This project has made the observations below except where a reference is given. Full details of the observations, and further examples, will be published on this website in due course. Given the nature of the observations, it is likely that we are not the first to notice some of them and possibly not the first to publish them. Please notify us of any omissions so that we can update references as appropriate.
1. We use the term ‘row line’ to mean the line across the landscape created by extension of a stone row.
2. Rows often appear to curve or be sinuous. However, we argue that such rows, in their original form, comprised a series of sections all of which were straight. Some ‘rows’ are therefore made up of ‘row sections’.
3. The terms ‘cursus line’ and ‘cursus section’ have the same meaning but in the context of cursuses.
· Causewayed enclosures across Western Europe seem to have been placed at broadly regular distances from each other (Andersen page 807).
· Some tors selected for enclosure are further from water than nearby similar tors, suggesting that settlement was not their prime purpose (Davies 2010 page 52).
· Causewayed enclosures seem to have been constructed within a short intense period of each other and re-used in the following centuries (Whittle et al. 2011).
· Often their building coincides with the first signs of ploughing with the ard and the opening of the landscape (Andersen page 808).
· Lines from one enclosure to its nearest neighbours often make angles which are multiples of 10 degrees (i.e. 1/36 of a circle) with each other.
· In England, there are at least two examples of three such enclosures falling precisely on a straight line that is 60-70Km long.
· As you walk along stone rows, there is sometimes a ‘landscape reveal’ at the end where a prominent landmark suddenly appears in sight, precisely at the end. For full discussion and examples see Gerrard (stone-rows-in-their-landscape).
· Straight sections of rows often align on distant barrows or hill tops. Gerrard lists examples where such landmarks are in view from the row.
· If row lines are extended to the hills and moors which are visible from Dartmoor on a clear day, but not necessarily visible from the row itself, then over 75% of Dartmoor rows align on a landmark.
· If row lines are extended across the landscape for several Km, they sometimes precisely intercept the end of another stone row section. The coincidence is striking and suggests that some rows were planned to link spatially.
· Row sections sometimes form geometry with Stone Circles.
· Rows are often clustered near each other in one location – see Gerrard’s description of local clusters at https://stonerows.wordpress.com/research/stone-row-clusters/ . Also, row sections meet other row sections end to end. Both layouts are consistent with multiple row sections at a location being set out from a ‘seed’ section.
· Cursus lines extending from the longest cursuses form right angled triangles with each other. Some of the triangles extend across mainland Britain. The same cursus lines can exhibit geometry with prominent hills. For example, the highest hill in south east England is Leith Hill (Surrey). if the Stanwell cursus (a ‘mega’ cursus Loveday 2006) is extended, it reaches Leith Hill. If the Lesser Stonehenge Cursus is extended it intercepts the Stanwell line at 90 degrees.
· Often a prominent high hill lies exactly at right angles to the cursus - providing a back mark? Poignant examples are that both the Greater Cursus and the Lesser Cursus pivot around Old Sarum hill in this way. The Greater Cursus is another of Loveday’s six ‘mega’ cursuses.
· The line from Old Sarum which crosses the east end of the Lesser Cursus, at right angles to its length, goes towards Dumfries (Scotland) – an area with four more cursuses and several stone circles within a 10km radius.
· The Old Sarum-Dumfries line is parallel to the Stanwell cursus line.
· Two lines parallel to the Dunkery Beacon-Rudston line also hint of a planned nationwide set of lines. They are the Aston Cursus line and the Marden-Maxey line. The Maxey-Bull Ring line is at right angles to these three lines and extends to the prominent landmark of Ely.
· Angles in ‘national’ cursus triangles are generally multiples of 10 degrees (1/36 of a circle) or 15 degrees (1/24 of a circle).
· Cursuses are known to have been extended (e.g. Lesser Cursus, HER record 1010901) which is consistent with survey refinement.
·
· The distribution of Circles & Henges across Britain is broadly distinct with most Circle-Henges along the boundary (e.g. Burl 2000 page 36). The circles are in the west of Britain where the terrain is generally steep whereas the henges are found in the east where the land is flatter. Their dates coincide (Historic England 2018b page 8). So, did they serve the same purpose but in different ways? Did the circle-henges meet that purpose across both types of terrain?
· The number of original stones in large stone circles do seem to cluster around certain numbers. For example, Burl (2000 page 57) says 12% of quantifiable circles in Britain and Ireland had 12 stones. Were the stones laid out to set angles that could be easily measured by dividing up a circle? e.g. 4, 8, 12,16,18,20,24,30,36,72.
· We have a case study where the varying number of original stones in four different circles can be related to a likely regional surveying objective.
· Stenness stones were erected around 3100BC but the Ring of Brodgar ditch was dug in 2600BC (dates from nessofbrodgar.co.uk). Why build these two magnificent monuments just two miles apart? Did the Ring of Brodgar represent a location refinement for the Stenness stones?
· Stonehenge falls within 400m (less than 200m on some mapping projections) of the Dunkery Beacon-Leith Hill line. It is also due south of Arbor Low. Was the Stonehenge (phase I) location determined by survey needs?
· The viewshed from the henge centre broadly matches the irregular shape of banks at Avebury and Mount Pleasant.
· Some of the Durrington Wall outer post holes (those with 2km diameter recognised by Gaffney, V. et al. 2020) match the direction from the centre of the henge to nearby hills.
· The level circuit of the ‘walls’ at Durrington Walls is very evident. They maintain a level, like an aqueduct or leat does, independent of slopes they traverse. Why?
· Silbury Hill and Marlborough Mound – both proven to be late Neolithic – make an 85-10-85 isosceles triangle with Avebury. Did Silbury Hill-Marlborough form the baseline for a survey with Avebury as a measuring centre? If so, there are hints that the baseline extended across the landscape to Little Solbury Hill, just north of Bath.
· Avebury, Silbury Hill and Marden mega-henge all align, bringing Marden into the survey.
· The geometry of right angle and isosceles triangles readily extends to encompass, for example, Devils Quoits, Maxey, Bull Ring, Stanton Drew, Mount Pleasant and Rollright.
· Sometimes mark the point on a line between other monuments where it is 90 degrees to a high hill.
· Rudston, Britain’s largest standing stone, is at the centre of four cursuses and at the apex of the right-angle triangle with Dunkery Beacon and Leith Hill.
CO-LOCATION OF MONUMENTS: Multiple excavators and authors have noted how monuments of different periods are often built very near each other or even on top of each other. Example sites include Maxey, Dorchester upon Thames, Long Meg and Her Daughters, Hindwell, Millfield and Maiden Castle. Such co-location has been interpreted to testify that these sites were an important location and the monuments marking it changed over time with changes in fashion or religion. However, perhaps the monument updates reflect improved technical methods?
BARREN ARCHEAOLOGY: The cursus monuments are notorious for the absence of significant deposits within them. The excavation evidence suggests that very few people went into them and they certainly weren't used for feasting or burial. Stone rows are also usually barren along their length, even if there is a burial at the end. Stone circles also yield much less than one would expect if they were centres for gathering. Causewayed enclosures do yield deposits but not of a consistent type to indicate a single primary purpose.
DESIGN IN COMMON: Rows, cursuses and long bank barrows can all be sighted along, perhaps to “set in stone” part of a survey line. It has been pointed out that the design of henges could be an evolution from causewayed enclosures (e.g. Historic England 2018b page 2).