STONEHENGE AND OTHER GREAT STONE
MONUMENTS IN ENGLAND AND WALES
Stonehenge, the most famous of our English megalithic monuments, has
excited the attention of the historian and the legend-lover since early
times. According to some of the medieval historians it was erected by
Aurelius Ambrosius to the memory of a number of British chiefs whom
Hengist and his Saxons treacherously murdered in A.D. 462. Others add
that Ambrosius himself was buried there. Giraldus Cambrensis, who wrote
in the twelfth century, mingles these accounts with myth. He says,
"There was in Ireland, in ancient times, a pile of stones worthy of
admiration called the Giants' Dance, because giants from the remotest
part of Africa brought them to Ireland, and in the plains of Kildare,
not far from the castle of Naas, miraculously set them up.... These
stones (according to the British history) Aurelius Ambrosius, King of
the Britons, procured Merlin by supernatural means to bring from Ireland
to Britain."
From the present ruined state of Stonehenge it is not possible to state
with certainty what was the original arrangement, but it is probable
that it was approximately as follows (see frontispiece):
[Illustration: FIG. 1. Plan of Stonehenge in 1901. (After
_Archæologia_.) The dotted stones are of porphyritic diabase.]
There was an outer circle of about thirty worked upright stones of
square section (Fig. I). On each pair of these rested a horizontal
block, but only five now remain in position. These 'lintels' probably
formed a continuous architrave (Pl. I). The diameter of this outer
circle is about 97-1/2 feet, inner measurement. The stones used are
sarsens or blocks of sandstone, such as are to be found lying about in
many parts of the district round Stonehenge.
[Illustration: Plate I. STONEHENGE FROM THE SOUTH-WEST
Photo Graphotone Co. To face p. 17]
Well within this circle stood the five huge trilithons (_a-e_), arranged
in the form of a horseshoe with its open side to the north-east. Each
trilithon, as the name implies, consists of three stones, two of which
are uprights, the third being laid horizontally across the top. The
height of the trilithons varies from 16 to 21-1/2 feet, the lowest being
the two that stand at the open end of the horseshoe, and the highest
that which is at the apex. Here again all the stones are sarsens and all
are carefully worked. On the top end of each upright of the trilithons
is an accurately cut tenon which dovetails into two mortices cut one at
each end of the lower surface of the horizontal block. Each upright of
the outer circle had a double tenon, and the lintels, besides being
morticed to take these tenons, were also dovetailed each into its two
neighbours.
Within the horseshoe and close up to it stand the famous blue-stones,
now twelve in number, but originally perhaps more. These stones are not
so high as the trilithons, the tallest reaching only 7-1/2 feet. They
are nearly all of porphyritic diabase. It has often been asserted that
these blue-stones must have been brought to Stonehenge from a distance,
as they do not occur anywhere in the district. Some have suggested that
they came from Wales or Cornwall, or even by sea from Ireland. Now, the
recent excavations have shown that the blue-stones were brought to
Stonehenge in a rough state, and that all the trimming was done on the
spot where they were erected. It seems unlikely that if they had been
brought from a distance the rough trimming should not have been done on
the spot where they were found, in order to decrease their weight for
transport. It is therefore possible that the stones were erratic blocks
found near Stonehenge.
Within the horseshoe, and near its apex, lies the famous "Altar Stone"
(A), a block measuring about 16 feet by 4. Between the horseshoe and the
outer circle another circle of diabase stones is sometimes said to have
existed, but very little of it now remains.
The whole building is surrounded by a rampart of earth several feet
high, forming a circle about 300 feet in diameter. An avenue still 1200
feet in length, bordered by two walls of earth, leads up to the rampart
from the north-east. On the axis of this avenue and nearly at its
extremity stands the upright stone known as the Friar's Heel.
In 1901, in the course of repairing the central trilithon, careful
excavations were carried out over a small area at Stonehenge. More than
a hundred stone implements were found, of which the majority were flint
axes, probably used for dressing the softer of the sandstone blocks, and
also for excavating the chalk into which the uprights were set. About
thirty hammer-stones suitable for holding in the hand were found. These
were doubtless used for dressing the surface of the blocks. Most
remarkable of all were the 'mauls,' large boulders weighing from 36 to
64 pounds, used for smashing blocks and also for removing large chips
from the surfaces. Several antlers of deer were found, one of which had
been worn down by use as a pickaxe.
These excavations made it clear that the blue-stones had been shaped on
the spot, whereas the sarsens had been roughly prepared at the place
where they were found, and only finished off on the spot where they were
erected.
What is the date of the erection of Stonehenge? The finding of so many
implements of flint in the excavations of 1901 shows that the structure
belongs to a period when flint was still largely used. The occurrence of
a stain of oxide of copper on a worked block of stone at a depth of 7
feet does not necessarily prove that the stones were erected in the
bronze age, for the stain may have been caused by the disintegration of
malachite and not of metallic copper. At the same time, we must not
infer from the frequency of the flint implements that metal was unknown,
for flint continued to be used far on into the early metal age.
Moreover, flint tools when worn out were simply thrown aside on the
spot, while those of metal were carefully set apart for sharpening or
re-casting, and are thus seldom found in large numbers in an excavation.
We have, therefore, no means of accurately determining the date of
Stonehenge; all that can be said is that the occurrence of flint in such
large quantities points either to the neolithic age or to a
comparatively early date in the copper or bronze period. It is unlikely
that stone tools would play such a considerable rôle in the late bronze
or the iron age.
At the same time it must not be forgotten that Sir Arthur Evans has
spoken in favour of a date in the first half of the third century B.C.
He believes that the great circles are religious monuments which in form
developed out of the round barrows, and that Stonehenge is therefore
much later than some at least of the round barrows around it. That it is
earlier than others is clear from the occurrence in some of them of
chips from the sarsen stones. He therefore places its building late in
the round barrow period, and sees confirmation of this in the fact that
the round barrows which surround the monument are not grouped in regular
fashion around it, as they should have been had they been later in
date.
Many attempts have been made to date the monuments by means of
astronomy. All these start from the assumption that it was erected in
connection with the worship of the sun, or at least in order to take
certain observations with regard to the sun. Sir Norman Lockyer noticed
that the avenue at Stonehenge pointed approximately to the spot where
the sun rises at the midsummer solstice, and therefore thought that
Stonehenge was erected to observe this midsummer rising. If he could
find the exact direction of the avenue he would know where the sun rose
at midsummer in the year when the circle was built. From this he could
easily fix the date, for, owing to the precession of the equinoxes, the
point of the midsummer rising is continually altering, and the position
for any year being known the date of that year can be found
astronomically. But how was the precise direction of this very irregular
avenue to be fixed? The line from the altar stone to the Friar's Heel,
which is popularly supposed to point to the midsummer rising, has
certainly never done so in the last ten thousand years, and therefore
could not be used as the direction of the avenue. Eventually Sir Norman
decided to use a line from the centre of the circle to a modern
benchmark on Sidbury Hill, eight miles north-east of Stonehenge. On this
line the sun rose in 1680 B.C. with a possible error of two hundred
years each way: this Sir Norman takes to be the date of Stonehenge.
Sir Norman's reasoning has been severely handled by his
fellow-astronomer Mr. Hinks, who points out that the direction chosen
for the avenue is purely arbitrary, since Sidbury Hill has no connection
with Stonehenge at all. Moreover, Sir Norman determines sunrise for
Stonehenge as being the instant when the edge of the sun's disk first
appears, while in his attempts to date the Egyptian temple of Karnak he
defined it as the moment when the sun's centre reached the horizon. We
cannot say which alternative the builders would have chosen, and
therefore we cannot determine the date of building.
Sir Norman Lockyer has since modified his views. He now argues that the
trilithons and outer circle are later additions to an earlier temple to
which the blue-stones belong. This earlier temple was made to observe
"primarily but not exclusively the May year," while the later temple
"represented a change of cult, and was dedicated primarily to the
solstitial year." This view seems to be disproved by the excavations of
1901, which made it clear that the trilithons were erected before and
not after the blue-stones.
Nothing is more likely than that the builders of the megaliths had some
knowledge of the movements of the sun in connection with the seasons,
and that their priests or wise men determined for them, by observing the
sun, the times of sowing, reaping, etc., as they do among many savage
tribes at the present day. They may have been worshippers of the sun,
and their temples may have contained 'observation lines' for determining
certain of his movements. But the attempt to date the monuments from
such lines involves so many assumptions and is affected by so many
disturbing elements that it can never have a serious value for the
archæologist. The uncertainty is even greater in the case of temples
supposed to be oriented by some star, for in this case there is almost
always a choice of two or more bright stars, giving the most divergent
results.
[Illustration: FIG. 2. Avebury and the Kennet Avenue.
(After Sir R. Colt Hoare.)]
Next in importance to Stonehenge comes the huge but now almost destroyed
circle of Avebury (Fig. 2). Its area is five times as great as that of
St. Peter's in Rome, and a quarter of a million people could stand
within it. It consists in the first place of a rampart of earth roughly
circular in form and with a diameter of about 1200 feet. Within this is
a ditch, and close on the inner edge of this was a circle of about a
hundred upright stones. Within this circle were two pairs of concentric
circles with their centres slightly east of the north-and-south diameter
of the great circle. The diameters of the outer circles of these two
pairs are 350 and 325 feet respectively. In the centre of the northern
pair was a cover-slab supported by three uprights, and in the centre of
the southern a single menhir. All the stones used are sarsens, such as
are strewn everywhere over the district.
An avenue flanked by two rows of stones ran in a south-easterly
direction from the rampart towards the village of Kennet for a distance
of about 1430 yards in a straight line.
At a distance of 1200 yards due south from Avebury Circle stands the
famous artificial mound called Silbury Hill. It is 552 feet in diameter,
130 in height, and has a flat top 102 feet across. A pit was driven down
into its centre in 1777, and in 1849 a trench was cut into it from the
south side to the centre, but neither gave any result. It is quite
possible that there are burials in the mound, whether in megalithic
chambers or not.
South-west of Avebury is Hakpen Hill, where there once stood two
concentric ellipses of stones. A straight avenue is said to have run
from these in a north-westerly direction. Whether these three monuments
near Avebury have any connection with one another and, if so, what this
connection is, is unknown.
There are many other circles in England, but we have only space to
mention briefly some of the more important. At Rollright, in
Oxfordshire, there is a circle 100 feet in diameter with a tall menhir
50 yards to the north-east. Derbyshire possesses a famous monument, that
of Arbor Low, where a circle is surrounded by a rampart and ditch, while
that of Stanton Drew in Somerset consists of a great circle A and two
smaller circles B and C. The line joining the centres of B and A passes
through a menhir called Hauptville's Quoit away to the north-east, while
that which joins the centres of C and A cuts a group of three menhirs
called The Cove, lying to the south-west.
In Cumberland there are several circles. One of these, 330 feet in
diameter with an outstanding menhir, is known as "Long Meg and her
Daughters." Another, the Mayborough Circle, is of much the same size,
but consists of a tall monolith in the centre of a rampart formed
entirely of rather small water-worn stones. A similar circle not far
from this is known as King Arthur's Round Table; here, however, there is
no monolith. Near Keswick there is a finely preserved circle, and at
Shap there seems to have existed a large circle with an avenue of stones
running for over a mile to the north.
Cornwall possesses a number of fine monuments. The most celebrated is
the Dance Maen Circle, which is 76 feet in diameter and has two
monoliths to the north-east, out of sight of the circle, but stated to
be in a straight line with its centre. Local tradition calls the circle
"The Merry Maidens," and has it that the stones are girls turned into
stones for dancing on Sunday: the two monoliths are called the Pipers.
The three circles known as the Hurlers lie close together with their
centres nearly in a straight line in the direction N.N.E. by S.S.W. At
Boscawen-un, near Penzance, is a circle called the Nine Maidens, and two
circles near Tregeseal have the same name. Another well-known circle in
Cornwall is called the Stripple Stones: the circle stands on a platform
of earth surrounded by a ditch, outside which is a rampart. In the
centre is a menhir 12 feet in height.
At Merivale, in Somersetshire, there are the remains of a small circle,
to the north of which lie two almost parallel double lines of menhirs,
running about E.N.E. by W.S.W., the more southerly of the two lines
overlapping the other at both extremities.
With what purpose were these great circles erected? We have already
mentioned the curious belief of Geoffrey of Monmouth with regard to
Stonehenge, and we may pass on to more modern theories. James I was
once taken to see Stonehenge when on a visit to the Earl of Pembroke at
Wilton. He was so interested that he ordered his architect Inigo Jones
to enquire into its date and purpose. The architect's conclusion was
that it was a Roman temple "dedicated to the god Caelus and built after
the Tuscan order."
Many years later Dr. Stukeley started a theory which has not entirely
been abandoned at the present day. For him Stonehenge and other stone
circles were temples of the druids. This was in itself by no means a
ridiculous theory, but Stukeley went further than this. Relying on a
quaint story in Pliny wherein the druids of Gaul are said to use as a
charm a certain magic egg manufactured by snakes, he imagined that the
druids were serpent-worshippers, and essayed to see serpents even in the
forms of their temples. Thus in the Avebury group the circle on Hakpen
Hill was for him the head of a snake and its avenue part of the body.
The Avebury circles were coils in the body, which was completed by the
addition of imaginary stones and avenues. He also attempted with even
less success to see the form of a serpent in other British circle
groups.
The druids, as we gather from the rather scanty references in Cæsar and
other Roman authors, were priests of the Celts in Gaul. Suetonius
further speaks of druids in Anglesey, and tradition has it that in Wales
and Ireland there were druids in pre-Christian times. But that druids
ever existed in England or in a tithe of the places in which megalithic
circles and other monuments occur is unlikely. At the same time, it is
not impossible that some of the circles of Ireland, Wales, and France
were afterwards used by the druids as suitable places for meeting and
preaching.
Fergusson in his great work _Rude Stone Monuments_ held a remarkable
view as to the purpose of the British stone circles. He believed that
they were partly Roman in date, and that some of them at least marked
the scene of battles fought by King Arthur against the Saxons. Thus, for
example, he says with regard to Avebury, "I feel it will come eventually
to be acknowledged that those who fell in Arthur's twelfth and greatest
battle were buried in the ring at Avebury, and that those who survived
raised these stones and the mound of Silbury in the vain hope that they
would convey to their latest posterity the memory of their prowess." It
is hardly necessary to take this view seriously nowadays. Stonehenge,
which Fergusson attributes to the same late era, has been proved by
excavation to be prehistoric in origin, and with it naturally go the
rest of the megalithic circles of England, except where there is any
certain proof to the contrary.
The most probable theory is that the circles are religious monuments of
some kind. What the nature of the worship carried on in them was it is
quite impossible to determine. It may be that some at least were built
near the graves of deified heroes to whose worship they were
consecrated. On the other hand, it is possible that they were temples
dedicated to the sun or to others of the heavenly bodies. Whether they
served for the taking of astronomical observations or not is a question
which cannot be decided with certainty, though the frequency with which
menhirs occur in directions roughly north-east of the circles is
considered by some as a sign of connection with the watching of solar
phenomena.
Dolmens of simple type are not common in England, though they occur with
comparative frequency in Wales, where the best known are the so-called
Arthur's Quoit near Swansea, the dolmen of Pentre Ifan in Pembrokeshire,
and that of Plas Newydd on the Menai Strait: in Anglesey they are quite
common. In England we have numerous examples in Cornwall, especially
west of Falmouth, among which are Chun Quoit and Lanyon Quoit. There are
dolmens at Chagford and Drewsteignton in Devonshire, and there is one
near the Rollright Circle in Oxfordshire.
Many of the so-called cromlechs of England are not true dolmens, but the
remains of tombs of more complicated types. Thus the famous Kit's Coty
House in Kent was certainly not a dolmen, though it is now impossible to
say what its form was. Wayland the Smith's Cave was probably a
three-chambered corridor-tomb covered with a mound. The famous
Men-an-tol in Cornwall may well be all that is left of a chamber-tomb of
some kind. It is a slab about 3-1/2 feet square, in which is a hole
1-1/2 feet in diameter. There are other stones standing or lying around
it. It is known to the peasants as the Crickstone, for it was said to
cure sufferers from rickets or crick in the back if they passed nine
times through the hole in a direction against the sun. The Isle of Man
possesses a fine sepulchral monument on Meayll Hill. It consist of six
T-shaped chamber-tombs arranged in a circle with entrances to the north
and south. There is also a corridor-tomb, known as King Orry's Grave, at
Laxey, and another with a semicircular façade at Maughold.
Among the megalithic monuments of our islands the chambered barrows hold
an important place. It is well known that in the neolithic period the
dead in certain parts of England were buried under mounds of not
circular but elongated shape. These graves are commonest in Wiltshire
and the surrounding counties of Dorsetshire, Somersetshire, and
Gloucestershire. A few exist in other counties. Some contain no chamber,
while others contain a structure of the megalithic type. It is with
these latter that we have here to deal. Chambered long barrows are most
frequent in Wiltshire, though they do occur in other counties, as, for
example, Buckinghamshire, where the famous Cave of Wayland the Smith is
certainly the remains of a barrow of this kind. In Derbyshire and
Staffordshire a type of chambered mound does occur, but it seems
uncertain from the description given whether it is round or elongated.
[Illustration: FIG. 3. (_a_)--Barrow at Stoney Littleton, Somersetshire.
(_b_)--Barrow at Rodmarton, Gloucestershire.
(_c_)--Chambers of barrow at Uley, Gloucestershire.
(After Thurnam, _Archæologia,_ XLII.)]
Turning first to the Wiltshire and Gloucestershire group of barrows we
find that they are usually from 120 to 200 feet in length and from 30 to
60 in breadth. In some cases there is a wall of dry stone-masonry around
the foot of the mound and outside this a ditch. The megalithic chambers
within the mound are of three types. In the first there is a central
gallery entering the mound at its thicker end and leading to a chamber
or series of chambers (Fig. 3, _a_ and _c_). Where this gallery enters
the mound there is a cusp-shaped break in the outline of the mound as
marked by the dry walling, and the entrance is closed by a stone block.
The chambers are formed of large slabs set up on edge. Occasionally
there are spaces between successive slabs, and these are filled up with
dry masonry. The roof is made either by laying large slabs across the
tops of the sides or by corbelling with smaller slabs as at Stoney
Littleton.
In the second type of chambered barrow there is no central corridor, but
chambers are built in opposite pairs on the outside edge of the mound
and opening outwards (Fig. 3, _b_). The two best known examples of this
are the tumuli of Avening and of Rodmarton.
In the third type of barrow there is no chamber connected with the
outside, but its place is taken by several dolmens--so small as to be
mere cists--within the mound.
The burials in these barrows seem to have been without exception
inhumations. The body was placed in the crouched position, either
sitting up or reclining. In an untouched chamber at Rodmarton were found
as many as thirteen bodies, and in the eastern chamber at Charlton's
Abbott there were twelve. With the bodies lay pottery, vases, and
implements of flint and bone.