"the conglomerate track" 177
development of wheeled traffic, when it would become a necessity. This
does not rule out the possibility that the stones on the bank may also have
marked out the position of the ford if the trail itself was obscure.
Particular importance is attached to the Grimes Graves stone—this was
first noticed at a shallow pit in company with a large Lincolnshire flint.
Both are normal erratics in the Chalky Boulder clay in which the pit was
dug, and when I examined the stone, I could see no reason for looking
further for an explanation. The deposit is really a marl, and such small
pits were formally dug to obtain material to marl the land. As there was
no immediate use for the big stones, these would naturally be discarded.
I should reject this stone even if aerial photographs proved a trackway.
I agree that true menhirs were used to indicate direction, but this cannot
apply to many of the occurrences, and in doubtful cases skilled excavation
would be needed to show that they are intentionally set in the ground—
or were so until fallen. There are other methods for indicating direction
over trackless country, such as blaze marks on trees, or poles thrust in the
ground. As a track became worn, it would become the best guide to itself.
Many of the stones claimed to form the course are too small, and would
be too difficult to find to serve as guides. Others would mislead into wrong
directions (as actually happened to Dr. Budge). This is evident in both
papers, where stones situated outside the line of the course are rejected.
But they are there, and would mislead a traveller.
Stones indicating wrong directions are further illustrated in the in-
dependent general list of Essex boulders by A. E. Salter. Dr. Rudge lists
29 stones along the Essex section of the course in a distance of about 44
miles, but one feels that this represents a localised intensity of search that
could not easily be extended over the surrounding country. One would
like to see a balanced distribution map representing equal endeavour to
equal areas. Salter's work covered a wide area from East Anglia to the
West. Country, and could only be a representative fraction of the total facts,
but it has some importance in being unbiased. In his list. I can only find
four stones that are included as belonging to the course, all his other records
being rejected. Of the latter, there seem to be six more situated not more
than about two miles on either side of the course, an additional 12 at two
to four miles; and five more at. four to 10 miles. Apart from a group of
local origin in the N.W. corner of the county (Arkesden), Salter records
no other boulders of puddingstone beyond 10 miles from the course.
Further records could now be added far beyond this limit, but in spite of
the inadequacy of Salter's list, I think it does suggest that the course passes
through the greatest occurrence of Puddingstones in Essex. As these are
not found only on the surface, but also buried in the glacial drifts, this
occurrence, on the whole, is natural, and not within the scope of
archaeology.
When considering closer detail, so many of the stones have been moved
in historical times, others destroyed, and some added from digging in the
drifts, that we need more permanent evidence, namely that from the track
itself, to be satisfying.
In conclusion, I can only say that I can see no reliable evidence either
of a trackway of any date, or of a flint trade way, along the course under
discussion. But. should aerial photographs confirm the opinions of Dr.
Rudge, I feel that the warmest congratulations would be due to him for
his insight.