The
Bayer’s Lake Mystery Wall
(Bayer’s
lake historic site BeCv)
The
Bayers Lake Mystery Wall site is located on the south side of Geyzer Hill in the
Bayers Lake business park. The site lies just off Lovett Lake Court and is easily
accessible from the road. Jack McNabb first reported the wall structure in the
1990’s. A report prepared by CRM for the Halifax regional municipality was completed
in August 2006, along with other studies including archeological surveys by
Saint Mary’s University. Before making any hasty conclusions as to the sites
purpose, it is important to keep in mind that the site is not protected. It is
unknown the amount of times it has been visited, altered, reconstructed or
vandalised. Due to its proximity to the city and people, surely it has been
altered to some degree.
When
we first arrived at the site and saw the five-sided structure, I immediately realised
that the site’s history would be difficult to unravel without the help of archival
records. Other than the fact that the site may have been constantly disturbed, the
site is built at the top of a steep hill made of sheer bedrock. This makes the
preservation of artifacts more problematic. In fact, previous archeological
surveys have not yielded any artifacts related to the sites original purpose (Sanders
& Stewart, 2006).
My
first impression of the structure was the location
is odd and the construction method does not appear to serve any domestic
purpose, but possibly more of a military purpose.
The
Location
Dry-stone walls and structures are a common sight in
landscapes across the world. Farmers often move rocks around for agricultural
purposes, to outline their properties or even to build structures. These types
of structures can be informal and not always appearing on official property records
or maps. Simple domestic purposes are the most common reasons for these types
of structures construction. But during my initial observation of the site, it
was obvious that this hill had very few opportunities for agriculture or
raising livestock, and so cannot be explained as a simple domestic site. The
dry-stone wall follows a winding path over the surrounding natural cliff and
does not seem to serve as a regular property divider. The CRM report has not
uncovered any known property lines or farms that coincide with the location of
the wall. The wall itself does not appear to have ever completely enclosed the
site, and so would not work to hold animals.
Upon
arriving at the five-sided structure, the first thing you notice is the view.
The location on top of the hill offers an imposing view over Bayers Lake. Even
with the trees that have grown in the way, the view spans from the industrial
park to First Lake, Second Lake and even Long Lake. This location would be particularly
ideal for defensive purposes. The surrounding cliffs offer a natural defensive
feature, slightly enhanced by the construction of the wall. The wall is built on
the south side of the hill, offering a defence from the mainland.
The
Construction
The structure itself is not big,
1.25 metres tall and 1.30 metres thick (Sanders & Stewart, 2006). At first
glance, it appeared as though it could have been used as a foundation for some
sort of platform that may have been built on top of it; or simply that it was
meant to be a stone structure, but was never finished. This is a dry wall
construction meaning that no mortar was used in its construction. Naturally,
the walls have to be thicker than one with mortar to stay up. If the stones did
support some sort of structure at some point, we would expect that there would remain
material evidence of the structure like nails, supporting beams or joints in
the wall meant to hold the floor in place. Also, if the site were used for
domestic purposes, there would most likely be some remnants we humans typically
leave behind. This is simply not the case. The CRM report mentions a variety of
test pits that have been done at the site but none of them have uncovered any
materials normally associated with the existence of a platform, or any other
structure superimposing the stone structure. Nor has the archeological surveys produced
any artifacts hinting to a prolonged domestic habitation. Many other things
such as glass, bullets and other modern items were found. This only shows that
the site was often visited by a variety of people and for a wide variety of
reasons since its construction.
The
building itself is built on top of a slanted piece of bedrock, making the floor
of the structure uneven. If the structure did not intend to ever support a
platform, it is safe to say that its floor does not appear to be very
comfortable. Whoever decided to build it in this location was clearly more
concerned with practicality and location rather than comfort. 
The
five-sided building has three interesting features. The fact that it is
five-sided is strange in itself, but there is also an entrance and a fully
enclosed stone box inside the building. Having an entrance included in its
design makes it unlikely as being designed as a foundation, although the stone
box enclosure inside the building does resemble a cellar, where food could be
kept cool. In my opinion, it could also serve as a powder magazine. Ammunition
in the 18th century was highly dangerous for both your enemy and
yourself due to its flammability. Ammunition
needs to be kept dry, secure and close. During battle, the ammunition can
explode and cause casualties to its own troops; even a mere spark from a nearby
rickshaw bullet can spell disaster for a group of surrounding soldiers. This
stone box could serve as a perfect location to keep ammunition secure; it also
serves to deflect the blast in case of an accidental ignition.
Also
mentioned in the CRM report, a lichenologist who studied the site came to the
conclusion that the rocks used to build the structures, had not been disturbed
for at least 200 years. This fact cannot be ignored and would eliminate many
other possibilities of a modern construction such as the possibility that
someone, or a group of people had decided to build these structures for no real
purpose. It was suggested during our visit that hikers could have possibly
built up the structures over time, placing one stone at the time every time
someone went up there on a hike. Although this has happened in other areas,
this is most likely not the case since it contradicts the lichenologist’s
findings and that this area was ever a travel destination.
The
history of Halifax is generally well documented and most military and land
appropriations are well known. The fact that this site is not mentioned in any
military document, map or land record makes it seem unusual for a military
site.
Although
there is no mention of a defensive position in records, it is common for a
military commander to take defensive matters into his own hands. If a unit is
posted in an unfriendly location for an extended period of time, they often
begin building themselves some form of defence. These often do not make it to
official records. Also, if the post was abandoned before completion then it
could have gone unrecorded.
Roy Bird Cook compiled a list of
fortresses found in West Virginia. The fortresses range in dates from 1719 to
1795. Some of the forts described resemble the fort at our site.
“The defenses of the frontier may be
classified into three general groups. First, the fort, which was the strongest
type of a fortress, and generally but not always erected under the direction of
the Executive Council of the State, and garrisoned in like manner. Second, the
stockade, which was usually a large log house with a palisade around it,
embracing enough ground to shelter several families in time of need. Third, the
blockhouse, which was to be found of several types. Some had a second story,
overhung, and others simply had provision made for rifle defense” (Bird Cook, 2013).
He
mentions that not all blockhouses were constructed with a second story but that
they could simply be installations built to enhance a rifle defence. The lack
of artifacts connected to military or domestic purposes is an indication in
itself. Perhaps the site was never finished, was purely temporary installation
used for training or perhaps even the domestic occupants of the site were simply
obsessive compulsive cleaners.
History
The
CRM report mentions that in 1751, defences were placed across the neck of the
Halifax peninsula. From the northwest arm to Fairview, blockhouses were
constructed to defend the patrol route (Bird Cook, 2013). These defenses were
needed to protect the town of Halifax from the French and their native allies.
During this period, there were many skirmishes happening between the English, French
and the natives who inhabit the region. This series of blockhouses is depicted
in Map 1, made in 1759.
Map 1: Halifax Harbour (Wilson, 2013)
It is reasonable to belive that 1751,
during the efforts to secure Halifax peninsula, represents the earlyest date
within the spectrum of time possible for the sites construction. It is not
uncommon for the military to establish forward observation points ahead of the
actual line that are reasonably well defended in order to warn the line of
incoming danger and to act as a buffer to slow the danger down. The site is at
a comfortable distance ahead from the main line to the nearest set of cliffs.
Map 2: Halifax Harbour (Greenway Maps, n.d.)
It is mentioned in the CRM report
that quarries were found here and there in close proximity to the site. Some of
the stones chipped away from the quarries were probably even used in the
construction of the wall (Sanders & Stewart, 2006). Map 2 shows many quarry sites in
the area surrounding chocolate lake, and
makeshift roads leading towards the mystery wall site. After 1758-1760 after
the defeat of the French fort of Louisbourg, tensions diminished and people
were more free to expand beyond the safety of the Halifax peninsula defensive
line.
In 1757,
the government decided to build an important route that would connect Halifax
and Lunenburg by land (Sanders & Stewart, 2006). This route could have
passed near the mystery wall site in order to circumnavigate the inhabitants of
Dutch village who did not want to be connected to Halifax by road (Sanders
& Stewart, 2006).
Map 3: Penn Block Houses (Landry, 1999)
Map
3 shows the defensive line with the blockhouses extending from the Northwest Arm
to the Bedford Basin. The map does not encompass the mystery wall site but does
show the Dutch Land Grants to the west dated 1763. At this time, development
has already begun to sprawl beyond the limits of the Halifax peninsula
rendering the defensive line pretty much useless. The defensive line cannot
protect the vital assets and populations that now exist beyond this line. This
is a possible motive for the construction of forward observation posts. As
development expands faster than anticipated, defences quickly become outdated.
I
believe this represents the latest possible date for the construction of the
mystery wall, built approximately from 1751 to 1763. The site is most likely a
military forward observation point built around the year 1757 by the English
soldiers tasked to defend the population of Halifax and its surroundings.
During this period, they were anticipating possible hostilities from the French
due to the impending attack on Fort Louisbourg. The post would have also served
the purpose to protect the inhabitants and quarry and lumber industries during
the rapid expansion of Halifax. As tensions with the French and natives
decreased after the capture of Fort Louisbourg, and the expansion extending
beyond this point, the post was quickly abandoned and forever left behind.
References
Bird Cook, R. (2013). Virginia Frontier Defences 1719-1795. West Virginia Archives and
History. Retrieved from: http://www.wvculture.org/history/journal_wvh/wvh1-2-4.html
Greenway Maps. (n.d.). HUGA webpage. Retrieved from: http://www.halifaxurbangreenway.org/maps/halifax2.gif
Landry, P.
(1999). Introduction To The Early History of Nova Scotia (Acadia). Retrieved
from: http://www.blupete.com/Hist/NovaScotiaBk1/Part5/Maps/PennBlockHouses.htm
Sanders, M. & Stewart, W.B. (2006). Bayers Lake Historic Site, BeCv-9, Bayers
Lake Business Park, Archaeological Screening. CRM Group Project
Number:2006-0008. Cultural Resource Management Group Limited (Halifax).
Wilson, A. (2013). Document 2: Woods and Lakes. Retrieved from:
http://recallingyourpresencewhilecallingyourname.com/
