONE

31

Chomko, Stephen A.

1984-1985 A Reevaluation of a William Clark Map as a Post-expeditionary

 Cartographic Work. South Dakota Archaeology 8 and 9:1-10.

Churchward, James

1933 The Sacred Symbols of Mu. Ive Washburn, New York.

Clark, Caven P.

1996 Archeological Survey of a Controlled Burn at Pipestone National Monument,

 Pipestone County, Minnesota. Technical Report No. 40. Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Clark, W.P.

1982 The Indian Sign Language. Bison Book reprint edition. University of

 Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Originally published 1885 by L.R. Hamersly,

 Philadelphia.

Committee on Press and Publicity

1904 Official Catalogue of Exhibitors; Universal Exposition, St. Louis, U.S.A.,

 1904; Division of Exhibits, Department L, Mines and Metallurgy. Revised

 edition. Official Catalogue Company, St. Louis.

Corbett, William P.

1976 A History of the Red Pipestone Quarry and Pipestone National Monument.

 M.A. Thesis, Department of History, University of South Dakota,

 Vermillion.

1978 The Red Pipestone Quarry: The Yanktons Defend a Sacred Tradition,

 1858-1929. South Dakota History 8(2):99-116.

1980 Pipestone: The Origin and Development of a National Monument.

 Minnesota History 47(3):82-92.

Coues, Elliott (editor)

n.d. The History of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Reprint edition in three

 volumes. Dover Publications, New York. Originally published 1893 in four

 volumes.

Cox, George W.

1984 Mounds of Mystery. Natural History 93(6):36-45.

Cronau, Rudolf

1886 Von Wunderland Zu Wunderland. Landschafts‐und lebensbilder aus dem

	 	 staaten und territorien der Union...mit erlauterungen in poesie unde prosa von

	 	 Friedrich Bodenstedt, H. W. Longfellow, Bret Harte, Joaquin Miller...und Rudolf

	 	 Cronau. T. O. Weigel, Leipzi
319

REFERENCES

1890 In Wilden Westen. Eine kunstlerfahrt durch die prairien und

Felsengebirge der Union... Oscar Löbbecke, Braunschweig.

n.d. Zwoliter Brief: Tchanopa-o-ta, das Heiligthum der rothen Rasse. “Um die

 Erde” section of Die Gartenlaube newspaper. Date of publication

 unknown, but believed to be in 1882 or 1883.

Cross, Marion E. (translator)

1938 Father Louis Hennepin’s Description of Louisiana Newly Discovered to the

 Southwest of New France by Order of the King. University of Minnesota

 Press, Minneapolis.

Dale, Lisa-Marie

1997 Sigstad Photograph Collection: Finding Aid. Report on file, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Darrah, William Culp

1964 Stereo Views: A History of Stereographs in American and Their Collection.

 Times and News Publishing Co., Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

Davis, Joel

1982 Who Made Those Mounds? Science 82_3(3):104.

Davis, John Wayne

1934 A History of the Pipestone Reservation and Quarry in Minnesota. M.A.

 thesis, Department of History, University of Colorado, Boulder.

Davis, Leslie B. (editor)

1983 From Microcosm to Macrocosm: Advances in Tipi Ring Investigation

 and Interpretation. Plains Anthropologist, Memoir 19 28(102, Part 2).

De la Ronde, John T.

1876 Personal Narrative. Report and Collections of the State Historical Society

 of Wisconsin 7:345-365. Madison, Wisconsin.

Delin, G. N.

1980 Occurence of Catlinite in the Southern Half of Pipestone National

 Monument: Minnesota. U. S. Geological Survey, open-file report to the

 National Park Service.

Diedrich, Mark

1995 Old Betsy: The Life and Times of A Famous Dakota Woman and Her Family.

 Coyote Books, Rochester, Minnesota.
PIPESTONE

320

DiPeso, Charles C.

1956 The Upper Pima of San Cayetano del Tumacacori: An Archaeohistorical

 Reconstruction of the Ootam of Pimeria Alta. Publication No. 7. Amerind

 Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona.

Dippie, Brian W.

1990 Catlin and His Contemporaries: The Politics of Patronage. University of

 Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Dobbs, Clark A.

1991 The Northwestern Archaeological Survey: An Appreciation and Guide

 to the Field Notebooks. Institute for Minnesota Archaeology Reports of

 Investigations No. 135. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Domenech, Emmanuel

1860 Seven Years Residence in the Great Deserts of North America. Vol. 2

 London.

Drass, Richard R.

1997 Culture Change on the Eastern Margins of the Southern Plains. Studies in

 Oklahoma’s Past No. 19. Oklahoma Archeological Survey, Norman.

Drass, Richard R., and Timothy G. Baugh

1997 The Wheeler Phase and Cultural Continuity on the Southern Plains.

 Plains Anthropologist 42(160):183-204.

Dudzik, Mark J.

1997 Visions in Stone: The Rock Art of Minnesota. The Minnesota

 Archaeologist 54:98-108. [Note: The section in which this article appears

 bears the retroactive date of 1995.]

Dudzik, Mark J. and Patrick D. Nunnally

1995 Final Report: A Cultural Resource Survey of the Bridge L-3703 Replacement

 Corridor at Pipestone Creek (SAP 59-599-34), Sweet Township, Road 24,

 Pipestone County, Minnesota. Minnesota Historical Society, Fort Snelling

 History Center, Minneapolis.

Ehrenhard, John E.

1973 Memorandum, Staff Archeologist, Midwest Archeological Center, to the

 Chief, Midwest Archeological Center, October 24, 1973. Subject:

 Reconnaissance of sewer line right-of-way, Pipestone National Monument.

 On file, Midwest Archeological Center.
321

REFERENCES

Elson, Mark D., and James N. Gundersen

1992 The Mineralogy and Sourcing of Argillite Artifacts: A Preliminary

 Examination of Procurement, Production, and Distribution Systems. In

 The Rye Creek Project: Archaeology in the Upper Tonto Basin, by Mark D.

 Elson and Douglas B. Craig, vol. 2, pp. 429-462. Center for Desert

 Archaeology, Anthropological Papers No. 11. Tucson.

Emerson, Thomas E.

2002 Hopewell Catlinite, Tremper Mound, and Pima Technology. Paper

 presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the Midwest Archaeological

 Conference, Columbus, Ohio, October 3-5, 2002.

Emerson, Thomas E., and Randall E. Hughes

1996 Flint Clay, Figurines, and the Cahokia Trade in Elite Goods. Program

 and Abstracts of the 54th Plains Anthropological Conference, Iowa City, Iowa,

 October 30-November 2, 1996, p. 70.

2000 Figurines, Flint Clay Sourcing, the Ozark Highlands, and Cahokian

 Acquisition. American Antiquity 65(1):79-101.

2001 De-Mything the Cahokia Catlinite Trade. Plains Anthropologist

 46(176):149-161.

Emerson, Thomas E., Randall E. Hughes, Mary R. Hynes, Kenneth B. Farnsworth, 

and Sarah U. Wisseman

2002 Hopewell Catlinite, Tremper Mound, and Pima Technology. Paper

 presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the Midwest Archaeological

 Conference, Columbus, Ohio, October 3-5, 2002.

Emerson, Thomas E., George R. Milner, and Douglas K. Jackson

1983 The Florence Street Site. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Erlandson, J.M.

1984 A Case Study in Faunalturbation: Delineating the Effects of the

 Burrowing Pocket Gopher. American Antiquity 49(4):785-790.

Erlandson, J.M., and T.K. Rockwell

1987 Radiocarbon Reversals and Stratigraphic Discontinuities: The Effects of

 Natural Formation Processes on Coastal California Archaeological Sites. In

 Natural Formation Processes and the Archaeological Record, edited by D.T. Nash

 and M.D. Petraglia, pp. 51-73. BAR International Series 352. British

 Archaeological Reports, Oxford, England.
PIPESTONE

322

Ewers, John C.

1956 George Catlin, Painter of Indians and the West. In Annual Report of the

 Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution...for the Year Ended June 30,

 1955, pp. 507-528. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Ewers, John C. (editor)

1979 Indian Art in Pipestone: George Catlin’s Portfolio in the British Museum.

 British Museum Publications, London, and Smithsonian Institution Press,

 Washington, D.C.

Farnsworth, Kenneth B.

1996 Illinois Platform Pipes and Hopewell Exchange: A Mineralogical Study

 of Archaeological Remains. Program and Abstracts of the 54th Plains

 Anthropological Conference, Iowa City, Iowa, October 30-November 2, 1996,

 p. 71.

Fenenga, Franklin

1951 Appraisal of the Archeological and Paleontological Resources of the

 Lovewell Reservoir, Jewell County, Kansas. Missouri River Basin Survey,

 Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. [CHECK]

Fernlund, Kevin J.

2000 William Henry Holmes and the Rediscovery of the American West.

 University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Finney, Fred A.

2001 An Introduction to the Northwestern Archaeological Survey by

 Theodore H. Lewis. The Minnesota Archaeologist 60:13-29.

Finnigan, James T.

1982 Tipe Rings and Plains Prehistory: A Reassessment of Their Archaeological

 Potential. National Mercury Series, Paper No. 108. National Museum of

 Man, Ottawa.

Fishel, Richard L. (editor)

1999 Bison Hunters of the Western rairies: Archaeological Investigations at the

 Dixon Site (13WD8), Woodbury County, Iowa. Report 21. Office of the State

 Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Fremont, John Charles

1886 Memoirs of My Life. Belford, Clarke and Co., Chicago, Illinois.
323

REFERENCES

Frison, George

1998 The Northwestern and Northern Plains Archaic. In Archaeology on the

 Great Plains, edited by W. Raymond Wood, pp. 140-172. University Press

 of Kansas, Lawrence.

Frison, George C., David Schwab, L. Adrien Hannus, Peter Winham, David

Walter, and Robert C. Mainfort

1996 Archeology of the Northwestern Plains. In Archeological and

 Biarcheological Resources of the Northern Plains, edited by George C.

 Frison and Robert C. Mainfort, pp. 8-40. Arkansas Archeological Survey

 Research Series No. 47. Fayetteville.

Gardner-Sharp, Abbie

1885 History of the Spirit Lake Massacre and Captivity of Miss Abbie Gardner.

Mills & Company, Des Moines, Iowa.

Geyer, Carl Andreas

1838 Carl Andreas Geyer Journal. National Anthropological Archives, Record

 Unit 7290, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Gibbon, Guy

1980a An Archaeological Survey of Nobles, Pipestone, and Rock Counties,

 Minnesota. Contract Report 80-0-645 and 79-0-558. Department of

 Anthropology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

1980b Archeological Survey of Proposed Waste Water Treatment Facilities Area in

Holland, Minnesota. Report on file, State Historic Preservation Office,

 Minnesota Historical Society, Minneapolis.

1998a Thomas, Cyrus (1825-1910). In Archaeology of Prehistoric Native America:

 An Encyclopedia, edited by Guy Gibbon, pp. 835-836. Garlanbd Publishing,

 New York.

1998b Holmes, William Henry (1846-1933). In Archaeology of Prehistoric Native

 America: An Encyclopedia, edited by Guy Gibbon, pp. 369-370. Garland

 Publishing, New York.

Gibbon, Guy and Homer Hruby

1983 “First-Step” Settlement-Subsistence Models for the Rock River Drainage

 in Southwestern Minnesota. In Prairie Archaeology: Papers in Honor of David

 A. Baerreis, edited by Guy E. Gibbon, pp 131-149. Publications in

 Anthropology No. 3. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
PIPESTONE

324

Glascock, Michael D.

1997 A Reassessment of the Neutron Activation Analysis Procedures and Data in

 John Sigstad’s Dissertation on “The Age and Distribution of Catlinite and Red

 Pipestone.” Report prepared for the National Park Service, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Goetzmann, William H.

1979 Army Exploration in the American West 1803-1863. Bison Book edition.

 University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Grange, Roger T., Jr.

1968 Pawnee and Lower Loup Pottery. Publications in Anthropology No. 3.

 Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln.

Grant, Campbell

1967 Rock Art of the American Indian. Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York.

Gray, John S.

1963 Last Rites for Lonesome Charley Reynolds. Montana, the Magazine of

 Western History 13(4):40-51.

Gregg, Michael L., David Meyer, Paul R. Picha, and David G. Stanley

1996 Archeology of the Northeastern Plains. In Archeological and

 Bioarcheological Resources of the Northern Plains, edited by George C. Frison

 and Robert C. Mainfort, pp. 77-90. Arkansas Archeological Survey

 Research Series No. 47. Fayetteville.

Griffin, James B., and George I. Quimby

1961 The McCollum Site, Nipigon District, Ontario. In Lake Superior Copper and

 the Indians: Miscellaneous Studies of Great lakes Prehistory, edited by James B.

 Griffin, pp. 91-102. Museum of Anthropology, Anthropological Papers, No.

 17. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Grosscup, Jeffrey P.

1975 Stereoscopic Eye on the Frontier West. Montana, the Magazine of Western

 History 25(2):36-50.

Gundersen, James N.

1981 Pipestones of Kansas. Paper presented at the Midwestern Archaeological

 Conference, University of Wisconsin-Madison, October 16-18, 1981.
325

REFERENCES

1982a Triclinic Pyrophyllites of Kansas and Minnesota Pipestones. Geological

 Society of America, South-central Section, 16th Annual Meeting, Norman,

 Oklahoma. Abstracts with Programs, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 112.

1982b Comments on the Distribution of Pipestone and Pipestone-Bearing

 Clastics in Kansan Drift, Southeastern Nebraska. Abstract. Proceedings of

 the Nebraska Academy of Sciences, 92nd Annual Meeting, p. 2. Lincoln,

 Nebraska.

1983 Pipestone Argillites from Huronian Quartzites in Wisconsin. Geological

 Society of America, North-Central Section, 17th Annual Meeting.

 Abstracts with Programs, vol. 15, no. 4, p. 210.

1984 Provenance Analysis of Plains Pipestone Argillites. Geological Society of

 America. 97th Annual Meeting. Abstracts with Programs, vol. 16, no. 6,

 p. 526.

1985 Pipestones of the St. Helena Phase. Program and Abstracts of the Plains

 Anthropological Conference, Iowa City, Iowa, October 23-26, 1985,

 pp. 22-23.

1987 Wisconsin Pipestone: A Preliminary Mineralogical Examination. The

 Wisconsin Archaeologist 68(1):1-21.

1988a Catlinite. In Historical Dictionary of North American Archaeology,

 edited by Edward B. Jelks and Juliet C. Jelks, p. 80. Greenwood Press,

 New York.

1988b Pipestones of the St. Helena Phase. In St. Helena Archaeology: New Data,

 Fresh Interpretations, edited by D.J. Blakeslee, pp. 79-97. Reprints in

 Anthropology 39. J & L Reprint Company, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1989 Pipestone Artifacts from Upper Mississippi Valley Archaeological Sites.

 Program and Abstracts of the 47th Plains Anthropological Conference,

 Sioux Falls, South Dakota, October 18-21, 1989, addendum and p. 43.

1991 The Mineralogical Characterization of Catlinite from its Sole Provenance,

Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota. National Park Service,

 Midwest Region, Research/Resources Management Report MWR-17.

 January 1991. Omaha, Nebraska.

1993 “Catlinite” and the Spread of the Calumet Ceremony. American Antiquity

 58(3):560-562.
PIPESTONE

32

1996 Red Plains Pipestone Argillites. Program and Abstracts of the 54th Plains

 Anthropological Conference, Iowa City, Iowa, October 30-November 2,

 1996, p. 78.

1999 X-ray Powder Diffractometry Analysis of Catlinite Beads from the

 Nagami Bay Site (HgLt-1) Cache. Appendix 4 in Kayasochi Kikawenow: Our

 Mother From Long Ago, by Kevin Brownlee and E. Leigh Syms, pp. 82-84.

 Manitoba Museum of Man and Nature, Winnipeg.

2001 The Significance of Pipestone Artifacts from the Eagle Ridge Site,

 25SY116. Draft report provided to the Archeology Division of the

 Nebraska State Historical Society.

2002 The Mineralogical Characterization of Catlinite from its Sole Provenance,

 Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota. Central Plains Archeology

 9(1):35-60.

Gundersen, James N., and Donald J. Blakeslee

2002 Great Bend Pipes and Pipestones. Program and Abstracts of the 60th Plains

 Anthropological Conference, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, October 23-26, 2002,

 p. 57.

Gundersen, James N., and Mark D. Elson

1991 Mineralogy of Argillite Artifacts: Trade and Exchange in the American

 Southwest. Abstracts of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Society for American

 Archaeology, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 24-28, 1991, p. 72.

Gundersen, James N., Norman Flaigg, and Michael Fosha

2000 A Catlinite Elbow Pipe from the Moreau River, Butte County, South

 Dakota. Newsletter of the South Dakota Archaeological Society 30(1):3-4.

Gundersen, James N., and John Ludwickson

1982 The Mineralogy of Pipestone Artifacts of the Linwood Site (Historic

 Pawnee) of East Central Nebraska. Proceedings of the Nebraska Academy

 of Sciences, 92nd Annual Meeting, p. 3. Lincoln, Nebraska.

Gundersen, James N., and John O’Shea

1981 The Mineralogy of Pipestone Artifacts and Raw Materials of the Barcal

 Site (Lower Loup Phase/Protohistoric Pawnee) of East Central Nebraska.

 Geological Society of America, Annual Meeting, Cincinnati, Ohio, November

 2-5, 1981. Abstracts with Programs, vol. 13, no. 7, p. 465.

Gundersen, James N., and Joseph A. Tiffany

1986 Nature and Provenance of Red Pipestone from the Wittrock Site (13OB4),

 Northwest Iowa. North American Archaeologist 7(1):45-67.
327

REFERENCES

Gundersen, James N., Gregory A. Wasellkov, and Lillian J.K. Pollock

2002 Pipestone Argillite Artifacts from Old Mobile and Environs. Historical

 Archaeology 36(1):105-116.

Gunnerson, James H.

1987 Archeology of the High Plains. Cultural Resource Series No. 19. Bureau of

 Land Management, Colorado State Office, Denver.

Gurley, George P. (identified by the initials G.P.C.)

n.d. Indian Pipestone Lore. In The Pipestone Indian Shrine, Pipestone, Minnesota,

 pp. 8-19. Compiled by the Pipestone Indian Shrine Association. Pipestone

 Leader, Pipestone, Minnesota.

Haines, Aubrey L.

1977 The Yellowstone Story: A History of Our First National Park. Two volumes.

 Yellowstone Library and Museum Association, Yellowstone National Park,

 Wyoming.

Halpin, Marjorie

1965 Catlin’s Indian Gallery: The George Catlin paintings in the United States

 National Museum. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Hannus, L. Adrien

1994 Letter, Director, Archeology Laboratory, Augustana College, Sioux Falls,

 South Dakota, to Jeff Richner, Midwest Archeological Center, November 7,

 1994. Re: Investigation of Find of Horse Skull at Quarry, Pipestone

 National Monument. Accompanied by an untitled four-page enclosure.

 On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Accession MWAC-583/PIPE-178.

Hansen, R.M., and M.J. Morris

1968 Movement of Rocks by Northern Pocket Gophers. Journal of Mammalogy

 49:391-399.

Harvey, Amy E.

1979 Oneota Culture in Northwesern Iowa. Report 12. Office of the State

 Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Hayden, F.V.

1867 Sketch of the Geology of Northeastern Dakota, with a Notice of a Short

 Visit to the Celebrated Pipestone Quarry. The American Journal of Science,

 2nd series, 43(127):15-22.

1869 Geological Report of the Exploration of the Yellowstone and Missouri

 Rivers by Dr. F.V. Hayden, Assistant, Under the Direction of Captain (now

 Lieut. Col. and Brevet Brig. Gen.) W.F. Raynolds, Corps of Engineers.

 1859-’60. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
PIPESTONE

32

Heilbron, Bertha L.

1958 Some Sioux Legends in Pictures. Minnesota History 36(1):18-23.

Henning, Dale R.

1970 Development and Interrelationships of Oneota Culture in the Lower

 Missouri River Alley. The Missouri Archaeologist 32.

1998a The Oneota Traditon. In Archaeology on the Great Plains, edited by

 W. Raymond Wood, pp. 345-414. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence.

1998b Oneota: The Western Manifestations. The Wisconsin Archeologist

 79(2):238-247.

1998c Analysis of Pottery from Pipestone National Monument. Report prepared

for the National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln,

 Nebraska.

2001 Plains Village Tradition: Eastern Periphery and Oneota Tradition. In

 Handbook of North American Indians: Plains, edited by Raymond J. DeMallie,

 Vol. 13, Part 1, pp. 222-233. Smithsonian Insitution, Washington, D.C.

2003 The Archeology and History of Ioway/Oto Exchange Patterns, 1650-1700.

 Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 50:199-221.

Henning, Dale R., and Thomas D. Thiessen

2004 Summary and Conclusions. In Central Siouans in the Northeastern

 Plains: Oneota Archaeology and the Blood Run Site, edited by Dale R. Henning

 and Thomas D. Thiessen, in Dhegihan and Chiwere Siouans in the Plains:

 Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, pp. 591-601. Plains Anthropologist,

 Memoir 36, Vol. 49, No. 192.

Henning, Dale R., and Thomas D. Thiessen (editors)

2004 Dhegihan and Chiwere Siouans in the Plains: Historical and

 Archaeological Perspectives. Plains Anthropologist, Memoir 36, Vol. 49,

 No. 192, pp. 345-625.

Hickerson, H.

1970 The Chippewa and Their Neighbors: A Study in Ethnohistory. Holt, Rinehart 

 and Winston, New York.

Higginbottom, Daniel K.

1996 Projectile Points of Minnesota: A Brief Introduction. Digital paper on the

 internet website of the Upper Midwest Rock Art Research Association

 <http://www.tcinternet.net/users/cbailey/lithic1.html>.
329

REFERENCES

Higginbottom, Daniel K., and Orrin C. Shane

1996 The Fluted Point Traditions in Minnesota: An Overview with

 Suggestions for Future Research. Paper presented at the 54th Plains

 Conference, Iowa City, Iowa.

Hill, Alfred J.

1899 History of Company E of the Sixth Minnesota Regiment of Volunteer

 Infantry. With an appendix by Capt. Charles J. Stees. Published by Prof.

 T.H. Lewis. Pioneer Press Company, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Hill, Lee

n.d. Secret Quarries of the Blue Hills. Photocopy in files of Pipestone National

 Monument. Source and pagination of published article are unknown.

Hogarth, Paul

1986 The Artist as Reporter. Gordon Fraser Gallery, London.

Hokanson, Hilding L., Francis D. Lorenzen, James J. Murray, and Richard O.

Paulson

1976 Soil Survey of Pipestone County, Minnesota. Soil Conservation Service,

 Department of Agriculture. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Holen, Steven R., and John K. Peterson (editors)

1995 The Stabaco Site: A Mid-eighteenth Century Skidi Townsite on the Loup

 River. Report submitted to the Bureau of Reclamation, Nebraska/Kansas

 Projects Office, Grand Island, Nebraska. Technical Report 95-01. Nebraska

 Archaeological Survey, University of Nebraska State Museum, Lincoln.

Holmes, William Henry

1892a Sacred Pipestone Quarries of Minnesota and Ancient Copper Mines on

 Lake Superior. In Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement

 of Science for the Forty-first Meeting Held at Rochester, N.Y., August, 1892, pp.

 277-279. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Salem,

 Massachusetts.

1892b Unpublished notebook of 1892 visit to the catlinite quarries. National

 Anthropological Archives catalog no. 4698, Archeology, Minnesota.

 Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

1892c Letter to Garrick Mallery, Pipestone, Minnesota, May 25, 1892. National

 Anthropological Archives, catalog no. 2372, Box 9, Minnesota File.

1892d Letter to Garrick Mallery, Pipestone, Minnesota, June 2, 1892. National

Anthropological Archives, catalog no. 2372, Box 9, Minnesota File.
PIPESTONE

330

1892e Tracings of Three Maidens petroglyphs. National Anthropological

 Archives, catalog no. 2372, Box 9, Minnesota File.

1907 Catlinite. In Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico, Part I,

 edited by Frederick Webb Hodge, pp. 217-219. Smithsonian Institution,

 Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 30. Government Printing Office,

 Washington, D.C.

1919 The Red Pipestone Quarry. In Handbook of Aboriginal American

 Antiquities, Part I, by W.H. Holmes, pp. 253-265. Smithsonian Institution,

 Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 60. Government Printing Office,

 Washington, D.C.

n.d. Vellum map entitled “Sketch Map of the Red Pipestone Quarry, Pipestone

 County, Minnesota, by W.H. Holmes.” Approximately 96 cm by 66 cm.

 National Anthropological Archives, catalog no. 7487. Smithsonian

 Institution, Washington, D.C.

Holzapfel, Elaine

1995 Ohio Pipestone. Ohio Archaeologist 45(3):4-6.

Hoskins, William J., and David Rambow

1987 Frederick W. Pettigrew and Early Area Archaeology. In The Karl E.

 Mundt Historical & Educational Foundation Series No. 15, 18th Dakota

 History Conference, April 10-12, 1986, Papers, compiled by H.W. Blakely,

 pp. 703-707. Dakota State College, Madison, South Dakota.

Hotchkiss, W.O., E. Bean, and O.W. Wheelwright

1915 Mineral Land Classification. Wisconsin Geological and Natural History

 Survey, Bulletin 44, Economic Series No. 19. Madison, Wisconsin.

Hovey, H.C.

1887 Eyah Shah: A Sacrificial Stone near St. Paul. The American Antiquarian

 and Oriental Journal 9(1):35-36.

Howard, James H.

1965 The Ponca Tribe. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 195.

 Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Howell, David H.

1940 Pipestone and Red Shale Artifacts. American Antiquity 6(1):45-62.

Hubbell, J.B.

1902 Notes by Judge Hubbell. The Dakotan, a Monthly Magazine 5(1):12-16. The

 Dakotan Company, Aberdeen, South Dakota.
331

REFERENCES

Hudak, Joseph G.

1972 Boulder Outlines in Southwestern Minnesota. Plains Anthropologist

 17(58, Part 1):345-346.

Hughes, David T.

1995 Perceptions of the Sacred: A Review of Selected Native American Groups and

 Their Relationships with the Catlinite Quarries. Report produced for the

 National Park Service, Midwest Region, Omaha, Nebraska.

Hughes, David T., and Alice J. Stewart

1997 Traditional Use of Pipestone National Monument: Ethnographic Resources

 of Pipestone National Monument. Report produced for the National Park

 Service, Midwest Region, Omaha, Nebraska.

Hughes, Randall E., Duane M. Moore, Thomas E. Berres, and Thomas E. Emerson

1996 Minerals Distinguish Native American Pipestone Sources. Program and

 Abstracts of the 54th Plains Anthropological Conference, Iowa City, Iowa,

 October 30-November 2, 1996, pp. 84-85.

Hughes, R.E., T.E. Berres, D.M. Moore, and K.B. Farnsworth

1998 Revision of Hopewellian Trading Patterns in Midwestern North

 America Based on Mineralogical Sourcing. Geoarchaeology: An International

 Journal 13(7):709-729.

Husted, Wilfred M.

1973 Memorandum, Archeologist, Northeast Region, to the Regional Director,

 Northeast Region, National Park Service, November 14, 1973. Subject:

 Sewer project - Pipestone. Copy on file, Midwest Archeological Center.

Hynes, Mary, Sarah Wisseman, Thomas Emerson, Randall Hughes, and Duane 

Moore

2001 Application of a PIMA SP Portable Infrared Mineral Analyzer to

 Pipestone Flint Clay Studies of Two Native American Cultures. Abstracts

 of the 66th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, April

 18-22, New Orleans, Louisiana, p. 191.

Jackson, Donald, and Mary Lee Spence

1970 The Expeditions of John Charles Fremont. Three volumes. University of

 Illinois Press, Urbana.

Jennings, Jesse D.

1994 Accidental Archaeologist: Memoirs of Jesse D. Jennings. University of Utah

 Press, Salt Lake City.
PIPESTONE

332

Johnson, Ann Mary, and Alfred E. Johnson

1998 The Plains Woodland. In Archaeology on the Great Plains, edited by W.

 Raymond Wood, pp. 201-234. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence.

Johnson, Craig M.

1996 A Chronology of Middle Missouri Plains Village Sites. Draft manuscript

 prepared for the Department of Anthropology, National Museum of

 Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

1998 An Analysis of Prehistoric Ceramics from the Pipestone National Monument,

Pipestone County, Minnesota. Report prepared for the National Park Service,

 Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Johnson, Donald L.

1989 Subsurface Stone Lines, Stone Zones, Artifact-Manuport Layers, and

 Biomantles Produced by Bioturbation Via Pocket Gophers (Thomomys

 bottae). American Antiquity 54(2):370-389.

Johnson, Donald L., Diana N. Johnson, and Rebecca C. West

1999 Pocket Gopher Origins of Some Midcontinental Mima-Type Mounds:

 Regional and Interregional Genetic Implications. Geological Society of

 America Abstracts with Programs 31(7):232.

Johnson, Elden

1988 The Prehistoric Peoples of Minnesota. Revised third edition. Minnesota

 Prehistoric Archaeology Series, No. 3. Minnesota Historical Society Press,

 St. Paul.

Julig, Patrick J., L.A. Pavlish, and R.G.V. Hancock

1989 Aspects of Late Paleoindian Lithic Technological Organization in the

 Northwestern Lake Superior Region of Canada. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic

 Resource Use, edited by Christopher J. Ellis and Janathan C. Lothrop, pp.

 293-322. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.

Kappler, Charles J.

1972 Indian Treaties 1778-1883. Amereon House, Mattituck, New York.

Kehoe, Thomas F.

1958 Tipi Rings: The “Direct Historical” Approach Applied to an

 Archeological Problem. American Anthropologist 60(5):861-873.
333

REFERENCES

1960 Stone Tipi Rings in North Central Montana and the Adjacent Portion of

Alberta, Canada: Their Historical, Ethnological and Archeological

 Aspects. Anthropological Paper No. 62. Bureau of American Ethnology

 Bulletin 173. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

1983 A Retrospectus and Commentary. In From Microcosm to Macrocosm: 

 Advances in Tipi Ring Investigation and Interpretation, edited by Leslie B.

 Davis, pp. 327-342. Plains Anthropologist, Memoir 19 28(102, Part 2).

Kellogg, Louise Phelps (editor)

1923 Journal of a Voyage to North America. Two vols. The Caxton Club,

 Chicago.

1967 Early Narratives of the Northwest 1634-1699. Barnes & Noble, New York.

 Originally published 1917 by Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York.

Keyes, Charles R.

1928 The Hill-Lewis Archeological Survey. Minnesota History 9(2):96-108.

Keyser, James D.

2001 Relative Dating Methods. In Handbook of Rock Art Research, edited by

 David S. Whitley, pp. 116-138. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, California.

Keyser, James D., and Michael A. Klassen

2001 Plains Indian Rock Art. University of Washington Press, Seattle, and UBC

 Press, Vancouver.

King, S.H.

1865 Letter to Colonel William Crooks, January 26, 1864. In Report of the

 Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the Year 1864, pp. 405-408. General

 Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Kirkham, E. Kay

n.d. Our Native Americans And Their Records of Genealogical Value.

 Volume 1: Federal Government Records, Oklahoma Historical Society

 Records, Genealogical Society of Utah Listings. Everton Publishers,

 Logan, Utah.

Kjellsen, Michael L., and Kenneth F. Higgins

1990 Grasslands: Benefits of Management by Fire. FS 857. South Dakota

 Cooperative Extenson Service, South Dakota State University, Brookings.

Krause, Richard A.

1990 John Stephen Sigstad, 1939-1989. Plains Anthropologist 35(127):75-78.
PIPESTONE

334

Kuehnast, E. L.

1974 The Climate of Minnesota. In Climates of the States, U.S. National Oceanic

 and Atmospheric Administration, 2:706-24.

Lamb, W. Kaye (editor)

1970 The Journals and Letters of Alexander Mackenzie. Hakluyt Society Extra

 Series No. 41. Cambridge University Press, London and New York.

Landes, Ruth.

1968 The Mystic Lake Sioux: Sociology of the Mdewakantonwan Santee.

 University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Lass, William E.

1965 The “Moscow Expedition.” Minnesota History 39(6):227-240.

Lees, William B.

1985 Results of a Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation in the Vicinity of the

 Tobias (14RC8) Sites, Little River Archeological District, Secondary Road

 Project 80-C-2303-01, Rice County, Kansas. Report produced by the

 Archeology Department, Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka.

Lees, William B., John D. Reynolds, Terrance J. Martin, Mary J. Adair, and Steven 

Bozarth

1987 Highway Archeology Salvage Program Investigates Great Bend Aspect

Site. Kansas Preservation 9(3):6-8.

1988 Emergency Salvage Excavations at Site 14MN328, a Great Bend Aspect

 Site at Marion, Kansas, Journal of the Kansas Anthropological Association

 9(4):60-82.

1989 Archeological Investigations at 14MN328, a Great Bend Aspect Site Along U.S.

Highway 56, Marion County, Kansas. Report produced by the Archeology

 Department, Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka.

Lehmer, Donald J.

1971 Introduction to Middle Missouri Archeology. Anthropological Papers 1.

 National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Lewis, T.H.

1887 Incised Boulders in the Upper Minnesota Valley. The American

 Naturalist 21(7):639-642.

1889a Letter to Alfred J. Hill, August 11, 1889. In the T.H. Lewis papers,

 Minnesota Historical Society, manuscript group 147.D.6.3(B), box 226.
335

REFERENCES

1889b Letter to Alfred J. Hill, August 12, 1889. In the T.H. Lewis papers,

Minnesota Historical Society, manuscript group 147.D.6.3(B), box 226.

1889c Stone Monuments in Southern Dakota. American Anthropologist

 2(2):159-165.

1890 Stone Monuments in Northwestern Iowa and Southwestern Minnesota.

 American Anthropologist 3(3):269-274.

1891 Bowlder Outline Figures in the Dakotas, Surveyed in the Summer of

 1890. American Anthropologist 4(1):19-24. 

1898 The Northwestern Archaeological Survey. St. Paul, Minnesota.

Linch, Lyle K.

1949 A Preliminary Study of the Geology of Pipestone National Monument. Report

 on file, Pipestone National Monument.

[Lofstrom, Ted, et al.]

1981 Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey. Summary: 1977-1980.

 Prepared for the Minnesota Legislature. Minnesota Historical Society,

 St. Paul.

Logan, Brad, and John G. Hedden

1991 Archaeological Survey of Lovewell Reservoir, Jewell County, Kansas 1991.

 Project Report Series No. 77. Museum of Anthropology, University

 of Kansas, Lawrence.

Logan, Wilfred D.

1976 Woodland Complexes in Northeastern Iowa. Publications in Archeology 15.

 National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Loosle, Byron N.

1991 Social Interaction Among the Late Plains Village Populations in the Central

 Plains. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of

 Kansas, Lawrence.

Lothson, Gordon Allan

1976 The Jeffers Petroglyphs Site: A Survey and Analysis of the Carvings.

 Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series No. 12. Minnesota Historical

 Society, St. Paul.
PIPESTONE

33

Lothson, Gordon, and Robert Clouse

1985 A Cultural Resource Review and Overview of Split Rock Creek State Park,

 Pipestone County, Minnesota. Projects Report No. 3, Minnesota Historical

 Society, Fort Snelling History Center, Minneapolis.

Ludwickson, John

1994 Historic Indian Tribes: Ethnohistory and Archaeology. Nebraska

 History 75(1):134-145.

Ludwickson, John, James N. Gundersen, and Craig Johnson

1993 Select Exotic Artifacts from Cattle Oiler (39ST224): A Middle Missouri

 Tradition Site in Central South Dakota. Plains Anthropologist, Memoir 27,

 38(145):151-168.

Lynott, Mark J

1981 Memorandum to the files, Midwest Archeological Center, July 6, 1981.

 Subject: Pipestone National Monument Archeology. On file, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Accession MWAC-59/PIPE-173.

1997 Memorandum to the Manager, Technical Information Center, Denver

 Service Center, September 16, 1997. Subject: Aerial imagery and maps of

 Pipestone National Monument. On file, Midwest Archeological Center,

 Lincoln, Nebraska.

McCracken, Harold

1959 George Catlin and the Old Frontier. Bonanza Books, New York.

McGuire, Joseph D.

1899 Pipes and Smoking Customs of the American Aborigines. Annual

 Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1897, Part 1, pp. 351-645 plus 4

 unpaginated plates. Washington, D.C.

McSwain, Betty

1984 Memorandum, Chief, Interpretation & Resource Management, Pipestone

 National Monument, to Mark J. Lynott, Midwest Archeological Center,

 September 13, 1984. Subject: Surface finds. On file, Midwest

 Archeological Center.

n.d. Note concerning discovery of animal bone along south quarry line on

 May 11, 1995. On file, Midwest Archeological Center.

Mallery, Garrick

1886 Pictographs of the North American Indians. A Preliminary Paper. In

 Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology...1882-’83, by J.W. Powell,

 pp. 3-256. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
337

REFERENCES

1893 Picture-writing of the American Indians. In Tenth Annual Report of the

 Bureau of Ethnology...1888-’89, by J.W. Powell, pp. 3-807. Government

 Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Manz, Kari L., Nancy E. Pearson, and Donald J. Blakeslee

1990 Archaeological Survey and Testing, Rural Water District #1, Rice County,

 Kansas. Report produced by the Department of Anthropology, Wichita

 State University, Wichita, Kansas.

Mead, A. Holly

1999 Design Analysis and Chemical Characterization of Non-tubular Stone Pipes

 of the Great Plains and Eastern U.S. Ph.D. dissertation, University of

 Missouri-Columbia.

Mead, A. Holly, and Michael D. Glascock

1998 Chemical Characterization of Pipestone by Neutron Activation Analysis.

 Program and Abstracts of the 56th Plains Anthropological Conference,

 Bismarck, North Dakota, October 14-17, 1998, p. 51.

Meltzer, David J., and Robert C. Dunnell

1992 The Archaeology of William Henry Holmes. Smithsonian Institution Press,

 Washington, D.C.

Merrill, George P.

1964 The First One Hundred Years of American Geology. Hafner, New York.

Michlovic, Michael G., and Fred E. Schneider

1993 The Shea Site: A Prehistoric Fortified Village on the Northeastern Plains.

 Plains Anthropologist 38(143):117-137.

Midwest Archeological Center

n.d.a Untitled summary of activities for the last half of Fiscal Year 1980. On

 file, Midwest Archeological Center.

n.d.b Report: Archeological Programs of the Midwest Archeological Center,

 National Park Service, Fiscal Year 1981. On file, Midwest Archeological

 Center.

n.d.c Report on Archeological Programs of the Midwest Archeological Center

 for Fiscal Year 1982. On file, Midwest Archeological Center.

Mills, William C.

1916 Exploration of Tremper Mound. Certain mounds and Village Sites in Ohio,

 Vol. 2, Part 3. F.J. Heer Printing Company, Columbus, Ohio.
PIPESTONE

33

Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey

1981 Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey Summary: 1977-1980. Minnesota

 Historical Society, St. Paul.

Minnesota Historical Society

1965 Lawrence Taliaferro Papers, 1813-1868. Microfilm publication. Four rolls.

 Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

1991 Northwestern Archaeological Survey. Field Notebooks and Related

Volumes, Pre-1880, 1880-1895. Minnesota Historical Society Microfilm

 Publication. St. Paul.

Mitchell, J.H.

1934 The Pipestone Quarry Or Restoring an Ancient Indian Shrine. Indians at

 Work (“A News Sheet for Indians and the Indian Service”) 2(8):25-29. 

 December 1, 1934. Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Mitchill, Samuel Latham (translator)

1806 Descriptive Observations on certain [sic] Parts of the Country in

 Louisiana; by Anthony Soulard. The Medical Repository, and Review of

 American Publications on Medicine, Surgery, and the Auxiliary Branches

 of Science. Second hexade, volume 3, pp. 308-313. New York.

Molyneaux, Brian Leigh

1998a Discovery of a Clovis Projectile Point near Sioux City, Iowa. Report

 prepared for the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. University of

 South Dakota, Vermillion.

1998b Recent Clovis Discovery. Iowa Archeology News 48(3):5.

2000 Update on the Northern Loess Hills Clovis Point. Iowa Archeology

 News 50(4):1-2.

Monk, Susan M.

1987 Invoice, Susan M. Monk, October 10, 1987. Accompanied by an enclosure

 entitled “A Summary of Archeological Investigations at Pipestone National

 Monument, September 15, 1987.” On file, Midwest Archeological Center,

 Accession MWAC-640/PIPE-185.

Moore, D.M., and Randall E. Hughes

2000 Ordovician and Pennsylvanian Berthierine-bearing Flint Clays. Clays

 and Clay Minerals 48(1):145-149.
339

REFERENCES

Morey, G.B.

1983 Evaluation of Catlinite Resources, Pipestone National Monument. National

 Park Service, Midwest Region. Research/Resources Management Report

 MWR-4. Omaha, Nebraska.

1984 Sedimentology of the Sioux Quartzite in the Fulda Basin, Pipestone County,

Southwestern Minnesota. Minnesota Geological Survey, Report of

 Investigations 32:59-74. St. Paul.

Morey, G.B., and Dale R. Setterholm

1987 Pipestone National Monument: The Sioux Quartzite, an Early Proterozoic

 Braided Stream Deposit, Southwestern Minnesota. Geological Society of

 America Centennial Field Guide--North Central Section, pp. 73-76.

Morrow, Toby

1984 Iowa Projectile Points. Special Publication, Office of the State

 Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City.

1994 A Key to the Identification of Chipped-stone Raw Materials Found on

 Archaeological Sites in Iowa. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society

 41:108-129.

Moulton, Gary E. (editor)

1983 The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Vol. 1, Atlas of the Lewis &

 Clark Expedition. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

1986 The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Vol. 2, August 30, 1803--

August 24, 1804. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

1987 The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Vol. 3, August 25, 1804--

April 6, 1805. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Munnick, Harriet D.

1971 Pierre Dorion. In The Mountain Men and the Fur Trade of the Far West,

 edited by LeRoy R. Hafen, vol. 8, pp. 107-112. Arthur H. Clark Co.,

 Glendale, California.

Murphy, James L.

1996 Comments on the Composition of Catlinite and Ohio Pipestone. Ohio

 Archaeologist 46(1):10-11.

Murray, Robert A.

1961 Administrative History of Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota. Report

 on file, Pipestone National Monument.
PIPESTONE

340

1965 Pipestone, A History. Pipestone Indian Shrine Association, no place of

publication stated.

Nasatir, Abraham P.

1976 Borderland in Retreat: From Spanish Louisiana to the Far Southwest.

 University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Nasatir, Abraham P. (editor)

1990 Before Lewis and Clark: Documents Illustrating the History of the Missouri,

 1785-1804. Two vols. Reprint edition. University of Nebraska Press,

 Lincoln. Originally printed 1952 by the St. Louis Historical Documents

 Foundation.

National Park Service

2001 ASMIS 2.01 Data Dictionary. Archeology and Ethnography Program,

 National Center for Cultural Resources, National Park Service,

 Washington, D.C.

Neuman, Robert

1963 Archeological Salvage Investigations in the Lovewell Reservoir Area,

 Kansas. River Basin Survey Papers No. 32, in Bureau of American Ethnology

 Bulletin 185, pp. 257-306. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Nickel, Robert K.

1980 Memorandum, Acting Chief, Midwest Archeological Center, to Chief

 Cultural Resources Management, Midwest Regional Office, July 28, 1980.

 Subject: Mapping and evaluation of quarry areas, PIPE. On file, Midwest

 Archeological Center.

Nickel, Robert K., and Forest Frost

2000 Archeological Geophysics and the Detection of Cultural Landscape Features

 at Pipestone National Monument. Report on file, Midwest Archeological

 Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Nickel, Robert K., and Thomas D. Thiessen

1980 Memorandum, Archeologists, Midwest Archeological Center, to the

 Chief, Midwest Archeological Center, July 25, 1980. Subject: Trip report -

 Pipestone National Monument. On file, Midwest Archeological Center.

Nicollet, J. N.

1843 Report Intended to Illustrate a Map of the Hydrographical Basin of the Upper

 Mississippi River. 26th Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Documents, No. 237,

 Serial 380. Also published in 1845, 28th Congress, 2nd Session House

 Documents, No. 52, Serial 464. Washington, D.C.
341

REFERENCES

Norall, Frank

1988 Bourgmont, Explorer of the Missouri, 1698-1725. University of Nebraska

 Press, Lincoln.

Norris, Philetus W

1883 Report of Ethnological Researches, in the Mississippi Valley During 1882 and

 January 1883. Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives,

 Collection 2400, Box 3, Minnesota Archeology file.

1884 The Calumet of the Coteau, and Other Poetical Legends of the Border.

J.B. Lippincott & Co., Philadelphia.

Northwestern Archaeological Survey

1991 Field Notebooks and Related Volumes, Pre-1880, 1880-1895. Minnesota

 Historical Society Microfilm Publication. St. Paul.

Nute, Grace Lee

1978 Caesars of the Wilderness: Médard Chouart, Sieur des Groseilliers, and

 Pierre Esprit Radisson, 1618-1710. Minnesota Historical Society Press, St.

 Paul. Originally published 1943 by D. Appleton-Century Company and the

 American Historical Association.

Nute, Grace Lee, and Gertrude W. Ackerman

1935 Guide to the Personal Papers in the Manuscript Collections of the Minnesota

 Historical Society. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

Nydahl, Theodore L.

1950 The Pipestone Quarry and the Indians. Minnesota History 31(4):193-208.

O’Brien, Michael J., R. Lee Lyman, and Thomas D. Holland

1989 Geoarchaeological Evidence for Prairie-Mound Formation in the

 Mississippi Alluvial Valley, Southeastern Missouri. Quaternary Research

 31:83-93.

O’Brien, Patricia J.

1976 Milford Lake Shoreline Archaeological Survey. Report produced by the

 Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Kansas State University,

 Manhattan.

Ojakangas, Richard W., and Charles L. Matsch

1982 Minnesota’s Geology. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

Olson, Gary D.

1982 Dakota Resources: The Richard F. Pettigrew Papers. South Dakota

 History 12(2 and 3):182-187.
PIPESTONE

342

Orr, Ellison

1939 Report of an Archaeological Survey of the Broken Kettle and Kimball

 Pre-historic Indian Refuse-Mound Village Sites. Works Progress

 Administration, Project 3600. Ellison Orr Papers, Effigy Mounds National

 Monument, Harpers Ferry, Iowa. Also published as volume XI of Archives

 of Archaeology No. 20 (microcard), Society for American Archaeology and

 University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1963.

O’Shea, John M.

1989 Pawnee Archaeology. Central Plains Archaeology 1(1):49-107.

Palmer, George A.

1973 Letter from the Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region, National

 Park Service, to Robert R. Garvey, Jr., Executive Secretary, Advisory

 Council on Historic Preservation, September 27, 1973. Copy on file,

 Midwest Archeological Center.

Parker, Donald Dean (editor)

1966 The Recollections of Philander Prescott, Frontiersman of the Old Northwest,

 1819-1862. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Parker, John (editor)

1976 The Journals of Jonathan Carver and Related Documents, 1766-1770.

 Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul.

Pedersen, H. Clyde

1989 Woodstock Wildlife Management Area Archeological Survey. Institute for

 Minnesota Archaeology, Minneapolis.

Pedersen, H. Clyde and G. Joseph Hudak

1981 Southwest Minnesota Plateau in Coteau Prairies Effigy (and Other

 Alignments) Field Survey. Archeological Field Services, Stillwater,

 Minnesota.

Penman, John T., and James N. Gundersen

1999 Pipestone Artifacts from Upper Mississippi Valley Sites. Plains

 Anthropologist 44(167):47-57.

Perley, M.V.B. (compiler)

1906 History and Genealogy of the Perley Family. Published by the compiler,

 Salem, Massachusetts.

Perttula, Timothy K., and James E. Price

1984 The 1882 Investigations by Colonel P.W. Norris at the Powers Fort Site,

 23BU10, Southeast Missouri. Tennessee Anthropologist 9(1):1-14.
343

REFERENCES

Peterson, Leslie D.

1994 The Minnesota Trunk Highway Archeological Reconnaissance Study: Annual

 Report 1993. Minnesota Department of Transportation and Minnesota

 Historical Society, St. Paul. 

Pettigrew, F.W.

1891 The Silent City. Sioux Falls Press, January 4, 1891, pp. 13-14.

1901 A Prehistoric Indian Village. Bulletin of the Minnesota Academy of

 Natural Science 3:348-355, 414, Plate VII.

Picha, Paul R., Stanley A. Ahler, Rodney D. Sayler, and Robert W. Seabloom

1991 Effects of Prairie Fire on Selected Artifact Classes. Archaeology in

 Montana 32(2):15-28.

Pipestone County Centennial Committee

1958 History of Pipesone County. No place of publication stated.

Pipestone County Genealogical Society

1991 Biographies of the Civil War Veterans Who Came to Pipestone County,

 Minnesota. Pipestone Publishing Company, Pipestone, Minnesota.

Pipestone County Genealogical Society and Pipestone County Historical Society 

(compilers and editors)

2000 “And What Nobler Purpose...”: Civil War Veterans and Pipestone County.

 Pipestone Publishing Company, Pipestone, Minnesota.

Pipestone County Historical Society

1984 A History of Pipestone County. Pipestone County Historical Society,

 Pipestone, Minnesota.

1989 Coteau Heritage: Journal of the Pipestone County Historical Society 2(1).

Pipestone Indian Shrine Association

n.d. The Pipestone Indian Shrine, Pipestone, Minnesota. Pipestone Indian

 Shrine Association.

Powell, J.W.

1893 Report of the Director. In Tenth Annual Report of the Bureau of

 Ethnology...1888-’89, pp. iii-xxx. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

1896 Report of the Director. In Fourteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of

 Ethnology...1892-’93, pp. xxv-lxi. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
PIPESTONE

344

Prescott, Philander

1852 Contributions to the History, Customs, and Opinions of the Dacota Tribe.

 In Information Respecting the History, Condition and Prospects of the Indian

 Tribes of the United States, compiled by Henry R. Schoolcraft, Part II, pp.

 168-199. Lippincott, Grambo & Company, Philadelphia.

Quigg, J. Michael, and John H. Brumley

1984 Stone Circles: A Review Appraisal and Future Directions. State Historical

 Society of North Dakota, Bismarck.

Quinn, James H.

1961 Prairie Mounds of Arkansas. Newsletter of the Arkansas Archeological

 Society 2(6):1-8.

Radford, David S. and Douglas C. George

1993 Minnesota State Park Cultural Resources Management Survey: 1993 Field

 Season. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

Rajnovich, Grace

1989 Visions in the Quest for Medicine: An Interpretation of the Indian

 Pictographs of the Canadian Shield. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology

 14(2):179-225.

1994 Reading Rock Art: Interpreting the Indian Rock Paintings of the

Canadian Shield. Natural Heritage/Natural History, Inc., Toronto, Ontario.

Rambow, David

1989 White Exploration of the “Red Stone Quarry.” Coteau Heritage 2(1):6-8.

2003 Dr. J. Frazer Boughter’s Descriptive Commentary on Fort Dakota, (Sioux

 Falls) D.T. Transcription of original document in the Records of the

 Adjutant General’s Office, Medical Histories of Posts, 1868-1913, RG 92, Vol.

 75, Descriptive Commentary on Fort Dakota, 1868-1869, National Archives

 and Records Administration, Washington, D.C.

Reaves, Roy W., III

[1973] Report on Archeological Salvage, Upper Midwest Cultural Center and

 Six-Unit Apartment Complex, Pipestone National Monument. Report on file,

 Pipestone National Monument. Copy on file, Midwest Archeological

 Center, Accession MWAC-57/PIPE-173.
345

REFERENCES

1974 Memorandum, Archeologist, Executive Order Consultant (Denver), to

 Dave Clary, Midwest Region, National Park Service, July 23, 1974. Subject

 Cultural resource preservation at Pipestone National Monument.

 Accompanied by a two-page enclosure entitled “Cultural Resource

 Preservation at Pipestone National Monument.” Copy on file, Midwest

 Archeological Center.

Reynolds, John D.

1982 Phase III Archeological Study of Sites 14MN324, 14MN328, and 14MN331:

 Highway Projects 56-57 K-0561-01 and 56-57 K-0562-01, Marion County,

 Kansas. Report produced by the Archeology Department, Kansas State

 Historical Society, Topeka.

Richner, Jeffrey J.

1994 Memorandum to the Chief, Midwest Archeological Center, June 3, 1994.

 Subject: Trip Report, Pipestone National Monument. On file, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Riggs, Stephen R.

1918 Dakota Portraits. Minnesota History Bulletin 2(8):481-568.

Riggs, S.R. (editor)

1864 History of the Dakotas. James W. Lynd’s Manuscripts. Collections of the

 Minnesota Historical Society 2(2):143-174. Reprinted 1889.

Rioux, Jean-Roch

1969 Hennepin, Louis. In Dictionary of Canadian Biography, Vol. 2, pp. 277-282.

 University of Toronto Press.

Ritterbush, Lauren W.

1999 Plains Adaptation Reflected in White Rock Lithic Technology. Paper

 presented at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Society for American

 Archeology, Chicago.

2002 Drawn by the Bison: Late Prehistoric Native Migration into the Central

 Plains. Great Plains Quarterly 22(4):259-270.

Ritterbush, Lauren W., and Brad Logan

1991 The Schultz Archeological Project, Phase I. A Survey of Selected Prehistoric

 Sites in North-Central Kansas. Project Report Series No. 73. Museum of

 Anthropology, University of Kansas, Lawrence.
PIPESTONE

34

Robinson, Doane (ed.)

1902 Official Correspondence of the Leavenworth Expedition into South Dakota for

 the Conquest of the Ree Indians in 1823. South Dakota Historical Collections

 1:179-256. News Printing Co., Aberdeen. Reprinted 1972 by the State

 Historical Society of South Dakota, Pierre.

1928 Tales of the Dakota: One Hundred Anecdotes Illustrative of Sioux Life and

Thinking. South Dakota Historical Collections 14:485-537. State

 Department of History, Pierre, South Dakota.

Rohn, Arthur H., and Alice M. Emerson

1984 Great Bend Sites at Marion, Kansas. Publications in Anthropology No. 1.

 Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas.

Roll, Tom E.

1965a Memorandum to Wilfred D. Logan, Midwest Region, National Park

 Service, September 12, 1965. Subject: Finding of Bones. Copy on file,

 Midwest Archeological Center.

1965b Letter to J.S. Sigstad, September 22, 1965. Copy on file, Midwest

 Archeological Center.

Rose, Arthur P.

1911 An Illustrated History of the Counties of Rock and Pipestone, Minnesota.

 Northern History Publishing Company, Luverne, Minnesota.

Ross, B.A., J.R. Tester, and W.J. Breckenridge

1968 Ecology of Mima-Type Mounds in Northwestern Minnesota. Ecology

 49(1):172-177.

Rothman, Hal K., and Daniel J. Holder

1992 Managing the Sacred and the Secular: An Administrative History of

 Pipestone National Monument. Report produced for the National Park

 Service, Midwest Region, Omaha, Nebraska.

Ryan, James L.

1973 Memorandum, Acting Regional Director, Midwest Region, to the

 Regional Director, Northeast Region, National Park Service, November 5,

 1973. Subject: Archeological Assistance at Pipestone National Monument.

 Copy on file, Midwest Archeological Center.

Salzer, Robert J.

1997 Wisconsin Rock Art. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78(1 and 2):48-76.
347

REFERENCES

Sayler, Rodney D., Robert W. Seabloom, and Stanley A. Ahler

1989 Impacts of Prescribed Burning on Archeological and Biological Resources

 of the Knife River Indian Villages NHS. Final Report. Report prepared for

 the National Park Service, knife River Indian Villages National Historic

 Site, Stanton, North Dakota.

Scheffer, Victor B.

1947 The Mystery of Mima Mounds. Scientific Monthly 65:283-294.

Schoolcraft, Henry R.

1821 Narrative Journal of Travels Through the Northwestern Regions of the United

 States Extending from Detroit Through the Great Chain of American Lakes, to

 the Sources of the Mississippi River. E. & E. Hosfrod, Albany, New York.

1851 Personel Memoirs of a Residence of Thirty Years with the Indian Tribes

on the American Frontiers. Lippincott, Grambo and Co., Philadelphia,

 Pennsylvania.

Schwarck, Don

2002 W.H. Illingworth: A Biography. In Exploring with Custer: The 1874

 Black Hills Expedition, by Ernest Grafe and Paul Horsted, pp. 270-279.

 Golden Valley Press, Custer, South Dakota.

Scott, Douglas D.

1997a Memorandum to the Park Program Manager, Midwest Archeological

 Center, November 10, 1997. Subject: Washington, D.C. research trip

 relating to Pipestone. On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln,

 Nebraska.

1997b Memorandum to the Park Program Manager, Midwest Archeological

 Center, November 10, 1997. Subject: Trip report of archeological inventory

 of 97 acres on the west side of Pipestone. On file, Midwest Archeological

 Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

2005 Memorandum to the Park Program Manager, Midwest Archeological

 Center, August 26, 2005. Subject: Trip report, Site Condition Assessment,

 Pipestone National Monument. On file, Midwest Archeological Center,

 Lincoln, Nebraska.

Scott, Douglas D., and Thomas D. Thiessen

2001 Catlinite Extraction at Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota: Social

 and Technological Implications. Paper presented at the 66th Annual

 Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans,

 Louisiana, April 18-22, 2001.
PIPESTONE

34

2005 Catlinite Extraction at Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota: Social

 and Technological Implications. In The Cultural Landscape of Prehistoric

 Mines, edited by Peter Topping and Mark Lynott, pp. 140-154. Oxbow

 Books, Oxford, England.

Scull, Gideon D.

1943 Voyages of Peter Esprit Radisson. Peter Smith, New York. Originally

 published 1885 by the Prince Society, Boston.

Scullin, Michael

1992 Cambria, Easternmost of the Western or Westernmost of the Eastern?

 Cahokia State Agricultural Extension Office, Occasional Papers, No. 3.

 Mankato State University, Mankato, Minnesota.

1996 Southern Minnesota Prehistory. Cahokia State Agricultural Extension Office,

Occasional Papers, No. 1. Mankato State University, Mankato, Minnesota,

 (revision of 1987 publication).

Sellars, Jonathan

1992 A Phase I Cultural Resource Survey for Proposed Golf Course Development,

 with Special Attention to the Clermont Mound Group (13FT2), Pleasant Valley

 Township, Fayette County, Iowa. Bear Creek Archeology Report No. 220.

 Bear Creek Archeology, Inc., Decorah, Iowa.

Shea, John Gilmary

1861 Voyage Up the Mississippi in 1699-1700, by Mr. Le Sueur. In Early

 Voyages Up and Down the Mississippi, by Cavelier, St. Cosme, Le Sueur,

 Gravier, and Guignas, edited by John Gilmary Shea, pp. 89-111. Joel

 Munsell, Albany, New York.

Shetrone, Henry Clyde

1930 The Mound-Builders. D. Appleton, New York.

Sibley, H.H.

1872 Reminiscences; Historical and Personal. Collections of the Minnesota

 Historical Society 1:374-396. Originally published 1856.

Siemens, Michael A., and James N. Gundersen

1982 Comments on the Distribution of Pipestone and Pipestone-bearing

 Clastics in Kansas Drift, Northeastern Kansas. 114th Annual Meeting of

 the Kansas Academy of Science, Kansas State University, Manhattan,

 April 23, 1982. Abstracts, vol. 1, p. 48, December, 1982.
349

REFERENCES

Sigstad, John S.

1965a Catlinite Artifacts in Aboriginal America. Paper produced for a class in

 “Culture Historical Reconstruction at the University of Colorado, Spring

 semester, 1965. Copy on file, Midwest Archeological Ceter, Lincoln,

 Nebraska.

1965b Field Notebook. On file, Accession No. MWAC-54a/PIPE-172, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1966 Field notebook. On file, Accession No. MWAC-120/PIPE-172, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1966-1967 Field Notebook. On file, Accession No. MWAC-120/PIPE-172,

 Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1967-1968 Field Notebook. On file, Accession No. MWAC-120/PIPE-172,

 Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1968a Pipestone Carving Today. National Parks Magazine 42(250):16-19.

1968b The Catlinite Age and Distribution Project: A Summary. Museum

 Graphic 20:3-6, 11.

1970a A Report of the Archeological Investigations, Pipestone National

 Monument, 1965 and 1966. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 17.

1970b A Field Test for Catlinite. American Antiquity 35(3):377-382.

1973 Age and Distribution of Catlinite and Red Pipestone: 1966. Unpublished

 Ph.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia. Also submitted to

 the National Park Service, Midwest Region, in fulfillment of Contract No.

 14-10-0232-1157.

n.d. A Report of the Archeological Investigations, Pipestone National Monument,

1965. Report prepared for the National Park Service, Midwest Region.

Silliman, Benjamin (editor)

1839 Catlinite or Indian Pipestone. American Journal of Science, First Series,

 35:388.

Simpson, Alice, Phil Clogg, Margarita Diaz-Andreu, and Brian Larkman

2004 Towards Three-Dimentsional Non-Invasive Recording of Incised Rock

Art. Antiquity 78(301):692-698.
PIPESTONE

350

Skaar, Kent, Jackie Sluss, Stacy Allan, Kent Bakken, and Kelly Gragg

1994 Draft Phase I Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report Volume 1:

 Technical Report. MnDOT S.P. 6703-16 for Reconstruction of T.H. 23 from

 I-90 to Jasper, Rock and Pipestone Counties. Report prepared by the

 Minnesota Historical Society for the Minnesota Department of

 Transportation.

Slattery, Richard G.

1995 Four Seasons in Pre-War Kansas Archeology. The Kansas Anthropologist

 16(1):1-23.

Smith, Bruce D.

1981 The Division of Mound Exploration of the Bureau of (American)

 Ethnology and the Birth of American Archaeology. Southeastern

 Archaeological Conference Bulletin 24:51-54.

1985 Introduction to the 1985 Edition. In Report on the Mound Explorations of

 the Bureau of Ethnology, by Cyrus Thomas, pp. 5-19. Reprint. Originally

 published 1894. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Smith, Carlyle S.

1977 The Talking Crow Site: A Multi-Component Earthlodge Village in the Big

 Bend Region, South Dakota. Publications in Anthropology, No. 9.

 University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Smith, Carlyle S., and Roger T. Grange, Jr.

1958 The Spain Site (39LM301), a Winter Village in Fort Randall Reservoir,

 South Dakota. River Basin Surveys Papers No. 11, in Bureau of American

 Ethnology Bulletin 169, pp. 79-128. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Smith, Carlyle S., and Alfred E. Johnson

1968 The Two Teeth Site. Publications in Salvage Archeology No. 8.

 Smithsonian Institution, River Basin Surveys, Lincoln, Nebraska

Smith, G. Hubert

1977 Ethnographic Contributions of J.N. Nicollet. Edited by Raymond J.

 DeMallie. The Minnesota Archaeologist 36(2):62-75.

Smith, Harlan I.

1906 The Data of the Archaeology of the Dakotas. Collections of the State

 Historical Society of North Dakota 1:74-88. Bismarck.

Snyder, Ellen J.

1985 Birds of Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone, Minnesota. Brochure.

 National Park Service, [Midwest Region, Omaha, Nebraska].
351

REFERENCES

Spendlove, Earl

1986 Arizona Pipestone: The Ancient Indian Carving Material is Creatively

 Used by a Modern-day Artist. Rock and Gem 16(10):36-39.

Stadler, Scott

1997 Memorandum to the Manager, Midwest Archeological Center, November

 14, 1997. Subject: Trip Report--Archeological Testing at Pipestone National

 Monument. On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

State of Minnesota

1890 Minnesota in the Civil and Indian Wars 1861-1865. Vol. 1. Pioneer Press, St.

 Paul.

Steen, Charlie R.

1964 Paul L. Beaubien, 1903-1962. American Antiquity 29(4):486.

Steinbring, Jack H.

1974 The Preceramic Archaeology of Northern Minnsota. In Aspects of Upper

 Great lakes Anthropology: Papers in Honor of Llyod A. Wilford, edited by

 Elden Johnson, pp. 64-73. Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series No.

 11. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

1993 Dating Rock Art in the Northern Midcontinent. American Indian Rock Art

12:15-29.

1999 Early Rock Art of Mid-Continental North America. In Dating and the

 Earliest Known Rock Art, edited by Matthias Strecker and Paul Bahn,

 pp. 5-14. Oxbow Books, Oxford, England.

Steinbring, Jack, and Anthony P. Buchner

1997 Cathedrals of Prehistory: Rock Art Sites of the Northern Plains.

 American Indian Rock Art 23:73-84.

Stevenson, Katherine P., Robert F. Boszhardt, Charles R. Moffat, Philip H. Salkin, 

Thomas C. Pleger, James L. Theler, and Constance M. Arzigian

1997 The Woodland Tradition. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78(1 and 2):140-201.

Steward, Julian H.

1937 Petroglyphs of the United States. In Annual Report of the Board of

 Regents of the Smithsonian Institution...for the Year Ended June 30, 1936,

 pp. 405-425 plus 12 plates. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
PIPESTONE

352

Storrs, Caryl B.

1916 “Visitin’ ‘Round in Minnesota.” Minneapolis Morning Tribune, June 12,

 1916, page 2.

Strong, Moses, with Messrs. Sweet, Brotherton, and Chamberlin

1882 The Quartzites of Barron and Chippewa Counties. In Geology of

 Wisconsin. Survey of 1873-1879. Vol. 4, pp. 574-581, Commissioners of Public

 Printing, Madison, Wisconsin.

Strub, Joseph H., Jr.

1960 Climatological Summary, Pipestone, Minnesota. U.S. Weather Bureau,

 Minneapolis.

Stubbendieck, James, and Gary Willson

1986 An Identification of Prairie in National Park Units in the Great Plains.

 National Park Service Occasional Paper No. 7, Midwest Regional Office,

 Omaha, Nebraska

Sundstrom, Linea

1993 Fragile Heritage: Prehistoric Rock Art of South Dakota. Report prepared for

 the South Dakota Historical Preservation Center, Vermillion.

2000 Rock Art Studies and the Direct Ethnographic Approach: Case Studies

 from the Black Hills Country. In 1999 International Rock Art Congress

 Proceedings, edited by Peggy Whitehead and Lawrence Loendorf, Vol. 1,

 pp. 105-114. American Rock Art Research Association, Tucson, Arizona.

2001 Rock Art, Women, Dakota Religion, and the Hide Trade. Abstracts of the

 66th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans,

 Louisiana, April 18-22, 2001.

2002 Steel Awls for Stone Age Plainswomen: Roct Art, Religion, and the Hide

 Trade on the Northern Plains. Plains Anthropologist 47(181):99-119.

Sutton, Ernest V.

n.d. A Life Worth Living. Trail’s End Publishing Co., Pasadena, California.

Swan, Joseph H.

1899 Report of Expedition to Lake Shetek. In Minnesota in the Civil and Indian

 Wars 1861-1865, published by the State of Minnesota, second ed., vol. 2, pp.

 282b-282e. Pioneer Press, St. Paul.

Temple, Wayne C. (compiler)

1975 Indian Villages of the Illinois Country. Scientific Papers, Vol. II, Part I, Atlas

 Supplement. Illinois State Museum, Springfield, Illinois.
353

REFERENCES

Theler, James L., and Robert F. Boszhardt

2003 Twelve Millennia: Archaeology of the Upper Mississippi River Valley.

 University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.

Thiessen, Thomas D. 

1981a Memorandum to the Acting Chief, Midwest Archeological Center, June

 30, 1981. Subject: Trip report: Bismarck, North Dakota and Pipestone

 National Monument. On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln,

 Nebraska.

1981b Record of Telephone Call, Chuck Derby, Maintenance Foreman,

 Pipestone National Monument, to Tom Thiessen, Midwest Archeological

 Center, June 4, 1981. Subject: Discovery of artifact. On file, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1994 Memorandum to the Assistant Regional Director,

 Anthropology/Archeology, Midwest Archeological Center, September 19,

 1994. Subject: Trip Report: Pipestone National Monument, September

 12-15, 1994. On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1997 Memorandum to the Manager, Midwest Archeological Center, July 31,

 1997. Subject: Trip Report: Pipestone National Monument, July 24-26, 1997.

 On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1998a Who Lived at Blood Run?: A Review of the Historical and Traditional

 Evidence. Report prepared for the State Historical Society of Iowa.

 Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1998b Memorandum to the Manager, Midwest Archeological Center, May 13,

 1998. Subject: Pipestone National Monument, May 5-8, 1998. On file,

 Midwest Archeological Ceter, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1998c Memorandum to the Manager, Midwest Archeological Center, June 29,

 1998. Subject: Trip report: Pipestone National Monument, June 1-4, 1998.

 On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1999 The Pipestone Petroglyphs. Digital paper posted on the internet website

of the Upper Midwest Rock Art Research Association

 <http://www.tcinternet.net/users/cbailey/PipeTom.html>.

2001 Memorandum to the Manager, Midwest Archeological Center, August

 27, 2001. Subject: Visit to Pipestone National Monument, May 22-23, 2001.

 On file Midwest Archeolgical Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, NE.
PIPESTONE

354

2004 Traditional and Historical Summary. In Central Siouans in the Northeastern

 Plains: Oneota Archaeology and the Blood Run Site, edited by Dale R. Henning

 and Thomas D. Thiessen, in Dhegihan and Chiwere Siouans in the Plains:

 Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, pp. 591-601. Plains Anthropologist,

 Memoir 36, Vol. 49, No. 192.

Thiessen, Thomas D. (editor)

1992 An Interview with Wilfred D. Logan, Career National Park Service

 Archeologist. Transcript on file, National Park Service, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Thiessen, Thomas D. and Charles R. Bailey

2000 The Pipestone Petroglyphs. In 1999 International Rock Art Congress

 Proceedings, edited by Peggy Whitehead and Larry Loendorf, Vol. 1,

 pp 115-126. American Rock Art Research Association, Tucson, Arizona.

Thode, Ralph C.

1961 Salvage Work at the Tobias Site. Kansas Anthropological Association

 Newsletter 7(3):16-18.

Thomas, Cyrus

1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. In Twelfth

 Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology...1890-’91, by J.W. Powell, pp. 3-730.

 Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Thwaites, Reuben Gold (editor)

1898 Travels and Exploration of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France 1610-1791. 

 Vol. 13. Burrows Brothers, Cleveland.

1900a Travels and Exploration of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France 1610-1791.

Vol. 59. Burrows Brothers, Cleveland.

1900b Travels and Exploration of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France 1610-1791.

Vol. 60. Burrows Brothers, Cleveland.

1902 1700: Le Sueur’s Voyage Up the Mississippi. Collections of the State

Historical Society of Wisconsin 16:177-194. Madison.

1903 A New Discovery of a Vast Country in America. Two vols. A.C. McClurg,

Chicago.

1904 Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition 1804-1806. Vol. 1. Dodd,

Mead & Company, New York.
355

REFERENCES

1905 Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition 1804-1806. Vol. 8 [maps].

Dodd, Mead & Company, New York.

1966 Part I of Maximilian, Prince of Wied’s, Travels in the Interior of North America,

1832-1834. Early Western Travels 1748-1846, Vol. 22. AMS Press, New York.

Tiffany, Joseph A.

1988 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the McKinney Oneota Village Site

 (13LA1), Louisa County, Iowa. The Wisconsin Archeologist 69(4):227-312.

Tiffany, Joseph A., and Duane Anderson

1993 The Milford Site (13DK1): A Postcontact Oneota Village in Northwest

 Iowa. In Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Western Prairies and Northern

 Plains, edited by Joseph A. Tiffany, pp. 283-306. Plains Anthropologist,

 Memoir 27, 38(145).

Tite, M.S.

1972 Methods of Physical Examination in Archaeology. Seminar Press, London

 and New York.

Todd, J.E.

1886 Boulder Mosaics in Dakota. The American Naturalist 20(1):1-4, Plate I.

Toupal, Rebecca S., Richard W. Stoffle, Nathan O’Meara, and Jill Dumbauld

2004 The Everchanging Pipestone Quarries: Sioux Cultural Landscapes and

 Ethnobotany of Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota. Report prepared

 for the Midwest Region, National Park Service, by the Bureau of Applied

 Research in Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Trenton, Patricia, and Peter H. Hassrick

1983 The Rocky Mountains: A Vision for Artists in the Nineteenth Century.

 University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Troccoli, Joan Carpenter

1993 First Artist of the West: George Catlin Paintings and Watercolors from the

 Collection of Gilcrease Museum. Gilcrease Museum, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Turpin, Solveig

2001 Archaic North America. In Handbook of Rock Art Research, edited by

 David S. Whitley, pp. 361-413. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, California.

Upham, Warren, and Rose Barteau Dunlap (compilers)

1912 Minnesota Biographies 1655-1912. Collections of the Minnesota Historical

 Society 14. St. Paul.
PIPESTONE

35

U.S. Court of Claims

1927 The Yankton Sioux v. the United States. No. 4-456. Evidence for Plaintiff.

 Copy on file, Pipestone National Monument.

Vachon, André

1969 The Administration of New France. In Dictionary of Canadian Biography,

 vol. 2, edited by David M. Hayne, pp. xv-xxv. University of Toronto Press,

 Ontario.

Vehik, Susan C.

1992 Wichita Culture History. Plains Anthropologist 37(141):311-332.

Verner, Willoughby

1889 Rapid Field-sketching and Reconnaissance. W. H. Allen and Company,

 London.

Vinyard, Timothy W.

1984 Lichens of Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone County, Minnesota.

 National Park Service, George Washington Carver National Monument,

 George Washington Carver National Monument, Missouri.

Waldsmith, John S.

1991 Stereo Views: An Illustrated History and Price Guide. Krause Publications,

 Iola, Wisconsin.

Wallis, Wilson D.

1923 Beliefs and Tales of the Canadian Dakota. Journal of American Folklore

 36(139):36-102. Republished 1999 by Prairie Smoke Press, St. Paul,

 Minnesota.

Walthall, John A., and Elizabeth D. Benchley

1987 The River L’Abbe Mission. Illinois Historic Preservation Agency Studies in

 Illinois Archaeology 2. Springfield.

Warner, Ezra J.

1964 Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders. Louisiana State

 University Press, Baton Rouge.

Warren, William W.

1957 History of the Ojibway Nation. Ross and Haines, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Wedel, Mildred Mott

1974 Le Sueur and the Dakota Sioux. In Aspects of Upper Great Lakes

 Anthropology: Papers in Honor of Lloyd A. Wilford, edited by Elden Johnson,

 pp. 157-190. Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series No. 11. Minnesota

 Historical Society, St. Paul.
357

REFERENCES

1981a The Ioway, Oto, and Omaha Indians in 1700. Journal of the Iowa

 Archeological Society 28:1-13.

1981b The Deer Creek Site, Oklahoma: A Wichita Village Sometimes Called

Ferdinandina, An Ethnohistorian’s View. Series in Anthropology No. 5.

 Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma City.

1986 Peering at the Ioway Indians Through the Mist of Time: 1650-Circa 1700.

 Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 33:1-74.

Wedel, Waldo R.

1936 An Introduction to Pawnee Archeology. Bureau of American Ethnology,

 Bulletin 112. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

1956 Archeological Remains in Central Kansas and Their Possible Bearing on

 the Location of Quivira. Kansas Anthropological Association Newsletter

 2(3):2-32.

1959 An Introduction to Kansas Archeology. Bureau of American Ethnology,

Bulletin 174. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

1961 Prehistoric Man on the Great Plains. University of Oklahoma Press,

Norman.

1986 Central Plains Prehistory: Holocene Environments and Cultural Change in the

Republican River Basin. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

West, G.A.

1910 Pipestone Quarries in Barron County. The Wisconsin Archeologist

 9(2):31-34.

1934 Tobacco, Pipes and Smoking Customs of the American Indians. Bulletin of the

Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee 17 (in two parts). Milwaukee,

 Wisconsin.

Weymouth, John W.

1981 An X-Ray Fluorescence Study of Catlinite from Pipestone National

 Monument. Report prepared for the National Park Service, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1997 Critique of Report by John S. Sigstad “Age and Distribution of Catlinite

 and Red Pipestone: 1966” Submitted to the National Park Service Midwest

 Region in 1973. Report prepared for the National Park Service, Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.
PIPESTONE

35

Wheat, Carl Irving (editor)

1958 Mapping the Transmissippi West 1540-1861. Vol. 2. Institute of Historical

 Cartography, San Francisco, California. 

White, Charles A.

1869 A Trip to the Great Red Pipestone Quarry. The American Naturalist

 2:644-653.

1983 A Trip to the Great Red Pipestone Quarry. In The Red Pipestone Quarry of

 Minnesota: Archaeological and Historical Reports, edited by Alan R.

 Woolworth, pp. 12-14. The Minnesota Archaeologist 42(1 and 2).

1989 A Trip to the Pipestone Quarry. Coteau Heritage, Journal of the

 Pipestone County Historical Society 2(1):20-22.

Williams, J. Fletcher

1876 A History of the City of Saint Paul, and of the County of Ramsey, Minnesota.

 Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society 4. Saint Paul.

Williams, Mentor L. (editor)

1992 Schoolcraft’s Narrative of Travels Through the Northwestern Regions of the

 United States extending from Detroit through the Great Chain of American

 Lakes to the Sources of the Mississippi River in the Year 1820. Michigan State

 University Press, East Lansing.

Willson, Gary D., and Timothy W. Vinyard

1986 Changes in the Lichen Flora of Pipestone National Monument,

 Minnesota. Prairie Naturalist 18(1):9-14.

Wilson, Bonnie G.

1990 Working the Light: Nineteenth-Century Professional Photographers in

 Minnesota. Minnesota History 52(2):42-60.

Winchell, Newton H.

1884 The Geology of Pipestone and Rock Counties. In The Geology of

 Minnesota. Vol. 1 of the Final Report, by N.H. Winchell and Warren Upham,

 pp. 533-561. Geological and Natural History Survey of Minnesota. Printed

 by Johnson, Smith & Harrison, Minneapolis.

1911 The Aborigines of Minnesota. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

[Winchell, N.H.]

1878 The Geology of Rock and Pipestone Counties. In The Geological and

 Natural History Survey of Minnesota, The Sixth Annual Report for the Year

 1877, pp. 93-111. Submitted to the President of the University of Minnesota,

 May 25, 1878. Johnson, Smith & Harrison, Minneapolis.
359

REFERENCES

Winham, R. Peter

1990 Lower and Upper Big Sioux Archaeological Regions: A Synthesis. South

 Dakota State Plan Archaeological Region Reports: Numbers 22 and 23.

 Prepared for the State Historical Preservation Center, Vermillion.

 Archeology Laboratory, Augustana College, Sioux Falls.

Wisseman, Sarah U., Duane M. Moore, Randall E. Hughes, Mary R. Hynes, and 

Thomas E. Emerson

2002 Mineralogical Approaches to Sourcing pipes and Figurines from the

 Eastern Woodlands, U.S.A. Geoarchaeology 17(7):689-715.

Witty, Thomas A., Jr.

1964 Newly Discovered Burials at the Doniphan Site, 14DP2. Kansas

 Anthropological Association Newsletter 9(9):6-7.

1977 1977 Kansas Anthropological Association Dig and Kansas Archeology

 Training Program. Kansas Anthropological Association Newsletter 22(7):1-21.

Wood, W. Raymond

1996 The Missouri River Basin on the 1795 Soulard Map: A Cartographic

 Landmark. Great Plains Quarterly 16(3):183-198.

1998 Introduction. In Archaeology on the Great Plains, edited by W. Raymond

 Wood, pp. 1-15. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence.

Wood, W. Raymond (compiler)

1983 An Atlas of Early Maps of the American Midwest. Illinois State Museum,

 Scientific Papers 18. Springfield.

1993 Joseph N. Nicollet’s 1839 Manuscript Maps of the Missouri River and

Upper Mississippi Basin. Illinois State Museum, Scientific Papers 24.

 Springfield.

2001 An Atlas of Early Maps of the American Midwest: Part II. Illinois State

Museum Scientific Papers 29. Springfield, Illinois.

Wood, W. Raymond, and Douglas A. Birk

2001 Pierre-Charles Le Sueur’s 1702 Map of the Mississippi River.

 The Minnesota Archaeologist 60:31-35.

Wood, W. Raymond, and Donald Lee Johnson

1978 A Survey of Disturbance Processes in Archaeological Site Formation. In

 Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 1, edited by Michael B.

 Schiffer, pp. 315-381. Academic Press, New York.
PIPESTONE

36

Woodman, E.E.

1882 The Pipestone of Devil’s Lake. Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy

 of Sciences, Arts, and Letters 5:251-254. Madison, Wisconsin.

Woolworth, Alan R.

1999 An Overview of Indian Rock Art Research in the Minnesota Area, C

 1766-1995. Paper presented at the International Rock Art Congress,

 Ripon, Wisconsin.

Woolworth, Alan R. (compiler)

1983 The Red Pipestone Quarry of Minnesota: Archaeological and Historical

 Reports. The Minnesota Archaeologist 42(1 and 2).

Wright, Herbert E., Jr.

1972a Quaternary History of Minnesota. In Geology of Minnesota: A Centennial

 Volume, edited by P.K. Sims and G.B. Morey, pp. 515-547. Minnesota

 Geological Survey, University of Minnesota, St. Paul.

1972b Physiography of Minnesota. In Geology of Minnesota: A Centennial

 Volume, edited by P.K. Sims and G.B. Morey, pp. 561-578. Minnesota

 Geological Survey, University of Minnesota, St. Paul.

Wulfkuhle, Virginia A., and Thomas A. Witty, Jr.

1992 Archeological Reconnaissance of a Proposed LPG Pipeline Route in the

 Vicinity of the Little River Archeological District, Rice County, Kansas. Report

 produced by the Archeology Department, Kansas State Historical Society,

 Topeka.

Zedeño, María Nieves, and Robert Christopher Basaldú

2004 Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota: Native American Cultural

 Affiliation and Traditional Association Study. Report prepared for the

 Midwest region, National Park Service, by the Bureau of Applied Research

 in Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Zehnder, Jon P.

1998 Relationships Between Two Little River Focus Sites in McPherson and Rice

 Counties of Central Kansas Based on Excavated Lithic Debitage. Master’s

 thesis, Department of Anthropology, Wichita State University, Wichita,

 Kansas.
36

SELECTED PORTIONS OF 

PHILETUS W. NORRIS’ LETTERS 

PUBLISHED IN THE NORRIS 

SUBURBAN NEWSPAPER

Among the diverse roles performed by Philetus W. Norris during 

the course of his long and multifaceted 

career was that of newspaper publisher 

(Chittenden 1900:303-305; Haines 1977, 

1:103 et seq.; Binkowski 1995). Following 

the conclusion of the Civil War, Norris 

acquired a large tract of land near 

Detroit, Michigan. There he established 

the town of Norris, where he published a newspaper, the Norris Suburban, 

between 1876 and 1878 (Binkowski 

1995:9, endnote 8). In a column in that 

newspaper entitled “The Great West,” 

Norris published a series of letters in 

which he described his widespread 

travels through the American West. 

Because of his romantic disposition and tortuous writing style, the 

letters are not as factual as might be

desired. Nevertheless, they are a source 

of information of some interest and rarity because copies of the Norris Suburban

have survived in relatively few repositories. Issues exist in the holdings of 

the American Antiquarian Society (the 

issues of April 21 and August 11, 1876; 

volume 1, numbers 7 and 23, respectively); the Burton Historical Collection at 

the Detroit Public Library (December 22, 

1876 issue; volume 1, number 42; letter 

from Barbara Louie, Archivist, Burton 

Historical Collection, to Thiessen, 

January 13, 1998); and the New-York 

Historical Society, which holds many 

issues (letter from Reference Librarian 

Mariam Touba, New-York Historical 

Society, to Thiessen, February 11, 

1999). A number of clippings from the 

“The Great West” column have also 

been preserved in a notebook or “journal” at the Huntington Library at San 

Marino, California (HM 506). Norris 

arranged and edited the clippings, 

evidently in anticipation of publication in book form, but died in 1885 before this could be accomplished. The 

notebook is titled “Meanderings of 

a Mountaineer, or the Journals and 

Musings (or Jotings) of a Rambler 

Over Prairie (or Mountain) and Plain.”

This appendix reproduces

excerpts from two 1877 letters from 

“The Great West” column that concern the catlinite quarries. Both letters

exist in surviving issues of the Norris 

Suburban as well as in the Huntington 

Library notebook. The transcription 

presented below was made from a

microfilm copy of the Huntington 

Library notebook clippings. Norris’ editorial emendations obscure some of the 

printed words to the point where they 

are illegible; these are indicated below 

by blank lines or are enclosed within 

brackets with a question mark. Some 

text that concerns other subjects not

relating to the quarries has been omitted.

APPENDIX A
PIPESTONE

36

Letter dated June 4, 1877 (published in issue no. 68, June 22, 1877, 

page 4; letter from Mariam Touba, 

Reference Librarian, The New-York 

Historical Society, New York, New 

York, to Thiessen, February 11, 1999):

THE GREAT WEST.

Sacred Calumet Quarry

--

The

Pipe of Peace

--

Grasshopper Plague

--

Guardian Spirit

Grottoes

Sacred Calumet, or Pipe Stone 

Quarry,

June 4th, 1877.

After a brief visit to the ever beautiful 

heights of Ft. Snelling, the now tunneled, 

flumed and utilized Falls of St. Anthony, 

and the ever quiet fairy Minnehaha, I left 

St. Paul for a trip to the famous Calumet 

Mountain, or quarry of Indian tradition.

A nearly continuous ride of 178 miles 

upon the St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad 

to Worthington, 34 miles to termination of its Western branch and all other 

railroad connection with the world in 

this direction, at Luverne, and 30 miles 

over a new prairie wagon trail, brought 

me speedily and safely here. Nearly 

the whole distance is over a fertile, well 

watered and beautiful undulating prairie, with only two drawbacks: scarcity of timber and surplus of grasshoppers,-both unfortunately, serious ones... 

Marquette, LeSeur [sic] and other early 

French missionary explorers ever found 

a grand pow-wow and smoke all around 

an indispensable preliminary to any 

important business. A beautifully ornamented pipe bowl of purple mottled 

stone, stem of wood and feathers was 

the traditional calumet of friendship 

and peace, thus sacredly burying the 

hatchet and pledging all who in council used it, until openly unearthing the 

war-pipe with hatchet, blade and stem 

ornamented with quills of the war eagle which ever indicated defense and 

war, and such has ever remained and 

still continues the universal ceremonial 

custom whatever the form, the material 

wherever possible to obtain it, has ever 

been the same, a peculiar redish [sic] 

purple, mottled, with light redish [sic] 

spots or specks; soft and easily carved 

into any desired shape when first dug, 

and bearing a fine polish gradually 

hardening and darkening with time and 

use. Material for all was obtained at one 

sacred mountain or quarry somewhere 

upon the famous Cauteau-des-Prairie 

[sic] of Dakota, (the last of the three syllables, Indian-like receiving the accent) 

presided over by the Great Manitau 

[sic] of the red men, where although in

 conflict elsewhere, they ever 

smoked, quarried and departed in peace.

But it was sacred to red men alone; 

for two full centuries no white man 

was ever allowed to visit it or even 

learn its location, and to this day no 

Indian predjudice [sic] or superstition 

has been more universal, stronger or 

 than hostility to white men ever being allowed to visit the Calumet quarry.

About the year 1836 or ‘37 the famous 

Indian painter, Catlin, through great 
36

APPENDIX A

difficulty, danger and by the aid of a 

prominent Englishman, visited, , 

and in the main correctly sketched and 

described it. Niccollet [sic] backed by the 

Government visited it in 1838 or ‘39; and 

in 1843 myself[,] a Frenchman and five 

Chippewa braves reached it from the St. 

Peters river, but were surrounded upon 

the quarry by such numbers of Sioux 

warriors that we gladly escaped with 

our hair but no pipestone, to the Pembina 

half-breeds on the Red River of the North.

Since the Sioux war of 1862, it has 

been visited and doubtless described, 

but Catlin’s is the only one that I have 

ever seen. The possession of iron tools, 

horses and some rude firearms early 

obtained of the whites around the falls 

of St. Anthony, for a time strengthened, 

but forever demoralized the eastern 

Sioux who then assumed control of the 

Calumet quarry, keeping rival tribes 

from there peaceably meeting to organize against the common enemy, and 

by sale at their own price of fragments, 

derived in various ways great benefit. 

Probably few gold or silver mines ever 

gave the possessors more preponderance over their neighbors than the Pipe 

quarry did the Sioux, and has been [a 

source?] of their long continued power 

not generally well understood. By the 

last treaty with the Sisson [sic] Sioux they 

reserve one square mile, embracing the 

cliffs and quarry, occasionally conveying a supply to their homes a few miles 

west upon the Sioux river to manufacture 

and sell, Indian-like, mostly for whiskey.

The sacred quarry though ever said to 

be in Dakota, is really some 8 or 10 miles 

east of it in Pipestone county, Minnesota.

At some remote period of the past upheaval has lifted nearly horizontally 

the long elevated vitreous quarry rock 

basis of the Cateau-des-Prairie [sic] of 

Dakota and Minnesota, near the head 

of the Red River of the North. Some all 

powerful ancient forces eroded a valley 

about two miles long, north and south, 

by less than one mile wide from east to 

west, with a cliff of these vitreous rocks 

30 or 40 feet high, for its eastern border, 

and nearly parallel with, and less than 

half a mile west of it, another ledge of 

the same kind of rocks, some 4 or 5 feet 

high, so stratified and cross fractured as 

to quarry out in blocks, some 3 or 4 feet 

long by 2 wide and 1 thick. Beneath the 

latter, some 4 or 5 feet of drift deposit, or some 8 or 10 feet from the present 

surface of the valley, is the only known 

Calumet quarry upon the Continent. 

It is now in one or two foot of water, 

though possibly dryer in the fall, nearly 

horizontal, and in all from 12 to __ inches in thickness. Only the bottom layer 

of some two or three inches is thick and 

compact enough for Calumets pipes, 

most of the upper portions, though soft 

and beautifully mottled, is still usually too thin and shaly for pipes, but 

beautiful for many kinds of ornaments.

The once all powerful erosion has 

formed a chain of small lakes and 

rock, bordered pools along the 

creek from the falls over the cliffs, 

through the valley to the Northwest.

At one of these pools, directly upon the 

quarry, the tramping of Buffalo at some 

dimly traditional period of the past, 

disclosed it to the joyous red men. The 

immense excavations all in a direct line, 

nearly due north and south for about 

one mile, many of them ancient and long 
PIPESTONE

36

abandoned, evince the patience and toil 

necessary, with their rude tools and no 

mechanical appliances, to remove the 

red rock, and obtain, (often if not always 

under water) the material for all the conventional pipes of peace and of war, for 

countless ages not only, for nearly all 

the Indians of North America (as in all 

my wanderings over all of the United 

States and much of British America 

[no?] other council pipe is used where 

possible to obtain that) but also all lost, 

destroyed, and deposited in the cabinets 

and museums of the civilized world.

With great effort of myself and two assistants I have secured some 150 pounds 

of the Pipestone, but some of it is from 

the upper layers; also some small fragments from the red and pink colored 

cliff wall. Much of the surface of the 

latter is as smooth as glass and hard 

as steel, certainly the hardest rock I 

ever attempted to break, and flakes of 

it will scratch glass almost like a diamond. Catlin’s sketch of the quarry, 

stream, bluff and number and location 

of the five huge granite bowlders [sic] 

(each from ten to thirty feet in diameter) [is?] correct, but not the line facing of the latter. He represents them 

as in line with the bluffs and with the 

Guardian Spirits grottoes facing west; 

they really are near the south end of 

both bluff and quarry, midway between 

them lining due east and west [and?] 

with Guardian grottoes facing north.

His burial cairn of the young Sioux 

brave who was killed just before his 

visit by slipping from the Medicine or 

Leaping rock. That mound (now not 

over four feet high) and hundreds of 

others, beside some rude stone and 

earthwork fortification are in plain 

view, though mostly above the bluffs. 

The fall of water is now much greater than he represented it, and during 

spring floods must be very beautiful.

I think an earnest effort of Catlin or 

any of his party to have jumped to the 

Leaping rock would have dispelled much 

of its legendary terrors, and the prowess 

of the ambitious braves to there leave 

their arrow proofs of their agility and 

daring. Although nearly [56?] years of 

age I found no special effort or danger in 

the feat. Practical experience and nerve 

in cliff climbing and care in not sliding 

from the glazed rock, 6 or 7 feet in diameter 35 feet high and 6 or 8 feet from 

the cliff, is all needed for perfect safety 

in reaching this famous Legend rock.

Near it is Niccollet’s [sic] record of his 

visit which is nearly the only legible one, 

as the Indian certainly never possessed 

tools capable of carving the glazed surface 

upon which our steel tools received more 

impression than they made[;?] still there 

are some faint etchings and paintings of 

former councils, and stalwart warriors 

of fable and fame-also imprints upon 

the rocks that the credulous superstition 

of the red men have ever viewed as the 

footprints of the Buffalo eating war Eagle 

Manitau [sic] of the Legend days agone.

A fringe of [desert?] oak, elm, box alder 

[sic] along the ragged edge of the bluff 

are all that were within vision for many 

miles anywhere upon an ocean of green 

grassy cauteaus [sic] terrace to the summit[,?] blue in the north-eastern horizon.

With all the surrounding evidence, and 

romantic beauty, it is hard for an old 

mountaineer to realize that this is the 

fabled birth place of the red Indian race, 
36

APPENDIX A

the red cliffs, the petrified bodies in mass 

of antedeluvian [sic] man here drowned 

in the great deluge, stained with the 

blood of countless buffalo’s [sic], here 

offered to the great Manitau [sic], and 

the ridge of rock was moulten [sic] and 

glazed by their ancient sacrificial fires, 

or here that Heaven’s thunderbolt’s [sic] 

petrified into crimson rocks impious 

warriors who sacriligiously [sic] sought 

fragments of the sacred Pipestone before 

sacrificing to the two female guardian 

spirits of the boulder grottos, alternately 

awake and on duty. Hard to feel that 

(save recently) the painted and plumed 

stalwart warriors of all the surrounding 

nations here alone laid aside the battle 

spear and scalping knife, burried [sic] 

the red hatchet of war, and leisurely 

met, quarried, smoked and departed in 

perfect equality and safety, conveying 

to their lauding friends fragments of the 

sacred rock for the indispensible [sic] 

cerimonial [sic] calumet to the remotest 

tepee or campfire of the red Indian race. 

Yet such is doubtless traditionally true 

and [though?] sad not regretful an abler 

and better race capable of progress and 

advancement crowd fast upon the dying 

campfires and fading footprints, and 

that soon law, human rights and true 

religion will sweep over this lovely park 

and permanently surplant the rude virtues and customs and savage oregies [sic] 

of the doomed Aborigines, and happy 

homes nestle around the red cliffs and 

sacred Calumet Quarry of the red mens’ 

fabled birth place, the lovely Cateau 

[sic] prairie of the distant Dakota Land.

P. W. Norris.

Letter No. 52 (undated; published in issue no. 53, March 9, 1877, 

page 4; letter from Mariam Touba, 

Reference Librarian, The New-York 

Historical Society, New York, New 

York, to Thiessen, February 11, 1999):

THE GREAT WEST.

The Sioux -- An Interesting Story 

of the Sioux or Dakotah

Savages.

LETTER No. 52.

Our first record of the people by us 

called Sioux, by themselves Dakotah, is 

derived from the early French missionaries who visited them around the fairy 

falls of Minnehaha (or laughing water) 

and the noted falls of St. Anthony, on 

the upper Mississippi, about two centuries ago...A race of stalwart, crafty 

and aggressive warriors, quick to perceive and improve all advantages for 

slaughter and conquest, they early acquired horses, iron weapons, some firearms, and countless beads and gaudy 

trinkets, and most profitably monopolized the traffic between the fur-catching Indians and the fur-buying whites, 

and their greed increasing with their 

strength, they assumed control of the 

sacred Calumet, or Pipestone Mountain.

This ledge of peculiar purple rock, 30 

or 40 feet high and several miles long, 

is one of the southern terraces of the 

elevated table land called “Catea-desprairies,” [sic] near the head of the Red 

River of the North in Eastern Dakotah, 

from time immemorial the resort of pilgrims from all the surrounding Indian 

nations, who, though at war elsewhere, 

there, at the only known quarry of the 

sacred blood-stone of the great Manitou, 
PIPESTONE

3

they ever met, smoked and quarried in 

peace, equality and safety. The location and strength of the Sioux enabled 

them to sacrilegiously levy tribute upon 

the pilgrims, or sell at their own price 

fragments of the sacred stone for the 

indispensable ceremonial Calumet of 

peace, and thus enriched and elated, 

they aspired to [the] conquest of all their 

neighbors. Only in the Chippeways of 

the Upper Lakes and the Mississippi 

did they find a foe nearly their equals 

in numbers, skill and bravery...

But the Sioux, nearly outlawed from the 

brotherhood of nations for their sacriReferences Cited:

Binkowski, Don

1995 Col. P.W. Norris: Yellowstone’s Greatest Superintendent-America’s 

 Early Environmental Champion (1877-1882). C & D of Warren,

 Warren, Michigan.

Chittenden, Hiram Martin

1900 The Yellowstone National Park. Third edition. Robert Clark Company,

 Cincinnati, Ohio.

Haines, Aubrey L.

1977 The Yellowstone Story: A History of Our First National Park. Two

 volumes. Yellowstone Library and Museum Association, Yellowstone

 National Park, Wyoming.

legious [sic] conduct about the sacred 

Calumet Mountain, having wantonly 

destroyed their best neighbors, and 

craftily absorbed the worst, and projected a systematic career of conquest, these 

Arabs of the new world desired, and as 

usual with them, captured, absorbed, 

or Mahommed-like, invented a religion 

suited to their tastes and purposes.

Virtually closing access to the Peace 

Mountain to prevent pilgrims from various nations there meeting and planning to unite against them, they embark 

upon a ruthless crusade of conquest 

deeming each Sioux a warrior born...
36

APPENDIX B

P.W. NORRIS’ REPORT 

ON ARCHEOLOGICAL 

INVESTIGATIONS AT THE 

CATLINITE QUARRIES, 18

The following is a partial transcription of Philetus W. Norris’ report 

on his investigation of several mounds 

in the vicinity of the catlinite quarries at 

Pipestone, Minnesota, in August of 1882. 

It is incomplete because two pages are 

missing from the original manuscript.

The original and a copy of this 

report, together with related correspondence and notes, are at the National 

Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian 

Institution, Washington, D.C. The original report is in Letters Received 1878-

1888, Bureau of American Ethnology, 

Norris Correspondence file. The letter and a copy of the report are in 

Manuscript Collection 2400, Box 8, 

Minnesota Archeology file. A copy of the 

report is also in Manuscript Collection 

2400, Box 3, Minnesota Archeology 

file. Pages 10 and 11 are missing from 

both files. The copy was transcribed 

by Douglas Scott on February 10, 1998. 

Capitalization and punctuation from 

the original were retained, only spelling was corrected in some instances.

The following is a partial transcription of 

Norris’ letter to W.H. Holmes, dated February 

10, 1883, from Manuscript Collection 2400, 

Box 8, Minnesota Archeology file.

Sir,

I have the honor to submit a preliminary 

report of the work entrusted to me in accordance with your letter of August 18, 

1882. [Norris states he left Washington 

and traveled to Detroit then to Madison 

and finally to Pipestone.] I then proceeded to the Sacred Calumet Quarry (in 

Pipestone County) Minnesota - near the 

line of Dakota carefully examined the 

cliffs, falls ancient and modern quarrys, 

traced many of the totem etchings found 

upon the rocks, sketched some ancient 

earthworks near there, and after securing some of the Calumet rock and also 

various relics from the 10 Mounds which 

I opened in that vicinity returned to 

Prairie Du Chien the last day of August. 

[The letter continues, dealing with other investigations in other locations.]

Manuscript Collection 2400, Box 3, 

Minnesota Archeology file contains the following report:

Report of Ethnological Researches,

in the

Mississippi Valley

During 1882 and January 1

By,

P. W. Norris,

Ethnological Assistant.

Minnesota.

Pipestone County.

Mounds, or other prehistoric Earthworks 

are rarely found upon the treeless borders of Minnesota and Dakota, the most 

important of those of which I have a 

knowledge being at, or near the Cliff 

and Quarry of the Sacred Calumet, a 

fair sketch and description of which 

and attendant legends may be found 

page 144 - Vol. 2, and elsewhere, in the 

English reprint of the famous George 

Catlin’s “North American Indians.”
PIPESTONE

3

This legendary birthplace of the Red 

Indian Race is embraced in the one 

mile square Sisseton Indian Reservation 

which is now adjoined upon the South 

by the flourishing town of Pipestone.

My first visit to this Quarry was for 

[end page 1] pipestone with a small 

party of Chippewa Indians in 1842, my 

next without them in 1857, again in 1877, 

and during my last, spent the 29th and 

30th days of August 1882 in opening ten 

mounds, and by the assistance of Mr. 

H.C. Bennett of Pipestone, Miss Nellie 

F. and Mr. G. C. George of Warner N H,1

secured sketches for the accompanying 

cut of the Cliff Quarry and mounds. The 

following is from my notes regarding the 

mounds opened during this last visit.

No. 1 A circular oval topped grassy 

mound 28 feet in diameter at the base 

and 3 feet high. I first cut a trench 3 feet 

wide, to and somewhat below the general surface, from the south side to the 

center and threw [sic] that for a radius 

of 3 or 4 feet entirely out. The material 

found was a dark colored somewhat 

adhesive alluvial soil unmixed with 

other soil, charcoal, or ashes, injulosly[?] 

mingled with fragments of rock. These 

range in size from 2 or 3 to 12 or 15 inches in length by half as wide, and thinner, 

evidently not drift material, but angular light colored and very hard jaspery 

rock similar to that forming the Cliff 

border, underlying, and thickly strewn 

over much of the surface of the valley. 

Continuing the drift Northeasterly to 

the border of the mound, developed the 

same dark adhesive earth, and angular 

rocks, and also several small fragments 

of the purple [end page 2] yellow mottled 

Calumet, Catlinite or Pipestone from the 

Sacred Quarry one of which bore traces 

of course [i.e., coarse] tool marks, but 

no human or other bones were found.

No. 2 This is a very interesting mound, 

from being one of the far Northern ones, 

having an authentic history, and thus by 

comparison shed[din]g some light upon 

those adjacent. It is the mound shown 

surmounted by a flagstaff and totem, in 

the sketch by Catlin, and by him stated 

to have then been made two years, and 

though no date of his visit is there given; from the fact of its having been after 

his main operations upon the Missouri 

and Yellowstone 1832-4 and subsequent 

campaign to the Comanche country 

and first visit to Florida and from my 

personal knowledge of his wanderings I 

place it in 1836 or 7. Catlin does not give 

the base of this mound, but places the 

height at 10 feet which much exceeds my 

recollection of it from a hasty glance in a 

horseback retreat from a Superior force 

of hostile Sioux in 1842. J.N. Nicolette 

[sic] saw and noted it without giving its 

size in 1838. I again saw and carefully 

noted it in 1857, when although apparently undisturbed it but little exceeded 

6 feet in height. In 1877 it had certainly 

been opened [end page 3] and at least 

the cranium of the skeleton and some of 

the weapons and trinkets buried with it 

[are] reported to have been carried off. 

I did not then disturb it further than 

to secure a perforated bears claw and 

some glass beads which were among 

the fragments of angular rocks in the 

1

 The George family of Warner, New Hampshire, were visitors in Pipestone at the time of Norris’ 

presence there. Gilman C. George was C.H. Bennett’s father-in-law and Nellie F. George was Mrs. 

Bennett’s younger sister (see the Pipestone County Star newspapers of July 20 and 22, 1882). The 

authors are indebted to David Rambow for pointing out this information.
36

APPENDIX B

excavation, which was somewhat south 

of the center of the mound. In 1882 it 

had evidently been further excavated 

being only about 4 feet high, but somewhat enlarged at its base which was 

circular and about 35 feet in diameter.

I then cut a large trench from the 

South side along the natural surface of 

the mound to, and beyond the center 

of the mound. The material was dark 

adhesive soil similar to that about it, 

and near the center was some mostly 

decayed fragments of wood, one of 

which appeared to have been the short 

thick perforated stock or handle of an 

Indian whip; also angular fragments 

of rock like that surrounding it, aggregating together with that previously 

thrown out, fully half a cart load. I 

found no evidence of these rocks ever 

having been arranged as a stone coffin, but rather as a cairn, over the 

corpse which from the size and form 

of the pile was probably, though not 

positively interred in a sitting posture.

Although the rock and soil material 

of which this mound is composed are 

in all respects similar [end page 4] to 

those about it, I have never at any visit to it during 40 years observed any 

considerable excavation or other difference in the surface surroundings, although the first casual visit was within 10, and the second, and careful one 

within 25 years after its construction.

No. 3 The location of this mound amidst 

the large angular blocks of rock from the 

Cliff, and upon a slope towards the stream 

below the falls, renders its form and size 

somewhat indefinite but it is circular, 

about 25 feet at base and 3 feet high. A 

4 foot trench which I cut from the south 

side nearly across it demonstrated that 

the material of which it was composed 

was a dark alluvium like that around it, 

without charcoal or ashes, but having a 

pile of the usual fragments of rock and 

Figure B2. Profile and plan view of P.W. Norris’ Mound 3 at the catlinite quarries, 1882. The 

plan view shows the trench dug by Norris.

Figure B1. Profile and plan view of P.W. Norris’ Mound 1 at the catlinite quarries, 1882. The plan 

view shows the trench dug by Norris.
PIPESTONE

370

the base of the center, and with them 

several small pieces of the pipestone.

No. 4 This mound is beside an ancient 

trail near its rocky ford of the creek, and 

is 58 feet in length from North East to 

South West, 34 feet at its greatest width 

and much of it about 4 feet high. I found 

the turf very thick and tough, which 

[end page 5] cut none the better from 

finding that, and the dark adhesive soil 

which composed the main portions of 

the mound literally filled with angular 

blocks of vitreous rocks, many of which 

were a good lift for one man to handle.

Through such material and numerous 

fragments of decaying human and other 

bones without any apparent regularity 

or concentration a four foot trench was 

opened Southerly across the middle of 

the mound and Shafts [were] sunk in 

several other portions of it, to the natural, lighter colored and much harder 

earth beneath, everywhere finding fragments of both human and animal bones, 

but no entire skeleton or even skull of either, but the jaw bone of a Coyote, a portion of the skull of a Deer with the Stub 

of a horn attached, and many fragments 

of pipestone were removed, one of the 

latter, having evidence of rude carving 

is numbered 45 in my collection of 1882.

This irregular intermixture of the 

contents of the mound, circular and 

ridge like elevations in various parts 

of it justify the inference that it has 

been pretty thoroughly upturned 

and replaced at some recent period.

No. 5 This mound found near the 

South fork of the creek is 25 feet at base, 

2 1⁄2 feet high at the highest portion of 

its oval surface, was [end page 6] next 

opened by a four foot excavation in the 

center, down through the dark adhesive earth, to the bed rock beneath it.

Ethnologically nothing of value was revealed, but unsought, a Geological fact 

of much interest. Scraping the smooth 

surface of the fine grained extremely 

hard bed rock with the spade disclosed 

parallel groovings which upon careful 

cleaning proved most unmistakably to 

be regular Glacial Striae, remarkably 

sharply cut and well preserved from 

abrasion or erosion, from 1 to 2 inches 

wide, half as deep and trending N.N.E. 

& S.S.W. or in line with the huge granitic boulders called the Maidens as 

shown upon the map in the valley. This 

led to an immediate search for Glacial 

groovings about the base of these erratic rocks, and upon the Cliff, with the 

interesting results, to be found noted 

in their proper order, or connection.

Neither the developments made or the 

time that I could properly spare justified 

opening the few remaining mounds below the falls and hence I ascended above 

them, and some mounds recently opened 

by Messers Bennett and George &c

No.  This is a circular conical mound

built upon the rocky but turf covered 

margin of the Sloughy channel of the 

creek about 100 yards above the falls 

where the slight Easterly [end page 7] 

dip of the horizontally stratified bed 

rock allows a deep alluvial deposit nearly to the brink of the falls. This is not the 

largest, but the highest mound near the 

Calumet Cliffs being 35 feet in diameter 

at base, fully 6 feet high, and standing as 

it does above the boggy channel (which 

is 6 or 8 feet deep at low water) and covered with a dense and tall growth of 
371

APPENDIX B

herbage looks much higher. This rank 

herbage and very tough turf seriously 

annoyed us in starting at the Western 

side, but once opened the loose dark alluvial soil handled well except adhering 

to our Spades, and by vigorous effort 3 

men soon opened a broad trench to the 

bottom of the loose dark earth, and another crossing it in the center. Projecting 

through the sod was found one angular 

rock 2 feet long nearly as wide and 9 

inches thick sitting nearly endwise in the 

center, a similar one flat ways beneath it 

and then a pile of them of various sizes 

but generally smaller commingled with 

fragments of pipestone, and very much 

decayed fragments of both human and 

Coyote bones, but no skeleton of either 

entire, but the only charcoal or ashes 

found at the cliff. These were under 

the pile of stone which were not then, if 

they ever had been, arranged as a stone 

coffin although equal in fitness to some 

of which I have seen them made. Some 

of the pipestone was covered but with it 

was found the stone perforater marked 

94 in my collection of 1882. [end page 8]

No. 7 This mound is across the sloughy 

stream and somewhat nearer the 

Cliff than no. 6 and like it is a circular conical one, 30 feet in diameter at 

base and 4 feet at its greatest height.

A trench opened 3 feet wide from the 

South side of this mound to and throwing 

out [i.e. throughout] its central portions, 

only revealed the usual dark adhesive alluvial soil, and in the center a small pile of 

angular chips, and smaller fragments of 

pipestone, and traces of decayed bones.

As this was also the result of the recent researches of Messers Bennett & 

George in adjacent mounds I went 2 

miles North Easterly and after pacing and sketching the large circular 

Earthwork, and some smaller crescent shaped ones went to mound

No.  This is simply a bastion like enlargement of the embankment of the

large circular Earthwork at one of its 

numerous unique angles, and is now 

about 4 feet at its greatest height 25 feet 

wide, and somewhat more along the 

embankment which in both directions 

is much Smaller. A broad trench cut 

directly across this mound, developed 

only a bank of loose alluvial earth lighter in color and less adhesive than those 

at the Cliff, but unlike them destitute 

of angular rock, pipestone and bones.

No. 9 I found this a circular oval 

topped mound within the great circular Earthwork measuring 20 feet 

at base and 4 high. [end page 9]

[pages 10 and 11 missing]

Remarks.

In the foregoing dry record of facts and 

figures in connection with the past 

seasons researches of the mounds at 

Pipestone, description of the Country, 

Cliff, and Quarry, the history of its present, and legends of its past occupants or 

visitors; as well as my own theories regarding these mounds, their age, or their 

builders, have been purposely omitted. 

For the first of these reference is made 

to the Illustrated works of the Artist 

Catlin, the official reports of the explorer Nicollett [sic]; and my own work of 

Border Legends now in the press; and 

the last, I will proceed to briefly state. 

The anomolous feature of the case, is, 

that the location of one of the historical-
PIPESTONE

372

ly, and legendarily most cherished and 

frequented haunts of the Aborigines of 

North America, [is] in a region among 

the most destitute of timber of any of 

its habitable portions. Of the ceaseless 

stream of Pipestone seeking pilgrims 

who for countless ages have visited the 

Sacred Quarry, very many must have 

died at this Mecca of their wanderings 

- and, - at least before their relatively recent possession of horses - were from necessity buried in the vicinity; and I deem 

it a subject of great Ethnological interest [as] to where, and how, it was done.

The rolling Coteau region despite its fertility [end page 12] is from its elevation 

arid and climate more destitute of timber than the great prairies of Illinois ever 

were, notably along its few and transient 

streams, and there is neither history or 

tradition when there was a tree to the 

square mile in the Pipestone region, or 

even a thicket of bushes for camp fuel, 

except a narrow fringe among the crags 

of the Calumet cliffs, which is ever so 

kept down by fire, or by Indians for fuel 

that I have never during 40 years, seen a 

growing sapling large enough for use in 

the construction of a lodge, or of a burial scaffold, above the reach of wolves. 

This absolute want of timber which has 

ever prevented the sustaining [of] an 

Indian town, and consequently regular burial places nearer than that of the 

Sisseton Sioux at Flandreau 10 miles 

west, on the Big Sioux river in Dakota 

must have also ever seriously restricted the construction of burial scaffolds 

and also cremation of the dead. To 

the statement that these pilgrims were 

prairie Indians, and hence burial scaffold builders, who would not bury the 

corpse, but only the bones subsequently 

in the earth, I reply, that not all or perhaps the most of them as many were 

occupants of the Great Lakes or other 

Eastern regions, who habitually bury 

mostly in the earth and hence likely to 

do so at the Calumet Quarry whereas 

shown all the circumstances favored 

that mode and hence the removal [of] 

the corpses [from] there [end page 13] or 

the adoption of any other mode of burial including cremation, under peculiarly unfavorable circumstances, entirely 

improbable and hence graves or burial 

cairns of the abundant material at hand, 

in mounds by those preferring them - 

or all combined - would in the lapse of 

centuries accumulate in the vicinity of 

the Sacred Quarry. In this view I am 

sustained by the authors above referred 

to, by the Indian legends. My own previous observations, and, the recent researches, to the extent of proving that 

these mounds are the work of man, but 

I frankly admit are far short of my anticipations, in Skeletons tools weapons 

and ornaments actually found in them. 

And here I venture a fact and a suggestion. I am informed by high authority 

that at different periods of the Sioux 

war in Minnesota during the Rebellion, 

detachments of troops (who had facilities for obtaining fuel) encamped for 

successive days or weeks, at this Indian 

reservation. These were mainly residents of those regions, incensed alike 

at the guilty and the innocent, the living and the dead, of the detested race 

some of whom had perpetrated demonic atrocities upon their friends, and with 

such feelings, abundant time and tools, 

wreaking vengeance upon the race 

by upturning their graves and burial 

mounds, and securing relics [end page 

14] was alike a pastime and a boast. From 

the fact of their being upon the reservation of a band ever mainly friendly, and 
373

APPENDIX B

semicivilized, these excavations were 

mainly refilled, and hence their external 

appearance, and the commingled situation of the material of the mounds and 

the want of relics found in them, which 

theory although not wholly satisfactory to myself is all I can offer until further researches sustain or disprove it.

Another pertinent inquiry regarding 

these mounds is do they bear evidence 

of being the work of a race older or different from those found there by Whites? 

To this I unhesitatingly answer no! 

whatever may be true regarding the age 

or the builders of the Great flat topped 

mounds, ditches and embankments of 

the lower Mississippi valley, the unique 

pottery and stone coffins around Cairo, 

the Effigy mounds of Wisconsin, or the 

hard cored conical mounds throughout 

our Country; in these at the Calumet 

Quarry I find neither in the form, arrangement, material, or contents, anything differing from what the present 

race of Indians certainly [has] done in 

one of the largest of these mounds and 

might reasonably have done in all, at no 

very remote period of time. No custom 

of the Indian race was more universal, 

than that of smoking the [end of page 

15] Calumet pipe of peace of which far 

the most common, widely disseminated, 

and valued were from the Sacred Quarry.

Pipes, and fragments of this material 

occasionally found in graves, or in intrusive burials in the outer and softer 

portions of the hard cored mounds, in 

or beneath which I have never found 

or know of others having found, a single Sacred Calumet, or even fragment 

of the rock from the Sacred Quarry 

- and I deem it of interest to bear this 

in mind in future researches and inquiries, as having an important bearing upon the relative age of this class of 

mounds, and the general dissemination 

of Calumets from the Sacred Quarry.

Circular and Crescent Earthwork

2 Miles from

The Sacred or Calumet Cliffs.

I am not certain that Catlin saw these 

works although they are situated near 

the great war trail from Flandrau 

[sic] and the Sacred Quarry to the 

Minnesota, then called St. Peters River. 

In 1838 Nicolett [sic] describes two 

circular Earthworks each 2000 feet 

in circumference with their entrances fronting each other. [end page 16]

In 1842 then in ignorance of his visit 

I was led by a Chippewa Indian comrade to the crescent shaped works and 

then to the large circular one with the 

view of judging their fitness for defense 

if necessary from the Sioux and hence 

noted them particularly, and not deeming them defensible with our small 

party, we did not in our subsequent retreat attempt to reach them or to make 

a stand in a similar circular work a mile 

or two Northerly of it, which I have not 

since seen, but learn that such a work in 

that direction is now under cultivation. 

The location, form, and size of the circular work hereinbefore shown so nearly 

agrees with Nicolett’s [sic] description as 

to leave no doubt of its identity but the 

description of the other circular work 

in or near the location of the crescent 

shaped works is not so easily reconciled 

[and] speaks an error or omission in the 

copy or press, or another circular work 

which I have never found. My observation was so careful, and recollection 

remains so clear that although I took 
PIPESTONE

374

no notes at the time of my first visit, 

I have no hesitancy in vouching that 

these embankments are now so much 

lower than they were at that time, as 

to indicate they are modern works, but 

certainly older than claimed by an aged 

Yankton Sioux who recently claimed to 

Mr. C.H. Bennett of Pipestone that he 

was [end of page 17] present when they 

were constructed by his people in their 

great war with the Eastern Indians for 

the possession of the Sacred Quarry 

about 80 years ago. As this tallies well 

with the closing conflicts of that war it 

is probable he may have helped defend, 

but certainly did not help build them as 

40 years ago there was little or no more 

evidence of excavations for the earth 

of the embankments than there is at 

this time, which is scarcely perceptible.

Some of the Chippeways of our party 

claimed to have been there during that 

war, and certainly well knew their location and character, and planned in reference to them in case of an emergency before leaving Mankato, but did not claim to 

know when or by whom they were built.

From all these evidences it is clear to 

my mind that these works are mainly 

modern, constructed by the Sioux, or 

other Indians during their long and ferocious conflicts for possession of the 

once Neutral ground of Nations at the 

Sacred Quarry after the Sioux sought 

sole control, which both history and 

tradition prove to have been since they 

obtained horses and firearms, or at least 

knives and hatchets of the whites; and 

probably and one or both parties were 

aided by them or by half-breeds and 

their tools in the construction of these 

works. I do not deem this position 

shaken, by the fact which I concede that 

the contents of Mound No. 9 in the large 

circular [end page 18] work indicate an 

earlier date, as the site is a natural one 

for a defensive battle, being between a 

commanding spur of the Great Coteau 

Des Prairies near its southern end and 

afoul of the Sloughy creek, and these 

modern warriors may have chosen to 

entrench around, and defend the grave 

of some great chieftain, or to use it as a 

lookout in a somewhat depressed portion of a treeless plain. I had neither the 

time or instruments to show the exact 

angles, or all of them but the size and 

general outline agrees well with a tracing recently made and sent me by Mr. 

Bennett as well as the size and circular 

form given by Nicolett [sic] and may 

be relied upon as essentially correct.

The roll of full sized copies of etchings 

are from a few of the countless numbers 

found upon the vitreous flesh colored 

rocks around the huge granite boulders 

between which, tradition and history 

alike prove, the Indians believed was 

the residence of the two Genii guardians of the Sacred Quarry and to whom 

propitiatory offerings were always made 

before attempting to secure a fragment 

of this rock and hence the etchings, are 

doubtless the totem marks of the respective nations or their clans, and are accurate as they [were] carefully copied by 

a far better artist than myself from the 

impressions upon thick soft paper well 

pressed upon them. [end page 19 and 

end of Pipestone narrative; the remainder relates to SE Minnesota’s Houston 

County and was not transcribed]
375

APPENDIX B

[Last page of Norris manuscript includes the following notes:]

List of Enclosures.

No. 1 23 Pages of manuscript report of mounds & c.

No. 2 1 Map of Minnesota with localities of works opened marked thereon

No. 3 1 Small map of the Calumet Cliffs & Quarry

No. 4 1 Long roll of totem tracings

No. 5 11 Sketches of painted totems

No. 6 1 Letter to Prof. C. Thomas
PIPESTONE

37
377

APPENDIX C

TRANSCRIPTION OF THEODORE 

HAYES LEWIS’ NOTES 

RELATING TO THE PIPESTONE 

PETROGLYPHS

The transcribed notes that follow were made from a microfilmed 

version of the original handwritten 

notebook in which they appear, plus 

a typescript copy which also appears 

on the same reel (reel 7) of the microfilm publication (Minnesota Historical 

Society 1991). Pagination of the original 

notebook and the microfilm frames on 

which the notes appear, as well as the 

frame number where the typescript is 

to be found, are shown as three numbers separated by slash marks, the 

whole enclosed within brackets. Thus, 

the notation “[3/705/750]” indicates 

that the transcribed material that follows appears on page 3 of the original 

notebook, and also on frame 705 of 

the microfilm publication; the typescript version appears on frame 750.

Lewis’ original tracings, made 

in the manner described below, also exist at the Minnesota Historical Society. 

Alan R. Woolworth (personal communication, November 10, 1998) advises 

that the 79 Native American glyphs are 

depicted on 15 sheets of thin yellow 

tracing paper, each measuring 20 by 

30 inches. An additional sheet depicts 

the famous Nicollet inscription made 

on the rock ledge near Winnewissa 

Falls in 1838. Newton H. Winchell published redrawn and reduced versions 

of the 79 Native American glyphs in 

his monumental work, The Aborigines 

of Minnesota (Winchell 1911:Plate 8). 

The Nicollet inscription appears on 

page 565 (Plate 9) of Winchell’s book.

In his discussion of the Pipestone 

petroglyphs, Winchell (1911:562-566) 

also published verbatim, or nearly verbatim, many of the notes that follow.

1. Lewis’ description of how 

petroglyphs were recorded by him:

[3/705 and 706/750] The pictograps 

[sic] described in this book, whether 

on boulders or rock ledges, have been 

copied the natural size, by first marking around the margins of the grooves 

with a very soft lead pencil, and then 

laying the greased side of a sheet of 

tissue paper over them. If the surface 

of the boulder or ledge was smooth or 

nearly so, simply rubbing the outer side 

of the paper lightly with the hand, was 

sufficient to get a good negative impression. Removing the tissue paper 

and placing it on a sheet of thick white 

paper, I then traced the positive lines.

On rough surfaces I first marked 

around the margins of the grooves, 

as described above, and then laying the paper over them, traced the 

outlines as seen through the paper, while it was in place on the rock.

The space between the lines [4/707/750] 

(on the paper) represents the actual width and shape of the groove.

The short notches or irregularities in the 

outlines are caused by the irregularity 

of the surface in most cases, and it is 

impossible to copy them in such away 

[sic] that the roughness of the surface of 

the rock will not be shown in the line.
PIPESTONE

37

In reducing the pictures to a smaller 

scale, the smaller notches in the outlines 

should be straightened, and the blured 

[sic] portion should be ignored, running the line at those points with the 

general trend of the well defined line.

The original tracings were not made 

with a [5/707/751] view of reducing them by photography, and they 

are entirely unfit for that purpose.

In order to be thus reduced, there should 

be new tracings made from the original 

tracings, following the above rule for 

making reductions, and making the lines 

on the new tracings uniform in width.

T.H. Lewis

2. Lewis’ description of the Three 

Maidens and nearby petroglyphs:

[43/727/772] The Three Maidens

SE - SW - 1 - 106 - 46

Pipestone Co Minn

There are 6 large granite boulders lying close togother [sic] in the 

valley of Pipestone creek, east of south 

from the quarries, and west of south 

from the falls. The three largest are 

called the “Three Maidens”, and they 

range in size from 60 to 65 feet in circumference and from 10 to 12 feet in 

height above the surface of the soil, but 

from the surface of the quartz upon 

which they rest they are from 12 to 14 

feet in height. The smallest boulder is 

33 feet in circumference and 41⁄2 feet 

high. There are no pictographs on the 

boulders as has been stated. (Over)

[44/728/773] Pipestone Pictograps [sic]

SE - SW -1 - 106 - 46

The Three Maidens rests [sic] on red 

quartzite, the colors of which range 

from dark red to light pink. The pictograps [sic] are carved on the quartzite, at and around the base of the 6 

boulders mostly on the south side, but 

there were a few on the North side 

and on the quartz between the boulders. The surface of the quartz slopes 

slightly at various angles, and there are 

numerous seems [sic] or cracks that divides [sic] the surface into small slabs 

of various sizes with irregular outlines.

The pictographs are of three classes.

1st those made with some round pointed implement.

[45/728/773] 2nd those made by hacking or cutting, as with a narrow bitted 

chisel.

3rd Those that were first pecked or cut 

out, and then smoothly polished.

The latter are apparently the oldest, and 

they are much harder to trace, and made 

doubly so, by other carved lines covering or overlaping [sic] them.

It is impossble [sic] to determine the date 

of any of them for in some instances, a 

part of a figure appears very ancient, 

and other portions seem to be of a more 

recent date, but a careful examination 

with a glass, of the work in both parts 

shows it to be one and the same.

The overlaping [sic] and intermingling 

of the figures would not necessarily 
379

APPENDIX C

mean that they were of different dates, 

nor would difference in workmanship 

indicate it, for the [46/729/774] figures 

may have been placed there on the same 

day by different individuals.

List of Tracings

1 Slab 2x21⁄2 feet owned by

 C.H. Bennett (2 sheets)

Fig 1 bird with hart [sic]

 “ 2 man

 “ 3 some kind of a 6 leged beatle

[sic]

 “ 4 part of a bird

 “ 5 circle

 “ 7 nondescript

 “ 8 animal (rabbit?)

 “ 9&10 shaped like pins

 “ 1 to 4 overlaping [sic] each other

more or less

2 Slab 11⁄2x2 feet

 “ 11 man

3 Slab 1x21⁄2 feet

 “ 12 animal also part of No 13

4 Slab 2x2 feet

 “ 13 bird with hart [sic], and also

snake snake [sic] attached to

wing

5 Slab 11⁄2x2 feet

 “ 14 man with outspread hands

[47/729/775]

6 Slab 1x2 feet

Fig 15 -man

7 Slab 11⁄2x3 feet - 6 in

 group

 “ 16 -bird track

 “ 17 -bird

 “ 18 -animal

 “ 19 -animal

 “ 20 -nondescrip

 “ 21 -charging buffalo

8 Slab 11⁄2x11⁄2 feet

 “ 22 -bird with attachment to wing

9 Slab 1x11⁄2 feet

 “ 23 -animal

10 Slab 1x2 feet (group)

 “ 24 -perhaps a lizard

 “ 25 -turtle

 “ 26 -bird track

11 Slab 1x2 feet

 “ 27 -turtle

12 Slab 2x2 feet

 28 -nondescript

 29 - “
PIPESTONE

38

 30 - “

13 Slab 1x21⁄2 feet (group)

 31 -bird

[48/730/776]

Fig 32 nondescript

14 Slab 1x11⁄2 feet (group)

 “ 33 animal

 “ 34 bird

 “ 35 animal

 “ 33 to 35 overlaping [sic] more or

 less

15 Slab 1x2 feet

 “ 36 man with uplift hands

16 Slab 1x21⁄2 feet

 “ 37 man

17 Slab 1x1 foot

 “ 38 animal

18 Slab 2x21⁄2 feet (group)

 “ 39 turtle

 “ 40 turtle

19 Slab 11⁄2x11⁄2 feet

 “ 41 animal

 “ 42 nondescript

20 Slab 11⁄2x2 feet

 “ 43 woman

21 Slab 1x1 foot

 “ 44 bird track

 “ 45 “ “

22 Slab 2x21⁄2 feet

 “ 46 man

[49/730/776]

Fig 47 -dragon fly

23 Slab 11⁄2x2 feet (group)

 “ 48 -man

 “ 49 -woman defending her virtue

24 Slab 11⁄2x2 feet (group)

 “ 50 -man

 “ 51 -bird

 “ 52 -bird track

 “ 53 -nondescript.

25 Slab 11⁄2x11⁄2 feet

 “ 54 -man

 “ 55 -man or cross.

 “ 1 to 55 copied Aug 9th 1889

26 Slab 1x1 foot

 “ 56 -bird

 “ 57 -animal

27 Slab 3x3 feet (group)

 “ 58 -man
38

APPENDIX C

 “ 59 -nondescript

 “ 60 “

 “ 61 “

 “ 58 to 60 inclusive overlap.

28 Slab 2x4 feet

 “ 62 -animal

[50/731/778]

Fig 63 nondescript

 “ 64 “

 “ 63 & 64 connected

29 Slab 2x4 feet (group)

 “ 65 animal

 “ 66 horned turtle

 “ 67 moose

 “ 68 bird

 “ 69 animal

 “ 70 animal

 “ 69 & 70 connected

 “ 56 to 70 inclusive copied Aug 10th

 1889

30 Small slab

 “ 71 man with horns

31 Small slab

 “ 72 woman

32 Small slab

 “ 73 shaped like a horse-shoe

33 Slab 1x2 feet

 “ 74 nondescript

 “ 75 “

 “ 76 “

34 Slab 1x11⁄2 feet

 “ 77 turtle

[51/731/779]

35 Slab 1x2 feet

Fig 78 -nondescript

 “ 79 -man

 “ 71 to 79 inclusive copied Aug 14th

 1889

The grooves are from 1/8 to 3/8 of an 

inch in depth.

Note that Lewis’ list of the individual 

glyphs omits mention of number 6. 

This is probably an unintentional omission, as glyph 6 is illustrated on Plate 8 

in Winchell’s volume (1911).
PIPESTONE

38
38

APPENDIX D

THE PIPESTONE INDIAN SCHOOL 

CEMETERY

Local oral history (Sigstad 

1970:10; D. Stevens interview with A. 

Bird) maintains that deceased students 

from the Pipestone Indian School were 

buried in a small cemetery located within the present boundary of Pipestone 

National Monument. However, little 

documentation of this reputed cemetery has been found, and only two archeological clues to its general location 

exist. One of these is the concrete base 

of a marker erected in 1934 after the 

cemetery is believed to have fallen out 

of use. John S. Sigstad (1970:19) found 

the concrete slab six inches below the 

ground surface in one of his two test 

excavations at site pp16 South (now 

Locality 16b; see this volume, Chapter 

9). The other clue is a mound in which 

a deceased Indian School student is said 

to be buried. Sigstad (1970:10) recorded 

it as site 21PP17, now Locality 17 (pp17). 

Probably the most definitive documentary evidence of the cemetery is a 

single-page form completed by a Works 

Progress Administration worker, Erland 

Argetsinger, in June 1937, long after the 

cemetery fell into disuse. The form, a 

copy of which is on file in the Pipestone 

County Historical Society,1 states that 

the dates of the first burials in the cemetery are unknown and that the cemetery was abandoned in 1904. The stated 

reason for abandonment of the cemetery 

is that “the Indians are now buried in 

Woodlawn Cemetery or sent home.” It 

further states the total number of burials 

to be nine, comprised of four students 

at the Indian School, three white children, and two adult Native Americans. 

The sources of the information presented on the form are identified as 

“Mrs. Joe Taylor, an old Indian woman 

now living at Flandreau, South Dakota; 

Miss Winifred Bartlett, Pipestone; 

and J.W. Balmer, Superintendent of 

Pipestone Indian Training School.” 

The form also states that no records 

for the cemetery are known to exist and that the records of the Indian 

School were destroyed by fire in 1932.

Some additional documentary 

evidence relating to the cemetery can 

be found in local newspaper articles. 

Notices of the death of three Indian 

School students were published in the 

Pipestone County Star newspaper between 1896 and 1903. The first of these 

(Pipestone County Star, June 19, 1896) reports the first death at the school and 

probably the first burial in the cemetery:

Annie Tappinnatis, a 12 year old 

scholar at the Government School 

here, died last night, after a long 

illness. Annie was one of the 

first class to enter the school and 

has been a very studious scholar. 

She has been failing for a long 

time, but has had the very best of 

care at the school. Annie had no 

home, and was buried this morning at 11 o’clock in a new cemetery 

which was laid out on the reservation by Supervisor Rakstraw 

and Superintendent Harris, just 

north of the falls. The funeral 

services were conducted by Revs. 

Henderson and White, of this 

1

 The authors are indebted to David Rambow for a photocopy of the form from his personal files.
PIPESTONE

38

Figure D1. Locality 17, the reputed historic burial mound recorded by Sigstad. (MWAC 642/

PIPE 180, 14-02:06)

Figure D2. Partially exposed stone alignment bordering southeast edge of Locality 17, the 

reputed historic burial mound recorded by Sigstad. The stone edging was observed by Glen 

Livermont, Pipestone National Monument staff, in 2001. (MWAC 946/PIPE 188)
38

APPENDIX D

city, and were very impressive, 

each one of the scholars seeming 

to share in the sorrow cast over 

the school by the death of Annie. 

This is the first death that has 

occurred at the school, which 

shows that good care is taken of 

all the pupils. [emphasis added]

One of the presiding clergy 

was the Reverend J.T. Henderson, 

who was a supply minister at the 

Pipestone Presbyterian Church from 

May 10 to September 1, 1891, and minister-in-charge there from May 1, 1892 

to September 1, 1898 (Rose 1911:338). 

Reverend White has not been identified.

The second burial in the cemetery took place eight months later 

(Pipestone County Star, February 19, 1897):

The second death in the history 

of the Indian school here occurred on Saturday evening, at 

which time Mabel Campbell, 

died of consumption. Mabel was 

11 years of age, an orphan, and 

was one of the first class of scholars to enter the school when it 

was opened. Her remains were 

buried this afternoon in the little cemetery on the reservation.

Her given name is recorded 

as Mabell in the Register of Deaths in 

the Pipestone County Courthouse.

The fifth death at the school, 

and the last recorded interment in 

the school cemetery, occurred early 

in 1903, as reported in the Pipestone 

County Star on January 23 of that year:

DEATH AT INDIAN SCHOOL

Yesterday occurred the fifth 

death that has occurred among 

the students at the Pipestone 

Indian School in the history of 

the institution. The victim in this 

case is little Florence Resler, a 7 

year old girl, whose home is in 

the northern part of Minnesota. 

She died of pneumonia. The interment will be made in the burying lot on the school grounds.

The third student who died at 

the school was Mary LaRose, whose 

body was sent home for burial (Pipestone 

County Star, February 13, 1897). No information has been found about the 

fourth student who died at the school, 

and it is not known if he or she was 

buried in the school cemetery or elsewhere.2 The Register of Deaths lists 

only two of these deaths, those of 

Tappinnatis (spelled Taponatis in the 

Register) and Campbell. Consequently, 

the total number of interments made in 

the cemetery is not known, although 

the newspaper accounts suggest that at 

least three students were buried there.

2

 Don Stevens, an historian in the Midwest Regional Office of the National Park Service, Omaha, 

Nebraska, informs us that student death notices published after January 23, 1903 all indicate that 

the bodies of the deceased were either sent home for burial or do not identify the place of burial 

(note to Thiessen, January 5, 1998). Dr. Stevens has graciously shared the results of his archival 

research for an Historical Resource Study of Pipestone National Monument, in progress at the 

time of our research. Shortly before her death, Dr. Stevens recorded an interview with Ailene 

Bird. She shared her recollections of having seen the cemetery, but a transcript of that interview 

is not yet available.
PIPESTONE

3

The cemetery fell into disuse at 

some undocumented time after 1903 

and its location became overgrown with 

brush.3 It was later cleared of brush, 

however, and a marker was erected in 

memory of the deceased students in 

1934 (Mitchell 1934:28-29). This effort 

was part of a plan proposed by J.W. 

Balmer, superintendent of the school. 

In a December 27, 1933 letter to the 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Balmer 

proposed creating a “Park Area” in a 

portion of the school lands, and requested funding from the Indian Emergency 

Conservation Works program, one of the 

New Deal work-relief initiatives. In the 

letter, he asked for money to enclose the 

“Indian Burial Grounds” within a fence:

(D) Enclosing Indian Burial 

Grounds will require nearly twenty five rods of new fence. This 

area is now included in the grazing land of the reservation and is 

marked by only a few stones laid 

on the surface of the earth. There 

are certain Indian traditions, 

which to the early colonist of 

tribal fame, are held sacred in the 

minds of many of th [sic] present 

day Indians and relate back to 

the history of this little cemetery. 

The erection of a fence around 

this plot will preserve the traditions so rapidly disappearing.

The fence will be constructed of 

wire supported by steel posts 

and should have a small gate. 

The wire proposed would be extra-heavy farm fence 48 inches 

in height surmounted with two 

strands of barb wire. The gate 

would not exceed four feet in 

width. The estimated cost for fencing the Burial Ground is $101.004

Balmer’s letter was accompanied by a map on which a rectangle 

was sketched northwest of Winnewissa 

Falls. The label “Indian Burial 

Ground” appears near the rectangle.

Although the land proposed for 

a “Park Area” was still under Bureau 

of Indian Affairs administration in the 

mid-1930s, discussions were underway 

that would result in the establishment of 

Pipestone National Monument in 1937 

under the aegis of the National Park 

Service (Rothman and Holder 1992:58-

74). The area originally proposed for this 

purpose totaled 81.75 acres.5 This was increased to 110.6 acres in order to include 

3

 On September 30, 1927, a citizen of Pipestone, George P. Gurley, testified in a deposition that he 

knew the location of “old graves” at the quarries, but stated that he had been unable to locate 

them a couple of years previous (U.S. Court of Claims 1927:263). Since Gurley referred to about a 

dozen “mounds,” he may have been recalling archeological mound features reported at various 

places near the quarries by earlier visitors such as Norris and Holmes, and not the Indian School 

cemetery. 

4

 J.W. Balmer, Superintendent, Pipestone Indian School, to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 

December 27, 1933, National Archives and Records Administration, CCC-ID General Records, 

1933-44, Pipestone Box No. 172, File 40754-1933-34, Vol. 1. 

5

A.E. Demaray, Acting Director, National Park Service, to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 

May 15, 1935; and William Zimmerman, Jr., Assistant Commissioner of Indian Affairs to James W.

Balmer, May 31, 1935; both in National Archives and Records Administration Record Group 75, 

Box 18, File Pipestone 11113-1932-307.2.
38

APPENDIX D

two additional tracts, the smaller of 

which encompassed the cemetery area.6

The work to create the “Park

Area” proposed by Balmer was conducted in 1934 and was described in an article published near the end of that year 

(Mitchell 1934)7. With regard to the “Indian 

Cemetery,” Mitchell (1934:28) states:

A touching thing about the restoration was the discovery, in the 

prairie nearby, of the remains of 

an old Indian cemetery. Only 

a few graves were distinguishable; they had been covered by 

brush for years. When the IECW 

boys cleared the place off they 

decided that they wanted to 

erect some sort of monument to 

those dead nameless tribesmen 

of theirs. Permission was given them. They set up a simple 

shaft of the red stone, using their 

own design and carved on it the 

two words, “Peace Forever.”8

Photographs reveal the marker to 

have been generally of an obelisk shape 

and constructed with stone and mortar 

(Mitchell 1934:29; Pipestone County Star, 

October 27, 1994; photograph by George 

Brent, March, 1950, in the files of Pipestone 

National Monument). One photograph 

in the collections of the Minnesota 

Historical Society (MP5.9 PS6 r1, negative 1152-A) bears a caption that reads 

“PEACE MONUMENT IN CENTER 

OF INDIAN CEMETERY PIPESTONE, 

MINN. N825”. The marker was removed 

at some undocumented date after 1950 

but prior to 1963 when its base was 

demolished (Betty McSwain, Chief of 

Resources and Interpretation, Pipestone 

National Monument, personal communication to Thiessen, October 31, 1994).

The marker and the surrounding rectangular area thought to encompass the cemetery are depicted on 

National Park Service maps of the 1940s 

(McSwain, personal communication to 

Thiessen, October 31, 1994; Nickel and 

Frost 2000:Figs. 1-3). An offshoot of the 

park’s interpretive trail led to the marker, and the interpretive trail booklet stated the following lore about the “Peace 

Monument” (photocopy of page 6 of the 

booklet used in 1950-1952, provided by 

McSwain to Thiessen, October 31, 1994):

5. PEACE MONUMENT “Y”. 

The left trail leads through an 

ancient Indian burial site to the 

Peace Monument. Traditionally 

you are now standing within the 

first American site dedicated to 

Eternal Peace-an area that even 

the fiercest of the warring tribes 

regarded as an oasis free from 

strife and combat. Just beyond 

the Peace Monument is another 

well preserved Indian Burial Site.

6

Ibid. The former letter was accompanied by a map depicting the proposed boundary deviation 

around the cemetery area.

7

See also B.G. Courtright, Special Agent, to Louis R. Glavis, Director of Investigations, Division 

of Investigations, Department of the Interior, May 28, 1934, National Archives and Records 

Administration, CCC-ID General Records, 1933-44, Pipestone Box 172, File 40754-1933-344. This 

letter was apparently written while the work was underway.

8

The inscription actually read “PEACE FOR EVER” (photograph in Pipestone County Star, October 

10, 1994, page 7A). The authors are indebted to David Rambow for pointing out this information.
PIPESTONE

3

Evidently by the 1950s the lore of 

the cemetery had become a blending of 

the perception of it as a place of eternal 

rest for the dead and the concept that the 

catlinite quarries were a place where hostile peoples could meet in peace to quarry the stone. The other “Indian Burial 

Site,” also depicted on the trail guide 

map, is a single mound that remains to 

this day. In 1965 Sigstad (1970:10) recorded it as site 21PP17 (now Locality 17). He 

related some undocumented oral history regarding the mound: “According 

to local informants, it marks the grave 

of a former student of the nearby Indian 

school” (Sigstad:1970:10). Elizabeth P. 

Sigstad, John S. Sigstad’s wife and assistant during the 1965 survey, noted 

on the site form: “Local Indian source 

says mound contains 1910 Burial of 

Indian school girl” (site form on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center). In 2001, 

the mound was observed to be at least 

partially bordered with Sioux quartzite 

rocks (see this volume, Chapter 9). The 

mound was not disturbed by excavation.

In 1965, Sigstad (1970:19-20) excavated two 5x5-foot excavation units 

near the former marker location in an 

area he designated as site pp16 South 

(now Locality 16b). A concrete slab, 

probably part of the base of the former 

monument, was encountered in the 

eastern half of the northern excavation 

unit at a depth of 6 to 18 inches (Sigstad 

1965:40; 1970:19). Two minute potsherds 

were found in the soil above the slab, 

along with numerous pieces of catlinite, chipped stone tools and debitage, 

bone fragments, and iron objects of 

relatively recent origin. These materials were judged to be from a disturbed 

context (Sigstad 1970:19). Additional 

cultural debris was found beneath 

the concrete slab (Sigstad 1970:19-20).

During the 1998 archeological 

inventory work in the park, six whole 

and four partial 20x20-meter gridded 

areas in the suspected cemetery location were magnetically surveyed with 

a fluxgate magnetometer, and electrical resistivity data were collected from 

two whole and two partial 20x20-meter grid blocks as well. No grave shafts 

were detected by these non-invasive 

techniques. This investigation has been 

summarized by Nickel and Frost (2000). 

The magnetic survey is believed to have 

revealed a former fenceline north of the 

monument base and a pathway that 

led to the monument (Nickel and Frost 

2000:7), and the latter former landscape 

feature may also have been detected in 

the electrical resistance data (ibid.:10).

Today (2000) the location of the 

“Peace Monument” is marked by a depression in which an orange-painted 

iron pipe has been driven. This feature, coupled with early National Park 

Service maps of the Monument, allows 

the approximate area of the presumed 

cemetery to be relocated. However, few 

substantive details about the cemetery 

are available in the scanty documentary 

records or local oral history, and little 

archeological evidence of it has been encountered other than the concrete slab 

that Sigstad found during excavations 

at pp16 South. Additional documentary 

research about the cemetery should be 

pursued. The back files of the Pipestone 

County Star, available at the Pipestone 

County Historical Museum, should be 

searched more systematically and thoroughly than has been possible before 

now. Examination of Pipestone Indian 

School records available at the Great 

Plains Region of the National Archives 

and Records Center in Kansas City 
38

APPENDIX D

References:

Kirkham, E. Kay

n.d. Our Native Americans And Their Records of Genealogical Value. Volum

	 	 Federal Government Records, Oklahoma Historical Society Records,

	 	 Genealogical Society of Utah Listings. Everton Publishers, Logan, Uta

Mitchell, J.H.

1934 The Pipestone Quarry Or Restoring an Ancient Indian Shrine. Indians at

	 	 Work (“A News Sheet for Indians and the Indian Service”) 2(8):25-29. Decem

	 	 1, 1934. Bureau of Indian Affair

Nickel, Robert K., and Forest Frost

2000 Archeological Geophysics and the Detection of Landscape Features at

 Pipestone National Monument. Report on file, Midwest Archeological Center,

	 	 Lincoln, Nebraska.

Rose, Arthur P.

1911 An Illustrated History of the Counties of Rock and Pipestone, Minnesota.

 Northern History Publishing Company, Luverne, Minnesota. Reprinted

 ca. 1980 through cooperation of the Rock and Pipestone County Historical

 Societies.

Rothman, Hal K., and Daniel J. Holder

1992 Managing the Sacred and the Secular: An Administrative History of

 Pipestone National Monument. Report produced for the National Park

 Service, Midwest Region.

Sigstad, John S.

1965 Field notebook kept during the 1965 archeological work at Pipestone

 National Monument. On file, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln

 Nebraska. 1970 A Report of the Archeological Investigations, Pipestone

 National Monument, 1965 and 1966. Journal of the Iowa Archeological

 Society 17.

U.S. Court of Claims

1927 The Yankton Sioux v. the United States. No. 4-456. Evidence for

 Plaintiff. Copy on file, Pipestone National Monument, Pipestone,

 Minnesota.

and the Genealogical Society of Utah 

may also reveal further information 

about the cemetery (Kirkham n.d.:106).
PIPESTONE

390
391

APPENDIX E

EARTHEN ENCLOSURES 

IN PIPESTONE COUNTY, 

MINNESOTA

Two archeological features, in 

the form of earthen enclosures purported to have been constructed by Native 

Americans for purposes of defense, were 

reported by nineteenth-century travelers about two miles east and slightly 

north of the catlinite quarries. Oral tradition links at least one of them to the 

struggle for control of the quarries by 

one or more subdivisions of the Sioux 

or possibly other native Plains people.

It is possible that George Catlin 

may have seen one or both of these 

earthworks during his 1836 visit to 

the quarries. In his Letters and Notes 

on the Manners, Customs, and Conditions 

of the North American Indians (Catlin 

1973, 2:166), he mentioned the “Graves, 

mounds, and fortifications that lie 

in sight,” but unfortunately did not 

elaborate further on these features 

that he claimed to have observed.

Two earthen enclosures were 

definitely encountered two years later, 

however, by the exploration party led by 

Joseph N. Nicollet. Nicollet recorded the 

following about them in his journal entry 

for June 29, 1838 (Bray and Bray 1976:72): 

Toward noon we see traces of 

a recent passage of buffalo on 

this prairie, and we soon stumble upon a circular breastwork 

about 2,000 feet in circumferFigure E1. Map of the circular enclosure and mound east and north of the catlinite quarries, 

observed by J.N. Nicollet in 1838 and investigated by P.W. Norris in 1882 (after Thomas 1894:44).
PIPESTONE

392

ence that is evidently the work 

of man’s hands. The parapet that 

surrounds it is made after the 

manner of the plains Indians, 

just high enough to cover the 

bodies of those who defend it 

from within, lying down and 

using a gun or a bow and arrow. The principal entrance is 

still marked by the lodges of the 

chiefs and important men who, 

according to custom, always occupy the position that shows the 

direction from which their enemies come. Two miles farther 

on we find a second encampment like the first. Although 

the system of fortifications was 

in neither case complicated, it 

indicated there had been long 

talks and the issue of the matter 

may have been war. The small 

number of graves evident within 

the forts showed that the parties 

remained here some length of 

time, but that a serious battle did 

not take place. The Sioux have 

lost the tradition of these camps; 

they suppose that they served 

to end the difficulties which divided the Teton and the Yankton.

In his official report, Nicollet 

(1843:14-15) described these earthen 

features slightly differently, as follows:

On our way, after having reconnoitred [sic] distinct marks of a 

buffalo path, we unexpectedly 

fell upon a circular breastwork 

of about 2,000 feet in circumference, and sufficiently elevated to 

protect the bodies of those who 

are defending themselves within. The principal entrance is still 

marked by the places where the 

chiefs or principal personages of 

the nation had their lodges; the 

situation of these always indicating, not only the main access to 

the camp, but also the direction 

whence the enemy was advancing. Two miles further on, accordingly, we met with another 

camp of a similar character. As 

the system of fortification was 

on neither side more complicated than just described, it would 

seem that they had been erected 

during a long talk, the result of 

which might lead to a war; whilst 

the small number of tumuli that 

are found within the breastwork would seem to imply that 

both parties remained in presence for some time, though there 

was no important battle fought.

The Sioux have lost the reminiscences of these camps, and 

merely conjecture that they 

were occupied during the 

settlement of difficulties between the Titons and Yanktons.

Nicollet’s manuscript map of 

his travel through this region, reproduced as Plate 83 in Wood 1993a and as 

a redrawn version in Figure 1 in Picha 

1993, shows two x-like symbols, each 

labeled “Sioux Fort,” along his route of 

travel east and north of the quarries.

Approximately an hour and a 

half after encountering the first of these 

enclosures (at about noon), Nicollet’s 

party arrived at the quarries (Bray and 

Bray 1976:72). Consequently, allowing 

some of this hour and a half as time for 

Nicollet to inspect both features before 
393

APPENDIX E

proceeding on, it can be concluded that 

the two “Sioux Forts” must have been 

quite close to the quarries indeed. The 

total distance traveled on June 29 between Nicollet’s camp on the East Rock 

River, also shown on his manuscript 

map, and the quarries is stated as 13 

miles, and the two enclosures are depicted as much closer to the quarries 

than to the previous night’s campsite.

The enclosures were next 

mentioned in print in an 1878 article in a nearby newspaper (Marshall 

Messenger, June 28, 1878, page 1), which 

contained a brief note about them:

An old fort is reported to have been 

discovered in Pipestone County, 

about 3 miles from Pipestone 

City. It has earth works regularly thrown up. It is claimed to be 

100 years old, and to have been 

built when war raged between 

the Yanktons and Teutons [sic].

Obviously, by “Teutons” is 

meant the Teton Sioux, the westernmost of three divisions of the Dakota 

nation (Howard 1980). The attribution 

of the enclosure to conflict between the 

Yanktons and the Tetons is probably 

based on Nicollet’s earlier statement.

A newspaper article published 

the following year contained more information about one of the enclosures, 

obtained firsthand from a mixed party 

of Yankton and Flandreau Sioux who 

visited the quarries for the purpose of 

quarrying catlinite (Rose 1911:246, footnote 2; Thiessen 1998:47). The Pipestone 

County Star on July 24, 1879 carried a 

brief article on page 3 about an interview 

between Charles Bennett of Pipestone 

and two Yankton chiefs, Strikes-theRee and Fat Mandan. It reads in part:

Charlie Bennett had a long interview and talk with Old Strike, 

head chief of the Yanktons, and 

Fat Mandan one of the sub-chiefs, 

one day last week, and through 

the able interpreter, Mr.. Eastman, 

gleaned a number of interesting 

facts concerning their lives and 

points of interest pertaining to 

the quarry. It was learned that 

the old line of breastworks two 

miles east of town, was built 

about 90 or 100 years ago by the 

Sissetons, who at that time were 

at war with the Omahas, who 

then claimed the quarry, one of 

the causes of the war being a 

strife for possession of the quarry.

This statement attributes the 

enclosure in question specifically to 

the Sissetons, but it does not describe 

the location of the enclosure in detail, 

making it difficult to identify it with 

either of the enclosures described by 

Nicollet. It is interesting to note that a 

number of Omaha oral traditions attest 

to the presence of that tribe as residents 

in the Big Sioux drainage, sometimes 

specifically near the catlinite quarries, 

where they fought with enemies sometimes identified as Sioux (Thiessen 

1998:3-11, 37-46; see also Thiessen 2004).

An earlier firsthand observation of the two enclosures was made 

by Philetus W. Norris, who saw one or 

both of them on at least two different occasions over a period of time spanning 

approximately 40 years. The first time 

was in 1842 or 1843 when he traveled 

to the quarries in company with five 
PIPESTONE

394

Chippewa Indians and a Frenchman 

(Appendices A and B, this volume; also 

see Norris 1877 and Thomas 1894:44 for 

the discrepancy regarding the dates of 

Norris’ visit). In 1882, he again returned 

to the quarries, this time as one of the 

hired excavators for Cyrus Thomas’ 

Division of Mound Exploration of 

the Smithsonian Institution (Thomas 

1894:42-44; Appendix B, this volume). 

During this final visit, he dug into ten 

mounds in the vicinity of the quarries, two of which were associated 

with one of these enclosures. He discussed these excavations in a handwritten report to Thomas (Appendix B):

No. 8 This is simply a bastion like 

enlargement of the embankment 

of the large circular Earthwork 

at one of its numerous unique 

angles, and is now about 4 feet 

at its greatest height 25 feet wide, 

and somewhat more along the 

embankment which in both directions is much smaller. A 

broad trench cut directly across 

this mound developed only 

a bank of loose alluvial earth 

lighter in color and less adhesive than those at the Cliff, but 

unlike them destitute of angular rock, pipestone and bones.

No. 9 I found this a circular oval 

toped [sic] mound within the 

great circular Earthwork measuring 20 feet at base and 4 - high.

At this point in his text, page 9 

of Norris’ handwritten report ends. 

Unfortunately, most of his observations about mound 9 and all of them 

about mound 10 were on pages 10 and 

11 of his report, both of which are missing from his original manuscript in 

the National Anthropological Archives 

(Appendix B). However, Thomas 

(1894:43) synopsized Norris’ information in his comprehensive report on the 

mound explorations of the Smithsonian:

No. 9 is a circular mound inside 

the earthwork, 20 feet in diameter and 4 feet high. In this was 

found a single skeleton lying at 

full length upon the right side, 

head north, on the original surface of the ground. It was covered with a layer or pile of stones 

about 2 feet thick, and was so 

much decayed that the bones 

and even the teeth crumbled to 

dust when exposed to the air. 

No implements or ornaments 

were found with it except a flint 

lance head, some arrow points, 

and two or three rude scrapers which were near the breast.

Norris placed an excavation in one of the crescent-shaped 

mounds lying to the east of the enclosure, but found nothing there:

No. 10 is merely an enlargement 

of the west horn of one of the 

circular works lying east of the 

large inclosure, of which more 

particular mention is made hereafter. Its diameter was found to 

be 20 feet; height, 3 feet. Nothing 

of interest was found in it.

On pages 16-19 of his handwritten report, Norris offered a few observations and much speculation about 

the same enclosure and a group of 

curvilinear mounds across a “sloughy 

creek” to the east (see diagram in 
395

APPENDIX E

Thomas 1894:44 and Winchell 1911:09). 

In a rambling narrative which alludes 

to the information given to Charles 

Bennett by Strikes-the-Ree and Fat 

Mandan three years previous, he also 

referred to his 1842/43 observation 

of the same earthwork (Appendix B):

Circular and Crescent Earthworks

2 Miles from

the sacred or Calumet CliffsI am not certain that Catlin saw 

these works although they 

are situated near the great war 

trail from Flandrau [sic] and the 

Sacred Quarry to the Minnesotathen called the St. Peters RiverIn 1838 Nicollet describes two 

circular Earthworks each 2000 

feet in circumference with their 

entrances fronting each other.

In 1842 then in ignorance of his 

visit I was led by a Chippewa 

Indian comrade to the crescent 

shaped works and then to the 

large circular one with the view 

of judging their fitness for defense if necessary from the Sioux 

and hence noted them particularly, and not deeming them defensible with our small party, 

we did not in our subsequent retreat attempt to reach them or to 

make a stand in a similar circular work a mile or two Northerly 

of it, which I have not since seen, 

but learn that such a work in that 

direction is now under cultivation. The location form and size 

of the circular work hereinbefore shown so nearly agrees with 

Nicolett’s [sic] description as to 

leave no doubt of its identity but 

the description of the other circular work in or near the location 

of the crescent shaped works 

is not so easily reconciled [and] 

[bes]peaks an error or omission 

in the copy or press, or another 

circular work which I have never 

found. My observation was so 

careful, and recollection remains 

so clear that although I took no 

notes at the time of my first visit, 

I have no hesitancy in vouching that these embankments are 

now so much lower than they 

were at that time as to indicate 

they are modern works, but certainly older than claimed by and 

aged Yancton Sioux who recently claimed to Mr. C.H. Bennett 

of Pipestone that he was present when they were constructed 

by his people in their great war 

with the Eastern Indians for the 

possession of the Sacred Quarry 

about 80 years ago. As this tallies well with the closing conflicts of that war it is probable 

he may have helped defend, but 

certainly did not help build them 

as 40 years ago there was little or 

no more evidence of excavations 

for the earth of the embankments than there is at this time, 

which is scarcely perceptible.

Norris implies that he saw the 

second enclosure also in 1842, but did 

not see it subsequent to that time. He 

reports hearsay information that the 

second enclosure was under cultivation 

in 1882. His rendition of the information 

from Strikes-the-Ree and Fat Mandan 

does not correspond closely to that stated in the Pipestone County Star article 

published only a week after Bennett’s 
PIPESTONE

39

meeting with the two chiefs. Norris attributes construction of the enclosure to 

the Yanktons, while the Star article not 

only does not mention the Yanktons as 

its constructors, it states that the feature was built by the Sissetons. Norris 

also asserts that the enclosure is more 

recent than is stated in the Star article 

(80 vs. 90 or 100 years old). Norris likely 

met Bennett during his 1882 visit to the 

quarries, but there is no way to know the 

nature of any oral information he may 

have obtained from the latter, other than 

what is stated in his report to Thomas. 

In that report (Appendix B), Norris 

goes on to state that the Chippewas of 

his party knew of the enclosure before 

their arrival at the quarries in 1842/43, 

but did not know who had built it:

Some of the Chippeways of our 

party claimed to have been there 

during that war, and certainly 

well knew their location and 

character, and planned in reference to them in case of an emergency before leaving Mankato, 

but did not claim to know when 

or by whom they were built.

Norris (Appendix B) offers unsupported speculation about who 

built the enclosure and the nearby 

mounds, and why it is located where 

it is. He concluded that these earthworks had been built with the help of 

white men or mixed-bloods, reflecting a common ethnocentric prejudice 

of the time. More interestingly, he indicates that he received a map or diagram of the enclosure from Bennett:

From all these evidences it is 

clear to my mind the [i.e., that] 

these works are mainly modern, 

constructed by the Sioux or other 

Indians during their long and 

ferocious conflicts for possession of the once Neutral ground 

of Nations at the Sacred Quarry 

after the Sioux sought sole controll [sic], which both history 

and tradition prove to have been 

since they obtained horses and 

firearms, or at least knives and 

hatchets of the whites, and probably one or both parties were aided by them or by half-breeds and 

their tools in the construction 

of these works. I do not deem 

this position shaken, by the fact 

which I concede- that the contents of Mound No. 9 in the large 

circular work indicate an earlier 

date as the site is a natural one 

for a defensive battle, being between a commanding spur of the 

Great Coteau Des Prairies near 

its southern end and a ford of the 

Sloughy creek, and these modern warriors may have chosen to 

entrench around and defend the 

grave of some great chieftain, or 

to use it as a lookout in a somewhat depressed portion of a treeless plain. I had neither the time 

or instruments to show the exact 

angles or all of them but the size 

and general outline agrees well 

with a tracing recently made 

and sent me by Mr. Bennett

as well as the size and circular 

form given by Nicolett [sic] and 

may be relied upon as essentially correct. [emphasis added]

Possibly the “tracing” provided 

to Norris by Charles Bennett, a founding 

citizen of Pipestone who had a keen interest in antiquarian matters, was repro-
397

APPENDIX E

duced as Figure 4 by Thomas (1894:44; 

also reproduced in Winchell 1911:109). 

Thomas (1894:43-44), who synopsized 

information furnished directly to him 

by Norris, described these “circular 

and crescent earthworks” as follows:

These interesting works are situated about 2 miles a little north 

of east from the quarry; a plan 

of them is given in Fig. 4. It is 

not certain that Catlin saw these 

works, although they are situated near the great war trail from 

Flandreau and the pipestone 

quarry to the Minnesota (formerly St. Peters) river. Nicollet, 

however, noted them in 1838, and 

makes special mention of two circular enclosures, or “camps,” as 

he calls them, estimating the circumference of one at 2,000 feet.

The shape of this inclosure, 

which appears to be the only 

complete one in the locality is 

shown at a. The circumference, 

according to Col. Norris’ measurement, is 2,386 feet, the wall 

varying in height from a few 

inches to 4 feet. It has two wellmarked and distinct openings, 

or gateways, one at the north, the 

other at the southeast, besides 

smaller and less evident ones. In 

the southern half is the mound 

No. 9, heretofore mentioned.

The crescent-shaped embankments, which are roughly sketched 

in the figure, are about half a mile 

east of the large inclosure. They 

are simply earth embankments 

of slight elevation and are possibly parts of unfinished works.

...Col. Norris thinks he saw 

in 1842 the second inclosure mentioned by Nicollet, 

but did not find it in 1882.

Francis La Fleshe, an Omaha 

tribal member, wrote a letter on January 

15, 1883 to F.W. Putnam of the Peabody 

Museum, in which he stated that the 

Omahas had knowledge of one of the 

earthworks near the catlinite quarries:

The Omahas say that three miles 

east of the pipe quarries there is 

a mound about nine or ten feet 

high and very large, surrounded 

by a large ring of earth piled up, 

and it is supposed that in that 

mound are buried the remains 

of warriors and their weapons 

of defence. [Putnam 1884:181]

The description of a mound enclosed by an earthwork suggests that 

this may refer to Norris’ Mound 9, 

which he dug into the previous year 

and found a human skeleton and some 

chipped stone implements. It is difficult to judge whether La Fleshe’s statement reflects traditional tribal knowledge or whether some of the Omahas 

had heard of Norris’ discovery by the 

time that La Flesche wrote to Putnam.

Theodore H. Lewis, in collaboration with Alfred J. Hill of St. Paul, recorded and mapped thousands of mounds 

and other archeological features as part 

of the Northwestern Archaeological 

Survey during the latter part of the nineteenth century (Lewis 1898; Dobbs 1991; 

Haury 1993). He visited the catlinite 

quarries in 1889. On August 12th of that 

year, he mapped one of the enclosures 

(Northwestern Archaeological Survey 
PIPESTONE

39

1991:Roll 2, Field Notebook 7, frames 

90-92, 191-193). Winchell (1911:108) published a map of the enclosure based on 

the measurements and segmented drawings recorded by Lewis; however, the detailed correspondence with Lewis’s field 

data is not great and it is not known if 

Lewis later compiled a complete map of 

the enclosure that might have been the 

basis of the one published by Winchell.

Lewis noted that the average 

width of the wall in 1889 was 18 feet 

and its average height was one foot 

(Northwestern Archaeological Survey 

1991:Roll 2, Field Notebook 7, frames 

91, 193). The total circumference, computed from the lengths of individual 

segments measured by Lewis, is 2422.5 

feet (Northwestern Archaeological 

Survey 1991:Roll 2, Field Notebook 

7, frames 191, 193). Lewis recorded 

the enclosure’s legal location as the 

N1⁄2 NW1⁄4 Section 5, Township 106 

North, Range 45 West (Northwestern 

Archaeological Survey 1991:Roll 2, Field 

Notebook 7, frame 90; Lewis 1889b), 

which gives either of the enclosures a 

specific location for the first time in any 

of the recorded evidence about them.

A letter that Lewis (1889b) wrote 

to Hill on August 12, the day that he surveyed the above enclosure, mentions that 

he had also made notes on a second “fort:”

Pipestone, Minnesota, Aug. 12th 1889

Alfred J. Hill Esq.

 St. Paul, Minn.

Dear Sir,

This morning I surveyed the fort 

on N1⁄2-NW-5-106-45 of which 

there are some 2500 feet of embankments. Rain drove me in so 

this afternoon I copied the [sic] 

notes for both forts (In ) 

and herewith enclose them...

This may refer to the second 

earthwork that Nicollet observed in 

the vicinity of the quarries, or it may 

refer to a similar feature he observed 

at the Blood Run Site near Sioux Falls, 

South Dakota, on July 31, 1889, a few 

days before he surveyed the feature 

near Pipestone. His Field Notebook 7 

(Northwestern Archaeological Survey 

1991:Roll 2) contains measurements and 

diagrams for both the Pipestone and the 

Blood Run enclosures, but is not likely 

to have been the enclosure that accompanied his August 12 letter because it 

contains entries made after that date.

Despite the observations about 

the enclosures that were recorded during the nineteenth century, twentieth-century archeologists have found 

no trace of either enclosure on the 

ground. After a June 26, 1945 visit to 

the legal location recorded by Lewis, 

University of Minnesota archeologist 

Lloyd A. Wilford noted that he observed no evidence of the enclosure 

(typescript note on file, Minnesota State 

Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul):

Memo on Pipestone County - June 26, 1

Made a thorough search for the 

enclosure surveyed by Lewis in 

1889, Winchell p. 108, said to be 

on the N1⁄2 of the NW1⁄4 of Sec 5, 

T. 106-45. Winchell has the description correct from the Lewis 

notes. The area was in corn (very 

small) and very favorable for observation. I could find no trace of 

the enclosure, and the men who 

have owned the farm for several 
399

APPENDIX E

years had never seen it nor heard 

of it. Since the embankment 

was only one foot high in 1889, 

and was already under cultivation, it can be presumed that the 

succeeding 55 years of plowing 

have obliterated all traces of it.

Wilford completed a University 

of Minnesota archeological site form (on 

file, Office of the State Archaeologist, St. 

Paul, Minnesota) for the reported enclosure, on which he noted that he “could 

find no trace of it; probably plowed down.” 

He assigned the number “PP1” to the site.

In 1978 archeologist B. Olson, 

affiliated with the State Historic 

Preservation Office at the Minnesota 

Historical Society, visited the same location and completed a Society site 

form for 21PP1 on July 26 (on file, 

Office of the State Archaeologist, St. 

Paul). On it he or she noted that the 

site could not be located and that both 

the present tenant and the owner of 

the land reported finding no artifacts.

In the absence of any modern 

data about either of these enclosures, 

recorded by trained archeologists, it is 

difficult to offer any substantiated conclusions about the nature, age, or authorship of these features. The enclosure mapped by Lewis and published 

by Winchell (1911:108) is most likely the 

same enclosure depicted on the unattributed map also published by Winchell 

(1911:109). Consequently, thanks to 

Lewis’ careful record-keeping, the

location of one of the two earthen enclosures reported by Nicollet is known, 

although tangible, surviving evidence 

of it is lacking. If the unattributed map 

published by Thomas (1894:44) and 

Winchell (1911:109) is the diagram that 

Bennett gave to Norris, which is possible because Thomas had at his disposal 

all of Norris’ information, presumably 

including Bennett’s map, then the enclosure recorded by Lewis is the same 

as that excavated by Norris in 1882. The 

location of the other enclosure reported by Nicollet is unknown, although it 

presumably lies a short distance either 

to the northeast or to the southwest of 

the feature recorded by Lewis, judging from Nicollet’s map of the region. 

Both Nicollet and Norris attributed the purpose of these enclosures 

to military defense in time of conflict. 

Winchell (1911:109, 110) disagreed with 

their interpretation that the enclosures 

were built exclusively for warfare, and 

compared them with palisaded villages 

known from the Minnesota River valley, suggesting that they were habitation sites. The enclosure recorded by 

Lewis contained a circular tumulus 

(mound 9) in which Norris excavated 

and reported finding an extended human skeleton, together with “a flint 

lance head, some arrow points, and 

two or three rude scrapers which were 

near the breast” (Appendix B; Thomas 

1894:43; see also Winchell 1911:110). The 

collections at the U.S. National Museum 

contain a chert biface, a chert drill, and 

a large side-notched chert biface or projectile point collected by Norris during his work near Pipestone, but there 

is no documentation to associate them 

with the artifacts he found in mound 9 

(Table 7.2). Norris also excavated a portion of the northern embankment of 

the enclosure, but did not find any artifacts (Appendix B; Thomas 1894:43; see 

also Winchell 1911:110). If mound 9 is 

associated with the enclosure and not 
PIPESTONE

400

simply coincidentally located within 

it, then the complex of the mound and 

the embankment may have served a 

mortuary purpose in addition to whatever other function it may have had.

The age of the mound investigated by Norris and Lewis is said, on 

the basis of oral information from two 

aged Yankton men, to have been on 

the order of 80, 90, or 100 years prior 

to 1879, which would place construction of the mounds sometime around 

approximately 1779 to 1799, but there 

is no way to confirm that information. There is no archeological evidence 

bearing on the age of either feature.

Candidates for the builders of 

the mounds are variously implied by 

oral information, filtered through an interpreter and other non-native writers, 

as including the Sissetons (Strikes-theRee in the Pipestone County Star article), 

Tetons (Nicollet), Yanktons (Nicollet and 

Norris), the Sioux in general (Norris), 

and “Eastern Indians” (Norris). If 

Strike-the-Ree’s story told to Bennett 

is not interpreted literally (Pipestone 

County Star), his mention of the Omahas 

may make them candidates as well.

Although similar enclosures are 

known to have existed elsewhere in the 

upper midwest (cf. numerous examples 

in Winchell 1911), it is interesting to note 

that Lewis recorded several other earthen enclosures in other localities, including the Blood Run Site in northwestern 

Iowa (Northwestern Archaeological 

Survey 1991:Roll 2, Field Notebook 

7, frames 68-73; Lewis 1890; Thomas 

1894:38-39; Henning 1982:Maps 12-13, 

pages 38-40) and near the present-day 

towns of Niobrara, Wynot, Hartington, 

and Ponca in northeastern Nebraska 

(Wood 1978). Four of these five features 

have not been located and are presumed 

to have been obscured by cultivation. 

However, one, the Ponca Fort Site, has 

been excavated and is believed to be the 

remains of a Ponca settlement dating to 

the 1790s (Wood 1993b). The Poncas are 

close cultural and linguistic relatives 

of the Omahas, with whom they are 

believed to have once been one people 

before the Poncas separated from the 

Omahas sometime prior to 1785, when 

the Poncas are first identified by name 

in historical sources (Fletcher and La 

Flesche 1992; Wood 1993b). The fact that 

all seven of these enclosures-the two reported by Nicollet, the one at Blood Run, 

and the four reported by Wood-occur in 

territory once occupied by the Omahas 

and Poncas (Thiessen 1998), and the 

convincing attribution of one of them 

to the Poncas on the basis of archeological, historical, and traditional evidence, enhances the possibility that the 

Omahas/Poncas may have been responsible for constructing these features.

It is unfortunate that most of 

these reported enclosures have not 

been located and that surface evidence 

of most of them is likely to have been 

obscured by a century or more of agricultural practices. Clearly, if these 

enclosures, or any surviving subsurface portions of them, can be relocated, 

they would be an important and rare 

resource for future research. Perhaps 

some evidence of them exists beneath 

the present-day surface and will someday be revealed by application of noninvasive geophysical methods of subsurface investigation, coupled with the 

results of systematic examination of 

available aerial photographic imagery.
401

APPENDIX E

References Cited:

Bray, Edmund C., and Martha C. Bray (editors)

1976 Joseph N. Nicollet on the Plains and Prairies. Minnesota Historical Society

 Press, St. Paul.

Catlin, George

1973 Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Conditions of North

 American Indians. Vol. II. Dover Publications, New York.

Dobbs, Clark A.

1991 The Northwestern Archaeological Survey: An Appreciation and Guide to the

 Field Notebooks. Institute for Minnesota Archaeology Reports of

 Investigations No. 135. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Fletcher, Alice C., and Francis La Flesche

1992 The Omaha Tribe. Reprint in two volumes. University of Nebraska Press,

 Lincoln. Originally published 1911 in Twenty-seventh Annual Report of

 the Bureau of American Ethnology...1905-1906, pp. 17-672. Smithsonian

 Institution, Washington, D.C.

Haury, Chérie H.

1993 Theodore Hayes Lewis: The Northwestern Archaeological Survey in

 Iowa. Journal of the Iowa Archeological Society 40:82-87.

Henning, Dale R.

1982 Evaluative Investigations of Three Landmark Sites in Northwest Iowa.

 Archaeological Research Center, Luther College, Decorah, Iowa.

Howard, James H.

1980 The Dakota or Sioux Indians: A Study in Human Ecology. J & L Reprint

 Company, Lincoln, Nebraska. Originally published 1966 in Museum News

 27(5-10), University of South Dakota, Vermillion.

Lewis, Theodore Hayes

1889b Letter to Alfred J. Hill, August 12, 1889. In the T.H. Lewis papers,

Minnesota Historical Society, manuscript group 147.D.6.3(B), box 226.

1898 The Northwestern Archaeological Survey. Pioneer Press, t. Paul.

1890 Effigy-Mound in the Valley of the Big Sioux Rover, Iowa. Science 15(378;

 May 2, 1890):275.
PIPESTONE

402

Nicollet, J. N.

1843 Report Intended to Illustrate a Map of the Hydrographical Basin of the

 Upper Mississippi River. 26th Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Documents,

 No. 237, Serial 380. Also published in 1845, 28th Congress, 2nd Session

 House Documents, No. 52, Serial 464. Washington, D.C.

Norris, Philetus W

1877 The Great West. Sacred Calumet Quarry--The Pipe of Peace--Grasshop

per Plague--Guardian Spirit Grottoes. Letter written at the “Sacred Calumet,

or Pipe Stone Quarry,” June 4, 1877. Norris Suburban, No. 68 (June 22, 1877),

page 4. Norris, Michigan.

Northwestern Archaeological Survey

1991 Field Notebooks and Related Volumes, Pre-1880, 1880-1895. Minnesota

Historical Society Microfilm Publication. St. Paul.

Picha, Paul R.

1993 Ethnohistorical and Cartographic Glimpses of the Northeastern Plains.

 In Joseph N. Nicollet’s 1839 Manuscript Maps of the Missouri River and Upper

 Mississippi Basin, compiled by W. Raymond Wood, pp. 93-96. Illinois State

 Museum, Scientific Papers 24. Springfield, Illinois.

[Putnam, F.W., editor]

1884 Sixteenth and Seventeenth Annual Reports of the Trustees of the Peabody

 Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology. Harvard College,

 Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Rose, Arthur P.

1911 An Illustrated History of the Counties of Rock and Pipestone, Minnesota.

 Northern History Publishing Company, Luverne, Minnesota. Reprinted

 1980 through the cooperation of the Rock and Pipestone County Historical

 Societies.

Smith, G. Hubert

1977 Ethnographic Contributions of J.N. Nicollet. Edited by Raymond J.

 DeMallie. The Minnesota Archaeologist 36(2):62-75.

Thiessen, Thomas D.

1998 Who Lived at Blood Run?: A Review of the Historical and Traditional Evidence.

 Report prepared for the State Historical Society of Iowa. Midwest

 Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.
403

APPENDIX E

2004 Traditional and Historical Summary. In Central Siouans in the

 Northeastern Plains: Oneota Archaeology and the Blood Run Site, edited by

 Dale R. Henning and Thomas D. Thiessen, in “Dhegihan and Chiwere

 Siouans in the Plains: Historical and Archaeological Perspectives,” pp.

 355-380. Plains Anthropologist, Memoir 36, Vol. 49, No. 192.

Thomas, Cyrus

1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. In Twelfth

 Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology...1890-’91, by J.W. Powell, pp.

 3-730. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Winchell, N.H.

1911 The Aborigines of Minnesota. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

Wood, W. Raymond

1978 Theodore Lewis and His Northeastern Nebraska “Forts.” Plains

 Anthropologist 23(79):75-81.

1993b Nánza, The Ponca Fort. Reprints in Anthropology 44. J & L Reprint

 Company, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Wood, W. Raymond (compiler)

1993a Joseph N. Nicollet’s 1839 Manuscript Maps of the Missouri River and Upper

 Mississippi Basin. Illinois State Museum, Scientific Papers 24. Springfield,

 Illinois.
PIPESTONE

404