Sir—It seems highly improbable that “place-names” on a map can guide us to the “origin” of famous Norfolk sites; though they may tell us of “occupiers” of the sites. Now, why did Briton or Roman fortify or build where they did, as at Tasburgh or Castleacre? Probably the sites were as well marked beforehand as Norwich was before its Cathedral was built.
The origin of Norfolk sites, mounds, &c., as distinct from towns and place-names, is undoubtedly connected with the remarkable isosceles triangle, of which Stonehenge and Avebury form the base, and Silchester the apex. The straight line from the monoliths of Stonehenge to those of Avebury (or Silbury Hill) forms the unit of measurement (approx. 18 miles or 20 Roman miles). The sides of the triangle to Silchester are exactly double this unit. Now this unit (and its half or double) can be traced across the “Shires” to East Anglia, through Dunstable (Maiden’s Bower), Bedford (castle), Huntingdon (mound), Saffron Walden (castle), Thetford, Colchester, &c.
Apply this Stonehenge unit to Norfolk, it can scarcely be mere coincidence that it is precisely the distance from Castleacre to Brancaster, Warham Camp, Briston Burgh, Attleborough, and Brandon. From Norwich to Briston Burgh, Happisburgh, Burgh Castle, and S. Elmham. From Tasburgh to Burgh Castle, Aylsham Burgh, and Filby Burgh. Again Burgh Castle to Happisburgh and Blytheburgh. From Thetford to Chedburgh and Finborough. From Warham to Cromer Roman Camp.
Now if on the other hand we attempt to work out some such connecting plan of the sites of the modern “place names” with suffix “ham,” such as Aylsham, Swaffham, &c., we fail, and must seek the origin elsewhere.
I incline to the view that neither Briton nor Roman originated the famous sites of Norfolk (and their triangulation, often perfectly equilateral), but that the builders of Stonehenge, or people of a more remote and civilised age, skilled in survey and direction, fixed the sites, possibly by Mr. Watkins’ theory of “leys.” Indeed without compass and map I fail to see how these remarkable sites could have otherwise been fixed with such amazing accuracy. There appears also to be a good deal to be said in favour of the origin of the sites of moats, fords, &c. Like the discoverer of Neptune, I have opened compasses with the Stonehenge unit, and swept the map with intersecting area from site centres, and been astonished to find many of the more obscure “burghs” of Norfolk. Very interesting also was the discovery that a “ley” line passes exactly through the moated Brisley Old Hall, situated in an isolated position in a remote corner of the green. Also that Mr. Dutt had discovered a “ley,” well known to me, connecting Tasburgh with Fundenhall.
Now, is it only a coincidence that the seven Burnhams and the seven South Elmhams are exactly equal distances from Grimes Graves?
I am aware that if we set out to seek proof of a theory we may see it where there is really none: yet the great Architect of the Seas placed the white, black, blue, and red, on a line connecting the poles.
Mr. Watkins and Mr. Dutt appear to be on the right track in disregarding place names, and seeking the origin of sites by
connecting up on a map.
ARTHUR CROSS.
Brisley.
Source info: Cuttings agency; checked in library.
This letter from Arthur Cross is interesting as an early example of speculation about landscape geometry. There is also an early instance of the phrase “ley line”.