Hob wrote:
It does doesn't it? Which can often lead to excruciatingly unproveable speculation that it could be a re-used part of a bona fide prehistorically significant stone. I hate it when that happens, 'cos I can never make my mind up one way or the other.
Frustrating! That's why I wanted to be up front and say I wasn't sure, I'm not experienced enough to tell genuine antiquary fromplain 'old'. Thanks for the input, much appreciated - I'll wait to hear from you. Cheers
