It's a long story, but I've pulled the hill off, just for lack of hassle. There are indications that the site is pre-Roman - there's a rectangular stone feature listed on the S.M.R. in the field below it, but, as the record dates to 2004, and the virtual listing hasn't been updated since November 2003, it's not shown there yet. And anyway using the S.M.R. to justify inclusion here is a circular argument as it's been myself that's listed them on the S.M.R. in the first place. There's one or two embarassing mistakes 'frozen in time' but, all in all, the S.M.R. is a good record of what I've found. It 'was' 58 sites in one parish - which is stupendous - but there's another six going on very soon that I discovered last year.

They only become real when an article in Antiquity appears, which describes them. In one way I am as peeved as hell - it's been six years since I reported the first stuff - on the other hand I'm happy that it remains a deserted landscape and that the possibility of stumbling onto something immense stays open. Maybe this has happened already and I've not recognised it ( http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/7531 ). At the beginning of posting to this site I looked up Julian's horoscope and reckoned that, as we were near complete opposites, if we got into the same room we'd start fighting after about fourteen minutes. But those strange-shaped cupmarks, that seem confined to Knarsdale, will be called teardrop shaped (they will, they will). I'm getting ready for my fieldwork.