|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
|
Fieldnotes
| First a pedantic point. Ron Curtis, writing in 1988, dismissed any idea of this being a circular setting. Neither a full circle with half fallen into the water nor a semi-circle by design. His views were based on the position of the stone hole of the easterly of the two N stones relative to the holes for the other two large stones. This stone hole was established prior to re-erecting the stone. Also, there is a small stub of a stone just over the fence to the E which is aligned E/W but would be N/S if it were part of a circle. It can best be described as a group of standing stones all facing roughly S looking over to what is now mainland Lewis. If anything, this makes the site more interesting. The stones are located just below a wide level ridge of ground and, if they were meant to be visible markers, this would have been a more obvious location for them. In their current location, clinging to the hillside, they are much less visible. So it must have been important to place them precisely there. Astronomical? Well I can't comment, but what I've read for this site sounds less convincing than the theories put forward elsewhere. Access Information layby on right over bridge. Short, steep climb up steps to the site. Visited 1 August 2004 |
Posted by greywether12th August 2004ce Edited 26th April 2005ce
|
Comments (0) |
|
| You must be logged in to add a comment | |
Top of page