This, then, at once brings us back to the orientation problem, which was to fix by means of a temple in the ordinary way dates nearer to these turning-points in the local farmer’s years than those fixed by the solstitial and equinoctial temples.
It must be borne in mind that it is not merely a question of stately piles such as Karnak and the Parthenon in populous centres, but of the humblest dolmen or stone circle, in scattered agricultural communities, which was as certainly used for orientation purposes, that is, for recording the lapse of time at night or return of some season important to the tiller of the soil. The advent of the season thus determined could be announced to outlying districts by fire signals at night.
I have already pointed out that any temple, dolmen or cromlech oriented to a sunrise or sunset at any dates between the solstices will receive the sunlight twice a year.
If the temple is pointed nearly solstitially the two dates at which the sun appears in it will be near the solstice; similarly, for a temple pointed nearly equinoctially the dates will be near the equinox ; but if the ancients wished to divide the ninety-one days’ interval between the solstice and equinox, a convenient method of doing this would be to observe the sun at the half-time interval, such that the same temple would serve on both
22
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
occasions. This could be done by orienting the temple to the sun’s place on the horizon when it had the declination 16° 20' on its upward and downward journey, or, in other words, was, in days, half-way between the equinox and solstice. Thus, for the 45 days
^ from March 22, we have in—
March 9
April 30
May 6
45
What, then, are the non-equinoctial, non-solstitial days of the year when the sun has this declination ?
They are, in the sun’s journey from the vernal equinox to the summer solstice and back again,
May 6 and August 8 Sun’s decl. N. 16° 20'.
Similarly, for the journey to the winter solstice and return we have
November 8 and February 4 ... Sun’s decl. S. 16° 20'.
We get, then, a year symmetrical with the astronomical year, which can be indicated with it as in Fig. 7; a year roughly halving the intervals between the chief dates of the astronomical year.
With regard to the dates shown I have already pointed out that fanning operations would not occur at the same time in different lands; that ploughing and seed time and harvest would vary with crops and latitudes; and I must now add that when we wish to
III AGRICULTURAL DIVISIONS OF THE YEAR 23
determine the exact days of the month we have to struggle with all the difficulties introduced by the various systems adopted by different ancient nations to bring together the reckoning of months by the moon and of years by the sun.
In more recent times there is an additional difficulty owing to the incomplete reconstruction of the calendar by Julius Caesar, who gave us the Julian year. Thus,
Summer solstice. June 21.
Dec. 2S.
Winter solstice.
FIG. 7.—The astronomical and vegetation divisions of the year.
while the spring equinox occurred on March 21 at the time of the Council of Nice, in 325 A.D., by the year 1751 the dating of the year on which it took place had slipped back to the 10th. Hence the Act 24 George II. c. 23, by which September 2, 1752, was followed by September 14 instead of by the 3rd, thus regaining the eleven days lost. This change from the so-called “ old style” to the “new style” is responsible for a great deal of confusion.
24
STONEHENGE
CH. Ill
Another cause of trouble was the forsaking by the Jews of the solar year, with which they commenced, in favour of the Babylonian lunar year, which has been continued for the purposes of worship by Christians, giving us “ movable feasts ” to such an extent that Easter Day, which once invariably marked the spring equinox, may vary from March 22 to April 25, and Whit Sunday from May 10 to June 13. It is at once obvious that no fixed operations of Nature can lie indicated by such variable dates as these.
Hence in what follows I shall only deal with the months involved; these amply suffice for a general statement, but a discussion as to exact dates may come later.
To sum up, then, the astronomer-priests had (l) to watch the time at night by observing a star rising near the north point of the horizon. This star would act as a warner of sunrise at some time of the year.
(2) To watch for the rising or setting of other stars in various azimuths warning sunrise at the other critical times of the May or Solstitial years.
(3) To watch the sunrise and sunset.
(4) To mark all rising or setting places of the warning stars and sun by sight-lines from the circle.
CHAPTER IV
THE VARIOUS NEW-YEAR DAYS
WITH regard to the astronomical year it may be stated that each solstice and equinox has in turn in some country or another, and even in the same country at different times, been taken as the beginning of the year. •
We have, then, to begin with, the following which may be called astronomical years :—
Solstitial /June December June.
year. [December June December.
Equinoctial fMarch September March.
year. [September March September.
Next, if we treat the intermediate points we have found in the same way, we have the following vegetation years:—
Flower J May N ovember May.
year. /November May November.
Harvest /August February August.
year. /February August February.
It will have been gathered from Fig. 7 that the temples or cromlechs erected to watch the first sunrise of the May-November-May year could also perform the same office for the August-February-August year; and in a
26
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
stone circle the priests, by looking along the axis almost in an opposite direction, could note the sunsets marking the completion of the half of the sun’s yearly round in November and February.
Now to those who know anything of the important contributions of Grimm, Rh^s, Frazer, and many others we might name, to our knowledge of the mythology, worships, and customs in the Mediterranean basin and western Europe, an inspection of the first columns in the above tables will show that here we have a common meeting-ground for temple orientation, vegetation and customs depending on it, religious festivals, and mythology. From the Egyptian times at least to our own a generic sun-god has been specifically commemorated in each of the named months. Generic customs with specific differences are as easily traced in the same months; while generic vegetation with specific representatives proper to the season of the year has been so carefully regarded that even December, though without May flowers or August harvests, not to be outdone, brings forward its offering in the shape of the berries of the mistletoe and holly.
About the mistletoe there is this difficulty. Innumerable traditions associate it with worship and the oak tree. Undoubtedly the year in question was the solstitial year, so that so far as this goes the association is justified. But as a rule the mistletoe does not grow on oaks. This point has been frequently inquired into, especially by Dr. Henry Ball (Journal of Botany, vol. ii. p. 361, 1864) in relation to the growth of the plant in Herefordshire, and by a writer in the Quarterly Review (vol. cxiv.), who spoke of the mistletoe “deserting the oak ” in modern times and stated, “ it is now so rarely
IV
THE VARIOUS NEW-YEAR DAYS
27
found on that tree as to have led to the suggestion that we must look for the mistletoe of the Druids, not in the Viscum album of our own trees and orchards, but in the Loranthus Europaeus which is frequently found on oaks in the south of Europe.”
On this point 1 consulted two eminent botanical friends, Mr. Murray, of the British Museum, and Prof. Farmer, from whom I have learned that the distribution of V. album is in Europe universal except north of Norway and north of Russia; in India in the temperate Himalayas from Kashmir to Nepaul, altitude 3000 to 7000 feet.
The Viscum aureum, otherwise called Loranthus Europaeus, is a near relation of the familiar mistletoe, and in Italy grows on the oak almost exclusively. There are fifty species of Loranthus in the Indian flora, but L. Europaeus does not occur.
In the Viscum aureum we have the “ golden bough,” the oak-borne Aurum frondens and Ramus aureus of Virgil; and it can easily be imagined that when the Druids reached our shores from a country which had supplied them with the Viscum aureum, this would be replaced by the V. album growing chiefly on apple trees and not on oaks; indeed, Mr. Davies, in his “ Celtic Researches,” tells us that the apple was the next sacred tree to the oak, and that apple orchards were planted in the vicinity of the sacred groves. The transplanting of the mistletoe from the apple to the oak tree before the mystic ceremonies began was not beyond the resources of priestcraft.
It must not be forgotten that these ceremonies took place at both solstices—once in June, when the oak was
28
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
in full leaf, and again in December, when the parasitic plant was better visible in the light of the young moon. Mr. Frazer, in his “Golden Bough” (iii. p. 328), points ?out that at the summer solstice not only was mistletoe gathered, but many other “ magic plants, whose evanescent virtue can be secured at this mystic season alone.”
It is the ripening of the berries at the winter solstice which secured for the mistletoe the paramount importance the ceremonials connected with it possessed at that time, when the rest of the vegetable world was •dormant.
With regard especially to the particular time of the year chosen for sun-worship and the worship of the gods and solar heroes connected with the years to which I have referred, I may add that the vague year in Egyptian chronology makes it a very difficult matter to determine the exact Gregorian dates for the ancient Egyptian festivals, but, fortunately, there is another way of getting at them. Mr. Roland Mitchell, when compiling his valuable “Egyptian Calendar” (Luzac and Co., 1900), found that the Koptic calendar really presents to us the old Egyptian year, “ which has been in use for thousands of years, and has survived all the revolutions.”
Of the many festivals included in the calendar, the great Tanta fair, which is also a Mohammedan feast, ?“ is the most important of all held in Egypt. Religion, commerce, and pleasure offer combined attractions.” As many as 600,000 or 700,000 often attend this great fair, “ no doubt the survival of one of the ancient Egyptian national festivals.”
THE VARIOUS NEW-YEAR DAYS
IV
29
It is held so as to end on a Friday, and in 1901 the Friday was August 9!
This naturally suggests that we should look for a feast in the early part of May. We find the Festival of Al-Khidr, or Elias in the middle of the wheat harvest in Lower Egypt; of this we read :—
“ Al-Khidr is a mysterious personage, who, according to learned opinion, was a just man, or saint, the Visir of Dhu’l-Karnen (who was a great conqueror, contemporary with Ibrahim—Abraham—and identified in other legends with Alexander the Great, St. George, &e.). Al-Khidr, it is believed, still lives, and will live until the Day of Judgment. He is clad in green garments, whence probably the name. He is commonly identified with Elias (Elijah), and this confusion seems due to a confusion or similarity of some of the attributes that tradition assigns to both.”
“ The ‘ Festival of El-Khidr and of Elias,’ falling generally on May 6, marks the two-fold division of the year, in the Turkish and Armenian calendars, into the Ruz Kasim and the Ruz Khidr (of 179-80 and 185-6 days respectively.”
This last paragraph is important, as it points to ancient sun-worship, Helios being read for Elias ; and 179 days from May 6 bring us to November l. So we find that the modern Turks and Armenians have the old May-November year as well as the ancient Egyptians who celebrated it in the Temple of Menu at Thebes.
The traces of the Ptah worship are not so obvious. Finally, it may be stated that the second Tanta fair occurs at the spring equinox, so that the pyramid worship can still be traced in the modern Egyptian
30
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
calendar. The proof that this was an exotic1 is established, I think, by the fact that no important agricultural operations occur at this period in Egypt, while in May we have the harvest, in August and November sowing, going on.
A cursory examination of Prof. Rh^s’ book containing the Hibbert Lectures of 1886, in the light of these years, used as clues, suggests that in Ireland the sequence was May-November (Fomori and Fir Bolg), August-February (Lug and the Tuatha Danann), and, lastly, June-December (Ciichulainn). Should this be confirmed we see that the farmers’ years were the first to be established, and it is interesting to note that the agricultural rent year in many parts of Ireland still runs from May to November. It is well also to bear in mind, if it be established that the solstitial year did really arrive last, that the facts recorded by Mr. Frazer in his “ Golden Bough ” indicate that the custom of lighting fires on hills has been in historic times most prevalent at the summer solstice; evidently maps showing the geographical distribution of the May, June, and August fires would be of great value.
Some customs of the May and August years are common to the solstitial and equinoctial years. Each was ushered in by fires on hills and the like; flowers in May and the fruits of the earth in August are associated with them; there are also special customs in the case of November. In western Europe, however, it does not seem that such traditions exist over such a
1 In Babylonia the spring equinox was the critical time of the year because the Tigris and Euphrates then began to rise.
THE VARIOUS NEW-YEAR DAYS
IV
3i
large area as that over which the remnants of the solstitial practices have been traced.
I have pointed out that both the May and August years began when the sun had the same declination (16° N. or thereabouts); once, on its ascent from March to the summer solstice in June, again in its decline from the solstice to September. Hence it may be more difficult in this case to disentangle and follow the mythology, but the two years stand out here and there. With regard to August, Mr. Penrose’s orientation data for the Panathensea fix the 19th day (Gregorian) for the festival in the Hecatompedon; similar celebrations were not peculiar to western Europe and Greece, as a comparison of dates of worship will show.
Hecatompedon...
Older Erechtheum Temple of Diana, Ephesus „ Min, Thebes „ Ptah, Memphis
„ „ Annu
„ Solar Disc, Tell el-Amarna
April 28 and August 16. April 29 „ August 13. April 29 „ August 13. May 1 „ August 12. April 18 „ August 24. April 18 „ August 24. April 18 „ August 24.
In the above table I have given both the dates on which the sunlight (at rising or setting) entered the temple, but we do not know for certain, except in the case of the Hecatompedon, on which of the two days the temples were used; it is likely they were all used on both days, and that the variation from the dates proper to the sun’s declination of N. 16° indicates that they were very accurately oriented to fit the local vegetation conditions in the most important and extensive temple fields in the world.
STONEHENGE
CHAP-
31
This is the more probable because the Jews also, after they had left Egypt, established their feast of Pentecost fifty days after Easter = May 10, on which day loaves made of newly harvested corn formed the chief offering.
With regard to the equinoctial year, the most complete account of the temple arrangements is to be found in Josephus touching that at Jerusalem. The temple had to be so erected that at the spring equinox the sunrise light should fall on, and be reflected to, the worshippers by the sardonyx stones on the high priest’s garment. At this festival the first barley was laid upon the altar.
But this worship was in full swing in Egypt for thousands of years before we hear of it in connection with the Jews. It has left its temples at Ephesus, Athens, and other places, and with the opening of this year as well as of the solstitial one the custom of lighting fires is associated, not only on hills, but also in churches.
Here the sequence of cult cannot be mistaken. We begin with Isis and the young Sun-god Horus at the Pyramids, and we end with “ Lady Day,” a British legal date; while St. Peter’s at Rome is as truly oriented to the equinox as the Pyramids themselves, so that we have a distinct change of cult with no change of orientation.
If such considerations as these help us to connect Egyptian with British worships we may hope that they will be no less useful when we go further afield. I gather from a study of Mr. Maudslay’s admirable plans of Palenque and Chich^n-Itzd that the solstitial and
i
IV
THE VARIOUS NEW-YEAR DAYS
33
farmers’ years’ worships were provided for there. How did these worships and associated temples with naos and sphinxes 1 get from Egypt to Yucatan ? The more we know of ancient travel the more we are convinced that it was coastwise, that is, from one point t>f visible land to the next. Are the cults as old as differences in the coast-lines which would most easily explain their wide distribution ?
1 See Dawn of Astronomy, Plate facing p. 182, for the lines of sphinxes at Karnak.
D
\
CHAPTER V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS AT STONEHENGE
AFTER Mr. Penrose, by his admirable observations in Greece, had shown that the orientation theory accounted as satisfactorily for the directions in which the chief temples in Greece had been built as I had shown it did for some in Egypt, it seemed important to apply the same methods of inquiry with all available accuracy to some example, at all events, of the various stone circles in Britain which have so far escaped destruction. Many attempts had been previously made to secure data, but the instruments and methods employed did not seem to be sufficient.
Much time has, indeed, been lost in the investigation of a great many of these circles, for the reason that in many cases the relations of the monuments to the chief points of the horizon have not been considered ; and when they were, the observations were made only with reference to the magnetic north, which is different at different places, and besides is always varying ; few indeed have tried to get at the astronomical conditions of the problem.
CH. v CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS 35
The first, I think, was Mr. Jonathan Otley, who in 1849 showed the “Orientation” of the Keswick Circle “according to the solar meridian,” giving true solar bearings throughout the year.
I wrote a good deal in Nature1 on sun and star temples in 1891, and Mr. Lewis the next year expressed the opinion that the British Stone Monuments, or some of them, were sun and star temples.
Mr. Magnus Spence of Deerness in Orkney published a pamphlet, “ Standing Stones and Maeshowe of Sten- ness,1 2” in 1894; it is a reprint of an article in the Scottish Review, Oct. 1893. Mr. Cursiter, F.S.A., of Kirkwall, in a letter to me dated 15 March 1894, a letter suggested by my Dawn of Astronomy which appeared .in that year and in which the articles which had appeared in Nature in 1891 had been expanded, drew my attention to the pamphlet; the observations had no pretension to scientific accuracy, and although some of the sight-lines were incorrectly shown in an accompanying map, May year and solstitial alignments were indicated.
So far as I know, there has never been a complete inquiry into the stone circles in Britain, but Mr. Lewis, who has paid great attention to these matters, has dealt in a general manner with them (Archaeological Journal, vol. xlix. p. 136), and has further described (Journal Anthropological Institute, n.s., iii., 1900) the observations made by him of stone circles in various parts of Scotland. From an examination of the latter he con-
1 See especially Nature, JxAy 2, 1891 p. 201.
2 Gardner, Paisley and London.
D 2
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
36
eludes that they may be divided into different types, each of which has its centre in a different locality. The types are—(1) the Western Scottish type, consisting of a rather irregular single ring or sometimes of two concentric rings; (2) the Inverness type, consisting of a more regular ring of better-shaped stones, surrounding a tumulus with a retaining wall, containing a built-up chamber and passage leading to it, or a kist without a passage; (3) the Aberdeen type, consisting of a similar ring with the addition of a so-called “ altar-stone ” and usually having traces of a tumulus and kist in the middle. In addition to these three types of circles, there are in Britain generally what Mr. Lewis calls sun and star circles, with their alignments of stones, and apparently proportioned measurements. He has shown that there is a great preponderance of outlying stones and hill-tops lying between the circles and the N.E. quarter of the horizon. From what has been stated in Chapter III with regard to the nightly observations of stars it will be gathered that these may have been used for this purpose.
The following list gives some of the bearings of outlying stones and other circles from the centres of the named circles :—
Roll-rich, Oxon.—Kingston© ... ... ... N. 27° E.
Stripple Stones, Cornwall—Bastion on bank ... N. 26 E.
Long Meg, Cumberland—Small circle... ... N. 27 E.
The Hurlers, Cornwall—Two outlying circles ... N. 13-16 E.
Trippet Stones—Leaze circle ... ... N. 11 E.
If these alignments mean anything they must of course refer to the rising of stars, as the position on the horizon is outside the sun’s path.
i
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
37
The many circles in Cornwall have been dealt with by Mr. Lukis in a volume published by the Society of Antiquaries in 1895.1 A carefully prepared list of circles will be found in Mr. Windle’s recently published work entitled “ Remains of the Prehistoric Age in England.”
It may be useful here to state, with regard to mega- lithic remains generally, that they may be classed as follows; some details will be discussed later on.
(?) Circles. These may be single, double, or multiple, and either concentric or not.
(?) Menhirs, large single stones, used to mark sightlines from circles.
(c) Alignments, i.e., lines of stones in single, double, or in many parallel lines. If these alignments are short they are termed avenues.
(d) Holed-stones, doubtless used for observing sight- lines, sometimes over a circle.
(e) Coves. A term applied by Dr. Stukeley and others to what they considered shrines formed by three upright stones, thus leaving one side open. I take them to be partially protected observing places. There are well-marked examples at Avebury, Stanton Drew and Kit’s Coity House.
(f) Cromlechs. This term generally means a grouping of upright stones; it is applied to irregular circles in Brittany. It also applies to a stone or stones raised on the summits of three or more pillar stones forming the end and sides of an irregular vault generally open at one end (“ Dolmens of Ireland,” Borlase, p. 429).
1 “The Prehistoric Stone Monuments of the British Isles— Cornwall.”
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
38
The top stone is called in S.W. England a “quoit.” Cromlechs in most cases have been covered by barrows or cairns.
(g) Dolmens, from Dol Men, a table stone. These consist of stones, resting on two or more upright stones forming a more or less complete chamber, some of which are of great length. I note the following subdivisions: “ Dolmen h galerie ” having an entrance way of sufficient height, and “ Galgal,” similar but smaller. In the “ Dolmen h l’all^e couverte ” there is a covered passage way to the centre. It is a more elaborate cove. For the relation between cromlechs and dolmens, see Borlase (loc. cit. and p. 424 et seq.).
With regard to dolmens, I give the following quotation from Mr. Penrose {Nature, vol. lxiv., September 12, 1901):—
“ Near Locmariaquer in the estuary named Riviere d’Auray, there is an island named Gavr’ Inis, or Goat Island, which contains a good specimen of the kind of dolmen which has been named * Galgal.’
“ At the entrance our attention is at once arrested by the profusion of tracery which covers the walls. From the entrance to the wall facing us the distance is between 50 and 60 feet. The square chamber to which the gallery leads is composed of two huge slabs, the sides of the room and gallery being composed of upright stones, about a dozen on each side. The mystic lines and hieroglyphics similar to those above mentioned appear to have a decorative character.
“ An interesting feature of Gavr’ Inis is its remarkable resemblance to the New Grange tumulus at Meath.
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
39
In construction there is again a strong resemblance to Maes-Howe, in the island of Orkney. There is also some resemblance in smaller details.”
While we generally have circles in Britain without, or with small, alignments; in Brittany we have alignments without circles, some of them being on an enormous scale;1 thus at Menec (the place of stones) we have eleven lines of menhirs, terminating towards the west in a cromlech, and, notwithstanding that great numbers have been converted to other uses, 1169 menhirs still remain, some reaching as much as 18 feet in height.
The alignments of Kermario (the place of the dead) contain 989 menhirs in ten lines. Those of Kerlescant (the place of burning), which beginning with eleven rows are afterwards increased to thirteen, contain altogether 579 stones and thirty-nine in the cromlech, with some additional stones. The adoration paid these stones yielded very slowly to Christianity. In the church history of Brittany the Cultus Lapidum was denounced in 658 A.D.
Many of the fallen menhirs in these alignments have been restored to their upright position by the French Government. Some of them may have been overturned in compliance with the decree of 658 A.D. above referred to. Several of the loftier menhirs are surmounted by crosses of stone or iron.
Both circles and alignments are associated with holidays and the lighting of fires on certain days of the
1 “ The French Stonehenge: An Account of the Principal Mega- lithic Remains in the Morbihan Archipelago.” By T. Cato Worsfold, F.R.Hist.S., F.R.S.l. (London: Bemrose and Sons, Ltd.)
4o
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
year. This custom has remained more general in Brittany than in Britain. At Mount St. Michael, near Carnac, the custom still prevails of lighting a large bonfire on its summit at the time of the summer solstice ; others, kindled on prominent eminences for a distance of twenty or thirty miles round, reply to it. These fires are locally called “ Tan Heol,” and also by a later use, Tan St. Jean. In Scotland there was a similar custom in the first week in May under the name of Bel Tan, or Baal’s Fire; the synonym for summer used by Sir Walter Scott in the “ Lady of the Lake”
Ours is no sapling chance-sown by the fountain,
Blooming at Beltane in winter to fade.
At Kerlescant the winter solstice is celebrated by a holiday, whilst Menec greets the summer solstice, and Kermario the equinoxes, with festivals. Concerning these fires and the associated customs Mr. Frazer’s “ Golden Bough ” is a perfect mine of information and should be consulted. It may simply be said here that the May and November, and June and December fires seem to be the most ancient. It is stated that the Balder bale fires on Mayday Eve were recognised by the primitive race, and I shall prove this in the sequel when British customs are referred to. On the introduction of Christianity the various customs were either transferred to or reorganised in association with church festivals; but as some of these, such as Easter, are movable feasts, it is difficult to follow the dates.
Regarding both circles and alignments in the light of the orientation theory, we may consider simple
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
4i
circles with a central stone as a collection of sightlines from the central stone to one or more of the outer ones, or the interval between any two; indicating the place of the rise or setting of either the sun or a star on some particular day of the year, which day, in the case of the sun, will be a new year’s day.
Alignments, on the other hand, will play the same part as the sight-lines in the circles.
Sometimes the sight-line may be indicated by a menhir outside, and even at a considerable distance from, the circle ; later on tumuli replaced menhirs.
The dolmens have, I am convinced, been in many cases not graves originally, but darkened observing places whence to observe along a sight-line; this would be best done by means of an allee couverte, the predecessor of the darkened naos at Stonehenge, shielded by its covered trilithons.
In order to obtain some measurements to test the orientation theory in Britain, I found that Stonehenge is the ancient monument in this country which lends- itself to accurate theodolite work better than any other. Mr. Spence’s excellent work on astronomical lines at Stenness, where the stones, till some years ago- at all events, have been more respected than further south, suggested a beginning there, but the distance from London made it impossible.
Avebury and Stanton Drew are well known to a great many archaeologists; there are also other very wonderful stone circles near Keswick and in other parts of England ; but unfortunately it is very much more difficult to get astronomical data from these
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
42
ancient monuments than it is in the case of Stonehenge, one reason being that Stonehenge itself lies high, and the horizon round it in all directions is pretty nearly the same height, so that the important •question of the heights of the hills along the sight- line—a matter which is fundamental from an astronomical point of view, although it has been neglected, so far as I can make out, by most who have made observations on these ancient monuments—is quite a simple one at Stonehenge. Hence it was much easier to determine a date there than by working at any of the other ancient remains to which I have referred.
In orientation generally—such orientation as has heen dealt with by Mr. Penrose and myself in Egypt and in Greece—the question frequently was a change in direction in the axis of a temple, or the laying down of the axis of a temple, by means of observations of stars. Unfortunately for us as archaeologists, not as astronomers, the changes of position of the stars, owing to certain causes, chiefly the precessional movement, are very considerable; so that if a temple pointed to a star in one year, in two or three hundred years it would no longer point to the same star, but to another.
These star observations were requisite in order to warn the priests about an hour before sunrise so that they might prepare for the morning sacrifice which -always took place at the first appearance of the sun. Hence the morning star to be visible in the dawn must be a bright one, and the further north or south •of the sum’s rising place it rose, the more easily it would be seen. Some stars so chosen rose not far
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
43
from the north point of the horizon. The alignments with small azimuths referred to in the British circles {p. 36) I believe to be connected with the Egyptian and Greek practice.
Acting on a very old tradition, some people from Salisbury and other surrounding places go to observe the sunrise on the longest day of the year at Stonehenge. We therefore are perfectly justified in assuming that it was a solar temple used for observation in the height of midsummer. But at dawn in midsummer in these latitudes the sky is so bright that it is not easy to see stars even if we get up in the morning to look for them; stars, therefore, were not in question, so that some other principle had to be adopted, and that was to point the temple directly to the position on the horizon at which the sun rose on that particular day of the year, and no other.
Now, if there were no change in the position of the sun, that, of course, would go on for ever and ever; but, fortunately for archaeologists, there is a slight change in the position of the sun, as there is in the case of a star, but for a different reason; the planes of the ecliptic and of the equator undergo a slight change in the angle included between them. So far as we know, that angle has been gradually getting less for many thousands of years, so that, in the case of Stonehenge, if we wish to determine the date, having no stars to help us, the only thing that we can hope to get any information from is the very slow change of this angle; that, therefore, was the special point which Mr. Penrose and I were anxious to study at Stonehenge, for the reason that we seemed in a position
44
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
FIG. 8.—The original tooling of the stone protected from the action of the
weather.
to do it there more conveniently than anywhere else in Britain.
But while the astronomical conditions are better at
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
45
Stonhenge than elsewhere, the ruined state of the monument makes accurate measurements very difficult.
Great age and the action of weather are responsible for much havoc, so that very many of the stones are now recumbent, as will be gathered from an article
FIG. 9.—View of Stonehenge from the west. A, stone which fell in 1900; BB, 8tones which fell in 1797. (Reproduced from an article on the fallen stones by Mr. Lewis in Man.)
by Mr. Lewis, who described the condition of the monument in 1901, in Man.
Professor Gowland in his excavations at Stonehenge, to which I shall refer in the sequel, found the original tooled surface near the bottom of one of the large sarsens which had been protected from the action of the weather by having been buried in the ground. It enables us to imagine the appearance of the monument as it left the hands of the builders (Fig.
.
46
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
But the real destructive agent has l>een man himself ; savages could not have played more havoc with
FIG. 10.—Copy of Hoare's plan of 1810, showing the unbroken Vallum and its relation with the Avenue.
the monument than the English who have visited it at different times for different purposes. It is said the
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
47
fall of one great stone was caused in 1620 by some excavations, but this has been doubted; the fall of another in 1797 was caused by gipsies digging a hole in which to shelter, and boil their kettle; many of the stones have been used for building walls and bridges; masses weighing from 56 lb. downwards have been broken off by hammers or cracked off as a result of fires lighted by excursionists.
It appears that the temenos wall or vallum, which is shown complete in Hoare’s plan of 1810, is now broken down in many places by vehicles indiscriminately driven over it. Indeed, its original importance has now become so obliterated that many do not notice it as part of the structure—that, in fact, it bears the same relation to the interior stone circle as the nave of St. Paul’s does to the Lady Chapel (Fig. 10).
It is within the knowledge of all interested in archaeology that not long ago Sir Edmund Antrobus, the owner of Stonehenge, advised by the famous Wiltshire local society, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, and the Society of Antiquaries, enclosed the monument in order to preserve it from further wanton destruction, and—a first step in the way of restoration—with the skilled assistance of Prof. Gowland and Messrs. Carruthers, Detmar Blow and Stallybrass, set upright the most important menhir, which threatened to fall or else break off at one of the cracks. This menhir, the so-called “leaning stone,” once formed one of the uprights of the trilithon the fall of the other member of which is stated by Mr. Lewis to have occurred before 1574. The latter, broken in two pieces,
48 STONEHENGE CHAP.
1
FIG. 11.—The Leaning Stone in 1901.
and the supported impost, now lie prostrate across the altar stone.
This piece of work was carried out with consummate
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
49
skill and care, and most important conclusions, as we shall see in a subsequent chapter, were derived from the minute inquiry into the conditions revealed in the excavations which were necessary for the proper conduct of the work.
Let us hope that we have heard the last of the work of devastators, and even that, before long, some of the other larger stones, now inclined or prostrate, may be set upright.
Since Sir Edmund Antrobus, the present owner, has acted on the advice of the societies I have named to enclose the monument, with a view to guard it from destruction and desecration, he has been assailed on all sides. It is not a little surprising that the “un- climbable wire fence ” recommended by the societies in question (the Bishop of Bristol being the president of the Wiltshire society at the time) is by some regarded as a suggestion that the property is not national, the fact being that the nation has not bought the property, and that it has been private property for centuries, and treated in the way we have seen.
Let us hope also that before long the gaps in the vallum may be - filled up. These, as I have already stated, take away from the meaning of an important part of one of the most imposing monuments of the world. In the meantime, it is comforting to know that, thanks to what Sir Edmund Antrobus has done, no more stones will be stolen, or broken by sledge-hammers ; that fires; that excavations such as were apparently the prime cause of the disastrous fall of one of the majestic trilithons in 1797 ; that litter, broken bottles
E
5°
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
and the like, with which too many British sightseers mark their progress, besides much indecent desecration, are things of the past.
If Stonehenge had been built in Italy, or France, or Germany, it would have been in charge of the State long ago.
I now pass from the monument itself to a reference to some of the traditions and historical statements concerning it.
Those who are interested in these matters should thank the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, which is to be warmly congratulated on its persistent and admirable efforts to do all in its power to enable the whole nation to learn about the venerable monuments of antiquity which it has practically taken under its scientific charge. It has published two most important volumes1 dealing specially with Stonehenge, including both its traditions and history.
With regard to Mr. Long’s memoir, it may be stated that it includes important extracts from notices of Stonehenge from the time of Henry of Huntingdon (twelfth century) to Hoare (1812), and that all extant information is given touching on the questions by whom the stones were erected, whence they came, and what was the object of the structure.
From Mr. Harrison’s more recently published bibliography, no reference to Stonehenge by any ancient author, no letter to the Times for the last twenty
1 The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine: “ Stonehenge and its Barrows.” By William Long, M.A., F.S.A. 1876. The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine : “ Stonehenge Bibliography Number.” By W. Jerome Harrison. 1902.
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
v
51
years dealing with any question touching the monuments, seems to be omitted.
It is very sad to read, both in Mr. Long’s volume and the bibliography, of the devastation which has been allowed to go on for so many years. and of the various forms it has taken.
As almost the whole of the notes which follow deal with the assumption of Stonehenge having been a solar temple, a short reference to the earliest statements concerning this view is desirable; and, again, as the approximate date arrived at by Mr. Penrose and myself in 1901 is an early one, a few words may be added indicating the presence in Britain at that time of a race of men capable of designing and executing such work. I quote from the paper communicated by Mr. Penrose and myself to the Royal Society :—
“ As to the first point, Diodorus Siculus (ii., 47, ed. Didot, p. 116) has preserved a statement of Hecatseus in which Stonehenge alone can by any probability be referred to.
“ ‘ We think that no one will consider it foreign to our subject to say a word respecting the Hyperboreans.
“ ‘ Amongst the writers who have occupied themselves with the mythology of the ancients, Hecatseus and some others tell us that opposite the land of the Celts [ev rois dvriirepav rrjs KSXTCKIJS T6irois\ there exists in the Ocean an island not smaller than Sicily, and which, situated under the constellation of The Bear, is inhabited by the Hyperboreans; so called because they live beyond the point from which the North wind blows. ... If one may believe the same mythology, Latona was born in
£ 2
52
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
this island, and for that reason the inhabitants honour Apollo more than any other deity. A sacred enclosure [vfjaov] is dedicated to him in the island, as well as a magnificent circular temple adorned with many rich offerings. . . . The Hyperboreans are in general very friendly to the Greeks.’ ”
“ The Hecatseus above referred to was probably Hecatseus of Abdera, in Thrace, fourth century B.c. ; a friend of Alexander the Great. This Hecatseus is said to have written a history of the Hyperboreans: that it was Hecatseus of Miletus, an historian of the sixth century B.C., is less likely.
“As to the second point, although we cannot go so far back in evidence of the power and civilisation of the Britons, there is an argument of some value to be drawn from the fine character of the coinage issued by British kings early in the second century B.C., and from the statement of Julius Csesar (‘ De Bello Gallico,’ vi., c. 14) that in the schools of the Druids the subjects taught included the movements of the stars, the size of the earth, and the nature of things (multa praeterea de sideribus et eorum motu, de mundi magnitudine, de rerum natura, de deorum immortalium vi ac potes- tate disputant et juventuti tradunt).
“Studies of such a character seem quite consistent with, and to demand, a long antecedent period of civilisation.”
Henry of Huntingdon is the first English writer to refer to Stonehenge, which he calls Stanenges. Geoffrey of Monmouth (1138) and Giraldus Cambrensis come next.
In 1771, Dr. John Smith, in a work entitled “Choir Gawr, the Grand Orrery of the Ancient Druids, called
V
CONDITIONS AND TRADITIONS
S3
Stonehenge, Astronomically Explained, and proved to be a Temple for Observing the Motions of the Heavenly Bodies,” wrote as follows:—
“ From many and repeated visits, I conceived it to be an astronomical temple; and from what I could recollect to have read of it, no author had as yet investigated its uses. Without an instrument or any assistance whatever, but White’s ‘Ephemeris,’ I began my survey. I suspected the stone called The Friar’s Heel to be the index that would disclose the uses of this structure; nor was I deceived. This stone stands in a right line with the centre of the temple, pointing to the north-east. I first drew a circle round the
vallum of the ditch and divided it into 360 equal parts; and then a right line through the body of the temple to the Friar’s Heel; at the intersection of these lines 1 reckoned the sun’s greatest amplitude at the summer solstice, in this latitude, to be about 60 degrees, and fixed the eastern points accordingly. Pursuing this plan, I soon discovered the uses of all the detached stones, as well as those that formed the body of the temple.”
With regard to this “ Choir Gawr,” translated Chorea Gigantum, Leland’s opinion is quoted (Long, p. 51) that we should read Choir vawr, the equivalent of which is Chorea nobilis or magna.1
In spite of Inigo Jones’s (1600) dictum that Stonehenge was of Roman origin, Stukeley came to the conclusion in 1723 that the Druids were responsible for
1 Mr. Morien Morgan informs me that Cor y Gawres is correct, and means Choir of the Giantess Cariadwen, the Welsh Neith, Nyth (Nydd).
54
STONEHENGE
CH. V
its building; and Halley, who visited it in 1720— probably with Stukeley—concluded from the weatherin of the stones that it was at least 3000 years old ; he only had taken his theodolite with him, how much his interest in the monument would have been increased 1
ft; oo
CHAPTER VI
GENERAL ARCHITECTURE OF STONEHENGE
ALTHOUGH I have before hinted that the astronomical use of the Egyptian temples and British circles was the same, there is at first sight a vast difference in the general plan of structure.
This has chiefly depended upon the fact that the riches and population of ancient Egypt were so great that that people could afford to build a temple to a particular star, or to the sun’s position on any particular .day of the year. The temple axis along the line pointing to the celestial body involved, then became the chief feature, and tens of years were spent in lengthening, constricting and embellishing it.
From one end of an Egyptian temple to the other we find the axis marked out by narrow apertures in the various. pylons, and many walls with doors crossing the axis. There are seventeen or eighteen of these apertures in the solar temple of Amen-Ra at Karnak, limiting the light which falls into the Holy of Holies or Sanctuary. This construction gives one a very definite impression that every part of the temple was built to subserve a special object, viz., to limit the sunlight which fell on its front into a narrow beam,
STONEHENGE
CH. VI
56
FIG. 12.—The axis of the Temple of Karnak, looking south-east, from outside the north-west pylon (from a photograph by the author).
and to carry it to the other extremity of the temple —into the sanctuary, where the high priest performed
FIG. 13.— Plan of the Temple of Rainses II. in the Memnonia at Thebes (from *Lepsius), showing the pylon at the open end, the various doors along the: axis, the sanctuary at the closed end, and the temple at right angles.
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
58
his functions. The sanctuary was always blocked. There is no case in which the beam of light can pass absolutely through a temple (Figs. 12 and 13).
In Britain the case was different, there was neither skill nor workers sufficient to erect such stately piles, and as a consequence one structure had to do the work of several and it had to be done in the most economical way. Hence the circle with the observer at the centre and practically a temple axis in every direction among which could be chosen the chief directions required, each alignment being defined by stones, more or less distant, or openings in the circle itself.
Now for some particulars with regard to those parts of Stonehenge which lend themselves to the inquiry.
The main architecture of Stonehenge consisted of an external circle of about 100 feet in diameter, composed of thirty large upright stones, named sarsens, connected by continuous lintels. The upright stones formerly stood 14 feet above the surface of the ground. They have nobs or tenons on the top which fit into mortice holes in the lintels. Within this peristyle there was originally an inner structure of ten still larger upright stones, arranged in the shape of a horseshoe, formed by five isolated trilithons which rose progressively from N.E. to S.W., the loftiest stones being 25 feet above the ground. About one-half of these uprights have fallen, and a still greater number of the imposts which they originally carried.
There is also another circle of smaller upright stones, respecting which the only point requiring notice now is that none of them would have interrupted the line of the axis of the avenue. The circular temple was also
VI
GENERAL ARCHITECTURE
59
surrounded by the earthen bank, shown in Fig. 15, of about 300 feet in diameter, interrupted towards the
north-east by receiving into itself the banks forming the avenue before mentioned, which is about 50 feet across.
FIG. 14.—One of the remaining Trilithons.
6o
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
Within this avenue, no doubt an old via sacra, and looking north-east from the centre of the temple, at about 250 feet distance and considerably to the right hand of the axis, stands an isolated stone, which from a mediaeval legend has been named the Friar’s Heel.
s
FIG. 15.—General plan; the outer circle, naos and avenue of Stonehenge.
F.H. = Friar’s Heel.
The axis passes very nearly centrally through an intercolumniation (so to call it) between two uprights of the external circle and between the uprights of the westernmost trilithon as it originally stood. Of this trilithon the southernmost upright with the lintel stone fell in 1620, but the companion survived as the
VI
GENERAL ARCHITECTURE
61
leaning stone which formed a conspicuous and picturesque object for many years, but happily now restored to its original more dignified and safer condition of verticality. The inclination of this stone, however, took place in the direction of the axis of the avenue, and as the. distance between it and its original companion is known both by the analogy of the two perfect tri- lithons and by the measure of the mortice holes on the lintel they formerly supported, we obtain by bisection the distance, 11 inches, from its edge, of a point in the continuation of the central axis of the avenue and temple.
The banks which form the avenue have suffered much degradation. It appears from Sir Richard Colt Hoare’s account that at the beginning of the last century they were distinguishable for a much greater distance than at present, but they are still discernible, especially on the northern side, for more than 1900 feet from the centre of the temple, and particularly the line of the bottom of the ditch from which the earth was taken to form the bank, and which runs parallel to it.
CHAPTER VII
ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS AT STONEHENGE IN 1901 1
AN investigation was undertaken by Mr. Penrose and myself in the spring of 1901, as a sequel to analogous work in Egypt and Greece, with a view to determine whether the orientation theory could throw any light upon the date of the foundation of Stonehenge, concerning which authorities vary in their estimates by some thousands of years. Ours was not the first attempt to obtain the date of Stonehenge by means of astronomical considerations. In Mr. Godfrey Higgins’ work 2 he refers to a method of attack connected with precession. This furnished him with the date 4000 B.c.
More recently, Prof. W. M. Flinders Petrie,3 whose plan of the stones is a valuable contribution to the study of Stonehenge, was led by his measures of the orientation to a date very greatly in the opposite direction, but, owing to an error in his application of the change of obliquity, clearly a mistaken one.
The chief astronomical evidence in favour of the
1 This chapter and the end of the previous one are mainly based on the paper communicated by Mr. Penrose and myself to the Royal
Society (see Proceedings, Royal Society, vol. 69, p. 137 seq.).
2 The Celtic Druids. 4to. London. 1827.
3 Stonehenge, &c. 1880.
CH.VII ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS IN 1901 63
solar temple theory lies in the fact that the •“ avenue,” as it is called, formed by two ancient earthen banks, extends for a considerable distance from the structure, in the general direction of the sunrise at the summer solstice, precisely in the same way as in Egypt a long avenue of sphinxes indicates the principal outlook of a temple.
These earthen banks defining the avenue do not exist alone. As will be seen from the sketch plan (Fig. 15), there is a general common line of direction for the avenue and the principal axis of the structure; and the general design of the building, together with the position and shape of the naos, indicates a close connection of the whole temple structure with the direction of the avenue. There may have been other pylon and screen equivalents as in other ancient temples, which have disappeared, the object being to confine the illumination to a small part of the naos. There can be little doubt,, also, that the temple was originally roofed in, and that the sun’s first ray, suddenly shining into the darkness, formed a fundamental part of the cultus.
With regard to the question of the roof, however, the above suggestion, I now find, is not new, the view having been held by no less an authority than Dr. Thurnham, who apparently was led to it by the representations of the Scandinavian temples as covered and enclosed structures.
Since the actual observation of sunrise was doubtless made within the sanctuary itself, we seem justified in taking the orientation of the axis to be the same as that of the avenue, and since in the present state of the S.W. trilithon the direction of the avenue can
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
*4
probably be determined with greater accuracy than that of the temple axis itself, the estimate of date must be based upon the orientation of the avenue. Further evidence will be given, however, to show that the direction of the axis of the temple, so far as it can now be determined, is sufficiently accordant with the direction of the avenue.
The orientation of this avenue may be examined upon the same principles that have been found successful in the case of Greek and Egyptian temples—that is, on the assumption that Stonehenge was a solar temple, and that the greatest function took place at sunrise on the longest day of the year. This not only had a religious motive; it had also the economic value of marking officially and distinctly that time of the year and the beginning of an annual period.
It is, indeed, possible that the present structure may have had other capabilities, such as being connected with the May year, the equinoxes or the winter solstice ; but it is with its uses at the summer solstice alone that we now deal.
There is a difference in treatment between the observations required for Stonehenge and those which are available for Greek or Egyptian solar temples. In the case of the latter, the effect of the precession of the equinoxes upon the stars, which as warning clock stars were almost invariably connected with .those temples, offers the best measure of the dates of foundation ; but in Britain, owing to the brightness of the dawn at the summer solstice, such a star could not have been employed, so that we can rely only on the secular change of the obliquity as affecting the azimuth of the
VII ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS IN 1901 65
point of sunrise. This requires the measurements to be taken with very great precision, and as the azimuth of the place of sunrise varies with the latitude, and as a datum point on the horizon in a known position was also required, Colonel Johnston, R.E., the Director- General of the Ordnance Survey, was asked for and obligingly supplied the following particulars :
The real point was to determine the direction of the so-called avenue. Measurements taken from the line of the bottom of the ditch assisted materially those taken from the crown of the bank itself. With this help and by using the southern bank and ditch when- , ever it admitted of recognition, a fair estimate of the central line could be arrived at. To verify this, two pegs were placed at points 140 feet apart along the line near the commencement of the avenue, and four others at distances averaging 100 feet apart nearer the further recognisable extremity, and their directions were measured with the theodolite, independently by two observers, the reference point being Salisbury Spire, of which the exact bearing had been communicated by Colonel Johnston.
This bearing was also measured locally by observations of the Sun and of Polaris, the mean of which differed by less than 20" from the Ordnance value. The resulting observations gave for the axis of the avenue nearest the commencement an azimuth of 49° 38' 48", and for that of the more distant part
Centre of stone circle, Stonehenge
Centre of spire, Salisbury Cathedral
F
66
STONEHENGE
CHAP.
49° 32' 54*. The mean of these two lines drawn from the central interval of the great trilithon, already referred to, passes between two of the sarsens of the exterior circle, which have an opening of about 4 feet, within a few inches of their middle point, the deviation being northwards. This may be considered to prove the close coincidence of the original axis of the temple with the direction of the avenue.
This value of the azimuth, the mean of which is 49° 35' 51", is confirmed by the information, also supplied from the Ordnance Survey, that from the centre of the temple, the bearing to the N.E. of the principal bench mark on a hill, about 8 miles distant, the bench mark being very near a well-known ancient fortified British encampment named Silbury or Sidbury, is 49° 34' 18"; and that the same line continued through Stonehenge, to the south-west, strikes another ancient fortification, namely, Grovely Castle, about 6 miles distant, and at practically the same azimuth, viz., 49° 35' 51". For the above reasons 49° 34' 18" has been adopted for the azimuth of the avenue.
The summer solstice sunrise in 1901 was also watched for by Mr. Howard Payn on five successive mornings, viz., June 21 to 25, and was successfully observed on the last occasion. As soon as the Sun’s limb was sufficiently above the horizon for its bisection to be well measured, it was found to be 8' 40" northwards of the peak of the Friar’s Heel, which was used as the reference point; the altitude of the horizon being 35' 48". The azimuth of this peak from the point of observation had been previously ascertained to be 50° 39' 5", giving for that of the Sun when measured, 50°
VII ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS IN 1901 67
30' 25"; by calculation that of the Sun, with the limb 2' above the horizon, should be 50° 30' 54". This observation was therefore completely in accordance with the results which had been obtained otherwise.
The time which would elapse between geometrical sunrise, that is, with the upper limb tangential with the horizon, and that which is here supposed, would be about 17 seconds, and the difference of azimuth would be 3' 15".
The remaining point was to find what value should be given to the Sun’s declination when it appeared showing itself 2' above the horizon, the azimuth being 49° 34' 18".
The data obtained for the determination of the required epoch were as follows:—
(1.) The elevation of the local horizon at the sunrise point seen by a man standing between the uprights of the great trilithon (a distance of about 8000 feet) is about 35' 30", and 2' additional for Sun’s upper limb makes 37' 30".
(2.) — Refraction + parallax, 27' 20".
(3.) Sun’s semi-diameter, allowance being made for greater eccentricity than at present, 15' 45".
(4.) Sun’s azimuth, 49° 34' 18", and N. latitude, 51° 10' 42".
From the above data the Sun’s declination works out 23° 54' 30" N., and by Stockwell’s tables of the obliquity, which are based upon modern determinations of the elements of the solar system,1 the date is found to be 1680 B.c.
It is to be understood that on account of the slight uncertainty as to the original line of observation and the
1 Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. xviii. No. 232, table 9. Washington. 1873. For curve, see page 130.
F 2
68
STONEHENGE
CH. VII
very slow rate of change in the obliquity of the ecliptic, the date thus derived may possibly be in error by 200 years more or less; this gives us a date of construction lying between say 1900 and 1500 B.c.
In this investigation the so-called Friar’s Heel was used only as a convenient point for reference and verification in measurement, and no theory was formed as to its purpose. It is placed at some distance, as before mentioned, to the south of the axis of the avenue, so that at the date arrived at for the erection of the temple the Sun must have completely risen before it was vertically over the summit of the stone. It may be remarked, further, that more than 500 years must yet elapse before such a coincidence can take place at the beginning of sunrise.
In an Appendix certain details of the observations are given.
In the next chapter I propose to show that an independent archaeological inquiry carried out, in a most complete and admirable way, just after Mr. Penrose and myself had obtained our conclusion, entirely corroborates the date at which we had arrived.
CHAPTER VIII
ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS AT STONEHENGE, 1901
SOON after Mr. Penrose and myself had made our astronomical survey of Stonehenge in 1901, some archaeological results of the highest importance were obtained by Professor Gowland. The operations which secured them were designed and carried out in order to re-erect the leaning stone which threatened to fall, a piece of work recommended to Sir Edmund Antrobus by the Society of Antiquaries of London and other learned bodies, and conducted at his desire and expense.
They were necessarily on a large scale, for the great monolith, “ the leaning stone,” is the largest in England, the Rudston monolith excepted. It stood behind the altar stone, over which it leant at an angle of 65 degrees, resting at one point against a small stone of syenite. Halfway up it had a fracture one-third across it; the weight of stone above this fracture was a dangerous strain on it, so that both powerful machinery and great care and precautions had to be used. Professor Gowland was charged by the Society of Antiquaries with the conduct of the excavations necessary in the work. The engineering operations were planned by Mr. Carruthers, and Mr. Detmar Blow was responsible for the local super-
