close
more_vert

Some Irish stone rows are thought by some to be the remains of old walls. It was once the practice (apparently) to build dry stone walls in sections with orthostatic stones every so often. I have never seen an intact wall of this construction, so I can not take it as gospel.

Pairs of evenly matched stones in a field could indicate an old gateway, where the hedge has been taken up and the stones left for rubbing.

Position is also key ...

If a stone is in the centre of a small field then it's likely to be a scratching post. In the middle of a large field it could have once stood in a hedge and been a boundary marker.

On a ridge or hilltop it is also likely to be a boundary marker.

Alongside a track/road it's likely to be a route marker.

I also consider landscape features and a stone's relationship to them.

IMO, building a stone wall with occasional orthostats would result in a weaker structure, so I'd be surprised if they did that, especially as it would involve a lot more effort. But incorporating large boulders horizontally makes constructional sense, and you can see that everywhere.

On the other hand, infilling an existing stone row to make a wall seems a pretty sensible thing to do.

> Alongside a track/road it's likely to be a route marker.

I agree with this FW, but surely it's a chicken and egg thing. A lot of stones are on roads because the roads follow tracks that used the prehistoric stones as weypoints. Sorry, this is blindingly obvious, but I thought I'd mention it.

K x