Pricing Change
New pricing for orders of material from this site will come into place shortly. Charges for supply of digital images, digitisation on demand, prints and licensing will be altered.
Gigha, Tarbert, Burial Ground
Burial Ground (Period Unassigned), Cross (Period Unassigned)
Site Name Gigha, Tarbert, Burial Ground
Classification Burial Ground (Period Unassigned), Cross (Period Unassigned)
Alternative Name(s) Ridh A' Chaibeil; Tarbet
Canmore ID 38598
Site Number NR65SE 13
NGR NR 6539 5161
Datum OSGB36 - NGR
Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/site/38598
- Council Argyll And Bute
- Parish Gigha And Cara
- Former Region Strathclyde
- Former District Argyll And Bute
- Former County Argyll
NR65SE 13 6539 5161
(NR 6539 5159) Burial Ground (NR)
(Ridh' a' Chaibeil) (NAT)
Cross (NR)
OS 6" map, (1924)
An old burying-place where there is a cross, with one of the arms and part of the top broken. The place is called 'Righ Chaibeal', ie the King's Chapel or Tomb.
Statistical Account (OSA) 1793.
'A well-known burying-ground, but not used for a considerable time; while the former tenant of Tarbert was ploughing about the edge of the above ground the plough turned open a small wooden coffin. No trace of any gravestone can be seen as the place is filled up with stones and rubbish. Near the centre of the burying ground stands an old stone cross, the arms destroyed a few years back by battle who knocked it down several times, but erected again by the inhabitants in the most suitable place'.
The name 'Righ Chaibeal' could not be confirmed, all the local authorities being of the opinion that 'Field of the Burying Ground' - Ridh' a' Chaibeil - should be adopted.
Name Book 1869.
A Neolithic or Bronze Age cairn (information from notes and illusts by R E MacCallum to OS, 1962) A small excavation at the SW edge in April 1961 showed the cairn material to be at least 3ft thick, all but 6ins being below ground. The cross, Keills-type and possible 10th century is inserted to a depth of 18ins.
D M Wilson and D G Hurst 1964.
This burial-ground is said to have been used until a fairly recent period (Anderson 1939). At the present time, however, the graveyard is marked simply by an uncultivated patch of ground, measuring about 25m by 20m, which has been artificially raised by stones dumped from the surrounding arable field; its original shape is uncertain, and although it is possible that a chapel formerly existed here, no trace of any building is now visible (cf also NR65SE 12).
Within the burial-ground there stands a mutilated and weathered cross,made of local micaceous schist. The cross is probably not precisely in its original position since it faces NE and SW and is only loosely supported at the base by boulders. Both the arms had been broken off before 1875, when White (1875) published a sketch of the monument, but one of the arms was discovered shortly before the Commission's visit so that the outline of the cross can now be reconstructed. A monolith, it originally stood only a few centimetres higher than its present height of 1.83m and measured 0.66m across the arms.
T P White 1875; R S G Anderson 1939; RCAHMS 1971, visited 1966.
Field Visit (19 January 1978)
In the last few years much stone, some of it massive boulders, has been piled up against the periphery of this uncultivated patch of ground; however the tenuous track of a wall, seems evident on the east margin. Otherwise no change to the RCAHMS report. The cross slab is as described and illustrated.
The indentification of the burial cairn is speculative. The lichen-stained stone tumbled in large quantity within the burial ground is of the rounded, medium size that is typical of cairn rubble.
Surveyed at 1:10 000.
Visited by OS (J M) 19 January 1978.
Reference (2001)
Mutilated cross on site of a burial-ground. It is 1.83m by 0.66m in original span and both side-arms are broken, but one survives as a detached fragment. Both faces show circular hollows within the armpits, which are slightly rounded, and the SE face (b) bears an outline cross with similar armpits. The NW face (a), where the hollows are deeper, has an incised margin.
I Fisher 2001.
