The site is used today as a general dumping ground, which makes it easy to overlook, but the stones arranged across this modest, stream-bounded plot have been quietly resisting easy classification for the better part of a century.

Two of the graves are box-like arrangements of large upright slabs, not unlike megalithic cists, which are prehistoric stone-lined burial chambers. The first is a three-sided rectangular setting, open to the east, measuring roughly 1.4 by 1.3 metres internally, with a prostrate slab nearby that may once have served as a capstone. The second, about 11 metres to the east, is a four-sided version of similar construction, its open south side giving directly onto the steep scarp that drops away at the edge of the site. The other two graves are less clearly defined: one is a low mound containing two parallel slabs set close together, and the easternmost is marked by a large boulder overlying a hollow, with a line of small stones running out from beneath it. Scholars have interpreted the graves variously as megalithic cists, as suggested by F. Henry in 1937, and as ceallúnach graves, a term used for a calluragh, that is, an unconsecrated burial ground traditionally used for unbaptised children and others excluded from churchyard burial, as proposed by T. Fanning in 1981. The unusually large stones argue against straightforward Early Christian burial practice, though the Megalithic Survey of Ireland has declined to classify the structures as megalithic tombs. The matter, in short, remains open. The cross-slab is more legible: a slab measuring 1.1 by 0.94 metres, it carries a cross of arcs with a plain pendant stem, and a loop at the right side of the upper arm that represents a monogram form of the Chi-Rho symbol, one of the earliest Christograms, formed from the first two letters of Christ's name in Greek. The slab now stands free, having been pulled from the field fence into which it had been embedded. A second inscribed stone fragment from the site was given to University College Cork in 1939, but its current whereabouts are unknown; the symbols on its surface were never satisfactorily identified, and a loom-weight found at the same time adds a further, unexplained domestic note to what is otherwise a burial site.