Sanctuary wrote:
I've never visited but this makes it very compelling to do so. It's interesting how the total stones either standing or fallen vary so much in various publications.
The stone count problem is due to large number of stones lying around the circle circumference, it gets difficult knowing which ones to exclude.
The embedded ones are easy, it's the fallen stuff that causes the probs. You can't just exclude on size as there a small circle stones (possibly stumps) which are in place, if these were uprooted, they'd be just like the many other smallish loose stones around. You also cannot tell if that "bumpy bit" has an in situ stump buried underneath it.
There is also a large jumbled "heap" of loose stones at the south, to further complicate matters.
We guessed at 32 remaining with 5 of these fallen, and with estimates of the original number peaking at 70, you get some idea of the carnage that has happened here over the years. We noticed that several of the large fallen stones had been drilled for splitting.
Counting aside, it's a cracking site to visit and it's just a stone's throw away from the complex of rows and cairns on Shovel Down.
