Sherry Chandler » Rocknapping
Rocknapping

Removal of Indian Head Rock, Portsmouth Daily Times file photo.
Lost in all the excitement of last week — and well might you ask what excitement was that, but I lead a simple life — was this news item Charlie W sent me from the Portsmouth Daily Times:
Rep. Tanya Pullin, D-South Shore, Ky., (98th District), says she considers the removal of what has come to be known as the “Indian Rock” from what she says was Kentucky property “a very serious matter.”
A group of volunteer divers recently brought the rock with carvings of dates from the 19th century, a likeness of a man and a house, as well as assorted names, up from about 16 feet down and about 30 to 40 feet from the Kentucky shore.
“I’m afraid I’m a little bit behind in it, but it was on Kentucky land, and I’m going to check into it,” Pullin said. “I will be talking with the Legislative Research Commission and the attorney general in Frankfort (Ky.)”
A little further research in the form of a Google query brought up this item from Bill Sloat’s The Daily Bellwether:
CINCINNATI (TDB) — There could be a border war in the works after an 8-ton archaeological oddity — some would say natural wonder or treasure — called the Indian Head Rock was torn from the Ohio River and taken to Portsmouth for display. The rock hasn’t been seen since it was covered by high water after the river was dammed in the 1920s. It had long been a pioneer and early American curiosity, as well as serving as a navigation marker on the river. Flat boaters and steam boaters alike used it to measure depth and distance as a natural mile marker.
Historians and geologists have debated whether it was a manmade feature, or was put in the river by Mother Nature. The question remains open.
Which in turn led to this news item from WSAZ News Ohio:
A recent river recovery of an eight ton treasure was followed by angry claims of archeological thievery.
This sandstone scratching is far from another face in the crowd. After years of planning and weeks of effort, a Portsmouth, Ohio Volunteer Recovery Team pulled the prehistoric, legendary Indian’s Head Rock off the mighty Ohio River’s bottom.
“It was tough to get straps around it,” recovery team diver Dave Vetter said.
In the 18 and early 1900’s before the days of locks and dams, the boulder would pop up every decade or so, depending on river levels the rock became a popular tourist attraction, a gilded age photo op, featured in post cards. Some of Portsmouth’s most prominent citizens scratched their names in the sandstone. Some think maybe this smiling face is an ancient Indian petroglyph, or maybe not.
“Maybe a quarrymen or an alien from Mars,” Vetter said.
And here from the Huntington West Virginia Herald-Dispatch is the story from the divers’ perspective, as told by Steven Shaffer:
PORTSMOUTH, Ohio — History, someone jokingly pointed out, takes a lot of time.
So appears to be the case with a historic preservation effort for the Indian’s Head Rock — a sandstone boulder which, until recently, rested upon the floor of the Ohio River near Portsmouth. What separated the nearly 80-ton behemoth from countless surrounding river rocks is that on the surface of this particular boulder is the image of a human face, reportedly carved centuries ago by a Native American.
This rock carving, or petroglyph to use a more scientific term, was nearly always under the water, even before navigational dams were constructed on the Ohio River. But during those dry summers of long ago, when the Indian’s Head Rock was exposed, Euro-American settlers intrigued by the ancient enigma took the opportunity to add their inscriptions to the boulder as well.
By the late 1800s, the appearance of the rock drew large crowds, and the petroglyph boulder was the subject of speculation in books, newspapers, on postcards, and was even depicted in a traveling panorama. The Indian’s Head Rock was last visible above the water in October 1920, when a steamboat damaged the dam downstream, temporarily lowering the water level. With the repair of the dam, the boulder sank beneath the water and the celebrated Indian’s Head became a mostly forgotten footnote in local history.
That was until eight years ago, when the story of the lost monument captured my imagination. While writing the script for a documentary film on prehistoric rock art, I became aware these cultural treasures were being erased at an alarming rate from the effects of acid rain, weathering and vandalism. Since that time I’ve worked to locate, document and encourage the preservation of prehistoric carvings found throughout the Ohio Valley. I suspected the Indian’s Head Rock still existed, could be found and could once again become part of Portsmouth’s rich history.
In the summer of 2000 with a group of Huntington-based divers, I began exploring the river bottom in the Portsmouth area. It took numerous dives over a three-year period, but persistence paid off, as the team located and photographed the boulder, discovering the ancient Native American image and historic inscriptions clearly visible and in excellent condition. However, recovering the 16,000 pound rock from the river would present an even greater challenge.
…
It was a wonderful project, and obviously one that wouldn’t be hurried. Raising the Indian’s Head Rock is also an example of grassroots preservation teamwork at its best. I’m happy to have been a part of it, and I’m glad Portsmouth’s future generations will be able to see and ponder the Indian’s Head as well.
To be clear, the Ohio River is within the state boundaries of Kentucky. As this Google map shows, South Shore is a sort of Kentucky-side little sister to Portsmouth. It is also home to a number of decent regional poets.
So is this an heroic preservation effort or archaeological theft?
Or, as Charlie asks, “Is ‘rock napping’ a ‘capital’ offense, or just a very ‘base’ act?”
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.



6 Comments
1. Terry replies at 8th October 2007, 3:39 pm :
Fascinating. There’s an international precedent for forcing repatriation. In the last few years museums in London, New York and Cleveland have had to return artifacts that were smuggled out of Italy and Egypt, some looted and others carried off by treasure hunters in more lax times. Some were generously given the privilege of exhibiting the objects periodically on loan, but that’s at the good will of the true owners.
Archaeologists agree that historical treasures belong to the location in which they were found, in this case Kentucky. Should someone challenge it in court, I doubt the theft would stand, since he has already admitted the source of the artifact.
2. charlie w replies at 9th October 2007, 8:44 am :
Something about the removal of “Indian Rock” from the river struck me as quite humorous. I think it was the reaction from some local folks, esp. Representative Pullin, and the fact that it was done right under the noses of the objectioners. I wonder if some think that this rock is the only one in the state of KY upon which people, ancient, or modern, scratched names and crude pictures.
Imagine dragging all those rocks into UK’s archaelogical department. And, there is just something about a rock shackled, bound, (and maybe gagged) on the back of a flatbed that makes me want to laugh.
Several days before the event, a story appeared in the Ports. Daily Times describing the rock and stating that it was about to be raised from the depths. As far as I know, no one objected then. But as soon as the object, (artifact??) was brought up complaints started coming in.
I did not know the dubious history of the rock as a nineteenth century land mark. I imagine few people around here actually knew about it.
I kept saying to myself, “it’s a rock, dang it! If they wanted it that badly, let them keep it.” “You want rocks? Come to my place and I’ll give you all you can carry.”
I suppose the “team” that raised the rock should have sought permission or some kind of official archaelogical judgement from some kind of official archaelogical entity in KY. Clearly, the rock was on KY property and belonged to the people of KY.
It seems pretty amazing that the removal of the rock could have been planned for eight years, and no one thought of this.
It also seems a no-brainer that the rock will be returned to it’s rightful owners. I hope, though, they don’t drop it back into the river as some want to do.
Maybe I just don’t have as much respect for historical stuff as I should have. But I have have always been a lot more interested in the future than the past. charlie w
3. sherry replies at 9th October 2007, 10:35 am :
Hey Terry & Charlie. I was sort of interested in the history of the rock itself since I’m willing to bet very few people are around who ever saw it or even knew it was there. You can correct me on that if I’m wrong, Charlie. Maybe it’s a famous lost artifact in your area.
Anyway, I found some Ohio historical sites that mention it but they won’t open. I’d like to see some photos of it when it was a tourist attraction.
As for the removal, I have a lot of mixed feelings. On the one hand, the guy was doing us all a favor by rescuing it from the depths, right? And it must have cost somebody a bundle (by my terms anyway). On the other hand, can private citizens just go around dredging up archaeological artifacts and carting them off to visitors’ centers without getting some kind of permission or license or something.
My husband’s question was, if it weighted eight tons, how in the world did they raise it but I didn’t pay any attention to that at all, being a woman and interested in the rock’s emotional value rather than the technical stuff. Ahem.
4. charlie w replies at 9th October 2007, 11:29 am :
A local contractor who possessed a barge crane was enlisted to bring up the rock.
As to the question of whom may collect artifactsI don’t know whether any legalities are tied to artifacts on private land. It’s pretty well known that you can’t take stuff from public land.
I hadn’t thought about this before, but while the Ohio River is part of KY to the low water mark on the OH side, actual ownership of the land, may actually be privately held as with smaller streams. If this is so, the state may not have any claim at all, providing the nappers had permission from the owner. Wouldn’t that be the pits? (no ton impended) This is all my speculation or conjecture. I will keep you up to date on it.
5. sherry replies at 9th October 2007, 11:32 am :
Thanks, Charlie. Meanwhile I found an old newspaper photo at Ohio History. If you click the link, you can just barely make out the head. The photo seems to have been taken in 1920 when the rock was still under several inches of water.
6. Jamey replies at 28th April 2008, 1:36 am :
In all this ,I think its a shame southern ohio and kentucky cant share a boulder. however it turns out there are things as a history buff that I wonder???? such as now that its out, is anyone looking at the names on the rock?? there might be some very historical names on it. arthur st clair , john johnson , daniel boone , simon kenton.ie. If it goes back in the river , kentucky gets it , ohio gets it.this should be done. jamey
Leave a comment