Publication Account
Date 2011
Event ID 886946
Category Descriptive Accounts
Type Publication Account
Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/event/886946
This stone circle is situated at the southern edge of a field about 100m north-east of Cairnfauld. Measuring about 22m in diameter, the disposition of the five surviving stones suggests that it originally comprised nine evenly spaced orthostats. Of the five that remain: one (5) has been displaced since Coles surveyed the circle in 1899 (1900, 156, fig 14) and has been lying at the foot of the orthostat on the south-west (1) for at least the last 25 years; another (4) stands askew the circumference of the circle and was apparently re-erected about 1877 (Coles 1900, 156); and two (2–3) are incorporated into the consumption dyke that forms the south-east boundary of the field. When first recorded by the OS surveyors all five orthostats were standing, ‘each about 5 feet [1.5m] in height’ (Name Book, Kincardineshire, No. 7, p 39). The one exposed to its full height on the south-west (1) is indeed 1.5m high and the exposed portions of the two in the consumption dyke suggest that they are of a similar order, as is the displaced stone, which measures 1.75m in length; in contrast, the re-erected stone on the north (4) is only 1.2m high. Nine large slabs built into the foundation of the consumption dyke are possibly fragments of the missing orthostats. In response to Coles’ enquiries at the farm, Charles McHardy, the tenant, told him that trenching near the centre of the circle many years before had uncovered human bones. The suggestion that Cairnfauld is possibly a recumbent stone circle can be traced back to Burl, who contended that it was not only in the typical size range of such circles but also that its stones were probably graded from the highest on the south to the lowest on the north (Thom et al 1980, 214–15; Burl 1976a, 360, Knc 2; 1995, 137; 2000, 429, Knc 3); other researchers have taken a similar line (Ruggles 1984, 60; 1999, 188, no. 87; Barnatt 1989, 274, no. 6:18). While the diameter does indeed fall within the range of recumbent stone circles, it is more difficult to sustain the grading of the stones, not simply because two are encumbered with clearance in the consumption dyke, but because the small stone on the north (4), which is crucial to their case, has probably been re-erected. Furthermore, as Coles appreciated, what is known of the spacing of these neat pillar-like stones around the south-west quarter does not lend itself to a circle with a recumbent setting. More likely, this is a circle of evenly spaced orthostats of relatively uniform height.
