Rhiannon wrote:
yep reckon you're right. The photo's missing the gate I got through, curiously, that must be newer than I thought. But it does seem like it's on the boundary line.
Despite the visual impression on GE of the continuation of the boundary from the north , the 6 inch OS map of 1889 has similar boundaries to what is seen today and no mention of the stone . Noteworthy that the farmer has a left a bit of rough pasture around it and hasn't ploughed/seeded right around it .