Featured Title:
Stones Playing Cards, great gift idea |
 |
| Stone Worlds: Narrative and Reflexivity in Landscape Archaeology |
 |
| Login |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 108 guests and 0 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : davidmorgan , TimPrevett , Andy B , Klingon , MickM , bat400 , sem , Runemage , TheCaptain
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries >> Stone Circles and cairn circles
|
 |
| Author |
Stone Circles and cairn circles |
BareClawz
Joined:
27-04-2012
Messages: 8
from Shrewton
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 28-04-2012 at 18:22
Hi,
I'm new and confuddled. This has probably been answered somewhere before but can someone please define the difference, in layman's terms.
I have a feeling that stone circles are just that, and built as such. Cairn circles being the remains of an earth covered structure, tomb, barrow or such.
Steve
 Profile
 Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 28-04-2012 at 19:21
You've got it in one Steve, that's right.
Sometimes it's difficult to tell at a glance if a circle is genuine, if it conforms to a certain type or if it's typical in any way, or to the practised eye if it looks right, but occasionally excavation is the only way.
Edited to say :- There are also hut circles, many circular shapes show up on Google Earth often as crop marks, but just because there may be a few stones in a roughly circular shape remaining today, it doesn't automatically mean it's the site of a stone circle.
Rune
[ This message was edited by: Runemage on 2012-04-28 20:12 ]
Profile
Reply
|
frogcottage42
Joined:
14-02-2010
Messages: 235
from tuosist
OFF-Line
| Posted 29-04-2012 at 10:38
This is actually a very sensible question and one which will continue to obtain differing answers.
Here in Ireland most stone circles are not truly round, if their stones face sideways to the centre like the spokes of a wheel they are called radial stone cairns even if there is no cairn material within the circle, if these are over about 10m in diameter they are called radial stone enclosures.
If they are arranged lengthways in a circle and are quite low to the ground they are a kerb circle.
Five stone circles are pentagonal and many boulder circles are ovoid.
Any circle of stones is called a circular enclosure unless a group of academics will stake their reputations on an exact interpretation.
The semantics are endless and fairly unhelpful, it is the same for standing stones. It is a standing stone if it is a stone that is standing! It takes a committee to decide whether it is of manmade ancient origin.
Profile
Reply
|
golux
Joined:
15-03-2010
Messages: 19
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 12:25
At the risk of muddying the waters further, may I point out that many stone circles were formerly cairns. Many of the RSC's (Recumbent Stone Circles) of Aberdeenshire (I think the majority but I'm not sure) began as simple cairns, then kerbstones were added as the cairns developed into more complex shapes (including chambers, a passage entrance, a central court, etc), then stone circles were erected around them and giant recumbent stones placed across the cairn entrance (usually the SSW face). When these sites fell into disuse and began to be robbed to provide building stones, the smallest and most transportable stones were taken first. So the cairn would disappear, leaving the kerbstones and the circle stones, then the kerbstones would be taken, the smallest first (usually at the NNW side) followed by larger and larger stones, to eventually leave the stone circle standing on its own. Then the circle stones would be taken (again beginning with the smallest on the NNW side) until finally only the very biggest stones. the recumbent and its flankers, were left. This is why many RSC's now consist of the recumbent stone only.
In some cases, a kerbed cairn would not acquire a surrounding stone circle at all, but when the cairn was removed by robbing then the remaining circle of kerbstones (or double circle where the cairn had had inner and outer kerbstones) was left standing in the form of a stone circle.
[ This message was edited by: golux on 2012-05-07 12:26 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 14:51
Many of the RSC's (Recumbent Stone Circles) of Aberdeenshire (I think the majority but I'm not sure) began as simple cairns, then kerbstones were added as the cairns developed into more complex shapes (including chambers, a passage entrance, a central court, etc), then stone circles were erected around them and giant recumbent stones placed across the cairn entrance (usually the SSW face). When these sites fell into disuse and began to be robbed to provide building stones, the smallest and most transportable stones were taken first. So the cairn would disappear, leaving the kerbstones and the circle stones, then the kerbstones would be taken, the smallest first (usually at the NNW side) followed by larger and larger stones, to eventually leave the stone circle standing on its own. Then the circle stones would be taken (again beginning with the smallest on the NNW side) until finally only the very biggest stones. the recumbent and its flankers, were left. This is why many RSC's now consist of the recumbent stone only.
Are you sure on this Golux? it's been established fairly recently by observation that on some recumbents where there's a decent sightline, the moon can be seen to roll across the recumbent at Lunar Standstill, once every 18.6 years. That wouldn't have been an observeable phenomenon if a recumbent circle was laid out as you've described above. Unfortunately, it's not an easy thing to witness, but I'm sure some clever techie will have a programme which could work it out.
Rune
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 17:25
Cairns are found in the majority , but the real common denominator is the presence of a fire , and not necessarily a pyre/funereal .
The view across the recumbent from the approx centre is usually distant , there are only a very few with relatively constrained views e.g. Midmar at 2 Km which does cannot have the major standstill in view . In some cases in can be shown that the recumbent was the last part of the architecture to be positioned and in many cases it is tangential to the circle .It's the low summer full moon that can be seen move between the flankers in the standstill period .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-07 14:51, Runemage wrote:
Many of the RSC's (Recumbent Stone Circles) of Aberdeenshire (I think the majority but I'm not sure) began as simple cairns, then kerbstones were added as the cairns developed into more complex shapes (including chambers, a passage entrance, a central court, etc), then stone circles were erected around them and giant recumbent stones placed across the cairn entrance (usually the SSW face). When these sites fell into disuse and began to be robbed to provide building stones, the smallest and most transportable stones were taken first. So the cairn would disappear, leaving the kerbstones and the circle stones, then the kerbstones would be taken, the smallest first (usually at the NNW side) followed by larger and larger stones, to eventually leave the stone circle standing on its own. Then the circle stones would be taken (again beginning with the smallest on the NNW side) until finally only the very biggest stones. the recumbent and its flankers, were left. This is why many RSC's now consist of the recumbent stone only.
Are you sure on this Golux? it's been established fairly recently by observation that on some recumbents where there's a decent sightline, the moon can be seen to roll across the recumbent at Lunar Standstill, once every 18.6 years. That wouldn't have been an observeable phenomenon if a recumbent circle was laid out as you've described above. Unfortunately, it's not an easy thing to witness, but I'm sure some clever techie will have a programme which could work it out.
Rune
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
golux
Joined:
15-03-2010
Messages: 19
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 19:59
Rune
My remarks do not apply to all RSC's but do fit many. Some RSC's with cairns were built in the reverse order: the Loanhead of Daviot circle with a central cairn is thought to have commenced with the installation of the recumbent, the circle and cairn being later constructions.
As you point out, it would not be possible to obtain a sight of the moon rolling across the recumbent where the circle centre was occupied by a cairn. But not all recumbents exhibit this feature and not all cairns completely filled the area of their circle: some left room for an observer in the space between the recumbent and the cairn (bounded by "portal" stones, as at Arnhill and East Auqorthies), in a passage behind the recumbent, or in a central open court. And where viewing from inside the circle was impossible there might be ways round this, e.g. by using a mirror.
Do you know which recumbents have this match between their top outline and the moon's positions at Lunar Standstill? I suspect it is very few indeed. I used to think that perhaps all recumbents were placed to catch the same astronomical phenomenon and hence might be expected to face the same direction. But then I saw the diagram in "Great Crowns Of Stone" showing the compass orientations of all recumbents and was surprised to see that the various alignments cover almost every possibility between due East and due West! Far from all facing the same way, they are all over the place!
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 20:20
Golux ,It's not the compass direction that matters but the declination . The variation in azimuth for the vast majority is much less than 90 -270 degrees , being closer to 158 -235 but it is the horizon that matters and many produce the declination allowing for viewing of the a low full moon between the flankers during the major standstill period e.g. Cairnton ,Loudon Wood , Druidstone , Daviot ,Esslie Lesser , Cothiemuir , New Craig , South Ley Lodge , there are others that will suffice but are not quite as accurate as these .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-07 19:59, golux wrote:
Rune
My remarks do not apply to all RSC's but do fit many. Some RSC's with cairns were built in the reverse order: the Loanhead of Daviot circle with a central cairn is thought to have commenced with the installation of the recumbent, the circle and cairn being later constructions.
As you point out, it would not be possible to obtain a sight of the moon rolling across the recumbent where the circle centre was occupied by a cairn. But not all recumbents exhibit this feature and not all cairns completely filled the area of their circle: some left room for an observer in the space between the recumbent and the cairn (bounded by "portal" stones, as at Arnhill and East Auqorthies), in a passage behind the recumbent, or in a central open court. And where viewing from inside the circle was impossible there might be ways round this, e.g. by using a mirror.
Do you know which recumbents have this match between their top outline and the moon's positions at Lunar Standstill? I suspect it is very few indeed. I used to think that perhaps all recumbents were placed to catch the same astronomical phenomenon and hence might be expected to face the same direction. But then I saw the diagram in "Great Crowns Of Stone" showing the compass orientations of all recumbents and was surprised to see that the various alignments cover almost every possibility between due East and due West! Far from all facing the same way, they are all over the place!
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
golux
Joined:
15-03-2010
Messages: 19
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 20:41
George
I would agree that the presence of fire is the real common denominator, I could have mentioned that both cairns and circles may be preceded by a pit and evidence of fire. And I would agree that the fire might have been something other than a funeral pyre, a celebratory bonfire perhaps, - there is nothing like a good blaze to cheer people up! But of course I only mentioned cairns to explain how a cairn circle and a stone circle might be one and the same thing.
You mentioned the restricted view at Midmar Circle; doesn't the same apply to nearby Sunhoney where the view is also blocked by the Hill of Fare?
Golux
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 21:13
Yes, Sunhoney doesn't get the standstill either and despite having a totally different and clear distant view , relatively close Tomnaverie has a similar declination to both Midmar and Sunhoney.With the inclusion of Loanend and Berrybrae this group of five seem quite distinct in their declinations, unlike any of the others .These last two are not in the same southern area but I have never noticed any similarity/connection between them and the others other than typologically , if you can think of anything ,do say .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-07 20:41, golux wrote:
George
I would agree that the presence of fire is the real common denominator, I could have mentioned that both cairns and circles may be preceded by a pit and evidence of fire. And I would agree that the fire might have been something other than a funeral pyre, a celebratory bonfire perhaps, - there is nothing like a good blaze to cheer people up! But of course I only mentioned cairns to explain how a cairn circle and a stone circle might be one and the same thing.
You mentioned the restricted view at Midmar Circle; doesn't the same apply to nearby Sunhoney where the view is also blocked by the Hill of Fare?
Golux
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
golux
Joined:
15-03-2010
Messages: 19
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 21:37
George
Yes of course the circle builders did not consult a compass, they looked at the view allowed by the surrounding landscape and that determined the alignment of the recumbent. I just thought the amount of variation surprising given how many circles are set on high ground or open country with good views. And while the recumbent would have to be positioned very carefully to achieve the "rolling across the recumbent" effect, there would be no need for such precision to provide a view of the moon in the large window between the flankers.
Golux
Profile
Reply
|
golux
Joined:
15-03-2010
Messages: 19
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 22:21
George
It is most interesting that Tomnaverie has a similar declination as Sunhoney and Midmar despite its open outlook. Alas, that is one circle I have never visited and never considered before. I think I may have been discouraged by hearing it is a re-build, having seen what re-building did to Strichen House circle. I will move it up my "must visit soon" list!
Berrybrae is another I have not reached, being stymied three times by crops in the field. Loanend I have seen: if memory serves well, the recumbent is so big that you would have to stand a long way back to see the horizon over it! But it is on high ground, - is it, like Tomnaverie, apparently ignoring an expansive field of view?.
Do the five you mentioned all share a similar declination or is it just Tomaverie, Sunhoney and Midmar, with the other two being on another alignment?
Golux
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 07-05-2012 at 22:29
Golux , That's what makes them so interesting , different situations and orientations providing the same result . The moon moving between the two flankers and low in the sky fits a lot of monuments , more than those I mentioned , and it is rising and setting by a few degree maybe taking as much as an hour to cover the distance between the two flankers so any observer is likely to have shifted a bit making it appear like it was rolling along the recumbent .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-07 21:37, golux wrote:
George
Yes of course the circle builders did not consult a compass, they looked at the view allowed by the surrounding landscape and that determined the alignment of the recumbent. I just thought the amount of variation surprising given how many circles are set on high ground or open country with good views. And while the recumbent would have to be positioned very carefully to achieve the "rolling across the recumbent" effect, there would be no need for such precision to provide a view of the moon in the large window between the flankers.
Golux
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
davep
Joined:
05-07-2009
Messages: 28
from Exeter
OFF-Line
| Posted 09-05-2012 at 22:53
Steve wrote:
Quote:
|
I'm new and confuddled. This has probably been answered somewhere before but can someone please define the difference, in layman's terms.
I have a feeling that stone circles are just that, and built as such. Cairn circles being the remains of an earth covered structure, tomb, barrow or such.
|
|
As others have said that is pretty much correct. I will restrict my comments on this to Dartmoor - which I know well.
On Dartmoor there are many sites which are referred to as "stone circles" but many of these are considered by archaeologists to be cairn circles. Good examples being "The Dancers" or Erme Circle, Trowlesworthy Warren, Nine Maidens (Belstone), Yellowmead 4-circle & Shovelldown 4-circle.
There are some of these which have no obvious cairn but are associated with stone rows which are typically associated with cairn circles on Dartmoor. The researcher Turner (1990) gave a listing of such Dartmoor "stone circles" see:
Turner Stone Circles
The "true" Dartmoor stone circle may have a complex of other structures such as rows and cairns nearby but will not itself be connected directly to a stone row or cairn. That is the generally accepted definition of a "stone circle".
A notable Dartmoor example not included in Turner's list is the impressive Down Tor (Hingston Hill) circle - presumably not included as he must have considered it to be a cairn circle.
The other notable difference is size. The Dartmoor stone circles are typically 20-40 metres in diameter where as the cairn circles are typically much smaller e.g. 7m for Nine Stones.
If I remember rightly the Grey Wethers and Fernworthy stone circles were excavated by the Dartmoor Exploration Committee (around 100 years ago). No evidence was found of any burials but evidence of fire was found. In contrast the cairn circles excavated typically revealed cists or pits with cremation remains.
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2658
OFF-Line
| Posted 09-05-2012 at 23:32
Sorry Golux ,I must have missed this . The Tomnaverie excavation provided lots of info about the monument and RSC 's in general , well worth a look .
Loanend has fine views but nothing like as as distant as Tomnaverie and the view over the recumbent ,when you can see over it and through the trees would only be about 3 Km .about the most constrained of the total horizon . Loanend and Berrybrae are just over 19 degrees of declination and the other three are between 16 and 17 ,you could also include Bourtie at 20 after that there is a jump into the mid 20's ,so that wee group are anomalous .They will see a full moon but it is in winter and won't move between the flankers but descend at an angle .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-07 22:21, golux wrote:
George
It is most interesting that Tomnaverie has a similar declination as Sunhoney and Midmar despite its open outlook. Alas, that is one circle I have never visited and never considered before. I think I may have been discouraged by hearing it is a re-build, having seen what re-building did to Strichen House circle. I will move it up my "must visit soon" list!
Berrybrae is another I have not reached, being stymied three times by crops in the field. Loanend I have seen: if memory serves well, the recumbent is so big that you would have to stand a long way back to see the horizon over it! But it is on high ground, - is it, like Tomnaverie, apparently ignoring an expansive field of view?.
Do the five you mentioned all share a similar declination or is it just Tomaverie, Sunhoney and Midmar, with the other two being on another alignment?
Golux
|
|
Profile
Reply
| |
|
|
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTES: This site uses COOKIES. Please do not use this web site if you do not agree to our Terms and Conditions of use.
If you plan to visit ancient sites in person, please make sure you follow our Charter.
Articles, photographs and comments are the property of their respective authors or contributors, please contact them for permission to reproduce. Site design ©1997-2012 Andy Burnham.
|
Main News