Robin Hood and Little John forum 2 room
Image by Zeb
close

Chris, you said: "The stones just don’t look old enough and they are *very* square. Having said that, Burl must have looked at more stones than just about any living person and I’m presuming he has visited the site so what’s going on here? "

Far from it be for me to doubt Mr Burl, but there's only so much time to visit stones. The book on stone rows has a gazeteer section so he probably collated a lot of information about sites he hadn't seen first hand??

I thought your comment also had relevance to the 'devil's jump stone' thread - as that's also listed in the carnac-callanish book, and it seems there's some doubt about the exact grid reference for that too. Guess it goes to show that nothing beats first-hand tramping about in the field.

This isn't the first time I've run into strange Burl related stuff. Apparently he describes Banc Rhosgoch Fach as a stone row, but as far as I can see (almost) nobody else does...

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/browse.php?site_id=2760

The Megalithic Portal has gone with Burl's description of this site, but having visited it I can't see any reason to doubt the records I've seen at the NMRW interpreting it as the remains of a dolmen (their words not mine FW).

Kammer x

I haven't seen the book myself so I was just assuming that he had visited the stones.
If they are just mentioned in the gazetteer then yes, he could have got the info from somewhere else but where from? I can’t imagine him just adding them to the list on somebody else’s say so unless he was sure that the source was reliable – he has a reputation to uphold after all ;-)
After I posted the fieldnote I had a quick check for information on the nearby Roman camp - it’s mentioned in several places but the sites I looked at made no mention of our mystery stones, so I’m guessing they’re probably not Roman but as Kammer suggests, middle ages/monastic or something similar. If we could get hold of the scheduling info that should sort it out.

-Chris