What makes the spot quietly puzzling is that this enclosure does not appear on the Ordnance Survey six-inch map of 1837, nor on the revised twenty-five-inch edition of 1913, yet it sits at the highest point of a hill with extensive views in every direction, part of a cluster of three monuments whose relationships to one another have taken considerable effort to untangle.

When the site was described in 1980, the enclosing bank was already much worn, falling steeply on the southern side. A 2012 survey by David McGuinness added considerably more detail. The enclosure is closely associated with a ring barrow to the east, a ring barrow being a burial monument in which a central mound is surrounded by a ditch and an outer bank, and a mound barrow sits partially in the south-western corner of the enclosure. The ring barrow itself is well preserved, composed of very stony earth, with a flat-bottomed ditch between 2.7 and 3.2 metres wide and a central mound rising up to 1.5 metres above the base of the ditch on the eastern side. Running eastward from that mound, in a gently curving line, is a low scarp some twenty metres long, its southern side sitting about 0.3 metres lower than the ground to the north. This scarp does not physically connect to the ring barrow, yet together the two features define the flattish summit of the hill, creating the effect of a carefully bounded space linking the highest point of the ground to the barrow on the slope to the north-east. Whether this enclosure had a ritual function connected to the barrows on either side of it, or served some other purpose entirely, remains an open question.