The above catalogue of stones may not convey very much to the ordinary visitor, and has only been inserted for the sake of completeness; or for the information of geologists who may be concerned with this aspect of the history of the monument. The conclusions to be drawn from such a list, however, are not without interest to the general reader. From the varied fragments found, it is apparent that some six, or perhaps seven, different classes of stone were used for the small uprights, but that only the harder and more durable rocks (the diabase, rhyolite, etc.) have survived. The softer rocks (basic tuffs, grey wackés, flagstones, and slates), being more easily broken, have fallen victims to the souvenir hunter, and to the action of the weather, rain, and frost. Originally, as has already been stated, the foreign stones numbered forty-five, disposed as follows: thirty in the outer circle, and fifteen in the inner horseshoe. To-day only nineteen exist in the outer circle, and eleven in the inner horseshoe.
A very striking proof that many of these foreign stones have disappeared, is to be found in the wide gaps which exist to-day in certain parts of the circle. That such gaps were originallyfilled by standing stones is beyond question, indeed, the base of a "schistose" stone (see Class 3 in the Lithology above) was actually discovered by Mr. Cunnington in the course of his investigations into the nature of the rocks composing Stonehenge. It is highly probable that careful and scientific excavation may add greatly to our knowledge in this direction.
There is yet one other point of interest in connection with these foreign stones. On entering the circle from the north-east (the usual path taken by visitors) a recumbent foreign stone will be noticed on the left-hand side, which has two cavities worked in it. This is the only worked foreign stone in the whole monument, and at first sight these cavities may possibly suggest themselves as "mortise holes" similar to those on the Sarsen trilithons, to be described later. It has even been suggested that the small uprights once carried imposts, or lintel stones similar to the trilithons, on the evidence of this one stone. Such a theory, however attractive, should be accepted with due caution, for the cavities on the stone are far from the ends, and situated too close together to justify a comparison with the existing Sarsen trilithons of the outer circle. This stone has never yet been explained and its position defined, consequently it is omitted from the frontispiece.
Outside the circle of Trilithons stand three stones which have not as yet been described in detail, since they do not fall within the geometrical arrangement of the circle. They are, however, of the highest importance, as it is from them, and from their position, that it is possible to gather some conclusions as to one use to which the structure may have been put.
Within the circular earthwork, lying in a line north-west and south-east, are two small untrimmed Sarsens, while outside the earthwork stands yet another unworked Sarsen, already referred to as the "Hele Stone" or "Friar's Heel." The fact that these three Sarsens are unworked, while all the others show very marked traces of dressing and trimming, is one that should be remembered. These three stones occupy no haphazard position either. As already stated, the "Hele Stone" marks the rising of the sun on the Summer Solstice. The remaining two mark both its rising on the Winter Solstice, and its setting on the Summer Solstice.
This stone, as being the largest of this group of three, and such a conspicuous feature in the structure, demands something more than mere passing mention. It is a monolith of unwrought stone standing sixteen feet high. Such untrimmed stones are to be found all the world over in connection with religious rites. Even the Jews were not untainted with this early cult of stone worship.
"Among the smooth stones of the valley is thy portion; they are thy lot; even to them hast thou poured a drink offering, hast thou offered a meat offering," writes Isaiah.
In Christian times the custom continued. The Council of Tours as late asA.D.657 categorically excluded from Christianity all worshippers of upright stones; while later, Canute forbade the barbarous worship of stones, trees, fountains, and heavenly bodies. At once, therefore, this huge unwrought monolith suggests religion, and probably one of the earliest, and most primitive forms of worship. And thus being obviously connected with non-Christian rites, it is not surprising to find that it has a "devil-legend" attaching to it.
The devil, so the story runs, determined one day to undertake some great and stupendous work, for the like of which he is famous throughout the world. In this devil we can still discern the Scandinavian "giant" legend, which in later Christian times became "devil" legends. The work had to be great, puzzling, and amazing to all beholders, for as the Wiltshire story-teller adds, "he had let an exciseman slip through his fingers." In the course of his wanderings up and down the earth, he had noticed some huge stones in the garden of an old crone in Ireland; and he determined, therefore, to transport them to the stoneless waste of Salisbury Plain as being the most unlikely spot in which to find such things. There yet remained the old woman's permission to be obtained before he could commence his labour. His request was at first met with a flat negative, but eventually the devil so played upon her cupidity, by the assurance that she could have as much money as she could count and add up while he was engaged in the work of removal, that she readily gave her consent. As usual the devil had the best of the bargain, for he, knowing her powers of arithmetic to be but scanty, handed her a number of pieces of money, whose value was fourpence halfpenny, and twopencethree-farthings. The dame had barely managed to add the first two coins together, when the devil called upon her to stop, and looking round she saw the stones were all removed, and had been tied with a withe band into a neat bundle which was slung upon his shoulder. Away flew the devil towards Salisbury Plain, but as he sped onwards the withe cut deep into his shoulder, so heavy were the stones. He endured it as long as he could, but just towards the end of his journey, while passing over the valley of the Avon, he winced, and re-adjusted his burden; in so doing one of the stones fell down and plunged into the river at Bulford, where it remains at the present day, as witness to the veracity of this legend. Right glad to be rid of his burden when he reached the Plain, the devil made haste to set up the stones, and so delighted was he with the result of his first efforts, and with the progress he was making, that he cried aloud with glee, "Now I'll puzzle all men, for no one knows, nor ever will know, how these stones have come here." Unluckily this bold boast was overheard by a holy friar walking near, who straightway replied in right Wiltshire fashion, "That's more than thee can tell"; and then realising who the builder was, turned and fled for his life. Enraged at his discovery by the friar, and perceiving that his scheme had failed, the devil, who had just taken up a stone to poise itupon its two uprights, hurled it at the holy man, and struck him on the uplifted heel as he made haste to run. The friar's sanctity was evidently greater than his personal courage, for it was the stone and not the friar which suffered most from the impact. Even to-day the huge impress of the Friar's heel is to be seen upon the stone. At this juncture the sun rose, and the devil had perforce to relinquish his task. This accounts for the present scattered appearance of the stones.
Turning from fancy to fact, the word Hele, from which the stone takes its name, is probably derived from the Anglo-Saxon verbhelan= "to conceal," and is so applied to the stone because it conceals the sun at rising on the day of the Summer Solstice.
In all matters of archæology it is constantly found that certain questions are better left in abeyance, or bequeathed to a coming generation for solution. The "Slaughtering Stone" appears to be an admirable example of this class. Just within the area enclosed by the earthwork circle, lies a prostrate Sarsen Stone, to which this name has been given. The idea of its having been used as a place of slaughter for the victim intended for sacrifice in the "Temple" of Stonehenge, seems to rest upon a very bare foundation. It isprobably a picturesque piece of nomenclature devised by certain bygone antiquaries to whom Stonehenge was a "Druidical" monument, and who, therefore, having the idea of human sacrifice, and "wicker figures" prominently before them, naturally jumped at the idea of providing a slaughtering stone for the numberless human victims whom they imagined had been slain there. Nevertheless, the stone is curious because of the row of holes which have been worked across one corner, which certainly is unshapely, and which would square up the stone very nicely if it were removed along the line of these holes. The indentations are somewhat oval, suggesting that they were made by "pecking" with a sharp instrument, rather than drilled by a rotating one, which would make a circular incision. Having recorded this, however, there is little to add, except that Mr. Gowland, who minutely examined the stone in 1901, is of opinion that the oval indentations referred to are more recent than the building of Stonehenge. Had they been contemporaneous with the erection of the Trilithons, he is convinced that the action of the water in the holes, combined with frost, would have caused a very much greater amount of disintegration than exists to-day. Yet another difficulty arises. At the meeting of the British Archæological Association at Devizes in 1880, a visit was paid to Stonehenge, and therewere, as usual at such gatherings, papers and discussions dealing with it. Mr. William Cunnington, F.S.A., specially put on record the fact that his grandfather, Mr. H. Cunnington, and Sir R.C. Hoare, remembered this stone as standing erect. Here at all events are three conflicting statements. Under these circumstances it is well to leave the Slaughtering Stone as a problem for posterity.
Stonehenge. shewing the Avenue approach & the earthwork surrounding the stone Circle.Stonehenge. shewing the Avenue approach & the earthwork surrounding the stone Circle.
Stonehenge. shewing the Avenue approach & the earthwork surrounding the stone Circle.
Visitors entering Stonehenge are apt in their eagerness to reach the stones to overlook a definite banked Avenue leading from the north-east towards the Hele Stone, and entering the circular earthwork enclosure. This earthwork is not very considerable to-day, but in the Stonehenge of yesterday it was probably far more marked and imposing. This Avenue extends from Stonehenge in a straight line northwards for about five hundred yards, where it divides into two branches, one going eastward towards the Avon, where there is an ancient ford, the other continuing northward until it joins yet another earthwork, generally known as the Cursus, about half a mile distant. The whole Avenue has suffered greatly in recent years and is fast disappearing entirely. Both the circular form of the earthwork enclosing Stonehenge, as well as the straight and parallelbanks of the Avenue, are specially worthy of notice. They belong to a class of earthwork quite unlike the usual planning of cattle enclosures, and defensive works, and exhibit a precision in setting out which is only associated with the sepulchral and religious earthworks of prehistoric times in this country.
Stonehenge, Yesterday—Looking South East.Stonehenge, Yesterday—Looking South East.
Stonehenge, Yesterday—Looking South East.
The question is often asked, "How did they build Stonehenge?" There is a refreshing simplicity about that indefinite word "they," but for the present, whoever "they" may be, it is possible to some extent, at all events, to furnish an answer to this ever recurring query. In the first place, however, it may be well to recapitulate very briefly the conclusions already arrived at, before entering into a more detailed description of the tools which were employed in the work of erection, and the methods by which the huge Sarsens were reared into position.
Stonehenge is a circular monument, enclosed by a circular earthwork, and approached by an avenue lying north-east and south-west. Without the circle lie four Sarsen stones. The Hele Stone, and two smaller stonesunworked, occupyingdefinite sites with reference to the rising and setting of the sun at the Summer and Winter Solstices; and the so-called Slaughtering Stone, the use of which is at present a matter of speculation. The monument proper, consisting of a circle of Sarsen Trilithons, enclosing a circle of upright foreign stones. Within these, five detached Sarsen Trilithons, of graduated height. These five Trilithons are set horseshoe wise. Before them a standing horseshoe of foreign stones, and in the front of the great Trilithon a flat slab or altar stone. From this stone it is possible to look outwards towards the Hele Stone, which lies in line with the axis of the monument drawn through the centre of the Altar Stone. The Sarsen stones were obtained from the immediate neighbourhood, the foreign stones must have been imported from a very considerable distance. All the stones, with the exception of the four specially indicated, have been worked. The question naturally arises how were they worked? The answer to this may be given without the least hesitation: with stone tools. For many years the method of working the stones was a matter of great debate, and the uncertainty then prevailing permitted many theorists to speculate on the "Roman" origin of the structure. Now, however, the entire absence of any metal which resulted from Mr. Gowland's excavations in 1901, at once precludes the possibility of thebuilders being anything but a primitive people, to whom the use of metal was unknown, or only partly known. The stone tools in use in the construction of Stonehenge were of four kinds.
i. Axes of rude form roughly chipped, and with a cutting edge.
Flint implement from Stonehenge.Flint implement from Stonehenge.
Flint implement from Stonehenge.
ii. Hammer-axes, chipped to an edge on one side and flat on the other.
iii. Rounded hammer-stones; many of which show signs of bruising and hard wear. The material used in these three classes was flint. All of these tools would have been used in the hand, and not set in a handle.
iv. Rounded hammer-stones of Sarsen, varyingfrom one pound to six and a half pounds in weight. They would have been used for the surface dressing of the stones, to which reference will be made later.
v. Mauls of compact Sarsen weighing between thirty-six and sixty-four pounds. The broadest side of these was more or less flat, and when wielded by two or three men they were capable of giving a very effective blow. Their use would have been for breaking the rude blocks into more or less regular forms; and consolidating the rubble foundations. It is specially notable that no ground or polished stone implements were found among them.
Stag's horn pick from Stonehenge.Stag's horn pick from Stonehenge.
Stag's horn pick from Stonehenge.
In addition to the stone tools, picks of deer horn were employed for quarrying the chalk when making the foundations of the uprights. Those who are familiar with the antlers of thedeer, will recall the sharp pointed tine, known as the "brow tine," which projects forward from the horn above its core or socket. This was the tooth of the pick, all other tines being sawn off; thus transforming the antler into a very rough implement closely resembling a pick, with a single point. Many splinters from these picks were found actually embedded in the chalk of the foundations, and one entire discarded example was discovered showing great signs of use, the brow tine being worn away to a considerable extent.
There can be little doubt that the Sarsens were first of all roughly hewn into shape, before they were conveyed to the site. It stands to reason that a primitive race, when faced with the problem of transporting a vast mass of stone, would first of all reduce its bulk to the approximate proportions which it would have when finished and erected. Moreover, the chippings and mason's waste discovered in the excavations of 1901 reveal comparatively little Sarsen stone, and only a few large fragments, such as must have been broken off in finally reducing the "Grey Wethers" to monolithic pillars and lintels. It must not be forgotten either, that the Sarsens occur naturally in tabular blocks, well adapted to the purpose of the builders. The surface of these blocks is often soft, and sugary, while thebody of the stone is dense. The nature of their composition is such that no two stones are quite alike in hardness, some can be disintegrated easily, even with the fingers, while others are dense, and will resist blows with a hammer and chisel.
But in any case the natural structure of the stone made it an ideal material for the Trilithons, or, it may be, that the Trilithons were the natural outcome of the physical peculiarities of the rock. The preliminary dressing may very possibly have been effected by lighting small fires along the proposed line of fracture, and heating the stone, and then by pouring cold water upon it, which would originate a cleavage in the grain, which would readily break away under blows from the heavy mauls referred to in Class V. of the Implements. Sides and ends could thus be roughly squared.
The next point was the transportation of the rough ashlar to the site. Here the problem is not so formidable as it appears, when it is remembered that time was no object to the builders, that labour was abundant, and that in all probability the work was undertaken under the stimulus of religion.
Labour, tree trunks, and stout ropes of twisted hide would have proved sufficient. It is only necessary to consider very briefly the megalithic monuments in Egypt, Assyria, and elsewhere, to see that such tasks were well withinthe capacities of a race emerging from comparative savagery. There exists on the wall of a tomb at El Bersheh in Egypt a very characteristic illustration of the transport of a Colossus; such as are to be seenin situin Egypt to-day. The approximate date of this isB.C.2700-2500, and prior to Stonehenge by about 1000 years.
Arrived at the site, the more skilled work of final dressing was completed. A close examination of the face of some of the fallen stones reveals several shallow grooves on the face with a rib or projection between them. It has been suggested that the rough stone was violently pounded with the heavy mauls until the surface was broken up and reduced to sand for a considerable depth, and thedébrisbrushed away. The projecting ridge resulting from this could then be cut away by hammer and stone chisel, or even by the hammer alone.
Hitherto no word has been said as to the arrangement of mortice and tenon, by which the Trilithons are keyed together. This has been done purposely, in order that the constructional questions relating to Stonehenge should, as far as possible, be dealt with together, and in due order. In the outer circle of Trilithons each upright had two tenons worked on its apex, to bear the two lintels or horizontal stones whichrested upon it. Corresponding mortices were sunk in those stones to admit the tenons. In the case of the Trilithons of the Inner Horseshoe, only one tenon on each upright was necessary. Further, the ends of the lintels of the outer circle were shaped so as to dovetail into one another, and form what is known as a "toggle" joint. This can easily be seen to-day, in the group of three Trilithons which lie between the Altar Stone and the Hele Stone. This careful arrangement, of mortice, tenon, and toggle, has doubtless very much to do with the comparative stability of Stonehenge at the present day. Had these simple but effective measures not been taken, it would not be exceeding the bounds of possibility to say that to-day the ruin would have presented a mass of fallen stones, and the task of their reconstruction would be well-nigh impossible.
Trilithons
Evidently the early mason found the cutting of these tenons by no means an easy task, for, withtwo exceptions, the workmanship is not remarkable. Luckily for the observer to-day the tenon on the remaining upright of the Great Trilithon is very strongly marked, and stands out boldly on its apex, thus affording a clue to those existing on other stones. The mortice holes were easier to accomplish. A small depression may have been made first of all, and then a round stone inserted with sand and water. In this way a smooth hollow could soon be worn. This principle is and has been applied by stone-using peoples in all quarters of the globe. The rough dovetailing of the lintels of the outer circle would present no difficulty to users of the tools already mentioned.
To-day the surfaces of the Sarsens bear undoubted signs of weather, but in the Stonehenge of yesterday the Sarsens were beautifully finished with rough tooling all over their surface. This final finish was achieved by the Quartzite Hammers (Class IV.). A very beautiful piece of this work was discovered by Mr. Gowland in 1901. In the process of raising the upright of the Great Trilithon, a thin slab of that part of the stone which had been buried in the foundation became detached. The tooling upon this fragment is absolutely perfect, and as clean and sharp as it was when it left the hand of the craftsman about four thousand years ago. So remarkable was the workmanship that experiments were made on pieces of Sarsen withvarious materials to endeavour to secure the same quality of surface, during which it was found that whereas the ordinary masons' chisels of to-day failed to produce the effect, a quartzite pebble used as a tool at once reproduced the character and surface of the original finish on the Trilithon.
The foreign stones appear to have been treated in a very similar manner, but it is not possible to discuss this with the same detail as in the case of the Sarsens, for the body of the rock to be dealt with varied vastly in quality and fracture. The method of dressing by pounding was probably not adopted. Quantities of small chippings from the foreign stones were found in 1901, so many indeed as to justify the claim that these stones were actually dressed on the spot, and not partly shaped before being transported to the circle, as in the case of the Sarsens. This at once disposes of a popular and ingenious suggestion that the foreign stones were originally a temple elsewhere, and that in migrating to Salisbury Plain, the tribe had brought their temple with them.
Contrary to another cherished belief, the Sarsen Trilithons were erected first, followed by the foreign stones. The building of the group was continuous and no gap separates the Trilithon from the foreign upright. Of this abundantocular proof was forthcoming in 1901, when the foundations of the great Trilithon were laid bare, and the leaning upright restored to its original perpendicular position. When the ground was opened it was found that each upright had been differently bedded in the earth—and for a very good reason. The one was twenty-nine feet eight inches long, while the other was only twenty-five feet. Obviously they were the two finest "grey wethers" obtainable in the flock, and because of that, they were set aside for the most prominent place in the enclosure. The master builder decided that the height of this central Trilithon should be the equivalent of twenty-one feet at the present day. Therefore it was necessary to bed one stone deeper than the other, in order that their two summits should be level to receive the lintel, or impost. One stone, therefore, was sunk to a depth of four feet, while the other extended downwards eight feet three inches. To compensate for the lack of depth in the shorter stone, its base was shaped into an irregular projecting boss to give it a greater bearing area. It was decided to raise the larger stone first, and the foundation was dug as follows: A slanting trench was cut with the deer's horn picks through the earth and chalk, having at its deeper end a perpendicular chalk face against which the Sarsen could rest when upright. Rubble and chalk were cleared away, and the stone carefully slid down theplane to its foundation. To raise it, now that its base rested against a solid wall of chalk, was not a great matter. The same ropes of hide and tree trunks which had served for its transport would again have come into play. Slowly it would be levered up, and packings or wedges of wood or stone inserted. Thus inch by inch, probably, it rose higher and higher, strutted up, perhaps, by strong saplings as it reared its head above the busy crowd of builders. Blocks of Sarsens were packed beneath it to equalise the bearing, and then the excavation was filled in with chalk and rubble, which doubtless was well rammed down and consolidated with the big sixty-pound mauls. Among the packing of chalk and rubble were found a considerable number of the rough implements already referred to.
The central Entrance of Stonehenge. Looking S.W.The central Entrance of Stonehenge. Looking S.W.
The central Entrance of Stonehenge. Looking S.W.
The shorter upright was next set on end. A shallower excavation had to suffice in this case, but the base of the stone, as has been already intimated, was wider, and to secure greater stability blocks of Sarsen were provided for the stone to rest on, other blocks being packed in carefully as it was raised, and curiously enough among the firm packing were several large stone mauls, fitted in to make the whole mass solid and compact. There is no direct evidence as to the actual method of placing the imposts upon the uprights. It has been suggested, and with every show of reason, that one extremity of the imposts wouldbe raised and packed with timber. The opposite end would then be similarly treated. In this way, by alternately raising and wedging first one side and then the other, the impost could have been brought, in time, level with the summit of its upright, and levered over on to the tenons.
Such a method is employed by primitive races to-day.
The five Sarsen Trilithons already mentioned were raised into position from the inside of the circle. Investigation has shown this to be a fact. It therefore stands to reason that the Foreign Stones were erected last, and not first as has so often been supposed.
This is a hard saying, for it at once negatives the picturesque legend that the Foreign Stones were a stone circle brought from Ireland, and erected by a colonial tribe, who afterwards gave dignity to their primitive temple by the erection of stately Trilithons. Furthermore, thedébrisof the ancient mason reveals chippings of Sarsen and Foreign Stone intermingled so thoroughly as to preclude any idea of two separate periods of building. Stonehenge, therefore, was erected at one date and continuously. It is a question, as yet, if the outer Sarsen Trilithons were erected from the outside or the inside of the circle.
It has not been possible, in the foregoingbrief description, to enter into minute detail, but it is hoped that sufficient has been said to show the stages by which the work of building was approached.
First, the rough trimming of the Sarsen, as it lay upon the Down, then its transport to the spot, its final dressing, and the preparation of its foundation, followed by those anxious days during which the builders toiled as they raised it aloft; the feverish haste with which they rammed and packed the loose rubble about its foot, casting in their mauls and implements to wedge and fix it securely on its base: and last of all, the final effort of raising the impost on its wooden bed, rising now on this side, now on that, as the packings were inserted beneath the levered stone. What a contrast to the Stonehenge of to-day—abandoned and silent on the fast vanishing Plain of Salisbury. Yesterday, it was the workplace of a teeming hive of masons, the air filled with the tap of the smaller hammers dressing the stone faces, with the sullen thud of the big maul pounding the face of a newly arrived Sarsen, while the faint muffled "peck" of the deer's horn told of trench workers dressing down a chalk face to receive the thrust of the monolith, while high above the steady tap of the picks and hammers came the sounds of an unknown tongue raised now in command, now in argument, or encouragement as the work went on.
Until comparatively recent years, the date of Stonehenge was a subject for speculation, and so fascinating did it prove that it attracted the attention of a vast number of minor authorities, who in the face of no definite data on which to base their theses, set the date of Stonehenge at almost any period except that to which it has been proved to belong.
Many decided definitely that it was of Roman origin. For the most part, these speculations have not been based upon the tangible evidence of the Stones, the Tools, and the Barrows, but rather upon the records of early historians, whose evidence in those days was probably not a question of first-hand information.
After all, the objects actually exhumed from the foundations of the Stones, must of necessity be the evidence of greatest importance. What are these objects? The following is a complete list taken from Mr. Gowland's report.
Excavation I.(Seven feet deep.)—A Roman coin of Commodus and a penny of George III. at eight inches below the turf.
A flint hammer-stone, and a splinter of deer's horn embedded in the chalk, at a depth of two and a half feet (below datum line).
Excavation II.(Eight feet deep.)—Two, edged hammer-stones of flint, and two rounded ones of the same material, at a depth of three feet (below datum).
Excavation III.(Eight feet three inches.)—A halfpenny of George I., just below the turf.
A Roman coin (sestertius of Antonia) ten inches below the turf, and a pewter farthing of James II. at the same depth.
Below this, at a depth varying from two feet to four feet, were twenty-six axes and hammer-stones of flint, two hammer-stones of Sarsen, and a large maul of the same material weighing over sixty-four pounds.
A fourth excavation, known as Excavation Q, yielded at a depth of three feet six inches to four feet six inches, ten flint axes, one sandstone axe, nine edged flint hammer-stones, four rounded flint hammer-stones, ten Sarsen hammers, and seven mauls, weighing from thirty-six to fifty-eight and a half pounds. Large numbers of deer's horn splinters were discovered in this excavation.
Excavation V.(Eight feet deep.)—Four axes of flint, one of Sarsen, three edged hammer-stones of flint, one Sarsen and one Diabase hammer-stone, were found at depths varying between two feet and four feet.
One Sarsen hammer-stone was found under the base of the foreign upright, which stands in front of the upright monolith of the Great Trilithon, at a depth of six feet below datum.
In this last excavation, at a depth of about seven feet, the slab of tooled Sarsen already referred to was discovered, and on it a very small stain of copper carbonate. The depth at which this stone was discovered precludes the possibility of metal being thus sunk by moles or rabbits.
This list, like the details of the foreign stones, may not be of general interest, but it affords a very powerful argument for the date of the structure.
To summarise the "finds." The metal objects found consist of various coins ranging from Roman to recent times, about half a dozen in number, all coming from the surface, and none at a greater depth than ten inches. In other words, they may be classed as "superficial" finds, of very little value; the more so, as some of the more recent coins were found at a greater depth than those of earlier date. The only other trace of metal is the small green stain upon the slab of Sarsen already alluded to. This stain can only have been caused by the contact with the stone of a small fragment of copper, which appears to have been entirely decomposed, as no traces of it could be found. It must have been very minute, since had it exceeded one-eighth of an inch, it couldnot have escaped the mesh of the sieve employed in searching for it. Clearly, therefore, it could not have been an implement; perhaps it was an ornament.
On the other hand, the Stone Implements discovered number one hundred and fifteen, and were found scattered through the excavations at all depths, and even under the foundations of one of the foreign stones.
Probably the entire area of Stonehenge, if opened up, would yield over seven thousand examples.
The evidence of the Stone Implements goes far to give the date of the building. Horn picks similar to those employed at Stonehenge have been found in considerable numbers at Grimes Graves, where they were used for excavating chalk in order to win flint for implement making. Other picks have been found at Cissbury, near Worthing, where similar chalk workings existed. This resemblance between the finds at Stonehenge, Cissbury, and Grimes Graves, does not, however, end with the picks; it is repeated in the similarity of the Implements of Stone, those at Stonehenge being in some cases the counterpart of those found in the other localities.
The Cissbury Implements have been assigned "to the Stone Age, or at any rate to the Age of Flint manufacture" by General Pitt Rivers, who discovered and reported upon them. CanonGreenwell describes the Implements from Grimes Graves as belonging to "a period when both metal and stone were in use."
It is obvious, therefore, that the similarity between the tools used in the construction of Stonehenge, and those used in other parts of England for similar purposes, and definitely assigned to their period in the history of Man, demonstrates very clearly that the date of the building of Stonehenge may fairly be placed at a time when the use of stone was continuous with a partial use of bronze; and that if Stonehenge is not a Neolithic structure, it must certainly belong to the Early Bronze period. It might be urged that the roughness of the Tools, coupled with the marked absence of bronze, indicates an even earlier period than that already stated, but it must be remembered that the form of the implement is not always a criterion of its age. Moreover, bronze tools were not necessary for the dressing of the Stones, though had they been plentiful, it is more than probable that some might have been either lost or dropped during the work, and would have come to light during the excavations.
Yet another sidelight upon the date of Stonehenge is to be found in the presence of chippings of foreign stone found inside some of the neighbouring Bronze Age barrows, which prove conclusively that the barrows must have been built at a date later than the erection of Stonehenge.
To many people, the mention of a period of culture, such as the Early Bronze Age, may not convey very much. To give a date in years, on the other hand, is not always easy. The march of culture in those days was slow, and the gradation from the use of one material to another very prolonged, often reaching into centuries. Consequently any date must only be approximate and given under great reserve. The late Sir John Evans has suggested that the Bronze Age in this country might be set at 1400B.C.Continental authorities set the age for countries in Europe somewhat earlier, at about 2000B.C.This is a perfectly natural conclusion, for it is an ascertained fact that the flow of civilisation was from East to West, as has always been the case, and that, therefore, it is only to be expected that the Bronze Age of the Continent would ante-date that of England by some centuries.
But, it is obvious from our present knowledge of Stonehenge that the Bronze Age was hardly established in the sense as used by Sir John Evans. Probably at the time of the building of Stonehenge bronze was only known as a rare substance, whose very scarcity would make it valuable as material for ornaments. It would not, therefore, be inconsistent with existing evidence to set the date of Stonehenge roughly at from 1700-1800 yearsB.C.
The Megalithic Stone structures, which exist not only in this country but also throughout the Continent of Europe, are a special feature of that period known as the Neolithic Age. As has already been shown, Stonehenge represents a very late type, erected at a time when the bronze culture had begun to overlap that of polished stone (Neolithic).
These stone structures can be roughly divided into three classes.
1. Single upright stones, ormenhirs(Celtic = "high stone"), which may be commemorative of some great event or personage.
2.Dolmens(Celtic = "table stone"), in which a stone slab is set table-wise on three or four uprights.
3.Cromlechs(Celtic = "stone circle"). Circles enclosing barrows or dolmens.
Stonehenge is a highly specialised example of this last class. Round these cromlechs popular myth and superstition have crystallised themselves into tales of the devil and his works (as in the case of Stonehenge), ogres, giants, dwarfs, Sabbathbreakers, and infidels, turned to stone. In nearly every case there is some story of the supernatural, which cannot be accidental, but which must have its root in past religious observance.
It is a recognised fact that the worship of stones is more widely distributed than any other primitive cult. Its almost universal distribution can be referred to the tendency of the half savage mind to confuse persons and things, and from seeming likeness of the inanimate to the animate, to endue the lifeless object with the virtue and power of the living object. This mental outlook is better understood in practice than in theory. A Melanesian native may come across a large stone, lying upon the top of a number of smaller stones. It suggests to him a sow with her litter of pigs, and he at once makes an offering to it, in the hope that he will secure pigs. In determining the function of Stonehenge, therefore, it will be useful to compare it with similar existing stone circles. The largest of these in this country is Avebury, not many miles distant from Stonehenge. Unluckily, to-day it is so ruined that its former greatness is hardly to be distinguished by the unskilled observer. Formerly comprising some hundreds of unhewn Sarsen stones, barely a score remain in position at the present day. In Avebury, as it was, can be found the early typic model of which Stonehenge is the final product. The use of the circle asa basic form is common to both. In Avebury the Sarsen is a rough unhewn monolith; in Stonehenge it is squared, dressed, and crowned with its lintel. All evidences of a slow evolution from Neolithic to Bronze culture. But whereas the circle alone is used at Avebury, Stonehenge has in addition the horseshoe series of Trilithons and foreign uprights, and in this particular differs from all other Cromlechs in this country. It is the climax of the Megalithic monument, and its use very certainly must have been connected with the religion of the race which set it up. It was, in short, a religious structure, probably used for the observation of the sun, and possibly connected with "nature worship."
The fact that the sun rises over the Hele Stone on the Summer Solstice, and that it can be observed in direct alignment with the centre of the Great Trilithon, can hardly be due to accident. Chance might bring two stones into such a position on the Solstice, but, in this case, the entire monument is so arranged as to place the rising sun in a due line with its axis on this particular day.
It will be well to consider the facts which must have been within the knowledge of the builders of Stonehenge, and to trace as far as may be their reasoning in the building of it.
To begin with, it is almost certain that at the time of building, there existed some primitiveform of priesthood, or body of "wise men." This is quite compatible with the culture of the period. The existence of the Neolithic Long Barrows is sufficient evidence that man had, by this time, arrived at that particular culture which grasps the existence of a "spirit."
Death only terminated the existence of the body, and not that of the spirit. It was even able to return and enter another body, say that of a new-born infant, an animal, or tree. And being after the manner of human beings, spirits could understand human language and become accessible to human petitions. Thus a spirit might even prove a powerful friend or enemy. And the dwellings of these spirits would be those great powers which meant so much to a primitive people; the sun, moon, stars, rivers, forests, and clouds; from which arose the two great classes of spirit, the "ancestral" and the "spirit of nature." From this general body was developed a regular hierarchy of good and evil spirits, gradually ascending to the conception of one great creative spirit, or superior deity.