Sir—May I record my opinion (for what it is worth) that there is nothing in Mr. Watkins’ theory as endorsed by Mr. W. A. Dutt. “Your Reviewer’s” arguments seem to me unanswerable.
If there are any early British trackways other than the Peddars Way one would expect to find them along the ridges of hills commanding views of distant enemies, or along and parallel with rivers linking up the fishing villages. The well-known Ridgeway at Wimbledon is a good example of the former, while the lane and footpath starting behind the Anchor of Hope at Lammas, and following the Bure for a long way is a specimen of the latter. Similarly, another range of paths starts on the other side of the Bure from Mayton Bridge through Horstead.
Why does Mr. Watkins so spell “leys.” If the idea is that they are laid out, surely “lays” would be better so as not to cause confusion with leys supposed to mean pasture land.
It seems inconsistent to use Roman places, like Burgh and Tasburgh, in a discussion as to British trackways. Such places
prima facie could not have existed in British times,
although as to Brancaster I notice Mr. Dutt adopts the old argument (see Popular History of Norfolk, 1885,
pp. 5–6) that its prefix points to a settlement by the Danes before the Roman invasion.—Yours, &c.
WALTER RYE.
Source info: Cuttings agency; checked in library.