What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lost Rocks: The Dare Stones and the Unsolved Mystery of Sir Walter Raleigh's Lost Colony
What if the 1587 Lost Colony of Roanoke was not lost? What if the survivors left Roanoke Island, North Carolina and found their way to Georgia? That is the scenario scholars contemplated when a series of engraved stones were found in the 1930's. The first, found near the Chowan River in North Carolina, claimed that Eleanor Dare and six other settlers had survived a horrible Indian attack which wiped out the rest of the colony. Among the dead were Eleanor's daughter, Virginia Dare, the first English child born in North America, and Eleanor's husband Ananias. The remaining Dare Stones, more than forty in number, told a fantastic tale of how Eleanor and the survivors made their way overland, first to South Carolina, and then to Georgia. If true, North Carolina stood to lose one of its most cherished historical legends. Author David La Vere weaves the story of the Dare Stones with that of the Lost Colony of Roanoke in a tale that will fire your imagination and give you pause at the same time. In this true story that shook the world during the 1930s and early 1940s, the question on everyone's mind was: Had the greatest mystery in American history -- the Lost Colony -- finally been solved?
246 pages, Paperback
First published March 23, 2010
13 people are currently reading
101 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
June 22, 2013
The only reason I'm giving 4 stars instead of 5 stars is on account of a bit too much repetition for my taste. The background of the stones and the historical record is intertwined beautifully, giving a real historical account, alongside the discovery of the stones. Most interesting.
As to whether the original, first stone is authentic, it seems the jury is still out on that one. The possible account that jives with the account on that stone makes a lot of sense, historically speaking. It has good vibes for this reader.
The reader is kept in suspense as to the veracity of the other 40-odd stones, and unless one is aware of the outcome from the newspaper reports of the late 30's and 40's, won't be sure until near the end of the book.
Some very interesting theories are brought out with regard for the reasons that the Colony was put in such jeopardy to begin with, including the machinations of one Sir Francis Walsingham, who was Queen Elizabeth I's spymaster. These are only briefly touched upon, and are certainly worth follow up with reading on that person.
Recommended.
As to whether the original, first stone is authentic, it seems the jury is still out on that one. The possible account that jives with the account on that stone makes a lot of sense, historically speaking. It has good vibes for this reader.
The reader is kept in suspense as to the veracity of the other 40-odd stones, and unless one is aware of the outcome from the newspaper reports of the late 30's and 40's, won't be sure until near the end of the book.
Some very interesting theories are brought out with regard for the reasons that the Colony was put in such jeopardy to begin with, including the machinations of one Sir Francis Walsingham, who was Queen Elizabeth I's spymaster. These are only briefly touched upon, and are certainly worth follow up with reading on that person.
Recommended.
June 4, 2012
Caveat: these are ramblings, not a book review! These are my thoughts following a long FB thread on the same topic.
I'm just going to write out my thoughts regarding the La Vere book here in a note. I finished reading it this morning. Despite some problems, I think it is worth reading, particularly in light of the new map evidence.
Criticism: A little too much on the wishful thinking side -- totally understandable, and even the author admits this is something he has had to stay aware of. Not enough questions regarding the first stone, supposedly discovered by a (again, supposedly) retired produce/grocer from California, who was (suposedly) on a rather extended vacation in 1937. There are questions aplenty about the finder of the Chowan (first) Stone, but something I really wish La Vere would address is: why would Hammond (the grocer/finder of first stone) show up that November at Emory? Why Emory? Why any university or academic institution? An educated man, yes, probably so, but supposing Hammond was educated (and this, along with most other things about him, remains unknown), why not take the relic to a research university in NC, where the stone was found? Or, failing that, when he returned home to CA, why not take it to a university out there, say, Stanford?
Not very many people attended and graduated college in those days, so if Hammond was indeed who he said he was, a forty-year-old retired produce grocer, he was probably not a college grad. Maybe I'm making too much of an assumption here, but it seems to me that yes, a college graduate would by training be compelled to take said stone to a research university and ask for help; but, someone less educated would be far more likely to contact a museum or historical society, or even a government agency, over a university. But, if indeed he decided to contact a university, why Emory, in Atlanta, GA? Especially when he was from California and had found the stone in North Carolina.
La Vere points to the possiblity that Hammond was actually a lawyer from the Alameda, CA area, which would explain his taking it to a research university. But why Emory and not Chapel Hill, Duke, or even William and Mary, or UVA? Why do I suspect that if he had indeed concealed his true identity, was educated, with a legal background, he also had the smarts to realize it might be wise to keep the artifact out of the state where he had found it, at least initially. Emory, in taking posession of the stone, would provide a type of protection for Hammond, against possible prosecution by NC, or a demand of ownership. Furthermore, at least in the beginning, Emory did not have as much of a stake in Lost Colony artifacts, and perhaps not as tempted to tout it as authentic right away (as NC would likely have done, since the finding of the stone coincided with the premiere of "The Lost Colony" drama -- the stone would encourage and promote tourism for NC).
A brief, major digression: Our family's motor yacht, the E.K. Ellington, originally named "Romar," made the journey down the intracoastal waterway to the aforementioned premiere at Roanoke Island, with no less than a former VA governor and other hoity-toity types aboard. The 1937 premiere was a big deal. We used to have photos of this event, obtained by the son of the man who commissioned the "Romar," back in 1932, but we lost them when the boat sank in 1992.
So, I still wonder why La Vere does not pose or try to answer some of the questions concerning Hammond and Emory. Additionally, I think La Vere's writing style is accessible, but maybe too much so, though I understand he was writing for a wider audience than nit-picky historians. I also think he should have spent more time in the OED, checking on some of the words found on the first stone. The text has quite a few typos, which was disconcerting. It does not take anything from the research, but it looks slipshod, which leads to reader suspicion that other things were also slipshod. But I can't talk, my still unfinished history thesis is a mess.
I was also a little concerned with the liberties La Vere takes in portions of the text. Don't get me wrong, I love a good yarn, and it is oh so tempting to just jump on the "I believe" train and ride to the end. La Vere sets up his text thusly: Each chapter begins with the goings on of 1937 onward, but finishes with an italicized, sometimes highly speculative (though, to his credit, La Vere makes excellent use of the known primary sources, such as Herriot, Strachey, the Virginia Company, all good buds of mine over the last four years) narratives of what happened in 1587 to 1591, which is the date on the stone.
Reading the stone's inscription, front and back, I admit, I am tempted to sway. It reads and appears authentic. I, like everyone else, WANT it to be authentic. There is good reason to believe that Eleanor White Dare had at least some education and the drive to encourage a fellow, literate colonist to carve on the stone. However, who is to say (certainly our author never, ever suggests this) that Eleanor inscribed the stone herself? La Vere stubbornly insists someone else -- a male, with stonecarving ability -- did the work. I agree that likely this was so, but desperate times call for desperate measures, and if the stone is authentic, Eleanor is clearly, achingly desperate to leave a final message to her father. Through trial and error she could have taught herself how to carve the letters, all of which are "crabbed" together, have the appearance of having been carved in haste.
As I stated yesterday, I think this book is worth consideration in light of the recent evidence regarding the White map. Yes, it is true, several of the contemporary sources suggest that at least some of the lost colonists ventured to the Chowan River area, but the status quo for most of the past 400 years has been -- CROATOAN (Hatteras); or, the possibility that the colonists went north and settled with the Chesepian Indians near today's Virginia Beach. If the Chowan Stone was created in the 20th century, the forger would need to know a good bit about the primary sources associated with the Lost Colony and Jamestown, and at least a passing familiarity with the English language of the period.
And that leads to another of my frustrations with this book and the story -- the author accepts "Hammond's" story that he found the stone off of Hwy 17 (an aside: does anyone know if that loathsome stretch of highway from Va leading to the NC border was ever turned into a four-lane? It was something of a death trap in the 80s) without much question. True, when Hammond was taken back to the purported site, he was very vague about the specific location, but having driven all over the country and the passage of years, that is somewhat understandable. Still, we have only his word that he found it where he said he did. That is all we have, but is it really enough? Thankfully, with the discovery on the White map, digs are being arranged at possible colony/indian village sites in the Edenton, NC area (which is a beautiful place!). I suppose that the scandal of the other 47 stones so tainted the possibilities held within the first, that no one has pursued archaeological research until now.
Very thankful and excited for and about the new evidence. Now we must wait (some more) and see.
I'm just going to write out my thoughts regarding the La Vere book here in a note. I finished reading it this morning. Despite some problems, I think it is worth reading, particularly in light of the new map evidence.
Criticism: A little too much on the wishful thinking side -- totally understandable, and even the author admits this is something he has had to stay aware of. Not enough questions regarding the first stone, supposedly discovered by a (again, supposedly) retired produce/grocer from California, who was (suposedly) on a rather extended vacation in 1937. There are questions aplenty about the finder of the Chowan (first) Stone, but something I really wish La Vere would address is: why would Hammond (the grocer/finder of first stone) show up that November at Emory? Why Emory? Why any university or academic institution? An educated man, yes, probably so, but supposing Hammond was educated (and this, along with most other things about him, remains unknown), why not take the relic to a research university in NC, where the stone was found? Or, failing that, when he returned home to CA, why not take it to a university out there, say, Stanford?
Not very many people attended and graduated college in those days, so if Hammond was indeed who he said he was, a forty-year-old retired produce grocer, he was probably not a college grad. Maybe I'm making too much of an assumption here, but it seems to me that yes, a college graduate would by training be compelled to take said stone to a research university and ask for help; but, someone less educated would be far more likely to contact a museum or historical society, or even a government agency, over a university. But, if indeed he decided to contact a university, why Emory, in Atlanta, GA? Especially when he was from California and had found the stone in North Carolina.
La Vere points to the possiblity that Hammond was actually a lawyer from the Alameda, CA area, which would explain his taking it to a research university. But why Emory and not Chapel Hill, Duke, or even William and Mary, or UVA? Why do I suspect that if he had indeed concealed his true identity, was educated, with a legal background, he also had the smarts to realize it might be wise to keep the artifact out of the state where he had found it, at least initially. Emory, in taking posession of the stone, would provide a type of protection for Hammond, against possible prosecution by NC, or a demand of ownership. Furthermore, at least in the beginning, Emory did not have as much of a stake in Lost Colony artifacts, and perhaps not as tempted to tout it as authentic right away (as NC would likely have done, since the finding of the stone coincided with the premiere of "The Lost Colony" drama -- the stone would encourage and promote tourism for NC).
A brief, major digression: Our family's motor yacht, the E.K. Ellington, originally named "Romar," made the journey down the intracoastal waterway to the aforementioned premiere at Roanoke Island, with no less than a former VA governor and other hoity-toity types aboard. The 1937 premiere was a big deal. We used to have photos of this event, obtained by the son of the man who commissioned the "Romar," back in 1932, but we lost them when the boat sank in 1992.
So, I still wonder why La Vere does not pose or try to answer some of the questions concerning Hammond and Emory. Additionally, I think La Vere's writing style is accessible, but maybe too much so, though I understand he was writing for a wider audience than nit-picky historians. I also think he should have spent more time in the OED, checking on some of the words found on the first stone. The text has quite a few typos, which was disconcerting. It does not take anything from the research, but it looks slipshod, which leads to reader suspicion that other things were also slipshod. But I can't talk, my still unfinished history thesis is a mess.
I was also a little concerned with the liberties La Vere takes in portions of the text. Don't get me wrong, I love a good yarn, and it is oh so tempting to just jump on the "I believe" train and ride to the end. La Vere sets up his text thusly: Each chapter begins with the goings on of 1937 onward, but finishes with an italicized, sometimes highly speculative (though, to his credit, La Vere makes excellent use of the known primary sources, such as Herriot, Strachey, the Virginia Company, all good buds of mine over the last four years) narratives of what happened in 1587 to 1591, which is the date on the stone.
Reading the stone's inscription, front and back, I admit, I am tempted to sway. It reads and appears authentic. I, like everyone else, WANT it to be authentic. There is good reason to believe that Eleanor White Dare had at least some education and the drive to encourage a fellow, literate colonist to carve on the stone. However, who is to say (certainly our author never, ever suggests this) that Eleanor inscribed the stone herself? La Vere stubbornly insists someone else -- a male, with stonecarving ability -- did the work. I agree that likely this was so, but desperate times call for desperate measures, and if the stone is authentic, Eleanor is clearly, achingly desperate to leave a final message to her father. Through trial and error she could have taught herself how to carve the letters, all of which are "crabbed" together, have the appearance of having been carved in haste.
As I stated yesterday, I think this book is worth consideration in light of the recent evidence regarding the White map. Yes, it is true, several of the contemporary sources suggest that at least some of the lost colonists ventured to the Chowan River area, but the status quo for most of the past 400 years has been -- CROATOAN (Hatteras); or, the possibility that the colonists went north and settled with the Chesepian Indians near today's Virginia Beach. If the Chowan Stone was created in the 20th century, the forger would need to know a good bit about the primary sources associated with the Lost Colony and Jamestown, and at least a passing familiarity with the English language of the period.
And that leads to another of my frustrations with this book and the story -- the author accepts "Hammond's" story that he found the stone off of Hwy 17 (an aside: does anyone know if that loathsome stretch of highway from Va leading to the NC border was ever turned into a four-lane? It was something of a death trap in the 80s) without much question. True, when Hammond was taken back to the purported site, he was very vague about the specific location, but having driven all over the country and the passage of years, that is somewhat understandable. Still, we have only his word that he found it where he said he did. That is all we have, but is it really enough? Thankfully, with the discovery on the White map, digs are being arranged at possible colony/indian village sites in the Edenton, NC area (which is a beautiful place!). I suppose that the scandal of the other 47 stones so tainted the possibilities held within the first, that no one has pursued archaeological research until now.
Very thankful and excited for and about the new evidence. Now we must wait (some more) and see.
December 20, 2018
This is one of very few books on the Dare Stones, an sideline to what may be the greatest mysteries in American history - the disappearance of the Roanoke Colony. The Dare Stones were either an amazing discovery that solved the mystery, a hoax, or a little bit of both. This book has information that you can not find easily elsewhere, proving beyond little doubt that most of the stones were a hoax. Yet, the possibility that one at least is genuine, leaves the reader with their own decision to make.
I found this book to be pretty well written. The one thing I did not like is that the author included a history of the Roanoke Colony, but he interspersed it throughout the chapters about the Dare Stones. Perhaps they were supposed to tie together in some metaphorical way? I found it to just be confusing. Better to have the whole story in chronological order.
I found this book to be pretty well written. The one thing I did not like is that the author included a history of the Roanoke Colony, but he interspersed it throughout the chapters about the Dare Stones. Perhaps they were supposed to tie together in some metaphorical way? I found it to just be confusing. Better to have the whole story in chronological order.
August 2, 2022
A treatise on the stones allegedly found in the 1930s that purported to be written by Eleanor White Dare to her father telling him what happened to the lost colony of Roanoke Island around the turn of the 17th century. An easier read and more of an analysis of how the professor at Emory University was duped by con men who claimed they found the stones. While the later stones are generally taken to be frauds, the first stone still has not been proven or disproven.
April 2, 2019
This goes from intriguing to tedious at times, but an interesting theory. I gotta call b.s. The academics seriously believed one person found 30+ carved (supposedly 400 years ago) stones from NC to GA. Naaah, man.
July 7, 2012
In 1584 (36 years before the Mayflower) 117 English colonists arrived on the shores of North Carolina. Three years later their leader sailed back to England for supplies - when he returned the colonists had disappeared. Alien abduction, or America's first murder mystery? The plot thickens in the height of the great depression, when a California tourist stepped off Rt. 17 near Edenton to answer nature's call, and discovered a stone reading "Ananais Dare + Virginia went hence into heaven 1591." The story captivated the nation, and additional stones kept turning up through South Carolina & Georgia. Emory University was interested, Barnum & Bailey was interested, and my grandad's cousin, Cecil Blount DeMille wanted the movie rights. Things went pretty well - until the number of stones turning up, and the inscriptions on them just got to be --- too much!
The book is fascinating, well-researched, and easy to read. A good choice for your Outer banks vacation reading.
The book is fascinating, well-researched, and easy to read. A good choice for your Outer banks vacation reading.
December 26, 2015
I saw a show on the History channel about the Dare Rocks and it piqued my interest as an avid early American history junkie.
The book is well researched. I liked the way the book alternated a chapter about the rocks and then one from the actual time period.
Highly recommend reading this if the reader has a concept of the history.
The book is well researched. I liked the way the book alternated a chapter about the rocks and then one from the actual time period.
Highly recommend reading this if the reader has a concept of the history.
February 17, 2013
extremely interesting!!
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews