Re: Trevethy Quoit | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

Trethevy Quoit 11

Image by Meic

Trevethy Quoit

more_vert

Sanctuary Apr 21, 2011 14:06:29

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone wrote:

Knights etching of 1845 shows the Quoit as it is now...all be it surrounded by midget sheep!. I think that if it had been re-erected it would have been done by the Victorians..which it wasn't.

Think Victoria reigned from 1837 to 1901, Mr H, (so that would put Knight’s print into the Victorian timeframe). It could have been erected a few centuries earlier though – lifting gear for heavier stuff would certainly have been fairly common. Question is, would anyone bother? Is it on private land or on an estate once owned by a wealthy landowner (who might have thought it worthwhile erecting as a ‘landscape feature’).

Interesting that in this drawing the 'fallen' stone is not shown. Why would that be? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Trethevyborlase2.jpg

IF the quoit had fallen in the past and been re-erected, then I suppose anyone (such as people like ourselves) interested in the ruin could have done it and at any time. And if it was lying around for a considerable time it is possible that certain stones may well have been reassembled incorrectly. I'm currently working on that puzzle because as I've said before that is the feeling I get when I look at it through the eyes of a person who has been in the construction industry all his working life.
There had to be much more to the 'mound' originally though, that, I believe is quite obvious. If the uprights are barely in the ground (just enough to station them) then the soil/stones banked up against them would have to be quite substantial to hold it all in place to be able to (slide?) the capstone into place. This suggests to me that the orthostats would have been certainly completely covered inside and out to even give this a chance of succeeding. These were ordinary folk of their time who would have recognised the easiest way of achieving this and completely enveloped them in soil/stone to stabilise the whole thing first. Once the capstone was on then the side slabs could have been put into position (if not already there) as the soil/stones were gradually removed. No doubt a ramp would have been part of the original build and at the same inclination as the capstone.

All of that apart it is the most wonderful thing to just stop and stare at and I feel priviledged to be able to do so whenever I choose after a few minutes drive.

Mr Hamhead Apr 22, 2011 08:12:50

Replying to Sanctuary

The oldest mention I can find of the Quoit is in Norden's Atlas of Cornwall published in 1650. The etching does not show the fallen stone either but I believe we have to accept it was there and had by this time fallen.

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/11/trethevy_quoit.html

It is interesting to note that neither Carew in his history of Cornwall in 1602 and William Borlase in his Antiquities of Cornwall both never mentioned the Quoit. Borlase writes about Quoits and has illustrations of Lanyon and Zennor but nothing about Trethevy...in fact he spends more time and page space on Kit's Coty in Kent http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/62/kits_coty.html

In none of the early texts that mention the Quoit is there any reference to it being rebuilt. I am sure that if it had been, even as early as the 15th century, then it would have been noted somewhere or handed down as folklore.

As for it's construction and the lack of soil around the bottom of the stones. Could this not be the result of 6000 years of 'archaeologists' digging and scratching at it? If it still stands now did it need very much more in the way of foundations originally?

It would be great to make a wooden model of all the stones and then rearrange them to see if it makes any difference. I don't see how it could...we would still have two uprights much taller than the other four....and unless the capstone was originally at 90 degrees to what it is now then it still would not balance.

Somewhere in this meandering list of postings there was a comment that the stones stand on bedrock. If this is the case....was the Quoit originally situated on a bare hillside or are we back to the theory that the surrounding ground, earth and stone has been taken away?

So many questions....so many puzzles....