Mike D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry but I don't agree.
>
> First, in Clapham Junction (Malta) you can find
> both large and narrow tracks, according to slope
> and may be also considering varying local
> resistance of terrain limestone.
>
> Second, as I just answered to Jon, it was surely
> not a big deal to engrave on initial undisturbed,
> uneroded, terrain path direction lines to follow,
> according to quarry organization needs at a given
> moment, and even to start digging an initial
> shallow track to be followed. that is limestone,
> not granite.
>
> Third, concerning traces left by beasts of burden.
> There remain some places where you can clearly see
> regular traces in the middle.
>
> But in Clapham Junction slopes, most of terrain is
> so eroded and disturbed with holes, bumps and
> cracks in bed rock, that such an assumption, pro
> or con, is quite impossible to establish as true
> or false.
>
> Clapham Junction terrain looks very old and
> damaged.
>
> And in the case of this site, we don't know if
> stones were transported downhill or uphill. In the
> former case, maybe a brakes system was necessary,
> not a pair of oxen.

I, too, have seen a different pair of tracks that do show a bit of wear between them. But the vast majority of ruts do not show any such erosion between them. And that needs to be recociled.