Take the same directions to locate the cup-and-ring stone of Ballochraggan 12. There are several rocks adjacent. The one immediately next to it, to the northeast, is the one you’re looking for. Be gentle and careful if you’re gonna look at it — deadly serious, be very careful indeed!
Archaeology & History
One of the most intriguing and most fascinating of all the prehistoric carvings I’ve yet to discover. Not that this was all my own work. If it hadn’t been for Paul Hornby, we might have simply walked past it as being little more than a single cup-marked stone—and in this area, single cup-marks tend to be little more than geological in nature.
After we’d looked over several of the registered carvings close by, I did my usual meandering back and forth, stroking stones and seeing if there were any carvings that had been missed by previous surveyors. And in walking past a small piece of smooth rock, a singular cupmark seemed to stand out. I walked past it, shouting across to my colleague.
“It looks like we’ve got a single cup-mark here Paul,” I said, “with possible half-ring.” Thankfully Mr Hornby gave it his better attention.
Mask Stone, with faint ‘urn’Close-up of features
The sun was still out and shining across the smooth rock surface, which tends to mean that you’re not seeing any carving on the stone quite as good as it actually is. Thankfully however, the sun was beginning to get lower and, when this happens, if we wet the rock, any carvings that might be there stand out much better. And this little fella just seemed to get better and more curious the more attention Paul gave it!
The first thing that became obvious were a series of faint carved lines above the single cup-mark. Initially these didn’t seem to merit much attention (straight lines on rock are usually more the product of geophysical action than that of humans), but as the rock got wetter, Paul saw something very distinct indeed.
“There’s a face on it!” he exclaimed. And indeed there was. A Rorschach response no doubt, but it was still very much like a face. This looked for all the world akin to the stylised olde English gentry sort of countenance, as in old cartoons. It was quite ‘distinct’, as such characters themselves insist on being! Yet around this initial face, more lines seemed to be emerging as the stone gave up more and more of its hidden story.
Standing back from an initial investigation, the carving was seen to consist of a triple-ring, but without the traditional ‘cup’ in its centre. Instead, the centre was marked simply by a small ‘dot’—perhaps, originally, being a small conglomerate hole formed as a result of another tiny harder fragment of stone falling away from its larger mass. But a ‘dot’ it was. The other carved ‘lines’ however, immediately below and attached to the triple-ring, gave us something almost unique—and another strong Rorschach response. As the photos clearly show, we have a distinct second ‘face’ made up of the same lines but in a quite different form. This ‘face’ has all the attributes we usually associate with pictures of mythical spirits, demons, or a mask—hence the name!
Paul took a series of fine photos, hoping that he could catch the image that our eyes could clearly see. And thankfully, his digital camera brought the image to life even better than our eyes did! The ‘mask’ is comprised of carved lozenge forms, akin to the more decorative ones we find at Kilmartin, and more especially around Newgrange, Ireland. We sat and talked about this: wondering and working out routes that we’d take over mountains and moors, from Ireland, to Kilmartin, then onto Ballochraggan, etching the same designs onto the rocks hereby and attaching similar mythic notions to them: of shamanism and kingship; underworlds and journeys—paradigms lost and certainly misunderstood in the non-polysemia of many modern academics.
Lozenges and rings
…The stone here was still slightly covered over and, beneath the loose grasses, another feature emerged of another petroglyphic rarity. At the topmost western side of the rock a straight line ran across the surface, seemingly marked by the hand of man, with a curious little line almost doubling back on itself for just an inch or so, and then feeling to run down the stone, towards the concentric rings and the face below. When we stood back and took the photos, this line and its tracer took on a form that I’ve only seen echoed in one of the Netherlargie tombs at Kilmartin, Argyll, 44.4 miles (73km) to the west. It is very distinct.
The beaker, rings & ‘face’
Spuriously ascribed as being ‘axe’ carvings (oh how archaeologists love this Rorschach projection), the Netherlargie North tomb cover-stone in Kilmartin has a series of burial ‘urns’ or beakers carved onto the rock, amidst a scattered collection of cup markings. (Beckensall 2005:73-4; Bradley 1983:92-3; Royal Commission 1971:68-70; Twohig 1972, etc) Here too at Ballochraggan we find another such symbol, but just a singular example, much larger and more clearly a beaker or urn, as are traditionally found within many old neolithic and Bronze Age tombs; although no tomb is immediately apparent at this Ballochraggan carving.
The entire carving is very faint indeed (you can’t even see it when you’re looking directly at it unless conditions are good) showing that it remained open to the elements for thousands of years. Other adjacent carvings lack the erosion that we find on this one, even on those which, as archaeologist Lisa Samson said, is “softer sandstone rock than this one”—implying that it’s one of the older carvings in this incredible cluster.
References:
Beckensall, Stan, The Prehistoric Rock Art of Kilmartin, Kilmartin Trust: Kilmartin 2005.
Bradley, Richard, Altering the Earth, Society of Antiquaries Scotland: Edinburgh 1993.
Royal Commission on the Ancient & Historical Monuments of Scotland, Argyll – volume 6: Mid-Argyll and Cowal, HMSO: Edinburgh 1971.
Twohig, Elizabeth Shee, The Megalithic Art of Western Europe, Clarendon: Oxford 1981.
Acknowledgments: Huge thanks again to Mr Paul Hornby for his considerable help with this site, and for use of his photos.
Access to these stones has, over recent years been pretty dreadful by all accounts. It’s easy enough to locate. Go into Calderstones Park and head for the large old vestibule or large greenhouse. If you’re fortunate enough to get one of the keepers, you may or may not get in. If anyone has clearer info on how to breach this situation and allow access as and when, please let us know.
Archaeology & History
Earliest known drawing from 1825, showing the carvings
Marked on the 1846 Ordnance Survey map in a position by the road junctions at the meeting of township boundaries, where the aptly-named Calderstones Road and Druids Cross Road meet, several hundred yards north of its present site in Harthill Greenhouses in Calderstones Park, this is a completely fascinating site whose modern history is probably as much of a jigsaw puzzle as its previous 5000 years have been!
Thought to have originally have been a chambered tomb of some sort, akin to the usual fairy hill mound of earth, either surrounded by a ring of stones, or the stones were covered by earth. The earliest known literary reference to the Calderstones dates from 1568, where it is referenced in a boundary dispute, typical of the period when the land-grabbers were in full swing. The dispute was over a section of land between Allerton and Wavertree and in it the stones were called “the dojer, rojer or Caldwaye stones.” At that time it is known that the place was a roughly oval mound. But even then, we find that at least one of the stones had been taken away, in 1550.
Little was written about the place from then until the early 19th century, when descriptions and drawings began emerging. The earliest image was by one Captain William Latham in 1825. On this (top-right) we have the first hint of carvings on some of the stones, particularly the upright one to the right showing some of the known cup-markings that still survive. By the year 1833 however, the ‘mound’ that either surrounded or covered the stones was destroyed. Victorian & Paul Morgan (2004) told us,
“The destruction first began in the late 18th or early 19th century when the mound was largely removed to provide sand for making mortar for a Mr Bragg’s House on Woolton Road. It was at this time that a ‘fine sepulchral urn rudely ornamented outside’ was found inside.”
The Calderstones in 1840
The same authors narrated the account of the mound’s final destruction, as remembered by a local man called John Peers—a gardener to some dood called Edward Cox—who was there when it met its final demise. Mr Cox later wrote a letter explaining what his gardener had told him and sent it to The Daily Post in 1896, which lamented,
“When the stones were dug down to, they seemed rather tumbled about in the mound. They looked as if they had been a little hut or cellar. Below the stones was found a large quantity of burnt bones, white and in small pieces. He thought there must have been a cartload or two. He helped to wheel them out and spread them on the field. He saw no metal of any sort nor any flint implements, nor any pottery, either whole or broken; nor did he hear of any. He was quite sure the bones were in large quantity, but he saw no urn with them. Possibly the quantity was enhanced by mixture with the soil. No one made such of old things of that sort in his time, nor cared to keep them up…”
But thankfully the upright stones remained—and on them were found a most curious plethora of neolithic carvings. After the covering cairn had been moved, the six remaining stones were set into a ring and, thankfully, looked after. These stones were later removed from their original spot and, after a bit of messing about, came to reside eventually in the curious greenhouse in Calderstones Park.
Simpson’s “Stone 1” outer faceSimpson’s “Stone 1” inner face
The carvings on the stones were first described in detail by the pioneering James Simpson. (1865) I hope you’ll forgive me citing his full description of them—on one of which he could find no carvings at the time, but he did state that his assessment may be incomplete as the light conditions weren’t too good. Some things never change! Sir James wrote:
“The Calder circle is about six yards in diameter. It consists of five stones which are still upright, and one that is fallen. The stones consist of slabs and blocks of red sandstone, all different in size and shape.
“The fallen stone is small, and shews nothing on its exposed side; but possibly, if turned over, some markings might be discovered on its other surface.
“Of the five standing stones, the largest of the set (No. I) is a sandstone slab, between five and six feet in height and in breadth. On its outer surface—or the surface turned to the exterior of the circle— there is a flaw above from disintegration and splintering of the stone; but the remaining portion of the surface presents between thirty and forty cup depressions, varying from two to three and a half inches in diameter; and at its lowest and left-hand corner is a concentric circle about a foot in diameter, consisting of four enlarging rings, but apparently without any central depression.
“The opposite surface of this stone, No. 1, or that directed to the interior of the circle, has near its centre a cup cut upon it, with the remains of one surrounding ring. On the right side of this single-ringed cup are the faded remains of a concentric circle of three rings. To the left of it there is another three-ringed circle, with a central depression, but the upper portions of the rings are broken off. Above it is a double-ringed cup, with this peculiarity, that the external ring is a volute leading from the central cup, and between the outer and inner ring is a fragmentary line of apparently another volute, making a double-ringed spiral which is common on some Irish stones, as on those of the great archaic mausoleum at New Grange, but extremely rare in Great Britain. At the very base of this stone, and towards the left, are two small volutes, one with a central depression or cup, the other seemingly without it. One of these small volutes consists of three turns, the other of two.
“The next stone, No. 2 in the series, is about six feet high and somewhat quadrangular. On one of its sides, half-way up, is a single cup cutting; on a second side, and near its base, a volute consisting of five rings or turns, and seven inches and a half in breadth ; and on a third side (that pointing to the interior of the circle), a concentric circle of three rings placed half-way or more up the stone.
“The stone No. 3, placed next to it in the circle, is between three and four feet in height; thick and somewhat quadrangular, but with the angles much rounded off. On its outermost side is apparently a triple circle cut around a central cup; but more minute examination and fingering of the lines shews that this figure is produced by a spiral line or volute starting from the central cup, and does not consist of separate rings. The diameter of the outermost circle of the volute is nearly ten inches. Below this figure, and on the rounded edge between it and the next surface of the stone to the left, are the imperfect and faded remains of a larger quadruple circle. On one of the two remaining sides of this stone is a double concentric circle with a radial groove or gutter uniting them. This is the only instance of the radial groove which I observed on the Calder Stones, though such radial direct lines or ducts are extremely common elsewhere in the lapidary concentric circles.
“The stone No. 4 is too much weathered and disintegrated on the sides to present any distinct sculpturings. On its flat top are nine or ten cups ; one large and deep (being nearly five inches in diameter). Seven or eight of these cups are irregularly tied or connected together by linear channels or cuttings…
“The fifth stone is too much disfigured by modern apocryphal cuttings and chisellings to deserve archaeological notice.
“The day on which I visited these stones was dark and wet. On a brighter and more favourable occasion perhaps some additional markings may be discovered.”
It wasn’t long, of course, before J. Romilly Allen (1888) visited the Calderstones and examined the carvings; but unusually he gave them only scant attention and added little new information. Apart from reporting that another of the monoliths had carvings on it, amidst a seven-page article the only real thing of relevance was that,
“Five of the Calderstones show traces, more or less distinct, of this kind of carving, the outer surface of the largest stone having about thirty-six cups upon it, and a set of four concentric rings near the bottom at one corner. One of the stones has several cups and grooves on its upper surface.”
Carvings on Stone A (after Forde-Johnson)Carvings on Stone B (after Forde-Johnson)
Unusual for him! The major survey of the Calderstone carvings took place in the 1950s when J.L. Forde-Johnson (1956; 1957) examined them in great detail. His findings were little short of incredible and, it has to be said, way ahead of his time (most archaeo’s of his period were simply lazy when it came to researching British petroglyphs). Not only were the early findings of Sir James Simpson confirmed, but some fascinating rare mythic symbols were uncovered that had only previously been located at Dunadd in Argyll, Cochno near Glasgow, and Priddy in Somerset: human feet – some with additional toes! Images of feet were found to be carved on Stones A, B and E. A carved element on Stone C may even represent a human figurine—rare things indeed in the British Isles!
Carvings on Stone DCarvings on Stone E
The detailed sketches here are all from Forde-Johnson’s 1957 article, where five of the six stones were found to bear petroglyphs (the sixth stone has, more recently, also been found to also possess faint carvings of a simple cup-mark and five radiating lines).
Elements on Stone C (after Forde-Johnson)More elements on Stone C (after Forde-Johnson)
The date of the site is obviously difficult to assess with accuracy; but I think it is safe to say that the earlier archaeological assumptions of the Calderstones being Bronze Age are probably wrong, and the site is more likely to have been constructed in the neolithic period. It’s similarity in structure and form to other chambered tombs—mentioned by a number of established students from Glyn Daniel (1950) to Frances Lynch—would indicate an earlier period. The fact that no metals of any form have ever been recovered or reported in any of the early accounts add to this neolithic origin probability.
There is still a lot more to be said about this place, but time and sleep are catching me at the mo, so pray forgive my brevity on this profile, until a later date…
Folklore
Curiously, for such an impressive site with a considerable corpus of literary references behind it, folklore accounts are scant. The best that Leslie Grinsell (1976) could find in his survey was from the earlier student C.R. Hand (1912), who simply said that,
“They were looked upon with awe by the people about as having some religious significance quite beyond their comprehension.”
There is however, additional Fortean lore that has been written about these stones and its locale by John Reppion (2011).
Ashbee, Paul, The Bronze Age Round Barrow in Britain, Phoenix House: London 1960.
Baines, Thomas, Lancashire and Cheshire, Past and Present – volume 2, William MacKenzie: London 1870.
Beckensall, Stan, British Prehistoric Rock Art, Tempus: Stroud 1999.
Beckensall, Stan, Circles in Stone: A British Prehistoric Mystery, Tempus: Stroud 2006.
Cowell, Ron, The Calderstones – A Prehistoric Tomb in Liverpool, Merseyside Archaeological Trust 1984.
Crawford, O.G.S., The Eye Goddess, Phoenix House: London 1957.
Daniel, Glyn E., The Prehistoric Chamber Tombs of England and Wales, Cambridge University Press 1950.
Faulkner, B.M., “An Analysis of Three 19th-century Pictures of the Calderstones,” in Merseyside Archaeological Journal, volume 13, 2010.
Forde-Johnson, J.L., “The Calderstones, Liverpool,” in Powell & Daniel, Barclodiad y Gawres: The excavation of a Megalithic Chambered Tomb in Anglesey, Liverpool University Press 1956.
Forde-Johnson, J.L., “Megalithic Art in the North West of Britain: The Calderstones, Liverpool,” in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, volume 23, 1957.
Grinsell, Leslie, Folklore of Prehistoric Sites in Britain, David & Charles: Newton Abbot 1976.
Hand, Charles R., The Story of the Calderstones, Hand & Co.: Liverpool 1912.
Herdman, W.A., “A Contribution to the History of the Calderstones, near Liverpool,” in Proceedings & Transactions of the Liverpool Biological Society, volume 11, 1896.
Morgan, Victoria & Paul, Prehistoric Cheshire, Landmark: Ashbourne 2004.
Nash, George & Stanford, Adam, “Recording Images Old and New on the Calderstones in Liverpool,” in Merseyside Archaeological Journal, volume 13, 2010.
Picton, James A., Memorials of Liverpool – 2 volumes, Longmans Gree: London 1875.
Simpson, James, Archaic Sculpturings of Cups, Circles, etc., Upon Stones and Rocks in Scotland, England and other Countries, Edmonston & Douglas: Edinburgh 1867.
Taylor, Isaac, Words and Places, MacMillam: London 1885.
Stewart-Brown, Ronald, A History of the Manor and Township of Allerton, Liverpool 1911.
Acknowledgements: With huge thanks to the staff at Calderstones Park; thanks also to the very helpful staff at Liverpool Central Library.
Along the A9 dual carriageway between Blackford and Auchterarder, take the A823 road south, up Glen Eagles as if you’re going towards Pool of Muckhart and Dunfermline. Less than 100 yards up the road, turn immediately to your right and park-up. On the overgrown grassy land on the right-hand side of the road, you’ll see this solid monolith calling for your attention. You can go through the gate. You can’t really miss it!
Archaeology & History
Looking south, to the fairy-haunted Ben Shee
Described by archaeologists as a Class 1 Pictish Symbol Stone (and shown on OS maps as such), this is a fine solid standing stone more than 5 feet tall, with a lovely view up Gleneagles to the fairy mountain of Ben Shee beckoning in the distance. Immediately north on the other side of the dual carriageway, the tree-lined mound 100 yards away is an ancient fort (which we’ll deal with in another entry); and of course we have the nearby companion of the Gleneagles A standing stone a coupla hundred yards west. Whether or not this stone and its western companion ever had anything to do with the lost stone circle of Gleneagles, we might never know.
Close-up of the carved designsCharles Calders drawing of the carvings
Although it seems consensus opinion that the standing stone here is prehistoric, the monolith was of some venerable importance to the Pictish people of the Ochils, who, according to the Royal Commission lads (1999) carved on this stone “the faint symbols of a goose and rectangle.” The rectangle, however, is in fact a parallelogram—as the images here clearly show. Archaeologist Richard Feachem (1977) thought the design was in fact “a double-sided comb.” I have my doubts (a much smaller and probably more recent parallelogram design was recently identified on the upright face of the large Dunruchan D standing stone, about 10 miles WNW of here). The ‘goose’ is carved above this geometric form and is much fainter, which may imply it was carved much earlier. In Elizabeth Sutherland’s (1997) survey, she suggests the bird may be an eagle. It is equally possible that it is a swan.
The earliest detaied account of this stone and its companion is in Mr Hutchison’s (1893) fine essay, where he wrote:
“On the south side of the road from Blackford to Auchterarder, about 150 yards west from Loaninghead where the line of the road is crossed by that from Gleneagles to Crieff, stands a fine stone of Highland grit. It measures 4ft. 10in. in height above ground, 10ft. in girth at the base, and 6ft. 9in. in circumference at top. It shows four sides of nearly equal measurement:— that facing north being 2ft 4in., south 2ft. 8in., west 2ft 5in., and east 3ft. On the north is an incised figure in the form of an parallelogram, 10in. broad by 9in. high, divided into three equal portions by two horizontal lines.”
A number of very large prehistoric burial mounds, or tumuli, were destroyed in this part of Dorset in the 19th century, including “three on the Came estate, near Dorchester, the property of the Hon Col. Damer.” This one—listed as a “bowl barrow” and known today as the Winterborne Came 18b tumulus in Grinsell’s (1959:148) brilliant survey—was found to house examples of petroglyphs, which are very rare in this part of Britain. Thankfully before its destruction, the local antiquarian Charles Warne (1848) was present and has left us with a good description of its structure and contents. After first telling of the demise of two other large tumuli close by, the biggest of them drew his attention:
“The last of these mighty mounds (and well do they merit the appellation from their vastness), measured rather more than ninety feet in diameter, and sixteen feet in height; this from the peculiarity of its contents was the most interesting of the three. The annexed rough sketch (above), shewing a central section of the tumulus, may serve to give some idea of the singularity of its composition. About the centre, at a depth of some three feet from the surface, was found lying flat a rough unhewn stone, with a series of concentric circles incised; this, on being removed, was seen to have covered a mass of flints from six to seven feet in thickness, which being also removed we came to another unhewn irregular stone, with similar circles inscribed, and as in the preceding case, covering another cairn of flints, in quantity about the same as beneath the first stone. It was in this lower mass that the deposits were found, consisting of all the fragments of an urn of coarse fabric, and apparently as if placed in its situation without either care or attention, no arrangement of the flints being made (as we have elsewhere seen) for its protection; the want of which observance had completed its destruction. Under the flints, lying at the base, were the remains of six skeletons, and some few bones of the ox. The skeletons had apparently been placed without order or regularity: with the exception of a few bits of charcoal with the urn, there was no evidence of cremation.”
Nearly twenty years later, Sir James Simpson (1867) also described the tumulus and its carved rocks in his 19th century magnum opus, repeating much of Warne’s earlier description, saying:
“In his antiquarian researches in this county (Dorset), Mr Warne opened , at Came Down on the Ridgeway, a tumulus of rather unusual form. At its base…were found the remains of six unburnt human skeletons…and some few bones of the ox. Above them, and in the centre of the tumulus, was built up a cairn or heap of flints around a coarse and broken urn, which contained calcined bones. This mass of flints was surrounded and covered by a horizontal rough slab. Above and upon this slab was built another large heap of flints, six or seven feet in thickness. This second heap was capped with another rough slab, lying two or three feet below the surface of the tumulus. Both these flat unhewn covering slabs had a group of concentric circles cut upon them.”
We don’t know for sure the exact whereabouts of the tumulus, nor the age of the tomb and its remains. But the size of it may indicate an early Bronze Age and perhaps even neolithic status. The finding of the rock art in the tomb is also an indicator that could push the date back into late neolithic period—but we may never know for sure…
References:
Grinsell, Leslie V., Dorset Barrows, Dorset Natural History & Archaeological Society 1959.
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England), An Inventory of Historical Monuments in the County of Dorset – Volume 2: South-East, HMSO: London 1970.
Simpson, James, Archaic Sculpturings of Cups, Circles, etc., Upon Stones and Rocks in Scotland, England and other Countries, Edmonston & Douglas: Edinburgh 1867.
Warne, Charles, “Removal of Three of the Large Tumuli on the Came Estate, near Dorchester,” in Journal of the British Archaeological Association, volume 3, 1848.
Warne, Charles, The Celtic tumuli of Dorset: An Account of Personal and other Researches in the Sepulchral Mounds of the Durotriges, J.R. Smith: London 1866.
A little-known early christian relic found in the driveway to East Riddlesden Hall was saved and propped up in the stable floor at the back. In 1984 however, the National Trust got round to moving it and bringing the relic to greater public attention by putting it on display in the great hall of the building. (I think you’ve gotta pay to go in and see the stone these days – which is a bittova pain if you just want to examine the carving)
Old photo of the carved stone (after Margaret Faull)
Measuring just 1 foot across and 2 feet high and carved on all sides, the design is all too familiar to those of you exploring early christian or late-Celtic art forms. Executed sometime between the 5th-10th century, on the main face of the cross we have the traditional ‘Celtic’ interlacing, with a bird-figure emerging on or around an early ‘cross’ symbol. There are a variety of interpretations of this, but none relate to any modern christian mythic structures. Indeed, we should cautiously reflect on the more pre-christian nature of this design: carved as it was at a time when the spirit of the natural world (animism) was endemic amongst all people. This carving would in some way reflect such implicit subjectivity, though perhaps have had emergent ideals relevant to the christian cult within it. However, we should be cautious about this christian idea, despite it being much in vogue by prevailing groups of consensus trance historians.
References:
Faull, Margaret L., “The Display of the Anglo-Saxon Crosses of the Keighley Area,” in Transactions of the Ancient Monuments Society, New Series no.30, 1986.
Take the road up alongside and past Shipley Glen, taking the turn to go to Crook Farm caravan site. Go right to the very end of the car-park, then walk up the footpath through the trees on your left. Keep going uphill about 100 yards by the field-wall until the land begins to level out – and shortly before the first gate into the field (on your right) keep your eyes peeled for the triangular stone in the ground, barely 10 yards away from the walling. Alternatively, from the entrance into the Dobrudden caravan park walk to the far-end of the level area in front of the little cafe and walk along the footpath that crosses the grassland to the walling nearly 300 yards away (south). Follow the wall down below the gate and zigzag about. You’re damn close!
Archaeology & History
Crook Farm north carving
For some reason this has always been one of my favourite cup-and-ring stones on Baildon Moor and it’s well worth checking out if you visit the area! It was rediscovered by the Bradford historian W.E. Preston, who photographed the carving around 1912. Shortly afterwards he took fellow historians Joseph Rycroft and W. Paley Baildon to see this (and others he’d located) and subsequently both a drawing and Mr Preston’s photo of the site was included in Mr Baildon’s (1913) magnum opus the following year.
As you can see from the relative photos—with literally 100 years between them—erosion hasn’t taken too much toll and this neolithic or Bronze Age carving remains in very good condition.
Rycroft’s early drawingPreston’s 1912 photo
Covered with upwards of fifty cup-markings, there are also two cup-and-rings and numerous carved lines meandering around and enclosing some of the many cups. One cup-mark was cut into the narrow end or ‘nose’ of the stone.
It’s a fascinating design, with another ‘Cassiopeia’ cluster of cups in one section, beloved of archaeoastronomers who explore these stones. Mr Rycroft’s drawing of the design (left) is perhaps the best one, to date.
Along this same ridge there are remains of other prehistoric sites, more cup-and-rings, remains of prehistoric walling and what may be a small cairn circle (to be described later).
References:
Baildon, W. Paley, Baildon and the Baildons – parts 1-15, Adelphi: London 1913-1926.
Bennett, Paul, Of Cups and Rings and Things, unpublished: Shipley 1981.
Bennett, Paul, Megalithic Ramblings between Ilkley and Baildon, unpublished: Shipley 1982.
Cup-and-Ring Stone: OS Grid Reference – SY 6800 8601
Also Known as:
Winterborne Came 18b Carving (Grinsell)
Archaeology & History
Charles Warne’s 1848 drawing of the old tumulus
On January 27, 1848, the great Dorsetshire antiquarian Charles Warne sent a letter to the British Archaeological Association about a series of three large tumuli he’d explored south of Dorchester in Dorset, within which he’d found some fascinating remains. And in what he called “the last of these mighty mounds (and well do they merit the appellation from their vastness),” which “measured rather more than ninety feet in diameter, and sixteen feet in height,” the most intriguing remains emerged. In the middle of what L.V. Grinsell (1959) catalogued as the Winterborne Came 18b tumulus, Mr Warne told:
“About the centre, at a depth of some three feet from the surface, was found lying flat a rough unhewn stone, with a series of concentric circles incised; this, on being removed, was seen to have covered a mass of flints from six to seven feet in thickness, which being also removed we came to another unhewn irregular stone, with similar circles inscribed, and as in the preceding case, covering another cairn of flints, in quantity about the same as beneath the first stone.”
“…It will be seen that the most singular feature connected with this tumulus, is that of the incised stones: examples of which I am not aware have before been met with in like situations. It may be as well to forego any attempt at an elucidation, which must be purely hypothetical; but it seems more reasonable to believe that they bore some mystic reference, rather than that they were the unmeaning amusement of some Celtic idler.”
One of 2 carved stones found in the tumulus
Sir James Simpson (1867) described these carved stones in his 19th century magnum opus, giving an early illustration of one of them, as shown here. You’ll note that the carving is devoid of any central ‘cup’ as commonly found, consisting simply of a mere series of concentric rings.
If anyone knows the whereabouts of this and its companion stone today, it would be good to see them. Are they kept in some local museum?
References:
Grinsell, Leslie V., Dorset Barrows, Dorset Natural History & Archaeological Society 1959.
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England), An Inventory of Historical Monuments in the County of Dorset – Volume 2: South-East, HMSO: London 1970.
Simpson, James, Archaic Sculpturings of Cups, Circles, etc., Upon Stones and Rocks in Scotland, England and other Countries, Edmonston & Douglas: Edinburgh 1867.
Warne, Charles, “Removal of Three of the Large Tumuli on the Came Estate, near Dorchester,” in Journal of the British Archaeological Association, volume 3, 1848.
Cup-and-Ring Stone: OS Grid Reference – SO 9875 2825
Archaeology & History
Nottingham Hill cup-and-ring
A rare find this! In October 1981, in deepest Gloucestershire on the edge of the Nottingham Hill Iron Age hillfort, archaeologists sifting through what they ostensibly called “occupational debris” along the western edge of the huge enclosed monument, found a singular piece of local oolitic limestone etched with an archetypal cup-and-ring design! The carving was on a typical ‘portable’ piece of stone and would not have been amiss had it been uncovered in a neolithic or Bronze Age cairn in our more northern climes. But this southern example is something of an anomaly.
In Morris & Marshall’s (1983) description of the stone they told how,
“it was found as a loose block lying with the worked surface uppermost, and half-embedded in the plough-soil, together with other slabs and irregular lumps of oolitic limestone of similar size, and of closely related rock-type. The object is a discreet slab with an unworked under-surface weathered by percolation of ground-water along a joint.”
Drawing of the carving
They found that the carved stone was typical of other rocks making up the ramparts at the outer-edges of the hillfort, and at some point in its history may possibly having been included in the walled structures of the fortress itself. However, this is unlikely to have been the original use of the carving. Its inclusion in the Iron Age ramparts would more be a likely consequence of it being appropriated from another, much earlier archaeological site in the area — a chambered tomb or long barrow for example. This re-use of cup-marked stones in the Cotswolds is known to have occurred in the village of Salford, on the church cross-base, 18.75 miles (30.2km) east of here.
The Nottingham Hill cup-and-ring was described in some detail by Morris & Marshall (1983). The rock on which it was carved measured one square-foot in size and barely 3 inches thick. The central cup-mark measured,
“approximately 15.5cm in diameter, and a shallow radial groove (channel 1) leads from it to the edge of the stone. The central cup-mark is surrounded close to its lip by a penannular channel or ‘ring’ (channel 2), which has a small depression at one end. This end of channel 2 appears to be discontinuous with channel 1, but there is a very lightly pecked connection at the other end. Outside channel 2 is a second shallower ring or channel (channel 3) but because of its shallowness it is difficult to determine whether it links with the radial channel 1. Channel 3 contains a clear, small cup-mark part-way along its length, and is quite definite on one side of the central cup-mark, and on the other side it is possibly mirrored by a rather indistinct depression or cup-mark and length of channel. Channel 3 is not continuous throughout its length, ending where it meets the edge of the stone beyond the small cup-marks.”
It is obvious that the carving, whenever it was made, was not subjected to long-term exposure to the outside air, as the carved design would have eroded quite quickly on the oolitic limestone.
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, England, Ancient and Historical Monuments in the County of Gloucester: Volume 1 – Iron Age and Romano-British Monuments in the Gloucestershire Cotswolds, HMSO: London 1976.
Follow the same directions to reach the recently discovered Slade-02 carving; and simply walk 30 yards southwest. The scattered ruins of numerous small stone piles, visible only when the heather’s been burnt back, is what you need to be looking for.
Archaeology & History
First discovered on a Northern Antiquarian outing in July 2011, it’s difficult to give an accurate appraisal of this site as much of the landscape all round here is very overgrown in deep heather. Added to this, there is evidence of more recent medieval and post-medieval industrial activity that’s intruded and/or affected the earlier prehistoric remains that are evident here. But these factors aside, we can say with certainty that here is a previously unrecognized prehistoric cairnfield — and it may be of some considerable size.
Ruined hut or cairn circle
We have so far located at least seven individual cairns and a cairn circle in relative proximity to each other, thanks to local rangers burning back the heather. It was the discovery of the cairns which then led to the discovery of the nearby cup-and-ring stones. Amidst the cairn-spoils there are also distinctive lines of stone, indicative of either walling or embankments of some form or another. Some of the stone making up this cairnfield appears to have been robbed. We also found that in walking through the deeper heather surrounding this ‘opening’ (where it had been burned away a few months previously), a number of other man-made piles of stone were evident that seemed to indicate more cairns. There is also evidence of further lines of prehistoric walling, whose precise nature is as yet unknown. But we do know that people have been on this moorland since Mesolithic times (structural and other remains of which are still evident less than a half-mile away).
The site requires greater attention the next time the heather’s been burnt back.
References:
Davies, J., “A Mesolithic Site on Blubberhouses Moor, Wharfedale,” in Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, part 161 (volume 41), 1963.
Cup-Marked Stone: OS Grid Reference – ST 9583 0294
Also Known as
Badbury Rings Carving
Shapwick 6a carving
Archaeology & History
Badbury Barrow carving (after J.F.S. Stone 1958)
Amidst what was once a veritable gathering of prehistoric tombs on the ground immediately west of the Badbury Rings hillfort — a small necropolis no less! — one particular tumulus which Leslie Grinsell named as ‘Shapwick 6a‘ was in the process of being destroyed at the end of October, 1845, but was fortunate in receiving the quick attention of a local historian called John Austen, who gave us the first known account of the place. (a fuller profile of the Badbury Barrow can be found here) Inside the churned-up remains of Badbury Barrow, which measured 62 feet across and 9 feet high, Mr Austin found a fascinating number of urns and other remains and, shortly after, this rare example of a petroglyph was identified. The stone now lives in the British Museum where, the last I knew, you could certainly check it out. But it’s not its original size, as sections of the stone were broken off. As Aubrey Burl (1987) told us, the stone was originally about half-a-ton in weight, on which,
“were carvings of five cupmarks, two bronze daggers and two flat, triangular axes of early Breton type.”
Grinsell’s more detailed description of the carving from his work on Dorset Barrows (1959) tells a little more of the design found on this seeming ‘tomb-stone’:
“Sandstone slab, probably from stone cist, decorated with pecked carvings of two daggers with hilts, resembling those on stone 53 at Stonehenge; two triangular objects probably intended to be flat bronze axe-heads expanding at their cutting-edge; and five cup-shaped hollows. The existing decorated fragment (in British Museum) is 1ft 10in long, and was detached from the original slab which weighed probably more than half a ton. The size suggests, perhaps, a cover-slab.”
It may well have been. Certainly it had some relationship to death! The design was suggested in the 19th century to perhaps have been influenced by Greek imagery, when such notions were in vogue. As Grinsell tells,
“In the centre according to Durden…was the well-known large slab of sandstone which was decorated with carvings of daggers and axes, the former of type similar to those from Stonehenge, conjectured to be of Mycenean type.”
But the Mycenean nature of the carvings is highly unlikely. What is intriguing with this carving is the appearance of cup-markings (commonly associated in or adjacent to prehistoric tombs) alongside defined symbols of daggers. We could infer a magickal relationship between the two symbols here: one of which, the cups, comes from a much earlier period than the dagger-design. A more in-depth analysis of the human remains within the tumulus and a plan of the site would perhaps be more revealing…
…to be continued…
References:
Austen, John H., “Archaeological Intelligence,” in Archaeological Journal, volume 3, 1846.
Burl, Aubrey, The Stonehenge People, Guild: London 1987.
Grinsell, Leslie V., Dorset Barrows, Dorset Natural History & Archaeological Society 1959.
Knight, Peter, Ancient Stones of Dorset, Power: Ferndown 1996.
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, England, An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in the County of Dorset – Volume 5: East Dorset, HMSO: London 1975.
Stone, J.F.S., Wessex Before the Celts, Thames & Hudson: London 1958.
Warne, Charles, The Celtic Tumuli of Dorset, John Russell Smith: London 1866.
