In seventeen of the cairns sculptured stones have been found to the number of 100. Cairn T has 28 stones with scribings, the largest number yet noticed in any of the group. We can only briefly refer to the contents of some of these cairns, which represent, as we have said, the largest and most varied collection of inscribed stones hitherto found in any Celtic monument. The largest is cairn D, which measures 180 feet in diameter; no trace of interment has yet been found within it, and it may have been merely monumental.
Cairn H is 5 or 6 feet high and 54 feet in diameter. Here Conway collected 300 fragments of bones, 14 of rude pottery, 10 pieces of flint, 155 sea-shells, and quantities of pebbles and polished stones. But the most remarkable portion of the collection consisted of nearly 5000 pieces of bone implements, many more or less perfect, several of which were engraved in Late Celtic pattern, as were many portions of combs. In addition to this collection, beads of amber and glass, bronze rings, and iron implements were found, and a recent examination has added to these.
Cairn L is 135 feet in diameter, and has a circle of 42 stones set on edge, varying from 6 to 12 feet in length, and 3 to 4 feet in height. It is chambered, and the roof fashioned by overlapping stones similar to that of Newgrange. The passage and chamber have a combined length of 29 feet, and the latter is 13 feet in width. On the floor of the passage is a flagstone, measuring 8 feet 9 inches by 3 feet 6 inches; and in one of these recesses is the largest and best finished stone basin yet discovered, measuring 5 feet 9 inches by 3 feet 1 inch. Fragments of pottery to the number of 154 were found, and under the basin pieces of burnt bone and many human teeth.
Cairn T is the most conspicuous monument of the group; it measures 116 feet in diameter, and rises with sloping sides to a height of 21 feet. It contains a recessed chamber, like that at Newgrange, in miniature, the entrance to which faces due east, and is reached by a shallow, funnel-shaped passage. Round the base is a closely-set circle of 37 stones, varying from 6 to 12 feet in length, and acting as a kind of retaining fence to the loose, dry boulders which form the body of the tumulus. One of these stones on the north side is popularly known as the ‘Hag’s Chair’ (see [p. 39]). Fergusson states there can be little doubt that it was intended as a seat, or throne, but by whom it was raised and for what purpose it is difficult to say. When opened in 1865 the roofing of the passage and much of the chamber had fallen away, leaving them filled with stones; the combined length is 28 feet, and the full width of the chamber is 16 feet 4 inches. The floor of the central octagonal chamber was covered by three large and two small flags, beneath which were found pieces of burnt bone and charcoal. It has three recesses, about 4 feet square.
Conwell, without the slightest authority, rushed to the conclusion that this particular monument must be the tomb of Ollamh Fodhla, and that the chair cannot be other than the judicial seat, or throne, of that famous king. He writes: ‘And to whom, keeping in view the preceding MS. testimony,[45] could this great megalithic chair be more appropriately ascribed than to Ollamh Fodhla? It would be natural to suppose that, for the site of the tomb of the great king and law-maker, his posterity (or, indeed, probably he himself, during his own lifetime) selected the most elevated spot on the entire range; hence we propose to call the carn on that spot—904 feet above the sea-level, and situated on the middle hill—Ollamh Fodhla’s tomb, and the great stone seat “Ollamh Fodhla’s Chair”; and the ruined remains of the smaller surrounding cairns, six of which still remain, the tombs of his sons and grandsons, mentioned in the previous extracts. In fact, on the summit of the highest hill in the site of this ancient royal cemetery, we believe there still exist the remains of the tombs of the dynasty of Ollamh Fodhla’!
The construction of these chambered tumuli, so peculiar to our eyes, had its origin in the primitive mound-dwelling, survivals of which are still to be found among the Lapps inhabiting the extreme north of Scandinavia. Here, as Mr. Arthur Evans points out, ‘are the ring-stones actually employed in propping up the turf-covered mound of the dwelling, and there is the low entrance gallery leading to the chamber within, which, in fact, is the living representative, and at the same time the remote progenitor, of the gallery of the chambered barrow.’ The bee-hive tombs of Mycenæ are traced back by Professor Adler to Phrygia. Here, according to Vitruvius, the dwellers in the valleys dug a circular pit, raised a cone-shaped chamber with posts, covered it with weeds and branches; over all they piled a heap of earth, and cut a passage into the chamber from without. Of this Dr. Schuchhardt says: ‘The analogy is certainly significant. Men in all ages have fashioned the dwellings of the dead in accordance with those of the living; but the dead are conservative, and long after a new generation has sought a new home and a new pattern for its houses, the habitations of the dead are still constructed in ancestral fashion.’[46]
The distribution of the spiral, which is so remarkable a feature at Newgrange, has in recent years received much attention from European archæologists. It was used in Egypt at a very early period. Dr. Flinders Petrie has discovered it on scarabs dating as far back as the fifth dynasty. It is now thought that the spiral reached Europe from Egypt northwards through the Ægean. Mr. A. J. Evans has found it in Crete on scarabs of the twelfth dynasty (2700–2500 B.C.), but its adoption in Mycenæan ornament from this early wave northward is doubted. Dr. Petrie considers that the intermediate stages so evident in Egypt are absent in Greece.[47] Evidence seems to show that its development in Greece was due to a wave of influence from Egypt during the eighteenth dynasty (1580–1320 B.C.). In Greek hands it attained the same degree of perfection as in Egypt, and has been found elaborately decorating the stelæ, gold ornaments, and vessels in the tombs of Mycenæ, in the alabaster frieze at Tiryns, and in the slabs of the ceiling of the tomb at Orchomenos.
Mr. Evans says: ‘In the wake of early commerce the same spiraliform motives were to spread still further afield to the Danubian basin, and thence in turn by the valley of the Elbe to the Amber Coast of the North Sea, then to supply the Scandinavian Bronze Age population with their leading decorative designs. Adopted by the Celtic tribes in the central European area, they took, at a somewhat later date, a westerly turn, reached Britain with the invading Belgæ, and finally survived in Irish art.’[48] But there is much to support the theory that the spiral reached Ireland from Scandinavia, and not by the direct western route, as communication existed between the races from a very early date. This view is maintained by Mr. George Coffey, who discusses the subject of prehistoric ornament in Ireland in a series of papers contributed to the Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries (Ireland).[49] He also accepts the theory, advocated, too, by Prof. Montelius, that the concentric circle is a debased spiral; and is of opinion that, where both are found, the spiral is the earlier form of the two. The distribution of the spiral is very widespread, and even the returning spiral has been used by the Maori in facial decoration and otherwise for a long period. The spiral is a form that would come under the notice of primitive man anywhere; and it is quite possible in such things as this, as in myths, customs, and objects common to most races, to push theory too far in one direction. But the spread of the spiral ornament throughout Europe, as the result of Mycenæan influence, receives confirmation by similar parallels being established in connection with other important branches of archæological research.
Many archæologists have hitherto been of opinion that the sculpturings on the rocks composing these sepulchral chambers are symbolical; but no satisfactory explanation has yet been given of their religious significance. Some, however, consider that they are mere ornament, and that in no sense have they a cryptic meaning. Many of the stones from the position in which they are now placed, as we have already pointed out, must have been carved beforehand, and may probably have served some other purpose at an earlier period. It is easily seen that the same ornamentation exists on many objects to which no symbolism could be attached; there is an absence, too, of all idea of method in design, and a want of unity in combination, which are against any theory except that of primitive man’s mere desire to decorate. Though much has been written on the question, yet, in the present state of our knowledge, it is impossible to arrive at a definite conclusion upon the subject.
