DUKE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2018 with funding from Duke University Libraries https://archive.org/details/stonehengeitsear01barc STONEHENGE h AND ITS EARTH -WORKS. mit\) plans anti Illustrations. BY EDGAR BARCLAY, R.P.E., AUTHOR OF “MOUNTAIN LIFE IN ALGERIA". LONDON: D. NUTT, 270 and 271, STRAND. 1895- V> LONDON : PRINTED AT THE BEDFORD PRESS, 20 AND 21, BEDFORDBURY, VV.C. 913.42 <|&244S Contents. _ PAGE Preface . . . . . • ix Chapter I.—Description of Stonehenge . . . i Appearance of the Ruin . . . . .4 General Arrangement of Stonehenge . . . .4 The Chips . . . . . .16 Chapter II.—Description of the Earthworks . . 19 The Barrows, or Tumuli . . . . .19 The Avenue, or the Approach . . . .21 The Cursus Avenue . . . . .21 The Long Avenue. . . . . .22 The Parallel Banks . . . . .22 The Cursus . . . . . 23 The Lesser Cursus . . . -24 Solitary Stones . . . . . .24 Stone in Durrington Fields . . . . .25 Stone upon Bulford Down . . . .26 Stone in the River at Bulford . . . .26 Other Stones mentioned by Stukeley . . . .26 Durrington Walls and Dwarf-Stone . . . 27 Radfin Ford . . . . . .28 Chapter III.—An Inquiry into the Meaning of the Antiquity . 29 Sources of Information . . . . 30 Comparison of Stone Circle, Circular Tomb, and Primitive Round Hut 31 Stonehenge Analogues . . ■ . -35 Study of the comparative dimensions of the various parts . . 38 Unity of Design . . . . 41 IV Contents. Chapter III.— Continued. Symbolism. The Sarsens . . . . -45 The Blue-stones . . . .50 Particulars of the Stones . . . . -54 Restored Ground-plans . . . . .55 The Earthworks . . . . . .58 The Cursus is shown by its Plotting to be an adjunct of the Temple . 59 The Plotting of the Temple and its Earthworks . . .61 Worship at Stonehenge . . . . .70 Chapter IV.—Stonehenge Theories and the Amesbury Story . 74 Objections to the theory that the present condition of Stonehenge offers evidence of incompletion . . . .74 Story of the Amesbury Massacre . . . -77 How the confused stories relating to the Amesbury Massacre and erection of Stonehenge may be explained . . .82 Objections to the Sepulchral theory . . . -87 Objections to theories of Prehistoric Antiquity . . .88 Objections to a date later than that proposed . . .89 Objections to the Belgic theory . . . .90 On Prof. Petrie’s group of Centres . . . -93 Objections to Astronomical theories . . • . 95 Chapter V.—Worship at Stonehenge . . . -97 Celtic gods mentioned by Julius Caesar . . .98 The presumed god of the May Festival . . .99 The presumed god of the June Festival . . .102 The presumed god of the August Festival . . .103 The presumed god of the November Festival . . .104 The presumed god of the March Festival . . 105 Chapter VI. — On Ancient Customs observed at certain Seasons . in Mayfires and attendant customs . . . .112 Has the May-pole ever been raised at Stonehenge ? . .114 Midsummer fires . . . . .119 Harvest Homes . . . . . .120 November Fires and Customs . . . .121 Spring Fires and Customs . . . . .122 Conclusion . . . . . . .124 List of Authors on Stonehenge, in Chronological Order. . 131 Index . . . . . . .150 Contents. v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Harvesting at Stonehenge .... Frontispiece The Approach ...... page i Ground-plan of Stonehenge in present condition . | > between pages 4 and 5 Restored Ground-plan . . . .1 Present condition of the Stones, and Stonehenge Restored. Views I, II, III, IV, Y, V I . . . . between pages 6 and 7 Restoration showing Axis . . . . . .12 Showing how the Axis is given by the Sun-stone and central trilithon . 13 Copy of earliest existing Drawing of Stonehenge . . 14 Camden’s View of Stonehenge . . . . .14 Three Views of the Stones from Inigo Jones and one from Stukeley, between pages 16 and 17 Storm-clouds at Stonehenge . . . . .19 Commencement of Long Avenue, from Stukeley . . .21 Long Avenue, pointing to Radfin, from Stukeley . . .22 The western extremity of the Cursus, from Stukeley . . .23 Stone upon Bulford Down . . . . .24 Stone in Durrington Field . . . . .25 The Heel-stone or Sun-stone . . . . 29 Trilithons in Tripoli (from Dr. Barth’s Travels) . . -36 Diagram showing the relation of the radius of Lintel-circle to the radius of Earth-circle . . . . .43 Diagram showing placing of outlying stones and mounds . . 44 Cybele . . . •. . .46 Diana . . . . . . .47 Diagram showing a circle divided into sixteenths with five trilithons . 49 Diagram with planetary symbols . . . . • 5 1 Plan of Blue-stones, and Blue-stones restored . . between pages 52 and 53 Six restored Ground-plans . . . . -57 View from Tumulus 23, looking towards the north-western angle of the Cursus . . . . . . -59 View looking back from the ring of the Tumulus 35 . .60 The southern trilithon . . . . . .66 Showing direction of sun’s rays at noon at the vernal equinox . . 67 Lodge to Amesbury Park . . . . . -74 Vespasian’s Camp . . . . . .80 The Ramparts . . . . . .84 VI Qontents. Watering sheep at Stonehenge Amesbury Bridge ..... Amesbury Church .... The Menhir Autel ..... Stonehenge and Barrow and Parallel Banks The Durrington stone—Moonrise .... Cavity in a Sarsen Pier ..... Barrows on Beacon Hill ..... Plan of Stonehenge, with Earth-circle and outlying stones and mounds Plan of Stonehenge and Tumulus 23, from the Ordnance Survey . Plan of Stonehenge, Cursus and Avenues, from the Ordnance Survey 1 22 104 109 111 118 100 97 HEADINGS TO CHAPTERS AND TAIL-PIECES. HEAD-PIECES. 1. The Union of Divine Love and the Soul. From a Greek intaglio by Trython. See J. Bryant, Ancient Mythology, p. 393. 2. Jupiter and the Giants. The centre of the design from a cameo in the Naples Museum. 3. The Sun-god and Moon-goddess. The designs in the medallions are taken from silver clasps in the Naples Museum. 4. Janus and Juno. See J. Bryant, Ancient Mythology, vol. ii, p. 262. 5. Diana Victrix overtaking the Spotted Deer, which she strikes down with her quiver full of arrows; from a vase in the British Museum. The moon overtakes the stars, whose light she subdues with her beams. 6. The Medusa head and the Caduceus. TAIL-PIECES. The Britons do not regard it lawful to eat the “ Hare”, the “ Cock”, and the “Goose”; they, however, breed them for amusement and pleasure.—J. Caesar, Gallic War, v, 12. We have no further information on this subject, but as, elsewhere, Caesar men¬ tions that, respecting their chief deities, whom he equates with Latin gods, the Gauls Qontents . Vll or Celts for the most part had the same belief as other nations, we may infer that their ideas concerning these sacred animals were similar to those of peoples in the south of Europe. The hare was sacred to Venus. “ The Cupids wish to present the hare, the sweetest of all sacrifices, alive to Aphrodite.” See Venus worship, Crowe and Cavalcaselle, Life of Titian, vol. i, p. 191. In Welsh legend the hunted hare seeks refuge in the folds of the robe of the virgin princess St. Monacella, whilst she is engaged in deep devotion in a thicket; when the huntsman blew his horn it stuck to his lips. “The cock and the oviparous hen,” says Mr. A. de Gubernatis, “are as egg- yielding symbols of abundance, and personify the Sun.” Superstitions in regard to the cock, “ the trumpet of the morn,” are mentioned in a well-known passage in the opening scene of Hamlet; and the domestic egg, observes Mr. A. E. Waite ( Occult Sciences) “ is redeemed from irretrievable commonplace by its symbolic value, its suggestion of hidden possibilities, and of a world in miniature.” The goose, an emblem of plenty, and the peacock, were sacred to Juno, Queen of Heaven, “ who presided over marriage and childbirth, and particularly patronised the most faithful and virtuous of the sex, and severely punished incontinence and lewdness in matrons.” — Lernfriere. Preface. AVING been deterred from publishing material I have of late years collected for a work on Stonehenge, on account of the financial risk involved in bringing out a book on a techni¬ cal subject that must of necessity appeal to a comparatively limited audience, I am now encouraged, and at last am able, to carry out my project, through the favourable response which has been made to the prospectus I have issued appealing for subscribers. Whilst offering my sincere thanks to all who have given me material support, as some amongst them wrote down their names for this volume more than three years ago, I must express regret that circumstances have not enabled me to complete the undertaking earlier. In the spring of 1892, I exhibited, in the Gallery of the 19th Century Art Society, Conduit Street, a collection of cabinet pictures, the result of several visits to Amesbury, and the collotypes‘of the present volume are reproductions of photographs taken by my friend Mr. Burchett from a selection of those paintings ; at the same time I took advantage of the opportunity to exhibit most of the plans and drawings now published with them. A year later I made the acquaintance of Mr. Romilly Allen, then about b X to bring out the first number of the Illustrated Archceologist , and it is chiefly due to the stimulating effect of interest shown by him in my studies, and to his sound advice, that I have been able to utilize my material. Owing to his kindness, I obtained an invitation to read a paper on Stone¬ henge before the British Archaeological Association, June 1893, and in the September following he published an article by me on the same subject in the Illustrated Archceologist. I take this opportunity of thanking him for help thus kindly rendered. The book undertakes to give a sufficing account of Stonehenge, and to be, as well, a book of reference to the literature of the subject; which, excepting small handbooks, is inaccessible to the general public. The older works, such, for instance, as those of Inigo Jones, Sir R. Colt Hoare, and Stukeley, are out of print and expensive, whilst later contribu¬ tions to our knowledge are for the most part scattered in the published Proceedings of various learned Societies. A list of authors, arranged in chronological order, is appended, giving their recorded opinions in regard to the nature and approximate date of the antiquity; it will be noted that there is considerable divergence of opinion amongst our authorities. It is hoped that this volume is sufficiently illustrated with plans and drawings to enable the reader to judge for himself the merits of the various theories ; if, when upholding my own views, it shall be shown that I have, like others before me, inadvertently fallen into error, the critic is begged to indulgently bear in mind the difficulties contended with. Of digging, surveying, and writing, there has been plenty. How comes it then that the Stonehenge question still remains beset with contradictory theories, which are rendered untenable by the overlooking of facts, some more, some fewer ? This unfortunate result appears to be in some measure due to the circumstance that a paper, however concise in style, fit for a learned society, is unsuited for reviewing the whole subject matter. Such contributions, indeed, aim at, and achieve, thoroughness, but as a consequence of details XI Preface. being treated with minute care, they fail to take a general view ; indeed, as a rule, it may be said, the more valuable the paper the less the ground it covers. At the same time the risk of incurring pecuniary loss by bringing out a book, is best appreciated by those most accustomed to write on kindred topics. That the public take a lively interest in Stonehenge is well attested by the fact that in spite of its solitary situation it is so largely visited. Except during the inclement winter months, never a day passes without the arrival there of carriages, and often three or four different parties are present at the same time. The writer has witnessed over two hundred persons assembled to see the midsummer sunrise ; and 3 A.M. is not the most con¬ venient of hours for visiting a ruin so remote from the comforts of home. THE APPROACH. CHAPTER I. Description of Stonehenge. LTHOUGH the first impression produced by Stonehenge on the visitor is often one of disappointment, this is usually due to its being first seen at a distance, when it appears but an insignificant object in the midst of the wide-spreading chalk downs upon which it is placed, and which constitute what is known as Salisbury Plain ; nevertheless, upon close inspection, when the size of the rocks which compose it is apparent, this unique relic of antiquity, by the sense of a grim earnestness, of energy and grandeur, which it never fails to convey, redeems its world-wide reputation ; and it is safe to predict that, with the course of time, the interest felt in it by the public will continue to increase rather than slacken. At present it enjoys two distinct advantages, and long may it continue to retain them ; it remains undisturbed by the hand of “ the restorer” and unvulgarised by schemes of the would-be b 2 ‘Description of Stonehenge. “improver”; so that, although a ruin, having suffered of old from the unscrupulous depredations of “ the spoliator”, from the ill-judged diggings of the “curious", from the wanton drippings of visitors, and from the climatic vicissitudes of centuries, it yet remains bare and unenclosed amidst the wide-spread solitude, in a condition to enable us to judge of the effect it first produced. The nearest village to “the Stones", as the monument is familiarly named in the neighbourhood, is Amesbury, about two miles distant, lying in a sheltered and wooded vale amongst the downs. At the lower end of its high street is an ancient church, set in a background of trees, and a bridge spans the river Avon, which here issues from Amesbury Park, the seat of Sir Edmund Antrobus. Within the park is a wooded eminence, verdure descending its escarped banks to the stream which winds at its foot, and which continues its course below the bridge through water meadows, until a second wooded bank causes it to sharply turn and repass the hill in the park, flowing now to the south-west of it, having previously washed its eastern bank. The height thus protected on two of its flanks by the river, is further strengthened on its north-western side by an earthwork—a formidable rampart 600 yards in length. The land dips abruptly from this fortification, making a great sweep, like the hollow of a wave, before rising toward the downs ; to the north only is the land level, allowing of easy access to the enclosure, now a game preserve, which is named, without legitimate reason, Vespasian’s Camp. It is spoken of by Sir R. Colt Hoare in his account of Wiltshire in the following terms:—“This extensive work is generally supposed to be Roman, and has, as well as the neigh¬ bouring camp of Yarnbury, been attributed by Stukeley to the Emperor Vespasian. That this great general occupied one, or both, of them during his conflicts with the Belgte, is not unlikely ; but that he constructed either of them is very improbable, as they bear no resemblance whatever to camps formed by the Romans. This was originally the stronghold of those numerous Britons who inhabited the plain around Stonehenge, an asylum in times of 3 Uescriptioji of Stonehenge. danger for their wives, children, and cattle; such as our experience has taught us existed all over our downs, and especially near those districts selected by the Britons for their residence.” The road from Amesbury to “the Stones” passes through one end of the ancient stronghold between the preserve and a knoll named “ Gallows hill”, and gradually rises until it attains the level of the plateau of Salisbury plain. Here, hidden within a plantation, is a row of tumuli fancifully named “ the graves of the seven Kings’ Barrows”, and from this point we first catch sight of Stonehenge another half-mile in advance. Before reaching it, however, the road descends to a little valley in the downs, where the old Exeter coaching road branches with the Bath road, which proceeds straight on, passing close to Stonehenge. Constable and Turner have painted the prospect from the crest of this hill ; the features of the scene are ordinary enough ; both artists have made their work interesting by their manage¬ ment of light and shade. Constable’s picture has been mezzo-tinted by David Lucas ; the sun is represented setting behind a second and imaginary Heel-stone, and a coach or waggon struggles into light from the intense gloom of the little hollow. Turner’s Stonehenge is a plate in the Liber Studiorum , one of his marvellous storm effects; terrific lightnings stream from threatening clouds, as though heaven were moved to wrath at the persistence of this relic of paganism. Both artists have painted Stonehenge from a closer point of view. Constable’s picture, now at S. Kensington Museum, is a storm effect with rainbow ; Turner’s is, again, characterised by a prodigal display of lightning: in the fore¬ ground, a shepherd and a number of sheep lie dead, the stones, arranged as fancy dictated, are represented at three or four times their real size ; he also executed a mezzo-tint of the Bath coach disturbing sheep when passing Stonehenge. 4 description of Stonehenge. Appearance of the Ruin. When standing within the precincts of the hoary and shattered temple, the spectator is forced to acknowledge that its unknown designer has succeeded in conveying a remarkable impression of grandeur ; simplicity in the means employed is the cause of this success. The stones differ greatly in size, and this gradation aids the impressive effect of the larger masses ; bold and rugged, with no attempt at elegance or adornment, these huge rocks stir one with a sense of endless endurance and power ; whilst order and dignity assert themselves amidst the wreck and wild confusion caused by the destructive hand of outrageous fortune. The rocks are so slightly trimmed, that natural irregularities everywhere abound, and they are so closely disposed within a limited area that with every few paces the grouping of the masses varies ; picturesque effect is further added by the everchanging play of light and shade over the lichened and rugged surfaces. General Arrangement of Stonehenge. Stonehenge is enclosed by a low circular bank with outer ditch, named “ the Earth-circle”, now much mutilated by carriage tracks. To the north-east is the ancient “Avenue” or “Approach”, where are two outlying stones—the “ Heel-stone” or “ Sun-stone” bows towards the temple ; the other, placed between the Sun- stone and the temple, lies Hat with the ground, and is named “the Slaughter-stone”. Two other outlying stones lie close to the Earth-circle, opposed to two mounds, very faint and unobtrusive features ; these are the two Stones and two Mounds of the Earth-circle. Stonehenge in its present disordered condition is shown by :— Ground Plan /.—Many stones remain as originally placed, PLAN c A North C7A Sarsons in Situ. C3 recumbent CD Blue stones in Situ. CD „ recumbent Horn stones © SoFt schist stump Altar stone Scale, 200 or 6 inches= 100 feet i 0 00 PLAN n. Description of Stonehenge. 5 others are prostrate, others again are fragments of shattered rocks. Grozind Plan II shows Stonehenge restored. Without at this moment considering it critically and in detail, a description of the general arrangement there shown will enable the intricate present ground plan to be more readily followed. The design consisted of an outer circle of thirty uprights supporting twenty- eight traverse stones or lintels ; one of the piers, in situ, is shorter than the others, which occasioned a break in the lintel ring ; so many piers remain in sih that their spacing shows that when complete the circle consisted of this number. Within this circle was another, consisting of smaller uprights. These circles contained two horse-shoe figures, one within the other. The outer was composed of five groups of stones, each group consisting of three stones — two piers supporting a superimposed block ; these groups (the trilithons) still form the most imposing feature of the monument ; they were graduated in height, the central trilithon excelling those next it to the same degree that these were higher than the trilithons forming the extremities of the figure. The inner horse-shoe, like the inner circle, was composed of small uprights ; both horse-shoe figures had their openings turned towards the Sun-stone. The outer lintel circle and outer horse-shoe were composed of rocks named “ Sarsens”, brought from the neighbourhood of Avebury, about twenty miles north of Stonehenge, where they occur in large numbers as a singular natural phenomenon, boulders lying deeply embedded in the soil of the chalk downs. To the north-east of the village of Avebury the land is thickly strewn with these boulders, found on the summit and in the hollows of the down, their appearance suggesting flocks of grey sheep, has caused them to be named “Grey Wethers”; some valleys are so choked with them as to be of a general grey tint. Geologists name these masses “ Silicious Grit”, or “Tertiary Sand-stones”. They have commonly been named 6 'Description of Stonehenge. Druid-stones. The most satisfactory derivation of the name Sarsens or Sassens is from the Anglo-Saxon word for a rock or stone, ses, pi. sesen or sesans. “ The people where the stones are found,” says Professor T. R. Jones, “call them Sasens or Sassans, so that perhaps the word Sarsens is no other than the Anglo-Saxon word for rock properly pronounced.” Other derivations have been proposed, Saracen softened to Sarsen, and the Latin saxa, stone. 1 The inner circle and inner horse-shoe are composed of the foreign “ Blue-stones”, igneous rocks. The locality from which they were originally taken remains undetermined ; experts, after microscopic examination, have affirmed that in “ no part of Great Britain is there any stone to be found of the same description.” Of these some differ markedly in their nature from others. We now return to the ground plan of the stones in their present condition, Plate I. This is taken from Professor W. M. Flinders Petrie’s survey, published in his book Stonehenge, 1880. The points of view from which the illustrations, numbered I, II, III, IV, and V, have been taken are shown by similar numbers, just beyond the Earth-circle, on Plate IV. In the Proceedings of ihe Society of Antiquaries of London, vol. ii, 1881-1882, there is an account of a report laid before the Society by the Rev. W. C. Lukis on the prehistoric monuments of Stonehenge and Avebury, in which this survey is mentioned in the following terms:—“The plan under the direction of the 1 “ History of the Sarsens,” Professor T. Rupert Jones, Wilts Arch. Mag., December, 1886, vol. xxiii, p. 122. For an excellent account of the grey wethers see Rev A. C. Smith, British and Roman Antiquities of North Wiltshire Downs, p. 128. For general account of Stonehenge petrology see important article by Mr. Nevil Story Maskelyne, Wilts. Arch. Mag., vol. xviii, p. 147 ; and for later particulars an important paper by Mr. W. Cunnington, “ Stonehenge Notes,” Wilts. Arch. Mag., vol. xxi. p. 141. Specimens have been examined by Mr. Thomas Davies of the Government Mineralogical Department. TDescription of Stonehenge. 7 Ordnance Survey Department and one by Mr. Flinders Petrie, in 1880, deserve mention. His plan (Petrie’s) is, I confess preferable to that of the Ordnance Department, and notwith¬ standing one or two slight errors, may be considered very accurate. Why then should the Society of Antiquaries not have been content with it, and have desired me to draw a new plan ? The only reason, and a sufficient one in their estimation, was, not that I was capable of constructing a better, but because they wished to possess one drawn to the same scale as that of other monuments which I have made for them. I should state that my measurements were taken and the plan was drawn before I had seen Mr. Petrie’s, and as the method adopted by me on taking measures may have differed from his, it will be satisfactory to you to know that although mine is not equal to his in delicacy of execution, the two plans agree in almost every particular, mine being a slightly larger scale. I allude to his plan from which the published one has been reduced one-half.” The orientation agrees with the Ordnance Survey, also with Mr. Hawkshaw’s plan, given by Mr. Fergusson in Rtide Stone Monuments, p. 92. Also with a plan accompanying Mr. W. Cunnington’s paper on Stonehenge Chippings, Wilts Arch. Mag., December 1883, vol. xxi. The different qualities of rock employed are marked in Professor Petrie’s plan by different hatchings ; for increased clearness of effect they are here shown by different colours ; and his system of numbering, which is con¬ venient and clear, is adhered to. No. 1 is in the outer circle near the axis, and the numbers follow on, turning sunways from east to west; first the outer circle, 1 to 30 ; then the inner circle, 31 to 49 ; then the horse-shoe of trilithons, 51 to 60 ; finally, the inner horse-shoe, 61 to 72. The lintels (the traverses of the outer circle) are marked like the imposts (the traverses of the trilithons), 1 go higher than the number of their western support, thus piers 1 and 2 support the lintel 102 ; piers 51 and 52 support the impost 152. Fallowing the several parts in the order thus indicated, we 8 ‘Z description of Stonehenge. can appreciate the amount of damage the monument has suffered, no part more so than— The Outer or Sarsen Circle. — Lintels ioi, 102, 105, 107, 122 and 130 are in situ; 120 and 127 are portions of prostrate lintels ; 8 is a portion of a pier ; ga + gb are another pier ; i 2, 14, and 25 are complete piers, though prostrate ; 19 and 26 are portions ; 11 is the short stone, and is unique. The Inner or Blue-stone Circle. —Very conflicting opinions have been held in regard to this circle, which has been grievously mutilated. Stone 150 is a Blue-stone impost; it has two mortice holes worked on one of its faces ; it is unique. Of the row of stones facing the central trilithon, named the Choir-screen, the Horn-stone 48 is remarkable by being out of line with its neighbours, and nearer the centre ; 46 is also a Horn-stone. The group of three stones, 37, 38, and 39, is also noticeable ; 37 and 39, which flank 38, are Horn-stones ; both are placed a little nearer the centre than is 38, and that to an equal degree. This group is now much damaged by the fall of pier 14 of the outer circle. The Outer Horse-shoe , or the Sarsen Trilithons. —The first trilithon , 51, 52, with impost 152, is perfect ; the second trilithon , 53, 54, with impost 154, also perfect ; the third trilithon , 55, 56, with impost 156, is in a ruined condition, due to diggings conducted by the Duke of Buckingham in 1620. The pier 55, in falling, struck a Blue-stone beneath it, which heeled it backwards and broke it into two pieces; it is marked 55a and 55^. The impost 156 was rolled across the Altar-stone, where it remains unbroken by its fall. On its under surface are two deep mortice holes, into which the tenons of its supporters formerly fitted, an arrangement common to all the superimposed stones, by which they were securely fixed in their proper places. Its upper surface has a noticeable peculiarity, it has two “ incipient mortice holes” with the same spacing as those completed ; these are probably due to an error on the part of the workmen, who began to sink the holes on the wider face of the rock—a not unlikely error. 9 'Description of Stonehenge. especially if the central trilithon was the first to be raised, as is probable. 1 Stone 56 is the great leaning pier ; its tenon is in perfect condition, and should be compared with that of stone 55, which has been chipped off, and is almost indistinguishable. When falling forwards, stone 56 heeled over to one side, and its fall was arrested by the Blue-stone 68, against which it leans. The fourth trilithon, 57 and 58, with impost 158, lies prostrate— it has fallen outwards—all three stones remain unbroken ; they show clearly the manner in which the impost was secured by tenon and mortice. The trilithon fell January 3rd, 1797. W. G. Maton, M.B., F.S.A., in writing to Mr. Lambert, F.R.S., gave the following account:— 2 “ Some people employed at the plough, full half-a-mile distant from Stonehenge, suddenly felt a considerable concussion or jarring of the ground, occasioned, as they afterwards perceived, by the fall of two of the largest stones and their impost. The weight of the entire trilithon has been estimated at seventy tons; the immediate cause of the fall was a rapid thaw succeeding a very deep snow.” Dr. Maton gave also the following account of the fall of this trilithon to Mr. Browne, of Amesbury, who published it in a little book on Stonehenge and A bury, p. 18:— “It was the habit of persons, waiting the commencement of fairs in this part of Wiltshire, to take up their abode in this part of Stonehenge for some days, as a defence against the inclemency of the weather. In the autumn preceding the fall of this trilithon, amongst others who availed themselves of this protection were some gipsies, who, not content with a position behind this trilithon on the level ground, made an excavation in the chalk to obtain a lower position. On quitting Stonehenge, 1 Mr. Fergusson, in Rude Store Monuments, p. 94, suggests a more fanciful theory for the holes in question. The account above given, is the view taken by the Rev. W. C. Lukis, Proc. Society of Antiquaries, vol. ii, 1881-1882, p. 147, and it explains the peculiarity in a simple and satisfactory manner. 2 Arc/iceologia, vol. xiii, p. 103. C io Description of Stonehenge. the effect produced by this proceeding was that of causing an extraordinary accumulation of moisture behind the trilithon, in the rainy and snowy seasons of autumn and winter. . . . This naturally weakened the foundation of the trilithon on its outward side to the west, and at length, as already stated, it fell in that direction after being observed for two or three days to be out of its perpendicular position.” Fifth Trilithon , 59 and 60, with impost 160. Stone 60 is in situ; there is a large cavity in the back of it. Both pier 59 and impost 160 have, in falling, broken into three pieces, 59 a, 59 b, and 59^, and 160 a, 160 b y and i6or. When this occurred is unknown. We learn from a drawing of Stonehenge, in the Manuscript Department of the British Museum, a copy of which is given, that it was before 1574. The Inner Horse-shoe or Inner Blue-stones.- —The prostrate Blue-stone 67, near the Altar-stone, is noticeable for being somewhat larger than others, and 68, which supports the great leaning stone, for having an even groove running the length of its western side. The Altar-stone.— This stone lies nearly flush with the ground, and immediately in front of the central trilithon, with which, however, it is not placed parallel ; consequently, it is not at right angles to the axis of the building—that is to say, with a line passing through from the opening of the central trili¬ thon to the tip of the Sun-stone. According to Mr. Maskelyne, “it is a grey sandstone composed of quartz sand and silvery mica, and some dark grains (possibly hornblend); such a stone might be obtained from the Devonian or Grey Cambrian rock, and other situations. There is just such a rock at the top of the old red sandstone cropping up no further off than Frome.” Many small pieces of the Altar-stone have been found in and around the building, showing that it has been trimmed on the ground. The Slaughter-stone has the peculiarity of lying obliquely with the axis. The stone lies flat, and is irregular in shape ; on its western side there is a deep notch, and near this an irregular r Desc?~iption of Stonehenge. i i hollow or basin in the rock ; the sheep in the neighbourhood are well acquainted with this peculiarity, and when passing hasten to inspect it, for after rain it is sure to contain a pool of water. The rock somewhat raised at its centre suddenly shelves towards this basin. The end nearer the Sun-stone is shaped to a point by a row of holes sunk in the stone, see Plan IV. The Friars Heel ’ the Heel-stone , Sun-stone, or Index-stone.— By means of this huge unwrought rock the temple is set to the rising sun at the summer solstice. A foolish mediaeval legend is attached to it: the Devil, when engaged in setting up “the Stones’’ which he had carried away from Ireland, is said to have thrown it at a mocking Friar, hitting him on the heel. “ It may have been called the Heel-stone,” observes Professor Flinders Petrie, “ from Anglo-Saxon helan, to hide or conceal, just as a cromlech at Portisham, Dorset, is called the ‘ Hel-stone’.” He adds that the words refer to horizontal covering. The rock is 16 ft. in height, and there is no reason to believe it has shifted from its original position ; the manner in which it marks the midsummer sunrise contradicts such a supposition ; a further reason is that it appears to be purposely so inclined that its apex should be above the side of its base nearest the temple. The Axis. —Viewed from the centre of the Altar-stone, the Sun-stone appears occupying the centre of the opening formed by piers i and 30. The line from the Sun-stone to the spectator would, if continued, strike the great leaning stone 56, therefore the opening of the central trilithon was to the east of such line ; and, if as Professor Petrie remarks, this line marked the direction of the sun’s rays when first seen at the midsummer rising, then the trilithon opening could never have had anything to do with the rising sun, which is unlikely. Moreover, no point on this line from Sun-stone to centre of Altar-stone gives a centre for the enclosing Sarsen circle ; we conclude, therefore, that the rising sun was observed through this opening ; the line I 2 Description of Stonehenge. passing through it to the tip of the Index-rock is the Axis, and the centre of the temple is on it. From what has been said, it is obvious that it passes nearer to pier i than to pier 30, and nearer to pier 16 than formerly it did to pier 15 ; hitherto no one has attempted to account for this remarkable peculiarity in the design. The Stones and Mounds of the Earth-circle .—The stone to the Restoration, showing Axis. The Tip of the Sun-Stone appearing above the large Blue-stone, 67 ; Centre of Cleft coincides with West Side of Blue-stone 40. west is in situ; that to the east has fallen over in an easterly direction. Dr. J. Smith, writing of Stonehenge in 1771, mentions the latter as then standing. He adds : “ it leans very much towards the ditch.” 1 The two mounds are very slightly raised and spread into the Earth-circle ; at their centres are cup-like depressions in 1 Dr. J. Smith, Choir Gawr , p. 51. ‘Descriptiott of Stonehenge. i 3 the soil. They have both been excavated ; beneath the western mound Sir R. Colt Hoare discovered a simple interment of burnt ashes, the other yielded no results. The mound with the interment has the addition of a ring, so shallow, however, that few persons would notice it without their attention was specially called to the fact. It will' be noticed that stones and mounds alternate, stone faces mound, mound stone ; also that Showing how the Axis of the Temple is given by the Sun-stone and the central Trilithon. a line from the corner of the western stone, in situ , to the cup of the eastern mound opposed to it, just touches the outer circumference of the Sarsen circle. Such a line is lopsided with the Axis — that is to say, the measurement from the near corner of the stone to the Axis, when applied to the opposite side falls somewhat short of the cup ; the arrangement will be readily understood by reference to Plan IV. The corner of the stone makes an angle of 22| = , or 14 Description of Stonehenge . -j- 1 ^ of a circle, with a line from the centre at right angles to the Axis ; this was first pointed out by Professor Flinders Petrie. Such are the dispositions and characteristics of Stonehenge, and it is hoped that the description given, aided by the accompanying plans and illustrations, will render them clear to the reader. The question arises, Have stones been occasionally carried away for the requirements of the neighbourhood ? The above is a copy of the earliest existing drawing of Stonehenge, from a MS. in the British Museum, 28,330, in Dutch, entitled Corte beschryuinghe van d'enghelandsche ghcs- chiedenissen (tot. 1574 ) vergadert unt de beste chronyeschryuers, by L. D. H. Paper, late sixteenth century, folio. Drawing, p. 36. Outline drawn with a pen ; details lightly tinted in water-colours. In spite of some errors and omissions, this interesting illustration (now for the first time published) shows much recognizable character in the drawing of the stones. The p'toner, t z. Tsnn U-'et d,andj£ round ortettT' oJ'tTar y To ^Oenr bone-r are du VIEW OF STONEHENGE, FROM CAMDEN, Under Heading of “ Relgas.” 'Description of Stonehenge . 15 spectator is supposed to be looking towards Amesbury ; in the distance a building is seen on the summit of a hill. A knight on horseback advances towards the central trilithon, which is in a perfect condition, as also is the western trilithon. The stone against which a man leans is No. 60, the standing pier of the northern trilithon ; the cavity at the back of it is drawn, though not being darkly-tinted it has the appearance of being another stone or perforation. This bird's-eye view shows signs of having been executed from a sketch done on the spot; a mistake in perspective has caused the draughtsman to show stone No. 60 as belonging to the outer circle, the piers of which are properly drawn. The fallen pier of the same trilithon is also very incorrectly given. If this fallen pier had been drawn in correct perspective, it would have been difficult not to make it look like a short upright stone; the original sketch would show the end only, which would be unintelligible, without the sketcher changed his position and drew it sideways. Pier 16 is fairly well drawn, but here also the perspective is at fault ; its base should have been placed much higher. We learn from the well-executed engravings given in Inigo Jones’ work that, with the exception of the fall of the western trilithon, the changes that have since occurred to Stonehenge are very slight. It is interesting to observe the unique stone, No. 11, represented with its slight lean out to the south precisely as we see it to-day. The three stones, 37, 38, 39, of the Blue-stone circle are shown as a distinct group, the two Horn-stones being nearer to the centre than the stone they flank. This group has since suffered by the further fall of the pier 14 ; in a water-colour drawing by J. Britton, 1813, it is shown as in the days of Inigo Jones. The ground-plans given by Wood, architect, of Bath, by Hoare and Smith, also show us that stones have not in modern days been abstracted from the ruin. A model of Stonehenge in the Sir John Soane Museum may also be mentioned; although 16 Description of Stonehenge. the Museum does not contain a record of its date, it must have been executed some time in the last century, as the western trilithon is shown standing. Professor Flinders Petrie remarks : “ No stones are missing- since Wood’s plan in 1747.” The Chips. 1 Between four and five hundred chips of the stones used in the construction of Stonehenge have been found by searching beneath the surface of the soil within the area of Stonehenge or in adjacent cart-ruts, and a few have been discovered within the barrows; these have been carefully examined, and many have been cut for the microscope. The Blue-stones offer the more numerous specimens, showing that the larger Sarsens were trimmed previous to removal, being thus rendered easier to transport, the working of the tenons being probably reserved till after arrival at their destination. Barrow No. 16 (according to Sir R. Colt Hoare’s numbering, Ancient Wilts\ a little to the west of Stonehenge, was first opened by Stukeley, who discovered within it chippings of the Sarsens and Blue-stones. It was subsequently re-examined by Sir R. Colt Hoare, who says that “ it contained the bones of two skeletons which had been deposited on the floor, with animal bones and several pieces of stag horns, as well as some fragments of Sarsen stones, similar to those of the great trilithon of Stone¬ henge. This barrow contained also an interment of burnt bones deposited in a fine circular cist, and with it was found a spear¬ head of brass in good preservation, and a pin of the same metal. We found also the chippings of stones mentioned by Stukeley.” “ On removing the earth from the cist, we found a large piece 1 For full particulars respecting the chips, see article by AV. Cunnington, Wilts Arch. Mag., December 1883, vol. xxi, p. 141. from inigo JONES, compare with view from point II. Showing Western Trilithon, since fallen, in situ . FROM STUKELEY.—COMPARE WITH VIEW FROM POINT IV. Uescription of Stonehenge. i 7 of one of the Blue-stones of Stonehenge, which Sowerby, the naturalist, calls a Horn-stone.” 1 Blue-stone chippings have also been discovered in Barrow No. 23, to the east of Stonehenge, though in what part we are not informed. Chippings of two distinct varieties of rock foreign to the neighbourhood, but, at the time of discovery, unlike any known stones at Stonehenge, were discovered by Mr. H. Cunnington in Barrow No. 41, about a mile distant from Stonehenge, in the direction of the western end of the Cursus. Some were a soft rock, a soft, calcareous schist ; others of a very hard dark quartzite, with grains of feldspar ; and splinters of this hard rock have also been found within the temple. The stump of the soft stone from which the chippings have been struck off has been found beneath the turf; it belongs to the Blue-stone circle, and is marked on the Ground Plan I, S. The parent stone of the hard quartzite chips has not yet been discovered. A fragment of rock (its position is marked by a dotted line) is known, by probing the soil, to exist beneath the turf nearly opposite to the soft stone ; to this possibly they may belong. In Barrow No. 42 there has also been found an interment of burnt bones, with a brass pin and part of its handle, deposited in a neat and perfect urn. Amongst the numerous chips examined three or four specimens are said to belong to rocks foreign to the neighbour¬ hood, but not known at Stonehenge, from which we may infer that a few of the smaller stones have been removed, or that other fragments may yet remain covered by turf. A covered fragment of a Blue-stone lies beside pier No. 52 ; formerly it helped to form the inner Blue-stone ellipse. “Its base”, says Mr. W. Cunnington, “is embedded in a concrete-like substance, which has apparently been produced by ramming into 1 See Sir R. Colt Hoare, Ancient PVilts, p. 164, Plate XVI. D I 8 c Desc?'iption of Stojiehenge. the hollow round the stone, when it was erected, a quantity of soft chalk mixed very freely with small flints (chalk and flint constituting the natural subsoil of Stonehenge), and with numerous fragments of all the different kinds of stone of which the building is composed. By the subsequent infiltration of rain water, chemical compounds have been introduced which have filled up the interstices, solidifying the whole in the course of ages into the tough, concrete-like mass found round the foot of the obelisk." STORM-CLOUDS AT STONEHENGE CHAPTER II. Description of the Earthworks. The Barrows or Tumuli. RULY, it would be difficult to select a prospect more dismal and forlorn than that offered by a desolate down in stormy weather; nevertheless, under favourable Down is diversified by the flying shadows of spring clouds, or when traversed in summer time by majestic thunder clouds, or when its russets glow beneath the glory of an autumnal sunset, the scene is not only beautiful, but one of much solemnity, and the impression produced is not a little heightened by the numerous monuments of the dead which stud the land in every direction. Their Distribution .—In the immediate vicinity of Stonehenge several faintly-marked mounds are discernible, and a conspicuous barrow lies a few hundred feet distant to the east ; to the south atmospheric effects, when Stonehenge 20 ‘Description of the Earthworks . a row of tumuli crown a distant ridge ; another important group lies to the north-west. As many of these turf-covered mounds are but slightly raised, they are not easily recognizable at a distance ; it is only upon intimate acquaintance with the locality, or by studying the Ordnance Map, that the number of these monuments can be appreciated. There is no perceptible order in their distribution, nor are they specially congregated in immediate proximity to Stonehenge, although many are within sight of it; to the east of the River Avon, as well as to the west, barrows abound. They dot the slopes of Beacon Hill, and two miles distant from the village of Bulford, in a north-easterly direction, on a down named Silk Hill, they are as closely clustered as anywhere in the more immediate neighbourhood of Stonehenge ; thus the impression is produced that the whole of this district, so unusually rich in grave-mounds, must for some unknown cause have been specially selected as a place of burial, and was the necropolis of confederated tribes, or of some powerful kingdom. A large well-formed tumulus, encircled with its ditch, is a monument not devoid of grace or dignity, and is seen to best advantage when the sun nears the horizon. The barrows in the vicinity of Stonehenge have been excavated, and their contents minutely examined; and the articles thus discovered have, as is well known, been matter for careful study by experts. Though some barrows were opened and examined as early as the year 1722 by the Earl of Pembroke, aided by Dr. Stukeley, it was reserved for Sir R. Colt Hoare to undertake a thorough and scientific investigation, and the results of his labours are to be found in the sumptuous volumes published by him, entitled, Ancient Wiltshire. “ He has given a more or less precise record of the opening of 465 barrows in the neighbourhood of Stonehenge.” To the north of Stonehenge the down is traversed by various alignments or avenues of great extent. The first to be observed is :— 1 'Description of the Earthworks . 2 I The Avenue, or the “Approach.” It is orientated to the midsummer sunrise, and points 50° east of North point ; it leads uninterruptedly to the circular space formed by the Earth-circle in which Stonehenge stands, the enclosing bank being discontinued in this direction. It is noteworthy that the Sun-stone, as well as the Slaughter-stone, are not placed in the centre of the Avenue or Approach, but lie towards the eastern side ol it. The Avenue is made by two parallel confining ditches, the earth having been thrown inwards so as slightly to raise the roadway ; these ditches, though shallow, are distinct. The Avenue thus formed descends the gradual incline of the down, until at about 1,500 ft. from the Sun-stone the ditches become indistinguishable ; here the descent is more rapid, and leads to a gentle valley in the down where the Avenue divided into two branches. It is now impossible to trace this point of division with any certainty; in 1880 Prof. Petrie fixed it at 1,800 ft. from the Sun- stone. The fork or division of the two branches is marked on the Ordnance Map of 1817, but on that dated 1877 it is omitted as no longer recognizable. One branch turned off sharply to the right and ascended the opposite, slope of the down ; the other led to an enclosure which has been named the Cursus. Sir R. C. Hoare, Ancient Wilts , p. 158, says: “The length of the Avenue from the ditch round Stonehenge to the spot where it branches off is 594 yards, and from thence it is visible about 814 yards up the hill.” The Cursus Avenue. This is now completely obliterated ; the direction it formerly took is shown by the formation of the land, for it followed the 22 r Descriptio?2 of the Earthworks . little valley just mentioned, which curves round in the direction of the Cursus, which is at no great distance. Sir R. C. Hoare says: “ The northern branch appears undoubtedly to lead towards the Cursus, though its traces become very faint soon after it has quitted the eastern line up the hill ; it seems to have pursued a bending course towards the Cursus, but I could not perceive that it pointed to any decided opening in that work.” The Long Avenue. The branch which turned to the right, after ascending the hill forming the eastern slope of the valley, went over its crest, passing the long line of tumuli, named fancifully by Stukeley the Seven Old, the Seven New King Barrows, and continued in a straight line in the direction of some high land to the north of Vespasian’s Camp. The plough, year after year at work with its obliterating shear, has long since completely effaced all traces of this Avenue, and we have to rely on Dr. Stukeley’s account, written a hundred and fifty years ago ; he was at considerable pains to illustrate it, and fortunately described it carefully, and by giving the distance of its ditches from the tumuli between which it passed on the crest of the hill, has succeeded in recording its direction. The Parallel Banks. At 1,200 ft. from the Sun stone, “the Approach” is intersected at an angle approximating roughly to a right angle, by parallel banks about 2 ft. in height and 40 ft. apart. The roadway thus formed continues about 600 ft. to left and right ; to the east it is continued by a causeway across the little valley already spoken of, and it is used by carts passing this way, required in the cultivation of fields to the west of the Avenue. What is curious is ; that these banks reappear well-defined beyond the arable, and continue, FROM STUKELEY.—A. LONG AVENUE. B. AND C. OLD AND NEW KING BARROWS. D. DIRECTION OF STONEHENGE. ‘Description of the Earthworks. 23 following the same direction, for about 900 ft. Just in the centre of this distance the roadway runs against a tumulus, which is crossed by one of the banks, whilst its ring causes two trenches to cross the roadway. What the meaning of this may be I have failed to learn ; the parallel banks are not mentioned by Stukeley, nor are they marked on Sir R. Colt Hoare’s map ; and as these careful observers could not have failed to notice them had they existed in their day, we may conclude that they have been made since 1812. The Cursus. This great enclosure lies to the north of Stonehenge, and veers 6 from due east and west: like the Avenue, it is formed by banks thrown up from an outer ditch. It is 9,000 ft. in length, with a width ol 350 ft. at its centre, but towards its extremities it narrows; to the west the southern boundary is irregular ; the northern ditch, on the contrary, makes a fairly straight line. Its eastern end is headed by a long mound, now difficult to trace ; near its western extremity, and within the enclosure, are two small tumuli irregularly placed. The greater part of this earth¬ work, being on the uncultivated down, is fairly well defined, especially to the west ; to the east it has been obliterated by the plough. Sir R. C. Hoare, Ancient Wilts, p. 158, says: “At a short distance from the western extremity, a slight bank runs across the Cursus, and between it and the end, which is rounded off, there are two barrows irregularly placed within the area.' This bank (not marked on the Ordnance), which makes a separate compartment containing the two tumuli, was a stumbling-block for the theory held by Sir Richard that the Cursus was a course for chariot racing ; as he could not suppose the chariots passed over the bank, he presumed that they started from it, and he thought he perceived the termination of the course at the distance of 55 yards from the eastern end. 24 Description of the Earthworks . The Lesser Cursus. To the north-west of the great Cursus, and over 7,000 ft. distant from Stonehenge, is an earthwork, apparently the begin¬ ning of a second Cursus. It is exceedingly ill-defined, and at 1,200 ft. from its enclosed end the ditches cease, and there is no reason to believe that they were continued further ; it appears to be an abandoned scheme for an enclosure similar to the Cursus. Sir Richard detected a bank across this earthwork also. Stone upon Bulford Down. (See p. 26.) Solitary Stones. Dr. Stukeley mentions a large stone 3 miles (f ?) northward in Durrington fields ; another in the water at Milford, and another at Fighelden. “They seem”, he says, “to have been carried back to make bridges, mildams, or the like, in the river. There is another on the London road, east from Amesbury about a mile from the town ; another in the water at Bulford ; a stone stands leaning at Preshute Farm, near the church, as big as those at Stonehenge.” 1 1 Stukeley, Stonehenge , p. 37. TDescription of the Earthworks . 25 The opinion that the isolated stones may have been abandoned when on their way to Stonehenge is contradicted by the consider¬ ation that they do not lie en route from the district where the Sarsens are found. Considering the labour of dragging these immense rocks across country, it is evident they would follow a direct line ; even if originally they lay at considerable distances the one from the other, long before the close of their journey they would have converged to the easiest and most direct route ; yet we find them at the termination of their transit far apart. Stone in Durrington Fields. Stone in Durrington Fields. It lies on high open ground near some isolated farm buildings, half-a-mile north of Vespasian’s Camp, where the land begins to decline to the valley of the Avon ; the opposite rise is crowned by the range of downs of Beacon Hill, named by Stukeley Harradon Hill, a tract of country studded with barrows. The view is limited to the west by the crest of the down, upon which is the long line of barrows, “the Seven Old and Seven New King Barrows”. The stone is fully 6 ft. in length, and about 5 ft. in width, and has a cleavage or ridge running its length pointed in the direction of the Cursus, which is 3,120 ft. distant; it is placed in line with the northern boundary of the Cursus. E 26 TDesxriptio?i of the Earthworks. Stone upon Bulford Down. This is within sight of the last-mentioned stone, and lies on the opposite bank of the Avon, on the open down above the village of Bulford ; it evidently once stood erect, and has fallen southwards. (See p. 24.) Stone in the River at Bulford. In the bend of the river below the village, is a large submerged stone ; only during drought is any portion of it visible above water ; it can, however, in ordinary times, be dimly seen from the bank, which is of chalk, here very steep and overgrown. The country people assert that a metal ring, “ turning allways,” is let into its upper end. Legend relates that when the Devil brought the rocks of Stonehenge from Ireland, tied together with withes, this stone escaped from the bundle and fell into the river. Its position forbids the belief that it got fixed in the bed of the stream when its passage to Stonehenge was being attempted, for it lies immediately beneath the crest of a very steep bank, and at its most inaccessible point; as the stream sweeps against this, the water must always have been deep at this spot, the open valley would everywhere offer more favourable points for such an operation, especially would this be the case before the Avon was dyked. A boundary stone would have been placed on the brow r of the hill; if the stone be a grey-wether, as report says, and as is probable, it may originally have stood on the bank, and “ once upon a time”, a ring having been fixed in it, it may have been dragged into the stream to moor a ferry-boat. It lies closely midway between the stone on Bulford Down and that in Dur- rington fields. Other Stones Mentioned by Stukeley. A mile upstream from Bulford is the hamlet of Milford, and two miles further the village of Fighelden. At these places the r ldescription of the Earthworks. 27 submerged stones mentioned by Stukeley are unknown; in the absence of boats search is attended with difficulty. At half-a-mile from the old London road, and in the direction of the little village of Shipton Bellington, nestled amongst the downs, is a rock about five feet in length, lying on down land but close to enclosed fields. Can this be the stone alluded to by Stukeley as on the London road ? Durrington Walls and Dwarf-Stone. Sir R. Colt Hoare, Ancient Wilts , p. 169, derives the name of Durrington from the Celtic word dur, water ; and within the space enclosed by the bank marked Durrington Walls on the Ordnance, he discovered “ fragments of rude unbaked pottery, yet the well burned Roman earthenware preponderates”. This shows that the Durrington settlement belongs in all probability to times of Roman dominion. The village commanded that sweep of the Avon which is nearest to the Cursus, and which is here easily accessible and offers a convenient watering-place ; immediately below this turn of the stream the ground suddenly rises and the descent to the river is very steep and difficult. A few feet removed from the bank which encircled this settle¬ ment, in a north-westerly direction, is an insignificant stone about a foot high, which apparently marks the boundary of a field. It is shown on the Ordnance. Its position corresponds with the follow¬ ing interesting account given by Sir R. C. Hoare, Ancient Wilts, p. 172. He says: “An interment was lately discovered above Durrington Walls by a shepherd, who in pitching the fold found his iron bar impeded in the ground. Curiosity led him to explore the cause, which proved to be a large Sarsen stone, covering the interment of a skeleton, with whose remains these articles were deposited, viz., a spear head chipped from a Hint, a small hone or whetstone, a cone and ring of jet like a pulley, and two little buttons of marl or chalk.” He appends drawings of these articles. 28 ‘Description of the Earthworks . Radfin Ford. According to Stukeley the “ Long Avenue” pointed in the direction of an ancient ford named Radfin, which he presumes meant “ white road”, and had reference to the chalky road which went up from the ford. The tradition of a ford near Radfin Farm is still current, and a bank in the river is pointed to as offering passage “to a gentleman out hunting”. It is a well marked bank of chalk and small stones, and extends about two-thirds way across the stream, where it disappears in deep water. There may, as tradition asserts, have been a ford at this point ; the bank in question has, however, more probably been caused by a sluice¬ gate at no great distance from it. CHAPTER III. An Inquiry into the Meaning of the Antiquity. CCORDIXG to a tale derived from ancient chronicles, and which we meet with in Spencer’s poem of the Fairie Queen. Stonehenge is a monument erected to honour the memory of British princes massacred at Amesbury through treachery of Hengist the Saxon: a story accepted as history, up to the time when King James I commissioned Inigo Jones to draw up an account of Stonehenge. That eminent architect was unable to accept for truth the mixture of ancient tradition and legend which till then had done service as historv; and being;, moreover, incredulous that the ancient Britons were ever masters of sufficient skill to enable them to erect such a structure, he cast about for others more capable, and concluded that Stonehenge is a Roman work in the ancient Tuscan style, dedicated to the god Ccelus. 30 An Inquiry into the Thus breaking away from accepted tradition he not only showed himself imbued with that inquisitive and critical spirit which is the sap of the tree of knowledge, but led the way for that long series of attempts which have been made to force the ruin to yield its secrets, to inform us in regard to the obscure circumstances of its origin, and the aims and sentiments of those who were at such pains to construct it. Information respecting Stonehenge has been sought from various sources :— 1. From study of those ancient records to which reference has just been made. A full account of the Amesbury story will be found in Chapter IV, where it is discussed along with other theories. 2. From study of objects discovered by digging within the precincts, and within the adjacent barrows. References to finds unearthed at Stonehenge are given with the list of authors at the end of the book. 3. From study of the nature of the rocks of which the ruin is composed ; a matter already touched upon when describing the stones. 4. By attempting to date the structure by exact observation of its orientation. If\ originally, the pointing of the Axis to the midsummer sunrise was absolutely exact, precision would in the course of centuries be lost, owing to the slow r reeling motion of the earth on its axis, a phenomenon named the precession of the equinoxes. Therefore, assuming perfect exactitude of pointing at starting, it becomes possible to date the central trilithon and index stone by this motion. Prof. Flinders Petrie has made such a calculation, and the date which emerges from his computations is 730 a.d. + 200 years. A result also criticised in Chapter IV. 5. From a comparative study of megalithic monuments found in this and in other countries ; and by comparing the stone circle with circular tomb and primitive round hut. The limited experience and meagre resources of primitive 3i Cleaning of the Antiquity . tribes are accompanied with a poverty of invention resulting in a certain degree of analogy between the primitive dwelling, the round hut ; the barrow, the house of the dead ; and the sacred stone circle, presumably the house of the gods. Domicile. —Large upright slabs of stone arranged in circles, once forming the foundation of huts, are still numerous on some parts of Dartmoor. Mr. Stevens, in his work Flint Chips , has pointed out the similarity of the circular winterhouses of the Esquimaux and Siberians to the Scandinavian “ gang grifter” or passage graves, and believes, in common with Prof. Nilson, that the latter are but a copy or adaptation of the former ; and Mr. A. Evans has further remarked that the entrances to such dwellings are oriented facing the rising sun “ for the inmates to be awakened by the first morning rays, in a land where, during a large part of the year, the hours of daylight are few in number". 1 The British round hut has been treated of by Prof. Boyd Dawkins. 2 Dr. O. Schrader 3 concludes that the most usual form of the primitive European hut was round. “The Teutonic huts represented on the triumphal column of Marcus Aurelius are round." “ So, too, were the dwellings of the BeDse and the Celts.’’ O O The Barrow. —The excavation of the Stonehenge barrow's has shown that the customs of cremation and burial were both alike practised. “ In some instances”, says Dr. Thurnam, “ the primary interment exemplifies the first form of burial, in others the case is reversed, and in several barrows the interment of unburnt and burnt bodies were in such close contact that it was more or less difficult to determine which was first in order of time.” 4 Cremation represents the later mode of interment, introduced possibly from a knowledge of its being practised by more civilised 1 J. A. Evans, Archeological Review , “Stonehenge”, January 1889, p. 314. 2 Early Man in Britain . 3 Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples , p. 338-347 ; translated by F. B. Jevons. 4 John Thurnam, Archeologia , vol. xliii, p. 312. 32 An Inquiry into the nations, but the older form in vogue in this country before the arrival of the Celts was continued along with the later fashion, w'hich seems to express, says Mr. Boyd Dawkins, “a faith in the dead being purified by being passed through fire”. 1 Inhumation, as practised by the Celts, has been shown to be significant of a faith in a life hereafter. The doubled-up posture of the swathed body within the grave is, it has been maintained, none other than that of the unborn infant, and was imposed “ when the body was about to re-enter the bosom of the universal mother, as the symbol of a belief, not only in a life to come, but likewise in that of the resurrection of the body”. 2 The dead were for the most part deposited on the meridian line, with the head to the north, and consequently with a south aspect, this has been thought to have reference to the position in the heavens of the mid-day sun. Mr. Borlase has pointed ou that the distribution and internal arrangements of barrows in Cornwall give evidence of Sun worship. 3 The mode of interment observed in the Stonehenge round barrows is usually the placing of the swathed and contracted body in a simple grave or cist excavated in the chalk ; this occupies the centre of the mound which has been heaped over it; secondary interments have in many instances been found in other parts of these barrow’s. We are indebted to Mr. Stevens’ study of the earlier “ long barrows” for pointing out the significance of such grave- mounds with reference to Stonehenge. These have within them a circular chamber containing cists led to by a subterranean gallery, the portal of which consists of three stones more massive than those of which the chamber and gallery are constructed. This portal, or trilithon, is sealed by a monolith. The long-barrows also 1 Early Man in Britain, p. 367. 2 Dr. Thurnam, Archaologia , vol. xliii, pp. 321, 324. He quotes this as the opinion of M. Troyon, and as held long previously by others. 3 W. Copeland Borlase, “Typical Specimens of Cornish Barrows”, Archaologia , vol. xhx, p. 182. ^Meaning of the Antiquity. 33 enclose dolmens which consist of three upright blocks of stone with a fourth superimposed to form a roof. The supporters are placed close together, and smaller stones aid in preventing the earth from falling into the chamber thus formed which encloses and protects the dead body. Dolmens are also found free standing, as independent monuments, and it is probable that these formerly served the purpose of altars . 1 Thus there is evidence of analogy between barrow, stone- circle, and circular hut. We find a barrow with an eastern gallery which leads to a circular stone chamber, within which, packed in cists, are the tenants of the tomb peacefully reposing in the sleep of death. An eastern avenue conducts to a temple consisting of a circular earth mound, within which is a stone circle, within this ao-ain certain stations marked by gateways (the trilithons). A circle of stones forms the base of the primitive hut, and beneath its domed roof we can picture the household, after their day’s labour, sitting round the central fire ; in turn, the occupants retire to repose in beds disposed in a horse-shoe form, and like the tenants of the cists, they lie with their feet towards the centre. They sleep. At length the eastern sky grows luminous, the rays of the rising sun enter by the crevices of the wicker doorway to wake the household to the duties of a new day ; then the men depart to their labours, to tend the cattle, to plough, to sow, or to reap. From study of skulls found in “long " 2 and “round barrows", it has been concluded that these were raised by different races, 1 See E. T. Stevens, Stonehenge Excursion , p. 115. Much information respecting dolmens, accompanied with numerous illustrations, is given by Mr. Fergusson in Rude Stone Monuments. The Rev. W. C. Lukis believes all such monuments were once enclosed by mounds. See On the Class of Rude Stone Monuments ■which are commonly called in England “ Cromlechs”, and in France “ Dolmens". For Mr. Fergusson’s comments on this subject, see Rude Stone Monuments , pp. 44, 167. For account of large numbers of free standing dolmens, with evidence of their having served as altars, see C. R. Conder, Heth and Moat, p. 266, 1885. 2 For “Long Barrows” see Archceologia , vol. xlii, p. 160, article by John Thurnam, 1867 ; for “Round Barrows” see Ibid., vol. xlii, p. 285, 1868. F 34 An Inquiry into the the constructors of the “long barrows” being the ruder and more savage. A “long barrow” is visible from Stonehenge, about a mile and a half distant to the north, crowning Knighton Down ; there is another about a mile to the west ; the nearest free standing dolmen lies between Avebury and Marlborough. If such comparisons as have been made be held applicable to Stonehenge, then we are entitled to argue further ; that if the arrangements of the primeval dwelling influenced the design of the primitive temple, the association of the household probably influenced the conception of the manner in which the divinities were associated to honour whom the temple was constructed. The struggle for existence enforced a certain form of social order, the only form of which men had knowledge, nor is it likely that they exercised their imaginations by forming conceptions of social order outside their own experience. The primeval form of property in land compelled brothers to live together on the undivided heritage. This circumstance, together with the widely spread custom of female infanticide brought about that dismal condition of the archaic household recorded by Julius Caesar. He says of the Britons, “Ten and even twelve have wives in common to them, and particularly brothers among brothers, and parents among their children, but if there be any issue by these wives, they are reputed to be the children of those by whom respectively each was espoused when a virgin .” 1 At the head of the primitive household was the House-father, who administered the corporate property, and conducted the family worship, making daily offerings at the hearth to the House- Spirits. By his side was the House-mother, who prepared the meals ; the bond of union Mr. Hearn insists was community of domestic worship, all the members of the household being alike under the protection of the House-Spirit. 1 J. Cassar, Gallic JVar, Bk. v, chap. xv. This passage is quoted by J. F. McLennan, in his Studies on Ancient History , “ Primitive Marriage”, p. 106. 35 t 'Meaning of the Antiquity . “ The house community”, says Dr. O. Schrader, “ dwells together, but ‘ the real house, the place of the fire’, is occupied solely by the house administrator and his family, whilst round it in a horse-shoe crescent are grouped the apartments which are bedrooms of the other members .” 1 We find, therefore, the following organization :— House-Spirit. House-Father and House-Mother. (Five) sons — brothers, married to a woman of foreign kindred, with whom they cohabit in succession accord¬ ing to certain rules. This order might suggest the following hierarchy An Invisible Spirit of Heaven. Sun-World Father. Moon-World Mother. Five Planetary Gods influencing Mother Earth, the seasons being dedicated to them. O Stonehenge Analogues. Antiquities curiously resembling Stonehenge have been dis¬ covered in countries bordering the Mediterranean, and in Arabia. An account of such a ruin, and which there is good reason to believe was a temple devoted to Sabean worship, i.e., the worship of the heavenly orbs, is given by Mr. Palgrave in his Journey through Central and Eastern Arabia ; and two similar monuments have been discovered by a Jesuit missionary in the same part of the world. Mr. Palgrave closes his account with these words: “in fact, there is little difference between the stone wonder in Arabia and 1 W. S. Hearne, The Aryan Household , p. 63 etseq. ; Dr. O. Schrader, Prehistoric Antiquities, p. 394. 36 An Inquiry into the that of Somersetshire, except that one is in Arabia, the other, though the more perfect, in England.” 1 2 \\ e have not drawings or plans to enable us to compare these eastern monuments with our own in matters of detail, but the resemblance must be striking to have called forth the remark quoted. Mr. Palgrave says that in the province in which these antiquities are, there was, in the commencement of the 11th century, an official restoration of the ancient Sabean or Planetary \\ orship, which was maintained for about 300 years. 1 here are curious antiquities also in North Africa. Dr. Trilithons in Tripoli (from Dr. Barth's Travels ). Barth" mentions trilithons and stone circles existing in the neighbourhood of the city of Tripoli, and gives drawings and very careful and precise measurements. Of one trilithon he says, “ it has a most surprising resemblance to the most con¬ spicuous part of the celebrated Celtic ruin of Stonehenge ; my distinct impression on the spot was, that the structure was a rude kind of sundial combining the vertical and horizontal principle, the 1 G. Palgrave, Jour?iey through Central and Eastern Arabia , p. 251. See J. Fergusson, Rude Stone Monuments, p. 444; and criticism on the discovery by Rev. W. C. Lukis, Proceeditigs of Soc. of Antiquaries, vol. ii, 1881-82, p. 148. 2 Dr. Barth, Travels in Northern and Central Africa (see pp. 58, 60, 61, 71, 74, 197, 204). Mr. Fergusson alludes to some of these discoveries, Rude Stone Monuments, p. 411 ; for trilithons in Syria, Ibid., pp. 100 and 445. 37 7 "Meaning of the Antiquity. religious character of the whole structure can scarcely be doubtful from the nature of the flat stone, the channel in which was certainly intended to carry off the blood of the victim.” He attributes the erection of these monuments to the Berbers under Carthagenian influence. At another desolate spot, he found on the site of an ancient village “the ruins of a large building of hewn stone, about 140 yards square, besides six pairs of pilasters, together with their imposts, but some of them are lying at present on the ground.” He says the square building, combined with the groups of trilithons, “has a ground-plan of an almost regular Roman temple.” The trilithons he observes “could never have been intended as doors or passages, for the space between the upright stones is so narrow that a man of ordinary size could hardly squeeze his way through them.” He also mentions “a stone circle laid out very regularly with large slabs of stone”, and near by “there are rude ancient sculptures deeply graven on rocks, one represents a bullock between two half human deities”, the first has the head of a bull, the second a head which reminds him of the Egyptian ibis. Another sculptured design represents an ox with its head protruding into a large circle. Isolated trilithons exist in Syria, they stand near tombs, and are of late date, a . d . 195 and 222 ; they are carefully finished with architectural mouldings. According to Dr. Phene, there are several trilithons in France. “They seem”, he says, “to follow a line from Africa, through Gaul, and then by the Atlantic shore and islands to Britain ; a trilithon being found on the coast of Brittany, at St. Nazaire, and one in the lie d’Ouessant. They are rare in any case, but examples can be found on the old route of tin traffic or near it.” 1 Stonehenge offers the only example in this country of the free standing trilithon. The Syrian examples are of comparative late date, and the origin of those found in Africa and France is shrouded 1 Dr. Phene, “ Existing Analogues of Stonehenge”, II ilts Archceological Mag., vol. xix, 1880. 38 A?i Inquiry into the in obscurity ; if they are of high antiquity, it still by no means follows that those of Britain are of the same date ; that they have the same significance wheresoever found, can hardly be doubted. Such is a sketch of the different lines that studies on Stone¬ henge have followed ; and references have been given to enable the reader to amplify his information on these topics if so disposed. An attempt will here be made to supplement these sources of knowledge by yet another; viz., by study of the comparative dimensions of the various parts ; and of the method employed in setting out the design. Other stone circles in this country have this characteristic in common ; they appear to have been constructed in a more or less haphazard fashion, regardless of precise measurement. The im¬ pression produced by Stonehenge is different. It is difficult to believe that the roughly trimmed boulders, which are piers, could have supported a ring of lintels, so that these should form a fit and sightly circle, without the exercise of considerable ingenuity and method ; indeed, it is precisely the sense of disturbed order which makes the ruin so impressive and interesting. Moreover, there are outlying stones which obviously have not been placed at random, but for some particular purpose. The experience, therefore, of any passing observer justifies investigation on these lines. Moreover, every visitor to Stonehenge must have been struck with the fact that the ruin lies by the side of a prominent and wel formed ringed tumulus ; he will probably therefore feel little surprise should he learn that evidence is forthcoming which connects Stonehenge with this barrow. Should it be that he has observed the Avenue and the Cursus ; it is strange if no suspicion arose in his mind that these also may be connected with the original purposes of Stonehenge. The impression which the antiquity produces on visitors is, that they look upon the ruin of one structure or design, not on several. Stonehenge, however, consists of several separate parts, con- 39 ^Meaning of the A?itiquity. structed of different kinds of stone, and the general opinion of writers has been that these parts have been constructed at different epochs. The reverse conclusion is now arrived at, viz., that all the stones were erected at the same time. In the first instance, the unity of the design will be demonstrated by the proportions which the measurements of the several parts bear to each other. This unity could not be proved if the outlying stones, viz., the “Sun-stone”, the “Slaughter-stone”, and the “Stones of the Earth-circle”, were omitted from consideration. These, it will be shown, are inseparable from the temple. The unity of the design proved, the corollary is that all the stones were erected at the same time, This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that chippings of the Sarsens, Horn-stones, and Blue-stones, have been found in a barrow (No. 16, Hoare’s Ancient Wilts') a little to the west of Stonehenge, together with a bronze spear-head and an interment of ashes ; also by the fact that small chippings of all the stones have been found embedded in a concreted substance at the foot of the Blue-stones. It should be noted that there are but four Horn-stones at Stonehenge, and these are the smallest stones. They can have supplied but a scanty supply of chippings, a minute fraction of the total number. The Horn-stone within the barrow proves that the Sarsens, Blue-stones, and Horn-stones, received a dressing at the same time, and that specimens of these rocks were selected and placed within the mound when, having been freshly broken off, the difference in the quality of these rocks was discernible, and when this difference was of significance. Doubtless these chippings of the sacred rocks were regarded as charms, having magical power to avert evil from the spirit of the dead. The significance of the avenues and the great enclosure named the Cursus, and their relation to Stonehenge, has hitherto been insufficiently considered, the Cursus having been regarded as an independent earthwork. These alignments can be shown to be appendages of the temple, and to have been constructed at the 40 An Inquiry into the same time. The proof rests in the orientation of the Avenue or Approach, and the position occupied by the Sun-stone with respect to the prominent tumulus to the east of the temple, and to the Cursus. For the argument, that Stonehenge is not of prehistoric intiquity, it is necessary to show :— Firstly, that the bronze spear-head, found in the barrow con¬ taining Stonehenge chippings, does not necessarily imply a very high antiquity. Secondly, that the majority of the tumuli were already on the Down when Stonehenge was erected. Firstly, that iron was rare in Britain at the time of the invasion we learn from J. Caesar’s Commentaries; and the trivial nature of the imports into Britain during the Peace of Augustus, and the barbarous character of the natives, is mentioned by Strabo. Thus it is difficult to believe that weapons of bronze were altogether discarded at the time of the conquest. That some tribes were armed with weapons of iron, others with those of bronze, and that others, again, used both, was the opinion of Dr. Thurnam, than whom no one is a better authority on the Wiltshire barrows. Secondly, that the majority of the tumuli were on the land when Stonehenge was erected, is proved by their distribution, and by the alignments which traverse the barrow-studded Down. To this we shall presently return when speaking of the earthworks. The trilithon is a feature which distinguishes Stonehenge from other sacred circles in this country. It is, indeed, possible that this solitary example of the trilithon is an independent, insular invention derived from the dolmen ; but the accounts that we possess of others in North Africa, in Syria, and in France, and Palgrave’s account of the stone wonder of Kaseem in Arabia, lead to the more probable conclusion that this feature of Stonehenge is derived from the south. If we admit that Stonehenge offers evidence of foreign influence, such a conclusion confirms the opinion that it is of late date, compared with the high prehistoric antiquity usually assigned to it, PRESENT CONDITION OF THE STONES. — VIEW FROM POINT I ON PLAN IV. PRESENT CONDITION.—VIEW FROM POINT III ON PLAN IV. hMeani?tg of the Antiquity . 41 because it is impossible to believe the Celts of interior Britain were influenced by peoples under Roman sway before the Peace of Augustus at the earliest. We learn from J. Caesar that in his day the foreign trade of Britain was in the hands of the Veneti of Brittany ; and from the same source, that these people looked to the north , not to the south, for guidance in religious matters, and sent young men over to this country to study the tenets of Druidism. This being so, it is incredible that the Celts of interior Britain can have been induced by the Veneti to introduce a feature into their temple which appears to be native to the shores of the Mediterranean. The trilithons, therefore, show the temple to be of comparatively late date. Tacitus mentions that Agricola, besides being attentive to provide the sons of British chieftains with a liberal education, encouraged the native chiefs to erect temples, in order to reclaim the tribes from their warlike habits. There appears to be no reason why Stonehenge should not be a product of this policy. It is a sacred circle conformably with the traditions of the country, and the same beds of natural boulders from which the great temple of Avebury had previously been constructed, have also supplied the material for the more important parts of the temple of Stone¬ henge. Although the rocks which compose the latter have received a rough dressing, the execution is very rude, as we should expect it to be. It does not, however, follow that the man who conceived this work, and superintended its construction, was an untutored barbarian ; on the contrary, it may well be that he was conversant with ideas current at Massilia, which great centre of learning was resorted to for instruction by Roman and barbarian alike. Unity of Design. The most remarkable feature of the Stonehenge design is the manner in which the temple is orientated to the rising sun of the summer solstice. This is done by means of the central trilithon and the Heel-stone or Sun-stone. At that season an observer G 4 2 An Inquiry i?tto the on the Earth-bank, at its point of furthest removal from the Sun- stone, was so situated that the tip of the Sun-stone, which appeared through the cleft of the central trilithon, coincided exactly with the visible horizon, and indicated the position of the rising' sun at this season. The direction of a shadow having been obtained at the solstitial sunrise, it is evident that if a line of any given length, with this direction, were marked on the face of the Down, and the car¬ dinal points determined, a triangle would be obtained, and the relative proportions of its sides could be learnt by measurement. Such a triangle offers us a base for Stonehenge measurements. The axis of the temple corresponds to the direction of a shadow at the midsummer sunrise, and probably indicates a moment con¬ sidered propitious for sacrifice to the sun-god. An) - one standing on this line, beside the Slaughter-stone, would be unable to observe the rising sun, he being in the shadow of the Sun-stone, the Hel- stone, or covering stone ; but being on the axis he could receive a signal for the death-stroke from an observer on the Earth-circle behind the central trilithon ; and on account of the Slaughter-stone being placed obliquely with the axis one half only of the stone would be in shadow. Thus, provided a clear sun-rise, the sun would shine on the flowing blood of the victim, and this would be construed as a propitious omen. The distance of the Sun-stone from the Slaughter-stone is ioo ft. A right-angled triangle formed by lines directed to the cardinal points, and a line ioo ft. in length, inclined at an angle representing the orientation of Stonehenge, has a perpendicular of 64 ft. 1 These proportions determine the measurements of the several parts. Thus the centre of the temple can be fixed by adding the hypothenuse to the perpendicular: as 64 is to 100, so is 164 to 256.2 ft., or four times the perpendicular (4x64 = 256 ft.), the distance from the centre to the Sun-stone. From a centre thus 1 This proportion inclines the axis 50° 12' from north point. Knighton Down, above which the sun rises, is higher than Stonehenge Down. 43 ^Meaning of the Antiquity . determined describe a circle, the point of the Slaughter-stone giving the measure of the radius, and divide the circumference into sixteenths; the position of the corner of the western stone of the Earth-circle in regard to the centre shows that the circle was so divided. Then it will be observed that the most important measurement of the temple, viz., the diameter of the Diagram I. lintel-ring, ioi It., results directly from this division of the circle, as shown by Diagram I. The western stone of the Earth-circle does not, however, agree with the centring of the Sarsen piers, but with the outer face of the temple. Its placing is explained by Diagram II. The diameter, ab, is given by the mounds. If the radius of the Earth-circle be measured off twice on the circumference, from B, we obtain the point c. b c is, therefore, the side of an equi- 44 A?i Inquiry into the lateral triangle described within the circle, and the altar is parallel to it. The line c a passes through the western stone of the Earth- circle. d, in line with stone and mound, is determined by pro¬ longing a side of the base-triangle. The placing of the stones and mounds, which form a quadri¬ lateral figure exactly containing the temple, is thus explained, also why stones and mounds alternate. It can be shown that all the more salient measurements of Diagram II. Stonehenge—the placing of the Sun-stone, Slaughter-stone, and Stones of the Earth-circle, in regard to the centre ; the diameter of the Sarsen circle in regard to the centring of the piers which support the lintels ; the diameter of the Blue-stone circle ; the distance of the central trilithon from the centre ; the depth of the horseshoe-figure from central trilithon to choir-screen ; and the dimensions of the Altar-stone—that all these measurements are directly derived from the proportions of the base-triangle ; and as these are directly due to an observation of the sun, all the salient t Meaning of the Antiquity . 45 measurements of Stonehenge may truly be said to result from an observation of that luminary. Thus the unity of the design can be proved, the corollary being that all the stones were erected at the same time ; which conclusion is again confirmed by the contents of the barrow to the west of Stonehenge, as already mentioned, and by the chippings at the base of the Blue-stones. We shall return to this subject after considering the Earth¬ works, when it will be possible to elucidate it in a simpler manner. Symbolism of Stonehenge.—The Sarsens. The characteristic features of the temple are not, however, explained by showing method in the plotting ; and these, as they cannot be accounted for by practical or aesthetic motives, must be of a symbolical nature, and connected with the worship to which the temple was dedicated ; in the same spirit as our churches are built on the figure of a cross. Stonehenge is shown to have been a temple not merely by characteristics of design, but by the fact that the Blue-stones of which it is partly constructed have been brought here from a great distance ; and without they had been regarded with superstitious reverence they would not have been so brought, because other stones nearer to hand would have answered all practical purposes. Finds of bulls’ heads and harts’ heads, and charcoal, repeatedly dug up within the precincts, show that these animals have there been sacrificed. According to Tacitus, the sacred rites of the Britons were similar to those of the Gauls ; and early travellers’ tales inform us tnat the latter worshipped an Earth-goddess with shrill music and noisy rites, in honour of Ceres and Proserpine ; and that Druidesses lived apart in companies, devoted to the service of the Moon- goddess. Celtic tribes settled in Gallo-Asia, or Galatia, in Asia Minor, worshipped a supreme “ Nature-goddess" or “ Moon and 46 An Inquiry into the Earth-goddess”, and her shrine attained a world-wide fame as that of the Phrygian Cybele, “the mother of the gods.” When her worship was introduced into Italy, the Romans sent a special embassy to Pessinus, “ and the rough field-stone which the priests of the place liberally presented to the foreigners as the real ‘ Mother Cybele’ was received by the community with unparalleled pomp.” If, therefore, Stonehenge was erected by the primitive Celts, the race which raised the grave mounds which surround it, it seems probable that the rough field-stone which they removed from the Avebury Downs to the brow of Salisbury Plain, was there set up as religious symbols in honour of a Nature-goddess. The accom¬ panying illustration of the goddess Cybele is taken from Montfaucon. She points with her right hand to the earth, in her left she holds a pitcher of water, the turrets which crown her head denote that she is the supporter of towns. The representation of the Ephesian Diana, a Nature-goddess, is from the same author. She was worshipped not only in Asia Minor, but also in the Greek colony of Massilia— the modern Cybele. Marseilles. This city was founded by the Phocaeans ; within the citadel, says Strabo, “are placed the Ephesium and the temple of the Delphian Apollo. This latter temple is common to all the Ionians; the Ephesium is the temple consecrated to Diana of Ephesus. They say that when the Phocaeans were about to quit their country, an oracle com¬ manded them to take from Diana of Ephesus a conductor for 47 Meaning of the Antiquity . their voyage. On arriving at Ephesus they therefore inquired how they might be able to obtain from the goddess what was enjoined them. The goddess appeared in a dream to Aristarcha, one of the most honourable women of the city, and commanded her to accompany the Phocaeans, and to take with her one of the statues consecrated in her temple. These things being performed, and the colony being settled, the Phocaeans built a temple, and evinced their great respect for Aris¬ tarcha by making her priestess. All the colonies sent out from Marseilles hold this goddess in peculiar reverence, preserving both the shape of the image of the god¬ dess, and also every rite observed in the metropolis.” 1 She bears a globe in one hand and a crescent in the other ; between the band¬ ages animals are pictured ; in the middle division a sacrifice to Mother Nature or Diana. “It is believed”, says Mont- faucon, “that Diana is the same as the Moon, and though in the common public worship these two deities were distin¬ guished, yet we have observed they have been esteemed the same by many ; some antiquaries think the crab is placed as the mark of sign Cancer of the Zodiac on ac- o count of some relation between that sign and the moon ; she is pictured with many paps because she is the nurse of all animals and plants. The Sun-stone, or Index-stone, which measures the cycle of the year, is probably a symbol of the sun, the primal fountain of life. The circle is a symbol appropriate alike to the sun and to Diann. 1 Strabo, The Narbontiaise. Bohn. 48 An Inquiry into the the disc of the full moon. When we look for a symbol of the lesser light, the moon, we find her crescent shape and full disc represented in the two figures which form the temple. Con¬ formably with this idea we find the Sarsen circle divided into thirty equal divisions by its piers, as the month (the cycle of time derived from the moon) is divided into thirty days. The lunar crescent and full disc together form a symbol of increase. The shadow of the Sun-stone at the midsummer sunrise is directed towards the centre of the crescent symbol, whilst the extremities or horns of this figure are pointed in the direction of the Sun-stone. The symbol is appropriate to the season when the land, enjoying the maturity of summer, was fabled to be espoused to her celestial bridegroom, the Sun-god ; whilst in August she brings forth her increase. Then the symbol of the season is the disc of the harvest moon, which we find typified in the zone of the temple. In confirmation that such ideas were once current, we find Irish feasts and fairs, called “ Lugnassed”, were held in honour of Lug, the sun-god. These were held in the neighbourhood of the great burial-places of olden times in Ireland ; and in discussing the origin of the name, Professor Rhys says that “we learn from it that the principal thing the celebration commemorated was the union of Lug, the sun-god, with the land.” There appear to have been similar feasts in Britain, and in Gaul, at Lugduna, a town on the Rhone, named after the god. The orientation of Stonehenge, the relation of the opening of the central trilithon to the Sun-stone, points out to us that a religious celebration took place at the summer solstice ; for why should the temple be designed to accord with this particular time if the flock were then absent. If the opening of the central trilithon be significant of a festival, a presumption is raised that so also are the openings of the remaining four trilithons, for surely all these mystical gateways must have a like interpretation, and if so, we ought to be able to date these five festivals by the positions of the openings within the circle. 49 t e Mea? 2 ing of the Antiquity. if the central one be reckoned to indicate the middle of summer, in regard to the division of the year into months, then we find the other four indicate the first of May, or the coming in of summer ; the end of August, or the close of summer; the end of October, or the coming in of winter ; and the beginning of March, the close of winter and the beginning of spring. The design fails to indicate a winter festival, and the temple was probably then deserted, as we should expect it to be from its exposed position, and from the inclemency of the season. The solstice, however, does not occur in the middle of summer, its position with regard to the other four openings appears to A Circle divided into sixteenths showing Five Trilithons. be indicated by the Altar being placed to one side of the Axis and obliquely to the central trilithon beneath which it lies. A line passing through the opening of the central trilithon and through the centre of the Altar, shows on the circle the position of the solstice in regard to the placing of the other four clefts. (See Diagram II.) Thus by the placing of the Altar the openings agree and the symmetry of the temple was maintained. Such an arrangement suggests that Stonehenge signalises an adjustment of the Celtic festivals to the Roman year, to a year of months of 30 and 31 days, or 360 days plus five feast days. It has previously been pointed out that the placing of the stones 11 50 An Inquiry into the and mounds of the Earth-circle shows the circle at Stonehenge has been divided into sixteenths ; this being the case, if the designer of the temple had wished simply to place five trilithons symmetri¬ cally within it, he would surely have proceeded as indicated by the accompanying diagram. Considering the care shown in the plot¬ ting, we cannot but believe that attention was paid to the precise placing of the trilithons, which are the most striking features of the structure ; the chances against their fitting to the theory pro¬ posed accidentally are considerable. The Blue-stones. If the placing of the larger stones be concerned with a symbolism touching the celestial deities and cycles of time given by the sun and moon, it must be conceded that the smaller stones (arranged so as to form similar though smaller figures) would be in harmony with the larger, if they, too, were consecrated to the celestial gods, and if their placing was significant of smaller cycles of time, of the division of the month into the week and days. It is contended that the unusual division of the Blue-stone Circle, and the placing of all the Blue-stones, is due to an ancient astrological figure which is concerned with the planets, and the week of seven days with planetary nomenclature, and which accounts for the order of succession of the days of the week. The diagram in question shows why there is only one Blue- stone impost, and why it lies where we find it; it accounts for some stones being placed in pairs ; why we find a group of three stones in the Blue-stone circle; why two of this triplet, which are Horn- stones, are placed somewhat nearer to the centre than the one they flank. Moreover, it effects a restoration with remarkably little violence. Five stones, though prostrate, occupy their proper posi¬ tions, and merely require raising, and others are displaced but a few feet. It appears that very few are missing; the Blue-stones, in this respect, offering an instructive contrast to the Sarsens. This fact tMeaning of the Antiquity . 5 1 is shown by the placing of the Blue-Stones in situ, without inquir¬ ing into the meaning of their placing. Presuming the Blue-stone Circle to be filled in with stones, so that equal spaces be between them, then the chances against stones being taken away acci¬ dentally, and yet leaving a remainder disposed as we find them, are, according to the computations of Prof. Flinders Petrie, as 5000 to 1. If it be conceded that the diagram offers an explanation of the placing of the Blue-stones, it follows that Stonehenge is not of prehistoric antiquity. At the time of the conquest the week of seven days was well known, and coming into vogue, in the south of Europe. Though of high antiquity in the East, it only found its way to Rome after the conquest of Egypt. I. The planetary diagram consists of a circle having its circumference divided into seven equal parts. The divisional points are joined with seven straight lines. The symbols corre¬ spond in their order with the periods of motion of the sun, moon, 52 An Inquiry i?ito the and planets round the earth, according to the ideas of the ancients. The Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. The cross-lines show the succession of the days of the week. The dotted lines represent the dawn joining day with day. Plan III is a ground-plan of the Blue-stones in their present ruinous condition, and shows the Blue-stones restored with the help of the planetary diagram. Fourteen stations, at equal distances apart, are marked on the circumference of the circle. Station i shows the Blue-stone trilithon restored. It is presumed to be dedicated to Saturn. With the rising sun, a new day, a day dedicated to the sun, commences, and time gives birth to a new cycle, the week, which proceeds from the mystical gate¬ way. Following the planetary diagram we now cross over to Station 7 on the axis. This is dedicated to the Sun. Day, night, and dawn are the first day of twenty-four hours. The moment which joins day with day is the moment of sunrise. It is here represented by the axis, which joins the day consecrated to the sun with that consecrated to the moon. The line passes between two Blue-stones of the choir-screen (Station 14), and points to the Sun-stone. We again cross over to Station 13, dedicated to the moon. We turn as before, sunways, and find the line of dawn, joining day with day, points to Station 6. The line passes midway between two Horn-stones, and strikes a Blue-stone. Thus we find two stations, presumably consecrated to the moon, are marked with Blue-stones, each stone being flanked with two Horn-stones, these six stones being in situ. In this manner the week can be followed, and all the stations be visited. The accuracy with which the line of dawn of the day dedicated to Mercury passes between two stones placed close together at Station 4 is noteworthy ; also the agreement of the soft schist stump with a station dedicated to Venus. The only stone which offers difficulty is one marked 2'. According to the planetary diagram we should expect to see PLAN JH A THE BLUE STONES. North 0 Scale 200 or 6 inches = 100 Feet 1 Blue stones prostrate. @i „ „ m Situ «» Horn stones c> N?2. SoFt schist stump WNTBPWW % SONS, UMTET. LONDON WAUJ.ONDON PLAN m B Scale, 200 or 6 inches = 100 feet. Blue stones Restored. „ „ in Situ Horn stones © N? 2. Soft schist stump 53 t 'Meaning of the Antiquity . Stations 2 and 12 each marked with two stones, like Station 4. These stations have apparently been marked with only one stone each ; and we find 2' of the circle, and 2" of the horseshoe, neither of them agreeing with the planetary diagram. When considering the symbolism of the Sarsens, we found horseshoe and circle to have equivalent meanings ; so, too, with the Blue-stone horseshoe and circle. We find days and lines of dawn pegged out by stones on the inner horseshoe, and by the introduction of stones 2" and 12", seven days are indicated instead of only five. The order in which the clays of the week are named is due to a theory of the relative distances of the planets from the earth, inferred from the times of their orbits, and to the consecration of each consecutive hour to a planetary power ; the order of hourly dedication agreeing with planetary distances. The Moon was the nearest planet, then came Mercury, then Venus, then the Sun, which was considered as a planet, finally Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. Saturn. Jupiter. Mars. The Sun. Venus. Mercury. Moon. K % c? O $ 8 D The order of the days of the week follows from this series. The first hour of Saturday being consecrated to Saturn, the seventh would be consecrated to the Moon ; and so with respect to the 14th and 21st. The 22nd hour would be consecrated to Saturn, the 23rd to Jupiter, the 24th to Mars, the 25th, or first hour of the following day, would be consecrated to the Sun, which thus receives its appellation of Sunday. Setting out from the day of the Sun, we find the 7th, 14th, and 21 st hours consecrated to Mars, the 22nd to the Sun, the 23rd to Venus, 24th to Mercury, 25th, or first hour of the following day, Monday, to the Moon ; and so on. 1 1 For account of the week, see Frangois Arago, Popular Astronomy. For its spread over Europe, see Sir George Cornwall Lewis, An Historical Survey of the 54 An Inquiry into the Literature supplies us with but a scanty knowledge of how the week of seven days spread over Europe ; but it is evident, as Jacob Grimm has remarked, that it must have taken a firm hold of the populations long before the introduction of Christianity, as the priesthood would certainly have abolished the daily use of the names of the heathen deities had it been in their power to do so. We are now in a position to give Particulars of the Stones. 58 stones of the Sarsen Circle, 30 piers, 28 lintels. 26 ,, ,, ,, Blue-stone Circle (?); this includes 1 impost. 15 ., ,, ,, Sarsen Trilithons, 10 piers, 5 imposts. 17 ,, ,, ,, Inner Blue-stones. 1 Sun-stone. 1 Altar-stone. 1 Slaughter-stone. 2 Stones of the Earth-circle. 121 total. The question arises whether formerly there were other stones belonging to the Earth-circle. From probing the ground there is some reason to believe that a stone on this bank may once have marked the direction of the axis ; such a problematical stone is shown dotted in Stukeley’s plan ; there is no evidence for the existence of others. Astronomy of the Ancients , p. 304; also Hare, on the names of the days of week in the Philological Museum , vol. i, p. 1 ; and Jacob Grimm, Teutonic Mythology, p. 122. In regard to the diagram showing the succession of the days of week, “ there were” says M. Arago, “ with these cabalistic intersections, certain theories respecting the influence of the heavenly bodies, upon which the astrologers refused to divulge their views”. Meaning of the Antiquity. 55 Sarsen Circle. 17 piers in situ , 8 prostrate or fragments, 5 missing. 6 lintels in situ , 2 fragments, 20 missing. Blue-stone Circle. 12 stones (or stumps) in situ, 10 prostrate, 4 missing. Sarsen Tnlithons. 5 piers in situ , including the inclined pier, which has slightly shifted, 4 prostrate. 2 imposts in situ , 3 prostrate. Inner Blue-stones. 9 zVz 3 prostrate, 5 missing. From this list of missing Blue-stones we may safely deduct two, two pieces of rock are known to be beneath the turf, and there may be others. We append six restored ground-plans, with notes. Restored Ground-plans. All these plans give 30 piers for the outer circle, in five they are represented as of equal size. Mr. Fergusson follows Mr. Hawkshaws excellent survey, and rightly represents pier No. 11 as smaller than others. 1 his, how¬ ever, has failed to remind him that the stone in question is also shorter than others ; otherwise he would not have written as follows : “There seems to be no doubt that the outer stone circle originally consisted of 30 square piers .... it seems equally certain that they were all connected by a continuous stone impost or architrave-” 1 The evidence that the Sarsen horse-shoe consisted originally 1 Rude Stone Monuments , p. 90. 56 An Inquiry i?tto the of 15 stones is too clear to admit of difference of opinion ; it will be observed, however, that in these plans the shape of that figure varies very considerably—Mr. Fergusson’s is the most correct. The differences in the reconstruction of the Blue-stone Circle are marked. Wood gives 29 stones for this part, Stukeley 40, Long 30, Smith 30 + two Blue-stone trilithons, Stevens 30. In spite of these differences of number the principle followed in all these cases appears to be identical, which is to reconstruct a circle with stones equally interspaced—an idea strongly contra¬ dicted by the placing of Blue-stones in situ. Stukeley shows two stones of the choir screen advanced out of line with others ; this is incorrect. The Blue-stone impost No. 150, with two cups worked in it, and one of its supporters, both lie on the Blue-stone circum¬ ference ; therefore, when restoring the trilithon, there is no reason to place it out of line with other Blue-stones, as Mr. Smith has done. A sentiment for symmetry has led him to suppose that another must have paired with it, although we have no evidence for the existence of such trilithon. He was, therefore, obliged to reconstruct the Blue-stone trilithon, of which the impost remains, out of line with other Blue-stones, because the position opposite to that, where it was most reasonable to place it, was already occupied by stones in situ , which obviously could never have supported an impost. Although Mr. Stevens admits that the cups worked in the Sarsens are mortise-holes, similar cups worked in the smaller Blue-stone he calls Elf-pots ; it is therefore noticeable that when restoring the temple, he neither leaves the stone with the Elf-pots where he finds it, nor does he find a place for it elsewhere ; he thus shows that he does not believe it to have belonged to the original structure, but to have been brought here later for the benefit of the Elves of the neighbourhood ; fairy rings abound on the Down. Mr. Fergusson has discarded the plan of filling in the Blue- stone Circle with stones until symmetry be obtained, and appears to be satisfied with the idea that the best way to insure correct / '' - I ' // - I 1 t 1 * -s\\ I \% 1 t : 1 i ;l 1 | * a # * 1 / # Wood. Long. Stukeley. * s m t * g •" / r/ . i •: «« K: N * - «. ^ '% i ■ I i I I / I - - ✓ ^ * Smith. Stevens. Fergusson. GROUND PLAN OF STONEHENGE RESTORED According to the mentioned Antiquaries. Meaning of the Antiquity . 57 reconstruction is to set up Blue-stones lying on the ground where we find them ; the result, at any rate, is unsatisfactory. In spite of having Mr. Hawkshaw’s excellent plan before him, he has failed to show the group of three stones of this part— a Blue-stone flanked by Horn-stones, the three stones being in situ; and it is certainly difficult to understand his motive for placing two Blue-stones side by side touching each other, except it be to show his scorn for symmetry ; and if so, how is it that although Mr. Hawkshaw places a Horn-stone of the choir-screen consider¬ ably out of line with its neighbours, Mr. Fergusson restores it symmetrically in line with them. The Inner Horse-shoe continues the list of contradictions ; it will be observed, firstly, that the shape of this figure varies con¬ siderably in the different plans : Wood gives 19 stones, Stukeley 19, Long 15, Smith 11, Stevens 17, Fergusson 14. Mr. Stevens remarks that the triple arrangement of stones shown by Mr. Long must be incorrect, “ for some of these mono¬ liths now standing depart from this arrangement, and occupy the interspaces.’’ 1 Smith’s restoration of this part is also contradicted by the posi¬ tion of stones in situ. Mr. Fergusson restores two recumbent stones beside the northern trilithon ; one of these is omitted in Mr. Hawkshaw’s plan ; it is almost hidden beneath the fallen pier of the trilithon. Mr. Fergusson places them symmetrically opposed to another pair of Blue-stones, although he disdains a precisely similar operation when dealing with the Blue-stones of the circle. 2 In regard to the Altar table, five out of the six plans place it parallel with the central trilithon. Mr. Fergusson shows it correctly, lying somewhat askew to it, and to one side of the axis ; by so doing, however, he acknowledges as untenable a theory he has himself been at some pains to propound, viz., 1 Jottings on Stonehenge, p. 94. 2 For Mr. Hawkshaw’s plan, see Rude Stone Monuments, p. 92. Mr. Fergusson’s restored plan is on the following page facing it. I 58 An Inquiry into the that this stone was once poised on two supporters above the central trilithon. The Earthworks. In old days a large concourse of strangers was, doubtless, attracted to Stonehenge to attend the festivals. It is difficult to believe that British villages can have offered them accom- modation ; we assume, therefore, that they were obliged to camp out on the plain, in the neighbourhood of the temple, and in the midst of an extensive burial-ground. Respect for the spirits of the dead would forbid strangers from camping on this hallowed ground anywhere where fancy might dictate ; therefore, when the temple was erected, an enclosure was constructed. This is named “ The Cursus”, although a more appropriate name would be “ The Fair-field”. It is conveniently situated, being near the temple, and within easy reach of the river. For the most part it lies in a slight depression of the Down, so although but a short distance north of Stonehenge, it is much out of sight, and the hubbub of the encampment was kept apart. There was another reason for this choice of situation. The presence of the Cursus and avenues attached to the temple prove that the tumuli scattered over the Down, singly or in clusters, were already there when Stonehenge w r as erected. Although there is no perceptible order in their distribution, we find them, as a general rule, on the higher and more conspicuous parts of the Down. By choosing low-lying ground for the Fair-field, the latter escaped the tumuli, or nearly so ; for at its western end, which is on the level Down, there are two small barrows within the enclosure, and these must have been on the ground before it was made. If the land was free of tumuli when Stonehenge was erected, no object can be assigned for constructing the earthworks attached to it, and we are forced to adopt some purely fanciful meaning for the Cursus. A practical reason for connecting this earthwork with the temple having been found, a presumption is raised that it 59 Meaning of the Antiquity . should show the same characteristics of thoughtful plotting, com¬ bined with rude execution, which we observed in the temple ; and we propose to show that this is the case, that the orientation and length of the enclosed Fair-field have been regulated by deliberate plotting. The Cursus is shown by its Plotting to be an Adjunct of the Temple. Plan VI, showing the earthworks, is taken from the Ordnance ; a few lines have been added to aid the eye. A.—View from Tumulus 23, looking tow ards the North-western angle of the Cursus. If we stand at the point marked i on the bank of the enclosure we can look along its northern boundary. From the same starting-point a line passing through the tip of the Sun-stone strikes the slope of the tumulus (No. 23), which is so conspicuous an object a few hundred feet to the east of Stone¬ henge. P'ormerly this line could have been easily followed by the eye, but the line of sight is now interrupted by one of the many formal plantations which disfigure the Down. The line crosses a tumulus, which, however, does not interfere with the view' — on the contrary, it helps to mark the line ; for the mound is a small one, and is in a low-lying part of the Plain, so that its summit, seen from the slope of the Stonehenge tumulus, coincides with the level of the land about end of the Cursus. 6o An Inquiry into the This is shown by the two accompanying sketches : the first is taken from the slope of the Stonehenge tumulus (No. 23), facing the north-western angle of the Cursus ; the second, taken on the same line, is from the ring of the low-lying tumulus, looking back over the mound at the Sun-stone. The Cursus is 9,000 ft. in length ; a line from a central point on its northern boundary, and at right angles to it, crosses tumulus (No. 23), and is intersected by the line from the north¬ western extremity of the Cursus, on the northern slope of the tumulus, at t. Thus we have a right-angled triangle formed, the base the northern bank of the Cursus, 4,500 ft. ; the perpendicular, from b.— View looking back from the ring of the Tumulus 35. centre of northern boundary to Barrow, 3,000 ft. ; and the hypo- thenuse (passing through the tip of the Sun-stone), 5,408 ft. Thus the base is to the hypothenuse as 5 is to 6 (within a small fraction). Also the distance from t, the point of intersection on the tumulus, to s the Sun-stone, is one-twelfth of the total distance of t from 1. It is difficult to believe that such combinations result from chance ; they indicate a close relationship between tomb, earth¬ works, and temple; if the earthworks have been set out from the barrow, then the temple itself may have been so set out. What considerations may there be for upholding such an opinion ? The placing of the Sun-stone in regard to the tumulus governs the placing of both temple and earthwork ; this leads to the inference that the tomb belonged to some family instrumental J 'Meaning of the Antiquity. 6l in raising the temple, and it becomes a matter of special interest to learn what this barrow, when excavated, was found to contain. Sir R. Colt Hoare records that “ Mr. Cunnington explored it, and that at his first trial he was unsuccessful, but, on a second, he found a rude urn inverted over a pile of burnt bones, amongst which was an elegant pair of ivory tweezers.” 1 * 3 The ghost of an elegant pair of ivory tweezers cannot have been deemed likely to be of practical service to the disembodied ghost resident within the mound, or absent elsewhere, and it matters little to what errant fancy its presence here be ascribed ; there is, however, no cause to believe it to have been manu¬ factured in a remote, vaguely defined, prehistoric bronze epoch. The mound is surrounded by a ring or ditch, and as it con¬ tained an interment by cremation, it probably is of later date than some others on the Plain; the simple bowl-shaped tumulus, accom¬ panied by inhumation, being judged by experts to be an earlier form of burial. Even if the burial could be dated, this would not enable us to date the temple. Sir R. Colt Hoare adds: “In opening the fine bell-shaped barrow N.E. of Stonehenge we also found one or two pieces of the chippings of these stones (Blue-stones), as well as in the waggon-tracks round the arc of the temple. We do not learn whereabouts in the mound these chippings were found ; they may, as other such chippings were lying about, have been cast upon the mound on some occasion when it received a refacing. The Plotting of the Temple and its Earthworks. The placing of the temple depends on the Sun-stone, for it is fitted to the shadow cast by that stone at a critical moment of the year. The question, therefore, arises, How have the relative 1 Sir R. Colt Hoare, Tumuli Wiltunenses: A Guide to the Barrows on the Plain of Stonehenge, No. 23. 3 Sir R. Colt Hoare, Ancient Wills, 1, p. 127. 62