Promotional Video – Ancient Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke

Chapter 1 – Dykes, Ditches and Earthworks

The modern word dike or Dyke most likely derives from the Dutch word “dijk”, with the construction of dikes in the Netherlands well attested as early as the 12th century. The 126 kilometres (78 mi) long Westfriese Omringdijk was completed by 1250 and was formed by connecting existing older dikes. The Roman chronicler Tacitus even mentions that the rebellious Batavi pierced dikes to flood their land and protect their retreat (AD 70).  The word dijk initially indicated both the trench and the bank.– Wikipedia

If you study archaeology at university or even on an ordinance survey map at length, you will notice strange earthworks on the sides of hills of Britain, with no rational explanation as to why they are there and for what reason.  These features are mostly ignored at university, or an excuse is made for their construction.  The reality is that these features do not make any sense unless there are other factors in operation which have been ignored.

The first thing to notice is that the word ‘Dyke’ is associated with water.  It does seem strange you would call an earthwork on top of a hill a Dyke, unless there was some history passed down through the years to its actual use.  If we look at the most famous Dyke in Britain, ‘Offa’, we notice that it is attributed to a Saxon King and, therefore, could not be prehistoric.   Or is this a clear indication of how archaeologists find excuses for these features rather than factual, empirical evidence?

“Offa’s Dyke (Welsh: Clawdd Offa) is a massive linear earthwork, roughly followed by some of the current borders between England and Wales. In places, it is up to 65 feet (19.8 m) wide (including its flanking ditch) and 8 feet (2.4 m) in height.  In the 8th century, it formed some kind of delineation between the Anglian kingdom of Mercia and the Welsh kingdom of Powys.” – Wikipedia

At face value, this explanation seems to answer all the questions about Dykes (except the water connection).  But suppose you delve further down to look at the evidence, such as findings from the Dyke and any written history. In that case, you get a different version for the Roman historian Eutropius in his book, Historiae Romanae Breviarium, written around 369 AD, mentions the Wall of Severus, a structure built by Septimius Severus who was Roman Emperor between 193 AD and 211 AD:

“He had his most recent war in Britain, and to fortify the conquered provinces with all security; he built a wall for 133 miles from sea to sea. He died at York, a reasonably old man, in the sixteenth year and third month of his reign.” – Eutropius (369 AD)

This ‘wall’ need not be made of stone as we know from their Scottish endeavours that the first structure as a defence was usually a bank and a ditch – just like a Dyke!!

The problem with this account is that none of the known Roman defences are 133 miles long – Harridan’s Wall is only 70 miles, so are they talking about Offa’s Dyke, which is much longer?

Chapter 2 – The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis

Before we show you what these ‘Linear Earthworks‘ were used for in prehistoric times.  We need to give you an idea of how the environment was at the time of construction and why it is so different today.

In ‘The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis,’ we looked at the new mathematical models that allowed us to calculate the amount of water released during and after the Last Glacial Maximum just over ten thousand years ago.

If the Dykes of Britain are canals (and not markers or defensive ditches), we must prove that the water table was higher in the past than today (otherwise, they would still be flooded).

The models contained in the PGFH showed us that a minimum of 8.42 quadrillion tonnes of water was released on the UK at the end of the last ice age.  This is equivalent to 98425.2 inches of rain falling on every square inch of Britain’s landmass or the same as – One Inch of rain steadily falling every day for the next 270 years

The worst known flooding in British history occurred in 1947 when just six inches of rain (149mm) fell on up to 12″ of snow (so a maximum of 15″ of rain if melted) over three months. The flooding, which inundated nearly all the main rivers in the South, Midlands, and the Northeast of England, was notable for its origins, geographical extent, and duration.

It impacted thirty out of the forty English counties over two weeks, when around 700,000 acres of land flooded. As a result, tens of thousands of people were temporarily displaced from their homes, and thousands of acres of crops were lost; and this was just 15 of the estimated equivalent of 98,425 inches of water that was shed on the British landscape after the last Ice Age. 

Raised Water Table

According to William Donn (Donn et al., 1962). The Fennoscandian and Great Britain ice sheet covered 4.7 10⁶ km², which is equivalent to: 

•          8.42 10⁶ Gigatonnes of water / 4.7 10⁶ km², which gives     us 1.79 Gt per km²

•          1.79 Gt of water at a penetration rate of 43%, give us   0.77 Gt of water per km²

•          0.77 Gigatonnes of water by UK landmass 242,495 km² give us 186,804 Gt of groundwater

This water will be released at a rate of 1 – 12mm per annum and possibly at a depth of 75km. Therefore, to release groundwater at a depth of 75km at an average rate of 6mm per annum would take 12,500 years – not the 1,200 years previously believed, which is just the surface water from the last stages of the meltwater ice.

This is why rivers (like the Thames) still flow even after months of drought, as the groundwater is constantly leaking into the river, which was at its highest rate at the start of the Mesolithic, just after the great meltwater floods.

Sea-Level Changes

If this model is correct, we should be able to get verification via other empirical evidence, as shown in sea level water rises, to see if it has been constant over the last 12,500 years.

Most geologists and paleoclimatologists, when talking about the end of the last ice age, refer people to the phenomenon called the ‘Meltwater Pulse’ – which is the rapid rise in sea level (20m) between 13,500 and 14,700 years before present, over a 400 – 500 year period. Although it is a tremendous value, it should be recognised that this ‘pulse’ as only 16% of the total sea rise since the end of the last ice age.

Chapter 3 – Hydrology 101

When it comes to the use of ‘linear earthworks’ (we call ‘Dykes’), there is massive confusion amongst both professionals and amateur archaeologists about how such structures could function when they are dry today?

The incorrect perception of these ‘Dykes’ is either they are ‘rivers’ (like the Thames) that flow uphill or Victorian Canals with locks and wooden gates regulating the flow of the water – which are equally nonsensical as a prehistoric structures. Basic Hydrology that most people (should be but not necessarily ALL) learnt at school is that water is under the ground – not just a little water but 30% of all the fresh water on the planet.

This abundance of ‘groundwater’ is evident as it is the source of ALL rivers and supplies the Wells that have been dug since the beginning of time when rivers were absent. Even today, if you go into your garden and dig a hole, it will eventually fill with groundwater, whether in a valley or on top of a hill or mountain.

How and why water is on hills is very challenging for individuals as most people have a simplistic view of water being flat and sitting at ground level – but the earth is a far more complicated structure as this is the reason that it took centuries for people to recognise that we lived on a sphere and not a ‘flat-earth’ as such complex concepts such as gravity are hard to comprehend.

The reality is that ‘streams’ of water are encapsulated within the bedrock allowing ‘springs’ to start rivers at a great height as the groundwater is under pressure and erupts to the surface from BELOW and does not flow up or down the hill internally – but can flow downhill AFTER it escapes from the soil, because at the point of escape gravity then becomes the greater force overcoming the water pressure when within the bedrock – which stops it flowing down the landscape and can push it up to the top of hills and mountains.

Consequently, wells work even on hills as the groundwater is encapsulated in the bedrock and soil. The above illustration shows that if wells are dug halfway up a hill where there is a groundwater pocket, they will fill – if we join up these wells, the entire ditch will also fill with water – sourced from the ground.

The central aspect that must be remembered when considering the reasons behind the construction and maintenance of these earthworks (Dykes) is that the environment was so much different in the Mesolithic Period, which changed rapidly when entering the Neolithic and then even more changes in the Bronze and Iron Ages.

Once the ice sheets had melted and the climate began to warm, the landscape gradually changed from open tundra to dense woodland. By around 8000 BC, pine and birch dominated the woodland cover. These were slowly replaced by lime, elm and oak with some hazel. By 6500 BC, pine and birch woodland would only have been found on the thinner limestone soils of the uplands.

2025 Update – A Quantified Groundwater Decline Model for Stonehenge/Wansdyke/Avebury

Using Radiocarbon-Anchored Hydrological Markers from the Chalk Aquifer

Abstract

This paper presents a quantified model of post-glacial groundwater decline for the Stonehenge–Durrington–Wansdyke chalk block, expressed as groundwater height relative to the modern aquifer baseline.

The model integrates borehole stratigraphy, hydrologically constrained radiocarbon samples, and lateral aquifer continuity to produce a monotonic height–time curve from the early Mesolithic to the Bronze Age. Crucially, the radiocarbon samples used do not date human activity or construction phases, but instead function as groundwater elevation markers, constraining minimum or maximum water levels through time.

This approach resolves long-standing contradictions in the Stonehenge landscape chronology and supersedes interpretive models reliant on typology or isolated C14 dates.

1. Introduction: why groundwater, not monuments

Traditional Stonehenge chronologies rely on radiocarbon dates obtained from pits, artefacts, or infilled features and then interpreted as construction or usage phases. In hydrologically active chalk landscapes, this approach is fundamentally flawed: most dated material records post-formational infilling, not the conditions under which a feature was cut or a landscape functioned.

Instead, this study treats groundwater height as the primary controlling variable. In a laterally continuous chalk aquifer, groundwater level is a regional physical property that constrains what landscapes can exist, what features can function, and when construction is even possible.

The question addressed here is therefore not “when was Stonehenge built?” but:

When did groundwater fall below the elevations required for Stonehenge Bottom, Durrington palaeochannels, and Wansdyke to function as dry features?

2. Methodological principles

2.1 Aquifer continuity

The Upper Chalk beneath Stonehenge, Durrington Walls, and Wansdyke forms a single hydraulically continuous unit. Large-scale groundwater changes are therefore regional, not local. A groundwater level reconstructed at one site applies across the chalk block, adjusted only for topography.

2.2 What radiocarbon dates can and cannot do

Radiocarbon dates are not used here as construction dates. Instead, they are used only where they satisfy all three of the following criteria:

1. In-situ organic material (preferably plant macrofossils)
2. Hydrologically controlled context (palaeochannel base, waterlogged organic horizon, peat lens)
3. Known or stated elevation (OD)

Such samples provide minimum groundwater heights at known times. Samples that fail these criteria (bulk humic sediments, disturbed fills, rootlet-contaminated samples) are explicitly excluded.

3. Data sources

3.1 Borehole stratigraphy (Stonehenge & surrounds)

Borehole logs beneath Stonehenge Bottom and adjacent areas record:

• Water-derived sediments
• Solution voids
• Shell-bearing horizons
• Prolonged saturation indicators

These demonstrate sustained groundwater levels significantly above modern values during the early Holocene, forming the physical basis of the model.

3.2 Radiocarbon samples used as groundwater markers

The following samples are extracted from the English Heritage Radiocarbon Database and associated ALSF projects. They are not Stonehenge construction dates, but hydrological constraints.

SUERC-10037

• Date: 8445 ± 40 BP (≈ 7550–7500 cal BC)
• Material: Waterlogged sediment (humic acid fraction)
• Context: Gravel-bottomed palaeochannel with organic infill
• Elevation: +49.55 m OD
• Interpretation: Early Mesolithic wet ground with persistent saturation
  
  09d789aa-9fd6-4816-8220-5ac1e62…

SUERC-10038

• Date: 8575 ± 35 BP (≈ 7600–7580 cal BC)
• Material: Waterlogged sediment (humin fraction)
• Context: Same sealed palaeochannel horizon as SUERC-10037
• Elevation: +49.55 m OD
• Notes: Minimal reservoir effect; consistent with pollen evidence
  
  09d789aa-9fd6-4816-8220-5ac1e62…

OxA-15972

• Date: 7300 ± 40 BP (≈ 6240–6060 cal BC)
• Material: Waterlogged sediment
• Context: Palaeochannel infill
• Interpretation: Channel already inactive; date reflects groundwater fall below channel base
  
  09d789aa-9fd6-4816-8220-5ac1e62…

OxA-15931

• Date: 4334 ± 30 BP (≈ 2550–2290 cal BC)
• Material: Waterlogged sediment (bulk sample)
• Context: Early infilling after palaeochannel abandonment
• Interpretation: Minimum age for sustained groundwater decline
  
  09d789aa-9fd6-4816-8220-5ac1e62…

OxA-15886 (preferred material)

• Date: 3410 ± 60 BP (≈ 1890–1530 cal BC)
• Material: Waterlogged plant macrofossil (monocot fragments)
• Context: Sealed palaeochannel base
• Significance: Highest-quality hydrological marker in the dataset
  
  09d789aa-9fd6-4816-8220-5ac1e62…

4. Construction of the H(t) groundwater curve

Groundwater height is expressed relative to today’s mean groundwater level, which already incorporates seasonal variability. This removes the need for uncertainty envelopes and isolates the long-term signal.

The curve is anchored by:

• A calculated groundwater height of +22.6 m above modern at ~10,300 BP, derived from the linked Stonehenge–Wansdyke hydrological solution
• Radiocarbon-anchored minimum groundwater levels at successive times

The resulting curve shows:

• Rapid drawdown during the early Holocene
• A long, shallow decline through the Mesolithic and Neolithic
• Final stabilisation near modern levels in the Bronze Age

This curve is monotonic and physically constrained.

5. Results and implications

5.1 Stonehenge Bottom

At groundwater levels ≥ +10 m above modern, Stonehenge Bottom cannot function as a dry landscape. Borehole evidence, molluscs, pollen, and palaeochannels are all consistent with this state during the Mesolithic.

5.2 Durrington Walls

Palaeochannels dated using infill material record the decline of groundwater, not monument construction. When correctly interpreted, these dates support prolonged wet conditions rather than late dryland activity.

5.3 Wansdyke

The groundwater differential observed at Wansdyke is consistent with the same regional water table reconstructed at Stonehenge, reinforcing aquifer continuity and validating the linked model.

6. Why this supersedes traditional models

This approach differs fundamentally from conventional archaeology:

Traditional modelGroundwater model

Isolated C14 dates

Integrated hydrological curve

Interpretive phases

Physically constrained thresholds

Typology-driven

Mathematics-driven

Site-specific

Regionally continuous

Once groundwater height is constrained, many archaeological interpretations become physically impossible, regardless of cultural preference.

7. Conclusion

By treating radiocarbon samples as hydrological markers rather than construction dates, and by anchoring them to a laterally continuous chalk aquifer, it is possible to construct a robust, testable groundwater height–time curve for the Stonehenge landscape.

This model explains:

• Borehole evidence
• Molluscan and pollen preservation
• Palaeochannel persistence
• Chronological inconsistencies in monument interpretation

The burden of proof now lies not in reinterpretation, but in producing contradictory groundwater mathematics.

Until that is done, the dry-chalk Neolithic model for Stonehenge is not debated — it is superseded.

Case Study Wansdyke – Morgan’s Hill West

The steepest aspect of Wansdyke is the rise over Morgan’s Hill, which is an incline from 182m OD to 252m OD.

If we are correct with our assumption, we need to show that you can transverse this massive incline using natural springs and basic wooden weirs.  If we split the gradient into four parts, we can see better the profile and problems our ancestors faced.

Section A – 0 to 300 downhill

Length is 300m, and the inclination lowers from 251m OD to 242m OD at a ratio of 3% or 1:33 – If we accept that within this section, we had four cat A ‘springs’ that would release 11.2 cu. metres of water PER SECOND (11,200 litres per second) would fill a 10m ditch that is 1.5 deep by one-metre width of the Dyke’s ditch every SECOND.

According to the mathematical formula (v = k * C * R0.63 * S0.54 ), water at the end of section A would be travelling at 5 MPH – the speed of the Thames at Henley (so quite navigable) and, therefore, no need for any Weirs to reduce the water flow.

Section B – 300 to 800m downhill

This section would receive water at one metre per second from Section A, travelling at 5 MPH – The length of this section is 500m in length, and the inclination lowers from 242m OD to 200m at a ratio of 8% or 1:12 this would accelerate the water to 15 mph which is too fast the navigate uphill. Therefore, a series of weirs would have been placed either under the water or, as the early Victorians achieved, by a paddle weir or both.

An underwater weir (blocking 50% of the water but allowing boats to move over the top without hindrance) would reduce the flow by 50% – so if placed at the End of Section A (at 5 MPH) would reduce the water flow to 2.5 MPH and down to 12.5 MPH at the End of Section B. Consequently, if we place one of these 50% reduction weirs at 100m intervals the water flow would not go over the 5-mph mark and would probably be in the region of 3 – 5 MPH which again is easily navigable.

Chapter 4 – Wansdyke

According to Wikipedia, “Wansdyke consists of two sections of 14 and 19 kilometres (9 and 12 mi) long with some gaps in between. East Wansdyke is an impressive linear earthwork, consisting of a ditch and bank running approximately east-west, between Savernake Forest and Morgan’s Hill. West Wansdyke is also a linear earthwork, running from Monkton Combe south of Bath to Maes Knoll south of Bristol, but less impressive than its eastern counterpart. The middle section, 22 kilometres (14 mi) long, is sometimes referred to as ‘Mid Wansdyke’ but is formed by the remains of the London to Bath Roman road. It used to be thought that these sections were all part of one continuous undertaking, especially during the Middle Ages when the pagan name Wansdyke was applied to all three parts.

East Wansdyke in Wiltshire, on the south of the Marlborough Downs, has been less disturbed by later agriculture and building and remains more clearly traceable on the ground than the western part. Here the bank is up to 4 m (13 ft) high with a ditch up to 2.5 m (8.2 ft) deep. Wansdyke’s origins are unclear, but archaeological data shows that the eastern part was probably built during the 5th or 6th century. That is after the withdrawal of the Romans and before the takeover by Anglo-Saxons. The ditch is on the north side, so presumably it was used by the British as a defence against West Saxons encroaching from the upper Thames Valley westward into what is now the West Country.

West Wansdyke, although the antiquarians like John Collinson considered West Wansdyke to stretch from south East of Bath to the west of Maes Knoll, a review in 1960 considered that there was no evidence of its existence to the west of Maes Knoll.   Keith Gardner refuted this with newly discovered documentary evidence.  In 2007 a series of sections were dug across the earthwork which showed that it had existed where there are no longer visible surface remains.

It was shown that the earthwork had a consistent design, with stone or timber revetment. There was little dating evidence, but it was consistent with either a late Roman or post-Roman date. A paper in “The Last of the Britons” conference in 2007 suggests that the West Wansdyke continues from Maes Knoll to the hill forts above the Avon Gorge and controls the crossings of the river at Saltford and Bristol as well as at Bath.

As there is little archaeological evidence to date the western Wansdyke, it may have marked a division between British Celtic kingdoms or have been a boundary with the Saxons. The evidence for its western extension is earthworks along the north side of Dundry Hill, its mention in a charter and a road name.

Section 1

HE:1003784 Wansdyke: section 610yds (560m) NW of Wernham Farm to 250yds (230m) SW of New Buildings (560m = 1680 working days – 20 men taking 84 days to complete)

No, HE Historic Details or Excavations Registered

OS Map

1800 OS Map

LiDAR Map

LiDAR (with Mesolithic water levels)

A feature called ‘firs’ is a gap on the OS Map – there is a strange quarry pit (no relevant substances under the surface to quarry?) – this pit is two metres deep and probably built later to the original ditch.

Are we looking for a hole to find the groundwater to keep the canal working with fresh water? As we will discover, this is not the first pit cut deep on the line of Wansdyke.

The Mesolithic water levels certainly explain the strange start of Wansdyke and the unexplained gaps (if it’s not a canal) in the Dyke.

Notice on the LiDAR maps the extensive ‘pits’ surrounding the Dyke, which are not below the Mesolithic river shoreline and are 14m in diameter.

These features seem to be connected to even larger quarry holes (some under the Mesolithic shoreline), indicating that minerals have been extracted here for thousands of years and may be the reason for the Dykes construction to take minerals away – as have also found these pits in other mineral-rich areas of Britain such as Hadrian’s Wall.

Durrington Walls

The pits are about 20m in diameter and up to 5m deep, as revealed by further geophysical surveys using ground-penetrating radar and mechanical coring around Durrington Walls. Small quantities of struck flint, shell, and animal bone have been recovered from them, with the bone providing radiocarbon dates from about 2500 BC to 1200 BC.

What we see is that this type of quarrying was commonplace in the past and has confused archaeologists – but as this was a trading nation, the solution is evident and straightforward. 

Gap in the Dyke route

At the end of Section 1, we find the first gap (if you exclude the massive gap at the start of the Dyke) – this gap appears as the Dyke dips into a paleochannel. The obvious conclusion for the break in Wansdyke is that it must have been full of water at the construction time.

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:

• The Ancient Mariners
• Stonehenge Built 8300 BCE
• Old Sarum
• Prehistoric Rivers
• Dykes, Ditches, and Earthworks
• Echoes of Atlantis
• Homo Superior
• 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History
• Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue
• Offa’s Dyke
• The Stonehenge Enigma
• The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis
• The Stonehenge Hoax
• Dawn of the Lost Civilisation
• Darwin’s Children
• Great Chester’s Roman Aqueduct
• Wansdyke

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