(2) It will seek for a ford.
(3) Other things being equal, it would naturally cross a river as high up as possible, where the stream was likely to be less difficult to ford.
(4) It would cross in as immediate a neighbourhood as possible to that height upon which survey could be made of the opportunities for crossing.
(5) The nature of the bottom at the crossing would influence it greatly, whether that bottom were gravel and sand, or treacherous mud. Moreover, a primitive road would often leave evidence of its choice by the relics of good material thrown in to harden the ford.
(6) A point of so much importance would probably be connected with religion, and almost always with some relic of habitation or weapons.
(7) It would often preserve in its place-name some record of the crossing.
(8) It would (as we had found it at Dorking and at Otford) choose a place where a spur on either side led down to the river.
To these eight points may be added the further consideration, that whatever was the more usual crossing in early historic times affords something of a guide as to prehistoric habits, and, finally, that where a tidal river was concerned, the motives which were present on any river for seeking a passage as far up stream as possible would be greatly strengthened, for the tide drowns a ford.
Now, in the light of what the map tells us, and of these principles, let us see where the crossing is most likely to be found, and having determined that, discover how far the hypothesis is supported by other evidence.
To begin with Cuxton: