Circle 278 forum 2 room
Image by thesweetcheat
Circle 278

Two views on 278

close
more_vert
ShropshireTraveller S
ShropshireTraveller Jul 26, 2004 19:39:48
Replying to ShropshireTraveller

There is no doubt about the description of 278. The word "enclosure" is used on the (coflein & OS) map, with a corresponding entry on coflein, which ties the enclosure to 278. (When I first saw 278, I thought it could be a hut circle - cf those on Gardom's Edge, Derbys - an example here http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=324).

Clicking on the blue dot for enclosure on the coflein map, 278 is then described as a ring cairn. "An oval enclosure, c.16m in diameter, defined by a kerbed stony bank, 2.0-3.0m wide. Several cremation deposts, inurned and otherwise, were observed about the inner periphery during excavation" SH72167457. This must be 278.

However some other things come to light :-)

The feature formerly known as 278, the stones SWW of Druids, are identified as just "Penmaenmawr Stone Circle" SH72197463

Also

- this is just south of feature formerly known as 278. There is a feautre called "Penmaenmawr Circle C" on Coflein. SH722746 (rounded up number from previous ref). This site has not been accounted for while dealing with the others.

Into the melting pot,

Tim

(apologies if that does not make sense... my wife is watching eastenders, and the doorbell went halfway through composing this posting - our neighbours are full of domestic strife - so I've had a bit of a shock, and my train of thought is seriously interrupted!)

B baza
baza Jul 27, 2004 00:28:48
Replying to ShropshireTraveller

This is how I see the situation:

Many of us - myself included - saw a stone setting near to The Druids Circle and wrongly assumed it was Circle 278. greywether subsequently posted a photo of the real Circle 278:

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/25505

.........a ringcairn at the exact location of Circle 278 ring cairn.

The stone setting doesn't seem to have had much attention paid to it by the archaeos and it remains un-named. So, if we want a name for it, then we should make one up between ourselves - no-one else is going to do it.

While we're at it, we should come up with some names for Circle 278 and Circle 275, becuse they aren't names, they're numbers - and they both deserve better.