mega-what / glossary

Stone Alignments, Rows and Pairs

There has been some conflict of terminology in this area. The term "stone alignment" has been in general use for rows of three or more stones, including for example, the long rows of NE Ireland and the very long alignments of Brittany. Some, including the Ordnance Survey, use the term "stone row" for shorter alignments but regard stone pairs as two-stone rows. Ruggles uses the term "short stone row" for rows of 3 to 6 stones to distinguish them from longer rows and avenues as well as pairs. The same terminology will be followed here. However, as all Stone Rows in the area of the "Cork-Kerry Complex" are of 3 to 6 stones, the word "short" will frequently be dropped and the terms "Stone Row" or just "Row" will be used for generalisations. The term "stone alignment" will not be used at all, while pairs are here shown to be separate entities, not rows at all. References to pairs as stone rows become particularly confusing when it comes to comparing the associations between different monument types, as they are different types in themselves. For example Walsh (1993), following the Ordnance Survey tradition, tabulates eleven associations between rows and circles but of these, eight are pairs and only three are short stone rows. Similarly, with boulder-burials - of six associations, four are actually pairs and only two are three-stone rows.

The definitive paper on stone rows of the Cork-Kerry type was written by Seán Ó'Nualláin (1988), listing 91 pairs and a total of 79 short stone rows, of which 53 are three-stone rows. They are defined as rows of "free-standing orthostats set along a general NE/SW axis". Usually the tallest stone of a row is at one end and the shortest at the other but in some cases either may appear between the end stones. Ó'Nualláin makes it clear that although the pairs are a distinct sub-class he regards the rows and pairs as a unified series. Pairs where the stones are more than 4 or 5m apart are labelled anomalous and Standing Stones more than 9 or 10m apart are not regarded as related at all. He says of rows that they "do not appear to have any special siting customs" and while their function "remains unknown", suggests "some sort of funerary or commemorative role" for them. The number of known sites has increased over the years, with Walsh (1993) giving the total as 195, of which 57 are three-stone rows and 106 are pairs. The general attitude to siting and function remains the same today as stated by Ó'Nualláin but this study indicates that there are differences between rows and pairs, it also shows that pairs of Standing Stones exist where the two stones are considerable distances apart yet they are intended to form an astronomical alignment and combine to make a functional unit.

Home | Pairs | References | Top

SHORT STONE ROWS

Two rows, Cashelkeelty and Maughanasilly, have been excavated (Lynch 1981,1999) without any significant finds, though charcoal samples helped set the date range for the monument complex as a whole to c.1650 - c.800 BC. The same may be said of a third, rescue excavation, at Dromteewakeen (Sheehan 1990). However, it may be noted that a series of five stake-holes were found at Dromteewakeen while at Maughanasilly, two shallow "furrows" were discovered as well as a number of pits. These features may well represent some remains of the setting out activities, prior to actual construction.

The Cork-Kerry rows have previously been subjected to two archaeoastronomical surveys (Lynch 1982 & Ruggles 1994,1996) but results have been inconclusive. Both studies have correctly treated the rows as potentially bi-directional but have concentrated on attempting to determine exact orientation, rather than identifying their intended targets by looking at what is actually on the horizon in the indicated directions. Lynch concluded that 23 out of 37 were aligned on major lunar or solar events but symbolically rather than systematically. Ruggles however, surveying a total of 48 rows, found only weak lunar associations coupled with evidence of orientation upon conspicuous hilltops (1999:110, 1996a:69, 1995:518, 1994:15).

Within the original study area are fourteen three-stone rows, three of which are my own re-classifications based upon physical evidence visible at the sites (Derreengreanagh, Dunmanus East and Kilmore) and also one longer row - Gurranes. These represent 21.7% of 57 three-stone and 15.2% of the total of 89 short stone rows reported by Walsh in his paper on the Cork-Kerry complex (1993:102). Knocks, a probable six-stone row in the study area that was originally classified as a pair but is not surveyable due to its position in an overgrown hedge is not included. To date, having gone beyond the original area, a total of 23 rows have been surveyed, which is 25% of the 89 reported by Walsh (1993:102) plus the 3 reclassified ones.

Rows may be either uni or bi-directional and, if the tallest stone is at one end this has been regarded as the "preferred orientation" though it seems that in fact this is not necessarily so. It has not been possible so far to deduce a clear reason for the variations in height ordering but the possibility of it being a coding system remains and it might be to do with use of non-axial horizons. Three-stone rows may perhaps be divided into two architectural sub-types based on height, the low and high, as practical experience shows that they tend to be low enough to look over or higher than a person. This is confirmed by studying the recorded heights of the tallest stones in all 27 rows in West Cork, which shows that for three-stone rows, they are either less than 1.8m or more than 2.9m. A local group of five low rows occurs south of Bantry with an additional outlying one 12.6Km ENE at Leitry Lower, all the others in the area are high.

Half of the rows surveyed have lunar axes. The alignments are generally very accurate while the apparent relationship with hilltops found by Ruggles is a by-product of the techniques employed and not a primary intention. Short stone rows are very linear monuments following the convention of NE/SW orientation but it has become apparent that they utilise sites offering all round functionality in similar ways to the other types of stone circle complex monument.

Home | Rows | References | Top

STANDING STONE PAIRS

Five Standing Stone pairs have now been excavated: Kealkil (Ó Ríordáin 1939), Carrigadrohid (Fahy 1957), Shanlaragh (O'Shaughnessy 1990), Ballycommane (O'Brien 1992) and Barrees (O'Brien 2003). Apart from Barrees, which had white quartz and also some cremated bone in a pit that yielded a 14C date of 2830±30 BP, they have produced no useful finds or dating evidence - though Ballycommane had a tiny stone cist and Shanlaragh produced some fragments of burnt bone in the fill of one stone socket. No previous archaeoastronomical survey has been undertaken. Initially they did not prove simple to interpret but were clearly different to short stone rows; they have again turned out to be calendrical indicators.

Twenty-one pairs in the original study area represented 19.8% of the number reported by Walsh (1993:102). Two of these are now gone, two have both stones fallen, three have only a single upright remaining (of these, one has been moved) leaving fourteen. Two of these are classed as anomalous. On inspection another pair at Knocks turned out to be part of a longer linear arrangement, possibly a six-stone row, which is currently astronomically unsurveyable due to its position in a field fence and obscuration of the sightline by bushes, trees and buildings. At Cullomane East and Cappagh More, sites listed as Standing Stones in the Inventory have been reclassified as anomalous pairs. The first by the Archaeological Survey, the second by me. To date a total of 20 pairs have been surveyed, which is 18.7% of the 106 reported by Walsh (1993:102) plus the reclassified ones mentioned above.

They may be usefully subdivided into different types for study purposes - the primary classification is based on stone height, with the two stones being either closely similar in height (equal pair) or markedly different (unequal pair). Walsh (1993) notes that the unequal pairs predominate overall but show no clear preference for a NE or SW orientation. The relationship of the stones to the axis of the pair may also be sub-classified for study purposes - a) In-line: both stones aligned with the axis of the pair, b) In-turned: near edges together, far edges turned to the same side, c) Out-turned: axis of one stone turned out from the axis of the pair. It is still not clear exactly what the significance of these differences might be but it would seem that pairs are not necessarily a single monument type. Rather, different variants may have been used at different times by different groups in slightly different ways.

A number of pairs are closely associated with other monuments. The pair associated with a boulder-burial at Ballycommane supplies supplementary information relevant to the site and two stones, not classified as a pair, accompanying another boulder monument at Cullomane East do the same. At Keilnascarta, the one surveyable pair associated with a three-stone row seems to be in a supporting role as is the only complete pair alongside a five-stone circle at Clodagh. Two more instances are in a slightly different league, being a bit further away. These are at Knockawaddra where the other monument is a row and at Coolcoulaghta where it is Dunbeacon multiple-stone circle. All the above are equal pairs. While I used to think that such pairs were perhaps part of the original conception, I am now of the opinion that they are just secondary re-use of the sites by latecomers to the area.

Some pairs are clearly designed to function as "sights" where a single observer stands away from the stones, lining them up with each other and the horizon to form an accurate mark on an otherwise unhelpful part of the skyline. This is only one aspect of their functionality however as they also occupy sites which offer other, more useful horizons. Equal, in-line pairs of this type may be found at Parkana and Coolcoulaghta while Foherlagh is a good example of the unequal, out-turned type.

Three equal pairs (Rathcool, Kilcrohane and Dromasta) are partially oriented beyond the major standstills and the reasons for this are not clear. As with the similarly oriented stone circles, it possibly shows an interest in extra-zodiacal stars but more probably is simply a device to indicate use of skylines on the NW/SE axis in addition to the usual NE/SW one. Certainly the first two do this but at Dromasta the NW skyline looks unpromising and the SE is obscured by buildings. An unequal pair at Mill Little also has an extreme axis.

Home | Rows | Pairs | Top

References

More about Megalithic Axial Alignments

Home Site Lists Row List Pair List Top

© Michael Wilson.