Thanks for the observations and pointer. I’ve exchanged messages with cerrig on other forums. As Cerrig Duon is something of a specialist subject with Andrew, and I’ve merely plotted it in dismal weather - and, what’s more, it’s on my more speculative list - I’m reluctant to press my thoughts on this ring.
The real prizes are those sites that have been excavated by archaeologists and for which professional surveys have been published. To date, I’ve seen no such survey in an excavation report that fails to provide support for the Rational Distribution Hypothesis.
It’s my feeling that if such a survey is copied it would be possible to check the angles formed by the gaps to determine in how many parts the circle is potentially divided (48, 60, 64, 72 etc.) - or look on my table of sites to see what I think it is (though bear in mind that I include the perceived axis). A template could then be drawn, with protractor, and overlaid on the plan to determine the viability of the fit.
I find that merely contemplating that the gaps might be so measured (and also being able to measure them) adds hugely to the enjoyment of visiting stone circles. It's one thing to be able to perceive a possible intent on a plan, but it's quite another to be able to experience that intent on the ground.
|
