Scorhill forum 3 room
Image by Moth
Scorhill

Scorhill Stone Circle

close
more_vert
Megalithics M
Megalithics Mar 22, 2012 19:55:11
Replying to Sanctuary

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.

M Meic
Meic Mar 23, 2012 13:01:42
Replying to Megalithics

A great place to visit Roy, It's a little battered but well worth the trip.
Buttern Circle is only 10 minutes walk away, the Tolmen Stone is close by over the river Teign and as already mentioned, Shovel Down is only 10 minutes walk the other side of the river.
Great Dartmoor views as well. I used to go here a lot when I lived on Dartmoor.

L Lubin
Lubin Mar 23, 2012 15:29:46
Replying to Megalithics

Megalithics wrote:
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.

I hope this will help. According to Jeremy Butler in "Dartmoor Atlas Of Antiquities" Volume Two The North there are 33 stones left in the circle with 11 fallen. He estimates the original number at 60