Re: Is this really a standing stone? | Forum

Rhiannon Mar 1, 2006 13:44:32

Replying to Kammer

Your problem Kammer, is that you're always right.

The question is, did anyone think anything of it before old Walter Scott brought it to people's attention? He was certainly aware of all sorts of folklore, he was always incorporating it into his books. So I'm sure it had a reputation before he turned up?? Or was it part of the tourist trade for the Spa, and entirely spurious? But if it's called the popping stone, and if that's (as Kentigern points out) from the OE poppel - pebblestone, maybe that suggests an earlier recognition??

Oh I dunno.

Kammer Mar 1, 2006 13:52:16

Replying to Rhiannon

I wasn't angling for the stone to be removed from the site (perish the thought - I'd never do such a thing!). I was just questioning its status as a standing stone.

Of course, if this delightful lump of water-worn stone isn't a standing stone, it's inclusion here is open to debate.

K x

PeterH Mar 1, 2006 17:13:23

Replying to Rhiannon

I dunno either, but a pebble in OE is certainly "papolstan". BTW I have an unproved theory that some, possibly many, of our standing stones are Anglo-Saxon boundary, marker or ritual stones. Some may have had an earlier purpose as well of course.