Kirkclaugh forum 1 room
Image by rockartwolf
Kirkclaugh

Rock Art in walls

close
more_vert

FourWinds wrote:
Who would try and split a stone into two thin slabs like that?
Especially when there was a whole pile of much more portable, useable stone right next to it.

I think I can more or less accept that some of the oval cups are the real deal, but still have a problem with the ones Stonelifter labels 'canoe shaped'. As I've said elsewhere on this thread, some of those quarry marks may be ancient, but they're nowt to do with cups marks per se.

Hob wrote:
FourWinds wrote:
Who would try and split a stone into two thin slabs like that?
Especially when there was a whole pile of much more portable, useable stone right next to it.

I think I can more or less accept that some of the oval cups are the real deal, but still have a problem with the ones Stonelifter labels 'canoe shaped'. As I've said elsewhere on this thread, some of those quarry marks may be ancient, but they're nowt to do with cups marks per se.

Each example on its own merit I would say. Some are. Some ain't.

No, it's me you have a problem with. I can explain cup marks - but it will involve a trip to the chili bush in the afternoon - I'm going down to see my friend in Jessops in the morning. And if it strikes it will have the power of a religious conversion - it's a fossil - you just have to say which one - the single one or the pair. A photograph's no good, I've tried that and can't get the detail.