This work began with a simple inquiry into the possibility that there is order to the placing of the ground markers (surface features) on Oak Island - that the Rocks and Triangles etc. had not been placed where found merely on some strange whim of the originator. The expectation, of course, was that their placing had a purpose, and that purpose might be revealed from an understanding of the manner in which the locations of the ground markers were determined.
I believe I have identified one such schema That is to say, I have developed a structured ground plan that fits all reported observations about the placing of the surface features at the east end of the island. I would have liked to have seen the plan tested on the ground, although this may be difficult now all the markers have been removed and their precise locations are unrecorded. However, my hope is that a survey based on the ground plan I suggest might reveal signs of the originator's passing. It is also possible that the results of a survey may reveal ways in which this ground plan might be modified and improved upon.
This was my first aim, to see this hypothesis tested, now highly unlikely. However, the development of the ground plan also revealed a number of strange coincidences. Certain numbers, associated with a so-called treasure map of dubious provenance, appeared in the geometry. While I initially dismissed this as sheer coincidence, I was nevertheless prompted to investigate further, indeed, to take the discovery to its logical conclusion. After all, if I didn't do so, someone else might! The results were surprising, and I still feel unable to eliminate completely the hypothesis that these so-called Captain Kidd treasure maps might apply to Oak Island - despite all suggestions to the contrary.
My work, of course, proves nothing - other than that it's possible to do what I have done. However, I believe there are here two hypotheses capable of test - and also feel that these should ideally be considered separately. The first suggests that there could be a precise geometrically designed ground plan to the island. The second is that this plan might assist in identifying the location of the Oak Island deposit. In this respect, I should have liked to see the ground plan checked out and the hypothesis developed further, were this consistent with the results of a survey.
Currently, I see no way to test the second hypothesis other than to check if there is any sign on the ground suggesting it might be the case. Such a test can only look for encouraging signs. I have taken this hypothesis as far as I am currently prepared to conjecture, and suggest that a specific spot on the island is presently indicated. However, I am well aware that, without testing, one spot on the island is as good as any other.
Thus, the work presented here provides an outline of the development of these two hypotheses, the first of which, I suggest, is a viable working hypothesis capable of test. The second hypothesis can, of course, be tested by digging. However, Oak Island has ever shown contempt for speculative excavation.
The Kidd Angle
The publication of this potential approach to investigation into the Oak Island mystery has, in a sense, been prompted by recent claims by a number of people to have the distinction of being first to have solved the so-called treasure maps of Captain William Kidd. It will be appreciated that, with no confirmation as yet, this claim is still open to all comers!
I have therefore decided the time is right to publish an outline of my work, partly to protect the investment of a great deal of time, money and effort on my part. The other possibility is that publication of my findings might help others in their search, even if only to prevent them spending valuable research time covering the same ground. Although my books on the Kidd maps and Oak Island are more or less complete, I feel that more investigation is required, and the full extent of the inquiry will not be ready for publication for some while yet.
I am well aware of the danger of publishing a hypothesis before it has been tested, but feel that, in the light of past disappointments and recent developments (the potential sale of the island), no opportunity to test it myself is likely to be forthcoming.
This document provides an overview of the main elements of the work. It shows, essentially, what I see to be the possible answer to a mystery of Oak Island, though not necessarily the mystery. At the least, I had thought it might provide those operating on the island with a number of possibilities.
I believe this work may provide an insight into, if not the the solution to, something that has intrigued and mystified the world for a considerable time. What you see here is the answer to something - be it part of the Oak Island hoax or the Oak Island mystery. If the latter, I can only hope that the solution is but a short while away. You may appreciate that the work possibly provides an opportunity to those working on the island to make some headway into one mystery - though not necessarily to reveal the who, what, where and when of Oak Island!
In general, I have used the nomenclature employed by Rupert Furneaux in describing locations on the island. Thus, I refer to the water inlet at Smith's Cove as the Sump Hole, and the excavation close to the East Rock as the Cave-In Shaft. I recognise that it has not been established that the Sump Hole was necessarily a shaft, as Furneaux believed likely. The Cave-In Shaft began life as a pit, and I acknowledge that 'Cave-In Pit' is a better name, but I tend to use the word Pit to describe the Money Pit. I have diverged from Furneaux by attributing the triangle found on the South Shore to its reported discoverer, Captain Welling. So, the Welling Triangle is the Hedden Triangle.
My debt to Rupert Furneaux from his book on Oak Island (in which not all the ideas were his, I would add) will be recognised by those familiar with his work.
|Return to Start|