02/08/2026.
This essay is a deep dive looking at the "Hill Forts" east of the Newark Earthworks. While they've been called "Hill Forts", that is probably not what they were used for, since they're really not well-defined for defense. Anyways, the Salisbury brothers (and most others), called them that in the early- to mid-1800s. These days we tend to prefer calling them hilltop enclosures, but the names (and the numbering) still stick around.
It is more likely, as far as I can tell, that they were special places of worship of some sort, since they appear open to the sky on top of, well, hilltops.
Hill Fort #1.
I am aware of two different early depictions of the first Hill Top ("Hill Fort #1") I am going to discuss. One if from the Salisbury brothers, and the other is by Charles Whittlesey. The enclosure is atop what these days we Newark Earthworks afficionados call "Salisbury Hill". However, there are recent mountain biking trails that have been laid out there (offically Forry Preserve as part of the Heath Park System), and they call it "Star Hill" (see this Central Ohio Mountain Biking Organization" webpage), supposedly named for a Christmas star that erected there every year, though Jeff Gill says that the star was on Horn's Hill, not here. The original name was Cochrane Hill, named for an early landowner.
Here is the Salisbury Map (Romain and Burks, 2008: 11).
It shows the hill as droplet-shaped, with its point about 20° to the east of north. You can also see a circular enclosure with a central mound.
The other early depiction comes from Charles Whittlesey in 1852 (Whittlesey 1852: Plate V, no. 4). While he does not show a tear-drop shape, that would not be expected, since he is really only showing just the top of the hill.
The first thing I notice is that these guys cannot agree on which way is north. Right now, though, I'd like to focus just a bit on the inset, which shows what was done to create the enclosure. Here, I've separated out and redrawn that cross-section.
It looks pretty clear that the enclosure was constructed by excavating soil along the down-slope and then piling it up on either side of that slope.
This is what the 2019 LiDAR data relief map shows.
Note that this data was taken before most of the mountain biking trails were put in, so they (mostly) do not show up. (Some mountain bikers were already using the existing hiking trails, though, so you might spot those.) However, as you can see, there was a road leading up from the southwestern base of the hill, and another one leading around the northeastern tip.
I'd also like to add that, while Salisbury and Whittlesey did not agree on north, they didn't even seems to know which way was north. This is rather surprising for Whittlesey, since he was an accomplished surveyor and created many of the other surveys of the Newark Earthworks we are familiar with. All I can figure is that he (and the Salisburys, for that matter) did just a simple expedition (without a compass) when he came to Salisbury Hill to map it.
We can see that a remnant of the central burial mound still exist. However, I've been up there and can report that one of the mountain bike trails traverses over the top of it, providing, I assume, the thrill of biking a bump.
But what can we say about the enclosure—does it remain? If we look at the Whittlesey picture, I think we can say that yes, it does, and quite faithfully. It even looks like the road borrowed part of the enclosure for a sort distance, but other than that, the enclosure is still preserved. Having been up there, I can say that, particularly where it meets the road, it is quite easy to see. (That said, yet again, a mountain bike trail is now newly "borrowing" part of its path for the thrill of the bump.)
Here's what I get when I try to overlay the Whittlesey map over the LiDAR. It required only very minor adjustments.
This looks like a nice fit. You can also see an earlier essay I wrote about Salisbury Hill at Up on Salisbury Hill. In that essay, I note how the spine of Salisbury Hill very closely aligns with the axis of the Octagon, which aligns with the northernmost moonrise at the Major Standstill. The red line is that axis.
Hill Fort #2.
The hill that "Hill Fort #2" sits on can barely be called a "hill". At best, it is a high spot along a ridge that lies to the south and east of Salisbury Hill. Much of that ridge is now covered by the River Oaks subdivision. The one bright spot about the current situation is that the burial mound that was part of Hill Fort #2 is now preserved with its own special lot, owned by an Archaeological Conservancy.
This LiDAR map shows that ridge along with Salisbury Hill. This map is at half the scale of the previous Salisbury Hill map.
I've marked the location of the burial mound and the Forry Preserve maintenence area. LiDAR also shows us the road that was laid out for the subdivision, and some of the lots. The high point ("Primary Peak") on the ridge marked "C" is about 40 feet higher than Salisbury Hill. Just below it is a small rise marked "D" ("Secondary Peak"). The high point near (but omitting) the burial mound is about 6 feet lower than Salisbury Hill. The high point along the ridge marked "A" is pretty much level with Salisbury Hill.
Here is the Salisbury map of Hill Fort #2.
It shows an inner raised (about 3 feet) earthwork (a) with gap (g), an inner ditch (b) just within another low raised earthwork (d), and an outer raised earthwork (c) with gap (e) surrounding it all. The burial mound (f) has been worked around. It is suggested that the circular earthworks are Adena, with the burial mound being a later addition. (Lepper 2010: 106)
I don't know how much of this diagram to trust, particularly given the Salisburys' rendering of the enclosure on top of Salisbury Hill. After all, it showed the Salisbury Hill enclosure as very close to a circle, but it wasn't. Can we even trust the arrow in this picture really points to north? I don't know.
Also, is that (exclusively) what Adena circles look like? This is a portion of the Salisbury Map of the Newark Earthworks.
I see a bunch of circular earthworks all along the eastern corridor. (That's the Fairlawn Circle in the upper left.) I don't see anybody claiming that these are Adena earthworks that were there before the corridor was made during Hopewell times. There may be some critical difference that I am unaware of.
So, now let me try to place Hill Fort #2. We know that the radius of the outer circle is close to 289 feet. So, we can scale it and see what happens when we overlay it onto the relief map.
Fortunately, the mound (outlined in red) gives a good location for the entire earthwork, and then we only have to worry about its orientation—does it need to be rotated? There are a few checks that we can make on that. To do so, I will take a look at another hilltop enclosure documented by the Salisburys: the so-called Moore-Coulter enclosure (named, unsurprisingly, after early land-owners). It is located between the Taft Reserve (Licking County Park System, which contains the Tippett Mound) and Flint Ridge. Here are images:
The image on the left comes from Cyrus Thomas (Thomas 1890: 468) and the one on the right comes from the Salisburys. I am always intrigued by the fact that two different reputable sources can be so different. Cyrus Thomas documents only a single gap, and says that the entrance is flanked by mounds. The Salisbury image has three (maybe 4?) gaps, and a fairly large circular mound in the center. So, what's right?
We can look at current LiDAR.
The Salisburys' drawing looks to be the more accurate. One thing we can clearly see are three gaps, and the gaps line up with the three ridges that intersect at that point. And if we squint just right, maybe we can even see the remains of a central circular mound in the middle.
Another thing we can do is add topographic lines on top. Here, I've highlighted the enclosure in blue, and then put the lines on top. They are spaced at 3 foot elevation differences.
I think there are 3 noticeable things here:
- The ridge to the west shows up better.
- This emphasizes how making gaps towards the ridges was something of importance.
- The enclosure lines make a decent attempt to follow topographic (that is, level) lines.
So, what if we add those topographic lines to our Hill Fort #2 overlay and take a closer look? (Here the topo lines are at 2-foot elevations.)
So, when I look at this, I see that the gap opens up along the ridge line at that point, and I see that the circle does a pretty good job of following the topographic lines (as much as the topography allows). Trying to rotate the image while keeping the burial mound in place improves nothing. Thus, I think the placement and orientation is pretty good.
Alignments?
Here's where things get weird.
Back in my Chimney Rock essay, I noted that, not only does the spine of Salisbury Hill align with the Octagon, that is, the northernmost moonrise at the Major Standstill, the northernmost moonset from Hill Fort #2 aligns with the angle of Raccoon Valley, and ends at Alligator Mound. In addition, those same azimuths from the top of Salisbury Hill and from the top of Geller Hill, fairly closely delineate the edges of Raccoon Valley.
It appears that the high point of the ridge heading off to the northeast of Hill Fort #2 also aligns with that northernmost moonrise. Check this out.
In the following, the two red lines heading off to the northeast align with the northernmost moonrise at the Major Standstill. The red line heading off to the northwest aligns with Raccoon Valley, and terminates at Alligator Mound. (Also note that the promontory that Hill Fort #2 sits on already is pointing that way.) The pink line starts at the burial mound atop Salisbury Hill and heads southeast along the southernmost moonrise at the Major Standstill, so the full span of the Major Standstill moonrises are encompassed from there. And finally, the orange line passes over the secondary peak along that ridge containing Hill Fort #2, and aligns with northern moonrise at the Minor Standstill.
Let me reinforce that by showing the views from, first, the center of the circles on Hill Fort #2, and, second, that burial mound on Salisbury Hill.
This graph shows the horizon from the center of Hill Fort #2, looking to the northeast. It needs a bit of explanation.
First, I'm calling that ridge "Ronan Ridge", using the name of an early landowner. While the Primary Peak and Secondary Peak are on land owned by A. Coffman, the Coffman name is already used for Coffman Knob to the east. But Jame Ronan owned the part of the ridge containing Hill Fort #2, and continuing to the southwest. So I'll use that.
More importantly, the graph shows two main pieces of information. The blue line shows the horizon seen from the center of Hill Fort #2. Be warned: the vertical scale (on the right) is about 35 times the horizonal scale—this really exaggerates the topographic relief. The red line shows the distance, in feet, of the horizon in that direction, and uses the scale on the left.
So, for azimuths from 0° to about 44°, the horizon consists of the distant hills across the Licking River to the north. But then, at 44°, the rising Ronan Ridge blocks the far horizon, and continues to do so all the way to the southeast, with the exception of a tiny "window" around 88°. Note that from this location, the Secondary Peak appears to be higher than the Primary Peak; this is because it is quite a bit closer than the Primary Peak, and thereby takes up more of the field of view.
Salisbury Hill sits to the north (0°). While the horizon is off in the distance, those looking in that direction will be able to see Ronan Ridge in the foreground. This picture/graph shows that (again, with the horrendous vertical exaggeration). And that peak showing through the "window" is Coffman Knob itself.
Remember how I said that the Primary Peak aligns with the northernmost moonrise at the Major Standstill (red line 2 figures ago) and that the Secondary Peak aligns with the northernmost moonrise at the Minor Standstill? Well, here is what those moonrises would look like. This graphic has no vertical exaggeration (so this is what they really would have seen). (Also note that I have decreased the width so that it only covers azimuths from 48° to 78°.) The location of the moon as it rises is shown (dark) below the horizon and (bright) above. It's not dramatic, but it's definitely visible.
Now let me move to the burial mound atop Salisbury Hill. In this graphic, I've used the same format as before: exaggerated vertical scale, blue line for the horizon, red line for the distance to the visual horizon. The view sweeps from due east (90°) to due south (180°)
I think it speaks for itself.
Coincidences?
At this point, you should be saying, "Oh, c'mon! This all just seems too coincidental." My answer is, "Oh, c'mon! This all just seems too coincidental!" I'm not sure just what to believe. Let me retreat to what I wrote about in Chimney Rock.
Just as for Chimney Rock, what we are seeing here are, at heart, astronomical/geographical coincidences. To remind you about Chimney Rock, were have an alignment with the northernmost moonrise at the Major Standstill that uses two sentinal rocks, Chimney Rock and Companion Rock, located about 860 feet along a ridge, combined with an elevation change, that provides a view of the alignment from a Pueblo at a different location along that same ridge.
Considering the size of the earth and all the geological landforms, I guess this is not all that unexpected. The genius of the Chimney Rock people (Chacoan Culture) was recognizing the alignment associated with the geographical situation. The existence of the Pueblo shows us that they recognized that alignment between the moon and the geography.
As I wrote earlier, the location of the Newark Earthworks contains a similar astronomical/geographical situation. We have Salisbury Hill aligning with the northernmost Major Standstill moonrise, and Raccoon Valley (with Salisbury Hill, Geller Hill, and the Promontory on Ronan Ridge) aligning with the corresponding moonset. As I said there, I think there is a very good chance that the Indigenous Peoples of the area recognized these extraordinary astronomical/geographical coincidences (just as the Chacoan Peoples did in their location). I suggest that this is why the Newark Earthworks are here.
Now, it appears that Ronan Ridge may also have been recognized in the same fashion (magnifying the extent of the geographical coincidence). I would like to suggest that the location of the burial mound atop Salisbury Hill and the location of Hill Fort #2 could be evidence of their recognition of the astronomical import, with Hill Fort #2 doing double duty for Raccoon Valley and Ronan Ridge.
One thing that does bother me, though, is the incongruity of the type of earthwork on the Hill Fort #2 Promontory; it's fancier than the Moore-Coulter or the Salisbury Hill hilltop enclosures. I don't know what that means, if anything. However, I also want to point out that, with the earthworks there being only about 3 feet high, they would not encumber the views from that location.
One other possibility I would like to get out there: These geographical alignments date from the time of the retreat of the Wisconsinan glaciers; the last glaciers left Ohio 13,000 years ago. That's a long time. This location could have been recognized as special before the time of the Hopewell Culture, and then it was the Indigenous Peoples of the Hopewell Culture that developed long-time lore about the association into full expression with the Newark Earthworks.
A Final Puzzle.
This is probably unrelated to the alignments, but on LiDAR, I note the following "feature" on the Primary Peak:
This area used to be an orchard and as far as I can tell, was never an industrial location. I've found no indication that this was some sort of mine, or when this "feature" might have appeared. The depression is about 4 feet deep.
References
Lepper 2010.
"The Ceremonial Landscape of the Newark Earthworks and the Raccoon Creek Valley", by Bradley T. Lepper. Chapter 4 in Hopewell Settlement Patterns, Subsistence, and Symbolic Landscapes, Ed. A. Martin Byers and DeeAnne Wymer.
Romain and Burks 2008.
"Lidar Assessment of the Newark Earthworks", by William F. Romain and Jarrod Burks (2008). Current Research in Ohio Archaeology 2008.
Thomas 1890.
Report on the Mound Explorations of the BureaU of Ethnology, by Cyrus Thomas. Twelfth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1890-91.
Whittlesey 1852.
Description of Ancient Works in Ohio, by Charle Whittlesey (1852). Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, Vol. III.