I couldn't see the angles looking west, until I considered standing outside the horseshoe, looking between the two trilithons, scross the space where the fallen stones of 57 & 58 were! Take those out of the equation, and this puts the lost stone somewhere around the 36-40 bluestones. Check your mail ;)

This is driving me nuts, you must be mad by now!

I suppose some druidy groups will want to re erect the Berwick stones now :(

Well, I'm not a member of any 'druidy' group but yes, if the stones at Berwick St James are shown to have come from Stonehenge then why should they not be returned?

The question of repatriation/restoration of displaced artefacts and works of art is an old chestnut and has exercised more qualified minds than yours or mine. Personally I'm of the opinion that unless there's a danger that the main part of an artefact (in this case Stonehenge) will somehow be damaged by returning a displaced part of it then I think the displaced part should be returned; I'd qualify that with one thing though - if the aesthetic appearance of an object is likely to be detrimentally changed (by retuning a missing piece of it) then perhaps it shouldn't be done (that's a tricky one though - who decides what's aesthetically appealing?). Stonehenge, in the ruinous state that it now is, still has an aesthetic appeal that has inspired visitors throughout the ages (though I can't really see that the return of the Berwick St James stones to the site would seriously change the appearance of the monument as a whole).

One thing's for sure, if the Berwick St James stones do turn out to be the real McCoy they shouldn't be left where they are and where they may be vandalised or accidentally damaged.