Neolithic Trackway Mats Theory: A Novel Addition to Megalith Transport Proposals

AI was challenged to propose a novel addition to the debate on how Neolithic megaliths were moved. The result is the Neolithic Trackway Mats Theory, a practical and original idea drawing from modern engineering and known Neolithic technology. (If this has been proposed before apologies for failing to identify a source.)

Theory Overview

The core idea involves using Neolithic ground mats—constructed from bundled or woven branches, reeds, or similar biodegradable materials—to create temporary trackways across difficult or soft terrain. These mats would be laid ahead of the megalith to provide a firm base, reducing resistance when moving massive stones. They could be moved and reused, similar to modern site trackways used for heavy vehicles on soft ground. This method would be particularly effective for crossing bogs, marshes, or waterlogged soils, common in many British Neolithic landscapes.

Modern Parallels

Portable ground protection mats are widely used today. Heavy machinery, cranes, and even tanks move across soft or fragile ground by placing mats under their tracks or wheels. These mats distribute weight, prevent sinking, and can be repositioned as needed. The concept translates easily to Neolithic conditions, given the resources and technology available at the time. For example, see modern archaeology compounds.

Neolithic Implementation

Neolithic communities had the skills to construct trackway mats from reeds, branches, bracken, hides or woven timber. Unlike the permanent brushwood foundations of the Sweet Track near Glastonbury, this theory proposes temporary, moveable mats. Preconstructed mats could be placed to form a temporary trackway, lifted, and moved forward as stone transport progressed. These mats would prevent rollers or sledges from sinking into the soil, reduce friction, and support immense weights on weak surfaces, particularly in soft valley floors, ancient bogs, or glacial till.

Trackway mats would make it easier for people—and possibly draught animals—to move heavy stones across rough or soft terrain. By spreading the load over a wider surface area, mats prevent sinking into mud or ruts, which would otherwise cause delays. The textured surfaces of the mats also improve traction, reducing slipping risks while pulling or pushing. Mats effectively transform uneven or boggy terrain into a temporary roadway, enabling more efficient transport with less effort.

Integration with Timber Rail Systems

The trackway mats theory complements existing timber rail systems proposed for Neolithic stone transport. Mats could be placed beneath and around timber rails to stabilise them and ensure they remain level on uneven or soft ground. This creates a consistent surface, reducing the likelihood of rails shifting or sinking. Mats also simplify the process of laying rails, preventing them from sinking during placement, and facilitate sledge movement by minimising friction. Workers could alternate between extending mats and rails, enabling rapid progress across varied terrain.

Potential Advantages

• Reduces friction and prevents sinking of sledges or rollers
• Makes previously impassable terrain navigable
• Requires only modest additional labour and materials
• Leaves few archaeologically visible traces, explaining the lack of direct evidence
• Provides continuity with later timber trackways

Conclusion

The Neolithic trackway mats theory offers a practical, resource-conscious solution to the challenge of moving megaliths across Britain's varied landscapes. Drawing on modern engineering and archaeological precedent, the simplicity and adaptability of mats could have made them indispensable in Neolithic construction.

Appendix: Timber Rails or Slipways

Several studies have explored timber slipways (or rails) for megalith transport. Below is a summary of key findings:

Key Research Findings

• Experimental archaeology: Full-scale experiments showed a 40-ton block could be moved on an oak sledge over a greased timber-rail slipway, requiring around 130 people on a 1:20 slope.
• Contrasted with roller theories: Slipways are argued to be more efficient and better supported by ethnographic parallels than free-rolling logs.
• Lubrication: Pig fat, tallow, and other greases were likely used to reduce friction on wooden rails.
• Ethnographic reinterpretations: Images from Nias and Sumba, once thought to show rollers, are now interpreted by some as evidence for static timber slipways.

References

• Richards, J and Whitby, M, ‘The engineering of Stonehenge’, in Science and Stonehenge, ed B Cunliffe and C Renfrew, Proceedings of the British Academy 92 (Oxford, 1997), 231–56. Demonstrates the use of an oak sledge on a greased timber-rail slipway. Link
• R. H. G. Parry (2000); Megalith mechanics. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Civil Engineering, 138(4): 183–192. Discusses sleds on lubricated timber rails. Link
• Harris, Barney. (2018a). Roll Me a Great Stone: A Brief Historiography of Megalithic Construction and the Genesis of the Roller Hypothesis. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 37: 267–281. Link
• Harris, Barney. (2018b) Moving megaliths: time to park the rollers. British Archaeology, Dec 1, 2018. Reinterprets ethnographic photos as evidence of slipways. Link
• Shillito, L.-M. (2019) ‘Building Stonehenge? An alternative interpretation of lipid residues in Neolithic Grooved Ware from Durrington Walls’, Antiquity, 93(370): 1052–1060. Suggests pig fat was used to grease sledges and rails. Link