Dorchester Pot

Background

The Dorchester Pot measures at around 4.5inches by 6.5inches high, and 2.5 inches in diameter, and 0.8 inches thick. This bell-shaped object is composed of a metal, which most presume to be zinc with silver overlay, with a small round opening at the top of the bell. The Dorchester Pot is adorned with decorative vines wrapping around the base and six different floral arrangements that decorate the surface of the outer surface of the bell. The decorative elements of the Dorchester Pot undoubtedly seem Victorian style in nature, and according to witnesses, it was clearly made by an extremely experienced blacksmith due to the ornate nature of Dorchester Pot. The utility and or purpose of the Dorchester Pot is unknown, with theories ranging from it being a simply ornamental object, vase, and a hookah base. Since its discovery, further research into the Dorchester Pot has been made impossible as it was lost shortly after its original discovery, leaving only a detailed drawing for reference. Today, the Dorchester Pot is occasionally referred to in articles, and websites where it is classified as an OOPArt (Out of Place Artifact)1, due to the place that it was found, and that it was supposedly not on par with the technology available during the era in which it was found.

Excavation

The Dorchester Pot was found in 1852, in Dorchester, Massachusetts. The exact date is unknown as the newspaper article which first announces the discovery of the Dorchester Pot, states that the incident took place “several days ago” [link]. Records indicate that a controlled explosion unearthed the Dorchester Pot, which was used to break up a large mass of puddingstone (this is also frequently referred to as the Roxbury Conglomerate) that was under the surface of the ground outside of the Meeting Hill House, belonging to Rev. Nathaniel Hall. According to witnesses who were present at the time that the explosion was set off, following the blast, the Dorchester Pot was discovered in two pieces, amongst the rubble from the puddingstone. While it is unknown precisely who originally found the Dorchester Pot, an article by the Boston Transcript, which makes the first-ever reference to the Dorchester Pot on June 5, 1852, mentions several notable people from the Dorchester community. Including Rev. Hall, John Kettle, Dr. J.V. C. Smith, John Doyle, and Professor Agassiz. The original article by the Boston Transcript states that following its’ discovery, the Dorchester Pot was taken to the home of John Kettle. An incredibly detailed drawing with accurate measurements was then made by Dr. J.V. C. Smith, who intended to submit it to an accredited newspaper the Scientific American so that the object could be further studied. Shortly afterward, the Dorchester Pot was lost, and its location continues to remain unknown, although there have been several people who have since claimed to either own or know the location of the Dorchester is; however, these claims remain unsubstantiated.

Post Discovery

Interestingly, the Dorchester Pot did not receive much attention at the time of its discovery, and would likely have been forgotten to history following its first official mention in the ‘'Boston Transcript’’, had it not been for the reprint of the original article in the ‘'Scientific American’',. Ironically, when the ‘'Scientific American’’ reported on the Dorchester Pot they were supposedly mocking the towns’ people and passed off the discovery as a joke. Even saying sarcastically writing, that the Dorchester Pot must have been made by Tubal Cain, a blacksmith referenced in the bible. The Dorchester Pot would not be referenced again for over seventy years, until it was brought back into the light, in 1919 by Charles Fort, with the publication of his novel ‘’The Book of the Damned’’, reawakening the publics’ interest in the Dorchester Pot. Several reports and websites have claimed that the Dorchester Pot has been studied and tested by museums and universities trying to ascertain the exact age of the pot. However, they were unsuccessful and could not establish conclusive results[Link]. Despite these claims, I can find no record or any evidence of this, nor are there any recent photographs that have been proven to be the real Dorchester Pot.

Pseudo-Archaelogical Lure

Pseudo-archaeologists have a plethora of theories as to the potential origin of the Dorchester Pot. Several of these theories are based off of the notion that the Dorchester Pot was embedded into puddingstone (this is also frequently referred to as the Roxbury Conglomerate) underneath the surface of the Meeting Hill House, which when carbon dated proved to be well over 500 million years old. Pseudo-archaeologists theorize that in order for the Dorchester Pot to have been embedded within the stone this must mean that it too was more than 500 million years old, which would date the Dorchester Pot all the way back to the Ediacaran Period. Obviously, leading to a flurry of theories on how it got there and who created it, by numerous pseudo-archaeologist.

Creationists

One of the more common theories regarding the Dorchester Pot is presented by creationists who claim that the Dorchester Pot provides proof of an ancient civilization predating the Noachian Flood. They use the imagery on the surface of the Dorchester Pot, as evidence for this theory. Specifically, the floral depictions, which they claim only existed over 500 years ago when they believe the Dorchester Pot was in fact created. Using this logic they have

Ancient Aliens

An alternate theory is that is the Dorchester Pot was evidence of an extremely skilled race of metal worker aliens, that occupied North America sometime around 600 million years ago. This theory stems from the fact that the rock that the Dorchester Pot was said to be encased in, was dated to be around 500 million years old leading them to believe the Dorchester Pot which was found inside of the rock was of the same age. However, obviously, 500 million years ago the technology to work with metal of any kind would not exist. Leading some pseudo-archaeologists to the conclusion that Earth had been visited by extraterrestrials who possessed the technology and resources to work with metal, and either intentionally or accidentally left the Dorchester Pot behind where it would be discovered millions of years later.

Lost Civilization

Some also theorize that the Dorchester Pot is evidence of a lost ancient civilization. Reasoning that it is obviously, an Out of Place Artifact (OOPArt), that would have required technology from beyond its’ time to have been constructed. Its existence is proof that there must have been a civilization of people living in North America with extraordinarily advanced technology that has since vanished.

Analysis of the Pseudo-Archaeological Narrative

The pseudo-archaeological claims surrounding the Dorchester Pot are A significant portion of the pseudo-archaeological claims are based on the results from carbon dating the rock, however, there is no proof that the Dorchester Pot was actually encased within the solid rock as they describe and there are a number of more reasonable explanations for why the Dorchester Pot could have been found around the rubble caused from the explosion and the Meeting Hill House, and absolutely evidence that the Dorchester Pot was ever encased in stone like the claims say. Within the first article about the Dorchester Pot printed by the Boston Transcript, it mentions Dr. J.V. C. Smith’s recent travels East, without naming any specific region or country. Curiously, though the depictions of the Dorchester Pot bare a striking resemblance to Indian Cigar holders. That is the exact same size and shape, with similar decorations as the Dorchester Pot, and also likely from the same region that one of the few men who were present at the time of the explosion just got back from visiting. Outside the original newspaper article by the Boston Transcript, there is no solid evidence that the Dorchester Pot ever actually existed.

References

“ Dorchester Pot.” Academic Dictionaries and Encyclopedias, https://enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/1152348#cite_note-BadArchaeology2007a-9.
Admin. “1852, May 19: The Dorchester Pot.” Anomalies: the Strange & Unexplained, 21 Jan. 2017, http://anomalyinfo.com/Stories/1852-may-19-dorchester-pot.
Burby, Tom. “Out of Place Artifact: The Story of the Dorchester Pot.” Strange New England, 21 Sept. 2015, http://www.strangenewengland.com/podcast/out-of-place-artifact-the-story-of-the-dorchester-pot/.
Crofton, Ian. History without the Boring Bits: a Curious Chronology of the World. Quercus, 2015.
“Dorchester Vase.” Genesis Park Dorchester Vase Comments, https://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/paleontological/artifacts/dorchester/.
Fitzpatrick-Matthews, Keith, and Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews. “Metallic Vase from Dorchester, Massachusetts.” Bad Archaeology, 19 Aug. 2007, http://www.badarchaeology.com/out-of-place-artefacts/very-ancient-artefacts/metallic-vase-from-dorchester-massachusetts/.
Nali. “On the Menu.” OOPArt? The Dorchester Pot - [Le Site D'Irna], https://irna.fr/OOPArt-The-Dorchester-Pot.html.
Robinson, J.P. “OOPArts Found in Coal and Stone: Is There an Explanation for These Anomalous Bells, Chains, Walls and More?” Ancient Origins, Ancient Origins, https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/ooparts-found-coal-0010767.
The Book of the Damned: By Charles Fort, https://archive.org/stream/bookdamnedbycha00fortgoog#page/n130/mode/2up.
“The Dorchester Pot: New Questions about an Old OOPART.” Jason Colavito, http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/the-dorchester-pot-new-questions-about-an-old-oopart.
“The Mysterious Dorchester Pot Found Solidly Embedded within 15 Feet of Sedimentary Rock: Out-of-Place Artifacts (OOPArt).” Of, http://thebiggestsecretsoftheworld.blogspot.com/2011/02/mysterious-dorchester-pot-oopart.html.
“The Mystery of the 500-Million-Year Old Dorchester Pot.” TRANSCEND Media Service, https://www.transcend.org/tms/2015/08/the-mystery-of-the-500-million-year-old-dorchester-pot/.