Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? | Forum

Scotland 35

Image by drewbhoy

Lack of stone circles north of Inverness?

more_vert

Resonox Sep 24, 2011 06:03:48

Replying to summerlands

summerlands wrote:

One thing I do keep reading is about possible circles that get lost in forestry - and I wonder if you plant trees you loose a circle, esp an already damamged one, in or to trees a lot easier than a cairn. Lot's of cairns still traceable in woods, but I can't think off top of many standing stones or circles known amongst trees around here...

The circles we do know tend to be of quite modest stones. I personally recon we've lost quite a number. But I agree it's definitely not stone country like the likes of other areas.

The barrows in Reigate Heath have trees planted in them(apparently a Victorian thing....anyone know why??)....and it may have been a common practice elsewhere. "Forests" as we know the expression was a Norman creation and were hunting areas(hence Ashdown forest for eg being thin on the ground tree-wise)...We know stones were removed for building purposes in many instances.....and some places still have "stone" in the name though the general concensus is that this is a bastardisation of tun/ton/town(ie a settlement)...it might be that a stone once stood prominently in some of these places though. There are a few Surrey and Sussex places with "stone" in the name...but no sign of any circles....Redstone being one exception as there is a tumulus on the common(in line with the small twin hills of St. Johns below...there is a church on one and on the other a school )

summerlands Sep 24, 2011 07:31:05

Replying to Resonox

The forestry around here tends to be modern conifer plantation - you know the type, thick, dark, stika spruce, etc, I *think* mainly planted in the last 60 years or so.

When you walk in it you can't see far ahead, hard to pin point locations, easy to get lost, hard to cross between paths, makes finding anything in them a nightmare.

GLADMAN Sep 24, 2011 08:40:58

Replying to Resonox

Resonox wrote:

A good example of this practice continuing is at Deerleap, also in Surrey:

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/2090/deerleap_wood_barrow.html

The South Walian uplands of Fforest Fawr were apparently set aside for hunting by the local lord.... tree-less - except in sheltered cwms - as you might expect for land in excess of 2,000ft. Guess the 'forest = trees' assumption came around since game usually preferred woodland cover.

BigSweetie Sep 24, 2011 10:23:33

Replying to Resonox

Resonox wrote:

The barrows in Reigate Heath have trees planted in them(apparently a Victorian thing....anyone know why??)....and it may have been a common practice elsewhere.

Someone (I forget who) told me that some Victorians considered the lumps and bumps of cairns and barrows to be overtly sexual, and so planted them with trees to try and disguise it.