Publication Account

Date 2011

Event ID 887080

Category Descriptive Accounts

Type Publication Account

Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/event/887080

RCAHMS, The Recumbent Stone Circles of Scotland

The southernmost of three stone settings on a terrace on the floor of the valley of the River Lyon 300m east south-east of Fortingall Church has been described as a ‘ruined and idiosyncratic recumbent stone circle’ (Burl 1976a, 194–5). The basis for this comparison lies in the composition of the setting. This lies north-west and south-east and comprises a pair of low pillars about 1.5m in height and standing 5.8m apart, apparently symmetrically flanking a lower boulder measuring 1.4m by 0.9m and no more than 1.2m in height. A trial excavation in 1970 was designed to test whether the setting stood on the south-west side of a circle and duly uncovered what has been interpreted as another stone-hole to the north-west (Burl 1988b, 175); the diameter of this postulated circle has been estimated variously at 23m (Thom et al 1980, 337) and 14.6m (Burl 1988b, 175; 1995, 160). Closer examination of the disposition of the three stones, however, suggests that they share little in common with the settings found at recumbent stone circles. Such settings consistently form a facade in which the flankers are typically placed hard against the recumbent and extend its long axis, even when turned slightly to pick up the arc of the circle. Here at Fortingall, what are supposed to be the flankers stand back from the recumbent, and both are turned at right-angles to the axis formed by the alignment of the setting as a whole. In effect, rather than forming a facade, they oppose each other like the corner stones of a four-poster. In this respect they replicate the design of the two settings to the north, which the excavations in 1970 demonstrated were essentially four-posters, but with lower intermediate stones in the centre of each side (Coles 1908, 121–5; Burl 1988b, 166–75). Furthermore, the alignment of the three stones roughly correlates with the alignment of both these monuments. In short, despite Burl’s protestations (1995, 160; 2000, 432, Per 27c), this setting is more likely to be the remains of a third four poster than any other form of circle (cf Barnatt 1989, 320–1, no. 7:30; Ruggles 1999, 188 no. 99, 266 note 27), and the discovery of the stone-hole to the north-west should perhaps be regarded as fortuitous until proven otherwise.