Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI

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/


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

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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.

Documents

Archaeo-Astronomy and the Standing Stones of NI