Posted by Michael Glickman on June 20, 2015

This site has been silent for too long and I must start here with an explanation and, perhaps, an apology. The 2014 crop circle season was my twenty-fifth and was, for me, the darkest and most depressing I have ever experienced. Not, of course, for the crop circles themselves which were as enigmatic, inventive and compelling as ever, but for the behaviour and activities of what used to be called the “crop circle community” – a phrase to be used now only ironically and with a raised eyebrow.

It has often been suggested that the crop circle phenomenon acts as an amplifier. That is, whatever we bring to it as individuals – whether fear or paranoia or a desperate need for status, fame or wealth – will be unpleasantly exaggerated or enlarged. The last season confirmed this. We all, whether researchers, farmers or visitors, played our parts. It pains me that, when we are offered the chance to share the beautiful and the numinous, so many respond with bitterness and abuse.

Over the years my experience of the crop circle season has been open, convivial and, above all, fun. Lasting friendships were formed and it was always assumed that everyone would, at least, tell the truth. The shock of the rivalries and falsehoods of 2014 affected me so profoundly that (emotional and soppy old fool that I am) I had to take a break. I have not been able to write (and I apologise for that) but, during my absence, I have given a little attention to a few formations and now I am back on line.

The Longbarrow formation of 22nd June 2014 [Fig 1] was immediately intriguing. It was one of those rare formations which, though apparently very simple and conventional, present themselves with absolute grace and poise. It seemed to vibrate with confidence in its own beauty.

Fig 1 West Kennett Longbarrow, 22nd June 2014

It resonated powerfully for me and I needed to discover what lay behind this elegant order. I have workedfor some time with sevenfold geometry and automatically applied this first. It was surprising how easily the mechanism revealed itself and [Fig 2] demonstrates it.

Fig 2 Diagram showing sevenfold “necklace”

This is an unusual geometric protocol. Seven circles are centred on the edge of the laid area of crop. They are sized precisely to touch each other and to form a perfect necklace or bracelet around the central laid circle. I was delighted to find that the edges of these seven circles exactly located the fine outer ring of the formation while the inner edges kissed the central laid disc with equal accuracy. Look carefully at this diagram. The inherent beauty of the design results from these hidden geometric constraints. Could this be “an accident” or “a coincidence” or (even more preposterous) the work of self-styled “hoaxers”?

There are two standing and two laid rings [Fig 3] and these are of subtly different widths. I was unable to discover the method underlying the delicacy of their sizing but I am sure that there is a system.

Fig 3 Detail of rings

This is the first time I have seen this bracelet-type geometry used in a crop circle. Though small and unpretentious, I believe this graceful and immaculately proportioned formation to be of major significance. It has become too easy for us to overlook or dismiss the less assertive designs.

AN UGLY CRIME

Figure [Fig 4] shows the malicious trashing of the Longbarrow formation. This was done by the thug-wing of the Crop Circle Denier Crew and is a telling illustration of the quality of their work.

Fig 4 Formation after trashing by thugs

It is regrettable when farmers destroy formations but their frustration is, at least, understandable and, I suppose, forgivable. This destruction of a crop circle by the hoax claimant mob is disgusting. I believe that this is the first time this has happened and it displays, inarguably, the contempt these people have for the law, for the farmers, for the circles and, above all, for common consideration and civility. This action establishes a historic low, even for them.

Commenting on this historic act of vandalism the unrelentingly mouthy Matthew Williams posted: “I honestly dont know why people are so cut up about a basic circle being screwed over – nothing flash – no measurements required – 2 people could make it… and someone has trashed it. I would say the people who made it were also trashing it by making it so boring and child like…”

“Boring and child like…” One can only feel pity for such a dunce. He clearly would not recognize style if it bit his nose off. I leave it for you to judge. We are offered gifts of rare beauty; we respond with breathtaking ugliness. Simply compare [1] with [4].

TRIPLICATE

Some time after the arrival of this lovely crop circle it was drawn to my attention that it was in fact a twin or a clone of a formation that appeared in July 2011 in exactly the same position. The precise date in July is contentious; various authorities place it anywhere between 22nd and 25th. And curiously, this crop circle was itself a result of an amendment, the initial incomplete formation having arrived in mid-May. I confess, with some embarrassment, that I noticed neither of these incarnations at the time. It was only after the arrival and defacement of the 22nd June 2014 formation and its replacement on July 13th that I looked at the formations as a group event.

Duplication is quite rare and generally occurs shortly, within a day or two, after a formation has been destroyed by the farmer. This kind of speedy and precise replication seems to imply that it embodied significant information which was not to be missed.

Here, at Longbarrow, we have been offered “triplication”. Three identical copies of a design were reiterated; Number Two because we ignored Number One and Number Three because Number Two was desecrated.

A Swiss family, the Leuthards, had come to see the circles and were staying in Avebury Trusloe. At dawn on 13th July 2014 Mr Leuthard awoke suddenly to the absolute certainty that there was a new crop circle at Silbury Hill. Leaving his wife and children asleep, hedrove quickly to the area where he found [Fig 5] the third iteration of the formation. Number Three was substantially identical, distinguished only by the presence [Fig 6] of two adjacent grapeshot circles.

Fig 5 Third iteration, 13th July 2014

Fig 6 Grapeshot adjacent to 13th July formation

The authors of this phenomenon have placed the same formation in the same field three times. This is without precedent. What are they so anxious for us to understand?

NO MORE WAR

The Chilcomb Down [Fig 7] spiral formation of 6th June 2014 carries an intriguing message.

Fig 7 Chilcomb Down, 6th June 2014

A tramline led, not to the very centre but through the ring which surrounded the central circle and hit that ring precisely – to an inch – where the spiral path took off on its circuitous journey. As always, we, the visitors, are offered these small courtesies and considerations. The 10” wide pathway, which was roughly 3,040 feet long, went through four and a half turns and its length was marked by a series of dots and round-ended dashes. The spiral [Fig 8] is shown here with the dots and dashes removed. The dots were simple swirled circles of about 31 feet in diameter and the dashes were pairs of dots linked by rather roughly laid areas connecting the two. In its pure form, this geometric shape is known as a “stadium”.

Fig 8 Chilcomb Down, spiral tracer path

Somebody called “Kaneda Ccdb” very quickly and correctly identified the dots and dashes as Morse code and translated the message as “No more war.” I tried hard to contact the elusive Mr Ccdb but had no luck. Perhaps, over there, Kaneda is a girl’s name. Perhaps I needed to look for Ms Ccdb.

THE TRACER PATH: A SHORT DIGRESSION

The 1996 Stonehenge formation (7th July) [Fig 10] established this method of construction of a line or chain of circles. First, a tracer path [Fig 11], the metaphorical spine of the design, is laid down. At Stonehenge it was 8” wide and was swept outwards from the large initiating circle. Second, when the path was in place the circles were positioned and swirled over it. Thus the path was largely obscured. It could be seen in the short link between circles but, within the circles, the wheat had to be carefully separated to expose the path running continuously below the surface.

Fig 10 Stonehenge, 7th July 1996

Fig 11 Stonehenge, tracer path

The tracer path also serves to establish small openings or hospitality portals in the thin standing walls of crop between adjacent circles. In providing these small gateways the circle designers have removed visitors’ temptation to damage standing crop by crashing directly circle to circle. This system of tracer path covered over by circles is widespread. In the magnificent 2001 Milk Hill formation (12th August) [Fig 12] there were six tracer paths, one for each of the enormous arms [Fig 13]. They were also 8” wide and they started at the edge of the central circle curving outwards to the last small circle of each arm.

Fig 12 Milk Hill, 12th August 2001

Fig 13 Milk Hill, tracer path

WHY THESE SIBLINGS?

I cannot recall why I decided to include these two formations in particular. I had drawn both of them but I saw, initially, no link, no connecting thread between them.

As I worked I noticed how clearly they represent two extreme (and very different) modes of crop circle communication. Longbarrow, on the one hand, is an exemplary jewel embodying evidence of great skill in design and a prodigious knowledge of geometry. Its multiple reiteration suggests it was of real significance. Yet no matter how hard we try, the “meaning” is inaccessible.

On the other hand, Chilcomb Down uses our earthly Morse code to deliver a clear and undeniable injunction: No More War! (Capitals and exclamation mark added for effect.) We are strongly enjoined or instructed here.

In a future post I will be exploring the importance of these two types of formation.

Acknowledgements and thanks

Photography: Steve Alexander, Leuthard family.

Diagrams and graphics: Michael Glickman, Ofmil Haynes Jr.