INGEN S CE 
| DECEMBER 13, 1906 
NOTES ON ANCIENT 
MONUMENTS. 
I. 
The Aberdeen Circles. A Letter to Dr. Angus Fraser. 
Dear Dr. FRASER, 
I told you when leaving Aberdeen that so soon as 
I had discussed the observations of the stone circles 
I was enabled to make, thanks to your kindness in 
placing your motor-car at our disposal, you should be 
the first to know of the results. 
Here is my report. Before I refer to the observ- 
ations themselves I will just say why I was so 
anxious to have a look at your circles. During the 
last year my wife and I had photographed and 
measured several circles in Cornwall and Devonshire. 
We found outstanding stones, apparently to indicate 
certain directions in which observations should be 
made from the centre of each circle. I studied the 
chief directions astronomically, and found that they 
might have been used to observe the rising places of 
stars and of the sun at different times of the year in 
each circle, and that practically the same places of 
star and sun rising were observed in all the circles. 
This indicated a general use: we were dealing with 
a system, and not with a chapter 
BRITISH 
of accidents. Each circle might 
have been a_ town-clock and 
farmer’s almanac combined, what- 
ever other purpose of utility it may 
have served. 
I gave an account of this worl: 
in my book ‘* Stonehenge,’’? and 
very briefly in a letter to The Times 
(July 30, 1906). 
Now before I went to Aberdeen, 
Mr. A. L. Lewis, a great authority 
on these ancient monuments, had 
told me that your circles. were 
different from those in south 
England. In each of your most 
perfect circles there is, instead of 
a standing stone outside the circle, 
a recumbent stone inserted between 
two of the stones of which the circle 
itself is composed. Not only had I 
got this information from Mr. 
Lewis, but I had had the advantage 
of seeing the many plans prepared for.the Gunning 
fellowship reports by Mr. Coles, the assistant leeper 
of the Museum of Antiquities at Edinburgh. 
The question, then, was, might the recumbent 
stones in the Aberdeen circles play the same part as 
the outstanding stones in Cornwall and Devonshire? 
If so, of course, they could have been used with the 
same object, that, namely, of indicating a direction ; 
they would only represent a difference of design, not 
of purpose. 
An inspection of some of the available plans sug- 
gested that in the recumbent stone and its supporters 
we had a special form of ‘“‘cove,’”’ the direction 
required being indicated by a line across the circle 
perpendicular to the length of the recumbent 
‘stone. 
If this were so, we should find the Aberdeen 
wecumbent stones placed at right angles to the chief 
‘direction lines to the outstanding stones found in 
‘S. England; lines used for the star- and sun-places 
I have detailed in my book ‘ Stonehenge,’’ and 
‘therefore dealing with practically the same declin- 
ations; latitude and heights of hills being taken into 
account. 
Now to settle this point it was necessary to obtain 
NO. 1937, VOL. 75| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
trustworthy azimuths of these directions, and of the 
| angular height of the horizon in each direction, and 
| it is here that I owe so much to the kindness of 
most anxious to 
The University authorities, represented 
friends in Aberdeen which I am 
acknowledge. 
| by Prof. Macdonald, lent me a theodolite, you placed 
your motor-car at our disposal, and Dr. Milne was 
good enough to suggest circles to examine, and accom- 
panied us to the sites. 
The circles examined were Sunhoney, Midmar, 
Auchquhorties (Fetternear), Raes of Clune, and Old 
Bourtree Bush. 
Friday, September 28.—Sunhoney, lat. 
az. N. 46° E., horizon 4° high. These numbers are 
only approximations, for the recumbent stone is 
curved, and the horizon is covered by trees. Midmar, 
lat. 57° 8’, az. N. 42° E., horizon 1° go! high. The 
alignment was taken on the stone across the circle, its 
line of direction being, apparently, at right angles 
to the front surface of the recumbent stone. The 
height of horizon is doubtful, in consequence of 
trees. 
Saturday, September 29.—Auchquhorties (Fetter- 
near), lat. N. 57° 16', az. N. 19° E., horizon) 2% go! 
high (assumed half-way up the trees). 
N. 57° 8!, 
Photo. by Mr. Ritchie. 
Fic. 1.—The recumbent stone at Auchquhorties, showing supporters and other stones directed to the 
centre of the circle. 
Monday, October 1.—Raes of Clune, lat. N. 57° 5. 
No measures were made, as the ground near the re- 
cumbent stone had been excavated, and the stone dis- 
turbed. Mr. Braid, who had taken much trouble to 
enable us to find the site, and whom we met near it, 
promised to make a new survey of this and the other 
adjoining circles for examination at some future 
time. Old Bourtree Bush, lat. N. 57° 3/, az. N- 
270° W., horizon not measured. ; 
Before I discuss these measurements in detail, let 
me say that the first result which stares one in the 
face is very remarkable. , f 
The measurements of the first five circles, which 
were selected at random, show that two, like the re- 
stored Stonehenge, could watch the sunrise at the 
summer solstice. The direction line of another resem- 
bles those of a dozen circles in S. England, built, as I 
hold, to watch the rise of the. clock-star, and the only 
other one measured is directed to the sunset at the 
equinoxes. ; : 
To enter into details. I take the magnetic vari- 
ation for 1906 at 18° 30’ W.; this then has to be ap- 
plied to the compass bearing to get the true azimuth. 
I also give a table of the solstitial azimuths, taking 
heights of hills into account, for lat. 57° :— 
