Chapter 19

90. Circle at Fiddes Hill, 46 feet in diameter.

If we may connect these stones at Rayne with the Newton stones, as Colonel Forbes Leslie is inclined to do, we obtain a proof of a post-Christian date for this sepulchral circle, as well as a mediæval use; and though I have no doubt that all this is correct, the mere juxtaposition of the sculptured stones and the circle hardly seems sufficient to rely upon.

In the Appendix to the Preface of the first volume of the 'Sculptured Stones,' Mr. Stuart records excavations made in some fourteen circles, similar, or nearly so, to this one at Rayne; and in all sepulchral deposits, more or less distinct, were found. In some, as in that of Crichie, before alluded to, a sepulchral deposit was found at the foot of each of the six stones which surrounded it. Like many of ourEnglish circles, this last was surrounded by a moat, in this instance 20 feet wide and 6 feet deep, crossed by two entrances, as is Arbor Low and the Penrith circle, and within the moat stood the stones. As a general rule, it may be asserted that all the Scotch circles, having a diameter not exceeding 100 feet, when scientifically explored, have yielded evidences of sepulchral uses. Such, certainly, is the result of Mr. Stuart's experience, as detailed above; of Dr. Bryce's, in Arran; of Mr. Dyce Nicol[304]and others, in Kincardine; and elsewhere. Colonel Forbes Leslie informs me that he has not been so fortunate in some of those he mentioned in his lecture, which he either opened himself or learnt the details of on the spot. Some of these he admits, however, had been opened before, others disturbed by cultivation; and altogether his experiences seem to be exceptional, and far from conclusive. The preponderance of evidence is so overwhelming on the one side, that we may be perfectly content to wait the explanation of such exceptional cases as these.

The Aberdeenshire circles are all found scattered singly, or at most in pairs, in remote and generally in barren parts of the country; so that it is evident they neither marked battle-fields nor even cemeteries, but can only be regarded as the graves of chiefs, or sometimes, it may be, family sepulchres. There is one group, however, at Clava, about five miles east from Inverness, which is of more than usual interest, but regarding which the published accounts are neither so full nor so satisfactory as could be wished.[305]

According to Mr. Innes, the ruins of eight or nine cairns can stillbe distinguished, though the whole of the little valley or depression in which they are situated seems strewn with blocks which may have belonged to others, but which the advancing tide of cultivation has swept away. The most perfect of those now remaining are three at the western end of the valley, the two outer and larger cairns stand about 100 yards apart. They are of stone, about 70 feet in diameter, surrounded by a circle of upright stones measuring 100 feet across. The intermediate one is smaller, being only 50 feet, with a circle 80 feet in diameter.[306]The two extreme ones have been opened, and found to contain circular chambers about 12 feet in diameter, and 9 in height, with passages leading to them about 15 feet long and 2 feet wide; and in two or three instances the stones in them were adorned with cup-marking, though it does not appear that they were otherwise sculptured.[307]In that to the west two sepulchral urns were found, just below the level of the original soil. They were broken, however, in extracting them; and they do not appear to have been put together again or drawn, so that no conclusions can be deduced from them as to the age of the cairns.

CAPTION91. Plan of Clava Mounds. From Ordnance Survey. 25 inch scale.

91. Plan of Clava Mounds. From Ordnance Survey. 25 inch scale.

92. View of Clava Mounds. From a drawing by Mr. Innes.

Meagre as this information is, it is sufficient to show that Clavadoes not mark a battle-field. Carefully-constructed chambers with horizontally-vaulted roofs are not such monuments as soldiers erect in haste over the graves of their fallen chiefs. It evidently is a cemetery; and, with the knowledge we have acquired from the examination of those in Ireland, there cannot be much hesitation in ascribing it to that dynasty which was represented by King Brude, when St. Columba, in the sixth century, visited him in his "Munitio," on the banks of the Ness.[308]If King Brude were really converted to Christianity by Columba, it is by no means improbable that the small square enclosure at the west end of the "heugh," which is still used as the burying-place of Pagan, or at least unbaptized babies, marked the spot where he and his successors were laid after the race had been weaned from the more noble burial-rites of their forefathers.

It would be extremely interesting to follow out this inquiry further, if the materials existed for so doing; as few problems are more perplexed, and at the same time, of their kind, more important, than the origin of the Picts, and their relations with the Irish and the Gaels. Language will not help us here: we know too little of that spoken by the Picts; but these monuments certainly would, if any one would take the trouble to investigate the question by a careful comparison of all those existing in Scotland and Ireland.

93. Stone at Coilsfield.

In the south of Scotland, for instance, we find such a stone as this at Coilsfield, on the Ayr,[309]which, taking the difference of drawing into account, is identical with that represented in woodcut No. 71. There is the same circle, the sameuncertain, wavy line, and generally the same character. Another was found at Annan-street, in Roxburghshire, and is so similar in pattern and drawing that if placed in the chamber in the tumuli of New Grange, or Dowth, no one would suspect that it was not in the place it was originally designedfor.[310]But no sculptures of that class have yet, at least, been brought to light in Pictland, or, in other words, north of the Forth, on the east side of Scotland.

94. Front of Stone at Aberlemmo, with Cross.

95. Back of Stone at Aberlemmo.

The sculptured stones of the Picts are, however, quite sufficient to prove a close affinity of race between the two peoples, but always with a difference, which is evident on even a cursory examination. To take one instance. There is a very beautiful stone at Aberlemmo, near Brechin, which is said to have been put up to record the victory gained over the Danes at Loncarty, in the last years of the tenth century.[311]Be this as it may, there seems no reason for doubting that it is a battle-stone, and does belong to the century in which popular tradition places it. On the front is a cross, but, like all in Scotland, without breaking the outline of the stone, which still retains a reminiscence of its Rude form. In Ireland, the arms of the cross as invariably extend beyond the line of the stone, like those at Iona, which are Irish, and these are generally joined by a circular Glory. The ornaments on the cross are the same in both countries, and generally consist of that curious interlacing basket-work pattern so common also in the MSS. of that age in both countries, but which exist nowhere else, that I am aware of, except in Armenia.[312]The so-called "key" ornament on the horizontal arms of the cross at Aberlemmo seems also of Eastern origin, as it is found in the Sarnath Tope, near Benares, and elsewhere, but is common to both countries; as is also the dragon ornament on the side of the cross, though this looks more like a Scandinavian ornament than anything that can claim an origin further east.

Among the differences it may be remarked that the figure-subjects on Irish crosses almost invariably refer to the scenes of the Passion, or are taken from the Bible. On the Scotch stones, they as constantly refer to battle or hunting incidents, or to what may be considered as events in civil life. The essential difference, however, is, that, with scarcely an exception, the Pictish stones bear some of those emblems which have proved such a puzzle to antiquaries. The so-called broken sceptre, the brooch, and the altar, are seen in the Aberlemmo stone; but in earlier examples they are far more important and infinitelyvarious.[313]It may also be worthy of remark that the only two real round towers out of Ireland adorn the two Pictish capitals of Brechin and Abernethy. All this points to a difference that can well make us understand why St. Columba should have required an interpreter in speaking to the Picts;[314]but also to a resemblance that would lead us to understand that the cemetery at Clava was the counterpart of that on the banks of the Boyne, with the same relative degree of magnificence as the Kings of Inverness bore to those of Tara; and if we do not find similar tumuli at Brechin or Abernethy, it must be that the kings of these provinces—if there were any—were converted to Christianity before they adopted this mode of burial. It may be suggested that, as Maes-Howe is certainly the lineal descendant of the monuments on the Boyne, it too must be a Celtic or Pictish tomb. For the reasons, however, given above, such a theory seems wholly untenable; but thus much may be granted, that such a tomb would probably not have been erected, even by a Northman, in a country where there was not an underlying Celtic or Pictish population.

96. Cat Stone, Kirkliston.

Before leaving these sculptured stones, it may be as well to point out one of those anomalies which meet us so frequently in these enquiries, and show how little ordinary probabilities suffice to guide to the true conclusion. Among the sculptured stones of Scotland, one of the oldest is probably the Newton stone. It has at least an Oghan inscription on its edge; and most antiquaries will admit that Oghan engravings on stone were discontinued when alphabetic writing was introduced and generally understood. It also has an alphabetic inscription on its face, but the letters are not Roman. They may be bad Greek, but certainly they appear to be pre-Roman, and therefore probably the earliest Scotch inscription known. There is another stone at Kirkliston, near Edinburgh, which has a Latin inscription on it. It is a "cat" or battle-stone, and records the name of Vetta, the son of Victis, in good Latin. Whether this Vetta is, or is not, the grandfather of Hengist and Horsa, as Sir James Simpson contended,[315]is of no great consequence to our present argument. It is of about their age, and therefore as old as any of the other stones in Scotland; and there is also a third at Yarrow,[316]with a later inscription, which seems about the same age as the Lothian example. Now the curious part of this matter is, that having begun with alphabetic writing, they entirely discontinued it, and during the six or seven centuries through which these sculptured stones certainly extend, it is the rarest possible thing to find one with an alphabetic inscription; and why this should be so is by no means clear. Take, for instance, the Aberlemmo stone just quoted. The people who erected it were Christians,—witness the cross: the ornaments on it are almost identical with those found in Irish MSS. of the seventh and eighth centuries.[317]It is thus evident that the persons who drew these ornaments could write, and being able to write and carve with such exquisite precision, it seems strange they never thought of even putting the name of the persons who erected the stone or some word expressive of its purpose. The Irish probably would have done so; and the Scandinavians would have covered them with Runes, as they did those they erected in the Isle of Man, though probably at a somewhat later date. In the instance of the two crosses illustrated in the woodcuts, Nos. 97 and 98, the first bears an inscription to the effect that "Sandulf the Swarthy erected this cross to his wife, Arnbjörg." From their names, both evidently of Scandinavian origin. The inscription on the side of the second runs thus: "Mal Lumkun erected this cross to his foster-father Malmor, or Mal Muru."[318]Both names of undoubted Gaelic derivation, thus showing that at that age at leastany ethnographic theory that would give these stones exclusively to either race can hardly be maintained. The two races seem then to have followed the fashion of the day as they did in ruder times. Except in the instance of the St. Vigean's stone on which Sir James Simpson read the name of Drosten,[319]ascribing it with very fair certainty to the year 729A.D., none of the 101 stones illustrated in the splendid volumes of the Spalding Club contains hardly a scrap of alphabetic writing. Throughout they preferred a strange sort of Heraldic symbolism, which still defies the ingenuity of our best antiquaries to interpret. It was a very perverse course to pursue, but while men did so, probably as late as Sueno's time,A.D.1008,[320]it is needless to ask why men set up rude stones to commemorate events or persons when they could have carved or inscribed them; or why, in fact, as we would insist on doing, they did not avail themselves of all the resources of the art or the learning which they possessed?

97. Cross in Isle of Man, bearing Runic Inscription.

98. Cross in Isle of Man, bearing Runic Inscription.

The other rude-stone monuments of Scotland are neither numerous nor important. Daniel Wilson enumerates some half-dozen of dolmens as still existing in the lowlands and in parts of Argyllshire, but none of them are important from their size, nor do they present any peculiarities to distinguish them from those of Wales or Ireland; while no tradition has attached itself to any of them in such a manner as to give a hint of their age or purpose. Besides these, there are a number of single stones scattered here and there over the country, but there isnothing to indicate whether they are cat stones or mark boundaries, or merely graves, so that to enumerate them would be as tedious as it would be uninstructive. What little interest may attach to them will be better appreciated when we have examined those of Scandinavia and France, which are more numerous, as well as more easily understood. When, too, we have mastered them in so far as the materials available enable us to do, we shall be able to appreciate the significance of much that has just been enunciated. Meanwhile it may be as well to remark that what we already seem to have gained is a knowledge that a circle-building race came from the north, touching first at the Orkneys, and, passing down through the Hebrides, divided themselves on the north of Ireland—one branch settling on the west coast of that island, the other landing in Cumberland, and penetrating into England in a south-easterly direction.

In like manner we seem to have a dolmen-building race who from the south first touched in Cornwall, and thence spread northwards, settling on both sides of St. George's Channel, and leaving traces of their existence on the south and both coasts of Ireland, as well as in Wales and the west of England generally. Whether these two opposite currents were or were not synchronous is a question that must be determined hereafter. We shall also be in a better position to ascertain what the races were who thus spread themselves along our coasts, when we have examined the only countries from which it is probable they could have issued.

Footnotes[271]'The Sculptured Stones of Scotland.' Two vols. quarto. Published by the Spalding Club. 1856 and 1867.[272]A few years ago the late Mr. Rhind, of Sibster, left an estate worth more than 400l.per annum, to endow a Professorship of Archæology in Scotland, who was also to act as curator of the monuments themselves, but unfortunately left it encumbered by a life interest to a relative. Two years ago an attempt was made to get the Government to anticipate the falling in of the life interest, and appointing Mr. Stuart to the office at once. It was, perhaps, too much to expect so enlightened an act of liberality from a Government like ours. But their decision is to be regretted; not only because we may thereby lose altogether the services of the best qualified man in Scotland for the purpose, but more so because the monuments are themselves fast disappearing without any record of them being preserved. Agriculture is very merciless towards a big stone or a howe that stands in the way of the plough, and in so improving a country as Scotland, very little may remain for the next generation to record.[273]The account of these monuments is abstracted from a paper by Lieutenant Thomas, of H. M.'s surveying vesselWoodlark. It is the most detailed and most correct survey we have of any British group. It was published in the 'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 88et seq.[274]Four stones are represented as standing when Barry's view of the monument was published in 1807, and four are represented as standing in a series of etchings made by the Duchess-Countess of Sutherland from her own drawings, in 1805. If the elbow in the bridge shown in the drawing in the frontispiece is not a licence permitted to himself by the artist, my drawing is earlier than either of these. When I first purchased it I believed it to be by Daniel. His tour, however, took place in 1815. From the internal evidence this drawing must be anterior to 1805.[275]'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 89.[276]'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 90.[277]The greater part of this find, with all the coins, is in the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries, Edinburgh. The dates on the coins were kindly copied for me by Mr. Stuart.[278]'Notice on the Runic Inscriptions discovered during Recent Excavations in the Orkneys.' By James Farrer, M.P. 1862.[279]'Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot.' v. p. 70.[280]Olaus Wormius, 'Monumenta Danica,' p. 188, fig. 6.[281]Barry's 'History of Orkney,' p. 399. See also 'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 89.[282]Barry, 'History of the Orkneys,' p. 124.[283]Mr. George Petrie has recently at my request made some excavations in these mounds, but the results have not been conclusive. He is of opinion that one of the mounds he explored may be the grave of Thorfin, but it is too much ruined to afford any certain indication.[284]'Mémoires des Ant. du Nord,' iii. p. 236.[285]These dates are taken from Barry, p. 112et seq., but they seem undisputed, and are found in all histories.[286]'History of Orkney.' p. 125.[287]'Prehistoric Annals of Scotland,' p. 112. 'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 89.[288]'Mémoires des Antiquaires du Nord,' iii. p. 250.[289]Farrer, 'Inscriptions in the Orkneys,' p. 37.[290]A few years ago such a question would have been considered answered as soon as stated; but, as Daniel Wilson writes in a despairing passage in his Introduction,* "This theory of the Danish origin of nearly all our native arts, though adopted without investigation, and fostered in defiance of evidence, has long ceased to be a mere popular error. It is, moreover," he adds, "a cumulative error; Pennant, Chambers, Barry, Mac Culloch, Scott, Hibbert, and a host of other writers might be quoted to show that theory, like a snow-ball, gathers as it rolls, taking up indiscriminately whatever chances to be in its erratic course." In spite of his indignation, however, I suspect it will be found to have gathered such force, that it will be found very difficult to discredit it. Since, too, Alexander Bertrand made his onslaught on the theory, that the Celts had anything to do with the megalithic monuments, the ground is fast being cut away from under their feet; and though the proofs are still far from complete, yet according to present appearances the Celts must resign their claims to any of the stone circles certainly, and to most of the other stone monuments we are acquainted with, if not to all.*'Prehistoric Annals of Scotland,' p. xv.[291]'Annales Innisfal.' in O'Connor, 'Rerum. Hib. Scrip.' ii. p. 24. 'Annales Ulton.'Ibid.iv. p. 117.[292]Duke of Argyll's 'Iona,' p. 100.[293]On the left of the view in the Frontispiece.[294]'Archæologia Scot.' iii. p. 119.[295]'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 113.[296]'Proceedings Soc. Ant. of Scotland,' iii. p. 213.[297]These dimensions and the plan are taken from Sir Henry James's work on 'Stonehenge, Turuschan,' &c.[298]Anderson, on horned Tumuli in Caithness, 'Proc. Soc. Ant. of Scotland,' vi. p. 442et seq., and vii. p. 480et seq.[299]'Sculptured Stones of Scotland,' ii. p. xxv.[300]Vol. iv. p. 499.[301]Glasgow, 1865, p. 186et seq.[302]In the 'Archæologia,' vol. xxii. pp. 200 and 202, are plans and views of six Aberdeenshire circles, and two more are given in the same volume further on.[303]'Sculptured Stones of Scotland,' vol. i. p. xxi.[304]In September, 1858, Mr. Dyce Nicol, with a party of experienced archæologists, excavated four circles situated in a row, and extending for nearly a mile, on the road from Aberdeen to Stonehaven, and about 1½ mile from the sea. The first and last had been disturbed before, but the second, at King Caussie, and the third, at Aquhorties, yielded undoubted evidences of their sepulchral origin. The conclusion these gentlemen arrived at was, that "whatever other purposes these circles may have served, one use of them was as a place of burial."—ProceedingsSoc. Ant. Scot.v. p. 134.[305]I regret much that I have been unable to visit this place myself. It was, however, carefully surveyed by Captain Charles Wilson, when he was attached to the Ordnance Survey at Inverness. He also made detailed plans and sketches of all the monuments, but, unfortunately, sent them to the Ordnance Office at Southampton, and they consequently are not accessible nor available for our present purposes.[306]These dimensions are taken partly from the Ordnance Survey Sheet, 25-inch scale, and partly from Mr. Innes's paper in 'Proceedings Soc. Ant.' iii. p. 49et seq.[307]Ibid.Appendix, vi. pl. x.[308]Reeves, 'Adamnan. Vita St. Columb.' p. 150.[309]Wilson's 'Prehistoric Annals,' p. 332.[310]An amusing controversy regarding the existence of this stone will be found in the 'Proceedings Scot. Ant.' iv. p. 524et seq.It seems absolutely impossible that any man, even under the inspiration of some primordial whisky, to have drawn by accident a sculpture so like what his ancestors did fifteen centuries before his time.[311]Gordon, 'Iter Septemtrionale,' p. 151.[312]In my 'History of Architecture,' ii. p. 345, I ventured timidly to hint that this Armenian ornament would be found identical with that in the Irish and Pictish crosses. Since then I have seen a series of photographs of Armenian churches, which leave no doubt in my mind that this similarity is not accidental, but that the one country borrowed it from the other.[313]See Stuart's 'Sculptured Stones,' and Colonel Forbes Leslie's 'Early Races of Scotland,'passim.[314]Reeves, 'Adamnan. Vita St. Columb.' pp. 65 and 145.[315]'Proceedings Soc. Ant. Scot.' iv. p. 119et seq.[316]Ibid.iv. p. 524.[317]Westwood, 'Facsimiles of Irish MSS.' plates 4-28.[318]These two woodcuts are borrowed from Worsaae, 'The Danes and Northmen.' London, 1852.[319]'Sculptured Stones of Scotland,' ii. p. 70.[320]Camden, 'Brit.' 1268.

Footnotes

[271]'The Sculptured Stones of Scotland.' Two vols. quarto. Published by the Spalding Club. 1856 and 1867.

[272]A few years ago the late Mr. Rhind, of Sibster, left an estate worth more than 400l.per annum, to endow a Professorship of Archæology in Scotland, who was also to act as curator of the monuments themselves, but unfortunately left it encumbered by a life interest to a relative. Two years ago an attempt was made to get the Government to anticipate the falling in of the life interest, and appointing Mr. Stuart to the office at once. It was, perhaps, too much to expect so enlightened an act of liberality from a Government like ours. But their decision is to be regretted; not only because we may thereby lose altogether the services of the best qualified man in Scotland for the purpose, but more so because the monuments are themselves fast disappearing without any record of them being preserved. Agriculture is very merciless towards a big stone or a howe that stands in the way of the plough, and in so improving a country as Scotland, very little may remain for the next generation to record.

[273]The account of these monuments is abstracted from a paper by Lieutenant Thomas, of H. M.'s surveying vesselWoodlark. It is the most detailed and most correct survey we have of any British group. It was published in the 'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 88et seq.

[274]Four stones are represented as standing when Barry's view of the monument was published in 1807, and four are represented as standing in a series of etchings made by the Duchess-Countess of Sutherland from her own drawings, in 1805. If the elbow in the bridge shown in the drawing in the frontispiece is not a licence permitted to himself by the artist, my drawing is earlier than either of these. When I first purchased it I believed it to be by Daniel. His tour, however, took place in 1815. From the internal evidence this drawing must be anterior to 1805.

[275]'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 89.

[276]'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 90.

[277]The greater part of this find, with all the coins, is in the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries, Edinburgh. The dates on the coins were kindly copied for me by Mr. Stuart.

[278]'Notice on the Runic Inscriptions discovered during Recent Excavations in the Orkneys.' By James Farrer, M.P. 1862.

[279]'Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot.' v. p. 70.

[280]Olaus Wormius, 'Monumenta Danica,' p. 188, fig. 6.

[281]Barry's 'History of Orkney,' p. 399. See also 'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 89.

[282]Barry, 'History of the Orkneys,' p. 124.

[283]Mr. George Petrie has recently at my request made some excavations in these mounds, but the results have not been conclusive. He is of opinion that one of the mounds he explored may be the grave of Thorfin, but it is too much ruined to afford any certain indication.

[284]'Mémoires des Ant. du Nord,' iii. p. 236.

[285]These dates are taken from Barry, p. 112et seq., but they seem undisputed, and are found in all histories.

[286]'History of Orkney.' p. 125.

[287]'Prehistoric Annals of Scotland,' p. 112. 'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 89.

[288]'Mémoires des Antiquaires du Nord,' iii. p. 250.

[289]Farrer, 'Inscriptions in the Orkneys,' p. 37.

[290]A few years ago such a question would have been considered answered as soon as stated; but, as Daniel Wilson writes in a despairing passage in his Introduction,* "This theory of the Danish origin of nearly all our native arts, though adopted without investigation, and fostered in defiance of evidence, has long ceased to be a mere popular error. It is, moreover," he adds, "a cumulative error; Pennant, Chambers, Barry, Mac Culloch, Scott, Hibbert, and a host of other writers might be quoted to show that theory, like a snow-ball, gathers as it rolls, taking up indiscriminately whatever chances to be in its erratic course." In spite of his indignation, however, I suspect it will be found to have gathered such force, that it will be found very difficult to discredit it. Since, too, Alexander Bertrand made his onslaught on the theory, that the Celts had anything to do with the megalithic monuments, the ground is fast being cut away from under their feet; and though the proofs are still far from complete, yet according to present appearances the Celts must resign their claims to any of the stone circles certainly, and to most of the other stone monuments we are acquainted with, if not to all.*'Prehistoric Annals of Scotland,' p. xv.

*'Prehistoric Annals of Scotland,' p. xv.

[291]'Annales Innisfal.' in O'Connor, 'Rerum. Hib. Scrip.' ii. p. 24. 'Annales Ulton.'Ibid.iv. p. 117.

[292]Duke of Argyll's 'Iona,' p. 100.

[293]On the left of the view in the Frontispiece.

[294]'Archæologia Scot.' iii. p. 119.

[295]'Archæologia,' xxxiv. p. 113.

[296]'Proceedings Soc. Ant. of Scotland,' iii. p. 213.

[297]These dimensions and the plan are taken from Sir Henry James's work on 'Stonehenge, Turuschan,' &c.

[298]Anderson, on horned Tumuli in Caithness, 'Proc. Soc. Ant. of Scotland,' vi. p. 442et seq., and vii. p. 480et seq.

[299]'Sculptured Stones of Scotland,' ii. p. xxv.

[300]Vol. iv. p. 499.

[301]Glasgow, 1865, p. 186et seq.

[302]In the 'Archæologia,' vol. xxii. pp. 200 and 202, are plans and views of six Aberdeenshire circles, and two more are given in the same volume further on.

[303]'Sculptured Stones of Scotland,' vol. i. p. xxi.

[304]In September, 1858, Mr. Dyce Nicol, with a party of experienced archæologists, excavated four circles situated in a row, and extending for nearly a mile, on the road from Aberdeen to Stonehaven, and about 1½ mile from the sea. The first and last had been disturbed before, but the second, at King Caussie, and the third, at Aquhorties, yielded undoubted evidences of their sepulchral origin. The conclusion these gentlemen arrived at was, that "whatever other purposes these circles may have served, one use of them was as a place of burial."—ProceedingsSoc. Ant. Scot.v. p. 134.

[305]I regret much that I have been unable to visit this place myself. It was, however, carefully surveyed by Captain Charles Wilson, when he was attached to the Ordnance Survey at Inverness. He also made detailed plans and sketches of all the monuments, but, unfortunately, sent them to the Ordnance Office at Southampton, and they consequently are not accessible nor available for our present purposes.

[306]These dimensions are taken partly from the Ordnance Survey Sheet, 25-inch scale, and partly from Mr. Innes's paper in 'Proceedings Soc. Ant.' iii. p. 49et seq.

[307]Ibid.Appendix, vi. pl. x.

[308]Reeves, 'Adamnan. Vita St. Columb.' p. 150.

[309]Wilson's 'Prehistoric Annals,' p. 332.

[310]An amusing controversy regarding the existence of this stone will be found in the 'Proceedings Scot. Ant.' iv. p. 524et seq.It seems absolutely impossible that any man, even under the inspiration of some primordial whisky, to have drawn by accident a sculpture so like what his ancestors did fifteen centuries before his time.

[311]Gordon, 'Iter Septemtrionale,' p. 151.

[312]In my 'History of Architecture,' ii. p. 345, I ventured timidly to hint that this Armenian ornament would be found identical with that in the Irish and Pictish crosses. Since then I have seen a series of photographs of Armenian churches, which leave no doubt in my mind that this similarity is not accidental, but that the one country borrowed it from the other.

[313]See Stuart's 'Sculptured Stones,' and Colonel Forbes Leslie's 'Early Races of Scotland,'passim.

[314]Reeves, 'Adamnan. Vita St. Columb.' pp. 65 and 145.

[315]'Proceedings Soc. Ant. Scot.' iv. p. 119et seq.

[316]Ibid.iv. p. 524.

[317]Westwood, 'Facsimiles of Irish MSS.' plates 4-28.

[318]These two woodcuts are borrowed from Worsaae, 'The Danes and Northmen.' London, 1852.

[319]'Sculptured Stones of Scotland,' ii. p. 70.

[320]Camden, 'Brit.' 1268.

Back to Index Next