7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
1/16
Ulster Archaeological Societyis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ulster Journal of
Archaeology.
http://www.jstor.org
Ulster rchaeological Society
The Sun, the Moon, and Megaliths: Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NorthernIrelandAuthor(s): Aubrey BurlSource: Ulster Journal of Archaeology, Third Series, Vol. 50 (1987), pp. 7-21Published by: Ulster Archaeological Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20567995Accessed: 08-01-2016 19:47 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/publisher/uashttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20567995http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20567995http://www.jstor.org/publisher/uashttp://www.jstor.org/7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
2/16
Ulster Journal
of
Archaeology,
Vol. 50,
1987.
THE SUN,
THE
MOON,
AND MEGALITHS
ARCHAEO-ASTRONOMY AND THE STANDING STONES OF NORTHERN IRELAND*
by
AUBREY BURL
(2
Woodland
Road, Birmingham B31)
The aims
of this paper
are
threefold:
to
explain
the
celestial
mechanics of archaeo
astronomy;
to
describe
the
difficulties
that
confront
thefieldworker;
and
to
recommend
a
programme of research
in
Northern
Ireland.
A child
would say:
'The
sun
rises
in
the east'.
An adult
would say: 'The sun rises at the
NE. at
midsummer and at the SE. inmidwinter'.
An astronomer
would say: 'This year,
at
the
latitude of
Belfast,
given
an
horizon
height
half
a
degree above
the eyesight of the observer,
allow
ing for
refraction,
and
with a solar declination of
?230-4,
the summer solstice rising
will occur at an
azimuth,
or
compass-bearing
fromTrue
North,
of
46.%8, over 13?4 degrees
south of NE'.
Many
archaeologists
would say: 'This
has
nothing
to
do with prehistory'. Sceptical
of the
proliferation
of dubious sightlines claimed
by
uncritical
enthusiasts,
dismayed
by
the complex
ities
of parallax, perturbation and
precession,
and
horrified by the spectres of druids and dowsers,
loonies and
ley-liners
lurking like
nocturnal
vampires around the moonlit megaliths,
many
archaeologists have
rejected
the
work of
pioneers
such as Lockyer and
Somerville
and,
more
recently, of Hawkins, Thom and Ruggles,
dis
missing
all
the
theories,
good
and bad
alike,
as
worthless,
nonsensical
and
irrelevant to the study
of
prehistory.
They
are
wrong.
The evidence
of Newgrange and Stonehenge,
of
Maeshowe,
of the recumbent stone
circles of
north-east
Scotland, and the stone rows
of the
Western
Isles,
proves that such a negative
reac
tion isunhelpful and obstructive. The question is
not
whether
Neolithic and Bronze Age communi
ties
in
the
British Isles integrated solar
or lunar
lines into
some
of their ritualmonuments
but
why
they
did
so
and how accurate
their
alignments
were. Archaeo-astronomy
is a part, no
more than
a
part but an
important one, of prehistoric
studies.
This
cannot
be
stressed
toomuch. The writer does
not know
of a single prehistoric monument
in the
British Isles
that
was
designed
exclusively,
or even
primarily,
as an observatory.
But he knows
of
many that
contain
sightlines
whose existence
is
certain but
whose purpose is
obscure. Archaeo
astronomy may reveal the significance of these
lines. With care
it
may provide
a
chronology
for
otherwise undatable
structures,
it
may reveal
cul
tural links between
distant regions,
and, above
all,
itmay offer insights into
the thinking of societies
who thought it
necessary to
erect
stone circles,
henges and
rows
of
standing
stones.
This seems so moderate
a
standpoint
that
it
is
saddening to
recall how some archaeologists
have
responded
to any suggestion
that
ancient
people
were aware of the
sun and the moon.
'It is fantastic
to
imagine
that
the
ill-clad
inhabitants
of these
boreal
isles
. . .
should
shiver night-long
in
rain
and gale . . . to note eclipses and planetary
movements
in
our
oft-veiled
skies'
(Childe 1930,
164).
'I
have
no
faith whatsoever
in correlations
between the orientation
of Rude
Stone
Monu
ments
of
any
kind
and
astronomical
phenomena'
(Macalister
1928,
109).
'Theorists
.
. .
building
up
verbose fatuities,
concerning
sunrise
on
Midsum
mer's Day,
and
so
forth'
(Keiller
1934, 11-12).
'Orientation
(except
for calendrical use)
has
no
sounder
basis
in
objective
fact
or
logic
than had
the
Druidical,
Dracontian,
Phallic and
other
obsolete
imaginings' (Engleheart
1930,
46).
A 1960 calendar used
to
hang in the Conyng
ham Arms Hotel, Slane. It contained a descrip
tion of the Newgrange passage-grave saying
that
'the
rays
of the
rising
sun
at certain
times of the
year penetrate
the
opening
and
rest on a
remark
able
triple
spiral carving
in the central chamber'.
Archaeological
derision
followed. The
account
was
'an example
of
the
jumble
of
nonsense
and
wishful
thinking indulged
in by those
who
prefer
the
pleasures
of the irrational and the joys
of
unreason to
the
hard
thinking
that archaeology
demands'
(Daniel
&
O'Riordain
1964,
19).
Ironi
cally,
not many
years
later another
archaeologist
did discover that 'atmidwinter
sunrise the tomb
was dramatically illuminated and various details
*
This
paper
is the
outcome
of the Oliver
Davies Lecture
given by
the writer
in
March,
1986.
7
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
3/16
of the side and end recesses could
be clearly seen'
(O'Kelly
1982,
124).
This
example
of
amegalithic
tomb
architecturally designed
to admit the
rays
of
the rising
sun into the
chamber
for
a
few
chosen
days
of the
year shows
that
prehistoric people
were concerned with celestial events. Similar
deliberate solar and lunarorientations were incor
porated
in several Breton
passage-graves
such as
Dissignac and Gavr'inis (Burl 1985,
98,
110-11).
Crude
alignments
towards
the
southern
moon
have been detected
in
the stone rows
of
Mull
and
Argyll
(Ruggles
1984, 275-8,
303-6). Why
people
should have raised those desolate lines
is
one question. How their handiwork can be
proved
today
is
another.
Let us
suppose
that in Northern
Ireland,
modern seekers
of
astronomical truth wish
to
devise
a
programme of research. They will
require
technological understanding;
a
strict methodo
logywith an awareness of the limitations of their
material;
and
they
will need sites for
analysis.
All
this
can
be
provided.
TECHNOLOGY
At
any site,
to
discover
where
the
sun ormoon
will
rise or
set
at their northern
or
southern extremes,
an
enquirer must
know three
things:
the
azimuth,
the
latitude, and
the horizon
height.
From
these
the necessary solar
and
lunar declinations can be
calculated.
Azimuth
Azimuth is the
bearing between two
objects,
first
the
backsight
where the observer
stands,
and the
foresight
towards which he
looks.
In
archaeo
astronomy
the azimuth can
only
be
properly
determined
if the
backsight
and
foresight are
both
artificial
and
archaeologically
associated. As
instances,
the backsight could be the centre
of a
stone circle, or a standing stone or the passage
of
a
chambered
tomb.
The foresight should be a
man
constructed
object
such
as
an
outlying
stone or the
far end of amegalithic row. It is not acceptable to
choose a notch on the
skyline.
It is possible that
prehistoric people
did
use
such
an
alignment.
It is
impossible
for us to prove it because the
same
skyline may contain a bewilderment of
notches
and
peaks
in line with
various solar, lunar
and
stellar events.
Only
genuine human structures
should
be
accepted
such as
the
rows at
Beaghmore
that
run NE.-SW.
(or
SW.-NE ).
Latitude
It is not
widely appreciated
that latitude has a
considerable effect on celestial positions. At Bea
ghmore, a stone circle complex in Co. Tyrone on
latitude
54?42',
the midsummer sun in 3000 BC,
with a declination of
240.027,
would have risen
over a nearby hill around
450.3
from True North.
If, however, the ring had been inCornwall nearly
300 miles
to
the
south,
latitude 50030',
the sun
would have appeared at 500-3, and ifBeaghmore
had been in
Caithness,
latitude 58030', the same
distance to the north, the midsummer solstice
would have been
at
390.9.
To
talk
of
midsummer
sunrise
occurring
at the
NE. or
450
isno
more than
a convenient
generalisation.
Altitude
The
height
of the horizon is also
important.
At
Beaghmore
it has been
assumed
that the north
eastern skylinewas formed by a low ridge 3/4mile
away
and
about
34ft.
(10-4m.)
higher
than the
area
in
which
the
stone
circles stand.
If, however,
a hill had been
there,
500 ft
(152m.)
above
the
ring,
themidsummer sunwould have
been
sighted
not
at
450.3,
but
at
570-6,
over
120
farther
to
the
south and 250
yards
from
the
original rising point.
Latitude is simple to
determine
from any good
0.
S.
map.
Horizon altitude
can
also
be
estimated,
albeit only
approximately,
from the same
source,
or much more
precisely
with
a theodolite in the
field, although
even
here modern
trees
may
obscure
what the
megalith
builders
saw.
Archaeo-astronomers have been only too well
aware of how
dangerously misleading
it can be
to
assume that
the altitude
of
the
modern
skyline
is
identical
to
that
of
prehistoric
times.
'Changes
in
ground
level
and
vegetation
. .
.
may
alter
the
height
of a
horizon
by up
to
about
2m.
When the
horizon
is nearer than
lkm.
this
will
result
in
the
declination being
altered
by
at
least 00-1'
(Ruggles
1984,
65).
In
consequence,
to avoid
this
distortion
fieldworkers,
such
as
Ruggles
and
Thom
have
deliberately
excluded
any sightline
to
a
horizon
nearer than 2/3
miles
(lkm.).
Yet,
as
will be
seen,
even this sensibly cautious procedure can create
difficulties.
Once the altitude has
been
established
it
must
be
refined
to
take into
account
the effects
of
refraction for
the
sun
and
moon,
and of
parallax
for
the
moon
which is
some
four hundred
times
closer
to
Earth than the
sun.
Parallax
is
the
appar
ent
displacement
caused
by looking
at a
nearby
object
first with one
eye
closed
and
then
with
the
other.
The
sun,
93
million
miles
away,
has a
parallax
of
less
than 9 seconds whereas the
moon,
so
much
closer,
has
a
parallax
of almost
a
degree.
Formulae for
refraction
and
parallax
can
be found
in Thom A. (1967, 26, 118).
8
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
4/16
Declination
Finally, there is
the
problem of
declination which
is
the angular
distance of a celestial
body north or
south of the celestial
equator. The
equator itself
will
have a
declination of 0? and the
North Celes
tialPole, at
right angles
to
it,
has a
declination
of
+90?. Declination
in the
sky
can
be
deemed
the
equivalent
of latitude on
Earth,
and the
farther
north from
the equator
the larger the
declination
will be. In a
sense,
a line
directly
east and west
of
an
archaeological
site is
the celestial
equivalent
of
the
equator. When the sun andmoon rise and set
on
that line,
at the Spring andAutumn
equinoxes,
they
have a
declination
of
0?.
When
they
are
north
of the line
they
will
have a
plus
declination
and
when they
rise
or set to its south their declination
will be a minus
one.
Declination
can be calculated
by
using
the
formula:
Sin dec.
=
(sin
Lat.
x
Sin
Hor.)
+
(Cos
Lat.
x
CosHor. x Cos
Az.)
A
rapid conversion table for the
sun and moon's
declinations in all latitudes of
theBritish Isles
can
be found
in Penny
& Wood
(1973, 66-74).
Targets
So
far this has been
a technical
exercise in survey
ing. Itmay have
established that the
long row of
low stones extending north-eastwards from
Circles C and D at
Beaghmore had
an azimuth of
37-6
looking
towards
a
skyline
about half a
degree
above
it
(Thom A.S. 1980,
17) but this is
meaningless unless the row
pointed
towards some
celestial
target
such as
the
sun, moon, stars or
planets.
Unlike peoples in
other parts of
the
world,
however,
prehistoric
communities in these
islands seem to have
ignored stellar
and planetary
movements.
In
some
ways
this
is a
pity. The sun's and
moon's
extreme
risings
and
settings cannot
easily
be used to
date amonument
because they
changed
littlemore than a quarter of adegree in a thousand
years. Stars
shifted much
more rapidly along the
skyline. In contrast to the
sun
andmoon the
bright
star, Pollux
(/3Geminorum),
moved
nearly
120
along
the
Beaghmore
horizon in the thousand
years
between 2500 and
1500BC
(Hawkins, 1966,
27).
If
itwere known
that the row
of stones
leading
from
Circle E had been
directed towards its rising
then
one
could
date
that row
very precisely.
Its
azimuth of
390
produced
a
declination
of
+
270
28,
thedeclination of
Pollux within a few
years of 1715
BC. Interestingly, when
it is
de-calibrated this
becomes
the approximate equivalent of 1400
bc,
fallingneatly between Pilcher's (1969, 89) termini
ante- and post quem
of 1535
?
and 775
?
55 bc for
the Beaghmore complex.
Regrettably,
one cannot assume that any such
alignment was intended. There are at least 20
bright stars in the northern hemisphere with visual
magnitudes between the -1-43 of Sirius (a Canis
Majoris) and + 131 of /3Crucis (Hawkins 1966,
19-42). Between 4000 and 1350BC, the
period
of
megalithic construction in these islands, their
movements
covered the greater part of the hori
zon so that
one can find
a
stellar orientation in
almost anymonument (Burl
1976,
51-2). Without
external confirmation, not yet forthcoming, of
star
sightings such as a regional group of rows or
circles
consistently aligned
on
th-atpart of the
skyline
where
only Capella (a Aurigae) or some
other star rose or set alignments to the starsmust
be left an
unresolved question. With the sun or
moon
the evidence ismuch less
equivocal.
The Sun
The sun, with a
declination
of
+24?112
in 4000
BC,
is relatively constant.
Two thousand
years
later its declination
had
reduced
only
to
?230.928.
Rising
at the NE. and
setting
at
the
NW.
at
midsummer,
giving
17 hours of
daylight
in central
Britain,
the sun
moved
down the horizon
day
by
day for
the next six
months, rising
at
the
east and
setting
at
the west at
the
Spring
and
Autumn
equinoxes
with
a
declination
of
00.
Continuing
southwards
it
eventually
reached its southernmost
extremes, declination -24'-112, of a SE. rising
and SW. setting
at
midwinter
when
daylight
lasted
less
than seven hours.
Its northern and
southern
extremes
are known
as
solstices
or
'Standstills'
because at June
21 and December
21
it
lingers
at
the same
place
for
several
days together
before
starting
on its
long
return
to
the other solstice.
The
Moon
Whereas
the sun
is
consistent with
only
two
extreme declinations
the
moon
is fickle
as
its four
declinations of
+28?32,
+18?-00, -30?-12,
and
-19?-84 show. Instead of a solar pendulum
trustworthily swinging
steadily
backwards and
forwards
from
NE. to
SE.
to
NE,
almost
unchang
ing through
the
millennia,
themotion of the
moon
is more like
a
heavenly
concertina
with both its
northern and southern
extremes
expanding
and
contracting
over
a
period
of
18-61
years.
When
this lunar
concertina
was
fully
extended
at its
Major
N. and
S.
positions
the
moon,
in
the
latitude
of
Beaghmore,
would be
rising
at the
NNE.,
360.8,
and
setting
at
the
NNW., 323?
2.
This would be at
midwinter
when it
reflected
the
light
of
the sun in the
south. At midsummer
it
would be
rising
and
setting
at the
SSE.,
1520-7
and
9
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
5/16
SSW.,
2270-3. The distance between its northern
and southern extremes
was
therefore about 116?.
The following year
the ends of the concertina were
not pulled so
far
apart
and
its arc
narrowed by
some
5?.
The contraction continued for another
eight years
until,
at its
Minor
positions,
it
was
rising in the north at 59? 0 and in the south at
127? 4,
an arc no more
than
67?-4
wide. Then it
began widening
again,
a
cycle repeated
every
18-61 years with hardly any
variation
over
the
millennia.
Observations
on the
moon,
with its
constantly
changing
positions,
demanded patience.
It was
more elusive
than the sun
and
yet,
paradoxically,
it
seems
that it
was the moon that
was
often
the
preferred target
in the British Isles.
More
detailed
explanations
of these solar and
lunar cycles
can
be
found
inThom
(1967,
14-26),
Heggie (1981,
86-98),
and,
for the less
numerate,
Burl (1983, 16-20).
An
understanding
of what the sun andmoon
do
will also
save the
researcher
from the
misfortune
of a
group
of
investigators
who,
in
1935,
went to
Newgrange
to test the legend
that the
passage
grave
was
aligned
on
the
solstitial sunrise.
They
camped
there for three
nights
but dawn after dawn
clouds
obscured
the
horizon
and
eventually they
left in
frustration.
They
would have been
frus
trated
anyway.
They
had
gone
there at
midsum
mer,
all right
for
Stonehenge
but not for
Newgrange whose
entrance faces south-east
and
the midwinter
sunrise, 80?
and six months later
than their visit (Brennan 1983, 34).
METHODOLOGY
It
is not
enough
to
know
about
these astronomical
matters
and
to be
able
to use a theodolite.
There
are
traps. It is possible
to be careless and it is
possible
to
be over-precise. It is possible to come
upon
a
solar
or
lunar
alignment that
was never
created by prehistoric
people and which exists
entirely by chance.
It is
possible to discover
accur
ate
alignments
inmonuments
and follies
erected
only a
few
years ago.
It is possible to miss a
sightline in a row of standing stones running
NE.-SW. by looking
along it only to the SW.
instead
of
looking
in both directions. As a gloss, it
is
possible
to come upon a sightline in a row or
circle
and overlook the three other
alignments
that
survive in
the
same structure.
In
archaeo-astronomy
the golden rule is to
avoid
drawing conclusions
from single sites. As in
any scientific test the results should be repeatable
and for this
groups are needed. One site
alone
may
contain a
solar alignment by accident.
Two
similar
sites
with similar
alignments may
be
coincidental, three become interesting and ten
or
more with similar orientations and similar decli
nations make it possible that this iswhat
prehisto
ric people intended. At that
stage
the
investigator
may go on to consider
why
there
were
such
align
ments. To do so
after having
looked at
only
one
site
is
a
very
questionable
procedure.
A second
point that
is
becoming
clearer
is that
when alignments are discovered they are rarely
precise.
Some sites are accurate within a few
seconds of arc but this was
probably
fortuitous
because similar sites are accurate
only
within a
degree
or
two, sufficient
if
the alignments were
symbolic but quite inadequate
for
analytical
observations
of
themoon's minute
perturbations.
To
accept
that
alignments
were
general
rather
than specific
will
preserve
the archaeo
astronomer from rejecting
a
host
of
clumsy
sites
and
accepting only
the
minority
of
high-precision
lines
thereby giving
the
impression
that the
pre
historic
British
Isles were inhabited
by
celestial
researchers setting up megalithic observatories to
further their
understanding
of
the
heavens.
They
were
not.
Such
researchers never existed. To the
contrary,
many ritual
monuments
were
directed
rather
haphazardly
towards the sun or moon for
reasonswhich are as
yet
obscure butwhich
suggest
links
with
funerary practices
and
death.
It
is
necessary
to
exercise great
care
when
look
ing for alignments.
Backsights
cannot
be
arbitra
rily
chosen but should
have
some
exceptional
quality
such
as
being
the
tallest
or
most massive
stone,
or
the entrance
to
a circle
-
which
will
not
serve as a
foresight
because of
its
width
-
the
centre of a ring if it can be determined closely, a
cupmarked stone,
or
the
end
of
a
row.
Such
features would
be
acceptable
as
putative
back
sights.
So would
the
chamber of a
megalithic
tomb.
Foresights
should
be
both
narrow
and
distant,
preferably
at least
50
ft
(15m.) away. Looking
from the centre of
an
average circle
a stone
on its
circumference
will
be
no
more than
33 ft
(1im.)
from
the
observer and
even if that stone
were no
more
than 2
ft
(0 6m.)
in
breadth
it
would
offer
a
range
of
vision
nearly 31/2' wide.
An outlying
pillar, edge on,
a
mere
1
ft
(0-3m.)
across, and
50
ft from the ringwould reduce this arc to barely
more than
1?.Tall,
slender
slabs, ideally
of
flag
stone,
make
excellent foresights
as do
elegantly
straight
rowswhose stones rise in
height
towards a
prominent
terminal
pillar
with its broad
faces
set
along
the
axis
of
the
line.
The most
famous
of
all
foresights,
the
Heel
Stone
at
Stonehenge,
is almost
an
archaeo
astronomical
nightmare.
Of
coarse,
unshaped
sar
sen,
leaning
16
ft
(Sm.)
high
and 9 ft
(2-7m.)
wide
of
grotesque
sandstone,
its
only recommendations
are its
tapering peak
and
the
256
ft
(78m.) that
separate
it from the centre of
the circle.
It
does not
even stand in line with its presumed target, the
10
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
6/16
midsummer sunrise. In 2200 BC, when the blue
stones were being erected at Stonehenge, the
Heel
Stone would have actedmore accurately as a
marker for the moon midway between its
northern
major
and minor
risings (Wood 1978,
163).
Its acceptance as a solar foresight serves as a
warning of the ease with which it is possible to
misinterpret an alignment.
Uncritically taking
two associated features of a
stone circle and claiming an alignment between
them can be misleading. The megalithic ring on
Castle Mahon mountain, excavated in 1953
(Collins 1956)
had a fire-reddened central pit to
whose NW. there was a tiny cist containing the
cremated remains
of a
child.
An
alignment from
the cist through the pit looks
south-eastwards,
declination -23? 4, apparently towards midwin
ter sunrise. This could be interpreted as a symbo
lic sightline seen from the sacrificed body of the
child, through
the flames of the
pyre
towards the
winter sun and the land of the dead.
It
was not. The pit
was
6
ft
(1-8m.)
wide and
only 7 ft (2-1m.) from the cist. An observer would
have been
presented
with an arc of vision between
1100
and
155?,
anywhere from sunrise
in
late
October and mid-February down to a southerly
point where neither
the
sun
nor the
moon ever
rose.
The
magnificent
stone
circle of
Ballynoe
inCo.
Down, appears
more
promising
for not
only
is it a
great ring
some
100 ft
(30m.)
in diameter but it has
a
clearly
defined
western
entrance,
a
tallest
stone
and
no fewer
than
five or six
supposed
outliers.
Yet
despite
this
rich
potential
the
ring
offers little
save a
reminder
that the
surest
way
of
confirming
an
alignment
is to
find
similar
monuments
with
similar
orientations.
At
Ballynoe
not one
of the
'outliers' has any
astronomical
significance
and it
may
be that
they
are no
more
than
stones
that
have been
dragged
from the
circle which has
several gaps.
What
does exist at
Ballynoe
are two
orientations to
cardinal
points,
one to
the north
through
the tallest stone
and another
to
the
west
through
the northernmost
pair
of
portal-stones
at
the
entrance.
Such alignments
link
Bally
noe
with the
group
of
large
Cumbrian
stone
circles
with which it shares
many
architectural
traits and
in
which
rough alignments
to
north, south,
east
or
west are
commonplace (Burl 1988). By
them
selves the two sightlines
at
Ballynoe
are unim
pressive
for
they
are
not
by any
means
precise.
But placing Ballynoe
with
Lake
District
rings
such
as
Swinside,
Brats Hill
and
Castlerigg
shows that
lines to cardinal points
are a characteristic
of
all
of
them. It also reveals the danger of studying any
site in isolation for by themselves the
inexact lines
at
Ballynoe
would be astronomically
unac
ceptable.
At
Beaghmore,
Dr
A.
S.
Thom examined
ten
NE.-SW.
lines
of
standing
stones
tangential
to or
leading
between
pairs of circles.
Only
two
pro
duced
interesting
declinations,
one towards the
midsummer
sunrise
along the
truncated 3-Stone
row of
Circles
F,
G;
and
a
second
towards the
same
target
along
the
line of tall stones between
Circles A, B. The other eight declinations offered
nothing
astronomical.
'In general
the fairly
short
rows
do not
point
to
any
obvious markers or
foresights
on the
horizon. As for the
remaining
rows the
average
declination
indicated is too low
by about
one lunar
diameter' (Thom 1980, 19).
This was so
puzzling
that
Thom
was constrained
to ask:
'Were the
erectors
beginners
and
learning
about the
moon's
movement or were the rows
put
there
for other
purposes?'
(ibid,
18). Itmay
be,
however,
that
the
wrong sightlines
had been
examined.
Thom surveyed only to the NE. because the
SW.
skyline
was so
close
that,
as
Ruggles
had
noted,
any change
in
vegetation
since
prehistoric
timeswould have
had
a considerable effect
upon
the calculated
declination. Yet
if
one
end
of
the
Beaghmore
rows was
more important than the
other it was that at the
SW.
because
every
one of
the rows had
a
cairn
there,
some in between the
circles, one,
at
Circle
E,
actually incorporated
into the
ring.
Excavation recovered human bone
fragments,
cremated
bone
and
a
skull from
the
cairns
(May 1953).
One of the
many
difficulties
facing
the archaeo
astronomer
is to know
how much the
landscape
has
changed
since
the
Neolithic
and
Bronze
Ages.
Today
the
rings
at
Beaghmore
lie
on
a
drearily
open
moor
of
peat
and
thin
grass
but
previously
the
countryside
was
very different as the name
Beaghmore,
'the
great place
of birches', suggests.
When the stones were
erected
therewas heath but
there were also
spreads of
birch and hazel and
oak, a stem
of which
was discovered in one of
the
cairns. There were 'a
number of small
agricultural
phases
but no
major reduction in the tree cover',
and
pollen
analysis
indicated that
quite dense
patches
of forest
survived
around the
rings (Pil
cher
1969, 89).
With
the
probability
of
only small
communities
in
the
locality
it
may
be
assumed that
therewere
many
trees
close to the
circles, chang
ing
the
horizon
from
the bland low distances of
today
into
high
and
dark skylines in many
directions.
With a
steep
south-western horizon
behind the
cairns it is feasible
that the
Beaghmore rows,
astronomically unaligned
to
the
NE., were aimed
towards the
mid-winter sunset at the
SW., linking
death
with
the
setting sun, a conjunction known in
other rows
joined
to
burial
cairns such as Balloch
roy
in
Argyll
(Burl
1983,
7-10).
At a latitude of
540-7and an assumed horizon altitude of 30 those
rows
that
point
most
directly
towards the cairns at
11
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
7/16
PI.
I. Beltany Tops stone circle,
Co.
Donegal. Outlier
and stone circle from the ESE.
Circles A,B; C,D; E; and F,G have declinations
of
-23?*1, -240*5,
-23?*9 and -220*5
respectively, all, except the
last, close to
the
sun's
declination of -230-9. As will
be seen, the excep
tion,
-22o.5,
may also have
been of solstitial
significance.
There are rows similar to
those at Beaghmore
in
Counties
Fermanagh,
Londonderry and Tyrone
and it is
noticeable that
amongst them
also
the
favoured direction
concentrates
around
NE.-SW.
At
several of them, moreover,
Drumskinny
in
Co.
Fermanagh and Castledamph inCo. Tyrone being
two examples, there are
cairns at the southern
end. It is a combination these
Irish rows
have in
common
with others on Dartmoor in
Devon
where
single rows often lead up a slope to
a cairn
and where
double
rows
climb towards
cairn
circles,
the
majority
of
the rows running
NNE.
SSW.
or
NE.-SW.
(Emmett
1979, 95,
97-8).
This
being so it
would be worth re-examining the cairn
joined
lines at
Beaghmore and elsewhere
in
Ulster
to see if
they really do have solar alignments
built
into them.
A decision to survey only one of the two direc
tions
possessed by a row because of an
adjacent
skyline at the
other may not be advisable. Rug
gles,
whose
recent work inwestern Scotland has
yielded some unexpected
but valuable results,
concluded
that
'the exclusion
from consideration
of
horizons
closer than
1km. leaves us lacking vital
data which
bears upon the
lunar hypothesis' (Rug
gles 1984,
304).
At this
pioneering stage
of
archaeo-astronomical
fieldwork
little can
be taken
for
granted
even
by
the
best of
surveyors.
Perhaps
the
most
intriguing 'astronomical'
site
in the north of Ireland is the stone circle of Beltany
Tops
in
Co.
Donegal.
Standing
on a low
hill not
far from
Raphoe
with its Druid
Bookshop,
the
ring is
145
ft
(44m.)
in
diameter
with 64 stones
still
standing
on
its crowded
circumference.
Here
there
is a 9 ft
(2-7m.)
high
stone at
the
SW.,
an
abundantly cupmarked stone at
the
NE.
and
a
61/4
ft (1-9m.) high outlier 67 ft (20.4m.) to the SE.
outside the circle. Somerville
(1923,
212-14) sug
gested
that several solar alignments existed at the
site.
Looking from
a tall stone at the NW.,
'conspic
uously greater and
higher
than
its
neighbours',
the outlier
212
ft (64.6m.)
away
stands
edge
on in
line with the midwinter sunrise over Betsy Bell
mountain 28
miles
away.
Another
line
across
the
circle looks towards the prominent hill,
Croaghan,
7
miles
to
the SE.,
above which
the sun
rose in early November at the Celtic festival of
Samain.
A third
orientation,
towards
Argery
hill
top
4
miles
away,
records the
equinoctial
sunrises.
Three solar alignments
built into a ring might
seem convincing proof
that they
were
intended.
There
are,
however,
reasons
for doubt.
Somer
ville's hypothesis implies
that the circle-builders
deliberately searched for
a
location where
three
notable landmarks
stood in line with the
equinoc
tial, Samain
and midwinter sunrises, something
difficult
to
achieve
even
today
with the
aid
of
detailed
maps.
Nor can hills
by
themselves be
accepted as foresights which should be artificial.
Only
the outlier at
Beltany
conforms
to
this
rule
and the
evidence
for its solstitial
sightline
is sus
pect.
The
line does
not
pass through
the
centre
of
the ring
but some
11
ft
(3-4m.)
to its north
although
there was
nothing
in
the
circle
to
obscure
the view. It
would have been
easy
to set
up
the tall
backsight
and
outlying foresight
6
ft
(1-8m.)
far
ther
to their west where the
alignment
would
have
crossed
the middle
of
the circle and still
coincided
'with
a
hill-summit seen
against
the sky, at some
little
distance. The azimuth of the line is
(exactly)
that of sunrise on the day of theWinter Solstice'.
Outlying
stones to stone
circles cannot
be
pre
sumed
to
be
foresights. Despite
the existence
of
the Heel Stone
at
Stonehenge
and the
pillar
of
Long Meg
inCumbria
aligned
on
mid-winter
sun
set,
there are
many
other outliers that have
no
astronomical significance
(Burl
1976, 77).
Even
12
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
8/16
the prostrate stone
at the Athgreany
megalithic
ring
in
Co.
Wicklow,
supposedly
in line with the
midsummer
sunrise
as
Athgreany
(achadh-grian,
'The
field of the sun')
implies, may
be no more
than
a
glacial
erratic lying
near the
ring.
It
is,
in
any case, too low to act as a foresight with Slieve
corragh
mountain looming
behind it.
The best alignment
at Beltany Tops
is that from
the
great pillar
at
the
SW. to the cupmarked
stone
at
the
NE.
Although
4
ft (1-2m.)
wide this stone
has
a pointed
top that defines
the sightline
neatly,
leading
the eye
to the 'small but
conspicuous
hill-summit'
of
Tullyrap
5
miles
away
where the
sun
rose
in early
May.
This was
the
time
of
year
when the pagan festival
of Beltane
was celebra
ted,
thememory
of
which
seems to
be preserved
in
the
name, Beltany.
Cupmarks in megalithic rings do seem to
occupy astronomical
positions. Analysis
of
the
eight
cupmarked
recumbent
stone
circles
in north
eastern Scotland:
Arnhill, Balquhain,
Braehead,
Cothiemuir
Wood,
Loanend,
Loanhead
of
Daviot,
Rothiemay
and
Sunhoney
showed that
in
every
case
the
eleven
decorated
stones stood
in
line with a solar
or
lunar
extreme,
one aligned
on
midwinter sunrise,
three
on
the
minor
southern
moonset,
two on
the
major
southern
moonrise
and no
fewer
than five on the
major
southern
moonset
(Ruggles
&
Burl
1985,
S54-S57).
Statis
tically this is
too complete a
correlation to
be
coincidental and
itmust be
accepted that at
least
in those Scottish circles the cupmarks were astro
nomically
placed.
The
same
could
be
true at Belt
any
Tops
where
the
cupmarked
alignment
had a
declination of
+
160.6
very
close to sunrise
in early
May
(Thom 1967, 110; Burl
1983,
34).
The
problem at
Beltany Tops is
that
the
align
ments
are
good
but they
cannot be
tested
against
similar
sites because
none exists.
Beltany
is
a
unique
circle. It
stands between
the heavily
kerbed
'passage-graves'
of
Carrowmore, Co.
Sligo, to the
west, from
which
it
may
have
derived,
and the
Ulster
rings
of
semi-contiguous stones
to
the east for which itmay have provided a proto
type.
In neither
complex are cupmarks
known
except at
atypical
rings such
as
Millin
Bay,
Co.
Down;
Kiltierney, Co. Fermanagh; and at
Castle
damph,
Co. Tyrone,
where
an
intrusive cist may
have had
a
cupmarked
slab.
Nor
is
there,
as
yet,
any
convincing evidence
of
an
interest
in the
sun
or
moon. Without
such external confirmation of
its alignments,
Beltany
must remain
a
debatable
..
..
....
4
.7"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~P0,7
1
PI.
II.
Beltany
Tops.
The
cupmarked
stone
at
the
NE.
of
the
ring.
13
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
9/16
archaeo-astronomical candidate. It is evidence
from a large group of
similar monuments that is
required.
The final section of
this
paper
offers
a
suggestion for fieldwork in
Northern Ireland.
THREE-STONE ROWS
In his
seminal paper about the stone circles in
Ulster,
Davies
(1939, 3-4)
drew attention
to
the
settings of
three large upright stones that some
times stood
alongside rings but which also existed
in
isolation in the eastern counties of
Antrim,
Armagh
and
Down. He suggested 'they may be a
separate feature
adopted by
the circle-culture' in
the counties of Fermanagh and
Tyrone. This was
perceptive.
Both in the north of Ireland and in the
western
areas of Scotland there are many 3-Stone
rows
without
any
adjacent
structure.
They
also
occur
sporadically
in
other parts of the British
Isles and inwestern Europe, although whether
such
remote sites had any connection with those
around the North
Channel is doubtful.
Some
rows
may
be
deceptive,
the three survi
vors of a once longer line from
which stones have
been removed
or a
pair of
stones
to
which
a
third
has been added
by Trinity-minded
Christians. In
this
respect
it is
interesting
that
quite
often in
Scotland
the
row
has been
'Christianised'
by top
pling the central pillar
to
transform the heathen
line into two innocuous
standing stones.
Despite these reservations it is likely that the
majority
were
put up as they
now
stand,
three
great stones in a straight line that often climbs in
height towards the south.
Why
the number 3
should have been
considered desirable
or
power
ful will
probably
never
be
known
but 3 still has
superstitious connotations,
'third
time
lucky',
'three
cheers'. Diseased
people would walk three
times
clockwise around the
Stones
of
Stenness
in
Orkney,
following
the
sun's
path, triple spirals
were
carved at Newgrange, children
were
passed
three
times through the Cornish
holed
stone,
Men-an-Tol,
to
preserve
them from
rickets,
and
men
and
women
would
turn a
pestle
three times
sunwise in the
cupmark
on
the base of
a
Celtic
cross inKilchoman churchyard, Islay (Grinsell
1976, 25,
61-2).
Scholars have
remarked
on
the
popularity
of 3 in the rituals and
myths
of Celtic
peoples
(Ross 1967;
Green
1986, 208f).
The
choice of three for
a row
of
standing
stones
may
therefore have been considered
a
magical
and
potent
combination.
They
were
powerful enough
to
have
villages
named after
them,
Trillick
(tri-liag,
'three flag
stones')
in Co.
Tyrone
near
the
Derryallen
row,
and,
in
Wales,
Harold's Stones
near
Monmouth
at
Trelleck
(tri-ilech)
where
a
sundial,
dated
1671,
in
the church has
a
carving
of the three
pillars
and
an
account in Latin of how
they
were
thrown there
from a
mountain
by
the
Devil. Others
like
'The
Three Sisters'
in
Co. Down
may have
passed
on
a
folk-memory
of solar
activities to the
name
of
the
nearby village,
Greenan
(grianan,
'the
place
of
the
sun').
Characteristically,
3-Stone rows
are
architectu
rally impressive, some of them of 'three large
slabs,
sometimes
eight
feet
high,
set not
conti
guously,
and with their broadest faces
aligned'
(Davies 1939, 3).
To this the observation
may be
added that the
preferred alignment
of
many
of
them isNNE.-SSW. or
NE.-SW.
with the taller
stone at
the
southern end. A
preliminary corpus
of
these
rows
(see Appendix)
has been
compiled by
the writer in the
hope
that the
many
sites that exist
inNorthern Ireland will be examined for astrono
mical
alignments just
as
Ruggles (1984)
has
done
inwestern
Scotland
with
very
informative results.
Working
on
islands such
as
Jura
and
Mull,
and
in Argyll from the north down to the Kintyre
peninsula,
he discerned distinctive
regional trends
(Ruggles 1984, 275, 285,
304).
In
north
Argyll
and
in
Mull several of the 3-Stone
rows,
Dervaig
and
Balliscate
amongst them,
seem to have been
directed towards the
rising
or
setting
of
the
southern moon although with a precision no
greater
than
?
1'. In
contrast,
the
superficially
comparable
rows in
Kintyre
were
aligned
towards
the winter solstice as the famous
alignment
at
Ballochroy
has demonstrated
(Thom 1971,
36-7).
It has
already
been
emphasised
that a row
could
have
looked towards theNE. or
SW.
equally
but
whereas the northern range of declinations in the
Scottish
rows,
+27?
to
+34?, yielded
no
persua
sive astronomical harvest those
to
the
south,
-19'
to -310 did with noticeable clusters around
the
solstice
and
the
minor
and
major
lunar extremes.
There
was no indication of
any
interest in
the
summer
solstice or in the
equinoxes
which,
indeed,
were
'strongly
avoided'
(Ruggles
1984,
304).
There
was,
however,
a
strange
concentra
tion of declinations around
-22?.5, puzzling
'as
there is no obvious solar
or
lunar
explanation for
it'
(ibid
305).
Nor do stellar
risings
and
settings
offer a
compelling
answer.
Sirius
[a
Canis
Majoris] had that declination around 3000 BC (c.
2300
bc),
too
early
if conventional
thinking about
the
chronology
of the rows
being
Bronze
Age
is
correct. The
same
objection
would
apply
to
Rigel
[/3
Orionis]
in
2350 BC
(c.
1870
bc). Conversely,
Antares
[a
Scorpii]
in 700 BC
(c.
525
bc)
is far too
late.
From the
presumed
existence of solar and
lunar
alignments
in
so
many
other
rows
it is
probable
that a
declination of
-22?-5, occurring
in
early
December
and
January,
also
was
of
celestial
importance
to
the
erectors
of
some rows.
Why this
should
have been
so at present eludes us
unless it
marked thebeginning and end of a four-week long
14
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
10/16
O-
~ ~ ~
N.
Argyll
-
3-STONE
ROWS
* Certain
A
Possible
A*
Ef
* t-S-*tL~
1j0
20
3|0 40 _I
~~~~~~~~~M
Mi
les
Fig.
1. Distrbution
of
3-stone
rows
around the
North
Channel.
15
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
11/16
ritual period as the sun approached
and
departed
from
its
winter solstice position. Unproveable
though
it
is,
one of the longBeaghmore
rows
may
have
provided
this kind of
solstitial
'warning'.
While
three of the known
alignments
looked
towards
themid-winter sunset the
fourth,
the row
to Circles F and G which are a full 160 ft (49m.)
from the other rings, has an estimated declination
of -22?-5. The sunwould have set in linewith this
row towards the end of the firstweek inDecem
ber. A
fortnight
later it reached its
major setting
at
mid-winter before
returning,
nights later,
to its
setting beyond the row to Circles F and G. Other
primitive societies have divided their year into
'months'
in
this
way (Burl 1981, 268-9),
and the
stone rows discussed
in
this paper may have per
formed
just
such a calendrical function.
On the
assumption
that the
3-Stone
rows in
Northern Ireland were in
some way connected
with those in Scotland it is likely that they too
contain alignments,
and
with Kintyre being
so
much closer thanMull and northern
Argyll
it
may
be that these
will
prove
to be solar. None has
yet
been
surveyed.
It is thewriter's
belief
that the two
tall stones sometimes thought to form an entrance
toCircle G at
Beaghmore
are,
in
fact,
the remains
of a
3-Stone
row. From Thom's
(1980,17) plan
the
two
survivors, alongside the longer
'warning'
row,
appear
to
have
an
azimuth of about
218?.
This
would produce
a declination of
-24?-3
very
close
to a mid-winter sunset
alignment.
The 3-Stone
row
by
Circle E is clearer. It is 14 ft
(4 3m.) long and composed of tall stones that
dwarf the
long
row
beside
it.
Reversing
Thom's
azimuth
of
390
the
row,
with a
south-westerly
bearing
of
2190,
has a declination of
-23? 9,
almost
precisely
that of mid-winter sunset. It
offers
some
support
to the
supposition
that
align
ments to the sun were
preferred
in
Ulster.
There are so
many
3-Stone
rows in
Ulster
(Fig.
1) that they form a challenging and statistically
satisfying group
for astronomical
analysis.
The
results might provide information about
cultural
links
between prehistoric Scotland and
Ireland.
Investigators
will find
some rows
destroyed.
Others will
yield nothing except
a
meaningless
declination. Local traits will almost
certainly
appear
with
preferences
for
direction,
choice of
site and graded heights of stones. But there should
be an overall
pattern
which in itself
may
indicate,
as Davies
intimated,
that the rows and the
stone
circles were
originally
of two
separate
traditions.
If astronomical information should
emerge this
would
give
a
reason
forwhat
otherwise
are inex
plicable
settings lacking
artefact or
origin
to
explain
their date or
purpose. They
are at
present
the
enigmatic
handiwork of
people
who raised the
stones from
compulsions
that we do not
under
stand. It is not the stones that we look
at but the
minds of
themen
and women
who put them up.
The
admonitory
words of
Mortimer Wheeler
remain apposite. 'Wedig upmere things, forgetful
that
our proper aim is to dig up
people
. . .
The
only
thing
that
really
matters
in
our work is the
recreation of thepast'
(Wheeler
1966,
111-12).
On North
Uist
in
theOuter Hebrides three tall
stones stand
in
a
long
ESE.-WNW. line on
the
lonely slopes
of
a
hill
overlooking
a
loch.
They
are
known
locally
as
Na Fir
Bhreige,
'TheFalse
Men',
turned
into stone for
deserting
their
wives
(Grin
sell
1976,
194).
They
point vaguely
towards
the
sunrises and sunsets
in late
April
and
mid-August,
times
of no obvious
prehistoric
importance,
set
up
three or
more
thousand
years ago by
people
whose only memorial they now are. In a sense
they
have
become the embodiment of those
for
gotten
families.
As
Shakespeare
observed
in
another
context,
'You are not
wood,
you
are not
stones, but
men'
Discovery of what
such a stone rowmeant to its
people
will
enable
us to
discover more about the
people
themselves.
16
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
12/16
APPENDIX:
A
PRELIMINARY
CORPUS
OF 3-STONE ROWS
*
=
doubtful site. [
I
=
Reference
no. A.
Thom
Min
-
minor; Maj
-
major; MR
-
moonrise; MS
-
moonset;
N
-
northern; S
-
southern; SR
-
sunrise; SS
-
sunset
BELGIUM
Wgris,
Erez&e,
northern Luxembourg. 3
stones,
ESE.-WNW.,
at
Oppagne,
tallest
8
ft
(2-4m.) high.
They stand at
right-angles to the S. end
of
a
2km.
long
alignment of an
a116-couverte,
a
menhir
and a
megalithic
tomb,
the
Dolmen
de
Weris (de
Laet
107-9;
Service
&
Bradbury 145-50).
BRITIANY,
FRANCE
Pergal, Lourget
(C6te-du-Nord). 3 stones in
NE.-SW. line (Burl
1985, 40, no. 20).
Kerfland,
Plomeur
(Finistere). 3 stones in NNE.
SSW. line. Sherds,
charcoal and
a
quernstone
found
by
them (Burl 1985, 60, no.
62).
Les
Demoiselles,
St Just
(Ile-et-Vilaine).
'Les Roches
Piquees'. 2 quartz stones, 10 ft (3m.) high on an E.-W.
axis with a 3rd prostrate near them (Burl 1985, 92, no.
llOf).
La
Pauvredrie,
St Pere
en Retz
(Loire-Atlantique).
3
great stones lie
in
a NNE.-SSW. line,
the
biggest,
19
ft
(5-8m.)
long,
at the
NNE.
(Burl 1985, 102,
no.
123b).
Men Guen, Brouel,
hle
aux Moines
(Morbihan).
3
stones stand in a N.-S. line, the tallest, at the N., 6?/2 ft
(2m.)
high.
Charcoal,
sherds,
animal
bones
and flints
found by them in 1877
(Burl 1985, 115,
no.
139f).
ENGLAND
*Giant's
Grave
(Cumbria).
SD 157 811
[Li/ll].
2
great
stones
10 ft and 8 ft
(3, 2-4m.) high
stand side
by
side. The
larger
is
cupmarked.
A 3rd
stone
is
reputed
to
have
stood here
(Hutchinson 1794, II, 529).
*Shuggledown,
Dartmoor
(Devon).
Southwards of
the Longstone, SX 660
855.
1
stone
survives,
41/2 ft
(1-4m.)
high,
of the
'Three Boys'
that stood here. The
others
were
taken
away
for
gateposts
(Worth
220-22,
no.
38).
*Setta
Barrow,
Exmoor
(Somerset).
SS 726 380.
Pos
sible
row
of 2
stones
with
a
4th almost
at
right-angles
to
them 26 ft (7-9m.) from their end (Grinsell 1970, 46).
REPUBLIC
OF IRELAND
Cavan
*St
Brigid'
Stones.
H 059
378.
3 erratic sandstone
boulders
in line.
1
stone has
11
cupmarks,
a
2nd
has 4
and the 3rd has
1
(Evans
67).
Cork
Cabragh
B. W 27. 79. An
alignment
of 3
stones with 2
stones at right-angles to it
(Killanin
&
Duignan 365).
Canrooska. V 936
583.
A row of 3
stones,
2
erect,
1
fallen,
stands by a 5-stone circle. The
biggest
is pros
trate, the others are
2?h
and
1?/4
ft
(70, 40cm.) high
(O'Nuallain
1984, 39).
Cloghboola Beg.
W
305 853.
3 large stones lie to the S.
of
a 5-stone
ring
(O'Nuallain 1984, 31).
Cullenagh. W 116 053. A
3-stone row aligned NNE.
SSW.
Astronomy
Az.
30? 6,
230?.6.
Dec.
=
-32? 2,
+33?.5
(Lynch A. 1982, 206).
Newcastle. W 577 804. 3 st st
41/2,
61?2
and
81/2
ft (1 4, 2,
2
6m.) high. SW.-NE. 33 ft
(Orm.)
long. Astronomy:
'On line of
Summer soistitial sunrise'. Az.
=
230?-2,
500.2.
Dec.
=
-23?.7,
+24?.1
(Somerville
1923,
200;
Lynch
A.
1982, 206).
Donegal
Barnes Lower. C 122 263, A line of 3 stones that rise in
height
towards the NE.
Heights:
4,
23/4 and
?/2
ft
(1-2,
0-8, 0-15m.) (Lacy
77,
no.
358).
Killycolman. C 282 334. 3
stones in line once, now
fallen (Lacy 83, no. 435).
Labbadish. C 238 096. A
line of 3 stones, roughly
N-S. The central stone is
41/4 ft (1 -3m.) high. The
others
are granite
boulders (Lacy 83, no.
441).
Portleon. C 172 233. 2
standing stones, a 3rd removed,
in
a NE.-SW. line
(Lacy 85,
no.
468).
Rashenny. C 422 476. 1
standing
stone
4 ft
(1 2m.)
high.
To
itsW. and SW.
are
2
partly
buried
stones.
The
SW.
has
2
cupmarks
(Lacy 85,
no.
472).
Kerry
*
Cashelkeelty.
V 747 575. 3
large stones,
1
fallen,
in an
E.-W. row,
201/2 ft (6 3m.) long, alongside
a 5-stone
ring.
The tallest
stone,
8 ft
(2-4m.)
is
at
the E. A socket
for a 4th
stone was
found
(Lynch
A.
1981, 65-9, 76)
Astronomy:
Az.
=
2620.3, 820-3. Dec.
=
-30.2,
+70?9
(Lynch
A.
1982, 207).
NORTHERN
IRELAND
Antrim
Ballycleagh.
D
251 333. 2 massive
stones
stand 18 ft
(5-5m.)
apart,
6 ft (1-8m.)
high,
a 3rd is prostrate in
a
roadside fence (Chart 1940, 17).
Tournagrough.
J 252 743. 2
fallen
stones
lie
10 ft
(3m.)
apart,
7
and 6 ft
(2-1,
1
8m.) long. Originally
there
was a
3rd
stone, now buried
(Chart 1940,
57;
Davies
13,
no.
77).
West
Division. J 338 887. 'The Three
Brothers'. 3
large prostrate stones in a
line once 15 ft
(4-6m.)
long
(Chart
1940,
47).
Armagh
Aghmakane.
J 021
253. 'The
Long
Stones'. 'The
Hag's
Chair'.
3
tall
standing
stones
in
a
line, arranged like
the
letter
H.
The tallest is 91/2 ft
(2-9m.) high (Chart 1940,
74).
Aughadave. J 00. 19. 3
stones
in
line, the tallest
7?
ft
(2-3m.)
high (Chart
1940, 76).
17
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
13/16
Eshwary.
J 02. 28. 2
standing stones,
9 ft
(2-7m.)
apart, with a fallen
stone between
them
(Davies
9.
no.
84).
Down
Greenan.
J 102 411. 'The Three Sisters'. 2
standing
stones and
1
prostrate, 5?/2 ft (1-7m.) average
height,
8
and 19 ft
(2-4, 5-8m.) apart
(Chart
1940,
111).
Fermanagh
Cantytrindle.
H
22.
55. A 3-stone
row,
with 2
stones
now
missing. Stone is
8?/4 ft (2-5m.) high.
The
missing
stones
were
thrown down
and
buried in the 20th
century
(Davies 12,
no.
69;
Chart
1940,
154).
*Drumacken.
H 362
515.
2
large standing stones,
41/4
ft
(1-3m.) apart,
7
and
5?/2
ft
(2-1, 1-7m.)
high.
23/4
ft
(0-8m.) away
is
a
3rd
stone,
23/4 ft
(0-8m.) high
(Chart
1940, 157).
*Formil.
H
159 676. Just to the N. of a stone
circle with
two converging stone rows
are
2 standing
stones with
another
to
the E (Chart
1940, 145).
Montiaghroe, NW. H 190 692. A stone circle and 3
standing stones, 53/4, 43? and 33/4 ft
(1-8,
1-5,
1-1m.) high
(Chart
1940, 144).
Montiaghroe,
SE. H 197
690.
3 stones
stand in a slight
curve 66
and
21/4 ft
(2-1,
0-8m.) apart. They are 81/4, 53/4
and
4.ft
(2-5,
1-8,
1-2m.)
high
(Chart
1940,
144).
Londonderry
Clagan.
C 583 054.
3 tall stones of schist
toppled by
treasure-hunters in 1770.
1
has been
re-erected,
another
leans and the 3rd
is prostrate. This is the largest, 12 ft
(3-7m.) long.
The
standing
stone
is 10 ft (3m.) high
(Chart
1940, 202).
Coolnasillagh.
C 785
003.
To
the E. of a
concentric
stone circle is a 3-stone row of which only 1 stone stands.
It is
11/2
ft (46cm.)
high (Chart 1940, 208).
Tyrone
Beaghmore
E. H 684
843.
Stone circle
with 2
parallel
rows, NE.-SW.,
theW. side long and of low stones, the
E.
side
a
short 3-stone
row
of tall
pillars (May
1953).
Astronomy: Lat.
54?-7.
h
=
3??
AZ.
2190-
Dec.
=
-23?-9.
MW
SS.
(These bearings
are
calculated from the
NE. azimuths of Thom
who
did
not
make observations
to
the SW.
because of
the close
horizon
(Thom
A.
S.
1980).
Beaghmore
F.
G. H
683 842.
2
parallel
rows
run
NE. to
the
midpoint
of 2
adjacent
stone
circles. The
eastern
row
is long and composed of small stones. The W. row, now
only
of
2 tall
stones,
is
likely
to
be the remains
of a
3-stone
row
(May,
1953).
Astronomy:
Az.
222.-5?.
Dec.
-22?.5 (Thom
A.
S.
1980).
Beleevna
Beg.
H
693 827. 3
standing
stones
in
line,
7 ft
(2l1m.)
apart,
4 to
5 ft
(1-2-1-5m.) high (Chart
1940,
233).
Creevy Upper.
H 25.
88.
1 small
standing
stone
and
2
others prostrate
(Chart
1940,
219).
Davagh.
H
707 867.
By a
ruined
stone
circle
are
3
big
stones,
2
of
them
fallen
(Chart
1940,
226).
Derryallen.
H
309 531. 3
standing
stones,
4 ft
(1-2m.)
high
and
9 ft
(2-7m.)
apart.
This
row
stands
only 2?/2
miles
SSW.
of
Trillick
village
(H
332
560)
whose name
means tri-liag, 'the
three pillar-stones' (Chart 1940, 250;
Joyce
93).
Glenmacoffer.
H
530
862.
3
standing
stones,
6 ft
(1
8m.) high.
Once associated
with a stone
circle
(Chart
1940,
224).
Tremoge,
East. H 655 735. 2 stone
circles,
1
with
a
tangential
alignment
of massive
stones,
the other with
a
3-stone row 25 ft
(7-6m.)
away (Chart
238).
Tremoge, West. H 64. 73. A ruined stone circle with 3
prostrate slabs near it
(Chart
1940,
239).
SCOTLAND
Argyll
Ballochroy.
NR 730 524.
[A4/4].
A
line,
NE.-SW.,
of
a
3-stone row,
the
site
of
a
cairn
of which
only
the
cist
remains, and the site of a 2nd cairn
and
a
standing
stone
(Burl 1983,
7-11).
Astronomy:
Az. 2260. h.
-0-.1.
Dec.
=
-23?-6.
MW
SS
(Thom
A.
1967,
97, 151-5).
Clochkeil.
NR
657 244.
A
16
ft
(Sm.)
long
line
of 2
standing stones on the dunes
with
a
3rd
prostrate
by
them. The
tallest
stone
is
61?
ft
(1-9m.) high (Ruggles
189 (KT27);
PSAS
64,
1929-30, 308). Astronomy:
Az.
2270?4to2290?45.
Dec.
=
-220.5.
NearMWSS
(Ruggles
188, 189,
194, 1271).
Duachy
(Loch Seil).
NM 801
206.
[Al/4].
A
line
of 3
standing stones,
16 ft
(5m.) long
(Ruggles
143
(LN22);
RCAHM-Argyll II, 1975,
no.
116).
Astronomy:
Az.
1460.6
to
1490. Dec.
-20?.7.
Near
Min.
S
MR
(Ruggles
143,
144,272-5:
Az.
146?-8.
h.
60.9. Dec.
=
-210.3.
MW
SR;
Thom
1967,
97).
Dunamuck I.
NR 847 929.
[A2/211].
2
standing
stones
8?/4 ft (2-5m.) high with a prostrate stone
111/2 ft (3-5m.)
long
between them in a row about
16
ft
(Sm.)
long
(Ruggles
161
(AR28)).
Astronomy: Az. 1640.2 to
1650-6.
Dec.
=
-30?.6.
Near Maj SMR. The bearing of NNW.
SSE. follows the line of local topography. (Ruggles 145,
158,
243, 268-70,
272, 275; Az. (to N.)
3460.1.
h.
3?.
Dec.
=
+35?; Thom,
1967
97).
Salachary.
NM
847 040.
(A2/26].
2 standing stones
8?/4
ft
(2-5m.) high
and
a fallen stone in a row about 13 ft
(4m.)
long
(Ruggles
148. (AR6)). Astronomy: Az.
3560.4
to
3570-8.
Dec.
=
+350.2.
Did not
look
to
S.
where line could be
towards Maj S MR
(Ruggles
144,
148,
152,
243, 281).
Ayr
Ballantrae.
NX
087
818.
[G1/4].
3
standing stones
arranged
NNE.-SSW.
(Thom 1967, 137).
Astronomy:
Az.
110-8.
h.
+20-7.
Dec.
=
+36?.5.
Deneb rising
(Thom
1967, 98, 105).
Dumfriesshire
Dyke.
NT
084 036.
[G6/4].
'Three
Stannin'
Stanes'.
3
squat
massive
blocks,
in
a NNE.-SSW.
line 28 ft (8-5m.)
long, 3,
4 and 5 ft
(0-9,
1-2,
1-5m.)
high
(RCAHM
Dumfries,
1920, 145, no. 426).
Astronomy: From
Thom's
plan.
Lat.
550-32.
Az.
2020.
h.
20?.
Dec.
-29?.9.
Maj S
MR.
Islay
Ballinaby.
NR
220 671.
[A7/5].
Centre stone
gone. At
SSW.
huge
stone
17 ft
7
(5-4m.)
h.
Row once 240 yds.
(220m.)
long
(RCAHM-Argyll,
V
1984,
63, no. 79).
Astronomy: Az.
3290.
h. 0?40'. Maj N. MS
(Thom
&
Thom 1978,
169-70).
18
This content downloaded from 78.130.184.38 on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 19:47:26 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp7/25/2019 Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI
14/16
Laphroaig (Achnancarranan). NR 389 460. 2 standing
stones,
8, 10 ft (2 5, 3m.) high, and a central
stone,
prostrate, in a line 20 ft (6m.) long (Ruggles 180
(IS41)).
Astronomy:
Az.
1680-4
to
1690.8.
Dec.
=
-340.
No
target known (Ruggles 167, 169).
Jura
Knockrome. NR 548 714 to NR 560 717.
[A6/4].
A
3-stone
row. E.-W. 2950 ft
(900m.)
long (Ruggles 163.
JU 3,
4).
Astronomy: Az.
253?0.
to 2530.2. Dec.
=
-30-2
(Ruggles
163, 166, 172; Az.
730.2
h.
10.9.
Dec.
=
+ 10?-4.
Spica
1970 BC. No observation toW; Thom
1967,
97).
Sannaig.
NR 518 648.
[A6/3].
Centre stone
71?4
ft
(2-2m.)
h, NNE. and
SSW.
stones prostrate. Row once
about
16 ft
(Sm.)
long (Ruggles 165
(JU7)).
Astronomy:
Az.
198?0.
to
2020.0.
Dec.
=
-32?.2.
Maj SMS? This is
an isolated row and an exception to the 'southern rule' of
declinations between -19?.5 to -30? (Ruggles
165, 166,
172-3,
272-4).
Lewis
Carloway (Clach
an Tursa). NB 204 429.
[H1/16].
A
standing stone
81/4
ft (2-5m.) high and 2 prostrate stones
in a
NW.-SE.
line about 16 ft
(Sm.)
long (Ruggles 77
(LH6)).
Astronomy: From
Thom's
plan. Lat
58?.3.
Az.
3330.
Dec.
=
+29?.4. Maj N MS?
Mull
Ardnacross.
NM 542 491.
[M1/9].
2
parallel
3-stone
rows. NNE.-SSW.
Each
about 33
ft
(lOm.) long
(Ruggles 127,
243
(ML12)). Astronomy:
Az.
206?0.
to
2090.2.
Dec.
=
-22?-3
Near
MW
SS
(Ruggles 125, 135,
279;
Az.
339??.
h.
20.
Dec.
+320.7.
Capella
1750 BC.
But 'Fallen
alignment';
Thom
1967,
99).
Balliscate. (Tobermory) NM 499 541. [M1/8]. 2 stand
ing stones, 6 and
81/4
ft (1-8,
2-5m.)
high
with
a
fallen
central stone
? ft
(2-8m.)
long. N.-S.
The
line
is
16?/2
ft
(5m.)
long
(Ruggles
123,
243.
(ML4)).
Astronomy:
Az.
1840.4
to
1860.2
Dec.
=
-28?0O.
Near
Maj
S
MS
(Rug
gles 123, 124, 268, 272, 274-5;
Within
30
of
meridian;
Thom,
Thom
& Burl
1987).
Dervaig
C
(Dervaig
C.
NM 438 516.
[M1/6].
3
stones
3-4
ft
(1-1-2m.)
high,
2
perhaps being broken,
in
a
row,
NNW.-SSE.,
the
line
of the local
topography.
36
ft
(1rmn)
long
(Ruggles 127,
243
(ML 11)). Astronomy:
Az.
1560.4
to
1570.8.
Dec.
-28?
4. Near
Maj
S MR
(Ruggles 125, 134,
168; Maybe
a
lunar declination
on
Maj
N
MS; Thom,
Thom
&
Burl
1987).
$Glengorm. NM 434 571. [M1/7]. 3 stones set in a
triangle
but 2 have been re-erected
(RCAHM-Argyll,
III,
1980, 58,
no.
105;
Ruggles
123
(ML1)).
Astronomy:
Az.
1530.5.
h.
Top Related