"Archaeologists have uncovered ancient stones thought to be the remains of a prehistoric monument which is 1,000 years older than Stonehenge, it has emerged."
So runs the story in today's Western Morning News, picking up on similar pieces in the Daily Mail, The Guardian, and even The New Scientist. How had this important archaeological site lain undiscovered for so long?
The simple answer, as I suspected, is that it hadn't! When I first read the story, I searched for Cut Hill, the location of the stones, on the OS 1:25,000 map and eventually found it - in one of the most remote parts of the Moor.
Even one of the keenest walkers I know had never got that far - although his son had... as a part of his Duke of Edinburgh's Gold award. He described the location as "out beyond Hangingstone', and that covers a great deal of bleakness! This is a part of the Moor that only the fittest and most enthusiastic trekkers ever reach.
But the stones are very well documented, and appeared as subjects of scientific papers as long as thirty years ago. One T.A. Greaves, writing for The Prehistoric Society in 1981 said, "(This idea) would mean that the stone row was erected during the Early Neolithic period. Whilst nobody would dismiss the idea of a 'previously un-recorded' stone row the dating and context is very questionable."
You can read much more about the subject at a site called Legendary Dartmoor. Although most of the piece refers to Letterboxing, Cut Hill's other claim to fame, it gives details (plus photos) of the stones - to which walkers over the years have given individual names.
So who are these 'scientists' claiming 'a new discovery? Did they find them by ariel photography? Or did they read about them as I have? However they did, it appears that these high-flying academics are taking the credit for discovering something that local folk have known about for centuries.
Source: Okehampton People
