Prehistoric Stone Circles by AUBREY BURL
Shire Archaeology. 2005 (fourth edition). 64 pages, 43 photographs, 4 figures. ISBN 0-7478-0609-8. (£5.99)
Prehistoric Astronomy and Ritual by AUBREY BURL
Shire Archaeology. 2005 (second edition). 72 pages, 48 photographs/illustrations, 5 figures. ISBN 0-7478-0614-4. (£5.99)
If, like me, you tend to think of Shire Archaeology titles as the Ronseal
products of archaeological publishing, giving you exactly what they say on the
cover, you may have certain expectations of these two titles from Aubrey Burl.
In new editions of books that were first published in 1979 and 1983 Burl brings
his acknowledged expertise to subjects – Prehistoric Stone Circles and
Prehistoric Astronomy and Ritual – on which he has written at greater
length over a considerable period. However, both books contain an added
ingredient that gives them a distinctive quality:- Burl himself, whose
character, opinions and enthusiasms at times burst out of the pages, with the
result that (at the risk of carrying the Ronseal analogy too far) the finished
product may be a slightly richer mix than you expected. Whether this is an
advantage or disadvantage will be a matter of reader preference.
There is a clear overlap between the two subjects, as many of the megalithic
alignments that are claimed to be of significance by the proponents of
prehistoric astronomy are to be found at stone circles. There are good reasons,
however, for dealing with them separately, not least the breadth of each
subject. Given the more fanciful interpretations with which many of these
monuments have become burdened over the centuries (and no less so today) Burl
is able in one volume to provide a concise summary of the temporal and regional
variants of stone circles, and in the other to deal critically with the thorny
issue of archaeo-astronomy.
Stone circles are one of the iconic symbols of prehistoric Britain, not only
representing the most widespread and durable legacy of our Neolithic and Bronze
Age forebears, but also reflecting what seems to have been those societies’
enduring obsession with other-worldly concerns, an attribute that infuses these
monuments with an irresistible aura of mystery and wonder. Yet, in Prehistoric
Stone Circles, Burl provides a relatively straightforward
chronological summary, with chapters on Early stone circles, The
middle period and Late stone circles, covering the late
Neolithic to middle Bronze Age, with additional chapters on The megalithic
enclosures of Brittany and Stonehenge.
Burl says in his Introduction that, as the function of these sites
will always remain elusive, we must be content with guesses based on their
architecture and contents. Faced with a catalogue of monuments many of which
little more is known, some might have struggled to create a narrative to engage
the reader. Burl has no such problem, and indeed the Burl ingredient soon
bubbles up to the surface. While coolly discussing The origins of stone circles,
created by the early farming communities of the late fourth millennium BC, Burl
suddenly shifts up a gear, announcing that it was a catastrophic climate
change, possibly caused by a volcano in Greenland, that led the helpless
Neolithic farmers, faced with sickening cattle, and desolate fields of
unripened crops, to turn away from the ancestors they had revered and to
construct stone circles within which they could plead in desperation with the
dark, threatening heavens, and where strangers could find sanctuary from a
seemingly never-ending calamity (this is the language he uses). A couple of
paragraphs later, after this whirlwind of vividly descriptive speculation has
blown itself out, he resumes his reasoned discourse on archaeological sites,
radiocarbon dates, monument dimensions and statistics.
Such Burl esque interludes, which this reader found at times stimulating,
amusing, but also, occasionally, slightly alarming, crop up unexpectedly
through the text of both books. One can stop and argue with him, as I started
to do, but to do so is to miss the point and spoil the fun. And it is, surely,
Burl’s evident enthusiasm for the subject, mixed with his encyclopaedic
knowledge, that has made his books so popular not only with archaeologists but
also with the general reader.
In Prehistoric Astronomy and Ritual, Burl provides a refreshingly
straightforward account of the claims and the realities of archaeo-astronomy,
the technicalities of which can be, to the non-specialist or (like myself) the
mathematically illiterate, beyond comprehension and therefore challenge.
Throughout the book I found myself referring back to his brief explanation of
solstices, azimuths and declinations in the chapter on Sun, moon and
prehistoric people, as I struggled to overcome the instinctive
‘knowledge’ (probably shared by prehistoric ‘astronomers’) that both sun and
moon go round the earth.
Burl is generally cautious and considered in his treatment of the subject,
placing it, in his first two chapters – Introduction and Discovery and
proof of prehistoric astronomy and ritual – within the context, at one
end of the debate, of Gordon Childe’s influential rejection of the idea, and at
the other, of its non-archaeologist proponents, such as the astronomer Gerald
Hawkins and the engineer Alexander Thom, as well as of the archaeological
research of Clive Ruggles. However, as always (if ever proof were needed),
reference to Newgrange in Ireland is enough to demonstrate that, from the
Neolithic, people could and did make precise observations of the sun’s
movements and incorporate those alignments within their monuments. At the
Newgrange passage tomb, the roof-box above tomb’s entrance admits the light of
the winter solstice sunrise to illuminate the tomb’s chamber at the end of the
long narrow passage.
The problem for archaeo-astronomy, and one dealt head on by Burl in Problems
and some answers: Callanish and Ballochroy, is that Newgranges are
thin on the ground, and that astronomical significances have been attributed to
many far less securely demonstrable alignments. One such is the Bronze Age
‘observatory’ at Ballochroy, on the Kintyre peninsula, where a line of just
three stone slabs purports to indicate the midwinter and midsummer sunsets, as
well the northern moon rise. Burl, however, points out the imprecision of the
alignments, and suggests that, if they existed, they may have had only general
symbolic significance, related perhaps to the burial chamber in the adjacent
cairn. As Burl warns, ‘because there is an alignment it does not follow that it
was astronomical’.
Having set the parameters for the discussion to follow, Burl then examines
Neolithic and Bronze Age sites within three general phases – The primitive
phase: burial places, 4000-3000 BC, The developed phase: stone circles,
3000-2000 BC, which includes discussion of Stonehenge, and The local
phase: standing stones, 2000-1250 BC. Within each phases, the
alignments at some monuments, or classes of monuments, are more convincing than
at others, while solar alignments are generally more convincing than those
marking the subtle and complex orbits of the moon (which even gave Sir Isaac
Newton a headache). It is difficult for the reader to make any judgements about
the majority of the sites described, given the few ground plans provided – a
shortcoming that applies equally to both books. While there are numerous colour
photographs, they frequently do not illustrate the particular points that Burl
is making in the text.
Burls ends with a close examination of one site, the recumbent stone circle at
Balquhain, Aberdeenshire, which, he argues, incorporates all the elements that
are to be found in monuments linked to the sun or the moon. Certainly, this now
ruined monument must originally have been an impressive site, its massive
recumbent slab at the south flanked by circle of possibly twelve standing
stones of varying size, shape and colour, some bearing cup-marks, and with a 3m
high outlier of white quartz standing some 6m to the south-east.
In quoting the Omar Khayyam in the title of this chapter, Balquhain:
‘the stone that put the stars to flight’, one is forewarned that Burl
is again likely to wax lyrical, and indeed the quartz outlier resembles a
‘cowled and white-shrouded hag’. However, it was not the colourful language
that caused me unease but the fact that, despite his earlier statement that
‘archaeo-astronomy demands discipline’ (p. 24), Burl declares that, in the
siting of the cup-marked stones, ‘the connection with the moon is obvious’ (the
chapter title refers in fact to the sun). Yet, despite the fact that a plan is
provided to illustrate his point, I was unable to see the connection myself,
nor could I discern the intellectual rigour which Burl says archaeo-astronomy
demands. The three alignments shown – to the most southerly rising of the moon
at 172° (shown as 174° on the plan), the major moon set at 190° (189° on the
plan) and the minor moonset at 232° – run from the apparent centre of the
circle (of which, however, only an arc of four stones and the recumbent stone
remain in place) to the edges of the two surviving cup-marked stones (one of
which has fallen over), and a hump in the middle of the recumbent stone. I have
to say I was not convinced – if only the ‘white-shrouded hag’ had been aligned
on something, but that, it seems, was no more than a marker to guide people
approaching from a low-lying settlement!
In the final chapter, which looks to The future, Burl says
‘Archaeo-astronomy is no longer regarded as an activity of the lunatic fringe.
It has become a respectable study. It now needs to become a respectable
discipline’ (p. 66). And, in fairness, throughout the book Burl is at pains
stress the ritual and symbolic nature of the astronomical alignments, and to
warn against accidental and coincidental correlations. Moreover, without all
the plans and the analyses which lies behind Burl’s statements, I am in no
position to argue whether or not he is right, and it is in the nature of a slim
Shire title that one has to take a certain amount on trust. Yet, after reading
the chapter on Balquhain, I am left with the nagging doubt that even someone of
Burl’s experience may be susceptible to a degree of wish-fulfilment in the
attribution of astronomical significance to the apparent alignments of these
stones.
However, if so, this would be nothing new, and in the end it does not detract
from the wider value of these books, which is that they simultaneously inform,
stimulate and entertain the reader.
Andrew B. Powell
Wessex Archaeology
Review Submitted: July 2005
The views expressed in
this review are not necessarily those of the Society or the Reviews
Editor.
|