Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Cup and ring rock art

  • 17-02-2014 11:58am
    #1
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    Cup and ring rock art or simple cup marks must be one of the most enigmatic of all prehistoric remains in Irish archaeology.
    Are they the remains of something practical, symbolic or decorative?
    What are your thoughts?


    An eroded, cup marked bullaun stone from Ticlash in county Wicklow (SMR W1030-040).
    (with apologies to Cianmcliam)
    294402.JPG
    Tagged:


«1

Comments

  • #2
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Maybe all three at different times? As a matter of interest has anyone tried putting round stones in these holes and checked what shadows they cast over a day?

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #3
    dublinviking
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭dublinviking


    bullaun stones

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057088700


  • #4
    bawn79
    Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭bawn79


    Two very interesting papers on rock-art.

    http://www.academia.edu/2642537/Open-air_rock_art_at_Loughcrew_Co_Meath (Ken Williams who posts here was involved with this paper)

    http://www.academia.edu/485023/Assuming_the_jigsaw_had_only_one_piece_abstraction_figuration_and_the_interpretation_of_Irish_passage_tomb_art

    I wonder how much undiscovered rock-art is out there? - I would say a vast quantity. In Britain they are regularly discovering new panels.
    Also in Archaeology Ireland Christian Corlett has recently rediscovered rock-art panels reused as gravestones in some graveyards in Wicklow. You would think this would be a very fruitful avenue for rediscovering panels. I understand that field walking around an existing panel can also yield results.


  • #5
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    bawn79 wrote: »
    Also in Archaeology Ireland Christian Corlett has recently rediscovered rock-art panels reused as gravestones in some graveyards in Wicklow.

    I know, I helped unearth them!


  • #6
    bogwalrus
    Registered Users Posts: 1,454 ✭✭✭bogwalrus


    I took a pic today of a rock in killarney national park. I think there was some pre Christian history to it but I don't know exactly what. Any thoughts.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    bawn79
    Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭bawn79


    slowburner wrote: »
    I know, I helped unearth them!

    Sorry slowburner - I don't know who you are in the real world!


  • #8
    bawn79
    Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭bawn79


    bogwalrus wrote: »
    I took a pic today of a rock in killarney national park. I think there was some pre Christian history to it but I don't know exactly what. Any thoughts.

    Well it looks like a bullaun stone to me.

    http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/10774/caherabbey_lower.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullaun

    Although I think I read in the recent Archaeology Ireland that they may have been used for grinding furze bushes as a source of food.


  • #9
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Here's one of the Wicklow cupmarked stones discovered by Christiaan Corlett in 2013.
    This one is particularly interesting.
    It's first life was as a neolithic cupmarked stone. Then it was used as a window sill, possibly in a long vanished early Christian church and finally, it was used as a gravestone.
    The cupmarks are unusual in that at least three perforate the stone and were bored from either side. It's also unusual to find cupmarks on both faces.

    The recess for the window can be seen carved into the bottom left edge of the stone.

    294762.JPG


  • #10
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Maybe all three at different times? As a matter of interest has anyone tried putting round stones in these holes and checked what shadows they cast over a day?
    Can't say I know of any experimental work on this theory.
    I think one of the problems with it is that not all cupmarked stones are recumbent, in which case the cupmarks would obviously not be able to retain anything.
    Mind you, in many cases the stones are probably not in their original position - just like the one pictured in the first post.


  • #11
    cfuserkildare
    Registered Users Posts: 3,573 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    Due to the orientation of the stones and the fact that there are indentations on multiple sides of most stones used, I would doubt there use as simple grain grinding devices.
    Perhaps they were used to signify a kings term? or as a boundary marker shared by multiple clans?


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    The above stone got me thinking. Could some of them be a religious ritual, I mean in the labour involved making one, either as a devotion or penance. So instead of confession and three hail marys, :D the person would be told/expected to labour at grinding one?

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #13
    bawn79
    Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭bawn79


    cfuserkildare wrote: »
    Due to the orientation of the stones and the fact that there are indentations on multiple sides of most stones used, I would doubt there use as simple grain grinding devices.
    Perhaps they were used to signify a kings term? or as a boundary marker shared by multiple clans?

    Hey cfuser - I was responding to the picture of the bullaun stone in Killarney National Park. Its the bullaun stone that I was putting forward as being used for grain grinding.
    Cup and ring marks are a whole different kettle of fish.


  • #14
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Wibbs wrote: »
    The above stone got me thinking. Could some of them be a religious ritual, I mean in the labour involved making one, either as a devotion or penance. So instead of confession and three hail marys, :D the person would be told/expected to labour at grinding one?
    Well that's as good a theory as any other :P


  • #15
    small farms association
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19 ✭small farms association


    theres probally thousands of them around the country


  • #16
    Maudi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    Symbolic or decorative?..in my humble opinion I think they were 'chasing' the minerals for consumption.....perhaps for some perceived restorative value..I think they chipped away. crushed and consumed the power in the stone by drinking .at least in some cases. leaving tell tale cup marks..the power of the stones..if you look at the hugely complicated tombs.newgrange for one..or the sheer impossible weight of the brownshill capstone..stone as a material had a very important place in the minds of our ancestor's. .timber could have lasted hundreds of years as monuments and would have been so much easier to handle but they insisted on and used stone again and again for tombs.standing stones.circles etc hinting at the importance of stone..stone was chipped .ground and consumed in recent times for its perceived restorative values. (Ornate churches in glendalough for eg.) I think theres something important about stone as a material modern people have lost....but our ancestors respected..perhaps even early christian monks seeing the importance of these centuries old hollowed out stones to the 'natives' incorporated some of the bigger stones into the new baptismal 'fonts'


  • #17
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Maudi wrote: »
    Symbolic or decorative?..in my humble opinion I think they were 'chasing' the minerals for consumption.....perhaps for some perceived restorative value..I think they chipped away. crushed and consumed the power in the stone by drinking .at least in some cases. leaving tell tale cup marks..the power of the stones..if you look at the hugely complicated tombs.newgrange for one..or the sheer impossible weight of the brownshill capstone..stone as a material had a very important place in the minds of our ancestor's. .timber could have lasted hundreds of years as monuments and would have been so much easier to handle but they insisted on and used stone again and again for tombs.standing stones.circles etc hinting at the importance of stone..stone was chipped .ground and consumed in recent times for its perceived restorative values. (Ornate churches in glendalough for eg.) I think theres something important about stone as a material modern people have lost....but our ancestors respected..perhaps even early christian monks seeing the importance of these centuries old hollowed out stones to the 'natives' incorporated some of the bigger stones into the new baptismal 'fonts'
    Could it not be argued that wood held an equally important place but that it simply does not survive as archaeology (except in very special circumstances)?


  • #18
    cfuserkildare
    Registered Users Posts: 3,573 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    slowburner wrote: »
    Could it not be argued that wood held an equally important place but that it simply does not survive as archaeology (except in very special circumstances)?

    Good point Slowburner,

    Stonehenge would be a good example ( although perhaps not quite relevant)
    The main henge somewhere between 4500 and 5400 years old, but a " Woodhenge " just beside it that is substancially older, perhaps as much as 3500 years older.

    Only found by chance when retarring a car-park.


  • #19
    Maudi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    slowburner wrote: »
    Could it not be argued that wood held an equally important place but that it simply does not survive as archaeology (except in very special

    Theres probably a lot of monuments that have wooden predessors. .and yes wood is a very versatile material..they could have built wood circles and tombs to last many generations and way into the neolithic future and at a fraction of the time .manpower and resources of stone..but they didnt..they used a material that they must have known would last well beyond their future to reach us..and beyond ..I cant help wondering why..and I can only imagine the conversations of the men who lived a lifestyle of hunter gatherer who could probly ill afford 'time off' to indulge the plans of the engineers who proposed building in stone..they must have been very persuasive. .


  • #20
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Use of stone over wood? Simple willie waving would be a part of it. Wood is "easy" to manipulate by comparison so building in stone is show off time. Plus we see these in the context of the current landscape, surrounded by open spaces and fields. Back in the day they would have been surrounded by forests for the most part, so again stone stands out. About the earliest non portable art we know of is found in caves, often deep in same, so some stone structures may have had an element of virtual caves they built themselves. The other aspect is a deep connection with stone in humans. We've been fashioning it into tools for 3-4 million years. Before copper and the like came along a good supply of stone was essential to our survival.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #21
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 14,544 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Simple willie waving....

    ..was very big around Neanderthal Navan I believe...:D

    Historically, buildings of stone provided far better protection and were much harder to gain entry to. If it is simple shelter one is after timber is faster and easier to build with, but if it's protection one is after stone couldn't be beaten. Even today reconstituted stone in the form of concrete, reinforced, is the preferred method of building from a security perspective.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    pueblo
    Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Use of stone over wood? Simple willie waving would be a part of it.

    Another advantage of stone over wood is the simple fact that while your away someone could just feck off with your wooden monument for firewood/building material or whatever.

    Not so easy with a 100 tonne capstone!


  • #23
    pueblo
    Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    The designs bring to mind ring ditch dwellings interconnected with paths.

    Are ring ditches contemporaneous with cup and ring art?

    53768.jpg


  • #24
    Cianmcliam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 715 ✭✭✭Cianmcliam


    pueblo wrote: »
    The designs bring to mind ring ditch dwellings interconnected with paths.

    Are ring ditches contemporaneous with cup and ring art?

    53768.jpg

    Nice pic, I think this is the stone found at Loughcrew covering a bronze age cist. I thought it was in storage somewhere but this seems to be on display? If it's your pic could you tell me when/where it was taken?


  • #25
    pueblo
    Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    Cianmcliam wrote: »
    Nice pic, I think this is the stone found at Loughcrew covering a bronze age cist. I thought it was in storage somewhere but this seems to be on display? If it's your pic could you tell me when/where it was taken?

    Hi there, not my pic, just a random google image. Turns out this stone is from Dumbarton in Scotland.


  • #26
    Cianmcliam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 715 ✭✭✭Cianmcliam


    pueblo wrote: »
    Hi there, not my pic, just a random google image. Turns out this stone is from Dumbarton in Scotland.

    Ah, thanks! Not seen it before, it's very like the Loughcrew one.


  • #27
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    The marks on this Dumbarton stone just don't look 'right' to this observer.
    What do we know about the find?


  • #28
    Maudi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    slowburner wrote: »
    The marks on this Dumbarton stone just don't look 'right' to this observer.
    What do we know about the find?

    Well..looking closely at this stone again..it does look as if its been "touched up"especially the cups..it dosent look worn..those whiteish chips in and around them make me think it has a chiselled look..then again ..would praps camera flash highlight them.


  • #29
    pueblo
    Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    slowburner wrote: »
    The marks on this Dumbarton stone just don't look 'right' to this observer.
    What do we know about the find?

    Ok this is a little convoluted but here goes..

    The image from Google is from Julian Cope's The Modern Antiquarian site (I know!) http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/5997/

    As far as I can ascertain they claim the stone is from a site near Canmore/Dumbarton called Auchentorlie/ Greenland. The Royal Commission of Ancient & Historical Monuments of Scotland do have a record for this stone (though no image) and this site http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/43363/details/auchentorlie/

    I agree the marks look very fresh, but maybe as suggested previously a flash would produce this effect?


  • #30
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Excuse the pun but this stone might well overturn thinking on cup and ring rock art.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-26366644


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    cfuserkildare
    Registered Users Posts: 3,573 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    Regarding the lighter marks inside the depressions,

    As a photographer I can say that this tends to happen because the smoother surfaces reflect light better than rough areas.


Advertisement