Two real ways to get here. Either (i) follow the directions to get to the Stag Cottage carvings of Duncroisk 1, then walk down to the fence by the riverside and walk along to the left for a coupla hundred yards till you reach a second metal fence-post sticking out of a rock on the other side of the deer-fencing; or (ii) from the roadside burn a coupla hundred yards along the road before you reach Stag Cottage, follow it down to the riverside, then head along the footpath behind the fencing, parallel with the river’s edge. It aint far. Within 100 yards you’ll reach the stone with the metal pole sticking out of it and the carvings are on this!
Archaeology & History
Confusingly redesignated as Duncroisk 5 carving by the usually efficient Canmore people, we’re sticking with this stone’s original name given by Ronald Morris (1981) in his British Archaeological Report of this and nearby carvings — and a quite fascinating carving this is as well!
C.G. Cash’s drawingDuncroisk 3 stone
As with many cup-and-rings, erosion and lighting has a powerful effect on seeing the design correctly. On my visit here in recent months there were quite distinct additional elements in the carving which haven’t been noted by previous archaeologists. But in saying that, there were also some elements that were reported by the earliest antiquarians that proved difficult to see in the grey light of day when I was here. The earliest report of the carving by C.G. Cash (1912) told there to be five rings, whereas today only 3 or 4 are visible (though this will probably change when viewed in other lighting conditions).
When Mr Cash told of this stone in his essay on the antiquities of Killin it sounded as if it was lucky to have survived, as it had previously been dug out and left by the roadside, before then being reused by a local to fix a fence-post in! Mr Cash told us that the local,
“had used it as the foundation stone of the stretching post at the south end of the easternmost fence on the farm, and there I found it, near the brink of the river, buried in sand and turf. I cleared it and then in pouring rain crouched over it to make a hasty sketch. It bears eighteen cups, of which five are surrounded by rings. The largest cups are 2½ inches and the rings 6 inches in diameter.”
Ron Morris’ images
When I visited the place the weather was much the same as Mr Cash described: lovely teeming rain, typical of the mountains, with the surrounding trees breathing moisture onto the slopes as ever.
Years later when Ronald Morris (1981) came here he saw “4 cups-and-one-ring…probably complete rings, up to 12cm (5 in) in diameters and 10 cups up to 2cm deep.”
If you stand and face the stone, the cup-marking on its lower right side (see Morris’ old photo, above) has a pecked line running from it further to the right and down to the edge of the rock. You can clearly make it out on the top photo. This carved line also seemed to touch another carved line which can be seen running along the outer edge of the stone — although the poor light didn’t allow me to view this with absolute confidence. I’ll have another look at it again when I’m up in the area in May and hopefully confirm or deny it with greater confidence (and if anyone else gets here in the meantime, have a look and see what y’ think).
Another one of those rare cup-marked stones from Cornwall, once again found in association with a burial— but once again destroyed, this time by having an airfield built over the tomb! This “cup-marked and perforated slab” was said by Paul Ashbee (1958: 192) to have been unearthed “by Mr C.K. Andrew” in 1941 when he was digging in the Nancekuke round barrow. Yet an earlier reference to the same site by Mr o’ Neil (1948: 26) told that “the grave was rifled c.1926, but in the ditch there were found traces of a Bronze Age wooden shovel and a perforated and cup-marked slate.” For any students studying this arena, the correct date would appear to be the earlier of the two.
I’ve not been able to locate any decent photos or diagrams of this small cup-marked stone and would truly appreciate an illustration of it if anyone could get hold of one.
References:
Ashbee, Paul, “The Excavation of Tregulland Burrow, Treneglos Parish, Cornwall,” in Antiquaries Journal, volume 38, 1958.
o’ Neil, B.H. St. John, “War and Archaeology in Britain”, in Antiquaries Journal, volume XXVIII, January-April 1948.
To get here, follow the same directions to reach its nearby colleague of Carse Farm south — but instead of walking down the track to where its companion is found, this small ring of stones is found a coupla hundred yards into the first field by the roadside. Unless the field’s fulla corn (in which case, give it a miss cos even if you do find it, you won’t be able to make much out), y’ can’t really miss it!
Archaeology & History
As with its nearby companion of Carse Farm south, this small “ring” of four stones is found along the Tay valley floor and, though cited as a stone circle in many archaeology tomes, should more accurately be defined as a cairn circle of sorts. Structurally akin to other four-posters, it reminded me of a distant companion in North Yorkshire more than 200 miles south: the Druids Altar at Bordley, which is also a robbed prehistoric tomb and not a stone circle. But it’s a fine little site sat amidst the majestic temple of surrounding hills on all sides, bar east, where the Tay valley reaches into the distance.
Faint cup-marksCarse Farm, looking north
Like its damaged companion in the field below, some of the stones in this circle also have well-defined cup-markings on top of the uprights; although when we visited here, low cloud and late daylight conditions prevented us from getting good images of the cup-marks concerned (as the photo of one of them here illustrates). The cup-markings are, curiously, carved on the top of the small standing stones.
Described briefly in Alexander Thom’s Megalithic Rings (1980), he regarded its geometry as “circular” in structure. Aubrey Burl (1988) gave the lengthier archaeological history of the site, telling:
“On the ‘carse’, or lowland…this 4-poster was excavated in 1964. When Coles saw it in 1907 only three smallish stones remained standing although “it seems clear that at this site there were originally four Stones as in so many other Perthshire groups”… The SW stone was missing but halfway between the NW and SE stones a long, thin slab lay half-buried.
“Coles noticed that there were cupmarks on the tops of both the NE and SE stones. The SE had three carvings but the top of the NE had no fewer than 17, the largest ‘cup’ being 4 by 3½in (10 x 9cm). In the group were two ‘dumb-bells’. In the same field the farmer had dragged away a buried stone which was also cupmarked.* (my italics, PB)
“Of the three standing stones, the NE is 3ft 11in (1.2m) high; the SE, 5ft 1in (1.6m); and the NW, 4ft 1in (1.3m). These heights…are almost double those cited by Coles (1908: 126).
“”The 1964 excavation discovered the SW stonehole. The 5ft 10in (1.8m) long stone lying at the centre of the 4-Poster was erected in it, a task made easier by the fact that its base had been keeled… The base was unweathered showing that the stone had been toppled in quite recent times as had the stones of the two Fortingall 4-Posters…3¾ miles to the WSW. The four stones stood at the corners of a rectangle 12ft by 8ft (3.7 x 2.4m) on a long ENE-WSW axis. They also stood on the circumference of a circle 14ft 5in (4.4m) in diameter.
“A tapering pit was discovered against the inner face of the NE stone, about 2ft 6in (76cm) across and 1ft 2in (37cm) deep. It was filled with cremated bone and sticky black earth and charcoal. At the bottom, a collared urn lay on is side, its rim decorated in geometrical designs. A flint flake lay near it. Within the 4-Poster there were three shallow pits, two between the NW and NE stones, another between the SE and SW. Their edges were clean and they had been backfilled with brown loam. The excavators thought they might have “been used for stabilising props during the erection of the stones.” …As the heaviest block, that at the NW, weighed about 6 tons it would have required 20 to 30 people to drag it upright…and the use of such props would have made their insertion safer.”
Unless the people building this site were dwarves, we’ve gotta re-assess this latter remark (which Burl quotes from the earlier archaeologist’s report from the 1960s). Having personally been involved with the creation of modern stone circles with stones larger than the ones here, we know that the uprights here could have been erected by 8-10 people at the very most.
Archaeology and folklore records describe many other prehistoric sites along this section of the upper Tay valley, but it’s also very likely that other “circles” or cairns of similar structure to the two known at Carse Farm once existed close by that are not in modern literary accounts.
References:
Burl, Aubrey, Four Posters: Bronze Age Stone Circles of Western Europe, BAR 195: Oxford 1988.
To get here, follow the same directions as you would to reach the curious Green Plain settlement; but just before you reach that, you’ll notice this rather large boulder known as the Eagle Stone right in front of you next to the ever-decreasing stream. Wander down and give it a fondle — you can’t really miss it!
Archaeology & History
Cupmarks on top (image by Graeme Chappell)
Curiously not included in Boughey & Vickerman’s rock-art survey (2003), this large boulder stands just below the ancient ford which crosses Sun Bank Gill and is pitted with a number of cup-marks on its top (though not the 38 we counted when Graeme Chappell and I in the early 1990s), plus a large “bowl”, not unlike the Wart Well on top of Almscliffe Crags and other such sites. Although some of the cups seem natural, others are artificial — as even an English Heritage rock art student could tell you! A small cluster of ‘cups’ are on top of the stone, but a number of them have been etched onto the sloping southern face; a curved line running across the rock-face towards these cups may be natural.
The straight track above you was known as Watling Street in bygone years and was the old Roman road running between Ilkley and Aldborough.
Pretty easy to find – assuming it aint at the height of summer and the crops are approaching maturity, otherwise you’re only gonna see its head! But, this aside: from Aberfeldy, take the B846 road over the river bridge that bends you along the valley of the River Tay towards Appin of Dull. After some 2 miles you’ll pass the right-turn up to Dull. Go past this for another coupla hundred yards or so, watching out for the left-turn down towards the farmhouse of Carse and park up where you can (if you go past it, there’s the second turn up to Dull, again on your right, where you can turn round). As you walk down the track towards Carse Farm, watch out on your right in the field below Carse I, in the second field down. You can’t really miss it. (and the farmer here is spot on if you ask to check the stone – as long as the crops aint growing)
Archaeology & History
Although all that’s left of what is thought to have been a once proud stone circle is the singular upright standing stone in the middle of the field. Aubrey Burl (1988) thought that this was one of the typical “four poster”rings that scatter our isles, but I’m not so sure misself. There were other stones associated with the site when Burl described it, but these were covered over in our visit here a few months back — which is a pity, as two of the stones are reported as possessing cup-markings (if/when we revisit the site, I’ll try get some images of the respective stones and add them on TNA as individual carved stones). The site gives the distinct impression of it having a funerary character of some sort and not a true stone circle — and this was strongly suggested by some of the finds inside the “ring”, described below.
Fred Cole’s old drawingAubrey Burl’s groundplan
Both this and its associated “circle” a few hundred yards away — known as Carse Farm north — sit on a flat level of ground in the Tay valley, with rounded hills all most sides. This landscape setting was obviously of some importance to the people who put the circle here in the first place but, not living in the region, it’s difficult to assess the mythic relevance some of the hills will have obviously played in the siting of these stones.
In bygone days, it was reported that the much of the site was ploughed away due to agricultural excesses, so there was obviously much more to it in earlier centuries. Describing the solitary stone that’s left today, along with the earlier excavation results, Mr Burl (1988) wrote:
“The stone still standing, of quartziferous schist, is 6ft 3in (1.9m) high. Its longer faces are aligned NW-SE. 32ft 6in (9.9m) to its SW is a large prostate block, sub-elliptical and about 8ft long and 4ft 3in wide (2.4 x 1.3m). It has probably fallen outwards. (my italics, PB) If so, when standing near the top of its inner face were four cupmarks in a cross pattern.
“About 32ft ((9.8m) to its NW is a fallen and enormous schist slab, 11ft long and 5ft wide (3.4 x 1.5m). It also appears to have toppled outwards. Near the bottom of its inner face are two cupmarks. The situation of these three stones suggests that they once stood at the corners of a rectangle some 32ft (9.8m) square, the pillars of a huge four-poster nearly six-times the national average and with an internal area ten times bigger than the small 4-poster (Carse Farm north, PB) just to its north.
“Excavation in 1964 found the socket from which the great prostrate slab had been dragged… Cash (1911) had noted the presence of a small stone inside the ring about 20ft (6.1m) west of the standing stone. It proved to be 4ft (1.2m) square with a carefull-dressed face. It had been set upright, standing about 1ft 4in (41cm) above the ground. Three sides of the worked face ‘had been carefully chiselled away to a straight edge.’ It may have been a slab lining the inner central space of a destroyed ring-cairn. Burnt bone was found near it. There was also a rounded river pebble with a worked hollow on one side…”
Folklore
Carse Farm stone
Stewart (1964) described the site as having been “christianized” not long ago, by having the northernmost standing stone in the ring removed. This is intriguing inasmuch as “north” is the place of greatest symbolic darkness in the pre-christian mythos, and represented death and illumination in magickal terms. North was also the point taken by witches and shamans in their excursions into Underworlds, usually via the North Star, which tethered the Earth to the heavens (see Godwin’s Arktos [1993], and Grant, The Magical Revival [1973]) In the removal of this northern stone for the reasons given, that implies some magickal events or folklore were in evidence here when this took place. Anyone got any further information along these lines, or has it long since been subsumed?
References:
Burl, Aubrey, Four Posters: Bronze Age Stone Circles of Western Europe, BAR 195: Oxford 1988.
Tumulus (destroyed): OS Grid Reference – SE 426 634
Also Known as:
Deuill Cross Hill
Devil’s Cross
Urn from Devil’s Cross tumulus
Archaeology & History
In Henry Smith’s wonderful Reliquiae (1852) on the history of Aldborough and district, this intriguingly named but forgotten site is given the greatest literary attention extant. Assumed by a couple of modern academics – without evidence – to have been little more than a natural hillock, this once great mound was undoubtedly an important burial place for some ancestral characters. Although its exact location is unknown (anyone out there know for certain?), it was said to have been located about 100 yards from where the old tracks crossed at Duel Cross.
First described by a Mr Urban in the Gentleman’s Magazine of June, 1787. He told it to be known as the Devil’s Cross and was a tumulus,
“whose elevation is about 18 feet, and circumference at the base 370 feet. It was broken into some time since to supply materials for the repair of the high road leading from Aldborough to York. The soil consists, first, of a black earth, and under that a red sandy gravel, human bones, some of which are entire, and urns of various sizes. The urns are composed of blue clay and sand, some ornamented and others quite plain; several Roman coins have also been found here.”
There were a great number of old urns found in the mound when it was dug into in 1756, leading Mr Urban to believe the site was used an ancient cemetery. Intriguingly he told that all of the urns and their ashes were found to have been placed on one side of the mound, with many human bones being deposited in another section, away from the urns. This, the finding of Roman coins next to the mound and the proximity of the Roman road led Mr Urban to believe the site was a Roman tumulus, though this seems unlikely. Years later, Henry Smith’s (1852) commentary on the Devil’s Cross hill led him to believe the mound was from a much earlier period:
“From a sketch of one of these, which is stated to have been nine inches high, there can be little doubt of these cinerary urns bring of the ancient British period, but from the great number of bones discovered, this tumulus was probably used as a cemetery during the Romano-British period, if not still later. Of its use in Roman times, evidence is unequivocally supplied in the numerous coins found here…”
Carved stone figure (from Smith’s ‘Reliquiae’)
Not far from this long lost tumulus, a curious carved stone figure was located “among ancient foundations” in a cellar! Thought to be a local deity, it may have been a carved representation of whichever figure or spirit ancestor was buried in Duel Cross Hill — though we’ll never know for sure.
Folklore
Although archaeologically, etymologically and geomantically related to the nearby Devil’s Arrows at Boroughbridge a couple of miles up the road, there is nothing specific I can find of this once important tumulus. However the place-name in both forms, Deul and Deuill, refers to the pre-christian devil (from deofol, Old English, “devil”). This name may relate to the stone figure shown in the illustration, or of long lost heathen rites enacted here in bygone times. Any further info on this place is very welcome.
References:
Hargrove, E., The History of the Castle, Town and Forest of Knaresbrough, Hargrove & Sons: Knaresbrough 1809.
Smith, Henry E., Reliquiae Isurianae, J.R. Smith: London 1852.
Go west through Aysgarth village along the A684 road and, just as you’re coming out of the town, take the left turn on the Thornton Rust road, past Town Head Farm, and turn left up the track (called Folly Lane). Go past the house where the track veers to your right and follow it straight on (don’t turn up the track on your left a short distance along). Keep walking on here for nearly a mile (about 10 mins), keeping your eyes peeled for the embanked rise in the field on your left, which is where the henge can be found! You’re damn close!
Archaeology & History
A.H. Allcroft’s 1908 plan
One of the earliest accounts I’ve found describing the Castle Dykes henge is in Mr Barker’s (1854) lovely literary exploration of Wensleydale, where he describes, “on Aysgarth Moor, which is now enclosed, may be seen a circular encampment, probably Danish” in origin. But he tells no more. When Edmund Bogg (c.1906) came here fifty years later, he added little extra, simply telling of, “the earthworks known as ‘Castle Dykes’, probably Angle or Danish, although Roman relics have been found here.” However, the brilliant Mr Speight (1897) gave what seems to be the earliest real description of the site when he described “the Celts” and the earliest settlers of the region, saying how:
“The so-called ‘Castle Dykes’ at Aysgarth betrays a probable connection with the same settlers. It is an irregular circular rampart, measuring about forty yards across its longest diameter, and not unlike the earthwork on Harkaside called ‘Maiden Castle’… A ditch completely encloses the mound, which, it should be noted, is unusually low, being little higher than the outer bank or upcast from the trench. It is totally different from the elaborate burh at Middleham; indeed, from its low and simply form, as well as from its situation in Celtic territory, there seems little doubt that it was the work of these early people.”
Ditch of Castle Dykes henge, looking east (photo credit – Richard Stroud)
Speight also made a suggestion that the place-name of Aysgarth itself may derive from this monument. He may have a point. A.H. Smith (1928) and other place-name authorities tell the name to derive from “an open space” either surrounded by, or — in some way — defined by oak trees. We might never know for sure…
Not long after the works of Speight and Bogg came the first real survey of British prehistoric earthworks by A.H. Allcroft (1908) — and amidst the mass of archaeological curiosities (as many were at the time) was another description of this great ceremonial monument. Allcroft told that here,
“a weak vallum of earth encloses a perfectly regular oval area measuring from crest to crest of the vallum 257 feet (east to west) by 217 feet (north to south). Immediately within the vallum is a broad fosse varying from 25 to 32 feet in width. The vallum at its highest (east) rises not more than seven feet above the floor of the fosse. The “island” measures 196 by 160 feet and is perfectly flat. There is no berm and no outer fosse. The vallum is broken by three gaps, of which that to the southeast is apparently original, as the fosse has never been excavated across it. The other gaps point respectively northeast and south-southwest, the latter being a mere depression like that to be seen at the eastern side of the northern ring at Thornborough. At one point in the vallum, on the southeast, a single large stone rises slightly above the turf which otherwise covers the whole work, and certain depressions observable at other points suggest that other such blocks have been removed —that, in fact, it originally had a peristalith standing upon the vallum. The principal entrance looks towards Pen Hill…”
Around the same time, the early scientific discipline of astroarchaeology was taking root and in Sir Norman Lockyer’s Nature journal, the reverend J. Griffith (1908) explored the potential astronomical orientation of Aysgarth’s Castle Dykes, thinking that the main entrance to the site gave indications of an alignment towards either Alpha Centauri or Capella. Y’ never know…
Although many visitors and local people knew of Castle Dykes, it was pretty late before the site gained status as a henge monument. This happened following a visit here by the pedantic archaeologist R.J.C. Atkinson (1951) in September of 1948. Following his visit, Atkinson described the place, saying:
“It consists of an oval enclosure bounded by a well-preserved ditch and external bank, with an entrance on the East side. Two small gaps in the bank, without corresponding causeways across the ditch, were probably made in recent times to allow the escape downhill of the surface water which collects in the ditch. The dimensions in H. Allcroft’s plan are incorrect. The markedly oval shape is probably in part dictated by the situation, in order that as much as possible of the enclosed area should lie on the level ground topping the ridge. There is no sign of any stone structure in the central area, but the district abounds in stone walls, for which the site may have been robbed in the past.”
Aerial image
In more recent years, archaeologists have speculated that the site was a sacred site or meeting place, aswell as a site where trade occurred, particularly a place where axes were traded; but this latter idea is more due to the projection of a modern religious notion, of ‘The Market’ with little veracity in terms of the site’s function. This increasing imposition of ‘economics’ and ‘trade’ (see Brown 2008:44-6) as vital ingredients to this and other sites has little relevance outside of a simple epiphenomenalistic adjunct to magical and tribal exchanges. But such notions are outside of archaeological frameworks, so we shouldn’t be surprised at so prevalent an error.
But this place is damn impressive — though with the exception of Mr Griffith, one notable ingredient archaeologists seem to have forgotten about was the position of this site in the landscape. The views surrounding the henge are excellent, giving a 360° arena all round. If the monument once had a ring of stones around it, as Allcroft suggested, the views would still have been the same. A modern excavation here might prove worthwhile and, as a result, open up once again, the potential for further astronomical investigations with the many hills and notches along the living horizon. This site, whilst requiring analysis of it as a ‘specimen’, must also be placed in the context of the wider living environment which, to all early traditional cultures, were such important and integral ingredients.
We have also found some previously unrecorded prehistoric remains nearby which, hopefully, we’ll be able to explore a little more in 2011 and report here.
…to be continued…
References:
Allcroft, A. Hadrian, Earthwork of England, MacMillan: London 1908.
Atkinson, R.J.C., “The Henge Monuments of Great Britain,” in Atkinson, Piggott & Sandars’ Excavations at Dorchester, Oxon (Department of Antiquities: Oxford 1951).
Barker, W.G.M.J., The Three Days of Wensleydale, Charles Dolman: London 1854.
Bogg, Edmund, Wensleydale and the Lower Vale of Yore, E. Bogg: Leeds (c.1906).
Brown, Paul & Barbara, Prehistoric Rock Art in the Northern Dales, Tempus: Stroud 2008.
Griffith, Rev. J., “English Earthworks and their Orientation,” in Nature, volume 80, 18 March 1909.
Harding, A.F., Henge Monuments and Related Sites of Great Britain, BAR 175: Oxford 1987.
Smith, A.H., The Place-Names of the North Riding of Yorkshire,Cambridge University Press 1928.
Speight, Harry, Romantic Richmondshire, Elliot Stock: London 1897.
Acknowledgements: Many thanks to Richard Stroud for use of his photo of the henge.
Destroyed by the usual mixture of intensive farming practices and the self-righteous advance of industrialism, this cursus of many names was discovered thanks to aerial survey photographs taken in the early 1960s. Found only 6½ miles west of the Aston Cursus and constructed on level ground on the north side of the River Trent next to B5009 road between Twyford village and Willington. I think the site was first described by J.K. St. Joseph (1966) in his notes on air reconnaissance finds, in which he described the site,
“So far the parallel ditches, some 220ft apart, defining the cursus have been identified on an east to west alignment across three fields for a length of some 1800ft. This may well be only fraction of the total length of the monument, which probably extended westwards towards the new power station at Willington. Three ring-ditches, one lying within the cursus, and two to the north, as well as a rectangular enclosure, have also been recorded.”
There was probably more to be discovered here, he thought. And so the following year the first dig into one section of the site was made, and again in 1969. A synopsis of this and subsequent excavation work have been reported on the PastScape website which tells:
“The cursus has been traced for a distance of at least 1560 metres, lying near the edge of the flood-plain of the Trent. Excavations in 1994-5 in advance of work on a bypass recovered Peterborough Ware sherds close to the bottom of the southern cursus ditch. Charred organic remains were also present, from which radiocarbon dates are to be sought. The excavations also uncovered a causeway between 10.5 and 19 metres in length through the northern ditch. Within this causeway were a cluster of short linear features and a post hole, all presumably evidence for controlling access into the monument. Another break in the northern ditch was shown to have been created to accommodate the course of a stream, which still runs through it. The 1994-5 excavations also confirmed that the 1969 excavations had in fact found a series of natural features which were mistakenly interpreted as representing the cursus ditches… At the south-western limit of the cursus cropmarks the southern ditch appears to have been recut and possibly reused at a later stage as a double ditched trackway…”
References:
St. Joseph, J.K., “Air Reconnaissance: Recent Result, 6,” in Antiquity journal, volume 40, no.157, March 1966.
Wheeler, Hazel, “The Findern Cursus,” in Derbyshire Archaeological Journal, volume 90, 1970.
An unusual cup-marked stone — not because it’s found in the grounds of the chapel, but because the design appears carved on a flat slab, as if it might have been used as a grave cover or perhaps stood upright in times gone by. First described in Rob Graham’s Carved Stones (1895) in the days when a few more cup-markings were visible; nearly a hundred years on it was included in the Royal Commission’s (1984) report as “a prone slab measuring 1.7m by 0.98m and 0.15m in greatest thickness; its upper surface bears at least nineteen plain cups up to 110cm in diameter and 40mm in depth. In addition, wear has caused a large deep cup, 180mm in diameter and 80mm deep, to penetrate the stone, and there is another circular, vertical-sided, perforation measuring 70mm in average diameter and expanding to 90mm at the upper surface on the stone” — meaning there’s a hole that’s been worn through the rock itself. This hole would seem to be accounted for by the folklore tradition of the site.
Folklore
It was reported by R.W.B. Morris (1969) that the cups here were “said to have been enlarged by a former ‘wishing’ rite” — a tradition echoed at another carving not far away where a pestle was used on the cup-marks and rotated 3 times, then a wish was made and an offering left to aid the wish. Morris suggests this could have been a faint relic of solar worship.
References:
Graham, Robert C., The Carved Stones of Islay, James Maclehose & Son: Glasgow 1895.
Cup-Marked Stone: OS Grid Reference – SO 1576 5858
Also Known as:
Llanerch Stone
NPRN – 306082
Archaeology & History
Llanerch cup-marked stone (after Watkins, 1932)
A small and simple cup-marked boulder, hidden away in the Welsh hills, all-but unknown even to cup-and-ring fanatics! It’s nowt special to look at, reminding me somewhat of the numerous cup-marked rocks that scatter the edges of Baildon Hill in Yorkshire. Found close to a number of other prehistoric sites, the stone isn’t in its original position so we’re unable to tell whether it was associated with any tombs (as is probable). The carving consists of around 32 cup-marks, with some 18 of them visible on its upper face. It’s likely that there were more cups on it originally, for when it was first found (as shown in the photo here, taken soon after being discovered) one side of the stone had been split away, but the other section was nowhere to be seen. Alfred Watkins (1932) told how it was first discovered:
“Following a visit by the Woolhope Club in 1928 to that fine mound on Radnor Forest—Cruger Castle…a fellow member (Mr. Walter Pritchard), working on alignments, discovered a fine cup-marked stone, at Llanerch Farm, a little south of the mound. I visited and photographed the stone the same year, and took a rubbing of the cup-marks on it, also taking as careful a bearing as possible, and marking it on the paper while on the stone.”
Its isolation is a little unusual, but there are likely to be other carvings scattering the nearby hills and valleys awaiting discovery by enthusiastic explorers.
Folklore
The great ley-hunter himself, Alfred Watkins (1932) — following in the footsteps of some of his contemporaries it’s gotta be said — used this carving to add fuel to his notion of leys and aligned sites, thinking that the cup-markings on the stone were representative of such things, etched thousands of years back to be used by other travellers. Can’t see it misself — but then I did spend a few years looking at the potential relevance cup-and-rings had with alignment features when I was a boy, ruining many a-map and finding they had no relationship whatsoever to such things! But it seems that Mr Watkins was still going through the exploratory phase at the time, because, after taking a rubbing of the stone he told:
“I also (as soon as I got home) tested for alignments, and inked in those of four cups which I found, as I considered lines of three to be of no value as proof. I could not at that time see any tangible proof of anything, and put it down to this (broken) stone having probably been moved. The reproduction I give is of this crude rubbing exactly as I finished it (outlining then the rather indefinite edges of the cups) in 1928.”
References:
Sharkey, John, The Meeting of the Tracks: Rock Art in Ancient Wales, Gwasg Carreg Gwalch: Llanrwst 2004.
Watkins, Alfred, Archaic Tracks round Cambridge, Simpkin Marshall: London 1932.
