Return to Doug's archaeology page

A PRELIMINARY REPORT ON A SURVEY OF THE 'WESTFORD KNIGHT'
David K. Schafer, Curatorial Assistant for Archaeology at Harvard's Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, has conducted a survey which will be published in the Massachusetts Archaeological Society Bulletin as well as some regional publications.
In his words (and with his permission):

The engraving on the bedrock in Westford, MA is not :

• a depiction of "...a rough life-sized portrayal of a late 14th century knight in full-length surcoat" (Glynn 1957:11).
  
• Nor "....a knight's great sword, a shield and crest, and the knight's face in a bassinet helmet with pendent neckmail of the kind in use in A.D. 1360-1390" (Glynn 1967:14).
  
• Nor should the heraldry which some people claim to see on the shield (since the *only* evidence of the shield that I could distinguish was the one painted in white paint on the bedrock by an unknown artist) be interpreted as a 14th century Scottish coat of arms (Glynn 1967:14; Willard 1958:86).
  
• Nor should the "T-shaped" engraving (which is in fact visible on the bedrock) be thought of as "clearly show(ing) a hand and half-wheel pommel sword of Medieval European vintage" (Willard 1958:61)
  
• Nor should the "T-shaped" engraving be interpreted as "...an early 18th century iron tomahawk of the era between 1700 and 1750...cut in the exposed rock by a Westford settler as a memorial of encounter with the Indians...." (Fowler 1960: 22).
  
  

Some things it is:

• a roughly globular "T-shaped" engraving on a section of exposed bedrock.
• The engraving was made by repetitive punching, most likely with a metal punch (I think Folwer's assertion that is was a "case-hardened iron center punch" dating to the mid-18th century is as fanciful as Glynn's assertion the technique is exactly the same as used by 14th-century blacksmith making armor).
  
• The "sword blade" that extends from the "T" are actually glacial scratches (marks made by rocks dragged along under the moving ice). The surface of the entire bedrock are covered by these parallel marks, and two are located in general proximity to the "T".
  
• There are NO OTHER engravings on the bedrock: weathering of the schist, yes; glacial scratches, yes; undulations along the surface of the bedrock, yes; a nicely painted portrait of the knight and shield, yes; even a nice commemorative marble marker.
  
• Based upon environmental studies, this area would have been a hardwood forest in the 14th century, and given the currently landscape (i.e. a flat area in an upland setting) the flat bedrock would have been buried under 1-3 feet of soil. Erosion of the area may have occurred as early as the colonial period due to tree cutting and subsequent farming. Luckily though, we know that Glynn himself was responsible for removing all the soil and plants to expose the greater portion of bedrock (Glynn 1957:11).
  
• Even though I claim no expertise in 14th-century sea-faring vessels, I question whether Henry Sinclair could have sailed his four ships up "Stony Creek" to this Westford local.
  
• And also is the simple fact that the town historian has evidence that the "T" was made by two local boys in the late-19th century (although, 1. that is his story to tell and will be in the articles, and 2. it doesn't make as good of a story as 14th century Scottish lords)
  
  

Return to Doug's archaeology page