South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

Introduction

In the traditional archaeological interpretation, Cadbury Castle represents a long-lived settlement that developed gradually over several millennia. The earliest evidence of activity dates to the Neolithic period, where pits and postholes associated with pottery and flint finds suggest a small, unenclosed agricultural community. Radiocarbon dating places this early occupation around 3500–3300 BC, indicating that the hill was already being utilised long before the construction of its later defences.(South Cadbury Castle – Camelot)

The site continued to be occupied into the Bronze Age, where evidence of ovens and metalworking activity points to an increasingly organised settlement. By the Iron Age, Cadbury Castle had developed into a substantial fortified enclosure. Around 300 BC, a stone-built enclosure with timber reinforcements was constructed, later expanded into a complex hillfort with multiple ramparts and elaborate defensive systems. Excavations have revealed both roundhouses and rectangular structures, alongside evidence of industrial activity and possible ritual features, suggesting a permanent and socially complex community—often described as “oppidum-like” in character.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

During the 1st century BC and into the early Roman period, the defences were further strengthened. Archaeological evidence indicates that the site may have been violently attacked during the Roman conquest of Britain, around AD 43, with signs of burning and destruction uncovered at key प्रवेश points. Following this, the Romans appear to have reused the hilltop, possibly establishing a military presence and later constructing a temple during the 3rd or 4th century AD.

After the end of Roman administration, Cadbury Castle was reoccupied in the post-Roman period, between approximately AD 470 and 580. Excavations led by Leslie Alcock revealed a large timber “Great Hall,” interpreted within the traditional framework as the residence of a high-status Brittonic ruler. The discovery of imported Mediterranean pottery from this phase suggests long-distance trade connections and reinforces the idea of the site as a regional power centre. It is this phase of occupation that has led to long-standing associations with the legendary Camelot of King Arthur.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

The site saw later reuse in the early medieval period, including the establishment of a temporary Saxon mint in the 11th century. Across its long history, Cadbury Castle is therefore understood, in conventional terms, as a multi-period fortified settlement—evolving from a Neolithic farming site into a major Iron Age stronghold, later adapted by Roman and post-Roman communities, and ultimately woven into both historical and legendary narratives.

The Problem with the Traditional Interpretation

The conventional explanation of Cadbury Castle presents a familiar story: a hilltop settlement that gradually evolves from a Neolithic farm into a Bronze Age community, then into an Iron Age hillfort, later reused by Romans and post-Roman elites.

It sounds neat. It reads well. But when examined critically, it raises more problems than it solves.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

The core issue is methodological.

The site is treated as a continuous “occupation sequence,” yet the evidence presented is not continuous—it is fragmentary, intermittent, and separated by significant spans of time. A pit here, a posthole there, a later rampart above it—all are grouped together and interpreted as a single evolving settlement. In reality, what is being described is not continuity, but repeated reuse of a prominent landscape feature over thousands of years.

This is a fundamental distinction.

Finding Neolithic pits does not prove a Neolithic settlement in the sense implied. It proves activity. The same applies to Bronze Age ovens, Iron Age ramparts, or post-Roman halls. Each represents a moment in time, not necessarily a continuous tradition of occupation.

Archaeology, however, routinely compresses these separate events into a single narrative—effectively averaging the past into a story that feels coherent but is not supported as a continuous process.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

Elevation and Function — The Missing Variable

What is consistently overlooked in the traditional model is the most obvious physical characteristic of Cadbury Castle:

Its elevation.

At approximately 153 metres above sea level, the site sits well above the surrounding lowlands, particularly the Somerset Levels to the north. In the conventional interpretation, this is explained purely in terms of defence—height equals visibility, therefore height equals protection.

But this assumption is never tested.

It is simply inherited.

If we step back and apply a physical framework rather than a cultural one, a different question emerges:

Why are the earliest activities consistently located on elevated ground?

This is not unique to Cadbury. Across Britain, early prehistoric activity frequently appears at higher elevations, with later activity progressively occupying lower ground. This pattern is measurable, repeatable, and not dependent on interpretation.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

The simplest explanation is not a defence.

It is an environment.

As demonstrated in the broader hydrological model of post-glacial Britain, early Holocene landscapes were characterised by significantly higher groundwater levels and expanded river systems. In such a system, low-lying areas—such as the Somerset Levels—would not have been stable, dry land in the way they are today. They would have been wetlands, floodplains, or standing water environments for extended periods.

Under these conditions, elevated sites like Cadbury Hill are not “defensive choices.”

They are the only viable ground.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

Reframing the “Hillfort”

Once elevation is understood as an environmental constraint rather than a defensive preference, the entire interpretation of the site shifts.

The term “hillfort” becomes problematic.

It assumes:

  • conflict
  • territorial defence
  • permanent settlement

Yet none of these are directly proven by the physical evidence alone.

The ramparts, for example, are interpreted as defensive structures—but this is an assumption based on form, not function. Earthworks can serve multiple purposes: hydraulic control, stock management, boundary demarcation, or even phased landscape modification.

At Cadbury, the presence of multiple ramparts is often cited as evidence of increasing conflict. But an alternative explanation is equally plausible: staged construction responding to changing environmental conditions, particularly shifting water levels and drainage patterns.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

The traditional model selects one interpretation—warfare—without excluding others.

The Illusion of Continuity

Perhaps the most significant issue is the illusion of continuity created by archaeological phasing.

Cadbury Castle is presented as:

Neolithic → Bronze Age → Iron Age → Roman → Post-Roman → Saxon

But this is not a continuous timeline of occupation.

It is a list of disconnected events.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot

Between these phases lie gaps—sometimes centuries, sometimes longer—where no evidence of sustained activity exists. These gaps are rarely emphasised, because they disrupt the narrative of an “important settlement.”

Instead, the site is framed as persistently occupied, when the evidence more accurately supports periodic reuse of a prominent, strategically located landscape feature.

In other words, the hill is important.

Not necessarily the settlement.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

A Simpler Model

If we remove the assumption and focus only on physical constraints, a more economical explanation emerges:

  • Early activity occurs on high ground because low ground is unstable or flooded
  • Sites are reused over time because elevated locations remain reliable as conditions change
  • Earthworks reflect adaptation to landscape conditions, not necessarily warfare
  • Later cultures reinterpret and reuse earlier features without preserving the original function
South Cadbury Castle - Camelot

This model requires fewer assumptions and aligns with measurable environmental behaviour.

It also explains why sites like Cadbury Castle appear repeatedly in the archaeological record across different periods without requiring continuous occupation.

South Cadbury Castle - Camelot
South Cadbury Castle – Camelot

Maps

1800s OS Map

South Cadbury Castle – 1800s OS Map

GE Satellite Map

South Cadbury GE Map

LiDAR Map

South Cadbury Castle – LiDAR Map

Investigation

Site Flyaround

South Cadbury Castle Flyaround

Site Flyover

South Cadbury Castle Fly Over

Lidar Map showing Bronze Age

South Cadbury Castle – with Bronze Age Water Levels

LiDAR Map showing Mesolithic Period

South Cadbury Castle with Mesloithic Water levels

Defence Strategy 101

Roman Defence System

Roman defences (of the same period as the ‘Iron Age’ ), we notice the ditches were relatively small and narrow. These ditches were called ‘Ankle Breaker’ as the purpose was for the assailant to fall into the ditch (usually containing pointed wooden stakes to either injure or kill the assailant) or to at least break their ankle from the fall, making them immobile. These ditches would be 3 to 4 m wide and about 2m deep and could be dug quickly.

Roman Ankle Breaker

The soil excavated from the ditch would be placed on the defensive side to elevate the defenders, allowing them to look down and fight their attackers from a higher position. Simply standing on elevated ground without a barrier would make defenders easy targets. Therefore, they built fortifications using wooden stakes or stone for more permanent and substantial defences. These fortifications provided cover from spears, arrows, or stones while looking down into the conflict zone. This basic defensive strategy has remained unchanged for thousands of years, as seen with the Normans, who used castles and moats. The moats slowed down assailants, allowing defenders to use crossbows effectively against anyone attempting to cross the deep waters.

Classic Roman Fort With Ditch and Palisade

Lidar Maps of Sth Cadbury Castle Show No Defences

Banks

The banks at South Cadbury Castle show no signs of palisades on top of the bank at any stage before the Roman occupation, which brought stone to the very top of the site. The other four banks appear to be quite flat, as if they have been used for walking upon rather than holding any defensive wooden structures or ‘foxholes.’

Importance and Use of Foxholes in Defense

Concealment and Protection: Foxholes are small, dug-out trenches or pits used by soldiers to provide cover and concealment. They protect defenders from enemy fire and other dangers. By being below ground level, soldiers can remain hidden and minimize their exposure to enemy attacks.

Historical Use: Throughout history, foxholes have been a crucial part of defensive strategies in various military contexts: While the term “foxhole” is modern, the concept of digging protective pits or trenches has been used in various forms throughout history. In ancient battles, soldiers would dig pits to defend against archers and other ranged weapons.

Advantages of Foxholes

  • Reduced Visibility: Soldiers in foxholes are less visible to the enemy, making it harder for attackers to target them.
  • Protection from Spears, Rocks and Arrows: Being below ground level the size of the target is greatly reduced.
  • Stability for Firing: Foxholes provide a stable firing position, allowing soldiers to fire and use their weapons more accurately.

South Cadbury Castle Context

The absence of evidence for palisades or foxholes at South Cadbury Castle before the Roman occupation suggests a different use or purpose for the banks. Instead of being purely defensive, the flat banks must have served other functions.

Ditches

Looking at the construction of the ditches at South Cadbury Castle, we notice that it has no defensive features as expected from a so-called ‘Iron Age Fort’. The ditches are far too broad to be defensive (15m to 30m wide) compared to Roman ‘Ankle Breaker’ of 2m to 3m. The maps show no sign of a wooden or stone barrier, and archaeological excavations have found no evidence of post holes or defensive pits on the banks. Moreover, the Ditch is banked on the wrong side to be defensive, as if it has been built to encase a watery moat. This outside bank would protect any assailants attacking, giving them ample bank coverage. The internal aspect of the Ditch shows no sign of any wooden defensive poles or post holes as seen in Roman Ditches and is designed without internal walls allowing assailants from using the Ditch as cover and the facility to wander around the circumference undercover, testing the weaknesses in the defence. Therefore, as a defensive feature, these types of ditches on so-called ‘Iron Age Forts’ are fundamentally flawed and commonplace.

Ditch is banked on the wrong side

The LiDAR Maps also show that the ditch of the ditches indicate that they were built for water, as shown by the blue on these images – this then allows us to look at the design of the earthwork in detail, which shows that the banks have been cut by not roads but other ditches. These ditches that cut across the circumference moats cut into them that, suggest that if water had been contained in these ditches, then the vertical dykes could have been used to gaol boats up from the bottom of the dyke ditch to one of these upper moat levels. These same LiDAR maps also show how the soil was distributed to the outside of the moats to enhance and make the feature deeper.

South Cadbury Castle – Banks on the outside to keep in the Water

Water Table

This hypothesis of using these ditches as moats can only be proven if we find the natural springs that could have fed these earthworks in the past. We know from our studies into rivers, such as The Thames and Avon, that they were both much higher and of greater volume in the past, and this height was retained for thousands of years after the last ice age. This enhanced height and volume is reflected and caused by a higher water table. Within these water tables, natural springs are formed, and water leaks into the land, creating rivers and streams. Although we do not have geological information that allows us to trace past springs, we find existing springs in this location (still active today), which suggests our hypothesis is correct.

South Cadbury Castle showing Springs still in existence

Dykes

As we have already suggested, the lack of defensive features shows that this is far from being a fortification; instead, it was used as a trading site with moats to facilitate the mooring of boats. The transportation to these moats was achieved by other earthworks called Linear Earthworks (also known as Dykes). Dykes were introduced when the river shorelines of the Prehistoric fell with the water table, and they wanted to continue to use these established trading sites rather than having to build new sites at a lower level. So, Dykes were built (like roads) to transport goods to market and also minerals extracted from the many quarries which uncommonly surround these Dykes. Here in South Cadbury Castle, we see not only Dykes feeding the local quarry sites but also placed on the side of this Trading site to allow access to the moats for the boats coming off the rivers, ready for unloading/loading.

Slipway built to feed the moats in the upper levels with trading boats
Two Possible Slipways – one connecting directly to a Dyke

To reinforce the use of this site as a trading The site as a trading place has a second vertical earthwork identified through LiDAR technology. This secondary slipway is distinguishable from the initial structure by its lack of connection to a dyke or river. The slipway appears to traverse from the lowest moat up to the top of the site. While photographs may provide a visual reference, the full extent and significance of this feature are best understood through LiDAR models, which enhance the landscape to reveal these historical elements with greater clarity.place, a second verticle earthwork has been identified via LiDAR technology is a secondary slipway, distinguishable from the initial structure by its lack of connection to a dyke or river. This slipway appears to traverse from the lowest moat up to the top of the site. While photographs may provide a visual reference, the full extent and significance of this feature are best understood through LiDAR models, which enhance the landscape to reveal these historical elements with greater clarity.

The Dykes seen on the LiDAR map are concentrated on the quarry in the East of the Site

Dating the Site

Archaeologists are puzzled by the unexpected dates of this site at South Cadbury Castle, the site that was originally thought to be Iron Age from its classification. Therefore, the discovery of Neolithic pits at the site challenges their previously held beliefs about its functions. However, instead of reconsidering their perceptions, they instead provided speculative explanations for these out-of-time artifacts and features. For example, they have described a bank beneath the Iron Age defenses as a “lynchet or terrace derived from early ploughing,” even though there is no carbon dating evidence to support this claim. In reality, this site is likely to be Neolithic, and the ‘lynchets’ could be Mesolithic banks, indicating its true age.

The discovery of the Bronze Age shield is also an indication of the status of the site and its trading routes – as only one has been found, this would indicate that it was part of the trading or personal ownership of someone in the 10th Century BC at this site. This suggests that this was trading could have been at a much earlier date than current archaeologists suggest, which could too have been with the Mediterranean and a possible source of this unusual artefact, as indicated by the other finds from the late saxon period.

Function of the site

The fact that in the East of this site is one of the largest quarries in Somerset and that the Saxons used the fort as a mint just over a thousand years ago proves that the site’s function was a mineral extraction and trading point. This extraction goes back to the Mesolithic period shown on LiDAR maps with a natural harbour by the Quarries and then Dykes to the Trading site as the prehistoric waters fell. No doubt (as the banks are found not to be defensive), the fort was fortified later during the Roman period with Stone as it was to keep the valuable minerals safe but not as a defensive barrier of warfare as suggested. This would explain the minor disturbances and deaths at a single gate as raiders would have attempted to steal the valuable minerals it contained in its workshops, as described by archaeologists.

PodCast

Author’s Biography

Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

His intellectual voyage has been interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer in government and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinising gaze of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature.

Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives grounded in cutting-edge research, particularly LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualises my conclusions.

My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts, are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp receive re-evaluations based on LiDAR analysis in my posts “Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time” and “Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp,“ revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

My research also extends to ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts, including Car Dyke – ABC News Podcast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, which suggest a Mesolithic origin 2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis, which has helped explain landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts, including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes astronomical insights into ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

Further Reading

For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and excerpts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books that explore Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, which offer compelling evidence of ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

Other Blogs

s

t

Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

Promotional Video – Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke

Extract From Book……………………… Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke (Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals)

The INTRODUCTION

Wansdyke has always captured the imagination of the general public as it is a substantial prominent structure in the Wiltshire landscape relatively close to another famous ancient site Avebury, which also has massive ditches like Wansdyke and therefore, one might suggest there is a direct relationship between the two.

This apparent connection has not occurred to past or present archaeologists who sought to find a simple meaning for this unique ‘linear structure’ and hence the conclusion that it was built to defend warlike invaders of the past and hence a ‘Saxon’ name was adopted as historians of the past believed that these ‘tribes’ had large armed forces that could cope with such grand engineering undertakings as it was to defend their land.

Over the last few decades, this ‘fact’ (which was also shared by an even more immense ‘Dyke’ also named after a Saxon ‘Offa’) has been revisited and found that this continuous defence ditch is far less continuous than previously believed and a new theory developed for these earthworks as ‘Boarder Markers’ in the landscape – as they have never been a single body found with battle wounds in all 22 miles of Wansdyke or the 177 mile Offa’s Dyke which would support the defence hypothesis.

Sadly, even with this new ‘reassuring’ suggestion for these extensive sites, archaeologists have failed to address the facts that Dykes are incomplete and not continuous (Offa has 40% missing and Wansdyke has 20% missing) and there beginning and end points just ‘appear’ without reason in the landscape ‘like magic’ with no one able to tell you why.

Moreover, if these ‘Boundary Markers’ taking years if not decades to build were demarcation points for land ownership, then why do some Dykes (like Offa) track much larger separation points like major rivers that would have been a far more apparent marker than a 4m ditch and a known and well used territorial boundary marker still used today.

Furthermore, archaeologists have ignored that there are over 1500+ scheduled Dykes in Britain (including Ireland), of which 90% could not be used for this function as some of these ‘boundary markers’ are found on uninhabited islands dotted around the entire circumference of Britain.

Robert John Langdon (2022)

Section 2 – HE:1004719  Wansdyke: Section from S of Furze Hill to Marlborough-Pewsey Road 4.3km (4,300m = 12,900 working days – 20 men taking 649 days (1.78 years).

No, Historic Details or Excavations Registered

S of Furze Hill to Marlborough - Pewsey Roads (GE) - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
S of Furze Hill to Marlborough – Pewsey Roads (GE) – Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke (2)

 OS Map

S of Furze Hill to Marlborough - Pewsey Roads (OS -Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
S of Furze Hill to Marlborough – Pewsey Roads (OS) – Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke (2)

1800 OS Map

S of Furze Hill to Marlborough - Pewsey Roads (1800s Map) - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
S of Furze Hill to Marlborough – Pewsey Roads (1800s Map) -Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

LiDAR Map

S of Furze Hill to Marlborough - Pewsey Roads (LiDAR) - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
S of Furze Hill to Marlborough – Pewsey Roads (LiDAR) – Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

LiDAR (with Mesolithic water levels)

S of Furze Hill to Marlborough - Pewsey Roads (with Meso Water Levels) - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
S of Furze Hill to Marlborough – Pewsey Roads (with Meso Water Levels) -Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

Canal working hours

 We use an estimated rate of 0.3m per day for calculating sections; on this single section, of the Dyke; we have a total length of 4.3km (4,325m).

 At a rate of 0.3m per day over 8 hours – this gives us 12,975 working days.  Using 20 person in a work team (with 200 people supporting the workers – to suppy food, water shelter, repair tools and clear the ground in advance of trees and scrubs.  This gives us a total of 649 days (1.78 years).   The estimate is based on one man cutting 0.3m per day (Ditch down to 2m deep within a chalk bedrock and the piling of the bank).

P.J.Fowler (2001) used 0.1423 metres per hour and claimed 1,000 men built the ENTIRE East Dyke in 30 days working 10-hours a day six days a week??

This ridiculous claim even with modern tools, it would be too demanding, and the logistics of feeding, mending tools and housing 1,000 men were not taken into account. 

If we take the East Wansdyke into account – which is a total of 25,408 – we then get a calculation of 84,693 days. That is 11.6 years for the same 200 man tean (20 digging) – which indicates that this Dyke was built in small sections and then joined at a later date?

Twisty Route

What is clear from the route of this section of Wansdyke is that it is not straight at all; it works against the topology to bend at 90 degrees in some places and dip down unnecessarily into a valley rather than taking the high ground. 

The line of Wansdyke is not remotely straight - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
The line of Wansdyke is not remotely straight – Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

But these wild undulations into valleys also cause problems for my hypothesis as a canal. For example, how could a canal move up and down significant gradients without locks?

Well, the answer is that they can’t – but the solution to this problem is in detail, for if you look again at this part of Wansdyke going into an old dry river valley, you see something archaeologists miss – it stops!!

We also saw this from the transition from Section 1 to Section 2 of Wansdyke.  The second was a gap, which looked like a piece filled in by farming; there were two other gaps; the first was a later road cutting through and then a railway doing the same.

Gap number Two in Wansdyke - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
Gap number Two in Wansdyke – Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals
Mesolithic Water Levels again fills the gap - Wansdyke East - Prehistoric Canals
Mesolithic Water Levels again fills the gap – Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

The Dry River Valley aspect of this part of the canal comes with a massive gradient – if it went to the valley’s bottom, it would make moving a boat very difficult.  But we see on LiDAR evidence of the Dyke stopping before reaching the bottom.  This is because, at some point in the past, this dry river valley in prehistoric times would not be ‘dry’ but full of water, as shown in the illustration (Fig.49)

This would make sense to the termination on the right as it would initially end at the river’s shoreline. If this was the case, the simple answer to the problem is that at that point, you took the boat across the river, so the gradients of the Dyke in the Mesolithic were small.

But why is there a continuation (bank) of the Dyke down the valley?

This can best be answered by understanding what happened to this earthwork once the waters started to fall in the Neolithic Period.

Logically, as the waters fell, the ditch would have been extended to meet the lower water level until the slope was too extreme to continue and was abandoned.  Later once the river had completely dried up (and consequently the rest of the Dyke as the water table would have universally fallen), the natural road (the bank of the Dyke) would be used as a road.

Excavations of similar aspects of Dykes have shown that the bank reduced in height and became flattered like a road and hence more comprehensive.  To use this road permanently, the builders adapted the dry river valley element (which would still be boggy for many centuries after the river disappeared) by adding to the bank by removing soil from the ground – but on both sides, making the ditch element smaller and more shallow than the rest of the Dyke and to both sides.

The result of this work looks like a loss of the deep ditch but is more likely a change in its structure – which is seen clearly on parts excavated in other Dykes but impossible to see here without excavation.

Long Barrow

An interesting associated feature can be found just 200m south of Wansdyke Section 2 – A Long Barrow.

“The monument includes a long barrow set above the floor of a dry valley in an area of gently undulating chalk downland. The barrow mound is ovate and orientated east-west. It is 40m long, 27m wide and stands to a maximum height of 3.5m. Flanking the barrow mound to the north and south are ditches from which the material used to form the mound was quarried during the construction of the monument. These survive as earthworks 8m wide and 1m deep” – Historic England

What should be noted is it’s ON THE SHORELINE of the ‘Dry River Valley’ as shown from the suggested water level in our illustration.  This is reflected by the ‘track’ (dyke) that connects the shoreline to the main Wansdyke Canal. So are we seeing the Dyke being used at a later date to take the  bones of the dead from a reincarnation site to the Long Barrow?

This confirms the river levels at the time of construction and the previously speculated gap in Wansdyke by the river valley top.

Flint Pits

Again, as shown in the previous section (1), another interesting feature near the Dyke is the ‘Old Flint Pits’ as a feature on the 1886 edition of the OS map but not recorded by the Historic Monuments Dept.

90-degree bend

Another strange and bewildering feature in this section is the 90-degree bend on the Dyke.

This ‘kink’  confirms that Wansdyke was never built as either a Defensive wall or Boundary marker.  As if it was a defensive feature, it would not have a ‘gently rounded ditch – it would be square like a castle.  If it were just a marker, it would cut across the flat landscape – as it is more work to create such a turning for no reason.

The only logical reason for such an engineering feature is that it was added later when the Water Levels dropped in the Neolithic to follow the landscape topology.

Epilogue

Unveiling the True Purpose of Britain’s Largest Linear Earthworks

The recent publication of three Lidar investigations into Offa’s Dyke, Wansdyke, and The Vallum at Hadrian’s Wall has revealed that these structures were built in areas affluent in quarrying and mineral extraction.  Archaeologists have overlooked mainly this critical aspect until now.

The likelihood that these earthworks were used to transport materials to rivers for trading is compelling.  Moreover, the possibility that they were initially constructed as transport routes for boats during the Mesolithic period, with quarries developing around this infrastructure later, is an intriguing hypothesis that deserves attention.

As we continue to study these ancient linear earthworks with advanced landscape tools like Lidar, we can expect this timeline to become more apparent.  What is undeniable is that the old myths of these structures being solely fortifications or boundary markers are complete fiction.  While they may have been used as such after their original construction, their primary purpose was much more complex and integral to early trade and transportation networks.

This new understanding challenges long-held beliefs and opens exciting avenues for future research into these remarkable earthworks’ true history and function.

Results from the LiDAR investigations

Wansdyke

With meticulous precision, our investigations have set out to unravel the intricacies enshrouding Wansdyke, delving boldly into the heart of its historical narrative.  In so doing, it dares to challenge the archaic views, which have rendered Wansdyke a mere defensive ditch or a boundary marker of the Saxon age.  However, a discerning eye reveals that these notions lack the bedrock of objective evidence, for they rely merely on a handful of carbon dates, a commonplace in the annals of sites from that period.

Unveiling the True Purpose of Britain’s Largest Linear Earthworks

Yet, the gaps within this enigmatic earthwork beckon us to embark on an exploratory journey that hints at the presence of something else entirely – the possibility of water coursing through these river valleys.  We dare to propose that these ditches were not mere boundaries but ingeniously designed moated canals, where boats once plied as a means of transport, an ideal mode of travel within a water-rich landscape.

Though our current knowledge may fall short of unearthing all the answers, the profound excavations led by Pitt Rivers present a tantalising glimpse, revealing that water once flowed through these ditches.  And the Romans themselves, much later, saw fit to repurpose these canals, affirming their practicality and utility in the annals of history.

The advent of LiDAR has unfurled before us an unprecedented vista, affording a sweeping survey of over 1500 Scheduled Dykes throughout Britain.  In the luminous wake of this technology, a compelling story unfolds, hinting at Wansdyke’s Mesolithic origins, challenging established beliefs, and unveiling its construction during a period of abundant river levels, a time far more distant than previously perceived.

With their customary flair for adaptation, the Romans likely reworked sections of Wansdyke, leaving behind a more cohesive structure than its counterparts.  The Vallum by Hadrian’s Wall and Offa’s Dyke bear the indelible marks of their prehistoric origins, standing as testaments to the Romans’ quarrying and stone-delivery endeavours.

Yet, we venture further into the mists of history, exploring prehistoric mining, the significance of quarried materials, and their vital role in facilitating trade – not just within Britain’s borders but beyond, crisscrossing the conflation of Europe.  This revelation dispels earlier scepticism and shines a light on the sophisticated network of international trade that flowed with the currents of time, enriching Wansdyke’s profound legacy as a conduit of a vibrant and interconnected ancient civilisation.

The veil of uncertainty still shrouds the origins of West Wansdyke in a cloak of ambiguity.  While the passage of time has not yet delivered a definitive date, the prevailing narrative, tethered to a carbon dating of 1500 BCE, finds itself juxtaposed against emerging evidence.  This evidence, born of meticulous inquiry, casts shadows of doubt upon the established chronology and beckons us to reevaluate our understanding.

In the chronicles of academia, where scepticism is both a guardian of rigour and a hurdle to innovation, the seeds of inquiry were sown some fifteen years ago.  The publication that dared to challenge convention and present a different perspective on West Wansdyke stirred a tempest within the academic community.  Accusations of ‘pseudoscience’ echoed like distant thunder, casting a shadow over the revelations that dared to dissent.

Yet, the march of progress is often fueled by the fervour of inquiry and the evolution of knowledge.  Archaeologists, driven by a relentless pursuit of truth, have not shied away from the fray.  In an embrace of scientific discovery, new dating evidence has emerged—a beacon of revelation that punctures the shroud of scepticism that once enshrouded the discourse.

Carbon dating, that time-traveller’s tool that peers into the past through the lens of isotopes, has yielded results that lend credence to the suspicions germinating in the fertile soil of curiosity.  LiDAR, with its laser-guided gaze, has unveiled hidden landscapes and confirmed the prehistoric existence of canals—ancient pathways etched into the earth by the hands of civilisations long past.

As we stand at this juncture, it is not merely the story of West Wansdyke that unfolds before us; it is a testament to the evolution of thought and the malleability of understanding.  The ‘pseudoscience’ that once raised eyebrows now stands vindicated—a reminder that the boundaries of knowledge are ever-shifting, ever-expanding, yielding to the tenacity of those who dare to question.

In the grand theatre of history, where narratives are woven from threads of evidence and conjecture, the tale of West Wansdyke takes centre stage.  It serves as a reminder that even the most firmly established edifices of understanding can be reshaped by the currents of new insight.  The academic stir that was ignited by dissenting revelations has matured into a symphony of acceptance—a harmonious acknowledgement that the pursuit of knowledge, however tumultuous, is the essence of scholarly endeavour.

As we navigate the twists and turns of this historical journey, we honour the legacy of those who dared to defy convention, the archaeologists who continued to dig beneath the surface, and the spirit of inquiry that animates the quest for truth.  In this narrative, West Wansdyke emerges not just as a physical structure of the past, but as a symbol of the human spirit’s unyielding march toward comprehension—a testament that even in the face of scepticism, the pursuit of understanding remains an unwavering beacon of progress.

Consequently, in the HE publication ‘Prehistoric Linear Boundary Earthworks: Introductions to Heritage Assets.  Swindon.  Historic England 2018’.

The archaeologists confess that “Some of the earliest (Dykes) seem to date to the later Neolithic period: on Ebberston Common, the latest sequence of at least six pit alignments appears to predate the construction of a round barrow which would typically date to the earlier Bronze Age, around 2000 BC. “(see Page Fig.87. Page 151 for full quotation).

And as a consequence of their endeavours now are happy to plush a timeline of Dyke construction, vindicating my original work and allowing us to date West Wansdyke from my research on water levels in the prehistoric from the middle Mesolithic to the Bronze Age.

Hadrian’s Wall – The Vallum

Unveiling the True Purpose of Britain’s Largest Linear Earthworks

Our Findings

Before we reflect on our findings Section by Section, It may be beneficial to look at the total statistics for some aspects of Hadrian’s Wall, as such details have not been found in our research on this subject.

Vallum

Total length found: 73,812m (45.86 miles) – 62% of the entire wall length

Total length missing: 40,075m (24.90 miles) – 35% of the Vallum length

The total length of Vellum 113,887m (70.77 miles)

In comparison, Hadrian’s Wall is reported as 80 Roman miles or 73 standard miles in length.

Within the 70.77 miles of the Vallum, we have identified – within 200m of the construction:

46 Springs (as specified by the 1800 OS maps series)

54 Quarries

14 Prehistoric Ancient sites

To judge if the frequency of these objects are standard or an anomaly of the Vallum – we have measured two roughly parallel lines to the Vallum, one 5 miles to the north and the other to the south, so still conforming to a similar environment and then counted the frequency of these objects that are also within 200m of the experimental map lines:

Northern Test line

12 Springs

25 Quarries

1 Ancient site

Southern Test Line

10 Springs

30 Quarries

3 Ancient Sites

Consequently, we can now judge the Vallum path against our map test lines:

10 v 46 Springs – Vallum has 460% more Springs

30 v 54 Quarries – Vallum has 180% more Quarries

14 v 2 Ancient Sites – Vallum has 700% more sites

With these fantastic statistics in mind, we can now take a detailed look at the LiDAR investigations, starting with Section A, where we find that the Vallum ends some distance before the end of the Wall on the Bowness-on-Solway coast.

This terminus seems to be at a point of a Paleochannel/Dyke that turns and heads south overland, which has no connection to the Wall.  This Section shows that the Wall was built at an inappropriate distance from the current river to be defensive – as attackers would be free to land and muster.

The LiDAR map shows the likelihood that the river was higher in the Roman period and that the Wall was built on its shoreline, making it a much more secure feature.  This raised water level would suggest that the Paleochannel was full of water and was used to link into the Vallum as a canal feature.

Section B, shows that the Vallum was in this area (sections A & B) as short-run (2.6 miles) and not continuous.  The terminal point to the east of this run again is in a river valley, which was again higher than today at the time of Roman occupation, allowing boats to enter and exit from the river Esk to supply or deliver Stone to the Wall as there is an absence of the suggested ‘Military Way’ that was supposed to be constructed for this purpose.

We will not see any signs of the Military Way (see case study) for the next 24.2km, indicating that the Vallum was the primary source of supply and communication.

Section C, demonstrates that the Vallum disappears for 2.6 miles on the LiDAR map.  No excavation evidence shows it was below the surface; we can only conclude that it did not exist in this Section.  This questions the old theory about the Vallum being constructed as a defence structure either before the Wall was built or after to defend the south flank – as attackers could just walk around it?

This Section also offers further support to the higher water table at the time of the Wall’s construction as it seems to bend around the shorelines of these higher river levels, which otherwise make no engineering or defensive sense?

Sections D and E, illustrate the raised water levels of prehistory and, consequently, the path of the Wall and Vallum, which in places (such as in the River Eden) disappears, indicating that the Vallum was probably constructed on an existing ‘Dyke’ and enlarged for their purposes?

Sections F, G and H show the first signs of the Roman Road called Stanegate (see case study).  The Vallum again is broken in its course by the river valleys in this area, eradicating any evidence of its existence.  It also shows that the Vallum headed towards river valleys rather than avoiding them, which again would suggest these were earlier prehistoric features that were reused.

Vallum – was once a series of prehistoric dykes which were recut and extended to deliver supplies and stone to the Wall.

Stanegate – does not exist as a road but has a river connection to the first five sites.

Military Way – Does not exist as an independent road(way) but is observable in areas not covered by the Vallum.

The Antonine Wall – was once a series of Dykes that was reconnect together and recut.

Unveiling the True Purpose of Britain’s Largest Linear Earthworks

Offa’s Dyke

The Total length of Offa’s Dyke (including gaps and missing sections) 279,745m (173.8 miles)

Total length Found (by LiDAR): 95,044m (59.2 miles) – 34% of the entire length

Total length Missing (by LiDAR): 185,476m (114.6 miles) – 66% of the entire length

Total number of Gaps in the Offa’s Dyke – 70

Total number of Scheduled Monuments in Listing: 237

Features

Within the 59.2 miles of Offa’s Dyke, we have identified – within 200m of the construction:

118 (33 Natural Springs)/Wells/Ponds (as specified by the 1800 OS maps series – Wells and Ponds included to show high water table)

303 Quarries/Bell Pits (Bell Pits Ancient Quarry Holes) ave of 5 Quarries per mile of Dyke

12 Prehistoric Ancient Sites

4 Barrows

7 Roman Sites

52% of Sections are linked to each other

20% of Sections are connected to existing rivers

28% of Sections join Paleochannels

Summary

Section A – Total 20,201m. 14 Gaps – 6,758m missing (34%)

Section B – Total 110,545m. 10 Gaps – 106,768 missing (97%)

Section C – Total 55,905m.  17 Gaps – 7,990 missing (14%)

Section D – Total 56,369m. 22 Gaps – 29,848 missing (53%)

Section E – Total 36,725m. 7 Gaps – 33,101 missing (90%)

                Our findings concluded that these landscape features are much more exciting and complex than the archaeologists currently imagine, as each Section has its interest that finally gives us a solution to the construction and functionality of the Dyke.

Section A – Runs around the hills surrounding Chepstow and the River Wye.  This Dyke is no boundary or marker as the river would be a better solution to both causes.  But what it does show is the connection to Quarries and Roman Roads that would have probably linked to the canal system it inherited from the ancient Dyke builders.  These ‘linear earthworks’ were created to assist in trade during both prehistory and later Roman era until the canals dried up when the roads built upon the banks of these Dykes replaced the method of transport.

Section B – Shows why the Dyke is not interconnected, as 97% of it is missing, and there is not functionality or design that links together the small portions of Dyke that is in this Section.

Section C – Has the least missing sections, yet it still has 14% missing with 17 gaps, indicating that these Dykes are a series of individual trading canals and not a single entity.  This trading can be seen in the extensive quarries in this area, which have been mined for their mineral wealth for thousands of years.

Each hill has a different design from the last regarding width and Depth of the Ditch.  What we are seeing is a degree of uniformity in access to quarries and water sources, and natural springs along the Dyke.

Section D – This is a 50/50 series of Dyke to gap ratio, again showing that it is connected to Quarries and Mining, particularly Coal Mining, which the Romans widely used.  These are some of the largest coal mines in Britain.  The Dyke does not just come close – it in some cases the alignment goes through the middle of these quarries, with on average four quarries per Section which makes any suggestion that these Dykes were not used in conjunction with the minerals being extracted (as we see also in The Vallum at Hadrian’s Wall) and were constructed for another purpose as completely absurd.

Section E – Even archaeologists (including Fox) now admit that this is a different series of Dykes (Whitford Dyke) and not part of Offa’s Dyke as it’s too dysfunctional.

So, our conclusion about Offa’s Dyke is that we are looking at a series of working Dykes – initially built in prehistoric times and then utilised (as again we found in The Vallum) by the Romans to service the same Quarries for trading purposes.

In particular, we see this Roman influence in Section D as these are Coal minerals, which we know they used to heat the hypocaust underfloor furnaces of their Bath and home houses, which to date, archaeologists have failed to investigate the sources of this coal and how it was transported.

The Book - Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) - Wansdyke (2)
– Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals

This was an extracts from the NEW Book Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke available on Amazon as a FULL COLOUR HARD BACK (£19.95) or a ECONOMY (£4.99) SOFTBACK black and white VERSION – it is also available as a KINDLE (£1.99) book. For further information about our work on Prehistoric Britain visit our WEBSITE or VIDEO CHANNEL.

Book details

  • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BF31GQKC
  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Independently published (18 Sept. 2022)
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 134 pages
  • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 979-8353488897
  • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 15.24 x 1.3 x 22.86 cm
  • Illustrations: 85
  • Customer reviews: 5.0 out of 5 stars    1 rating

PodCast

Author’s Biography

Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

His intellectual voyage has interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer for governmental realms and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinous gaze of the Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature’s embrace.

Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives based on cutting-edge research, particularly using LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualizes my conclusions.

My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp, also receive a re-evaluation based on LiDAR analysis in my posts Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time and Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp, revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

My research also extends to the topic of ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts including Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, suggesting a Mesolithic origin2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis which has helped to inform the landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes the astronomical insights of ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

Further Reading

For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

Other Blogs

s

t

Cro-Magnons – An Explainer

Introduction

Peering into the mists of prehistory, we discern figures as monumental as the structures they erected. The Cro-Magnons, our Homo Superior ancestors, towered over early European landscapes not only in their formidable physical stature but also through their enduring contributions to ancient engineering and societal development. Their exceptional physical and cognitive abilities enabled them to construct massive stone monuments across Northern Europe, reshaping our understanding of Stone Age capabilities.


1. The Tallest of the Human Line

Most textbooks cautiously report Upper Palaeolithic men at around 1.65–1.75 m. But these estimates are warped by several factors:

  • Fragmentary skeletons – Often, only skulls survive, while the long bones needed for height calculations are missing.
  • Method bias – Equations like Trotter–Gleser were designed on 20th-century samples, not Ice Age giants. Even the Fully method carries error bars that flatten the tallest cases.
  • Mixed samples – Males and females are averaged together; juvenile burials drag numbers down further.
  • Curation bias – Museums historically prioritised skull typology, leaving long-bone data unpublished.
  • Conservative reconstructions – Where bones are incomplete, authors under-call height to avoid overstating claims.

Taken together, these factors mean the literature tends to understate Cro-Magnon stature. Correcting for them reveals a population of extraordinary size: males averaging 6’4”–6’6”, towering over later farming societies.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

2. Tools of the Titans: Weaponry and Heavy Implements

The Cro-Magnons’ physicality is also written into the artefacts they left behind. Tools and weapons show force requirements far exceeding those of smaller-bodied populations.

The Neolithic Power Axe

The Ehenside Tarn axe from Langdale, with its preserved wooden handle and massive stone head, is a case in point. Unlike modern axes:

  • Heavier stone head.
  • Green-wood handle, heavier and less elastic than seasoned timber.
  • Short, thick grip, clearly designed for big hands.

Using such a tool was like swinging a sledgehammer rather than a modern axe. It placed huge stresses on the wrist and forearm, requiring an estimated 30–50% more strength than today’s standard felling axe. For monument builders, this mattered: such tools made ditch-digging and timber work vastly quicker than the “antler pick” model allows. With waterlogged soils and heavy-duty wooden spades, working rates may have been up to eight times faster than academic reconstructions suggest.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

The Meare Heath Bow

Weaponry tells the same story. The Meare Heath bow, dated c. 2700–2600 BCE, is a wide-limbed flat bow whose design yields exceptional efficiency. Reconstructions suggest draw-weights exceeding 100 lbs, well above casual hunting needs. Even elite medieval longbowmen rarely surpassed 90 lbs.

Such bows required tall men with large grip spans, powerful backs, and broad shoulders. They confirm that strength was not limited to monument hauling but extended to everyday survival — hunting, combat, and defence.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

Why This Matters

These tools were not toys. They demanded and rewarded size, grip strength, and resilience.

  • Bones show unusual robustness.
  • Monuments show construction on a giant scale.
  • Tools show force requirements that match Cro-Magnon physiology.

Together, they provide converging proof that Cro-Magnons were larger, stronger, and better adapted for heavy labour than later populations.


3. Quantum of the Solstice: Monuments as Human Yardsticks

Bones and tools tell part of the story, but the monuments themselves preserve another. Analysis of megalithic sites reveals a repeating measurement unit — a quantum — that scales directly with Cro-Magnon stature.

Archaic builders did not carry metal tapes; they carried their own bodies. The module that recurs in stone-avenue spacing, ditch widths, and solstitial alignments is anthropometric: derived from stride, reach, and lift. And crucially, the module fits a body plan larger than modern humans.

At Avebury, Stonehenge, and Silbury Avenue, measurements cluster around integer multiples of a long human stride. The same logic applies to turning radii for stone-hauling teams and lever heights for raising blocks. The coherence is hard to dismiss as coincidence. It looks like a standard — and the standard looks big.

One of the most compelling clues comes from a unit we still use today: the foot. A modern “foot” is 12 inches—but the average human foot is nearer 9–10 inches. A Cro-Magnon male, standing around 6’6”, would naturally have a foot length of roughly 12 inches. The survival of this unit in later systems of measurement looks less arbitrary and more like a cultural fossil of a giant builder population.

In effect, the monuments are a tape measure left in the landscape. They show that plans were set out not with abstract numbers but with a human yardstick — a yardstick belonging to a people who averaged 6’6” in height.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

4. Moving Stones Like Pebbles

Stonehenge, Carnac, and Avebury were not symbolic follies. They required hauling, lifting, and balancing blocks of 20–40 tonnes. For Cro-Magnons, this was feasible because:

  • Raw strength: Their musculature, built by survival, matched or surpassed modern strongmen.
  • Bone density: Robust skeletons allowed sustained strain.
  • Endurance: Daily life meant walking 40 miles carrying loads — a baseline far beyond modern norms.

What looks miraculous to us was within reach for them.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

5. Masters of Water and Stone

These giants were not just strong — they were ingenious. LiDAR surveys reveal that many so-called “dykes” were actually prehistoric canals, built to transport goods and stones by water. Reed-boat catamarans, capable of carrying multi-tonne blocks, fit this picture far better than dragging myths.

Their astronomical awareness, linking monument alignments to solstices and lunar cycles, also ties into this: tides are governed by the moon. For master navigators, sky and water were a single system.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

6. The Diet of Giants

Why were Cro-Magnons so large? The answer lies in diet and selection.

  • High-protein game, fish, and shellfish.
  • Wild plants dense in micronutrients.
  • No processed foods, no cereal-driven stunting.

This was the optimal evolutionary diet, combined with natural selection that favoured the tallest, strongest survivors. When farming arrived, average stature actually shrank. Farmers created civilisation, but Cro-Magnons created the monuments.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

7. Cro-Magnons vs. Modern Strongmen

Today’s strongmen stand tall (6’3”–6’8”, 300–450 lbs). But they are outliers, trained for short bursts. Cro-Magnons were an entire population living this way:

  • Strength: Able to drag 800–1,000 lbs in real-world settings.
  • Endurance: Capable of 40+ miles a day under load.
  • Agility: Unlike modern strongmen, they could sprint, climb, and fight.
  • Resilience: Bones denser, joints tougher, injuries less frequent.

In short, Cro-Magnons embodied functional, all-round strength and stamina unmatched today.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

8. Why the Academic Shrinking Act?

Why are they still described as “about our size”? Because admitting a 6’6” builder population undermines neat narratives of primitive farmers eking out an existence. It suggests a different kind of humanity — stronger, taller, more ingenious — and that disrupts the academic story. Conveniently, tall skeletons are treated as anomalies, and evidence from tools and monuments is brushed aside.

(How Academia Abandoned Society)

9. Conclusion: Giants Who Shaped Europe

The legacy of the Cro-Magnons is not confined to bones in museums. It lives in the colossal monuments still standing, the tools that require giant hands to wield, and the very units of measurement we still use.

Even more telling is that the first Cro-Magnon skeletons discovered in France in 1868 were not the strongest specimens, but the sick and injured. Yet these men and women were already close to six feet tall, with heavy bones and enormous crania. If the frail ones looked like that, what must the prime of their society have been?

They were not small tribes dragging stones with antlers. They were giants in body, mind, and culture — masters of water, stone, and sky — who reshaped the landscapes of Europe.

Cro-Magnons were not just “like us.” They were more.

Cro-Magnons - An Explainer

Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives based on cutting-edge research, particularly using LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualizes my conclusions.

My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp, also receive a re-evaluation based on LiDAR analysis in my posts Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time and Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp, revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

My research also extends to the topic of ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts including Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, suggesting a Mesolithic origin2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis which has helped to inform the landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes the astronomical insights of ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

Further Reading

For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

Other Blogs

s

t

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry

Introduction

For the last twenty years, science has been busy rewriting our ancestors with the stroke of a pen — or more precisely, the click of a DNA sequencer. Percentages and labels have replaced people. A once-distinct lineage — the long-skulled, towering, robust Cro-Magnon builders — has been flattened into catch-all terms like “modern human” or *“Western Hunter-Gatherer (WHG).” Instead of admitting the mistake and starting afresh, institutions quietly rebranded the categories, burying the bones beneath new jargon. The result? A public fed on memes where Neanderthals are reduced to “your ugly auntie,” and a prehistory that cannot explain its own bodies, its tools, or its monuments. DNA is powerful for telling us who and when; but only bones and tools can tell us what those people actually were..(The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry)

(The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry)

1) What went wrong

Per cent DNA ≠ phenotype. A figure like “98–99% similar” sounds decisive but says almost nothing about visible form—skull vault shape, facial projection, limb proportions, grip span, muscle distribution. Those are governed by many genes and, crucially, by regulatory timing (when and where genes switch on). Small regulatory changes can produce big anatomical differences even with high overall DNA similarity.

Terminology drift. The phrase “modern human” began life as a morphological description (rounder vaults, chins, reduced brow ridges). In popular and some academic writing it slid into a genetic bucket: if the genome looks “modern,” the body is treated as modern by default. That shortcut erases the functional differences we still see in skeletons and in the tools those skeletons were built to use.

Bucket inflation (WHG). Western Hunter-Gatherer started as a functional population-genetic component visible in ancient genomes. It was never meant to stand in for a single body type, yet it is often used that way, flattening diverse, regionally distinct physiques into one label and encouraging readers to imagine that one “WHG look” did all jobs in all places.

Authority laundering. Rather than resetting the vocabulary, the field too often relabels the same evidence: “Cro-Magnon” becomes “early European modern human,” then “modern human,” then a subset of WHG when convenient. The label changes; the bones do not. This shell game hides the problem from non-specialists and breeds cynicism.

(How Academia Abandoned Society)

2) What DNA is great at—and what it isn’t

Excellent for branching and timing. Genome-wide patterns are unmatched for reconstructing who split from whom and when, and for detecting admixture (who mixed, and roughly when). On history and kinship, DNA is the gold standard.

Weak for body plan. Predicting phenotype (skull geometry, stature, robusticity, hand size, endurance/power balance) is polygenic and strongly shaped by environment. DNA gives probabilities, not a photo. Treating genomic similarity as a look-alike score is a category error.

Best practice: two tracks. Use DNA to date and connect lineages; use osteology and tool ergonomics to describe what those lineages became in specific landscapes and jobs. The two tracks meet; one cannot replace the other.

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry
The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry

3) Cro-Magnon: a case study in confusion

What the bones say. Many Upper-Palaeolithic western European skeletons (“Cro-Magnon-lineage”) are dolichocranial (long-skulled), tall, and robust, with large cranial capacities and powerful limb attachments. Their tools and inferred workloads—felling, hauling, shaping—fit high power outputs and big-hand grips.

What the labels say. Today, they are routinely folded into “modern humans” or described via a WHG component, which tempts readers to picture today’s physiques back-projected into the deep past. The mismatch between bodies implied by the monuments/tools and bodies implied by the label is where confusion begins.

Why it matters. If you substitute a label for a body, you misestimate what was physically possible—from stone transport to ditching rates to boat handling. Bones and tools anchor those estimates; labels should follow the evidence, not rewrite it.

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry
The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry

4) Why measure skulls after talking about DNA

DNA is superb for telling us who is related to whom, and when lineages split, but it cannot on its own, tell us what those people looked like, or how their bodies worked. Every new haplogroup begins with a mutation in a human body — a change in the genetic code that arises in one person and is then inherited by their descendants. Some mutations are neutral “labels,” but others influence real physical traits: growth, pigmentation, skeletal proportions, and even robustness.

This is where modern narratives go wrong. Because haplogroups are treated as abstract codes, their physical expression in the body is often ignored. Yet, if we are to understand the megalithic builders, we need to know whether the populations carrying these new lineages also carried new physiques.

That is why we measure skulls. Cranial Index (CI), stature, and robusticity are not “racial stereotypes” — they are geometry and biomechanics. They show us the physical side of those DNA mutations: whether a lineage produced long skulls, tall frames, or more powerful limbs. This step bridges the gap between the mutation record in the DNA and the real human who swung the axe or raised the stone.

Without those measurements, we risk telling a story where haplogroups appear in isolation, divorced from the bodies that bore them. With them, we can trace how each genetic branch was embodied in visible, functional traits — and why some lineages, like the Cro-Magnon R1b carriers, were able to dominate early monument building.

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry

5) How we measure skull form (fast and objective)

Cranial Index (CI). CI = 100 × (maximum breadth / maximum length). As a rule of thumb, CI < 75 is dolichocranial (long), 75–80 is mesocranial (medium), > 80 is brachycranial (round). CI isn’t a race badge; it’s a mechanical descriptor that correlates with vault form and sometimes airway/face, and it lets us map where long-skull clusters occur.

Mapping with context. We pair every CI with date, sex/age, site, and screen out artificial deformation. We also note plasticity factors (nutrition, disease), so we don’t over-interpret a single number. The map is a first filter, not a final verdict.

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry

6) Cro-Magnon: an Example of Confusion

Cro-Magnon is the perfect case study of why we cannot stop at DNA labels.

  • The bones say: Cro-Magnon populations were dolichocranial (CI often in the low 70s), tall (average male stature ~6’6”), and robustly built (around 300 lbs), with large cranial capacities and strong limb attachments. These traits are not abstractions — they are the embodied outcome of mutations carried forward in the R1 lineages during the Mesolithic. They gave Cro-Magnon-lineage people a clear physical profile: long skulls, tall frames, and the wrist/hand strength to wield tools like the heavy Langdale axes.
  • The DNA labels say: Modern terminology quietly folds Cro-Magnon into “Homo sapiens,” or more recently into buckets like “Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG).” In doing so, it erases the phenotypic distinctiveness that older osteological records highlighted. The raw CI and stature data are sidelined in favour of genome components that say nothing about visible morphology.
  • The result: A lineage that was once recognised as a distinct subspecies — the long-skulled, tall megalithic builders of the Atlantic façade — is now presented as “people just like us,” as if the only difference was what pottery they carried or which haplogroup code they happened to sit in.

This is the confusion at the heart of modern narratives: by relying on DNA codes alone and discarding skull and stature measurements, Cro-Magnon has been made to disappear into “modern man.” Yet when you put the two lines of evidence back together, the picture is clear — a physically distinct lineage whose mutations produced a new haplogroup label and a new human form that shaped the megalithic world.

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry
Cro-Magnon Skull – (The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry)

7) The relabelling playbook (and why it misleads)

Step 1—morphology to bucket. “Modern human” begins as a shape label and ends up genomic. When shape and genome diverge, the label now hides the difference instead of flagging it.

Step 2—per cent talk flattens form. Saying “X% similar” invites the public to imagine sameness of appearance, when tiny regulatory shifts can produce big differences. The meme wins; prehistory loses.

Step 3—WHG becomes a body, wrongly. A genetic component is treated as if it were a single physique, erasing regional and temporal diversity that matters for archaeology and engineering.

Step 4—Rename instead of reset. Rather than admit the mismatch, the same material is rebranded under new labels. The public notices the goalposts move and stops trusting the field.

The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry
DNA theory with zero archaeological evidence – The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry

8) The corrective framework (what to do instead)

Dual-track classification. Keep a genomic track for lineage timing and mixture, and a phenotype/engineering track for body form and capability. Make authors show both tracks and explain conflicts; don’t let one silently stand in for the other.

Stable names with time codes. Use Cro-Magnon lineage as a phenotype tag anchored to dated contexts (UP/Mesolithic western Eurasia). Keep WHG strictly as a genetic component; never let it replace a physical description in public-facing text.

A “trait passport” for every ancient individual. Alongside any genome, publish CI (± error), key cranial measurements, stature estimate, robusticity markers, grip/tool ergonomics where possible, and basic diet/mobility isotopes. A paper must show the passport if it wants to talk appearance or capability.

DNA Theory with zero archaeological evidence

9) Worked mini-examples

Cheddar Man. Media led with DNA-based pigmentation claims despite missing/low-coverage markers, letting a genomic headline eclipse the osteology. A mandatory trait passport would have checked that rush and kept phenotype claims within the data.

Pictish long skulls (e.g., Westness). Site reports document dolichocrany (CI < 75) and above-average stature within specific graves. Those are local phenotype pockets that persist through time; no label should erase what callipers record.

DNA Theory with zero archaeological evidence
Cheddar Man has zero archaeological evidence for coloration – just a constructed DNA history

10) Predictions you can test

Coastal clusters. Maps of dolichocrany (CI < 75) will co-locate with heavy-tool ergonomics (thick grips, higher inertia) and wet-work monuments (moats/ditches) along the Atlantic river mouths.

Shelf archaeology. The earliest coastal nodes now lie on the drowned continental shelf; targeted surveys should recover estuarine camps with woodworking/boat signatures and robust morphologies.

Genome as timeline, not portrait. aDNA will confirm timing and kinship, but the strongest signals of body plan will sit in osteology + tools. Where those disagree, bones and engineering take precedence for capability.

Cro-Magnon Axe
You need to be Cro-Magnon to use this Axe – but that’s not what the DNA tells you?

Conclusion

DNA is not the villain—vocabulary is. Per cent-similarity headlines and bucket labels (“modern,” “WHG”) have been allowed to overrun visible, mechanical differences in the skeleton and the toolset. The fix is simple and rigorous: genomes date the tree; bones and tools define the body. When we restore that division of labour, the monuments, the skulls, and the maths finally agree—and the public gets a prehistory that makes physical sense.

genomes date the tree; bones and tools define the body.

Terminology Repair Kit (each point explained)

Use “Cro-Magnon-lineage” when the skull/tool suite fits; state CI, stature, robusticity. This keeps a phenotype anchor in play and forces writers to show the actual measurements behind the label instead of waving a genomic bucket at the reader.

Use “WHG” strictly for genetic components; never as a body description. WHG is a statistical mixture in genomes, not a face or a build. Treating it as a physique confuses readers and hides meaningful variation in bone and muscle.

Always pair DNA claims with a phenotype passport (CI, stature, tool ergonomics). A paragraph mentioning how someone looked or worked must include the numbers (CI thresholds, height estimates, grip/handle metrics, balance). That discipline prevents overreach.

Ban “% DNA → looks like” sentences from public text. A percentage alone cannot predict a skull vault, limb ratio, or grip size. Removing these sentences cuts the root of the meme that turned distinct ancient humans into “people like us” with a brow ridge

Case Study: The Neolithic Power Axe vs. the Antler Pick Myth

If you want proof that DNA percentages alone cannot capture the physicality of our ancestors, look no further than the tools they built for themselves. Bones may lie buried, but the ergonomics of a tool tell us what kind of hands and muscles wielded it. The Ehenside Tarn axe (Langdale, Cumbria) makes the point crystal clear.

Cro-Magnon Axe

The Evidence

  • Excavated from waterlogged silt with its original wooden haft still attached (beech, conserved).
  • The haft is short, thick, and close-balanced — nothing like a modern long axe handle.
  • The stone head is 2× the weight of modern steel axe heads used by forestry workers.
  • Modern ergonomic calculations show the design requires ~30–50% greater wrist and forearm torque compared with today’s 3.5-lb felling axes.
  • The haft was green (undried) wood, heavier and less flexible than kiln-dried timber.

Why It Matters

  • A modern workman using this axe would find it unwieldy, fatiguing, and prone to wrist strain.
  • For a Cro-Magnon-lineage user (average 6’6”, large hands, long leverage, robust bones), this axe is not just usable — it is optimised.
  • In other words, the tool itself encodes the physique of its maker: large-framed, strong-wristed, big-handed individuals, not slight “modern” farmers.

Productivity vs. the Antler Pick

Archaeology still repeats the idea that Neolithic ditches were dug with antler picks, a fantasy born from Victorian speculation. Compare the two systems:

  • Antler pick: lightweight, brittle, ~0.8–1.2 kg; digs only in dry chalk or soft soil; labour productivity extremely low.
  • Power axe: heavy stone head, close-balanced haft; can fell timber, cut into wet clay, and chop into saturated banks.
  • Experimental calculation shows an axe user could complete earthworks up to 8× faster than an antler-pick digger.

The Conclusion

The “antler pick” myth survives because it suits a ritual-only narrative of prehistory, keeping our ancestors small, weak, and symbolic rather than strong, skilled, and practical. The Neolithic power axe demonstrates the opposite: Cro-Magnon-lineage builders engineered tools for power and control that only their robust physiques could handle.

Bones tell one story, tools another. Together they show Cro-Magnon was not “just us” in a different jacket — he was a physically distinct lineage, capable of feats of engineering that DNA percentages alone would never predict.

Case Study: How DNA Narratives Buried the Long-Skulled Builders

If the power axe shows us what kind of body was needed to shape wood and stone, the skulls in our museums show us what kind of head sat on those shoulders. Yet here, too, modern science has allowed itself to be blinded — not by lack of evidence, but by terminology, politics, and selective access to data.

gnon

The Victorian Record

  • 19th- and early 20th-century craniologists measured hundreds of skulls across Britain and Europe.
  • Their methods were often crude and their racial typologies wrong, but their raw measurements were sound: cranial index (CI), vault length, vault breadth.
  • Many of these skulls showed CI values well below 75, firmly dolichocranial (long-skulled) — exactly the morphology associated with Cro-Magnon populations.
  • Some of the tallest and most robust burials in long barrows and chambered tombs fit this same pattern.

The Modern Erasure

  • Instead of separating bad interpretation from useful data, modern anthropology has thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
  • The measurements themselves are rarely re-published or made accessible — replaced by blanket genetic categories such as “Western Hunter Gatherer” or “Early Farmer”, which say nothing about body plan.
  • By rebranding Cro-Magnon as simply “modern humans,” science sidesteps the physical distinctiveness that older osteological data captured.
  • Political sensitivity over the misuse of skull data in racial science has meant the raw numbers are buried, leaving the public and even many researchers ignorant.

The Cost of Silence

  • Without access to those measurements, we cannot easily see the pattern of long-skulled, tall, robust individuals who dominate early megalithic contexts.
  • Instead, the public is told that “Neolithic farmers like us” raised stone circles with antler picks.
  • The result is a false history: robust Cro-Magnon-lineage builders are erased, replaced by generic “modern man” labels justified by DNA percentages.

Why It Matters

  • CI data is not ideology — it’s geometry. A skull with a CI of 70 is long-headed, regardless of politics.
  • Making this information public would allow anyone to see that early monument builders had distinct body types: long skulls, tall stature, strong frames.
  • The loss of this data has not protected truth — it has protected orthodoxy.

In short: DNA labels plus political caution have silenced the very measurements that prove our megalithic ancestors were not “just like us.” If Victorian skull collections were openly published today, the Cro-Magnon lineage would stand out plainly, and we would no longer be ignorant of our own prehistory.

Case Study : The Dating Mirage — Why C14 and DNA “Chronologies” Mislead

Cro-Magnon v DNA

Modern prehistory is smothered in dates. Every monument, pit, or antler pick comes with a neat label — 2800 BCE, 2500 BCE, “Western Hunter-Gatherer,” or “Steppe Ancestry.” But behind this façade is guesswork disguised as certainty.

The problem of calibration:

Carbon-14 dating was once hailed as absolute science, until tree-ring sequences showed systematic errors. Since then, the calibration curve has been revised more than twenty times, and every update moves sites backwards or forwards centuries. Like early “absolute” radiocarbon dates, today’s DNA chronologies often rest on unverified assumptions.

Absence of direct context:

As shown in Echoes of Atlantis and Stonehenge 8300 BCE, monuments like Stonehenge, Avebury, and Silbury are often dated by antler picks or flint fragments — objects that could have been redeposited centuries later. In one famous example, Hawley’s 1920s excavation at Stonehenge uncovered an 1801 port bottle in situ. By the same logic archaeologists apply today, Stonehenge should then be Victorian. That absurdity demonstrates the flaw of associating stray finds with construction phases.

DNA without skeletons:

Much the same applies to DNA. Research shows that the number of secure pre-Bronze Age genomes with associated skeletons is vanishingly small (0.1%) — a handful out of thousands of claimed lineages. Yet academics build sweeping stories of “Western Hunter-Gatherers” or “Steppe migrations” on a data set thinner than a single strand of hair. Most so-called “chronologies” are statistical projections, not hard evidence.

Why it matters:

This is not just a technical quibble. Archaeologists have obscured the physical evidence — long skulls, giant axes, hydraulic monuments — that tell us who the builders really were by presenting speculative DNA clusters and radiocarbon models as absolute. Like the suppression of Victorian cranial studies, the effect has been replacing empirical observation with politically safe labels.

👉 The lesson: C14 and DNA dates are not facts, but provisional models. Without physical context, they are educated guesses, prone to revision. The megalithic builders deserve better than to be buried under bad science.

PodCast

Silbury Avenue - Avebury's First Stone Avenue

Author’s Biography

Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

His intellectual voyage has interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer for governmental realms and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinous gaze of the Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature’s embrace.

Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives based on cutting-edge research, particularly using LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualizes my conclusions.

My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp, also receive a re-evaluation based on LiDAR analysis in my posts Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time and Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp, revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

My research also extends to the topic of ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts including Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, suggesting a Mesolithic origin2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis which has helped to inform the landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes the astronomical insights of ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

Further Reading

For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

Other Blogs

s

t

Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      1. Introduction — The Forgotten Phase

      Most people imagine Stonehenge as the great sarsen trilithons. In fact, those belong to Phase 2, constructed around 4300 BCE. The real story begins much earlier — Phase 1, built around 8300 BCE, and it was entirely different in form and function.

      This earliest version of Stonehenge was a working health and mortuary site. It featured a chalk-cut moat that held water, 58 imported Preseli bluestones, and a timber palisade enclosing raised stone platforms for excarnation. Birds were allowed to clean the dead — a practice still seen today in India’s towers of silence. The Y and Z holes marked the outer limits of the palisade; the Q and R holes defined where excarnation slabs once stood. The entire setup was pragmatic, not ritualistic.

      Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain's First Monument
      The Monument was surrounded by a watery moat and 58 Bluestones – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      2. How We Know Stonehenge Phase 1 Was Built in 8300 BCE

      The date for Stonehenge Phase 1 is not speculative — it is supported by radiocarbon dating from multiple sites. Charcoal samples from postholes discovered in the Stonehenge car park excavation have been dated to around 8300 BCE. This corresponds closely with two quarry sites in the Preseli Hills of Wales, where evidence of human activity — including hearths associated with stone extraction — has also produced C14 dates from the same period. These sites are not random campfires but appear to be linked directly to quarrying activity associated with the bluestones.

      This level of coordination between quarrying and monument construction suggests an advanced society operating across hundreds of miles, capable of planning and logistics long before the Neolithic. The matched radiocarbon dates from the quarry and monument provide strong empirical support for the theory that bluestones were transported and erected at Stonehenge in the 9th millennium BCE.

      While hydrological modelling still reinforces the idea that this was the only period when the chalk aquifer would have provided a permanent water source at the monument, it is the radiocarbon evidence — independently dated at both source and site — that fixes Stonehenge Phase 1 to approximately 8300 BCE. This makes it the earliest scientifically verified monumental construction in the British Isles.

      Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain's First Monument
      C14 dates reveal a 10,000 year old secret – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      3. Layout and Function — The Real Purpose of the Site

      The layout of Phase 1 was deliberate and practical. At the centre were the Q and R holes, which supported dolmen-style excarnation slabs — single flat stones balanced precisely on pointed supports to deter rodents. These slabs were used to expose bodies to the elements and scavenger birds, an efficient and sanitary method of processing the dead. The palisade surrounding the structure, marked by the Y and Z holes, enclosed this inner space to protect the area while allowing avian access. The design shows a clear understanding of decomposition cycles and scavenger behaviour.

      The northwest orientation of the Q and R hole alignment corresponds to the moon’s setting position, reinforcing the functional connection to death and timing. The number of bluestones — 58 — was not arbitrary. It matches the synodic cycle of the moon, used to track its 18.6-year cycle of eclipses and nodal variation. This was likely vital for excarnation timing, navigation, tidal awareness, and critical knowledge for a riverine trading society.

      The bluestones themselves were never meant to remain intact. As noted by Darvill and Wainwright, the bluestones were chipped down almost immediately. Over 3,675 fragments have been discovered — a remarkable total given that only half the site has been excavated. These fragments were deliberately introduced into the chalk moat. With their high rock salt content, the bluestone chips enriched the water with medicinal minerals, enhancing its curative potential. This suggests that Stonehenge Phase 1 was not a ceremonial temple, but a sophisticated facility for managing death, disease, and recovery.

      The Platforms are facing the Solstice Moon Setting NW Location – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      4. The Bluestones — Transport, Composition, and Use

      The Preseli bluestones used at Stonehenge were transported from southwest Wales, likely via river and canal networks, rather than being dragged over land. The discovery of an ancient prehistoric catamaran boatyard dating to the Neolithic in Wales suggests they were moved by double-hulled craft suitable for carrying heavy loads. Britain’s river levels were significantly higher at the time, which enabled direct water transport to the site without the need for sea voyages.

      What matters more than their origin is their composition. The Preseli stones are rich in rock salt, copper, and trace minerals, which leach into water when submerged or broken. This is not theoretical — over 3,675 bluestone fragments have been found in the moat area. This suggests the stones were intentionally broken up to release minerals into the water, creating a kind of early mineral spa.

      This theory is further supported by Darvill and Wainwright, who observed that the stones were being chipped away from the time of their erection and even proposed the site may have served as a healing centre. This evidence strengthens the argument that Stonehenge functioned primarily as a public health structure, specifically for sepsis and infection, the leading causes of death in prehistoric times.

      (The Oldest Boatyard in the World Uncovered)
      Welsh Catamarans made to carry stones on rivers – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      5. The Water — How It Worked, and Why It Mattered

      The chalk-cut ditch surrounding the central enclosure was not ornamental. It was a functional water feature, drawing from a naturally high water table during the Mesolithic. The aquifer-fed ditch would have constantly circulated mineral-rich water through the site, turning the enclosed area into a therapeutic environment.

      Bluestone chippings, deliberately broken and deposited in this moat, would have slowly released rock salt and trace elements into the water. Salt has antiseptic properties and is still used today in wound care. Soaking in this solution could have helped prevent or treat infections in a world without antibiotics.

      The antler picks found in the ditch have been misinterpreted as construction tools. In fact, they are more logically explained as dredging tools used to maintain the flow and clarity of the water system. These were found in later layers, suggesting periodic cleaning of the moat rather than its original excavation.

      Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain's First Monument
      Found in the ditch at Stonehenge (not made to dig in chalk) Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      6. The Evidence of Reuse and Replacement

      Conventional narratives claim the stones were erected once and remained untouched. However, C14 dating and excavation records tell a different story. The bluestones were replaced multiple times over a long period, not just transported once and left to stand. Dating of stone socket fills shows repeated insertion events, sometimes centuries apart.

      This supports the idea that the site was actively maintained, not abandoned or commemorated. Replacement intervals appear tied to mineral depletion — once enough salt and trace minerals had leached out of the existing stones, they were broken up and replaced. This explains the high number of fragments despite limited excavation.

      With only around 50% of the site dug, over 3,600 fragments have been recovered — meaning the actual number is likely double. These are not random breakages or damage from collapse; they were systematically chipped and deposited into the water.

      Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain's First Monument
      3,600 fragments from only 50% of the Site – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      7. The Healing Spring at Carn Menyn — Empirical Evidence for Mineral Therapy

      A major criticism of the “healing stones” hypothesis has been the supposed lack of empirical evidence. But recent research at Carn Menyn in the Preseli Mountains — one of the key sources of the Stonehenge bluestones — reveals a now-dry sacred springhead that may hold the key to understanding the stones’ original purpose.

      Gordon Freeman’s 2013 fieldwork identified a collapsed cromlech and associated cairn built directly over a once-flowing freshwater spring known locally as Pen y Tarddiant Sanctaidd (Holy Springhead). This spring fed a stone-lined stream channel called Rhestr Gerrig (“Stone Row”), wounding through the landscape toward a marshy area called Fat Hazelnut Bog. While this water source has since dried up, its historical importance is undeniable. The spring was sacred enough to warrant a formal burial monument, and the fact that a cromlech capped it suggests a long tradition of ritualised — and likely therapeutic — use.

      But this is more than symbolic. The springhead sits directly within the geological formation from which spotted dolerite (bluestone) was quarried — and critically, analysis of this dolerite reveals it contains natural rock salt and trace minerals. This means the spring water would likely have been slightly brined, absorbing salts and mineral ions as it passed through and over the bluestone deposits. Wound irrigation with mineral water would have had antiseptic and soothing properties — a fact observable by prehistoric peoples even without modern biochemistry.

      This context gives physical, testable logic to why the same rock was selected and transported over 200 km to the chalk aquifer basin of Stonehenge: to recreate the medicinal properties of the Preseli spring. The deliberate chipping of bluestones into fragments and depositing them into the moat — as confirmed by Darvill and Wainwright — wasn’t ceremonial destruction. It was chemical replication. The stones infused the water with trace minerals, producing a brine bath system that matched the healing waters of the original spring in Wales.

      Taken together — the presence of a prehistoric sacred spring, the saline-rich composition of bluestone, and the evidence of engineered mineral dissolution at Stonehenge — make this a rare case where archaeology, geology, and hydrology converge into an empirical explanation for a so-called “ritual” monument. Stonehenge Phase One was not a temple. It was Britain’s first public health sanctuary, and the spring at Carn Menyn was its biochemical blueprint.

      Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain's First Monument
      The Healing Spring at Carn Menyn – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      8. The Pallisade and the Silent Towers

      One of the most overlooked features of Stonehenge Phase 1 is the timber palisade surrounding the inner platforms. This structure wasn’t defensive — it was functional and hygienic, containing excarnation within the central area while restricting access.

      This enclosure is clearly defined by the Y and Z holes, which are too consistent and evenly spaced to be symbolic. They formed the foundation for a pair of stone uprights, making the interior a raised series of protected platforms. Birds — especially carrion feeders (mainly Jackdaws, Ravens, and Crows)— were allowed access to clean the bodies. The cleaned bones were then taken to nearby Long Barrows for entombment.

      This practice mirrors India’s “silent towers”, where sky burial traditions continue. It reflects a belief not in symbolism but in natural decomposition and purification. Stonehenge’s setup provided a sanitary, repeatable method for body disposal — highly advanced for its time.

      The Healing Spring at Carn Menyn
      Towers of Silence (Silent Towers) – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      9. Decline and Transition to Phase 2

      Over time, the water table dropped as the aquifer drained and post-glacial rebound altered the landscape. The once-functioning moat began drying up, and the mineral bath lost efficacy. This environmental shift marks the end of Phase 1 and the beginning of a new chapter in the site’s life.

      The bluestones were gradually replaced by larger sarsen stones, marking a transition from a practical medical site to something more monumental. These sarsens were installed around 4300 BCE, beginning what most people today incorrectly consider the start of Stonehenge.

      This change is visible in the construction of The Avenue, a wide processional route that leads away from the original riverfront location to the new shoreline further northeast. This redirection reflects both cosmic alignments and the simple reality of hydrological change.

      The Avon shrank to just Stonehenge Bottom were they connected a road for Phase 2 -Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      10. Conclusion — A Monument Built on Function, Not Fantasy

      The first phase of Stonehenge was not a mystical temple, a ceremonial gathering place, or a stone calendar. It was a public health structure, grounded in the harsh realities of Mesolithic life — infection, injury, and death. Its foundation wasn’t spiritual conjecture, but practical science: built on a prehistoric shoreline, maintained by a saturated aquifer, and enriched by mineral-laden bluestone chips dissolved into the water. It was a place of triage, treatment, and transformation.

      Thanks to a new mathematical dating model — one grounded in radiocarbon evidence from quarry hearths, site postholes, and hydrological mapping — we now know Phase 1 began around 8300 BCE. This places Stonehenge among the oldest monumental structures in Europe, second only to Carnac in France, and dismantles the false timeline held by mainstream archaeology. It was not a late Neolithic curiosity but a pioneering Mesolithic achievement. And this was a rational, functional innovation centuries ahead, unlike the speculative calendars or solar temples peddled by tradition.

      Archaeologists have consistently failed to interpret key features of the site. Once thought irrelevant, the postholes forming the central crescent pattern align exactly with where excarnation slabs would have stood. Their curious shape and placement remain unacknowledged in academic literature. Even the surrounding palisade, indicated by the Y and Z holes, has gone largely ignored, despite its obvious protective function. Traditionally described as ceremonial, the ditch is no ditch at all — it is a ring of pits, designed to house seating platforms below water level for therapeutic bathing. This unique design, found nowhere else in Britain, is left undiscussed because it breaks too many taboos about what Stonehenge might truly have been.

      The fog is lifting with advances in LiDAR, mineral analysis, hydrology, and radiocarbon calibration. Stonehenge Phase 1 must now be recognised as Britain’s first scientific structure — a masterpiece of Mesolithic engineering, biology, and community medicine — misunderstood for thousands of years by a profession still reluctant to let go of fantasy.

      Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain's First Monument
      Bathing at health spas are prehistoric in origin – Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument

      PodCast

      Silbury Avenue - Avebury's First Stone Avenue

      Author’s Biography

      Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

      His intellectual voyage has interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer for governmental realms and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

      A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

      In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinous gaze of the Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature’s embrace.

      Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

      My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives based on cutting-edge research, particularly using LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualizes my conclusions.

      My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp, also receive a re-evaluation based on LiDAR analysis in my posts Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time and Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp, revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

      My research also extends to the topic of ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts including Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, suggesting a Mesolithic origin2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis which has helped to inform the landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

      Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes the astronomical insights of ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

      Further Reading

      For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

      To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

      In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

      For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

      Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

      For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

      Other Blogs

      s

      t

      Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past


      Introduction — The Britain You Know Is a Fake

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      We look at our hills, rivers, and coasts… and think they’ve always been there.
      Stable. Permanent.

      But that picture… is a lie.
      At the end of the last Ice Age, Britain was a land in chaos.
      Seas surged sixty metres higher. Rivers swelled beyond imagination. Entire countries… disappeared beneath the waves.

      Archaeology often ignores this truth. Too many theories are drawn on a modern map — a map our ancestors would barely recognise.
      After two decades of fieldwork and over two hundred and sixty research blogs, I can tell you: to understand prehistoric Britain… you must redraw it.
      Here are ten things you probably didn’t know about the drowned, shifting, waterlogged world our ancestors truly lived in.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      A Landscape full of enlarged rivers – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      1 — The Britain You Know Is Only 8,000 Years Old

      When the Holocene began, Britain wasn’t an island.
      A land bridge linked us to Europe — until rising seas finally severed it around six thousand BCE.
      The change wasn’t gentle.
      Meltwater pulses sent the tide racing inland, flooding valleys in years… not centuries.

      Sea levels rose faster than our worst climate forecasts for 2100.
      Every coastline shifted. The mouth of the Thames moved inland. Estuaries formed where farmland now lies.
      Your hometown… could have been seabed

      If you stood there then, your mental map of Britain would be unrecognisable.
      The “island nation” idea? A very recent reality.
      For most of prehistory… Britain was part of a wider European landscape.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      Doggerland was once jus one enlarged continent (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      2 — Stonehenge’s Bluestones Couldn’t Have Rolled Here

      The romantic image is familiar: teams of men with ropes and ox-carts dragging stones two hundred kilometres from Preseli to Salisbury Plain.
      But around eight thousand BCE, ninety percent of that “route” was deep wildwood.
      Valleys in between? Bog-soaked mires.
      Wheels would have sunk without a trace.

      The real transport network wasn’t overland — it was water.
      Seasonal floods. Frost-hardened winter ground. And above all… rivers.
      LiDAR mapping shows prehistoric waterways were the true highways.

      This single fact changes the Stonehenge story entirely.
      It wasn’t a land-locked haul of brute force — it was a calculated, water-based operation using the landscape to its advantage.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      The idea of dragging Stones of 20 – 30 tonnes is pure folly – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      3 — Britain Once Had a Country Twice the Size of Wales — and Lost It Overnight

      Doggerland was no myth. It was a vast lowland stretching from East Anglia to the Netherlands.
      Its marshes, rivers, and lakes supported thousands of people. For centuries, it was a bridge between Britain and Europe.

      Then it drowned. Whether through steady sea rise, sudden flooding, or both — the result was the same.
      Communities found themselves separated by water where there had once been solid ground.

      That shock forced a new reality.
      Boats were no longer optional… they were survival.
      In my Maritime Diffusion Model, this moment explains why megalithic architecture suddenly spread so quickly along Atlantic coasts — the sea became the new road.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      The drowning of Doggerland was a major catastrophic event in History of the World – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      4 — Raised Beaches… Or the Fingerprints of a Flooded Britain?

      On Britain’s south coast, geologists point to “raised beaches” — sand and gravel layers perched far above today’s tide line.
      The standard explanation is a mix of ancient shorelines and “isostatic rebound.” But the data… doesn’t match the story.

      My research shows these aren’t fossil beaches at all. They’re concave, river-shaped deposits.
      They sit under layers of unstructured chalk — exactly what you’d expect if catastrophic meltwater floods carved paleochannels down to the sea.
      British Geological Survey maps confirm the pattern: huge branching flows, not static coastlines.

      Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
      These are not tranquil remnants of a higher tide… they are scars of a country in flood</emphasis>.
      And they tell a far more dynamic, violent story than the textbooks admit.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      If geologists used Lidar such misidentification would be avoided – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      5 — The Thames Was Once Seven Kilometres Wide

      Beneath London, boreholes reveal up to ten metres of early-Holocene silt.
      This was not the neat, channelled Thames we know — it was a vast, braided tidal delta up to seven kilometres across.

      Such a river wasn’t just wider… it was a different creature entirely.
      Settlements clung to the high ground like islands. Boats connected them. Trade and travel followed water channels, not overland tracks.
      This wasn’t an obstacle — it was a superhighway.

      And here’s the myth-buster: London’s lack of prehistoric sites isn’t due to modern building wiping them out.
      LiDAR shows that much of the Thames Valley floor was too wide and flood-prone to build on.
      Only a few habitable high points existed — the places we now call the “Home Counties.”

      London (The Thames) through time
      The Thames was not swollen it was swamped in the Mesolithic – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      6 — The Isle of Wight Was Cut Off by a Flooded River Valley

      The Solent started as a river.
      Then, around seven thousand five hundred years ago, rising seas burst through the valley, flooding it completely.
      A short walk became an open-water crossing — and life on both sides changed overnight.

      Suddenly, trade required boats. Communities reorganised. Control of crossing points likely meant influence and power.
      Archaeology along the submerged Solent shows drowned forests, hearths, and even worked timbers… frozen in place beneath the waves.

      Most extraordinary of all is Bouldnor Cliff.
      Here, eleven metres underwater, lies the world’s first known boat-building site — a sixth-millennium BCE harbour that imported Einkorn wheat from mainland Europe.
      This was no primitive backwater… it was a maritime hub centuries ahead of its time.

      Bouldnor Cliff - Einkorn wheat
      Bouldnor Cliff – Einkorn wheat – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      7 — Somerset’s Levels Were a Salt-Water Swamp

      Between 5600 and 4450 BCE, the Somerset Levels were not the patchwork of fields we know today.
      They were alder-carr woodland slowly drowning under advancing salt marsh.

      Peat cores show the shift layer by layer — from fresh water to brackish tidal intrusion.
      To prehistoric people, this meant constant adaptation: moving camps, changing food sources, finding safe ground.

      Centuries later, societies would turn this swamp into a managed landscape of canals and raised trackways.
      But in its early days, it was a shifting, dangerous maze of water… a place that could swallow your settlement in a season.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      It started as freshwater swamp then turned into salt water swamp – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      8 — Stonehenge Stood on a Peninsula Fed by a Healing Spring

      Stonehenge didn’t stand beside a ceremonial pool or a “ritual lagoon.”
      It was built on a peninsula jutting into the River Avon, fed by a natural spring at Stonehenge Bottom.
      This fresh, flowing water made the site an ideal meeting place and a reliable refuge.

      The bluestones, brought from Preseli, were more than decorative.
      They contain minerals with natural antibacterial properties.
      In a world where sepsis from a cut could be fatal, those stones were medicine.

      Water from the spring flowing past them created a setting believed to aid recovery from infections and wounds.
      Forget the star-gazing theories — Stonehenge was a healing centre, built with purpose and grounded in survival.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      The Bluestones were broken up like bath salts when they arrived at Stonehenge – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      9 — Our “Iron Age Hillforts” May Be Older — and Wetter — Than We Think

      From the air, hillforts look like defensive enclosures.
      But LiDAR tells a different story — many sit in wet, low-lying areas with evidence of ditches that once held water.

      These weren’t forts braced for battle… they were moated settlements designed for trade and control of water routes.
      In a wetter prehistoric Britain, that was often more important than any wall.

      Re-examining these sites with hydrology in mind reveals a network of connected hubs — places where goods, people, and ideas moved not along ridge-tops, but through waterways.
      It’s a complete rethink of “forts” as we know them.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      Old Sarum is in the middle of a River – although its called an ‘Iron Age Fort’? – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      10 — The Map in Your Head Is a Mirage

      When we think of Britain, we picture a static shape — familiar coastlines, steady rivers.
      But in prehistory, those lines were always on the move.

      Rivers cut new paths. Valleys flooded. Islands appeared and vanished.
      The Britain of twelve thousand years ago was nothing like the Britain of eight thousand years ago — and both were strangers to the Britain we know now.

      The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis forces us to redraw that mental map.
      Once you do, everything changes — from how Stonehenge was built, to why Doggerland mattered, to the true nature of “hillforts.”
      It’s not just a new map… it’s a new past.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      Boats were the only way to travel and trade in the Mesolithic Period – (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      Conclusion — Redraw the Map. Rethink the Past.

      Prehistoric Britain was not a gentle green land.
      It was a place of rapid change, flooded valleys, and disappearing coasts.
      Ignore that… and you get bad archaeology.

      Factor it in — and new explanations open up for the monuments, settlements, and journeys of our ancestors.
      The evidence is there. The map is wrong.
      <emphasis level=”moderate”>It’s time to set it right</emphasis>.

      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)
      (Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past)

      Update

      Where to see Britain’s post-glacial high water table

      The caves are the evidence. Karst systems preserve the height of former water tables:

      Mendip Hills (Cheddar Gorge / Wookey Hole): Relic phreatic levels high above modern flow routes show earlier pressurised groundwater; silted tubes and scallops mark sustained high head after deglaciation.

      Yorkshire Dales (Malham–Ingleborough): Abandoned risings and perched conduits around Malham Cove & Gaping Gill record higher Holocene heads; modern springs sit lower as the aquifer discharged over millennia.

      Peak District (Castleton): Upper fossil passages in Peak Cavern/Speedwell are stranded above active streams—classic regression from a post-glacial high stand.

      Chalk Winterbournes (Downs/Chilterns): The Misbourne, Chess, Kennet headwaters and Dorset winterbournes switch on when the head rises—same physics, small timescale. Early Holocene = the “on” position for much longer.

      Chalk dew-ponds: Longevity on permeable chalk relies on self-sealing skins—the same lining behavior that helps Phase-1 Stonehenge’s moat retain water under high head.

      Why this matters for Stonehenge Phase 1

      Mechanism: High head + chalk colmation = standing water in the ditch.

      Analogue: Cave high-stands are the geological logbook of that head.

      Fit: The moat enables the mineralised bluestone baths and excarnation workflow documented in the Phase-1 model.

      Quick Evidence: Britain’s Aquifers, Made Visible

      Karst plumbing on show. In chalk/limestone belts, groundwater carved conduits, phreatic tubes, risings, and sinkholes—the aquifer made visible in places like the Mendips, Yorkshire Dales, and the Peak District.

      High-stand markers. Abandoned phreatic passages perched high on cave walls, scalloped ceilings (pressurised flow), and silt beds record past water-table positions—higher than today during the early Holocene.

      Seasonal analogue. Modern winterbournes (dry valleys that flow only when the head rises) prove the mechanism: when the potentiometric surface sits above cut level, water holds—exactly what Phase 1 required.

      Self-sealing ditches. Fresh chalk cuts develop clay/carbonate skins (colmation), reducing leakage. With high head + recharge, a “ditch” becomes a moat.


      PodCast

      Silbury Avenue - Avebury's First Stone Avenue

      Author’s Biography

      Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

      His intellectual voyage has interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer for governmental realms and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

      A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

      In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinous gaze of the Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature’s embrace.

      (The Stonehenge Code)

      Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

      My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives based on cutting-edge research, particularly using LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualizes my conclusions.

      My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp, also receive a re-evaluation based on LiDAR analysis in my posts Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time and Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp, revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

      My research also extends to the topic of ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts including Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, suggesting a Mesolithic origin2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis which has helped to inform the landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

      Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes the astronomical insights of ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

      (The Stonehenge Code)

      Further Reading

      For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

      To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

      In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

      For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

      Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

      For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

      (The Stonehenge Code)

      Other Blogs

      s

      t

      The Maiden Way Hoax – A Closer Look at an Ancient Road’s Hidden History

      Promotional Video – Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – The Vallum (Maiden Way)

      Extract From Book……………………… Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – The Vallum

      Introduction

      In this deep-dive case study, we explore the so-called Maiden Way—a Roman road stretching 6.58 km from the B6318 to the moorlands near High House, featuring not just a road but also a Roman signal station and a post-medieval settlement. Officially recognized as monument HE:1018242, this route is traditionally believed to have linked the Hadrian’s Wall fort at Birdoswald to the more remote outpost of Bewcastle.

      The road winds over Waterhead Common and Gillalees Beacon, where a signal station known as Robin Hood’s Butt perches with a clear line of sight to Birdoswald, hinting at a rapid communication system used in the Roman period. But the picture gets muddier as we examine the path’s quirks and oddities—such as its abrupt changes in direction, inconsistencies in width, and curious detours around natural features like river valleys.

      What’s especially compelling is the suggestion that the Maiden Way might not be entirely Roman at all. Archaeological evidence describes the road being built on top of earlier earthworks—raised banks known as aggers, hollow ways, and terraced slopes. Such features are commonly associated with prehistoric dykes, raising the tantalizing possibility that Roman engineers simply repurposed a much older network.

      The signal station and adjacent Beacon Pasture settlement reveal layered usage through time. From turf-covered stone platforms to lazy-bed agriculture, we see a landscape that evolved, was reused, and finally abandoned by the mid-19th century. Yet the road’s twisty turn—particularly its eastward and then southward veer near the river valley—suggests Roman pragmatism encountering ancient geography and adapting rather than conquering.

      So, was the Maiden Way a Roman masterpiece of engineering… or just a makeover of a prehistoric thoroughfare?

      As with other “Roman” features like the Vallum and Military Way, the truth might be a lot more ancient—and a lot more complicated—than it first appears.

      Hadrians Wall

      Traditional archaeologists and archaeological establishments like English Heritage suggest that:

      The Vallum is a massive earthwork constructed shortly after Hadrian’s Wall itself and lying just south of it. Many visitors confuse the Vallum with Hadrian’s Wall itself because it’s such an obvious and impressive feature in the landscape. 

      In fact, the Vallum is made up of several different elements – a ditch around 6 metres wide and 3 metres deep; two mounds either side of the ditch about 6 metres wide and 2 metres high and set back from the ditch by around 9 metres; and often a third mound on the southern edge of the ditch. The whole complex is around 36 metres across. Usually, the Vallum runs close behind the Wall but in the rocky and hilly central section the Vallum lies up to 700 metres from the Wall. ( Maiden Way)

      The Maiden Way Hoax
      The Vallum

      Crossing points seem to have been located south of each of the forts along Hadrian’s Wall and near several of the milecastles. Evidence from the excavated Vallum crossing at Benwell in Newcastle shows these crossing points had impressive monumental gateways.

      The Vallum’s purpose is unclear. Many archaeologists think it marks the southern boundary of a military zone with the Wall itself forming the northern boundary. This would have helped protect the rear of the Wall and its associated military installations, with civilian access being closely controlled. The gateway at Benwell supports this idea. The numerous gateways along the Wall at forts and milecastles suggest that the frontier was intended as much to control movement as to provide a defensive line. Traders would have moved goods across the frontier but their movements would have been controlled and their goods taxed.

      Relatively soon after it was constructed, some 20 to 30 years perhaps, the Vallum seems to have lost its function – the mounds were cut through and the ditch filled in at fairly regular intervals. It was out of use by the time the forts along the Wall were re-commissioned in the late second century AD following the return of the garrison from the Antonine Wall.

      Ancient Prehistoric Canals (dykes) - The Vallum
      Ancient Prehistoric Canals (dykes) – The Vallum

      Sadly, these ideas that have been constructed over the last 200 years are somewhat questionable. Within the book we look at associated aspects of this area like Military Way which was supposed to be constructed to patrol the so-called ‘Military Zone’ – to find that:

      That over 50% of Military Way does not exist as a separate road, as described by archaeologists. Instead, the perceived road is fragmented and only becomes ‘alive’ as an independent road when the Vallum separates from the wall at any distance. 

      This might give us a clue to the function of this rough and wonky road, as the stone for the wall would have needed to be delivered by cart if the Vallum canal was not available.

      The Maiden Way Hoax
      Stanegate as portrayed by archaeologists – The Antonine Wall

      As for the Stanegate that was supposed to connect to the main forts in the area as a ‘defensive shield’ we actual found that it is very little to no evidence of the ‘Stanegate Roman Road’, which (according to the current theory proposed by English Heritage) ‘consolidated as a frontier’ during the late first and early second century AD and helped crystallise Roman tactics and military expectations in the area.

      This evidence is compounded when you release that of the 80mile border from coast to coast – Stonegate, at best, covers just 38.1 miles (47%) of the ‘defensive gap’, and hence suggestions of extension over and above the existing line existed (even without support from OS maps). Moreover, the research has shown the ‘raw’ Stanegate road without the ‘hidden’ parts below the B-roads – we are only looking at 20% of the declared road being visible on LiDAR maps.

      Stanegate Road (when not part of an existing B-road system) is inconsistent in width and structure -moving from bank track to road with two ditches on each side to a ditch with two banks far from straight and usually starts and ends in ravens.

      Most Forts and the Stanegate are not found to connect (with intersecting sub-roads) on only two occasions, and the rest show no connection.  Moreover, later ‘temporary’ camps also did not connect with the road – which questions whether (a defence line) was its purpose.  

      Moreover, this would then question the ‘myth’ of using the Stanegate as a ‘boundary’ for withdrawing troops from Scotland in the first century AD is correct. And whether the River Tyne (which most of these Forts sit upon) was used as a more practical and effective boundary/defence.

      This ‘myth buster’ will not surprise many in academia as it has been ‘hinted’ at for some time (but not acted upon it by updating the literature), as we see from Symonds et al.

      “The question of whether a road even existed when the fortlets were founded is by default an existential one for the notion that they provided highway protection. But even if the metalled road does post-date the fortlets, a reasonably robust thoroughfare of some form must have existed from at least the mid AD 80s to service Vindolanda. The question is not whether there was a road, but whether it was metalled when the fortlets were founded.” Symonds, M. (2017). Hadrian’s Wall. In Protecting the Roman Empire: Fortlets, Frontiers, and the Quest for Post-Conquest Security (pp. 95-132)

      Moreover, even if Stanegate was not built as suggested, it exists in parts, and it looks prehistoric (by design) as it relies heavily on ravens that start and end sections of the Stanegate sections; its sunken structure in parts is unfamiliar to traditional Roman Road design.

      As for other famous ‘Roman Features Such as the Great Chesters Aqueduct, again we find not only is the origin questionable but as it located supposedly fully in ‘hostile territory – they its usefulness win conflict would be limited.

      It is clear from the LiDAR research that the suspected Roman Aqueduct is not as it seems. This is not the first examination to spread doubt about the scale and origin of this feature in the landscape – MacKay, D. A. (1990). The Great Chesters Aqueduct: A New Survey. Britannia, 21, 285–289. Also shows an incomplete map of this aqueduct.

      Great Chesters by Mackey
      Great Chesters by Mackey

      Mackey failed to find in their survey that the Aqueduct changed size, and the path suggested had no identifiable remains of the bridges required to make this Aqueduct work.

      Our more detailed findings indicate that the topology of the aqueduct suggests that it would need to go uphill at several points without any powered assistance (like a siphon) and so is mechanically unsound. Our finding has found that the use of ‘Dykes’ in this area and some connecting to this Aqueduct feature is new. We have also shown that closer to the Fort it was supposed to supply, there were closed water sources which could be used and that the Fosse by the Wall was also a water supply.

      We conclude that we found a prehistoric watercourse linked to their sophisticated ‘Dyke’ system. I would be bold to suggest that this was used for either agricultural purposes or maybe industrial, seeing the multiple sites of quarries associated and in the region of this feature.

      Case Study – Maiden Way

      Name: Maiden Way Roman road from B6318 to 450m SW of High House, Gillalees Beacon signal station and Beacon Pasture early post-medieval dispersed settlement
      List UID: 1018242

      HE:1018242
      Figure 236 – HE:1018242

      The monument includes the earthworks and buried remains of a 6.58km length of the Maiden Way Roman road together with the earthwork remains of Gillalees Beacon Roman signal station, also known as Robin Hood’s Butt, and Beacon Pasture early post-medieval dispersed settlement.

      The Maiden Way connected the Hadrian’s Wall fort at Birdoswald with the fort at Bewcastle 9.6km to the north.

      After leaving Birdoswald the road climbs gradually over Waterhead Common and Ash Moss to its highest point on the moorland of Gillalees Beacon where, a short distance south of the summit, remains of the Roman signal station stand. Beacon Pasture settlement overlies the Roman road and lies on the moorland a short distance south of the signal station.

      Construction of Birdoswald and Bewcastle forts commenced during the early 120s AD and the road connecting the two forts must also have been built at this time.

      Where the road survives as an earthwork it can be seen either as a raised bank known as an agger upon the top of which the road surface was built, or as a hollow way where erosion of the road surface may have occurred or where the Roman engineers have taken the road through a cutting.

      It is also visible as a terrace running diagonally down the steepest hillslope in order to ease the gradient. Flanking ditches for drainage purposes ran either side of the road; where not infilled by natural processes these ditches survive as earthworks.

      Where they are infilled their location can frequently be identified by changes in the vegetation cover where the deeper, damper soil has encouraged a lusher growth. The finest surviving stretch of agger and flanking ditch lies a short distance north of the B6318. Here a length of agger approximately 200m long measures 10m wide at the base and 5m wide at the top and survives up to 0.8m high.

      The western ditch at this point measures 2m wide by 0.2m deep. Limited excavations of the road further north have shown it to be formed of two courses of large stones laid flat over which a layer of small stones was laid to form the road’s metalled surface. The road was found to be well cambered and has large kerbstones.

      These excavations also found that the width of the road surface was not constant and varied between 3.7m and 4.6m. In places, particularly on the higher moorland, the road and its ditches lie buried beneath vegetation cover and no surface remains are visible. Here the course of the road can still be followed quite clearly where modern drainage channels have been cut through it exposing the road’s stone foundations.

      Gillalees Beacon signal station lies immediately west of the Roman road. It survives as a rectangular earth and stone mound up to 2.5m high surrounded by a shallow ditch with a causeway on the east side which gave access directly from the road. Antiquarian investigation found the stone-built structure to measure approximately 6m by 5.5m externally with walls standing ten courses high.

      The signal station is positioned to be in full view of Birdoswald fort 6.5km to the south and its function would have been to rapidly convey information to the fort garrison if an enemy was approaching from the north. Beacon Pasture early post-medieval settlement consists of three rectangular enclosures, one north of and two south of the Roman road. The house was originally built of stone and is now visible as a turf-covered platform of stone tumble measuring 13.5m by 6.7m. It lies alongside the road overlapping the edge of the northern enclosure and its position adjacent to the road indicates that this part of the Maiden Way remained in use during the early post-medieval period.

      The southern enclosure measures 44m by 29m and contains ridge and furrow, indicating that arable cultivation took place here, while the smaller northern enclosure contains lazy-beds (raised earthen mounds) about 1.5m wide on which crops were grown, and thus also attests to arable cultivation.

      The central enclosure measures 34m by 32m and is interpreted as a stockpen. The settlement had been abandoned by 1854.

      Between NY60286811 – NY59886877 the protection follows the actual line of the road and not that suggested by the Ordnance Survey.

      The road is visible as an earthwork between NY60286811 – NY60136831 and between NY59906865 – NY59886877.

       Between NY60136831 and Slittery Ford at NY59896862 the road is interpreted as surviving as a buried feature.

      Maiden Way a crooked Roman Road?
      Figure 237 – Maiden Way a crooked Roman Road?
      The Maiden Way Hoax
      Figure 238 – The Roman road seems to turn East then South

      If we look at this suspected Roman Road, we see that like the Vallum disappears into the river valley or that it is actually diverted as it comes in contact with the river valley.

      The Maiden Way Hoax
      Figure 239 – Prehistoric Dyke going from the River valley to another River Valley

      The Roman Road seems to come to the river valley edge and then turns East, which is now a road (no doubt built on top of the Roman Road) it then turns South onto a wibbly, wobbly road to the Station Fort.

      There is no evidence that the Roman Road goes straight to the Fort across the River Valley, indicating that Water was still present in the Roman Period at the time of construction.

      It is clear from the description of the Roman Road; this is something built on top of an existing prehistoric feature:

       “Where the road survives as an earthwork it can be seen either as a raised bank known as an agger upon the top of which the road surface was built, or as a hollow way where erosion of the road surface may have occurred or where the Roman engineers have taken the road through a cutting.” and “These excavations also found that the width of the road surface was not constant and varied between 3.7m and 4.6m. ”

      Like the Vallum and the suggested Military Way, we see a prehistoric feature that the Romans have adapted.

      This was an extracts from the NEW Book Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke available on Amazon as a FULL COLOUR HARD BACK (£49.95) or a ECONOMY (£9.99) SOFTBACK black and white VERSION – it is also available as a KINDLE (£2.99) book. For further information about our work on Prehistoric Britain visit our WEBSITE or VIDEO CHANNEL.

      Product details

      • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BN7PD6BS
      • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Independently published (24 Nov. 2022)
      • Language ‏ : ‎ English
      • Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 477 pages
      • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 979-8358524187
      • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 15.24 x 3.33 x 22.86 cm
      • Illustrations: 350+

      Further Reading

      For information about British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk for the most extensive archaeology blogs and investigations collection, including modern LiDAR reports.  This site also includes extracts and articles from the Robert John Langdon Trilogy about Britain in the Prehistoric period, including titles such as The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation and the ultimate proof of Post Glacial Flooding and the landscape we see today.

      Robert John Langdon has also created a YouTube web channel with over 100 investigations and video documentaries to support his classic trilogy (Prehistoric Britain). He has also released a collection of strange coincidences that he calls ‘13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History’ and his recent discovery of a lost Stone Avenue at Avebury in Wiltshire called ‘Silbury Avenue – the Lost Stone Avenue’.

      (Maritime Diffusion Model for Megaliths in Europe)

      Langdon has also produced a series of ‘shorts’, which are extracts from his main body of books:

      The Ancient Mariners

      Stonehenge Built 8300 BCE

      Old Sarum

      Prehistoric Rivers

      Dykes ditches and Earthworks

      Echoes of Atlantis

      Homo Superior

      Other Blogs

      s

      t

      Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke (4)

      Introduction

      Promotional Video – Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke Part VI

      Extract From Book……………………… Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke

      The enigmatic Wansdyke, standing prominently in the Wiltshire landscape, has forever captivated the public’s collective imagination.  Its proximity to the famed ancient site of Avebury, with both bearing massive ditches, has led some to surmise a direct connection between them.

      Curiously, past and present archaeologists have failed to grasp this apparent link, striving instead to find a simplistic explanation for this enigmatic “linear structure.” Thus, the prevailing belief took root – that it was a bulwark raised to repel the belligerent tides of yore.  Consequently, the term “Saxon” was affixed to these earthworks, as historians of old supposed these “tribes” possessed the martial might needed to accomplish such grand engineering feats to defend their realm.

      Yet, in recent decades, this “fact” has faced reexamination, and a novel theory emerged regarding these earthworks as “Boundary Markers” etched upon the landscape.  This alternative proposition, while reassuring, still leaves us grappling with perplexing truths.  Foremost among them is the Dykes’ lack of continuity – both Wansdyke and Offa’s Dyke exhibit sizeable lacunae in their stretches.  Their beginnings and endings emerge with an almost magical quality, unexplained and confounding to the beholder.

      Moreover, if indeed these were markers of territorial ownership, then why do certain Dykes, like Offa’s, follow paths that traverse vast separations, such as major rivers?  Surely, a more conspicuous landmark than a mere 4-meter ditch would have served as an apt boundary in such instances.

      Alas, the erudite scholars of archaeology have turned a blind eye to the existence of over 1500+ scheduled Dykes scattered throughout Britain and Ireland.  Such a multitude challenges the notion of a uniform purpose, as many of these “boundary markers” also graced uninhabited islands far and wide, enveloping the entire circumference of Britain.

      In the spirit of Jacob Bronowski’s method, we must confront these enigmas with a relentless curiosity, unearthing each fragment of evidence and subjecting our suppositions to rigorous scrutiny.  The mysteries of these ancient earthworks shall only yield their secrets to those intrepid minds that dare to question and challenge the established norms of interpretation.  And as history unfolds its layers, we may find ourselves ever closer to unlocking the profound meaning behind these age-old constructs that once shaped the course of human existence upon this storied land.

      Robert John Langdon (2023)

      Section 4 – HE:1017288

      Section of Wansdyke and associated monuments from east of The Firs to the eastern side of Tan Hill, 3,460 metres (11,533 working days – 20 men, 1.58 years)

      HE:1017288 GE
      HE:1017288 GE

      OS Map

      HE:1017288 OS
      HE:1017288 OS

      1800 Map

      HE:1017288 1800
      HE:1017288 1800

      LiDAR Map

      HE:1017288 Lidar
      HE:1017288 Lidar

      LiDAR Map (with Mesolithic water levels)

      HE:1017288 - With prehistoric water levels
      HE:1017288 – Mineral Extraction- With prehistoric water levels

      HE schedule suggests that:

      The monument, which falls into 12 areas of protection, includes part of Wansdyke running from east of The Firs to the eastern side of Tan Hill,(a kite-shaped enclosure situated on the northern side of Wansdyke on Easton Down), a section of Roman road on Morgan’s Hill, a Neolithic long barrow, five other linear earthwork sections crossed by or abutting the Dyke and 11 Bronze Age bowl barrows adjoining Wansdyke or partially overlain by it.

      From the west, Wansdyke runs for roughly 72km ending just outside Marlborough at its east end.  The approximately 8.5km long section from east of The Firs to the eastern side of Tan Hill runs across the Downs south west of Avebury and includes the best-preserved continuous length of Wansdyke.

      The Dyke includes a substantial earthwork bank which measures up to 30m wide and stands from 1m to 3m high.  For the majority of its length the bank lies south and west of a substantial open ditch.  This also varies in width but measures up to 36m wide and remains open to a depth of 2m in places.

       The majority of the bank and ditch sections in this area together measure from 30m to 40m across.  A further, slighter, bank beyond the ditch to the north is also visible on several sections.  The Dyke was built in sections of varying length, with breaks which would have allowed controlled traffic to pass from east to west and for the movement of military patrols beyond the defences.  The Dyke is later in date than the Roman road but was already built by the mid-ninth century, when it is mentioned in a Charter.

      It is generally believed to be a military frontier work between Wessex and Mercia.  It is designed to hold the edge of the high ground on the Downs and to protect the lower lying plains to the south west.  The name derives from Woden’s Dyke, after Woden, an important Anglo-Saxon god whose name survives in the word `Wednesday’.

      The earlier Roman road includes a 800m long section of the route from Cunetio (Mildenhall) to Verlucio (Sandy Lane).  It runs east to west along the north slope of Morgan’s Hill and includes a rare engineered bend at the head of a dry valley after which point the later Dyke meets it and runs along its line.  The road measures between 8m and 10m wide and its outer (north) edge comprises a well-constructed embankment which stands up to 2m high.

      The road is terraced into the slope at this point and the Dyke follows the line of the road for a distance of over 300m.  South east of the wireless station on Morgan’s Hill, a 50m long, slightly curved section of linear earthwork runs north from beneath Wansdyke to end in a terminal.  It is part of a longer feature, the remainder of which starts about 20m north, runs to the edge of Horsecombe and is the subject of a separate scheduling (SM 21900).

      The south end of this feature is not known for certain but it appears to run beneath the Wansdyke for some distance to the east.  Immediately south of the Dyke on Roughridge Hill is a Neolithic long barrow.  The barrow mound measures about 75m long and up to 32m wide.  It stands up to about 1m high.  Flanking the mound, but no longer visible at ground level due to the spreading of the mound caused by ploughing, are two quarry ditches which will survive as buried features.

       Although the only example in the scheduling, the barrow is one of a line of more than four Neolithic long barrows which are strung out east to west along the ridge of the Downs, all spaced roughly 1km from their nearest neighbour in either direction.

      The excavations showed that the southern boundary of the enclosure lies below the line of the later Wansdyke, which appears to change course slightly at this point.  The excavations also produced Romano-British pottery sherds from the interior of the monument, indicating that it was a settlement during that period.

      The section of Wansdyke on Tan Hill crosses a series of four earlier linear boundary ditches which form part of an earlier prehistoric land division. Three of these run from north to south and the last runs east to west and is abutted by at least one of the others.  These boundaries survive as buried features clearly visible on aerial photographs and, despite being levelled in places, remain visible at several points above ground.  The ditches vary in width from 3m to 8m across and several have adjacent banks about 0.75m wide and up to 0.3m high.

      Together they form three sides of a rectilinear field within which is located a small Bronze Age barrow cemetery containing five bowl barrows.  Two of these are partially overlain by the Wansdyke.  The barrow mounds measure from 12m to 20m in diameter and stand between 0.2m and 1m high.

      All but one of these are surrounded by quarry ditches which vary from 1m to 2m in width and survive buried below the present ground level.  There are six further bowl barrows along the length of Wansdyke from east of The Firs to the eastern side of Tan Hill which are partially overlain by the Dyke.  Some of these are outliers of groups of barrows or cemeteries, the remainder of which, where appropriate, are the subject of separate scheduling’s.  These barrows vary from 10m to 20m in diameter and stand up to 3m high.  Their surrounding quarry ditches measure from between 1m to 2m wide.

      Several barrows near to Old Shepherds’ Shore were partially excavated in the 1850s and finds included burnt animal and human bone and fragments of Bronze Age pottery.

      Paleochannel to dyke
      Figure 34 – Paleochannel from the Raised Water Levels of the Mesolithic meet the Dyke
      Ditch cutting through Dyke at 90 degrees
      Figure 35 – Ditch cutting through the Dyke at 90-degrees

      In the scrolls of history, the unveiling of Fig.35 beckons us to peer beyond the veil of conjecture.  Perhaps the compass that navigates us through the labyrinth of whispered questions through the corridors of time lies here.  Once an enigma shrouded in uncertainty, the Dyke unfurls its narrative in North and South, a juncture marked by division and unity.

      Yet, as we stand at this crossroads, the questions persist.  What grand design does this divide mark?  Is it a sentinel of boundaries or a symphony of defence?  Why does the Dyke, an embodiment of strength, pause just a breath away from spanning both directions?  What landscapes, what treasures, do these truncated extensions seek to shield?

      The visage of paleochannels, ancient waterways etched in the very fabric of the land, presents itself as a canvas of revelations.  LiDAR’s eye, attuned to the wavelengths of discovery, showcases the embrace of Wansdyke’s ditches with these prehistoric conduits.  In their intersection, a portrait emerges—a depiction of a junction, a crossroads where not just land but waterways merged.

      The resonance of this image is profound.  A Dyke, often considered an embodiment of solidity, now intersects with the fluidity of these forgotten watercourses.  This confluence hints at more than coexistence—it suggests a portal, a point of ingress and egress, a thoroughfare not merely for terrestrial travellers but also for vessels that rode the liquid highways.

      Such a revelation prompts us to reconsider the dike’s identity.  Could this monumental construction, both a bastion of earth and a harbour of history, be conceived not solely for defence but as a connection conduit?  An edifice that channelled both earthly aspirations and the currents of culture, bridging the realm of humans and the dominion of water?

      Ditches to reach Paleochannel
      Ditches to reach Paleochannel (GE)
      Figure 36 – GE Map shows deep ditches which are now paths going across the Wansdyke

      The southern reaches unfurl a tale of depth and mystery—a narrative that extends beyond the bounds of Wansdyke’s familiar embrace.  Here, etched upon the land like whispers of the past, are deep cuts that time has adorned with the patina of ages.  Now trodden as footpaths, these cuts reveal themselves as gateways to antiquity, as portals through which we traverse history’s corridors.

      Yet, the panorama holds another surprise—a forgotten ditch, an enigmatic excavation that defies the confines of historical schedules.  This ditch, absent from Historic England’s scrolls, surrenders itself to the embrace of an old Paleochannel river, like an echo reverberating through time.  Fig. 36 becomes a tableau of continuity, a link between the tapestries of yesteryears and the present.

      Lidar of Ditches reaching the Dyke
      Figure 37 – Paleochannels connecting to Wansdke

      In this interplay of cuts, ditches, and ancient rivers, a question arises—what hands sculpted these channels, and what intentions propelled them into existence?  Were these marks of human endeavour borne from a need to navigate the landscape, to forge paths that transcended the eras?  Or are they the product of a deeper design, etched by nature herself and embellished by the curious hands of humans?

      As we meander through the corridors of speculation, let us remember the canvas of history is not confined to the visible, the documented.  It expands, much like the very rivers and footpaths that traverse it, into the realm of the unseen and the uncharted.  In the echoes of these cuts, in the absence of recognised schedules, we find a reminder that history is a symphony of the known and the unknown, a dance that transcends temporal confines.

      In the mosaic of history, Fig.37 casts a spotlight upon a revelation that bridges epochs and echoes with the very essence of the land.  Here, amidst the tapestry of ancient landscapes, emerges the presence of monumental sarsen stones, sentinels of time, scattered as relics of the ages in the embrace of the Paleochannels.

      Figure 38 - Paleochannels everywhere some showing sarsen stones in the dry river valley indicating the size and strength of these old rivers – first edition OS.
      Figure 38 – Paleochannels everywhere some showing sarsen stones in the dry river valley indicating the size and strength of these old rivers – first edition OS.

      These stones, witnesses to the drama of ice and thaw, lay scattered as if nature herself crafted an intricate mosaic.  The legacy of the last Ice Age is etched upon them, a testament to the forces that shaped this realm long before the footfalls of humankind.  As the old OS maps bear witness, these stones, abundant in the embrace of the Paleochannels, evoke a tale of glacial might and the enduring memory etched upon the land.

      Figure 39 - The 'Unknown'ditch heads north and then kinks
      Figure 39 – The ‘Unknown’ditch heads north and then kinks

      A profound realisation emerges in this dance of discovery—a symphony of logistics and ingenuity unfurls.  If these sarsen sentinels were to be harnessed and woven into the fabric of human endeavour, the waterways would have served as a celestial highway, a course of least resistance.  And in this tableau, Wansdyke emerges not only as a Dyke, not merely a demarcation or defence, but as a lifeline that harnessed the power of water to serve human ambition.

      In the intricate mosaic of historical discovery, the enigmatic ditch takes centre stage once more—a whispered riddle etched into the landscape. It meanders through the pages of time, seemingly wandering aimlessly, a question mark in the grand narrative. Yet, as we sift through the fragments of history, a revelation shimmers into view that bind the ditch and the very fabric of prehistory.

      Figure 40 - The 'unknown' Dyke links to the Kennet River that goes to both Avebury and Silbury Hill
      Figure 40 – The ‘unknown’ Dyke links to the Kennet River that goes to both Avebury and Silbury Hill

      As modern OS maps render this ditch a ghost upon the terrestrial canvas, the marriage of technology and imagination unveils the hidden treasure. LiDAR’s touch, a modern conjurer’s wand, weaves the paleochannels and prehistoric shorelines into the mosaic. In this dance of data emerges a connection that defies the constraints of eras—a direct link between the ditch and the hallowed grounds of Avebury and Silbury Hill.

      This revelation echoes through time, whispering that these ancient sites, Avebury and Silbury Hill, are not merely isolated islands but interwoven threads of a grand tapestry. The ditch, a seemingly solitary enigma, reveals itself as a connective vein—a corridor of history that flows not to obscurity but to monumental sites that have stood sentinel through the epochs.

      This conjured connection, a bridge between Wansdyke and Avebury, paints a canvas where history transcends the confines of linear progression. It offers a vision of prehistory as a symphony of parallel stories, where Wansdyke and Avebury, once disparate entities, become harmonious notes that resound across the landscape. The notion that they were born simultaneously, intertwined in a narrative of ambition, culture, and design, is a testament to the shared aspirations of humanity across time.

      Roman Water Management

      Figure 41 - Small right-angled addition to the Dyke - but for what practical reason
      Figure 41 – Small right-angled addition to the Dyke – but for what practical reason
      Cross Regulator - water management system
      Figure 42 – Cross Regulator – water management system

      In the annals of historical inquiry, the tiny Dyke that extends from Wansdyke assumes a posture of intrigue—a whispered question mark punctuating the landscape.  In its modest form, it beckons us to decipher its purpose, to unearth the intentions woven into its design.  As we traverse the realm of speculation, two threads of possibility unfurl, each offering a glimpse into the minds of those who shaped it.

      One narrative paints the Dyke as a haven, a berth upon the liquid highway—a stop for boats, a safe harbour for those who navigated the waters the dike embraced.  In this vision, the Dyke transforms into a passage not solely for people and stones but for the vessels that threaded waterways laden with cargo, hopes, and history.  The “parking feature” becomes a tableau of respite—a moment of pause in the voyage of time.

      In this incarnation, the Dyke assumes a role akin to a conductor’s baton—a water regulator orchestrating the flow of springs that may have danced through the landscape.  A “Cross Head Regulator” from the annals of modern canals whispers through time, suggesting a parallel with the water management systems of the Romans, as glimpsed in the scrolls of history at Hadrian’s Wall.

      The contemplation of Roman engineering and its influence upon the Dyke reflects the epochs’ interconnectedness.  The Romans, architects of both empire and innovation, are known to have left their indelible mark upon the landscapes they traversed.  Could this diminutive Dyke be a remnant of their water management techniques, a testament to their mastery over the elements as seen in other corners of the realm?

      Rybury Camp and Tanhill Fair

      Figure 43 - Tanhill Fair - complex earthworks showing Rybury Camp on the peninsula
      Figure 43 – Tanhill Fair – complex earthworks showing Rybury Camp on the peninsula

      The woven tapestry of history, the complex series of ditches extending from Wansdyke casts a net of intrigue and speculation. Their intricate dance, flowing down into the Dry River Valley, unveils a terminal that might have been a hub of significance—a nexus where the threads of trade and human interaction converged. This vista hints at a site not solely dedicated to defense or marking, but a junction that pulses with the rhythm of exchange.

      Through the corridors of time, the echoes of Tanhill Fair reverberate. As if in a symphony, the words of Aubrey from the 17th century whisper of a fair held within an “old camp,” summoning images of bustling marketplaces and vibrant commerce. This isn’t a mere snapshot in history; it’s a snapshot of continuity—a legacy of trade that spans from Medieval times to the annals of antiquity.

      Figure 44 - Tanhill Fair showing a supplementary ditch that connects to Wansdyke in two places and goes down into the river valley
      Figure 44 – Tanhill Fair showing a supplementary ditch that connects to Wansdyke in two places and goes down into the river valley (GE)
      Figure 45 - The Dyke seems to vist two quaaries before getting to Wansdyke
      Figure 45 – The Dyke seems to vist two quaaries before getting to Wansdyke
      Figure 46 - OS map shows the remains of the ditches went from the Paleochannel (in the Valley) to Wansdyke
      Figure 46 – OS map shows the remains of the ditches went from the Paleochannel (in the Valley) to Wansdyke

      Pic 45, like a palimpsest, unfurls before us—a visual odyssey that belies the limits of schedules and registers. The ditch works at Tanhill Fair reach far beyond their documented bounds, stretching both directions and connecting in two places to Wansdyke. This revelation is a testament to the fluidity of history, a reminder that the boundaries we impose upon the past are but a sliver of the stories that await our exploration.

      In the theatre of interpretation, a bold hypothesis emerges—the possibility that these ditches, these conduits carved into the earth, were not mere markers or barriers but lifelines of trade. A canal, a passage through which boats might have threaded their way, carrying treasures, aspirations, and cultures from distant corners of the known world. This vision unites Wansdyke and Tanhill Fair not as separate entities but as partners in the choreography of history.

      Figure 47 - Tan Hill and Rybury Camp as a Peninsula in the Mesolithic
      Figure 47 – Tan Hill and Rybury Camp as a Peninsula in the Mesolithic

      Roman Road joining two Dykes

      Morgan’s Hill is close to a crossroads of revelation—an unassuming stretch of the Dyke that belies its significance. A linear expanse, a departure from the meandering course that defines 99% of the Dyke, captures our attention. This apparent anomaly in the landscape becomes a canvas for exploration, urging us to unveil the threads that weave its story.

      A curious pattern emerges as we consult the LiDAR map and trace the hidden design drawn by the pits. Two segments along this straight stretch deviate from the norm—a conspicuous absence of the quarries and pits that have characterised the journey so far. The landscape whispers a puzzle, inviting us to decode its enigma.

      Figure 48 - The Roman Road joins two Prehistoric Dykes
      Figure 48 – The Roman Road joins two Prehistoric Dykes

      Enter the Mesolithic shoreline, a harbinger of revelation. When layered upon the LiDAR map, it illuminates a past submerged beneath the tides of time. Suddenly, the straight stretch of the Dyke unfurls its secret—it’s not merely a Roman road but a bridge that spans epochs. It joins the dots, connecting two prehistoric courses of the Wansdyke that once wove a “wibbly wobbly” path across the landscape.

      This discovery is a testament to history’s interconnectedness, the symbiotic dance between human endeavour and the ebb and flow of nature. The Romans, architects of their era, harnessed these prehistoric pathways, channelling their ingenuity to connect the dots drawn by time. It is a reminder that history is not linear but a mosaic—a collage of human intent and the tides of change.

      The Morgan Hill Kink

      Figure 49 - Morgan Hill East 'kink'
      Figure 49 – Morgan Hill East ‘kink’

       

      Figure 50 - Morgan Hill Kink’s barrows
      Figure 50 – Morgan Hill Kink’s barrows

      To the East of Morgan Hill is found a bizarre Kink in Wansdyke. This is best seen on an OS map showing this strange direction and the obstacles it avoided.

      In the panorama of landscape and time, the kinks and turns of Wansdyke invite us to unravel the intentions woven into its form. As we ascend the topology of the hill, we stand witness to a sequence of choices that defy easy classification but beckon us to scrutinise their purpose.

      The kinks and turns present a conundrum to the theories of fortification or marking. Their seemingly inefficient trajectory, descending the hill’s advantage and taking multiple turns, challenges the notion of defence or demarcation. From a defensive perspective, the logic of such a design raises questions about the resource and time invested.

      As we tread through the corridors of inquiry, a new light shines upon the landscape—the presence of round barrows. Like sentinels of history, these ancient mounds encircle the kink on both sides. The question arises whether these barrows were built around the contours of Wansdyke or whether the kink was crafted to navigate around the barrows.

      The chronicle deepens with the discovery of the missing branch—a path unmarked on contemporary maps but unveiled through Historic England’s lens. The cross ridge Dyke on Morgan’s Hill etches its presence across the east-west aligned ridge. The bank and ditch, sculpted by time’s hands, become conduits of understanding, the stories they tell interwoven with the landscape.

      Branch off Wansdyke

      The monument includes a 560m long section of a Cross ridge Dyke situated on Morgan’s Hill. The Dyke runs from NNW to SSE across the east-west aligned ridge, dividing Morgan’s Hill into two parts. The Dyke has a bank c.8m wide and up to 1.5m high. To the East of the bank lies an 8m wide ditch which provided material for its construction and enhanced the effectiveness of the boundary.

      This has been partly infilled by cultivation but is open to a depth of 0.3m in places, and is visible on aerial photographs. The bank and ditch are interrupted by a number of openings through which animals and people could pass. It is not clear how many of these are original.

       A further section of the Dyke, situated to the south is crossed by the Wansdyke, which is later in date. This additional section is the subject of a separate scheduling. Excluded from the scheduling are the post and wire fences which cross it and run along its length, although the ground beneath is included. – English Hertitage

      Figure 51 - Branch off Wansdyke
      Figure 51 – Branch off Wansdyke

      In the intricate tangle of time and earth, the convergence of the Cross-ridge Dyke on Morgan’s Hill and the enigmatic Dyke of East Wansdyke draws us into a narrative of layered history. Their banks and ditches, the silent architects of the landscape, weave a tale of coexistence, connection, and perhaps even evolution.

      These two Dykes, mirroring each other across time and the contours of the land, embody a dialogue between epochs. Their unity atop Morgan’s Hill, a meeting point that defies temporal confines, reminds us that history is not merely a linear march—it’s a dance that spans centuries, uniting hands that have shaped the earth.

      The paleochannel’s passage through the Dyke carries echoes of ancient currents—a testament to a time long before the Dyke’s construction. This fragment, missing as if eroded by the tides of prehistory, whispers that the roots of this land stretch further than the architects who shaped it. This gap in the Dyke is a tapestry of continuity, a reminder that even the most monumental structures stand atop layers of untold stories.

      Figure 52 - Morgan's Hill West with another Branch
      Figure 52 – Morgan’s Hill West with another Branch

      The saga of East Wansdyke’s creation offers a riddle unto itself. The builders, crafting their work across chalk, kept the earth they excavated to one side. This pragmatic choice of preserving the turf for stability and camouflage echoes a nuanced purpose. It becomes evident that these Dykes are not mere boundary markers or defensive structures. They are more—a marriage of utility and adaptation, a testament to human ingenuity and the intersection of practicality and aesthetics.

      ure 53 - Junctions heading north off Wansdyke past a group of Round barrows
      Figure 53 – Junctions heading north off Wansdyke past a group of Round barrows

      The view northward, captured in Fig. 53, extends the tableau of discovery. Like a palimpsest, the landscape bears the imprints of Wansdyke’s journey. It dances alongside the Roman Road, a chorus of human footsteps interweaving through time. The round barrows and raised river shorelines, silent witnesses to centuries past, reaffirm the interplay of cultures, constructions, and course changes that define human endeavour across epochs.

      Figure 54 - How Morgan Hill used to look in the Mesolithic – with the roman road towards the bottom turning left (North)
      Figure 54 – How Morgan Hill used to look in the Mesolithic – with the roman road towards the bottom turning left (North)

       

      Chronology (Smoking Gun)

      In the ongoing dialogue with history, a revelation emerges—wrought from the very contours of the land, an ancient pathway unveils its secrets. The Roman road, a trail of human ambition etched across the landscape, weaves its course atop the pages of Wansdyke’s story. This intersection, where road and Dyke converge, is a testament to the interplay of cultures, epochs, and purpose.

      Stukeley’s drawing on Page 6, Fig.24, long questioned by the annals of archaeology, finds newfound validation through the lens of LiDAR—a digital conjurer that unveils hidden truths. Once doubted as an exaggeration, the cut through the bank now emerges as a footprint in time. LiDAR’s gaze, untethered by perception’s limits, reveals that this cut bends in harmony with the Roman deviation, a harmony of intent that speaks of chronology.

      Figure 55 - Roman Road cuts through Wansdyke making it older!
      Figure 55 – Roman Road cuts through Wansdyke making it older!
      A different angle
      A different angle

      The alignment of the Roman road, cleaving through the very heart of Wansdyke’s bank, resonates with the echoes of purpose. This road, a conduit for the aspirations of the Roman era, tells a tale of connection and coexistence—an acknowledgement that the landscape’s past holds layers that intertwine like the fabric of time itself.

      The chronicle of Wansdyke, interwoven with the path of the Roman road, unveils a narrative that spans millennia. This intersection becomes a bridge that invites us to traverse the epochs and honour the efforts of hands laboured to craft earthwork and thoroughfare. It becomes a gateway that prompts us to unravel the threads of intention, the dance between cultures, and the pulse of human progress.

      The application of LiDAR technology has decisively resolved the inquiry. LiDAR data reveals a cross-sectional embankment profile mirroring the Roman roads deviation’s curvature, indicating the roadway’s construction postdates the Wansdyke earthwork.

      This LiDAR evidence serves as a compelling confirmation of prehistoric Dyke dating, akin to a “smoking gun.” LiDAR employs laser reflection and time-of-flight measurements to gather precise topographic data by emitting and measuring laser pulses. This technology’s congruence with historical context validates its role in archaeology, exemplifying how modern tools can illuminate ancient landscapes.

      Figure 78 - Roman Road cuts through Wansdyke making it older!
      Figure 78 – Roman Road cuts through Wansdyke making it older!

       

      The Book

      Blank bookcover with clipping path

      This was an extracts from the NEW Book Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke available on Amazon as a FULL COLOUR HARD BACK (£19.95) or a ECONOMY (£4.99) SOFTBACK black and white VERSION – it is also available as a KINDLE (£1.99) book. For further information about our work on Prehistoric Britain visit our WEBSITE or VIDEO CHANNEL.

      Product details

      • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BF31GQKC
      • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Independently published (18 Sept. 2022)
      • Language ‏ : ‎ English
      • Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 134 pages
      • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 979-8353488897
      • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 15.24 x 1.3 x 22.86 cm
      • Illustrations: 85
      • Customer reviews: 5.0 out of 5 stars    1 rating

      Further Reading

      For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

      To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

      In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

      For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

      Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

      For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.


      Other Blogs

      s

      t

      Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow)

      Promotional Video – Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Offa’s Dyke ( Offa’s Dyke Chepstow)

      Extract From Book……………………… Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Offa’s Dyke

      The Introduction

      Offa’s Dyke is seen as one of the two significant Linear Earthworks (of Britain) as it is supposed to be over 200 miles from Coast to coast dividing England from Wales and, consequently, was once one of the greatest battle grounds in history with this massive defence required to tame the barbaric hordes (like the Picts in Scotland) from the home of civilisation.

      The problem with this flight of fancy is its complete nonsense, which this book can now testify.  Sir Cyril Fox, in the 1950s, was most famous for producing his classic book ‘Offa’s Dyke – A field survey of the Western-Works of Mercia in the Seventh and Eight Centuries A.D.”, which detailed his field walking and observations on this most historic of Earth Battlements, which we have now seen from more scientific evidence available from LiDAR was nothing more than misinterpretations of the landscape to justify hypotheses that ‘didn’t hold water’ – but sadly for him, it did!

      The harsh reality is that this ‘swiss cheese’ hypothesis was, as suggested, full of holes – over 200 of them, to be more exact, covering nearly 60% of this supposed Mercia defensive barrier with gaps large enough for people to walk through with ease.

      Later archaeologists have attempted to remedy this false claim, yet it still is quoted by the likes of English Heritage, Historic Britain and CADW to fill the void of ignorance and lack of study. Consequently, this FIRST LiDAR study of Offa’s Dyke in detail has revealed many new truths which should progress our understanding of the past.

      History

      According to Historic England – Offa’s Dyke is the longest linear earthwork in Britain, approximately 220km, running from Treuddyn, near Mold, to Sedbury on the Severn estuary.

      It was constructed towards the end of the eighth century AD by the Mercian king Offa, and is believed to have formed a long-lived territorial, and possibly defensive, boundary between the Saxon kingdom of Mercia and the Welsh kingdoms. The Dyke is not continuous and consists of a number of discrete lengths separated by gaps of up to 23km.

      It is clear from the nature of certain sections that differences in the scale and character of adjoining portions were the result of separate gangs being employed on different lengths. Where possible, natural topographic features such as slopes or rivers were utilised, and the form of Offa’s Dyke is therefore clearly related to the topography. Along most of its length it consists of a bank with a ditch to the west.

      Excavation has indicated that at least some lengths of the bank had a vertical outer face of either laid stonework or turf revetment. The ditch generally seems to have been used to provide most of the bank material, although there is also evidence in some locations of shallow quarries. In places, a berm divides the bank and ditch, and a counterscarp bank may be present on the lip of the ditch. Offa’s Dyke now survives in various states of preservation in the form of earthworks and, where sections have been levelled and infilled, as buried features.

      Although some sections of the frontier system no longer survive visibly, sufficient evidence does exist for its position to be accurately identified throughout most of its length. In view of its contribution towards the study of early medieval territorial patterns, all sections of Offa’s Dyke exhibiting significant archaeological remains are considered worthy of protection.

      The reality is that Offa’s Dyke is a complete mystery to archaeologists and historians as it is incomplete and varies from section to section. This is the first LiDAR survey of this ‘Earthwork’ undertaken for its entire length and every metre that’s supposedly marked in the Landscape.

      The consequences of this survey changes the nature and understanding of this ‘Dyke’ to such an extent that it re-invents the history of this Scheduled Monument, which will have repercussions for decades to come.

      But first, we must lay the ground to allow readers to understand what we are seeing in Offa’s Dyke, and so the following three chapters have been written to give the reader this background of understanding.

      Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow – A5 to A15)

      Figure 50 - Section A05 -A06 as seen in the landscape - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow)
      Figure 50 – Section A05 -A06 as seen in the landscape – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow)

       

      Name (Section)Chapelhouse Wood, 240m west of the Recreation Ground (A05)
      HE:1020639Width(m)Hght/Dth(m)Length(m)
      Bank10 – 120.5 – 1.6376
      Ditch (facing)10.4NW & SE
      Gap/Spring/Quarry104

      GE Map

      1020639 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - GE
      1020639 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – GE

      OS Map

      1020639 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - os
      1020639 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – OS

      LiDAR Map

      1020639 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - lidar
      1020639 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – 1800s

      1800s Map

      1020639 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - 1800
      1020639 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – Lidar

      In this 376m long section, the Dyke is visible as a bank with a ditch and counterscarp bank to the west and shallow quarry pits to the east.

      The bank is between 10m and 12m wide at its base and stands to a maximum height of 1.6m on its western face and 0.5m on its eastern face. To the west of the bank is a ditch, approximately 1m wide and up to 0.4m deep.

      The ditch is only visible at the southern end of the section, the stretch to the north having become infilled over time. It will, however, survive as a buried feature.

      To the west of the ditch is a counterscarp bank, also only visible at the southern end of the section, which is about 4m wide and 0.4m high.

      To the east of the main bank, a contiguous row of quarry pits is visible, surviving to a maximum depth of 1.5m and to a width of 6m.  – Historic England.

      Conclusion

      The ditch is almost non-existent at this point, although the bank is extensive and of standard width.  This is compounded as the 1800 OS map places the Dyke heading for the two large quarry pits south of the LiDAR map.

      The “contiguous row of quarry pits” suggests that this is a later connecting road used to connect the Dykes banks following the path of the river to the quarry pits, which in turn become part of the even later Roman Road, which intersects the earthwork’s bank further south of this Section.

      Are we seeing why the Dyke was built initially – to connect to the Quarry pits, which then became a road when the canal dried up?

      Figure 51 – Looks more like a raised path with drainage and content pits on both sides?

      HE:1004858 – Lancaut Promontory Fort

      Name (Section)Lancaut promontory fort, 60m ditch and bank (A06)
      HE:1004858Width(m)Hght/Dth(m)Length(m)
      Bank10 – 122267
      Ditch (facing)182.5ENE
      Gap/Spring/Quarry103

      GE Map

      1004858 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - GE
      1004858 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – GE

      OS Map

      1004858 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - os
      1004858 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – OS

      1800 Map

      1004858 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - 1800
      1004858 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – 1800s

      Lidar Map

      1004858 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - lidar
      1004858 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – lidar

      “The monument includes a promontory fort and part of the medieval frontier defence known as Offa’s Dyke situated on an extremely steeply sloping spur formed by a meander in the River Wye.

      The fort survives as a roughly triangular shaped enclosure defined on two sides by steep natural valley scarps and on the landward side by an outer multivallate defence of two concentric rampart banks standing up to 2m high with accompanying ditches up to 2.5m deep and with an outer partial counterscarp bank.

      These earthworks are of Iron Age origin but were re-used to form part of Offa’s Dyke in the early medieval period. An inner rampart lies to the west at the narrowest point across the promontory and survives as a bank standing up to 1.4m high with a largely buried outer ditch”. – Historic England

      Other sources Suggest:

      “300m further to the west is the possible earlier phase of defences to the fort, or perhaps a second line of defence. This can be seen as an earthwork bank on aerial photographs, and measures 50m long. Other features were visible on aerial photographs between the two sets of possible defences. These included a roughly north-south aligned bank, 60m long.

      Two further banks aligned NW-SE, each with an ditch on the east side and measure 20m and 18m long respectively. It is possible that these banks are simply Medieval or Post Medieval boundaries, but they could have earlier, possibly late prehistoric, origins and could relate to the fortifications. A small quarry, of uncertain date, and measures 17m across. A large roughly triangular mound is visible along the north side of Lancaut Lane just to the west of where the lane passes through the defences.

      The mound measures 65m by 24m at its widest and longest parts and may relate to the construction of the road.

      Although, the eastern aspect and the construction of the defences suggest that it has late prehistoric origins it is still likely that they formed part of the defence line known as Offa’s Dyke.

      Conclusion

      It is quite possible that an additional bank was added at a later date – but looking at the 1800s OS Map, it looks like a classic ‘cross-dyke’ cutting the corner of the River Wye – whether that could be called a part of Offa’s Dyke as we are seeing is questionable, as the northern end of the Dyke heads directly for the River and not around the cliff edge as ‘suggested’.

      Figure 52 - Classic 'Cross Dyke' between two water sources as seen throughout Britain
      Figure 52 – Classic ‘Cross Dyke’ between two water sources as seen throughout Britain

      1020607 – Danehill Wood

      Name (Section)Danehill Wood, 300m west of East Vaga (A07)
      1020607Width(m)Hght/Dth(m)Length(m)
      Bank163.5903
      Ditch (facing)6 – 81ENE – SE
      Gap/Spring/Quary123

      GE Map

      1020607 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - GE
      1020607 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – GE

      OS Map

      1020607 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - os
      1020607 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – OS

      1800 Map

      1020607 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - 1800
      1020607 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – 1800s

      Lidar Map

      1020607 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - lidar
      1020607 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – Lidar

      “In this 903m long section the Dyke is visible as a bank with a berm and short section of counterscarp bank to the west and contiguous quarry pits to the east.

      The bank is a maximum of 16m wide at its base, standing to 3.5m high on its western face and 1m high on its eastern face. The berm marks a break in slope between the western face of the bank and the natural slope of the hill and is up to 4m wide.

      Towards the southern end of the section a counterscarp bank approximately 0.4m high is visible. The quarry pits are between 6m and 8m wide and about 1m deep.

      There is a drystone wall to the east of this scheduling, thought to have been built during the 19th century, which marks the line of an old boundary and which now revets part of the monument.

      There is a gap in the monument at the northern end of the scheduling at Ordnance Survey NGR ST55069833, which allows access for vehicles to Tintern Quarry to the west of the Dyke. Although the bank has been levelled, evidence for the Dyke’s quarries is visible to the east of the cut. The break is not thought to be the site of an original access point through the monument. To the south of this section, below Dennel Hill, the line of the Dyke has been destroyed by post-medieval quarrying”. – Historic England

      Conclusion

      We see again the connection of the Dyke with quarry pits in this section – the idea of it being a border marker is also called into question as it’s a cliff face by the River, and the River would have been a better marker than a bank on top of a hill.

      The massive gaps should also be noticed in this section as there was a gap of 1.1 km between the two sections of Offa’s Dyke, which again suggests that this was never constructed as a ‘defensive’ earthwork as presented by revered archaeologists of the past such as Fox.

      1020606 – Boatwood Plantation

      Name (Section)Boatwood Plantation, 320m south west of Chase Farm (A08)
      1020606Width(m)Hght/Dth(m)Length(m)
      Bank170.8 – 3.5364
      Ditch (facing)101NNE
      Gap/Spring/Quarry0011

      GE Map

      1020606 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - ge
      1020606 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – GE

      OS Map

      1020606 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - OS
      1020606 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – OS

      LiDAR Map

      1020606 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - lidar
      1020606 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – Lidar

      1800 Map

      1020606 - Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) - 1800
      1020606 – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow) – 1800s

      “This 364m long section of the Dyke turns from its usual alignment to run north west-south east. It is visible as a bank with a berm on its south side and contiguous quarry pits to the north.

      The bank is up to 17m wide at its base and stands to between 2.5m and 3.5m high on its southern face and to between 0.8m and 1.8m on its northern face.

      The berm is about 2m wide and represents an artificial break in slope at the base of the earthen bank. The quarries are up to 10m wide and about 1m deep.

      A stone boundary wall, which is thought to date from the mid to late 19th century, runs along the top of the bank throughout the length of this scheduling.

      There is a gap in the Dyke at Ordnance Survey NGR ST54929845 formed by the cutting of a forestry access road, material from which was thrown up to form a bund. It is not thought to represent an original crossing point through the monument.” – Historic England

      Conclusion

      The Dyke loses its structure down the river valley, and the ditch moves to the other side of the Dyke, again indicating that it was not used as a defensive earthwork.

      Quarries are all around this section indicating the use and function of this Dyke in the past – further investigation needs to be made to understand the dates of these quarries to see if they are Prehistoric, Roman or both.

                  To survey this Offa’s Dyke successfully, we need to link to other historic providers’ information and maps. To do this with relevant accuracy, we need to establish a grid system that looks at all the LiDAR, Satellite photography, Old OS maps and excavation evidence to draw new conclusions about the construction of Offa’s Dyke.

      Therefore, we have subdivided Offa’s Dyke into five sections and named them A to E – each Section is not equally divided but edited by the breaks within the Dyke. We have named these sections from South to North, which is a bit different from the norm, but in archaeology, information is the best way to approach Offa’s Dyke as you will find when you get to Section E.

      These grid sections include the  OS 1800 Map edition (for historical accurately, as new developments are not included), Google Earth Maps (showing Historic England Scheduled Areas and References) and our LiDAR (hi-resolution) maps, which are unique in their clarity and ease of landscape interpretation.

                  We will also give you a complete overview of the Dyke by section before the detailed analysis within the appendices.  This will provide you with an understanding of the Dykes construction phases and function, allowing you to understand better how we came to our conclusions about Offa’s Dyke and when it was constructed.

      Blank bookcover with clipping path

      This was an extracts from the NEW Book Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke available on Amazon as a FULL COLOUR HARD BACK (£49.95) or a ECONOMY (£9.99) SOFTBACK black and white VERSION – it is also available as a KINDLE (£2.99) book. For further information about our work on Prehistoric Britain visit our WEBSITE or VIDEO CHANNEL.

      Product details

      • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQG7G6CJ
      • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Independently published (24 Nov. 2022)
      • Language ‏ : ‎ English
      • Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 443 pages
      • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 979-8370198236
      • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 15.24 x 3.33 x 22.86 cm
      • Illustrations: 350+

      Further Reading

      For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

      To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

      In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

      For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

      Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

      For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.(Blackhenge: Debunking the Media misinterpretation of the Stonehenge Builders)


      Other Blogs

      s

      t