DCist T-Shirts
dcistshirt.jpg
About DCist

DCist is a website about Washington, D.C. More

Editor: Sommer Mathis Publisher: Gothamist

About | Advertising | Archive | Contact | Mobile | Photos | Staff | Subscribe

Categories
DCist Exposed Photography Show -- Feb 20-Mar 7
Favorites
Contribute

Latest tip:

There is a suspicious package being investigated near 12th and D St SW, in front of the new Homel [more]

 

Latest link:

 

Latest Photo:

 

Recent Comments
Subscribe
Use an RSS reader to stay up to date with the latest news and posts from DCist.
Overheard
Voting Rights
Public Calendar
Links

November 1, 2007

Revisiting the D.C. Boundary Stones

A DC boundary stoneUsually in our Revisiting Series, we like to talk about the monuments and memorials you pass on a regular basis; this time, by revisiting the District’s boundary stones, we thought we’d point out something you might never have even seen.

In fairness, they’re easy to miss. Of the 40 original stones, two have been lost, and the rest have been marred and eroded from sitting outside for 216 years. Some sit in no trespassing zones, some serve as target practice, and others have been decapitated by farm plows or bulldozers. Most, though, rest in front yards, woods, intersections, or parking lots, unnoticed and under appreciated.

Mark Kennedy, who runs Boundarystones.org, explained that although D.C. was not officially the capital until 1800, the first stone was laid on April 15, 1791, by a surveying crew led by Major Andrew Ellicott on a project assigned by George Washington himself. Ellicott put a stone at each mile of the “Ten Miles Square,” as D.C. was nicknamed. Starting at Jones’ Point in the south, the stones went to Falls Church (in Andrew Ellicott Park) in the West, Woodside in the North, and Bennings in the East.

Unfortunately, in 1847 the U.S. ceded land west of the Potomac back to Virginia, cutting the District by a third, and a good number of the stones were excluded from serving their original purpose. The stones became, in essence, little more than memory markers.

And yet, as we’ve seen from revisiting the Old Stone House in Georgetown, sometimes memory markers are also enjoyable time machines. At the very least, there seems to be something irresistible about these kinds of historical indicators, about the perspective their journeys through time can provide.

In 1906, Fred E. Woodward read this paper to the Columbia Historical Society, describing the “ramble” he took, along with his camera, to document the stones as they stood over a century after their installment. He found it fascinating to see how the stones had changed over time, writing 27 pages of meticulous assessment on the stones' condition: “One is worn totally smooth, another stands in the waters of the Potomac, and two lean badly.”

Woodward also mentioned that eight of the stones were tucked deep in dense woods, though “the rapid growth of building operations toward the outer limits of the District during the past two years bids fair to soon eliminate all woods.” And he just couldn’t help it: “The inspiration which comes with true communion with nature entered into our hearts here, as we searched through wooded dells over bracken fern, under oak and chestnut, with the smell of the pine in our nostrils mingled with the aroma of wild flowers.”

NW5 is one of the wooded stones he was talking about. Woodward says that NW 5 sits hidden “in the fastnesses of an ancient wood not far from the inlet of the receiving reservoir of the water supply.” Sure enough, Mark Kennedy’s web site (a 21st century Woodward paper, really) says that the stone sits on the federal property of the Dalecarlia Reservoir.

Like most of the other stones, NW5 is caged behind an iron fence put up by DAR, who was so enthralled by the monument that it took over the protection and maintenance of the stones in 1915. Despite their care, it is evident that, in Kennedy’s words, “very few have escaped vandalism.”

But in some sense, it seems fitting that humans should leave their mark on the stones; so many of the stones have been moved, even if just a few feet, from their original locations. After all, at the most basic level they are objects of nature manipulated into a certain shape and planted into a landscape by human hands. Their very purpose was to designate a human dwelling, and as we know from the District’s growth from the wooded low-density area it was in 1791 to the sprawling center it is today, humanity has filled that space and more.

Some of our other favorite stones are South, SW6, NE1, SE4, and SE8.


Photo by Ronnie R.


Email This Entry







Advertisement: DCist Continues Below!

Comments (7)

One of my friends lives within 100 feet of a boundary stone. It's pretty cool to look at, though it's quite weathered down.

 

"Unfortunately, in 1847 the U.S. ceded land west of the Potomac back to Virginia, cutting the District by a third, and a good number of the stones were excluded from serving their original purpose. The stones became, in essence, little more than memory markers."

Unfortunately for whom?

If you just mean unfortunately for people who wish the stones to still have some legal significance, then why not point out that the stones still act (for the most part) as boundary stones for Arlington County?

 

It's unfortunate for DC, who lost 1/3 of its land. This is DCist, after all.

 

I've wondered sometimes about what the development of northern virginia would have looked like had it never been retroceded to Virginia. For that matter, how would the existing District look? You could almost write a book on this topic.

 

"It's unfortunate for DC, who lost 1/3 of its land. This is DCist, after all."

Well it's debatable whether it was unfortunate for DC to lose that land. It's impossible to know what the picture would look like had it not retroceded (for instance, you could argue that the city would be better off financially had Maryland taken back the land east of the Anacostia. Similarly, who's to say that Arlington might not have also become an economic drag on Washington had it remained in the District. Much of its wealth has come as a result of the fact that it isn't in the District. So you can't just assume it would look exactly the same).

And more broadly, this site has never directed itself solely to District residents, nor should it. If something is "good" or "bad" to District residents only, it should be stated as such. And for what it's worth, this is coming from a DC resident.

 

So wait...Clarendon Ballroom isn't in DC?!? I thought it was cool, but not anymore!

 

"It's unfortunate for DC, who lost 1/3 of its land. This is DCist, after all."

You could flip that around: "Fortunately, 331,000+ residents of the retroceded areas today have Congressional representation."

I've always considered it a cruel irony that one of the rationales for VA retrocession was to protect Alexandria's (then city and county) slave trade. Yet today the VA descendents of slaves and freedmen of that time have representation, but everybody in DC is still waiting.

 
Post a comment (Comment Policy)

2003-2009 Gothamist LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use & Privacy Policy. We use MovableType.

Site Meter