Hi fitz. Since my last post most of what I was going to say has now been said by others. Just a couple of points though if I may. You say that, "Surely the common sense approach to stock management is not to spend thousands of man-hours creating huge ditch and bank structures..."

I've argued this before but surely the amount of effort one puts into building a structure is dictated by how long one plans to stick around - if it's just for a season then sure, a bunch of brushwood will probably do the trick. But a more settled community is going to look towards a more substantial structure. For example, why continuously build a bridge from perishable materials (that might be quick to construct initially but will only last a year or two) when a stone bridge is going to pay off in the long run (even though the stone bridge will take more man-hours initially it <i>is</i> likely to last for many more years).

You say that, "It's very difficult to catch a beast within a circular structure, corners are far more practical." Yep, can't disagree with you there but who said anything about catching a beast within a corral? To my mind a corral is a place where livestock are given shelter (overnight, or perhaps when there is danger) and then herded out to pasture when it's safe to do so.

You also say that, "Henges have orientations and relationships with other monuments both natural and man-made. None of this is a quest for spirituality in the 21st century it is based on observation, excavation and common sense." Yep, agree with you there as well but I think I'd insert 'many' - ie, 'Many henges have orientations...' and although I agree with you generally I must disagree with you when you say, "None of this is a quest for spirituality in the 21st century it is based on observation, excavation and common sense."

The quest for 'spirituality' in things like stone circles, wells, ley lines, crystals, vanished civilizations, etc etc is a burgeoning quest in the 21st century and a visit to any good bookshop or the internet will confirm that. I do not wish to belittle that quest but I also believe we should not be afraid to say (as others have said here and elsewhere) that some of the things we hold dear as the remains of our 'spiritual' past may actually have been purely utilitarian in function - that does not make them any less interesting nor any less worthy of our attention :-)