[16] This woollen cloth must be regarded as a woven texture, but whether it were woven in so artificial a machine as a loom may be questioned. A great variety of contrivances have been used for weaving, i.e., crossing alternately threads passed in opposite directions, the warp and the woof, by what are called savage races. Still it is not at all improbable that a people so advanced in pastoral habits, possessed some machine for weaving, bearing a relation to a primitive loom. Both warp and woof are composed, as might be expected, of a simply spun thread of one strand. Perforated stones are found in British and Danish barrows, and perforated pieces of earthenware in the Swiss Lake villages, even of the stone period, which are regarded as spindle-whorls.
[17] It is worthy of remark, that this noble mound, with its very early interments, has been made a place of sepulture in more recent times, many Roman coins and remains of that period having been found there.
[18] These immense monoliths have originally, it is estimated, been upwards of thirty in number, and to have been placed probably ten yards apart. The largest remaining stone stands between eight and nine feet above the ground, and is seventeen feet in circumference. It is estimated to weigh upwards of seven tons. Several of the stones have entirely disappeared, of others fragments remain scattered about.
[19] For an excellent notice of this and other remains, the reader is referred to Mr. W. F. Wakeman’s “Handbook of Irish Antiquities,”—the best and most compact little work on the subject which has been issued, and one which will be found extremely useful to the archæological student—to which I am indebted for some of the accompanying engravings.
[20] For the loan of these seven engravings I am indebted to the Council of the “Historical and Archæological Association of Ireland,” (formerly the “Kilkenny and South-east of Ireland Archæological Society,”) in whose journal—one of the most valuable of antiquarian publications—they have appeared. This Association is one of the most useful that has ever been established, and deserves the best support, not only of Irish, but of English antiquaries.
[21] F. C. Lukis.
[22] Vol. i. p. 142.
[23] T. Wright.
[24] “Archæological Journal,” vol xi., p. 315.
[25] For articles upon this subject see the “Reliquary, Quarterly Archæological Journal and Review,” vol. ii., pages 61 to 70; and Mr. Bateman’s “Ten Years’ Diggings,” page 279.