A brief examination of our old system of linear measures shows exactly where the Sumerian foot was used in the calculation of furlongs:
600 Sumerian feet = 1 furlong
5280 ft (1 mile) Â¸ 1.1 ft (13.2 inches) = 4800 Sumerian ft.
4800Â¸ 60 (Sumerian feet) = 80
4800Â¸ 600 (Sumerian feet) = 8 ‘furlongs’
A Sumerian ‘cubit’ also harmonises with Professor Thom’s megalithic yard thus:
1· 1 Â´ 1· 5 (ratio of foot to cubit) = 1· 65 ft(Sumerian ‘cubit’)
1· 65 Â´ 1· 65 = 2· 7225 sq. ft
Megalithic yard = 2· 721 ft (Â± 0.001 ft)
Perhaps Prof. Thom discovered a measurement of area? Using Sumerian square measures look at an acre for example:
4840 sq. yds = 1 acre
4840 Â´ 9 sq. ft = 43,560 sq. ft
43,560 Â¸ 2· 7225 sq. ft = 16,000 sq. Sm. cubits
43,560 Â¸ 1· 21 sq. ft (1· 1Â²) = 36,000 sq. Sm. ft
Whole numbers appear to be the key, by using the Sumerian system of measuring; an acre is much easier to calculate, for it is revealed as being a strip of land 60 Sumerian feet wideÂ´600 Sumerian feet long. As the Sumerians counted in sixties this does appear to make sense. Furthermore there is archaeological evidence of strip farming in Britain. Consequently, we now have to ask several searching questions: Why were these ancient sites so sacred? Why were they used for such a long period of time? Why were the measurements associated with them so important? What was significant about the measures that they had to be kept so secret? Why did ancient kings, as a result, have to ‘measure up’ in order to fulfil their role? Paul Broadhurst provided a possible answer in his thought-provoking book Tintagel and the Arthurian Mythos – Pendragon 1992:
“Standing on the highest point of the Island[Tintagel]… the seeker may marvel at the vista that includes nigh on thirty miles of rugged Cornish coastline. As if to bring himself down to earth, his gaze may naturally fall to the rocks beneath his feet. A curious depression in the slate bedrock invites closer examination. It is in the shape of a footprint. This is…none other than King Arthur’s Footprint… Weathered and worn as it is, there is no doubt that the shape of a left footprint was…carved into the rocky summit of the island… Charles Thomas agrees that it is typical of early royal inauguration marks, where an incoming ruler confirmed, by placing his foot in the symbolic shape, his dominion over the land…” [My emphasis]
In his book Paul Broadhurst included a remarkable photograph (which I append below), showing the actual ‘footprint’ cut into the Tintagel rock itself. What on earth was it cut for? How could a king confirm his ‘dominion over the land’ by placing his foot in a hole? I think I might be able to hazard an answer but let us take a look at the picture first:
King Arthur’s Footprint at Tintagel
[Reproduced by kind permission of Paul Broadhurst]
Paul Broadhurst confirmed over the telephone during the late nineteen-nineties, that the size of ‘King Arthur’s footprint’ at Tintagel could be about 13.2 imperial inches (1.1 Imp.ft.), the actual size of an Anglo-Saxon/Northern/Sumerian foot. 
This suggested to me the King had to prove his right to rule by showing that his extremities fitted classical sizes once established by larger ancestors. I suspect that such specific criteria became so shrouded in secrecy over the intervening years; knowledge of their original purpose has completely disappeared, together with the information concerning the taller race. I contend that this lost race might well have created the system in the first place. Do the measures represent the ‘giant’ beings I saw in my vision, who appeared to have ‘angelic’ qualities? Is this one reason for their sacred usage? Could they have been Atlanteans? The late Anthony Roberts suggested such an idea in his book Atlantean Traditions in Great Britain – Rider (1975).
Whatever the answer, if we accept that Merlin had anything to do with the construction of Stonehenge, we have to embrace some startling criteria: we have to reconsider all our ideas about the classical Arthurian period. Today, nobody believes that Stonehenge was built in 500 AD. The dates are being pushed further and further back into preâ€‘history, which is what we had intuited on our first visit. Some dates now make the beginnings of the henge contemporaneous with the building of the pyramids in Egypt, perhaps 4000â€‘5000 BC, or even earlier?
[Reprinted from Earth Mysteries – a Study in Patterns – R.I.L.K.O. – 1978]
More recently, the researcher and scholar, John Anthony West, and his colleague, geologist Dr Robert Schoch, have revealed astounding new evidence concerning the Sphinx, by using geological dating that places construction between 7,000-10,000 BC. Apparently, the base of the Great Pyramid may also date from that time. What an exciting prospect!
Could it be that twelve thousand years ago our ancestors were building sophisticated structures in stone? Is it possible that Stonehenge falls into this area of speculation too? The writer, Graham Hancock, suggests that an ‘Atlantean’ high culture and civilisation might well be the answer:
“…the sudden end of the last Ice Age is one of the great enigmas of earth history. I do not believe that this mystery can be explained by recourse to relatively slow and gentle climatic changes. I do very strongly believe that some cataclysmic agency must have been at work and I continue to believe that the mechanism advocated by the Flem-Ath, and by their predecessor and mentor Dr Charles Hapgood, namely a massive one-piece displacement of the earth’s crust, is a very plausible explanation of the worldwide cataclysm that did indeed occur…”
[Extract from Graham Hancock’s official website]
Using the pioneering work of both Dr Charles Hapgood and Rand and Rose Flem-Ath, Hancock places the lost continent of Atlantis in Antarctica! If this is the case then other speculations about prehistory may be correct too. Certainly, authors like Nigel Pennick and John Michell have shown that Ireland was once the repository of an ancient wisdom that touched upon Earth energy, and both solar and lunar alignments of ancient sites. Perhaps there is a grain of truth in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s book: The History of the Kings of Britain, in which he suggested that Merlin had brought the Giants’ Dance over from Ireland, the ‘Emerald Isle’, and erected it on Salisbury Plain?
Undeniably, the ‘blue’ stones at the henge have come from a great distance, the nearest possible site being the Prescelly Mountains in South Wales. Although, there is even some doubt cast on this location. The author, dowser and archaeologist, T.C. Lethbridge, believed that the blue stones might have come from Tipperary, in Ireland, and he made out a good case for their transportation by sea, via Land’s End, Christchurch and up the other Avon, to West Amesbury. 
There are still a great many puzzles and unanswered questions hanging over Stonehenge. I realise how fanciful some of these ideas might sound, and how far-fetched the racial images must seem to those engaged in an academic study of stone circles. Nevertheless, if I am to be truthful as a sensitive, I can only report what I experience in these remarkable locations.
As I have mentioned, progressive dating events in Egypt, at Giza by John Anthony West, reminded me of what we had sensed on our first trip to Stonehenge, giving my visions at least some validity. It is far easier to handle the concepts now, in the early part of the twenty-first century, than it was back in nineteen seventyâ€‘five at the beginning of our search for the Round Table, when we felt that we were flying in the face of everyone and everything. At that time we felt we needed additional evidence, from other sacred sites, to prove we were not embarked upon a fool’s errand. Consequently, we planned the next stage of our pilgrimage in our search for the Round Table. We sensed we had to visit King Arthur’s ‘Avalon’, bearing in mind that we now considered the legends to be much older than previously imagined. So we turned our attention to John Michell’s View over Atlantis for further inspiration on our quest, asking the vital question – were Merlin and Arthur Atlanteans?
Curiously, as I mentioned briefly before, in January 2001 the news broke that Stonehenge had been continually refurbished throughout the twentieth century; to such an extent that no one could really be sure if the actual layout of the monument was now in its original form or not! Establishment archaeologists had been caught with egg on their faces by not reporting this important fact in the official Stonehenge guidebook. Personally, I do not think it matters much. How can the repairs have affected the actual stonework itself? Surely, the restorers were only attempting to return Stonehenge to its former glory and grandeur. Judging by the drawings undertaken by all the variety of artists in the nineteenth century and even earlier the restorers have done a pretty good job. I suspect this is just another attempt by the powers-that-be to undermine all the recent exciting research in this area. In spite of such machinations the monument will continue to be an inspiration to all who choose to visit it.
 A measure once in common use for laying out sacred enclosures – see Book three.
 See the Legend of the Sons of God by T.C. Lethbridge RKP (1972).
To contact or find out further information on Peter Quiller and his work with Merlin, please visit firstname.lastname@example.org