close

Having surveyed some 300 stone circles in Britain and Ireland over the past 50 years, and after careful study of the placing of orthostats on the perimeters, it would seem that the stones of virtually all stone circles appear to be rationally distributed.

That is to say, although the stones might appear to be unsystematically positioned, when the angles formed by the gaps are measured from the centre of the circle they all appear to be multiples of a common number of degrees suggesting that the gaps were, in fact, measured using a common unit.

The curious thing is that the likely length of such a common unit can be logically deduced, and it happens to be related to the Megalithic Yard by a factor of pi (that is, MY x pi = 2.6m = 8 circumferential units). Thus, it is possible that a circumferential unit has caused the Megalithic Yard to be introduced into stone circle diameters.

I’ve uploaded a summary of the thesis to academia.edu (extracted from a book on the subject), but also to a series of web pages at:

http://www.gjbath.com/SCDM2/MY00.htm

I’d be interested to know if anyone has surveyed a stone circle and is thus able to check this out independently.

Thanks for this.

I admit when I first read Thom I thought 'yeah, right?'... however, the more I see - in my opinion there really is no credible alternative to fieldwork on location - the more I notice 'coincidences' becoming too frequent to ignore strong suggestions of 'base templates' of some nature having been employed at prehistoric sites.

I'm certainly no surveyor... however you might be interested in the work TMA member Cerrig has undertaken mapping alignments in South Wales?