The damaged ring cairns at Waun Mawn

It's intriguing that the two ring cairns on Waun Mawn are either unfinished or else seriously damaged -- and maybe both........

The biggest one, which I call the Gernos Fach ring cairn, at SN 07708 34535, is not a very spectacular feature, since the embankment is generally only about 50 cms high.  That may be, of course, because it is very old and degraded.  But it's about 30m in diameter, and is very easy to spot on satellite images. The embankment is grassy and dry, and the centre is boggy with reeds here and there.  It may be that only two thirds of the embankment was completed, since there is no trace of it in the NW segment.  It's made of dolerite bloulders and stones, as distinct from the Cnwc yr Hydd ring cairn which is made largely of meta-mudstone and shale rubble.

There is a clear entrance on the eastern edge of the feature, with one stumpy standing stone apparently in position and another much larger stone that has almost fallen over.  There may be an entrance "passage" to the east of these stones, with a further six boulders roughly in two lines, and with a seventh stone -- probably fallen -- in the centre of the "passageway".  

The southern and south-western sections of the embankment have clearly been excavated and partly removed.  Why, and when?

The two entrance stones of the Gernos Fach ring cairn.

The ring cairn to the SE of the Cnwc yr Hydd summit cairn (at SN08321 34446) is a smaller feature, only about 11m in diameter, with an embankment made of meta-mudstone and shale fragments and an embankment that varies between 50 cms and 1m high.  There is a distinct hollow in the centre.  Most of the ring is complete, but in the northern segment there are traces of two overlapping circular features, each with a diameter of c 4m.  One of these is quite prominent, and may be a remnant of a hut circle.  But there has been a lot of debris removal from this northern segment, and the cutting shows up quite clearly on the satellite image.

The smaller Cnwc-yr-Hydd circle, with disturbance on its northern flank.

So why have both of these features been cannibalised rather than revered?    The cuttings appear quite fresh, so they may even have been created in historical time, within the last 200 years.

The impression gained from these features, and from many other prehistoric features in the neighbourhood, is that in Neolithic and Bronze Age times there was an active working community in this area, who used local stones in ritual stone settings.  But none of these settings (apart from the Pentre Ifan cromlech) is particularly impressive, and unfinished or poorly made monuments appear to be quite common.  So there was a megalithic culture here, characterised by enthusiasm rather than technological mastery.  There is no sign of any great preference for particular stone types or provenances; all of the monuments are built from stones which have been locally sourced.  There was never any need for quarrying;  stones could simply be picked up and used where found.   Parker Pearson's claim that “this was one of the great religious and political centres of Neolithic Britain” is not supported by any evidence on the ground. As I have said elsewhere, it follows that there is still no evidence of any connection between this site and Stonehenge.

PS.  I'm quite intrigued by the fact that neither of these ring cairns / circular enclosures is mentioned in the RCAHMW or Coflein records.  Other features on Waun Mawn and Banc Du are mentioned, but not these......... in spite of them being quite prominent and easy to spot on satellite imagery.