More information : The following summarised history of the interpretation of this
monument replaces the OS record, but includes and expands on
information therein. OS record cards are available in the NMR
archive.
[SK 2383 6287]: Doll Tor Stone Circle. This stone circle was first
noted by Thomas Bateman on 10th April, 1852 and was excavated by him
on that same day (Bateman 1861). Bateman's account records that the
circle was about 20 feet (6.1m) in diameter and comprised six stones,
two of which were prostrate; upon digging the interior, "a grave had
been dug for the reception of three or four cinerary urns and as many
'incense cups' ". These had apparently been emptied of their calcined
contents and broken by earlier diggers. The site was subsequently
"re-discovered" by Messrs. J. P. and J. C. Heathcote in 1931 and
excavated by them over a period of two years between 1931 and 1933
(Heathcote 1939). The Heathcotes noted that hollowing at the centre
marked the site of Bateman's excavations and from where a burnt flint
knife was recovered at this time. Further deposits were found,
including cremations, sherds and flints, close to or at the bases of
five out of the six orthostats. Large stones located in the circle
were thought to form part of Bateman's "grave". It was noted that a
circle of flat stones (generally of only one course) linked the
standing stones. The excavations also revealed that a mound had been
added at the E end, which up to the time of these excavations was
undisturbed. Almost centrally placed to this mound was a rectangular
enclosure of small upright stones surrounding a large flat stone from
under which an interment (interment I in Heathcote's report), which
included a segmented fiance bead, was recovered. Heathcote
interpreted the whole as a degenerate form of cist, with the flat
stone being a capstone (although not supported on any uprights) and
representing the primary burial of the mound. Three further
interments were found, one at the N (Heathcote's interment G) which
included a further star-shaped fiance bead [the fiance beads
recovered from this cairn indicate a possible date for it of
fifteenth century B.C., (Burl 1976) ] was found in a pit with an
upright stone alongside, and two others (interments E and F)
including biconical urns with food vessel affinities (Vine 1982 and
Barnatt forthcoming), bronze and flint tools, were found either side
of a large flat stone at the SE; this flat stone was thought to have
formed the capstone of a cist although this was not conclusively
proved. A further interment was found under a flat stone placed high
up between Stones 1 and 2 on the main circle. A large flat stone at
the extreme E of the mound which was thought may cover an interment,
produced negative results. After the excavations on this mound the
stones were left in situ and uncovered. Some excavated material was
replaced in the circle, resulting in a level approximately one foot
(0.3m) lower than when excavations began and other material
(including sand and loose stones) was scattered outside the site.
During the course of the excavation Heathcote records that three of
the standing stones in the main circle were damaged by vandals,
including Stones 1 and 4 which were "smashed into dozens of
fragments"; these were subsequently restored by the Heathcotes to
their approximate size and height [the other stone damaged was
probably Stone 2]. Heathcote notes the unusual shape and form of the
two prostrate stones [Stones 5 and 6] as being flatter and possibly
dressed. This monument was located and recorded by the Ordnance
Survey Archaeology Division in 1966 (see OS Record Card SK 26 SW 6).
It is suggested by a later commentator that the ring of horizontal
slabs between the uprights on the main circle was a retaining kerb
for a low earthen mound which filled the interior and which was
destroyed by early excavations and disturbances, or alternatively,
that there may have been an external earthen bank surrounding the
circle, although this is thought less likely (Barnatt forthcoming).
Barnatt is also unclear as to whether the central mound and its kerb
are contemporary with, or later than, the ring of orthostats,
although it is suggested that the drystone walling and burials were
secondary (Burl 1976). It is argued by Barnatt (forthcoming) that if
this monument consisted of a mound and retaining kerb then the circle
should be perhaps considered more of a "barrow with a fancy kerb"
than a stone circle. Barnatt notes the increased height of the
retaining kerb where the secondary cairn abuts the circle and offers
two theories for this; firstly, the modification and addition of
layers to produce a "drystone wall" and, secondly, that this ring was
originally higher than one course all round, and has only survived
to a higher level here due to the protection offered by the abutting
secondary cairn. This cairn (which is conjectured may be more than
one phase), is described as being polygonal, 5.5m in diameter and
defined by a kerb of boulders on 5 sides, with the drystone wall
mentioned forming the W side; it is noted that at the SE and E is
evidence of two overlapping kerbs which suggests an addition to the
mound at the S. It is suggested by another commentator that in fact
this mound to the E is a ring-cairn (incorporating Stone 2 into the
back), subsequently filled in to produce a flat-topped platform cairn
(Burl 1976). The theory of a variant ring-cairn is also offered by
Barnatt, although he also conjectures that the rectangular setting
of uprights (described by him as sub-rectangular and defining an
internal space and measuring 1.8m by 1.3m) could be a cist later
infilled.
The description below was produced following RCHME survey of
Stanton Moor in 1986-7.
SK 23830 62873: Embanked Stone Circle: Doll Tor stone circle (a
Scheduled Ancient Monument -Derbys. SAM 142), is situated at 275m OD
on the SW facing slope of a spur projecting from the W side of
Stanton Moor, with a steep escarpment-like edge 100m to the SW. It is
situated close to the N edge of an enclosed coniferous woodland known
as Doll Tor Park Plantation; before being enclosed by woodland there
would have been an extensive panorama to the W. This plantation
encloses an area of old quarrying immediately SE of the stone circle
and is otherwise surrounded by improved grassland. The monument now
appears to be much in the same state as left by the Heathcotes after
excavation. A mixture of turf and bracken obscure much of the
remnants of the cairn at the E, although the ring of orthostats and
interior are reasonably clear of obscuring vegetation. Four
orthostats (Stones 1, 2, 3 and 4, with heights of 0.77m, 0.70m, 0.55m
and 0.80m respectively), are standing, with Stone 3 leaning heavily
to the N and Stone 4 inclined slightly southward; Stones 1 and 4 show
clear evidence of their fragmenting and rebuilding, cement or
concrete having been used in their reconstruction, and Stone 2
appears to have been broken or fractured above the base. There is no
obvious evidence of any of the exposed faces of the two of the large
prostrate stones (Stones 5 and 6) having been dressed, as alleged by
Heathcote. A number of the large stones in the ring depicted on
Heathcote's excavation plan can be correlated with stones wholly or
partially visible through the turf, giving the appearance in places
of a rubble bank, particularly round the E and S arcs, although there
is little evidence of this now between the two prostrates. The
precise form and continuity of the alleged 'retaining kerb' of flat
stones between the orthostats is not now easy to determine due to the
turf cover, and although a number of stones protrude through the
turf, many are loose and may have been disturbed in excavation; one
large, flat, loose stone measuring 0.9m by 0.7m by 0.2m partially
overlies the S end of the southern prostrate (Stone 5), which
measures 1.0m by 1.0m by 0.2m thickness. The remaining prostrate
(Stone 6), measures 1.5m by 0.8m and 0.2m thick. The basic shape
defined by this ring of orthostats is an ellipse, with an almost E-
W oriented long axis 5.5m in length, and a short axis of
approximately 4.5m.
A sharply defined narrow trench, varying in width between 0.5m to
1.2m can be traced as one coherent feature, encompassing both the
ring of orthostats and the remains of the abutting cairn at the E
(see 1:200 scale survey). This is a Heathcote excavation delineation
trench. The Heathcote techniques of excavation and spoil stacking are
representatively documented in the excavation reports for T2 (NAR No.
SK 26 SW 20) and T14 ( NAR No. formerly SK 26 SW 30 now SK 26 SW
137). The sinuosity of this trench at the extreme E and S of the
cairn extension where the trench is detached from the bulk of the
indicated cairn extent (both on the ground and as depicted on
Heathcote's plan), and no kerb or coherent feature is exposed on the
inner edge would probably indicate little original structural
definition to this extension and that probably limits of cairn
material or spread were being followed. Indeed, trench branches can
be observed leading to exposed natural earthfast boulders at the
extreme NE and SE, further indicating a lack of confidence by the
excavators in an original perimeter.
The sub-rectangular setting of small uprights is still exposed,
including the flat stone that covered the interment I, and the one
immediately adjacent to the S which was flanked by two interments, E
and F, and the stone adjoining the interment G. Various changes of
level and covings in the rubble spread indicate the investigations of
the Heathcotes. A large flat stone, possibly the one which marked
the site of interment H, is inclined toward and just outside the
orthostat circle at the NE, and has "Doll Tor Stone Circle 1934"
neatly inscribed on the exposed face. This inscription can be
confidently attributed to the Heathcotes as numerous other monuments
excavated by the Heathcote's on Stanton Moor have similar carefully
cut 'tumulus' numbers associated with them; these numbers correspond
with the published map of numbered 'tumuli' (Heathcote 1936). Due to
the intensity of excavation disturbance on this mound or cairn, the
original precise shape and limits, and evidence for phasing as
suggested by Barnatt and Burl, may not be retrievable without further
excavation; the eccentricity of the sub-rectangular enclosure
compared to the present bulk of material and original extents
indicated by excavation certainly suggest construction on this side
of the orthostatic ring may be of more than one phase. The present
morphology of this sub-rectangular setting of stones does not
immediately suggest the formative structure of a small ring cairn, as
seems to be the interpretation offered by Burl; it is perhaps more
conceivable that this feature is better viewed as a rare type of open
'cist' or enclosed area, subsequently covered over after interments
were made and which forms part of a complex monument. The
relationship between this enclosed area and the further covered
burials outside the ring is now not determinable from surface
remains. Any suggestion that the cairn extension is polygonal or has
a series of straight sides (Barnatt forthcoming; 1978) or indeed has
any coherent shape, should be viewed with caution. The flat stone
which covered the interment at I (and which Heathcote described as a
'flat capstone') is small compared to that of the enclosed area
within which it was found, and therefore would indicate it could not
function as the only capstone of a cist. It also does not appear to
be broken on any edges (which may indicate that it may have been part
of a larger capstone).
In an arc, outside, and to the W of the two prostrates at the W
(Stones 5 and 6) is a slight outward facing scarp 0.2m high and which
marks a slight rise up from the present ground surface outside the
ring, but which can only be traced for a cord length of some 4.4m.
This rise is cut into by the Heathcote excavation delineation trench,
indicating the feature existed before the date of excavation. The
present slight form of this rise is insufficient for classification
as an outer bank, particularly as no evidence was seen elsewhere of
a continuation, and may be purely a natural, insignificant ground
rise. This same increase in height is recorded on Heathcotes measured
profile (Heathcote 1939, fig. 1) on which the prostrate (Stone 5)
lies. A bank-like feature, mostly composed of rubble, curving with
and outside of the arc formed by Stones 1 and 2, and appearing as an
outer bank to the orthostats (which is almost 2m in width and 0.4m in
height) appears to be mostly shaped as such by the defining
excavation trench to the N, and the clearance of the circle interior
in excavation, and may represent only residual material, most of
which is loose and may well have been disturbed in excavation.
Due to the high level of excavation disturbance, interpretation of
the present remains can offer little evidence to support or refute
the suggestion that the main ring may be better regarded as a cairn
with an elaborate kerb subsequently infilled (Barnatt forthcoming)
rather than a true stone circle. The choice of distinctive stones
(and their spacing) is perhaps more indicative of a stone circle
typology for this monument, possibly subject to subsequent
modification and adaptation. Slab-like, lozenge shaped stones,
similar to the two prostrates on this monument, have also been
recorded on nearby Stanton Moor at the Nine Ladies stone circle (NAR
No. SK 26 SW 15) and the probable embanked stone circle T61 (NAR No.
SK 26 SW 18). (1-1g) |