In a recently published book on “Early British Trackways,” Mr. Alfred Watkins has put forward a theory that from prehistoric times until after the Roman occupation all trackways were in straight lines marked out by experts on a sighting system. Such sighting lines (or leys) were from hill to hill, such points being terminals. Further marking points on the lower ground between were made. These secondary and artificial sighting points still remain, in many cases either as originally made or modified to other uses. They were constructed either of earth, water, or stone, trees being also planted on the line. Sacred wells were sometimes terminals in the line, and sometimes included as secondary points. Between the sighting points the trackway ran straight, except in cases of physical impossibility, but did not of necessity go as far as the primary hilltops. Earth sighting points were chiefly on higher ground, and now bear the name of tump, tumulus, mound, castle, bury, low, barrow, moat, and camp. Another form of earth sighting point was in the form of a notch or cutting in a bank or mountain ridge, which had to be crossed by the sighting line. Water sighting points seem to have evolved from the excavations made for the tumps or moats. Almost all are on low ground, to form a point or ring of reflection from higher ground, and are now known as moats or ponds. Stone sighting or marking points were used for commerce, and for assemblies of the people. These trackways of successive ages grew so thick on the ground as to vie in number with present day roads and byways. All forms of sighting points became objects of interest, superstition, and genuine veneration, and as such were utilised on the introduction of Christianity. Practically all ancient churches are on the site of these sighting points (tumps or stones) usually at a cross of tracks, and there is evidence that in some cases the churchyard cross is on the exact spot of the ancient sighting or marking stone. In time, homesteads clustered round the sighting points, especially the ponds. The moats and tumps were often adopted in after ages as sites for the defensive houses or castles of wealthy owners. Mr. Watkin’s evidence is chiefly from Herefordshire, and seems to follow similar lines to those suggested by Mr. Percy A. Nash as the basis of a Roman survey of Norfolk. Mr. Watkins has however strained his theory to breaking point, and his philological proofs are often absurd. There is a great danger in speculation of this kind of putting the cart before the horse. The existence of a track naturally caused the erection of camps, barrows, moated houses, and later of churches, in its vicinity, and it is not safe to assume that any of them were constructed as sighting points.
[From Norfolk Notes by W.G.C. in the “Norfolk News and Weekly Press.”]
Source info: Cuttings agency.