STANTON DREW (Lat. 51° 10′ N.)
Other circles to which I have given some attention are at Stanton Drew
in Somerset. I regret to say that I have not as yet had an opportunity
of visiting them. But a cursory inspection on the Ordnance map of the
possible sight-lines from circle to circle, for there are three,
suggested at once that we were dealing with the same problem as that
worked out, if somewhat differently, at the Hurlers.
The three circles, two avenues leading from two of the circles towards
the river, and some outstanding stones were most carefully surveyed by
Mr. C. E. Dymond some years ago. He was good enough to send me copies of
his plans and levelling sections. I have not had the advantage of
perusing his memoir, but I have studied the monuments as well as I could
by means of the 25-inch Ordnance map. This, combined with an azimuth
which Colonel Johnston, the Director-General of the Ordnance Survey, was
kind enough to send me, should give me bearings within a degree.
I will begin by giving a short account of the stones which remain,
abridged from the convenient pamphlet prepared for the British
Association meeting at Bristol in 1898 by Prof. Lloyd Morgan.
The circles at Stanton Drew, though far less imposing than those of
Avebury and Stonehenge, are thought to be more ancient than are the
latter, for the rough-hewn uprights and plinths of Stonehenge bear the
marks of a higher and presumably later stage of mechanical development.
Taken as a group, the Somersetshire circles are in some respects more
complex than their better known rivals in Wiltshire. There are three
circles, from two of which “avenues” proceed for a short distance in a
more or less easterly direction; there is a shattered but large
dolmen--if we may so regard the set of stones called “the cove”; and
there are outlying stones--the “quoit,” and those in Middle Ham--which
bear such relations to the circles as to suggest that they too formed
parts of some general scheme of construction.
From the photograph of the Ordnance map (Fig. 47) it will be seen, as
pointed out by Prof. Lloyd Morgan,
(1) That the centre of the great circle, that of the S.W. circle, and
that of the quoit, are nearly in the same straight line.
(2) That the cove, the centre of the great circle, and that of the N.E.
circle, are nearly in the same straight line.
The quoit, which generally means the covering stone of a
cromlech--“Hautville’s Quoit,” as it is named on the Ordnance map--looms
large in Stanton Drew tradition; it is locally as much respected as the
circles themselves. It is pointed to most unmistakably by the fact that
a line from it to the S.W. circle passes nearly through the centre of
the great circle.
If the observation line, then, meant anything astronomically, it can
only have had to do with the rising of a star far to the north, in a
position far more northerly than the sun ever reaches.
The “quoit,” lying in an orchard by the roadside, has nothing very
impressive about its appearance--a recumbent mass of greyish sandstone;
but it seems to be a brick in the Stanton Drew building. By some
regarded as a sarsen block from Wiltshire, it is, in Prof. Lloyd
Morgan’s opinion, more probably derived from the Old Red Sandstone of
Mendip. In any case it is not, geologically speaking, _in situ_; nor has
it reached its present position by natural agency.
With regard to two of the megalithic circles, at first sight the
constituent stones seem irregularly dotted about the field; but as we
approach them the unevenly spaced stones group themselves.
The material of which the greater number of the rude blocks is composed
is peculiar and worthy of careful examination. It is a much altered rock
consisting, in most of the stones, of an extremely hard siliceous
breccia with angular fragments embedded in a red or deep brown matrix,
and with numerous cavities which give it a rough slaggy appearance. Many
of these hollows are coated internally with a jasper-like material, the
central cavity being lined with gleaming quartz-crystals.
[Illustration: FIG. 47.--The Circles and Avenues at Stanton Drew.
Photograph of 25-inch Ordnance map, shewing approximate azimuths of
sight-lines.]
The majority of the stones were probably brought from Harptree Ridge on
Mendip, distant some six miles. Weathered blocks of Triassic breccia,
showing various stages of silicification, there lie on the surface; and
there probably lay the weathered monoliths which have been transported
to Stanton Drew. It is important to note that they were erected
unhewn and untouched by the tool. A few stones are of other
material--sandstone, like the “quoit,” or oolite from Dundry.
In the great circle, of the visible stones some retain their erect
position, others are recumbent, several are partially covered by
accumulation of grass-grown soil. Others are completely buried, their
position being revealed in dry seasons by the withering of the grass
above them.
To the east of this circle a short avenue leads out, there being three
visible stones and one buried block on the one hand, and two visible
stones on the other. But one’s attention is apt to be diverted from
these to the very large and massive megaliths of the small N.E. circle.
This is composed of eight weathered masses, one of which (if indeed it
do not represent more than one), Prof. Lloyd Morgan tells us, is
recumbent and shattered. From this circle, all the stones of which are
of the siliceous breccia, a short avenue of small stones also opens out
eastwards.
The third or S.W. circle lies at some little distance from the others.
The average size of the stones is smaller than in either of the other
circles, and not all are composed of the same material.
“The Cove,” which has been variously regarded as a dolmen, a druidical
chair of state, and a shelter for sacrificial fire, is close to the
church.
The dimensions and numbers of the stones are as follow:
Great circle, diameter 368 feet, 30 stones.
N.E. „ „ 97 „ 8 „
S.W. „ „ 145 „ 12 „
As I was not able to visit Stanton Drew when the significance of the
northerly alignments struck me, I made an appeal to Prof. Lloyd Morgan,
of whose pamphlet I have so largely made use, to obtain some theodolite
observations. As a result such observations have been made by himself
and Mr. Morrow, from whom I have recently received a report with full
permission to make use of it in this place.
The monuments are not easy to measure, as the centres of the circles are
not readily determined, as so many of the stones are either absent,
recumbent or buried.
In my rough reading of the Ordnance map given in Fig. 47, I thought I
might be guided by taking centres, such that the avenues would be
aligned on them as at Stonehenge. I had not then seen the Dartmoor
avenues, which in some cases are not aligned on the centres. In this it
is possible that I was wrong, as both Mr. Dymond’s and Mr. Morrow’s
observations suggest that the avenues are really of the Dartmoor
pattern. Mr. Morrow writes: “The centres of the circles are (to a
certain small extent) a matter of choice, a difference of a few minutes
may easily occur. In dealing with the avenues a larger discrepancy may
occur. I have taken what, in my opinion, was the best centre line of
each avenue and thus determined its azimuth. But I believe that
originally the southern line of stones forming each avenue was directed
towards the centre of the corresponding circle, and that the avenue was
then completed by the erection of a parallel line of stones. A
difference of a few degrees may thus be accounted for in the azimuth
supposed to have been originally marked out.”
About Mr. Morrow’s azimuths there can be no question. He writes:
“The instruments used were, first, a 6″ theodolite, and second, a 6″
transit theodolite. The final results were obtained with the latter. It
cannot be reversed when measuring elevations. I tested it very carefully
for the adjustments of (_a_) line of collimation at right angles to the
horizontal axis, (_b_) horizontal axis perpendicular to vertical axis,
and (_c_) line of collimation and spirit level parallel to each other.
The instrument was in first-rate order, the error in elevation, for
example, being within that corresponding to a slope of 1 in 40,000; that
is well within the limit of 20″ to which vertical angles can be read.
“The meridian was obtained by two different methods applied several
times, the results agreeing very closely. Readings of azimuths and
altitude of sun were taken between three and four hours after noon,
corrected for semi-diameter, &c., and the true bearing obtained with the
aid of the latitude and the declination given in Nautical Almanac
(corrected for time).
“With regard to the elevations of the horizon, the existence of trees on
or just below the sky-line renders readings to the nearest minute
uncertain. In all cases I have tried to give the most probable value,
supposing the trees to be absent. In some places the heights will have
altered slightly during recent years owing to the construction of
railways.
“The values given are the means of observations. They are not corrected
for height of instrument above ground, which might increase the angles
by about 5 mins. Trees on the sky-line appear to make a difference of
some 35 mins.”
The azimuths as found by Mr. Morrow and myself are as under:
Height of horizon
(excluding trees).
Morrow. Lockyer. Morrow.
[23]From centre of great circle
to Hauteville’s quoit N. 17° 59′ E. 17° 2° 23′
From centre of great circle
to N.E. circle 53° 0′ 51° 1° 5′
From centre of great circle
along great circle avenue 68° 43′ 65° 0° 38′
From centre of N.E. circle
along N.E. circle avenue S. 83° 52′ E. 79° 1° 40′
From centre of S.W. circle
to centre of great circle N. 19° 51′ E. 20° 1° 44′
The azimuths to which I first direct attention are these:
Az.
Great circle to quoit N. 17° E.
S.W. circle to great circle N. 20° E.
These azimuths indicate that at Stanton Drew as at the Hurlers and
elsewhere we are dealing with Arcturus as a clock-star. The facts are:
Az. N. Decln. Height Star. Date.
of hills.
N. 17° E. 38° 59′ 0″ 2° 23′ Arcturus 1690
20° 37° 26′ 50″ 1° 44′ „ 1410
One of the greatest differences between Mr. Morrow’s local observation
and my reading of the 25-inch Ordnance map occurs in the case of the
direction of the avenue from the great circle. It may be suggested that
the use of this avenue was to observe the May and August sunrises of the
May year. If we take the sun’s declination at 16° 20′ N., see p. 22, the
azimuth should be about N. 64° E.; this is 1° from my value and 5° from
that given by Mr. Morrow, but it must not be forgotten that the choice
of a day in May and August slightly differing from the normal date might
easily produce such a variation.
It seems probable that the great circle was one of the first erected,
and the fact that, like Stonehenge, it had an avenue, but that, unlike
Stonehenge, the avenue was directed towards the May and not the June
(solstitial) sunrise further, I think, suggests that the May worship was
considered the most important and was the first provided for.
There is reason for supposing that the great circle was at all events
built before the S.W. one. The great circle is situated at a lower level
than the S.W. one. The angular elevation of the hills over which
Arcturus rose would appear, therefore, to be higher from the great than
from the S.W. circle. Arcturus has been reducing its declination for
centuries in consequence of the precessional movement. It would
therefore rise gradually in a greater azimuth, that is, nearer the east.
An observer in the centre of the great circle, to follow this more
easterly rising over the quoit, would have to change his position
gradually to the westward. But there was another way. The original
direction could be nearly maintained if the observation were made at a
higher level near the original line, as then the relative elevation of
the rising-place would be reduced.
This is what possibly was done, and this indeed may be the _vera causa_
of the building of the S.W. circle.
This view of the possible function of the “quoit” is, of course,
strengthened by the fact that we find traces of high northerly alignment
in other stone circles. I have already shown that there are such
alignments in Cornwall.
The “quoit” is nearly on a level with the great circle, while the hills
rise behind it. It has been suggested that it would have been more
useful on the top of the hill, but this suggestion cannot be accepted
for a moment if it were used in the way I have indicated. On a dark
night it would have been invisible, and it also would have prevented the
observation of star-rise if it were truly aligned. Being comparatively
near the circle it could easily have been illuminated at the critical
time, and thus have anticipated the bright line micrometer of more
modern times.
So far I have found no obvious use for the avenue attached to the N.E.
circle. The conditions are:
Az. Height of Dec.
Hills.
Morrow. Lockyer. Morrow. Morrow. Lockyer.
S. 83° 52′ E. S. 79° E. 1° 40′ 3° 52′ 30″ S. 5° 49′ 30″ S.
With regard to this N.E. circle, in relation to the large circle, the
data are as follows:
Az. Height of Dec. N.
Hills.
Morrow. Lockyer. Morrow. Morrow. Lockyer.
N. 53° E. N. 51° E. 1° 5′ 22° 43′ 50″ 23° 48′ 46″
As Mr. Morrow states, the choice of centre of the circle may alter the
azimuth obtained by as much as “a few degrees,” but the value obtained
from the Ordnance map is, definitely, N. 51° E., and with the height of
hills determined by Mr. Morrow this would suggest that the N.E. circle
was really erected to provide the alignment, from the centre of the
great circle, or from the Cove, to the summer solstitial sun, about the
year 870 B.C., Stockwell’s values for the obliquity being taken. This
result is the more striking as it gives a date for the substitution of
the June for the May worship at Stanton Drew, which is in full
accordance with that obtained for the similar change at Stenness.
There is other evidence, to which I attach importance, as it deals with
a method and policy found in many temple fields in Egypt, that of
blocking the alignment of an older star- or sun-cult, which the
astronomer-priests replaced by their own. The stones of the avenue of
the solstitial N.E. circle I expect once blocked the May sunrise line
from the great circle; judging from the Ordnance map, and remembering
the number of stones that have disappeared, this is probable if not
certain.
If this were so, then the N.E. circle was the last to be erected, and
this suggestion is strengthened by Mr. Lewis’s statement that it is the
most perfect of the three.
Prof. Lloyd Morgan concludes his interesting account of which I have
made so much use with the following remarks:
“In what order the circles were constructed we do not know. Whether the
small N.E. circle with its more massive megaliths preceded or succeeded
the great circle with its more numerous but, on the average, less
massive stones, is a matter of mere conjecture. They may have been
contemporaneous: but it is more likely that so large a work took a long
time in execution; nor does the unity of plan of the final product
preclude a gradual process of development. Finally as to the purpose of
the erection, and its hidden astronomical, mythological, or social
meaning (if it have one), we are once more at the mercy of more or less
plausible conjecture. There stand the circles in a quiet Somersetshire
valley, silent memorials of a race concerning whose modes of life, of
labour, and of thought we can but speculate.”
It is to be hoped that before the monument has disappeared like so many
of its fellows, some student with more knowledge and time to devote to
the inquiry than myself will endeavour to answer more of the questions
raised by it.
[23] With regard to these values Mr. Morrow writes: “At present
Hauteville’s quoit is not visible from the centre of great circle. If
the stone were erect, however, and any intervening trees and walls
removed, the top of the stone would no doubt be within view. The
Hauteville quoit line is thus rather a difficult one to obtain with
accuracy, but the azimuth given should be correct to the nearest
minute.”