RoystonCave had a knight and he was the most holy Knight of all. In addition, according to the cave carvings, he had been given helpers to guard this gate. The Guardian of the Gates of Ulster is one, Sheila Na Gig another. These are guardians to the underworld.

But what about the Knight of Christ? In full armour and carrying a sword, he is something new; and as the Knights Templar legend states, the treasures were being looked after in the most sacred place of all, by the Fischer King.

I believe that the cave holds the clue as to its location.

As we look at RoystonCave, we can see many carvings around the walls, depicting certain characters. You may simply judge them on face value. Or you may link them to the ancient saints; you could even go further and say that they are depicting ancient gods.

As I looked at them, I realised that they are all jumbled up, more like a jigsaw puzzle that's been put together in the wrong order. For instance, why draw a crucifixion and then put a panel over that crucifixion. Why can they be so easily referenced to so many people? Many people have looked at the cave and come up with different conclusions.

If you take all the crosses and X's that are marked on the characters in the cave, you would expect them to make some sort of statement. But all the crosses and X’s are placed in random parts of the body. It is my belief, that these are reference points, deliberately placed.

In Denny Abbey, we noticed on one of the carved arches, cross marks carved into the stonework. The Mason's that created this particular arch inside the building, have left their points of reference, which enabled them in their construction of the stonework. These reference points are small crosses, which I believe are the Masons’ measurement points.

These same small crosses can be seen in the carvings at RoystonCave. This leads me to believe that these markings are also reference points to measurements. If my theory is correct, then these become measurements, which become lines, but not just lines, because if you take one drawing of the carvings, and overlay it on another, using the crosses to align them, it all becomes much more interesting.

I believe that by including the panel on the floor in his sketches, and this panel is nowhere to be seen on the actual carvings, William Stukeley was telling us something. The carvings were created in a specific manner, and more than likely, they were created by using a diagram as a reference, in order to document something important, something that could only be understood by those that had the knowledge.

In studying the carvings, I realised that they were drawn in an ancient language, which I refer to as ‘rabbit’ language. In applying this theory, it all started to make sense. I realised that one wall fits upon another, as if there is no Cave at all. I believe that William Stukeley also realised this and started to re-arrange the carvings in his initial sketches; once he had completed his studies, he produced a set of drawings from which he determined the true meaning of the cave. He left us clues in his working sketches. Does this prove he was moving objects around?

Click on the 'NEXT' arrow for page 3