Tag: heritage

Serpent Mound, Scallasaig, Glen More, Inverness-shire

megalithix

Cairn:  OS Grid Reference – NG 848 202

Folklore

I’m presuming that this burial site is the right one, described in the fine Mr MacGregor’s Peat Fire Flame (1937) as being “by the roadside up near Scallasaig.”  There certainly doesn’t appear to be another alternative site close by (though if I’ve got it wrong, someone please lemme know!).  This place was, said MacGregor, a site “where the people in olden times used to worship the serpent.”

MacGregor spoke with a local man about the myths here and asked how long it had been associated with serpents.

“Och, about two thousand years,” said Mr John MacRae. “The mound was in the shape of a serpent, and when the chief of the people would die, he would be buried in the head of the serpent..”

He continued, saying, “One from London, that was going about searching things like that, opened the mound, and they found in the mound a big stone coffin with a big stone slab on the top. And there the bowl was found with the ashes of the chief of the people at that time. The bowl was taken to the Manse. That’s about fifty years ago. It was there for a few months; and they took it to Edinburgh, to some museum or something. They were saying that there was a funny noise in the Manse when the bowl was lying there. If there was any treasure in the bowl, or in the grave along with the bowl, it was taken out before. You see, had he any treasure – the chief like – guns and money and the like – I’m sure they wouldn’t be putting much money in the grave. It would be going into the grave with the dead man, so, when he would rise in the next world, he would be ready to start at the same game as he was carrying on here on Earth.”

This sounds a little like the folk-memory of an idea of a heathen afterlife – and of course it’d make sense finding such lore here at a tomb.

I’ve come across references to several other serpent mounds scattering the western side of Scotland, but their exact locations have proven hard to pin down. It makes y’ wonder how many more there once were before the christian paradigm became entangled in the myths of the country people.

References:

  1. MacGregor, Alisdair Alpin, The Peat-Fire Flame: Folk-Tales and Traditions of the Highlands and Islands, Ettrick Press: Edinburgh 1937.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Lattice Stone, Middleton Moor, North Yorkshire

megalithix

Cup-and-Ring Stone:  OS Grid Reference – SE 11571 51635

Also Known as:

  1. Carving no.481 (Boughey & Vickerman)

Getting Here

Lattice Stone carving

This is a lovely-looking stone in the pictures and diagrams, and is quite easy to find close to the meeting of the footpaths along Foldshaw Ridge and the Parks Lane track, near the gate. It lays at an angle in the short grass just by the path…but to me, all is not what it seems…

Archaeology & History

This was a carving I saw pictures of in the 1970s, and always thought it would be something to behold – but my first impression here wasn’t just disappointment, but the most distinct thought that the carving’s modern! It’s a real oddity. For a start, the cups in this carving are very small – much smaller than the countless authentic carvings on the moors here and at Ilkley to the south. And after seeing thousands of these things, this one didn’t seem at all right.

The lack of erosion on the cups may be due to it once accompanying a prehistoric tomb some time in the past, though no such remains have been noted here.  However, at carved stones Middleton Moor 001 and Middleton Moor 2 — less than 100 yards to the east — cairns are in evidence next to the petroglyphs, indicating that this relationship occurs at some cup-and-ring stones in this small geographical region and, perhaps, explaining the ideosyncratic nature of this design.

But such speculation aside – the brief literary history of this stone is: first described by Stuart Feather in 1965 and illustrated by Sidney Jackson the same year.  The rock art students Boughey & Vickerman’s (2003) described around sixty ‘cups’ etched onto the stone here, but they made no comment about either the odd nature of the cups or the possibility of it being modern. Perhaps it’s just me…

References:

  1. Boughey, Keith & Vickerman, E.A., Prehistoric Rock Art of the West Riding, West Yorkshire Archaeology Service 2003.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian 


Fearby Cross, Masham, North Yorkshire

megalithix

Cross: OS Grid Reference – SE 1984 8127

Getting Here

Take the road from Masham into this lovely hamlet and, as you reach the staggered crossroads, you’ll see a small village green with a single tree at where the four roads meet.  In the grass below the tree is this forgotten monument!

Archaeology & History

Fearby Cross remains

Found at the meeting point of five old lanes, little has been written about the old cross remnants here, which is barely a foot high and rests on its roughly circular stone base.  It sits where five old tracks meet and is thought to be medieval in origin.  Speculation alone pronounces the site to have been a place where local council proclamations occurred, and where funerals stopped and the dead were rested.

One intriguing piece of information narrated by Edmund Bogg (1906) that may have had some relevance to the siting of this old cross, told that between here and the hamlet of Healey a mile west,

“there were formerly circles of upright stones and other relics suggestive of druidical origin.”

Any historical information or folklore relating to these apparent megalithic remains needs to be uncovered!

References:

  1. Bogg, Edmund, Richmondshire and the Vale of Mowbray, James Miles: Leeds 1906.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Springfield Lyons, Chelmsford, Essex

megalithix

Enclosure:  OS Grid Reference – TL 7357 0818

Archaeology & History

Springfield Lyons enclosure (after Brown, 2001)

We’ve known that there was an excessive number of prehistoric archaeological sites in and around the Chelmsford region for quite a long time now, but defining precisely the age and nature of the finds takes some doing! (as you’d expect)  It hasn’t helped, of course, with the housing estates and other ecologically destructive building operations in and around the area, screwing up a more accurate and patient assessment of the material there.  And this predicament was exemplified with the Springfield Lyons neolithic causewayed enclosure just as much as at the Springfield Cursus and other sites nearby.

Although excavations here found a large, deep ditch with impressive ramparts and entrance, in Oswald, Dyer & Barber’s (2001) survey of these giant monuments, they defined the remains here as “probable,” pending further investigations.  But the site was primarily defined by the large deep ditch, broken in several places round its edges with the ’causeways’ built leading onto the site.  The enclosure gave good views over the small valley from here and had streams running either side of it.

Adjacent to the site were the remains of a “small circular enclosure with multiple entrances,” saying that excavation here,

“has proved that it is of late Bronze Age date and might be interepreted variously as a defended settlement, or a ritual monument.”

This external small enclosure site was then conjectured, quite spuriously it’s gotta be said, to be a mini-version of the great causewayed enclosure monument, saying:

“Its siting and form both hint that it could have been a conscious imitation of, or re-invention of, the perceived form of the earthworks of the neolithic enclosure.”

I like the idea, it’s gotta be said — but without direct evidence we’ve gotta take this idea with a large pinch of salt!

…to be continued…

References:

  1. Brown, N., ‘The Archaeology of Essex 1500 – 500 BC,’ in Bedwin, O. (ed.), The Archaeology of Essex, ECC: Chelmsford 1996.
  2. Brown, N., “The Late Bronze Age Enclosure at Springfield Lyons in its Landscape Context,” in Essex Archaeology & History, volume 32, 2001.
  3. Oswald, Alastair, Dyer, Caroline & Barber, Martyn, The Creation of Monuments: Neolithic Causewayed Enclosures in the British Isles, EH: Swindon 2001.
  4. Priddy, D., ‘Excavations in Essex, 1987,’ in Essex Archaeology & History, 19, 1988.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Ringstone, Cropredy, Oxfordshire

megalithix

Stone Circle (destroyed):  OS Grid Reference – SP 470 464?     

Also Known as:

  1. Ringstone Well

Archaeology & History

In 1239 CE we find records of a field-name site called “Ringstoneswelle.” Although the place-name writer Margaret Gelling (1954) initially ascribed this as the watering-place of some dood called Hringstan, it is in fact the only record that I’ve found of a “stone circle by a well” in the village.  This etymological root is confirmed in A.H. Smith’s English Place-Name Elements (vol.1, p.265) as a probable stone circle.

Folklore

There is also the curious field-name legend of a place in Cropredy called Kirk or Church Piece, where a christian church was being built, but in the morning all the stones had been uprooted & moved back from whence they came. This happened several times according to the folktale – a story that has with all the hallmarks of a megalithic site. (see Grinsell’s Folklore)  To me it seems likely that the nearby Cup and Saucer Stone also had something to do with this lost stone circle.

In the same area we have another intriguing bit of folklore that was reported in an early edition of the Banbury Guardian (1932) which told that,

“on one of the top stones of a wall in front of one of the farmhouses is what is supposed to be the Devil’s footprint and there are nail-marks in the stone, but how it gots it name is a puzzle.  At the back of the vicarage gardens is a small jetty called HellHole, the old ‘Old Man’ must have visited this village a time or two.”

Are there any local antiquarians or historians who can throw further light on this seemingly lost megalithic ring?

References:

  1. Anonymous, ‘Cropredy and its Legends,’ in Banbury Guardian, December 29, 1932.
  2. Bennett, Paul & Wilson, Tom, The Old Stones of Rollright and District, Cockley: London 1999.
  3. Gelling, Margaret, The Place-Names of Oxfordshire – volume 2, Cambridge University Press 1954.
  4. Grinsell, Leslie V., Folklore of Prehistoric Sites in Britain, David & Charles: London 1976.
  5. Smith, A.H., English Place-Name Elements – Part 1, Cambridge University Press 1954.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian 


Ring Stones, Worsthorne, Lancashire

megalithix

‘Stone Circle’:  OS Grid Reference – SD 886 330

Also Known as:

  1. Ringstones

Getting Here

Ring Stones plan (after Bennett 1946)

Various ways to get here. From Worsthorne village, go east, up past the church, uphill following the dead straight path.  After about 600 yards there’s a crossing in the footpath: go left here and walk another coupla hundred yards, over 2 walls, and after you’ve past the second wall you’ll notice the earthworks in the ground to your right.  That’s it!

Archaeology & History

There’s nowt much to see here to be honest.  It was included in Walter Bennett’s (1946) survey of ROMAN remains (oh dear) in the region — and his archaeological description of this place certainly seems to imply it was those doods (the Romans) who built this structure and not our neolithic ancestors.  He wrote:

“Ringstones is a rectangular enclosure 50 yards square, surrounded by a mound or rampart 2 yards wide and one yard high, and an outer ditch two yards wide. Sepereated from the main enclosure by the ditch on the southeast side is another enclosure 18 yards square. Excavations made in 1925 gave the following information: a gateway, seven yards wide, was paved with boulder stones regularly laid on a gravel foundation, and on the south side of the gateway flat stones were sunk below the general floor level to act as a drain; a regular course of large stones flanked the gateway entrance on either side, and a foundation or irregular boulder stones was laid outside the gateway between the rampart and the ditch: inside the enclosure and 9 inches below the present grass surface., a floor had been made of gravel in some places and of flat stones or cobbles in others; the rampart was of earth and stones; a well-constructed road, 7 feet wide, ran from the earthwork in the direction of Bottin Farm, wich is situated on the Worsthorne-Roggerham road.”

There used to be a rough circle of stones on top of the site (probably giving the place its name), but these were apparently from the old remains of a lime-kiln from the 16th or 17th century — not prehistory.  There is, therefore, a case that this site may not be prehistoric as archaeologists have classed it — and if the ground-plan above is anything to go by, you’d have to say it looks less than promising.  More diggings are needed!

References:

  1. Abraham, John Harris, Hidden Prehistory around the North West, Kindle 2012.
  2. Bennett, Walter, History of Burnley – volume 1, Burnley Corporation 1946.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Dun Dubh, Ford, Argyll

megalithix

Dun:  OS Grid Reference – NM 8640 0479

Getting Here

From Ford village, take the track that goes uphill (west) running near the edge of the forest-line. Keep going until you hit the top of the forest and the large rocky hill above you (on your right) is where you need to be heading.  The rise to your left is Dun Chonallaich.  Walk around the bottom of the hill until you get to the other side (you should be 100 yards or more above the tree-line) where you’ll notice a ‘pass’ running west, with a rocky knoll above you on your right.  That’s it!

Archaeology & History

Thought to date from the Iron Age, the remains here cover an area 15 yards by about 25 yards.  Remains of walling around the edge of the summit nearly a yard wide in places define quite clearly where the ‘fort’ was centred.  The entrance to the site was found on the northwestern side.  In more recent times however, animal pens have intruded on the remains here and the archaeological remnants are much denuded.

Folklore

Samhain fires were lit on the larger ridge above this ruined fort until recent years, as some old local folk will tell you. These Halloween fires (done to celebrate the old New Year) were stopped a short time after the new ‘owner’ of the Auchinellan Estate (on whose land Dun Dubh is found) took exception to them and, for all intent and purpose, deemed them a fire hazard! The lady in question who inherited the Estate was in fact a devout christian who took exception to the local “pagan” goings-on, contrary to the beliefs of the previous Estate owner, who not only allowed such old events, but played a part in them.  Local folk hereabouts, not surprisingly, aint too keen on their part-time dictatorial christian neighbour.

The fires up here were also related to the linear cemetery at Kilmartin. Here the giant tombs all line up & point to Dun Chonallaich, behind which hides the more flattened top of Dun Dubh. When the Halloween fires were lit on top of this, the glow from behind the great pyramid of Chonallaich all the way down the Valley of the Kings, was spectacular!  One wonders just how long the local people had been doing this.  Quite a long time I imagine….

References:

  1. Royal Commission on the Ancient & Historical Monuments, Scotland, Argyll – volume 6, HMSO: Edinburgh 1988.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Tobar na H-aoise, Iona, Argyll

megalithix

Holy Well: OS Grid Reference – NM 2839 2525

Also Known as:

  1. Canmore ID 21613
  2. Pool of Healing
  3. Well of Age
  4. Well of Healing

Folklore

Although ascribed as a holy or healing well, this site is actually a curious natural water-filled depression near the top of Dun I, on the northern side of the island.  It is one of three magickal wells to be found hereby.  F.M. McNeill (1954) described this Well of Eternal Youth as having a fame that had spread far and wide, saying,

“Here, through ages past, pilgrims of each generation have lingered at the enchanted hour of dawn, ‘to touch the healing water the moment the first sun-ray quickens it.'”

In doing so, devotees would recover the energies of youth once more and live a longer healthy life.

References:

  1. Hannan, Thomas, Iona and some Satellites, W. & R. Chambers: London 1928.
  2. McNeill, F. Marion, Iona, Blackie & Sons: Glasgow 1954.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Stonehenge Cursus, Wiltshire

megalithix

Cursus Monument:  OS Grid Reference – SU 1095 4292 to SU 1370 4319

Also Known as:

  1. The Cursus
  2. The Greater Cursus, Stonehenge

Archaeology & History

Stukeley’s Stonehenge Cursus

Not far south of the smaller Lesser Cursus monument, this huge linear earthwork was the very first cursus to be described, by William Stukeley no less, who thought it to be an old race-course for charioteers and the like!  He stumbled upon this: a curious gigantic linear earthwork feature, stretching for nearly two miles roughly east-west and as wide a football field, cut into the Wiltshire Earth, betraying all notions of ‘primitive’ histories as proclaimed by the ‘intellectuals’ of his day.  They were clearly wrong!  This immense enigmatic structure, still baffles the same creed of intellectuals to this day — but at least our old ancestors have been granted greater abilities than previously believed.  In his book on Stonehenge in 1740, Mr Stukeley described this,

“most noble work, contriv’ed to reach from the highest ground of two hills, extended the intermediate distance over a gentle valley; so that the whole cursus lies conveniently under the eye of the most numerous quantity of spectators. To render this more convenient for site, it is projected on the side of more rising ground, chiefly looking towards Stonehenge. A delightful prospect from the temple, when this vast plain was crowded with chariots, horsemen and foot, attending these solemnities with innumerable multitudes.”

Sir Norman Lockyer propounded its function as astronomical, aligning with the Pleiades around 2000 BC — a date we now know to be inconsistent with its construction, although as John North said in his Stonehenge (1997):

“Lockyer’s chronology was certainly better than the general archaeological consensus at the time.”

But further archaeological alignments and leys have been suggested running eastwards from here.  And as Paul Devereux pointed out, “In the case of this cursus, archaeology got there first.”  J.F.S. Stone, who carried out some excavations at the cursus in 1947, noted that

“its axis, if projected 1500 yards east, strikes Woodhenge and passes the Cuckoo or Cuckold Stone by the way.”

This was endorsed in 1981 by archaeologists John Hedges and David Buckley:

“In addition to aligning upon Woodhenge, the Greater Stonehenge cursus also sights upon the Cuckoo or Cuckold Stone.”

Alignment to Beacon Hill

In Roy Loveday’s (2006) survey of cursus monuments he told how this alignment goes much further, telling how it aligns “on the lower, northernmost prominence of Beacon Hill 8km away”, crossing Woodhenge on its way.  Such suggestions used to bring outcries of derision from the archaeological fraternity, but it seems archaeologists themselves are making such claims more and more these days.  At the forefront of modern alignment research in previous decades was Paul Devereux — and it was he who first noted the line-up with the distant Beacon Hill from the Great Cursus, telling:

“The course of the alignment can be extended eastwards a few miles beyond Woodhenge to cross the barrow-dotted ridge of Beacon Hill — a perfect example of a Wakins-style ‘initial point.’ The ridge is highly visible from Woodhenge.  It disappears from view as one walks westwards down the cursus, but reappears clearly as the west end is approached.  Indeed, the west end is so placed that it is at about the furthest point from which the Beacon Hill ridge , and the intermediate on which the eastern end of the cursus fall, can be seen together.”

…to be continued…

References:

  1. Burl, Aubrey, A Brief History of Stonehenge, Robinson: London 2007.
  2. Hedges, John & Buckley, David G., The Springfield Cursus and the Cursus Problem, Essex County Council 1981.
  3. Loveday, Roy, Inscribed Across the Landscape, Tempus: Stroud 2006.
  4. North, John, Stonehenge, Harper-Collins: London 1997.
  5. Pennick, N. & Devereux, P., Lines on the Landscape: Leys and other Linear Enigmas, Hale: London 1989.
  6. Stone, J.F.S., ‘The Stonehenge Cursus and its Affinities,’ in Archaeological Journal, 104, 1947.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian


Rosette Stone, Ilkley Moor, West Yorkshire

megalithix

Cup-and-Ring Stone:  OS Grid Reference – SE 12822 46190

Also Known as:

  1. Carving no.128 (Hedges)
  2. Carving no.285 (Boughey & Vickerman)

Getting Here

Rosette Carving (after Hedges 1986)
Rosette Carving (after Hedges 1986)

Follow the directions to reach the giant Haystack Rock, then follow the footpath west along the moor-edge, round where it bends keeping along the edge of the stream (Backstone Beck) below.  A couple of hundred yards after the bend, right by the side of the path.  You’ll see it! (if you hit the clearly defined ‘enclosure’ walling, you’ve gone too far)

Archaeology & History

No — not the Rosetta Stone; but it is a lovely carved rock this one.  Best seen (as usual) when the rock’s wet and the sun’s heading for (or just emerged from) the horizon — but much of this image is visible even when She’s cloudy.

Close-up of 'rosette' and other CnRs
Close-up of ‘rosette’ design & and other CnRs
The Rosette Stone
The Rosette Stone carving

First mentioned in literary terms (surprisingly) by M.J. Walker (1956), in a short write-up following one of the Bradford Archaeology Group’s moorland walks up here.  Nearly six-feet along its longest axis, there are more than 30 cup-marks on this stone, at least three with rings; plus a variety of lines linking some cups to others.  At its northern tip is the lovely little ‘rosette’ design, as archaeologists have called it.  Others have seen this part of the design as a solar image; a flower; the Pleiades; a ring — take your pick!  It is a lovely carving though (if you’re a sad person like me, who’s into these sorta things!).  What relevance – if any – it may have had to the ‘enclosure’ within whose edges it sits, is anyone’s guess!

Excavations done close by (focusing mainly on the prehistoric ‘enclosure’ within whose domain this and other carvings occur) uncovered remains of old grooved ware pottery and the remains of flints. (Edwards & Bradley 1999)

The one thing we realise from looking at this design is the difference seen between the ‘accurate’ illustration drawn by archaeologists, and the flesh and blood of the stone itself, in situ.  The living rock has much greater form and expression than anything which our desire for accuracy possesses.  This aint knocking any attempt to portray the cups, rings and lines on paper correctly to show what the design originally looked like; merely that there’s a world of difference between the experiential vision of the carving and that done with graphic accuracy.  But we all know that anyway – so please forgive my little sojourn into speaking the bleedin’ obvious!

References:

  1. Boughey, Keith & Vickerman, E.A., Prehistoric Rock Art of the West Riding, WYAS 2003.
  2. Edwards, Gavin & Bradley, Richard, ‘Rock Carvings and Neolithic Artefacts on Ilkley Moor, West Yorkshire,’ in Grooved Ware in Britain and Ireland (edited by Cleal, R. & MacSween, A.), Oxbow: Oxford 1999.
  3. Hedges, John (ed.), The Carved Rocks on Rombald’s Moor, WYMCC: Wakefield 1986.
  4. Walker, M.J., ‘Ilkley Boulders Tour,’ in Bradford’s Cartwright Hall Archaeology Group Bulletin, 2, 1956.

© Paul Bennett, The Northern Antiquarian