A sentimental & practical guide to Amesbury and Stonehenge
Date: 2020-12-29T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Amesbury (England) -- Guidebooks; Stonehenge (England) -- Guidebooks

The Project Gutenberg eBook of A sentimental & practical guide to Amesbury and Stonehenge

This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: A sentimental & practical guide to Amesbury and Stonehenge

Author: Lady Florence Caroline Mathilde Sartoris Antrobus

Release date: December 29, 2020 [eBook #64167]

Language: English

Credits: Transcribed from the 1908? edition, by David Price

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SENTIMENTAL & PRACTICAL GUIDE TO AMESBURY AND STONEHENGE ***

Transcribed from the 1908? edition, by David Price.

A SENTIMENTAL & PRACTICAL
GUIDE TO AMESBURY AND
STONEHENGE, COMPILED
BY LADY ANTROBUS

DEDICATED TO MY MOTHER
GEORGINA ALICIA SARTORIS

TENTH THOUSAND

ESTATE OFFICE: AMESBURY, WILTS

PREFACE.

In compiling this little Guide Book, I have somewhat departed from the ordinary lines, but I venture to hope that the traveller to Amesbury and Stonehenge will not like it the worse on that account.  I am much indebted to the kindness of Mrs. Gordon and of Messrs. Murray, Barclay, Story Maskelyne, and Hewitt, for allowing me to quote from their works, also to the Editor of the Ladies’ Realm, for permission to use an article by me which appeared in the February number of that magazine, and, above all, to Miss Clarisse Miles, for the charming photographs which illustrate my book.

Florence Caroline Mathilde Antrobus.

Amesbury Abbey,
Salisbury, 1900.

GUIDE TO AMESBURY AND STONEHENGE.

Leaving Salisbury by what is called the “Upper Road” to Amesbury, one travels across a tract of bleak and rather uninteresting downs.  About two miles from Salisbury (on the left) Old Sarum stands up conspicuously, and is the only object of interest till one arrives at Amesbury, eight miles distant from Salisbury.  Amesbury calls itself a town, and boasts of several shops and the telegraph.  A railway station is in process of construction.  In Aubrey’s times Amesbury was celebrated for its tobacco pipes, marked with a gauntlet, the name of the maker.  Of these, several specimens are to be found in the museum at Salisbury.

Returning to Salisbury from Amesbury, and taking “the Bourne” route, there is a beautiful drive winding along the banks of the Avon.  I give a short account of the most interesting places the traveller meets with on his homeward journey.

OLD SARUM.

Lies two miles from Salisbury, and stands up, making a bold outline in the surrounding open country.  It is a hill, bare now, save for some trees, encircled with entrenchments, with a central mound peering above them.  But centuries ago this spot was crowded with buildings—religious, military, and domestic, and was one of the most important in our island.  Some say that the ancient British name was Caer Sarflag, the “City of the Service Tree.”  Its Roman name was Sorbiodunun, the Saxon Sarobyrig.  The face of the hill is smooth and very steep.  The summit is fenced by a mighty earthen rampart and ditch, protected by a lower raised bank outside of it, the height from the top of the one to the bottom of the other being 106 feet.  The surface of the hill is an elongated circular area of 27½ acres.  In the centre of the area is a second circular earthwork and ditch 100 feet high, and within these stood the citadel.  On the top of the earthwork surrounding the citadel was a very strong wall 12 feet thick, of flint embedded in rubble, and coated with square stones, of which some portion remain.  To the great outer earthwork there were two entrances—one (guarded by a hornwork still remaining) on the western, another (the postern) on the eastern side.  The site of the citadel is now overgrown with briers and brushwood; the rest of the area is partly in a state of nature, partly cultivated.  “Celt and Roman alike had seen the military value of the height from which the eye sweeps nowadays over the grassy meadows of the Avon to the arrowy spire of Salisbury; and, admirable as the position was in itself, it had been strengthened at a vast cost of labour.  The camp on the summit of the knoll was girt in by a trench hewn so deeply in the chalk that, from the inner side of it, the white face of the rampart rose 100 feet high, while strong outworks protected the approaches to the fortress from the west and from the east.”

Though there may have been a British stronghold here, still, it is the opinion of good antiquaries that there is now no British work to be seen; that the Romans took possession of the hill and defended it by a simple escarpment, without any ditch, but with outworks at the entrances; and that the ditch now on the face of the scarp, as well as the central citadel and its defences, were added by the Saxons, and perhaps by Alfred, who, in his war with the Danes, certainly paid great attention to strengthening the position.  There are Roman roads to Silchester, Winchester, Dorchester, Uphill, on the Bristol Channel, and others, it is believed, to Bath and Marlborough.  Cynric the Saxon won a victory over the Britons in 552.  In 960, Edgar held his Council here.  In 1003, Seweyn and the Danes are said to have stormed it.  In the time of the Confessor a monastery of nuns was established.  It was not till 1072 that it became the seat of a bishop.  The kingdom of Wessex originally formed one diocese, and the see being fixed 683, St. Hædde being bishop, the see was removed to Winchester.  In 705, the diocese was divided, a new see for the district of E. Selwood being fixed at Sherborne, whose first bishop was St. Ealdhelm.  A further subdivision took place in 909, a new see for Berks and Wilts being created at Ramsbury, which was reunited to Sherborne by Bishop Herman 1045, who in 1072 transferred the see to Old Sarum.  In 1070 William the Conqueror, as the closing act of his conquest, reviewed his victorious army on the plain below Old Sarum, where now the modern city stands, rewarding its leaders with lands and gifts.  The Castellanship of Sarum he gave to his kinsman, Osmund, who afterwards, taking Holy Orders, succeeded Herman in the see.  In 1086 the King assembled here, the year before his death, all the chief landowners of the realm to swear that “whose men soever they were they would be faithful to him against all other men,” by which “England was made ever afterwards an undivided kingdom.”

Bishop Osmund finished his new cathedral in 1092, “and established the new ritual ‘ad usum Sarum.’”  The foundations of the cathedral were visible in the very dry summer of 1834.  It was in the form of a cross 270 feet long by 70 feet wide, the transept of the same width and 150 feet long.  Its plan is remarkable for having a square instead of an apsidal East end, and a Galilee or Atrium at the West end.  Within a few days of its consecration a thunderstorm seriously injured the roofs and walls.  Robert of Gloucester, alluding to the fifth year of the reign of William II., sings:—

“So gret lytnynge was the vyfte yer so that al to noghte
The rof of the Chyrch of Salesbury it bronte
Rygh even the vyfte day that he y hawled was.”

Henry the First’s celebrated chancellor, Bishop Roger, improved both the church and its fortifications.  In the reign of Stephen the place began to decline.  The soldiers and priests, cooped up into so small a space, could not agree.  The situation was cold and windy, and water was scarce.  Bishop Richard Poore is said to have been directed in a vision to build upon the maer (or boundary) field, called in some accounts Miry-Field or the Merrifield, where a new church (the present cathedral) was begun.  The citizens migrated, the great travelling road was diverted to the new site, and the days of Old Sarum were numbered.  A charter granted to the new town sealed its fate.  Very little, however, is known about the real history of the transference of the people from one place to the other.  There are some reasons for believing that a new town had been growing up by degrees long before the cathedral was built at New Sarum.  Being only 1600 feet in diameter, Old Sarum must have afforded small space for a cathedral, bishop’s palace, a garrison, streets and houses.  The cathedral was taken down in 1331 (Edward III.), and its materials used in building the new spire, Close Walls, &c.  Leland (temp. Henry VIII.) reports some portions of the building as visible in his time, but says: “There is not one house neither within or without Old Saresbyri inhabited.  Much notable ruinus building of the castell yet ther remaynith.  The ditch that envirined the old town was a very deepe and strong thynge.”  The walls remained till 1608, and served as a quarry.  Fisherton old county jail (inter alia) was built out of them.  The great hollow enclosure of Old Sarum, girt by its frowning earthwork (not unlike the crater of a volcano), is certainly a solemn and desolate place.  Pepys, passing by, and not knowing what it was, desired to examine it.  “I saw a great fortification,” he says, “and there light and to it and in it, and find it so prodigious so as to frighten one to be in it all alone at that time of night.”  A subterranean passage was discovered in 1795.  The foundations of towers may be traced, and many Roman coins have been met with.  Old Salisbury has given a title to the families of d’Eureux or Devereux, Longespee, Montacute, Nevill Plantagenet, and the Cecil family, who still enjoy it.  The ground ceased to be Crown property in 1447, when it was granted by James I. to the Lords Stourton; on forfeiture by them, it was granted by James I. to the Cecils.  They sold it to Governor Pitt, and the Earl of Chatham sold it to the Earl of Caledon.  It was subsequently purchased by the Ecclesiastical Commission.  Its dignity as the resort of kings and seat of councils ceased with the growth of the younger city; but it long retained one relic of its former greatness, the right of returning two members to Parliament, which was duly exercised until the passing of the Reform Bill, although for many a year only two or three cottages had existed.  The elections were held at the foot of the hill on Election Acre, where a tent was pitched beneath the branches of an elm-tree, which is still pointed out as occupying the site of the last remaining house.

STRATFORD-SUB-CASTLE.

Lies close under the hill of Old Sarum, and derives its name from the Roman “street” or road which here “forded” the river on its course to Bradbury Rings and Dorchester.  The manor house was the residence of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, who was first returned to Parliament (1735) as member for those vacant mounds on the hill above.  Governor Pitt purchased the manor in 1690 for 1500l., and Lord Grenville, who had married the sister of Thomas Pitt, Lord Camelford, afterwards sold it for 65,000l. to Lord Caledon.  In 1801 John Horne Tooke was returned by Lord Camelford, and in his case the question of the disability of clergymen to sit as Members of Parliament was tried and settled.  The doorhead of the quaint gabled parsonage bears the inscription, “Parva sed lapsa domino 1675.”  A charming lime avenue leads from the parsonage to the church, which contains an hour glass stand for the pulpit.

THE CHURCH, AMESBURY.

Dedicated to the Memories of St. Mary and St. Melorus.

One of the finest in Wiltshire.  A fourteenth century nave roof covers a Norman nave, and a thirteenth century chapel possesses a beautiful window, with two lights, and slender delicate column and sculptured leafy cap.  Archæologists dispute as to whether this is the abbey church (a Benedictine order founded by Queen Elfrida to expiate the murder of her step-son at Corfe) or merely the parish church.  I consider that there can be no doubt that it is the abbey church, and in my next edition I hope this fact will be proved from excavations to be made under the superintendence of Mr. Detmar Blow, the architect for the structural repairs that are, unfortunately, necessary, the four angles of the church tower and the voussoirs of the arch having become separated, &c.  Only 1400l. is needed, and subscriptions will be gratefully acknowledged by the Manager of the Wilts and Dorset Bank, Amesbury, Wilts; or Lady Antrobus, Amesbury Abbey.  An unfortunate “restoration” was made in 1853, which swept away the furnishings of the Early Romantic period.

Florence C. M. Antrobus.

AMESBURY ABBEY.

Salisbury.

Since writing the above little note on Amesbury church, the necessary repairs to the tower have been most sympathetically carried out by Mr. Detmar Blow.  No changes are to be noticed from the exterior—the test of a good architect’s work applied to old buildings.  The underpinning disclosed the remains of a Saxon pillar embedded in the masonry of the nave wall—may not this fact go to prove that the present building stands on the site of Elfrida’s church?  At the completion of Mr. Blow’s work, which includes the underpinning of the tower, repairs to the nave, and the rehanging of the bells, further repairs were found to be necessary.  The Rev. F. Windley (the new vicar) held a meeting, dismissing Mr. Blow and appointing Mr. Warre as architect in his place, with most unfortunate results.  The roof of the exquisite little chapel has been removed and altered to a higher pitch, inferior flint work used, and crude yellow stones instead of the beautiful silvery-grey old coping.  This act of vandalism was done against the wishes of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, and my own.  No “restorations” (so called) should ever be allowed for these buildings, only “repairs.”  The pitch of the old roof should not have been altered, even if originally higher, as, so to speak, the whole thing had grown together; also nothing but old stones for coping should have been used, and grey flints instead of black ones.  It is extraordinary to see the damage done to the rare and beautiful buildings in this neighbourhood.  Yellow stones, hideous in colour, put in with still more hideous plaster, is the local idea of suitable “restoration.”  The vandal architect Butterfield buried (in 1853) under the chancel the memorial tablets, at the same time breaking up the lovely old font and burying its remains.  This latter has been beautifully mended by Mr. Kite, builder.  The memorial tablets, some very beautiful, have not yet been rehung, as they should be, in the body of the church.

I was requested to give a cross for the altar.  I had a copy made of the celebrated Celtic “Cross of Cong.”  I also presented an altar-cloth of old crimson Italian damask (from Florence).  A dove, embroidered in different tones of gold and silver thread, decorates the frontal.  Mr. Windley thought fit to cut and alter this altar-cloth, adding an unsuitable top and fringe, and spoiling the effect of the chancel by covering the pink alabaster with cheap, ugly, woven materials.  The effect of the delicate lines of the Celtic cross and the crimson damask are by this treatment utterly ruined.

Florence C. M. Antrobus.

February 9th, 1908.

AMESBURY ABBEY: ITS HISTORY, ANCIENT AND MODERN.

The river Avon, on its course to the sea, passes through a beautiful, thickly wooded valley in Wiltshire, in which lies Amesbury, or, to follow the old spelling, Ambresbury, signifying the land of Ambrosius.  This fascinating place, and the wild country surrounding it, possess a charm and beauty all their own, and those born and bred there ever pine for the breezy downs, as the Swiss for their mountains or north-country people for the moorland; and no one who has walked or ridden on some glorious summer morning over the fine, close grass clothing these Wiltshire downs can ever forget its delicious “springy” quality underfoot.  A talented modern artist once happily christened Amesbury “The Golden Valley;” he saw it in the spring, at which season of the year the whole country-side seems ablaze with brilliant yellow flowers.

Amesbury lies eight miles north of Salisbury, and we may consider that it occupies a space in the midst of that vast tract of undulating country that (somewhat erroneously to my mind) is given the name of “Salisbury Plain.”  I now propose to trace, as briefly as I can, some of the history of this interesting and beautiful place.  Its antiquity is so great as to take us back to pre-historic times.  In its near neighbourhood many desperate battles were fought between Briton, Saxon, and Roman with varying success.  Lewis, in his ancient History of Britain, says: “In the reign of Vortigern, 461 A.D., a Conference was appointed to take place near the Abbey of Ambri, with Hengist the Saxon, and it was agreed that both parties should come without armour.  But Hengist, under colour of peace, devised the subversion of all the nobility of Britain, and chose out to come to this assembly his faithfullest and hardiest men, commanding every one of them to hide under their garment a long knife, with which, when he should give the watchword, every one should kill the Briton next him.  Both sides met upon the day appointed, and, treating earnestly upon the matter, Hengist suddenly gave the watchword and caught Vortigern by the collar, upon which the Saxons, with their long knives, violently murdered the innocent and unarmed Britons.  Thus were 460 earls and noblemen of the Britons treacherously murdered.  They were buried in the convent at Amesbury.  This massacre took place near Stonehenge, where repeated battles were fought between Ambrosius and Hengist.” [10]

There is a fanciful legend, told by an old writer called Geoffrey of Monmouth, about Stonehenge.  He says that Ambrosius, wishing to commemorate those who had fallen in battle, thought fit to send for Merlin the Wizard, to consult him on the proper monument to be erected to the memory of the slain.  On being interrogated Merlin replied, “Send for the ‘Giants’ Dance,’ which is in Killarus (Kildare), a mountain in Ireland; they are stones of a vast magnitude, and if they can be placed here quite round this spot of ground they will stand for ever.”  At these words Aurelius laughed and said, “How was it possible to remove such stones from so distant a country, and had not Britain as good stones?”  Merlin replied “that they were mystical stones and had a medicinal virtue,” whereupon the Britons resolved to send for them and to risk a battle.  Upon landing in Ireland, the removal of the stones was violently opposed by Gillomanius, a youth of wonderful valour.  At the head of a vast army, he exclaimed, “While I have life they shall not take from us the least stone of the Giants’ Dance.”  A battle ensued, which was won by the Britons.  They then proceeded to Killarus, where the sight of the stones filled them with joy and admiration, and, while they were all standing round, Merlin asked them to try and remove the stones.  Their efforts proving futile, he laughingly proceeded with his own contrivances, and took down the stones with incredible facility.  This done, they set sail to Britain, and repaired to the burial-place with the stones, Aurelius ordering Merlin to get them up in the same manner as they had been in the mountain of Killarus, which he accordingly did.

Queen Elfrida, who performed many penances and built monasteries in atonement for the crime of the murder of her step-son, Edward the Martyr, founded a Benedictine nunnery at Amesbury in 980.  This nunnery flourished for many years, until the ill-conduct of the nuns caused King Henry II. to expel them (1177), and place them under stricter discipline in other religious houses.  He then gave the monastery of Ambresbury to the Abbey of Fontevrault, in Normandy.  This order was founded by Robert d’Arbrissel about the end of the eleventh century.  It is looked upon as a singularity in the church, some finding it strange to see an abbess exercising equal authority over men as well as women.  Before his death d’Arbrissel appointed Petronilla de Craou Chemille as head and chief of his order, of which he drew up statutes, putting them under the order of St. Benedict.  Under the new rule, this monastery increased in splendour and royal favour, King John conferring upon it important privileges.  Eleanor, only daughter of Geoffrey, Earl of Bretagne, was buried, according to her own request, at Ambresbury in 1241.  Mary, sixth daughter of Edward I., together with thirteen young ladies of royal birth, took the veil in 1283; and two years afterwards, anno 1287, Eleanor, queen of Henry III., entered the order, and died and was buried at Ambresbury in 1292.  The monastery continued to prosper, and became one of the richest in England.  The following names of the prioresses have been preserved:—Isabella of Lancaster, fourth daughter of Henry, Earl of Lancaster; Joan de Gennes; Sibilla de Montacute; Katherine of Arragon lodged within the convent walls on her first arrival in England in 1501.

At the time of the Reformation, the last prioress (but one), Florence Bormewe, refused to surrender her monastery to the King’s emissaries.  They wrote: “Albeit we have used as many ways with her as our poor wits could attain, yet in the end we could not by any persuasion bring her to any conformity, but at all times she resteth and so remaineth in these terms.”  She answered, “If the King’s Highness command me to go from this house I will gladly go, though I beg my bread, and as for pension I care for none.”  The death of this brave prioress saved her from further humiliation.

Joan Darell was abbess at the time of the Dissolution; she surrendered to King Henry VIII. Dec. 4th, 1540.

The old Chronicle of Geoffrey of Monmouth gives Amesbury as the place of Queen Guinevere’s penitential retirement.  The modern poet, Tennyson, takes the same view:

“Queen Guinevere had fled the Court and sat
There in the holy house at Almesbury.”

Antiquarians disagree as to whether the fine church now standing—with its lancet windows, pointed arches, and massive turret—is the old abbey church, or only that of the parish.  In an obscure corner at the back of the church is found a window of quite another description—very beautiful, and more approaching to the “rose” style of architecture.  Of the old stained glass only a few broken fragments remain.  On one piece is a picture of a fair-haired, long-necked woman suppose to represent Queen Guinevere.

The churchyard (lying to the south of the old church), with its grey tombstones and dark green yew-trees, has a solemn, calm and peaceful air.  Over a grave is found the following epitaph:—

“Altho’ his body here doth lye
Till the last trump doth it raise,
His soul is now in heaven high
And sings Jehovah’s praise.”

I now finish my description of Amesbury’s monastic period and turn to the modern years.  According to a good authority, Henry VIII. bestowed Amesbury upon Edward, Earl of Hertford, afterwards Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector in the succeeding reign.  After his trial, death sentence, and execution, the lands were confiscated by the Crown till the reign of Queen Elizabeth, who probably restored them to the Protector’s son, Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford.  This gentleman was thrice married, his last wife being a widow of fascinating beauty and charm.  She had previously been engaged to Sir George Rodney, who loved her madly, but, being ambitious, she left him for Lord Hertford.  The day before the marriage, Sir George Rodney travelled to the inn at Amesbury and waited for the home-coming of the bride and bridegroom.  All the night he occupied himself by composing a dying love song written with his own blood.  Upon the arrival in the village of his false love, he went to greet her, and fell upon his sword and expired at her feet.  I give the following extract from the poem, which is somewhat long and tedious:—

“Sir George Rodney before he killed himself—
What shall I do that am undone,
Where shall I fly myself to shunne?
Ah mee! myselfe must kill,
And yet I die against my will.
In starry letters I behold
My death in the Heavens enrolled.
There finde it wrytt in skyes above
That I (poore I) must die for love.
’Twas not my love deserved to die,
O no! it was unworthy I.
I for her love should not have dyde,
But that I had no worth beside.
Ah mee! that love such woe procures,
For without her no love endures.
I for her vertues her doe serve,
Doth such a love a death deserve?”

Lady Hertford presented a bell to the parish of Amesbury.  An inscription on it runs thus:—

“Be stronge in faythe, prayes God well.
Frances, Countess Hertford’s bell.”

After the Seymour period, the Amesbury estates passed through different hands, belonging in 1720 to Henry, Lord Carleton; he having purchased them from Charles, Lord Bruce, son of the Earl of Ailesbury.  Lord Carleton left them by will to his nephew, Charles, Duke of Queensberry, in 1724, who married the charming Lady Catherine Hyde in 1720.  This couple spent much time at Amesbury, altering and improving it in various ways, and entertaining their friends.

The poet Gay was a devoted friend and admirer of the Duchess, who, indeed, seems to have been an attractive woman of immense spirit and wit.  She offended George II. and his Queen by her defence of Gay’s play, the Beggars’ Opera, and was forbidden the Court for some time; but she, standing firmly by her friend, refused to retract or alter her sentiments, and finally forced the Court to receive and forgive her.  Here is a copy of her message to the King:—

“Feb. 27th, 1729.

“That the Duchess of Queensberry is surprised and well pleased the King has given her so agreeable a command as to stay from Court, where she never came for diversion, but to bestow a civility upon the King and Queen.  She hopes, by such an unprecedented order as this, that the King will see as few as he wishes at his Court, particularly such as dare to think or speak truth.  I dare not do otherwise, and ought not nor could not have imagin’d that it would not have been the very highest compliment that I could possibly pay the King, to endeavour to support truth and innocence in this house.

(Signed) “C. Queensberry.”

The following is an extract from a letter from Gay to Swift:—“To the lady I live with I owe my life and fortune; think of her with respect, value and esteem her as I do.  She hath so much goodness, virtue, and generosity, that if you knew her you would have a pleasure in obeying her as I do.”  In another letter from Gay to Swift, the former presses his coming to join the party at Amesbury, saying (speaking of the Duchess):—“I think her so often in the right, you will have great difficulties to persuade me she is in the wrong.  The lady of the house is not given to show civility to those she does not like.  She speaks her mind and loves truth, for the uncommonness of the thing.  I fancy your curiosity will prevail over your fear, and you will like to see such a woman.  But I say no more till I know whether her Grace will fill up the rest of the paper.”  P.S. by the Duchess: “Write I must, particularly now, as I have an opportunity to indulge my predominant passion of Contradiction.  I do, in the first place, contradict most things Mr. Gay says of me to deter you from coming here, which, if ever you do, I hereby assure you that, unless I like my own way better, you shall have yours; and in all disputes you shall convince me if you can.  But, by what I see of you, this is not a misfortune that will always happen, for I find you a great mistaker.  For example, you take prudence for imperiousness.  ’Tis from this I first determined not to like one who is too giddy-headed for me to be certain whether or no I shall ever be acquainted with him.  I have known people take great delight in building castles in the air; but I should choose to build friendship on a more solid foundation.  I would fain know you, for I often hear more likeable things than ’tis possible any one can deserve.  Pray come that I may find out something wrong, for I, and I believe most women, have an inconceivable pleasure to find out any faults except their own.”  P.S.—“Mr. Gay is very peevish that I spell and write ill, but I don’t care, for neither the pen nor I can do better!”

This Duchess also attracted the attention of Prior, who wrote the well-known ballad:—

THE FEMALE PHAETON.

I.

Thus Kitty beautiful and young,
And wild as colt untam’d,
Bespoke the Fair from whence she sprung
With little rage inflam’d.

II.

Inflam’d with rage at sad restraint,
Which wise mamma ordained,
And sorely vex’d to play the saint
Whilst wit and beauty reigned.

III.

“Shall I thumb holy books confin’d
With Abigails forsaken?
Kitty’s for other things design’d,
Or I am much mistaken.

IV.

“Must Lady Jenny frisk about
And visit with her cousins?
At ball must she make all the rout
And bring home hearts by dozens?

V.

“What has she better pray than I,
What hidden charms to boast,
That all mankind for her should die
While I am scarce a toast?

VI.

“Dearest mamma, for once let me
Unchain’d my fortune try:
I’ll have an Earl as well as she
Or know the reason why.

VII.

“I’ll soon with Jenny’s pride quit score,
Make all her lovers fall;
They’ll grieve I was not loos’d before,
She I was loos’d at all.”

VIII.

Fondness prevailed, mamma gave way,
Kitty, at heart’s desire,
Obtained the chariot for a day
And set the world on fire.

This lady’s luck and happiness appear to vanish in later life, both her sons meeting tragic deaths; the eldest, Viscount Drumlanrig, shooting himself, the second, Lord Charles Douglas, dying of consumption at Amesbury, having just escaped the perils of the great earthquake at Lisbon.

The Duchess died July 19th, 1777, aged 77, and the Duke the following year.

The title of Duke of Queensberry descended to the Duke’s cousin, William, Earl of March and Raglin.  In 1778 he succeeded his cousin Charles as 4th Duke of Queensberry, and in 1786 was created a British peer, taking the title of Baron Douglas of Ambresbury.  This eccentric nobleman never married, and was commonly known by the nickname of “Old Q.”  He died in 1810, the Amesbury estate passing to Archibald, Lord Douglas of Douglas, whose executors sold it in 1824 to Sir Edmund Antrobus, Bart., my husband’s great-great-uncle.

No record is to be found of the destruction of the Abbey, Lord Hertford apparently building himself a house in Amesbury.  In “Vitruvius Britannicus” there is a picture of a fine mansion in the Palladian style, built for Lord Carleton from designs by Inigo Jones, the architect being Mr. Webb, nephew of Inigo Jones.

The Queensberrys added wings to this house, and caused a beautiful bridge to span the river Avon, which runs through the grounds.  A pretty old house stands in the park, near an old entrance: tradition tells us the Duchess of Queensberry used this lodge as a dairy.  It possesses two octagon rooms (one over the other), and an underground passage is supposed to connect it with the river.  The park is small, but extremely pretty; one enters it through splendid old gates supported by Palladian pillars.

Opposite the dwelling house is a high bank cut into a fantastic shape and known as “The Diamond.”  The cave in which the poet Gay loved to write is hollowed in this bank.  The wild-bird-frequented Avon [18] runs below, and above it is crowned by a beautiful wood planted over what is called “Vespasian’s Camp.”  In this wood are found two avenues of beech-trees, and walking through the old deer park and across the Downs, at a mile and a half’s distance, glorious Stonehenge bursts upon one.

Returning to Amesbury, and following the course of the river in the opposite direction, one comes upon a little house built of flints, with quaint pointed roof and tower, in which the floor of a small upper chamber is found to be movable; outside, over a door, the stone moulding bears this inscription:

“Diana, her hovs—1600.”

Diana certainly possessed a picturesque dwelling, but I can find no clue to her identity.  After the death of the last Duke of Queensberry, Amesbury House remained uninhabited for sixty years, except during the tenancy of Sir Elijah Impey, and when some French nuns occupied it for a short period.

My husband’s grandfather, on inheriting Amesbury from his uncle (the first Sir Edmund Antrobus), wished to enlarge and restore the old house, but finding it in too dilapidated a state, decided to pull it down, and in 1838 began to build an entirely new house (closely resembling the old one) of handsome cut stone, with a grand loggia, supported by beautiful pillars and ornamented with carved stonework of fine design.  This house is supposed to stand on the site of the old Abbey, and many traces of cells were discovered, underground, when digging foundations.  To-day not a single stone of the old Abbey remains above ground to remind us of its former existence and splendour; it having once covered, tradition says, a space of thirteen acres.

Note.—Some beautiful coloured tiles decorated with different intricate patterns were dug up near the present house at Amesbury.  We suppose them to be from the cells of the old Abbey.  Some have designs of the Fleur-de-lys on them.

PRICELESS STONEHENGE—SOME IMPRESSIONS.

(From Ladies’ Realm Magazine.)

The Great Druidical Temple, or (as some hold) Phœnician Observatory, composed of gigantic, beautifully-coloured, hewn stones, stands in the middle of Salisbury Plain.  These stones have been measured, counted, defaced, praised, depreciated, commented upon, by numerous authorities on countless occasions, but (to my knowledge) no account of their poetical and picturesque aspects, at different seasons of the year, has been attempted.  I shall feel satisfied if I succeed in conveying feebly in words what David Cox (the artist) did ably in colours, with his glowing brush.  I do not propose to enter into any statistics, as to the “Market value of Stonehenge to the nation,” or to tell you the number of miles that lie between it and the town of Salisbury, the goodness or inferiority of the roads to it, the number of visiting tourists, &c.; I only wish to place before you some impressions I have felt of its grandeur and charm, through many seasons, in all sorts of weather, and varying moods.

There is always a constant surprise and delight to me in the manner in which Stonehenge bursts upon one, approach it as one may, from various points across the undulating Plain which surrounds it.  Starting upon one’s “Pilgrim’s Path” to visit it, from any side, at first there is nothing to be seen but the crisp crackling grass underfoot, and the white glittering roads; then, as one advances nearer, unexpectedly, dark, mysterious forms seem to start up, which gradually shape themselves into the incompleted circle we call “Stonehenge.”

The late spring, and early summer, are enchanting periods; myriads of starry white flowers, and gorgeous yellow and blue ones, wave together with a glowing harmony of colour, as they are swayed by soft breezes, whilst a “Hallelujah Chorus” of skylarks sing overhead, making the air full of scent and sound.  In this setting, the old stones seem all yellow and grey in the brilliant sunshine.  Picturesque shepherds, wrapped in their great dark-blue cloaks, appear upon the horizon; tinkling sheep bells are heard, reminding one of the Roman Campagna; evening falling, brings a sense of peace and stillness, chimes from the old Church at Amesbury float across the valley.  The light comes and goes, and the world seems far away.

* * * * *

To my mind the magic of Stonehenge is never more powerfully felt than during the wild, tempestuous autumnal gales, that usually sweep across the Plain in October.  Great clouds roll above, enfolding the circle in a shadowy purple mantle, sometimes tipped with gold.  Thoughts rise up suddenly, of the many tragedies, feasts, sacrifices, mysterious rites that must have been enacted here in far-off bygone days.  One wonders if beautiful golden-haired Guinevere passed this way, on her flight to safety, at the Convent at “Ambresbury” (the Land of Ambrosius), or if sad King Arthur tarried there on his lonely homeward journey?

I prefer to picture to myself, Stonehenge, in happy, thoughtless Pagan days, Druid priests and priestesses forming grand processions; crossing the “rushing Avon” and winding up from the valley to Stonehenge, clothed in pure white, and holding gleaming sickles in their hands, chanting hymns on their way to perform the sacred rite of cutting the mistletoe.  Perhaps they sang and chanted through the short summer night, waiting for the sun to rise (over the pointed outlying stone) on the day which marks the solar half-year (June 21st), and which bathes the altar-stone in golden light.  Probably this was the signal for sacrifice, the death of the victim, and the appeasing of wrathful gods.  In mid-winter the stones appear like black masses, in the midst of driving snows.  The least interesting time of year, in this enchanted place, is the bright, clear, commonplace summer, when no mysteries abound (except by moonlight).  The old gods are sleeping, everything is orderly, agriculture and its implements surround us, and Romance seems dead for the moment.  Farewell.

Florence Caroline Mathilde Antrobus.

In approaching’ the momentous and deeply interesting subject of Stonehenge, I considered it best and wisest to collect the thoughts and opinions of several learned authors on this subject, and submit them to the reader, who thus will have an opportunity of comparing for himself the truth and merits of the different theories presented to him for judgment.

Various explanations of the name “Stonehenge” have been forthcoming; but the true etymological significance seems to be: A.S. “Stàn,” used as an adjective, and “henge,” from A.S. “hòn” i.e., stone hanging-places, from the groups of stones resembling a gallows.  This was long ago suggested by Wace, the Anglo-Norman poet, who writes:—

“Stanhengues ont nom en Englois
Pierres pendues en François.”

As to the date of Stonehenge, opinions vary.  It is supposed Hecatæus (500 B.C.) mentioned it as the “Round Temple” (Translation of Extract from Diodorus Siculus, about B.C. 8).

Hecatæus, the Milesian, and others, have handed down to us the following story:—“Over against Gaul, in the great ocean stream, is an island not less in extent than Sicily, stretching towards the north.  The inhabitants are called Hyperboreans, because their abode is more remote from us than that wind we call Boreas.  It is said that the soil is very rich and fruitful, and the climate so favourable that there are two harvests in every year.  Their fables say that Latona was born in this island, and on that account they worship Apollo (Apollo would signify the sun to the Latins) before all other divinities, and celebrate his praise in daily hymns, conferring the highest honours upon their bards, as being his priests.  There is in this island a magnificent temple to this god, circular in form, and adorned with many splendid offerings.  And there is also a city sacred to Apollo, inhabited principally by harpers, who in his temple sing sacred verses to the god, accompanied by the harp, in honour of his deeds.

“The language of the Hyperboreans is peculiar, and they are singularly well affected towards the Greeks, and have been so from the most remote times, especially to those of Athens and Delos.  It is even said that some Greeks have travelled thither, and presented offerings at their temple inscribed with Grecian characters.  They also say that Abaris in former times went thence to Greece, to renew their ancient friendship with the Delians.  It is related, moreover, that in this island the moon appears but a short way from the earth, and to have little hills upon it.  Once in nineteen years (and this period is what we call the Great Year) they say that their god visits the island; and from the Vernal Equinox to the rising of the Pleiades, all the night through, expresses his satisfaction at his own exploits by dances and by playing on the harp.

“Both the City and the Temple are presided over by the Boreadœ, the descendants of Boreas, and they hand down the power in regular succession in their family.”

The first author who is considered to make unmistakable mention of Stonehenge is Henry of Huntingdon (twelfth century).  In his Chronicle he speaks of it as the second wonder of England, and calls it Stanenges.  Geoffrey of Monmouth (1138) wrote of it about the same time; he believed it to have been erected by Aurelius Ambrosius, King of Britain, and called it Hengist’s Stones.  Giraldus Cambrensis, a contemporary of Geoffrey, also makes mention of it.

Among more modern authors, may be quoted Sir Philip Sidney’s lines:—

“Near Wilton sweet, huge heaps of stones are found,
But so confused that neither any eye
Can count them first, nor reason try
What force them brought to so unlikely ground.”

Then Wharton’s sonnet:—

“Thou noblest monument of Albion’s isle!
Whether by Merlin’s aid from Scythia’s shore
To Amber’s fatal plain Pendragon bore,
Huge frame of giant hands, the mighty pile,
To entomb his Britain’s slain by Hengist’s guile;
Or Druid priests, sprinkled with human gore,
Taught ’mid thy massy maze their mystic lore;
Or Danish chiefs, enriched with savage spoil,
To victory’s idle vast, an unhewn shrine,
Reared the rude heap; or in thy hallowed round
Repose the kings of Brutus’ genuine line;
Or here those kings in solemn state were crowned
Studious to trace thy wondrous origin,
We muse on many an ancient tale renowned.”

To descend to prose.  Langtoft, in his Chronicle, says:—“A wander wit of Wiltshire, rambling to Rome, to gaze at antiquities, and there screwing himself into the company of antiquarians, they entreated him to illustrate unto them that famous monument in his country called Stonage.  His answer was that he had never seen it.  Whereupon they kicked him out of doors, and bade him go home and see Stonage.”

The immortal Pepys says the stones are “as prodigious as any tales I have ever heard of them, and worth going this journey to see.”

The archæologist, Mr. Edmund Story Maskelyne, fixes the date of Stonehenge at 900 or 1000 B.C.  I quote what he says from a lecture, read 1897, “On the Age and Purpose of Stonehenge”:—

“It is of consequence that we should recognize that Stonehenge was built about nine or ten hundred years B.C., and not 700 A.D., as many writers would have us believe.  For instance, Dr. W. M. Flinders Petrie, in his book, ‘Stonehenge, 1880,’ states his opinion that it was erected A.D. 700±200, that is, between A.D. 500 and 900.  The date of Stonehenge will be of great interest if there is found at Avebury remains sufficiently perfect to determine astronomically the date when that monument was erected.  For it cannot be but interesting to ascertain when the two cults—that of the sun, pure and simple, as exemplified in the original Temple at Stonehenge; and the cult of the sun in connexion with the serpent, as exhibited at Avebury—respectively prevailed in this country.”

Mr. Story Maskelyne’s reasons for his theory that Stonehenge was built by the Phœnicians are as follows:—

“I should like to add some reasons for my belief that Stonehenge was built by the Phœnicians.  In the first place, I cannot think of any other people that could have either designed or executed such a monument, which required both science for its conception and skill for its erection.  The Phœnicians, with their perfect familiarity with masts, and cordage, and pulleys, could easily lift the imposts, of which the largest—being about 11 ft. long, 4 or 6 wide, and 3 ft. thick—would weigh less than ten tons; and the Phœnicians must have known how the Egyptians raised masses of stone many times heavier.

“The trilithon [24] standing clear seems to have had some fascination for these people.  They are found still standing in Tripoli in Libya, as described in ‘The Hill of the Graces,’ a record of investigation among the Trilithons and Megalithic sites of Tripoli by Mr. Cowper, F.S.A., 1897, and specimens exist on the Continent of Europe, in Normandy and in Brittany.  One may be seen in the Island of Ushant, and another in St. Nazaire on the probable route they adopted for the passage of tin.

“Another peculiarity can be seen to this day by any one at Stonehenge in the large trilithon impost, namely, that the under surfaces of the imposts which rested on the uprights are smoothly cut and slightly bevelled, so as to throw the principal weight of the mass of the impost on its outside edge, thus excluding rain, &c., and this very contrivance was employed by the Egyptians in the pyramids, and it is certain that the Phœnicians had free intercourse with Egypt.  Finally, the Phœnicians had founded Cadiz, their Gadir in the eleventh century B.C., more than two centuries before the date which, from astronomical considerations, I assign for the building of Stonehenge.  We know that they sailed along the shores of Spain and Gaul and to the Baltic, and though they preferred coasting as a rule, the straight cut across from Cherbourg to Poole or Christchurch in fine weather would not be a long voyage; and as they certainly did trade with Britain, and it must have been hazardous for British coracles to sail across the open sea, laden with tin, we may conclude that Phœnician ships did cross the Channel.  We know also that the Phœnicians made, more or less, homes for themselves wherever they landed; and it is probable that they did so at Poole or Christchurch, also that they would build them a temple where they found it convenient to stay.”

Mr. Story Maskelyne considers the Greeks reformed the Temple later on.  “Within 500 years of the latest of the above-mentioned dates the Phœnician or Tyrian Empire had ceased to exist, and her numerous colonies had been absorbed by the nationalities surrounding them.  About B.C. 400 the Greeks supplanted the Phœnicians in their trade with Britain, and probably for some time continued to use the same mart and sea route the latter had used—we may assume from Cherbourg to Poole or Christchurch, whence they bore away the tin in their coracles from Cornwall.  Now commenced a new era for Stonehenge.  It must have been a noted Temple, and I cannot doubt that Hecatæus did allude to it as cited by Strabo, when he wrote, in the sixth century B.C., of the Round Temple to Apollo in the land of the Hyperboreans.  Now the festivals of the Greeks were more connected with the months than with the year, and their calendar months were alternate, full and hollow, where the thirty pillars were doubtless used by them for the daily sacrifice in the months of thirty days and the spaces between them, omitting the entrance, for the hollow months, of twenty-nine days.  Owing to the precession of the stars, Stonehenge no longer answered some of the purposes for which it has been founded.  The Greeks had adopted with ardour the Metonic Cycle discovered by them B.C. 430, and they reformed the old Sun Temple by the addition of the inner horseshoe of blue stones which represented that Cycle, for they were in number nineteen.  As to how, or why, the blue stones came to be imported, I imagine they are native to Brittany or Normandy, whence they might easily have been brought as ballast in Greek ships, which took back tin in their stead from Poole or Christchurch, and from the latter port they might easily have been taken in rafts to Amesbury.”

THE DATE OF STONEHENGE.

In printing this second edition of my little guide-book, I think it will be found interesting and necessary to leave all the former evidence and opinions that I collected as to the date of Stonehenge.  Since the excavations in 1901, I think we may consider the age of Stonehenge to be between three and four thousand years.  Mr. W. Gowland judges from the implements or tools found, Sir Norman Lockyer and Dr. Penrose from astronomical observations, based on the fact that the avenue (“Viâ Sacra”) to Stonehenge from the east of the ancients was in a line with the Altar Stone, so that the sun, rising on the day of the solar half-year (June 21st) and creeping over the horizon, shed his beams on the Altar Stone, thus marking the solar half-year.  Of course, the east of the ancients is not our east, but the difference between the position of the sun now and then to the avenue gives, according to these gentlemen’s calculations, a date of 3700 years old to Stonehenge.

THE FINDS AT STONEHENGE, 1901.

The implements found during the excavations made for the underpinning of the “Leaning Stone” are thus classified by Mr. W. Gowland:—

(1) Haches roughly chipped, longer and shorter.  (2) Axe-hammers.  (3) Hammer-stones with blunt edge.  The above are of flint.  (4) Regular hammer-stones of compact sarsen.  (5) Mauls of the same rock, weighing from 37 to 64 lbs. each.  There were also found chippings from the monoliths, and, near the surface, coins and animal bones.

Only one trace of copper or bronze occurred other than coins and superficial finds, a mere strain on a block of sarsen.  So we may consider Stonehenge to belong to the late Neolithic, or early Bronze Period.  These objects have been lent by Sir Edmund Antrobus to the museum at Devizes for a period of six months.

In the January, 1902, number of Man, Mr. W. Gowland’s interesting paper will be found, describing the excavations, methods of trimming and erecting the stones practised by the ancients.

As to the kinds of stone actually employed in the building of Stonehenge, the whole of the outer circle and the four stones lying beyond that circle are undoubtedly “Sarsen” (which are the boulder stones left by the ice-sheet of the glacial period on the Wiltshire downs).  There are, in the inner circle, four stones which have been called “horn-stone.”  The remainder are “diabase,” commonly called “bluestones,” and similar are found in Wales, and in parts of Cumberland and Cornwall, the so-called Altar Stone being a kind of grey sandstone, not sarsen.  The large outlying stone, known traditionally as the “Friar’s Heel,” from a legend that when the devil was busy erecting Stonehenge he made the observation that no one would ever know how it was done.  This was overheard by a friar lurking near by, and he incautiously replied in the Wiltshire dialect, “That’s more than thee can tell,” and fled for his life; the devil, catching up an odd stone, flung it after the friar, and hit him on the heel.  This stone is also named the “Pointer,” because from the middle of the Altar Stone the sun is seen at the summer solstice (21st of June) to rise immediately above it.  The Hele Stone is the true name, “Hele” meaning “to hide,” from Heol or Haul of Geol or Jul, all names for the sun, which this stone seems to hide.  From the Friar’s Heel it is about 66 yards to a low circular earthen boundary, enclosing the area within which Stonehenge stands.  Just within the entrance to this earthen ring lies a large prostrate stone called the “Slaughter Stone,” supposed by some to have been used for the slaughter of victims about to be offered in sacrifice at the altar.  The Slaughter Stone (at the end nearest to the Friar’s Heel) bears evidence of tool-marks, there being six small round cavities made in it by blows from a flint tool.  On the margin of the earthen ring, one 55 yards on the left, the other 95 yards on the right of the entrance, are two small, unhewn stones.

Stonehenge stands about 440 feet above the sea-level.  The outer circle measures 308 feet in circumference, and is supposed to have been formed originally of thirty upright stones, seventeen of which are still standing, and the remains of nine others are to be found fallen to the ground.  These stones formerly stood 14 feet above the surface of the ground, but now are of different heights.  Their breadth and thickness also vary: the former averaging 7 feet, the latter 3½.  The stones were fixed in the ground at intervals of 3½ feet, connected at the top by a continuous line of thirty imposts forming a corona or ring of stone at a height of 16 feet above the ground, and were all squared and rough hewn, and cleverly joined together.  The uprights were cut with knobs or tenons, which fitted into mortice holes hewn in the undersides of the horizontal stones.  About 9 feet within this peristyle was the “inner circle,” composed of diabase obelisks; within this, again, was the “great ellipse,” formed of five, or, as some think, seven trilithons of stones, each group consisting of two blocks placed upright and one crosswise.  These structures rose progressively in height from N.E. to S.W., and the loftiest and largest attained an elevation of 25 feet.  Lastly, within the trilithons was the “inner ellipse,” consisting of nineteen obelisks of diabase.  Within the inner ellipse we find the Altar Stone.  At the present moment, there remains of the outer circle or peristyle sixteen uprights and six imposts; of the inner circle, seven only stand upright of the great ellipse—there are still two perfect trilithons and two single uprights.  The Duke of Buckingham, in his researches in 1620, is said to have caused the fall of a trilithon.  He was at Wilton in the reign of James I., and he “did cause the middle of Stonehenge to be digged, and under this digging was the cause of the falling down or recumbency of the great stone there, twenty-one foote long.”  “In the process of digging they found a great many horns of stags and oxen, charcoal batter-dishes (?), heads of arrows, some pieces of armour eaten out with rust, bones rotten, but whether of stagge’s or men they could not tell.”

In 1797, on a rapid thaw succeeding a severe frost, another trilithon fell; of the inner ellipse, there are six blocks in their places; and in the centre remains the so-called Altar Stone.

In Sir R. C. Hoare’s “History of Wiltshire,” he mentions that Inigo Jones observed a stone, which is now gone, in the inmost part of the cell, appearing not much above the surface of the earth and lying towards the east, four feet broad and sixteen long, which was his supposed Altar Stone.  Also “Philip, Earl of Pembroke (Lord Chamberlayne to King Charles I.), did say ‘that an altar stone was found in the middle of the area here, and that it was carried away to St. James’s.’”

The entrance to Stonehenge faced the N.E., and the road to it, “Viâ Sacra,” or avenue, can be traced by banks of earth.

It is the opinion of competent authorities that many of the stones should be underpinned in the manner of the “Leaning Stone,” as any violent storms, such as periodically sweep across the Plain, might bring them down.  The fall of two of the stones from the outer circle (supposed by the superstitious to foretell the Queen’s death) on December 31st, 1900, the last day of the old century, and 103 years after the last stones fell, was caused by a gale from the west.

There are the two opinions as to the right course to pursue regarding Stonehenge—some people considering it would be well to leave it to fall down, so that eventually it would appear like a jumbled heap of ninepins, others (myself among the number) that the necessary steps for its Preservation, not Restoration, should be taken.

Florence C. M. Antrobus.

April, 1902.

PARTICULARS OF THE STONES.

58

stones of the Sarsen circle: 30 piers, 28 lintels.

26

,, ,, Bluestone circle (2): this includes 1 impost.

15

,, ,, Sarsen trilithons: 10 piers, 5 imposts.

19

„ Inner bluestones.

1

Sun stone.

1

Altar stone.

1

Slaughter stone.

1

Stones of the Earth Circle.

123

Total

.

The question arises whether there were formerly other stones belonging to the earth circle.  From probing the ground, there is reason to believe that a stone on this bank may once have marked the direction of the axis.

SARSEN CIRCLE.

17 piers in situ, 8 prostrate or fragments, 5 missing.

6 lintels in situ, 2 fragments, 20 missing.

BLUESTONE CIRCLE.

12 stones or stumps in situ, 10 prostrate, 4 missing.

SARSEN TRILITHONS.

5 piers in situ, 3 prostrate, 5 missing.

From this list of missing blue stones we may safely deduct two; two pieces of rock are known to be beneath the turf, and there may be others.  The most satisfactory derivation of Sarsens or Sassens is from the Anglo-Saxon word for a rock or stone—ses, plural sesen or sesons.  The Inner Circle of blue stones and Inner Horse-shoe are composed of the “Blue Stones,” igneous rocks.

DERIVATION OF AMESBURY.

“On Salisbury Plain stand the ruins of the weird Circle of Revolution, Cor y Coeth in Welsh, the Circle of Dominion, the holy anointed stones of Ambresbiri (ambree, anointed; biri, Hebrew for holy ones), at once a sanctuary and a sundial (3000 years ago the only clock in Britain), regulated by the sun and moon for days and years.  But the beautiful old British names since the sixth century have been blotted out by the terrible title Stonehenge or stone gallows—Stanhengen in Anglo-Saxon.  A permanent gallows of stone was used by the Saxons for the execution of criminals, and wishing to aim a death-blow at British power, no surer way was found by the invaders than by hanging British leaders upon the consecrated stones of their revered temple.  The road from the village of Amesbury to the Circle is still called Gallow’s Hill.”

From Mrs. Gordon’s Pamphlet.

DERIVATION OF DRUID.

An Arabic (and Persian) word meaning Holy Men come from the valley of the Euphrates.  Mrs. Gordon considers Merlin (the Bismarck of his age) as the builder of Stonehenge; also that Aurelius Ambrosius, by his own wish, was buried within the Circle of Stonehenge.

DERIVATION OF BARROWS.

Barrow, a Hebrew word for grave Mounds.  Literally, the “thrown-up pit of lamentation.”

DERIVATION OF WILTSHIRE.

Wiltshire, in the Saxon Chronicles Wiltunseir, in Doomesday Wiltescire, derives its name from the town of Wilton, from the Wit-saetas (saetan = settlers or inhabitants), the West Saxon tribe who made it their home.

MENTION OF AMESBURY IN MALORY’S “MORTE D’ARTHUR.”

“And thus upon a night there came a vision unto Sir Launcelot, and charged him, in remission of all his sins, to haste him towards Almesbury.  ‘And by that time thou come, there thou shalt find Queen Guenever dead; and therefore take thy fellows with thee, and also purvey thee a horse bier, and bring you the corpse of her, and bury it by her lord and husband.’  Then Sir Launcelot took his seven fellows with him, and on foot they went from Glastonbury, which is little more than thirty miles.  And when Sir Launcelot was come to Almesbury, within the nunnery, Queen Guenever died but half an hour before.”

Timbs, in his “Abbeys and Castles in England,” says: “At Amesbury, says Bishop Tanner, quoting from Geoffrey of Monmouth, there is said to have been an ancient British monastery for 300 monks, founded, as some say, by the famous Prince Ambrosius who lived at the time of the Saxon invasion, and who was therein buried, destroyed by that cruel pagan, Gurmendus, who overran all this country in the sixth century.”  This alludes to a monastery prior to the one founded by Elfrida, with which I begin my account of Amesbury Abbey.

THE AVENUE OR VIÂ SACRA
is orientated to the midsummer sunrise, and points 50° east of north point.  It leads uninterruptedly to the circular space formed by the earth circle in which Stonehenge stands, the enclosing bank being discontinued in this direction.  It is noteworthy that the sun stone, as well as the slaughter stone, are not placed in the centre of the avenue or approach, but lie towards the eastern side of it.  The avenue is made by two parallel lines confining ditches, the earth having been thrown inwards so as to slightly raise the roadway.  These ditches, though shallow, are distinct.  The avenue thus formed descends the gradual incline of the Down, until at about one thousand five hundred feet from the sun stone the ditches become indistinguishable.  Here the descent is more rapid and leads to a gentle valley in the Down, where the avenue divided into two branches.  It is now impossible to trace this point of division with any certainty.

THE CURSUS AVENUE.

This is now completely obliterated.

THE LONG AVENUE.

The branch which turned to the right, forming the eastern slope of the valley, went over its crest and continued in a straight line in the direction of some high land to the north of Vespasian’s Camp.  The plough at work year after year has completely effaced all traces of this avenue, and we have to rely on Dr. Stukeley’s account written 150 years ago.

THE PARALLEL BANK.

At 1200 feet from the sun stone “the approach” is intersected at an angle approximating roughly to a right angle by parallel banks about two feet in height and forty feet apart; the roadway thus formed continues about 600 feet to left and right; to the east it is continued by a causeway across the valley already spoken of, and it is used by carts passing that way, required in the cultivation of fields to the west of the avenue.

THE CURSUS.

Discovered by Dr. Stukeley, 1723.

This great enclosure lies to the north of Stonehenge, and veers 6° from due east and west.  Like the avenue it is formed by banks thrown up from an outer ditch.  It is 9000 feet in length, with a width of 350 feet at its centre, but towards its extremities it narrows.  To the west, the southern boundary is irregular.  The northern ditch, on the contrary, makes a fairly straight line.  Its eastern end is headed by a long mound now difficult to trace.  Near its western extremity, and within the enclosure, are two small tumuli irregularly placed.  The greater part of this earthwork being on the uncultivated Down is fairly well defined, especially to the west; to the east it has been obliterated by the plough.

THE LESSER CURSUS.

To the north-west of the Great Cursus and over 7000 feet distant from Stonehenge, is an earthwork apparently the beginning of a second cursus.  It is ill defined, and at 1200 feet from its enclosed end the ditches cease.  It appears to be an abandoned scheme for an enclosure similar to the Cursus.

From “Stonehenge,” Mr. Edgar Barclay.  At page 66 he says:—“The Cursus is irregular in shape, nevertheless there remains a very strong probability that it is an adjunct of Stonehenge, and was designed with it, and is not an independent earthwork as Sir R. Colt Hoare maintains.”

From Mr. J. F. Hewitt’s “Ruling Races of Pre-historic Times”:—“A hippodrome can still be traced about half a mile north of the Temple, with which it is connected by an avenue about forty cubits wide.  This is divided into two branches, about 1700 feet from the Temple, the eastern hand going eastward to Radfin, a ford on the Avon, and the western curving round to the ancient chariot-course.  It was here the seasonal games took place, said by Macrobius to have been celebrated by the Druids, when sacrifices were offered to the gods.  This ancient campus martius, running east and west, is about 10,000 feet or 6000 Druidical cubits long, and 350 feet or 200 Druidical cubits wide, and on the east side is a long bank, extending nearly its whole length, which must have served as a place for spectators; while on the west side is a curve to allow for the turning of the competing chariots.  There can be no doubt whatever that this racecourse represents the ancient site of the national games; instituted by the Sons of the Horse, which are said in Greek tradition to have been founded by Akastus, king of Iolcus, after he had driven out Jason and Medea the sorceress.”

EARTHWORKS ON SALISBURY PLAIN.

Tumuli, or Barrows, are the most simple kind of sepulchral monument; they consist of a mound of earth or stones raised over the dead.

Sir Richard Colt Hoare thus classifies them in his “History of Wiltshire”:—

1.  The Long Barrow.  Differing considerably in their construction.

2.  The Bowl Barrow.  The most ordinary shape.

3.  The Bell Barrow.  This, from the elegance of its form, seems a refinement on the Bowl Barrow.  They abound near Stonehenge.

4.  Druid Barrow (1st class).  I consider these tumuli were appropriated to the female tribes.  The outward vallum with the ditch within is beautifully moulded, and in most instances found to contain small cups, small lance heads, amber, jet, and glass beads.

5.  Druid Barrow (2nd class).  In external form these resemble the preceding, but their circumference is not so large.  The tumulus within rises to a point from the edge of the vallum.

6.  Pond Barrow.  They differ totally from all others, and resemble an excavation made for a pond.  I can form no conjecture as to their use.

7.  Twin Barrow.  They are not very common, and, by being enclosed in a circle, seem to denote the interment of relations.

8.  Cone Barrow.  The only one I have seen is at Everley.  The tumulus rises immediately from the ditch, and the apex is higher and more pointed.

9.  Broad Barrow.  Resembles the Bowl Barrow, but is higher and flatter at the top.

Mr. Edgar Barclay, in “Stonehenge,” says:—“The presence of barrows (near Stonehenge) would enable marriages to be celebrated on the spot.  A feast at the family tomb was an opportunity for a young woman about to marry to be formally introduced to the domestic worship of the family she was about to enter.  That feasts did occur at Stonehenge Barrows we have proofs.  We find also that Irish Fairs in honour of the Sun God were held in proximity to extensive burial-places.  The arrangement of the avenues, the placing of the cursus, the placing of the sun stone and slaughter stone, the break in the lintel circle, &c.: these characteristics point out to us the probable procedures at times of festival.  The midsummer festival solemnized the holy espousals of the Sun God with the land.”

In “The Ruling Races of Pre-historic Times,” Mr. Hewitt says:—“The deer worshippers were the mixed race formed from the union of the sons of the mother-tree, the mother-bear and wolf, the lordly boar and the prolific sow, the mother-cow, the mother-mountain, and father firestone, the people who looked on the Sun God of the equinoxes and solstices as the god who made their crops to grow and who ripened their barley, the seed of life (zi), the Zeus of the Greeks, which gave its name to the Deus of the Latins and the Theos of the Greeks, the Manx god Ji.  This father sun god was the god on the grey white horse, the clouds, the white horse in Zend mythology of Tishtrya, the star of the summer solstice which succeeded the golden horned bull of the bull race, as the adversary and conqueror of the black horse, and the black bull or dragon, the cloud which will not give up its rain, which was in Northern mythology the winter frost giant.  It was this white horse—the sun god of the limestone, flint, and chalk country—which was the god of Stonehenge, the temple whose ruins still remain to set before us, with absolute certainty of the correctness of the deduction in its main details, the complete ritual of this primæval worship.”

Note.—The white sun horse is still worshipped and fed daily at Kobe, in Japan.

The worshippers of the sun god who built this temple are proved to have belonged to the Bronze age by the number of round barrow tombs within twelve miles of it; and Stukeley (A.D. 1723) counted one hundred and twenty-eight as visible from a hill close by.

VESPASIAN’S CAMP.

A name given by Dr. Stukeley to the (probably) British earthworks, locally known as “the Ramparts,” which crown a hill in the demesne of Amesbury Abbey.  Its ancient lines of defence, enclosing thirty-nine acres and boldly scarped towards the west, environ the summit in the form of a scalene triangle.  This hill is densely wooded, containing two beautiful avenues of beech-trees, and as it descends to the Avon, is cut into a fanciful shape, supposed to resemble a diamond.  I have described this in “Amesbury Abbey.”

WEST AMESBURY HOUSE.

A pretty old house on the road-side, belonging to Sir Edmund Antrobus, built of stone and flint.  The interior has been much altered and spoilt.  Traces of a monastic building exist in the beams supporting the roof, and in a church doorway at the top of the staircase.  These date from the fifteenth century.  Aubrey informs us that this house and property, along with Stonehenge, once formed the dowry of the wife of Lord Ferrers of Chartley.  The village of West Amesbury possesses some picturesque thatched cottages, and on an outside wall of one is a rude sketch of fighting cocks and their backers.

WILSFORD HOUSE.

A house on the banks of the Avon, built by the late Mr. Loder, of Salisbury, two miles from Amesbury.  It is of the modern “villa” description.  In 1898 Mr. Young purchased it from Sir E. Loder, and re-sold it to Mr. Edward Tennant in 1900.  None of the places described along the Avon Valley are open to the public, but they can be seen from the high road.

LAKE HOUSE,
situated on the banks of the Avon, is in the parish of Wilsford, and about three miles south of Amesbury.  The exact date of its foundation is uncertain.  Its main features are Elizabethan, but an old letter in the possession of the family clearly suggests an earlier date.  “As to ye date of ye house,” says the correspondent, “I do not remember anything in that beautifully written deed to which you refer that would bear on it.  Great weight would belong to any opinion expressed by ye late J. H. Parker, and you told me that you thought it might be as early as Edward VI. or earlier, and probably Parker judged only by what he saw, and ye architectural features that remain have in them nothing distinctive in comparison with those what have vanished.”  Lake House is one of the most beautiful in this neighbourhood, and is built of the usual stone and flint; it possesses yew hedges and delightful old-fashioned gardens sloping to the river.  It was purchased in 1591 by George Duke, and it remained in the Duke family till 1897, when (just in time to save the old house from utter ruin) it was bought by Mr. J. N. Lovibond, and most beautifully restored by the architect, Mr. Detmar Blow, according to the views of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.  There are barrows in the park at Lake, and many curious objects, such as amber necklaces, &c., were discovered in them about fifty years ago during excavations made by the late Mr. Duke.  Some of the things then found are in the British Museum.  A cottage industry is now carried on in the village of Lake: a sort of rough tweed in pretty colours being made in hand looms by the women.  This tweed is called “Stonehenge” cloth, and is not expensive.

GREAT DURNFORD CHURCH.

Leaving Amesbury, and following the eastern banks of the Avon, we come to Great Durnford.  Its name is derived from the British word “dur,” signifying water.  The church is most picturesque, and is built of stone and flint, with very rich Norman north and south doorways and chancel arch.  The font is Norman, with an interesting arcade.  The pulpit is of oak and dated 1619, and has a very old velvet cover with 1657 worked on it.  Built into the wall of the church is a stone coffin containing a skeleton, supposed to be that of the founder.  Traces of two doors leading to the rood loft can still be seen, and in one window are the remains of some very old glass.  Inside the south door are several curious crosses, supposed to be dedication crosses.  In the chancel is a leper’s window.  The altar rails are of oak, and date back to the sixteenth century.  The pattern on the walls is the same as that found some years ago under the plaster and whitewash.  There is a curious brass to the memory of Edward Young, his wife, and fourteen children, dated 1670.  In the chancel, chained to an ancient desk, is a copy of Jewel’s “Apologie of the Church of England,” ordered by Convocation after the Reformation, 1571.

GREAT DURNFORD HOUSE
was once a seat of the Hungerfords.  Evelyn notes in his Diary, July, 1654:—“We dined at a ferme of my Uncle Hungerford’s called Darneforde magna, situate in a valley under the plaine, most sweetly watered, abounding in troutes, catched by speares in the night when they come attracted by a light set in ye sterne of a boate.”

It is in the French château style on a small scale, and has lovely old-fashioned gardens, quite unspoiled, with some rare trees growing in them.  At the end of the last garden flows the Avon, and picturesque Durnford Church stands close by.  In 1869 Mr. Pinckney bought the house and some of the estate from the Earl of Malmesbury.

OGBURY CAMP.

On the eastern side of the Avon is a very ancient earthen work called Ogbury Camp.  Sir Richard Colt Hoare thus describes it:—“On this hill we recognize the very early and simple handiwork of the Britons, unaltered by their successors and conquerors, the Romans and Saxons.  Here we see a large tract of sixty-two acres enclosed within a single rampart, and without any fosse to strengthen it against the attacks of an enemy, and we perceive within the area the evident marks of enclosures, and only one entrance to the east.  On the northern side the ramparts followed the windings of the hill, and are interrupted by the plantations of Lord Malmesbury’s demesne.  The area contains sixty-two acres and a quarter.  The circuit of the outer ditch is one mile, one furlong and fifty-five yards, and the depth of the vallum is thirty-three feet.  On the south-east and west sides the ramparts are very much mutilated.  I cannot consider Ogbury as a camp or work of defence against an invading enemy, but rather as an asylum or place of refuge, whither the Britons, in times of danger, retired with their families and herds of cattle.  On digging within this area we could not find any marks of ancient residence, but on some high ground adjoining the extraordinary verdure of the turf induced us to dig into the soil, where we immediately found numerous bones of animals with fragments of the rudest British pottery.”

HEALE HOUSE, MIDDLE WOODFORD.

The Residence of the Honourable Louis Greville; bought by him from Sir E. Loder, 1894.

This house, beautifully built of small red bricks, has stone-coped windows in the Dutch style of architecture introduced into this country by William III., and is quite unlike the usual stone and flint “chequered” houses of the neighbourhood.  You enter the grounds through old wrought-iron gates and down an avenue of elm-trees.  The river Avon flows through the garden.  This property formerly belonged to the Errington and Hyde families.  Inside the house little remains of the old decorations but some carved woodwork.  A cupboard in a bedroom is shown as the hiding-place of Charles II. after the battle of Worcester.  He is said to have visited Stonehenge from Heale, and there met friends who were to conduct him to the coast of Sussex prior to his escape from England.  He is supposed to have proved to his own satisfaction the fallacy of the notion of the impossibility of counting the stones composing Stonehenge.

“In 1721 Robert Hyde bequeathed Heale to his sister, Mrs. Levinz, widow of the Bishop of Sodor and Man, and she, by will, devised the estates to her son-in-law, Michael Frampton of Oxford, and he, in his turn, left them to his nephews, Thomas Bull, rector of Porton, and Edward and Simon Polhill and their heirs in succession, in default thereof to William Bowles; in seventeen years after the death of the testator, Canon Bowles was in full possession of the property.”  Several members of the Bowles family lie buried in Salisbury Cathedral.  Heale Hill is remarkable for a circle on the summit and traces of a British village on the south slope.

LITTLE DURNFORD HOUSE.

Built of stone and flint, successively the property of the families of Pregers, Wodhull, and Tropnell, afterwards Yonge or Young.  In 1795 it was sold to Edward Hinxman, whose descendants sold it in 1897 to Mr. Devenish (the present owner).  The Avon, flowing through the grounds, has been artificially widened in one place, forming a miniature lake in front of the house.

ENVOI.

With much regret I find myself at the end of my little book, which, I hope, will help to describe a beautiful and interesting country.  It has been compiled from various learned sources, and only a small portion of it can claim to be original.  I shall consider myself fortunate if the traveller finds any pleasure in reading what has given me great pleasure to write.

Florence Caroline Mathilde Antrobus.

June, 1900.

APPENDIX.
THE RECENT WORK AT STONEHENGE. [43]

At a meeting held last March at Stonehenge, and attended by representatives of the Society of Antiquaries, of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Monuments, and the Wiltshire Archæological Society, various plans and measures were discussed and suggested for the better preservation of Stonehenge.  The whole state of the surrounding neighbourhood being changed from its former quietude by the introduction of new elements, such as the military camps at Bulford, &c., the making of the new branch line of the South-Western Railway (from Grateley to Amesbury), it became necessary to meet the altered circumstances by the exercise of greater precautions for the care of the beautiful old Sun Temple standing in the midst of the grass-clothed downs—a thing of wonder and mystery to behold.  The advice given to Sir Edmund Antrobus by the representatives of these societies was as follows, published in the Times of April 3:—

Resolutions.

(1)  That this Committee approves of the suggested protection of Stonehenge by a wire fence not less than 4 ft. high, following on two sides the existing roads and crossing on the west from the 331-foot level on the north road to the 332-foot level on the south road shown on the O.S. map (1-2, 500), Wilts sheet liv. 14.

(2)  That the Committee recommends, without prejudice to any legal question, that the local authorities be requested to agree to divert the existing track-way or ridge-way from Netheravon now passing through the earth circle so as to pass from the 302-foot levels in the O.S. map immediately west of Stonehenge.

(3)  That stones 6 and 7 with their lintel, and stone 56 (according to the numbering on Mr. Petrie’s plan) be first examined, with a view of maintaining them in a position of safety.

(4)  That, in the opinion of this Committee, stone 22 should be replaced, stone 21 be made safe, and the lintel of 21 and 22 be replaced in the most safe and conservative manner.  The Committee also recommends the re-erection of stones 57 and 58, and their lintel 158.

(5)  That the instructions to custodians already in force be approved with a few suggested alterations.

(6)  That this Committee feels that it is impossible to overstate the value of the assistance which the County Council of Amesbury can give to the efforts made to preserve this unique monument.

(7)  That these resolutions be sent to Sir Edmund Antrobus with the earnest thanks of the Committee, for the part he is proposing to take in the preservation of Stonehenge, also that it be left to him to communicate with the Press.

The fence was erected by Whitsuntide, and is 1700 yards in circumference, and composed of lightest barbed wire of a neutral tint, and absolutely invisible at a distance, so that the traveller gets the whole effect of Stonehenge in its full grandeur instead of, as in former days, the view of the stones mingled with two or three flys, a cart, an old waggonette, and photographer’s van, &c., to say nothing of picnic luncheons, spread out within the sacred circle.  This fence encloses as large an area as possible, being well outside the vallum, except on the west side, where a right of way interferes with the true circle.  The next work undertaken—the most difficult and important of the whole—was the raising of the “leaning stone”—the largest monolith in England except Cleopatra’s needle—to an upright position.  This stone formed one of the uprights of the trilithon, the fall of which was said to have been caused by the digging and researches of the Duke of Buckingham in 1620.  The horizontal and the other upright (the latter broken in two pieces) now lie prostrate across the altar stone.

The great stone leaned considerably towards the N.E. and appeared to rest upon (actually touching at one point) a beautiful little pillar stone of syenite, the danger being that in some storm, especially after a heavy fall of snow and sudden thaw, the great stone would break in three pieces (having three veins) in falling, and also crush the smaller stone beneath it.

That a forward movement was continually taking place is shown by observations taken by Mr. Flinders Petrie some years ago.  It then leaned at an angle of 66, which has been increased to one of 60.5 degrees lately.  The work of the raising of the stone was begun on August 18th and finished September 25th, and was under the direct supervision of Mr. Gowland, Mr. Detmar Blow, architect, and his assistant Mr. Stallybrass, and Mr. Carruthers, engineer.  The first thing done was to make a fitting to the stone of a strong timber cradle, so as to protect it from injury by the immense iron chains and ropes placed round it, these being attached to winches worked by men, so that the stone was actually “wound up,” so to speak, into an upright position.  Hydraulic jacks were also used.  The whole thing was most carefully and slowly done, and devotedly watched over by the workers.  A rectangular excavation was made in front of the stone, a square excavation at the back.  A frame of wood with numbers at equal distances apart was placed over the ground, which was excavated in sections, and the earth was most carefully sifted in layers through four grades of sieves in such a manner that the position of every object found could be recorded.  The excavations round the base of the stone are now filled with concrete, and the large struts which uphold it will remain in their positions for six months, until the concrete be thoroughly set.

The objects found were one Roman coin and one George III. penny at a shallow depth, and many chippings of both the blue and sarsen stones.  Numerous flint axe-heads and large stone hammers were also found at a depth of from two feet to four feet six inches underground; all tending to prove the great antiquity of Stonehenge—at least Neolithic.  But all this will be discussed scientifically later on.

Florence C. M. Antrobus.

1904.  A.  No. 335.

In the High Court of Justice.
CHANCERY DIVISION.
MR.  JUSTICE FARWELL.

Writ issued the 1st day of March 1904.

Between HIS MAJESTY’S ATTORNEY-GENERAL at and by the relation of FRANK TUCKER, THOMAS MERCHANT, The Right Honourable GEORGE JOHN SHAW LEFEVRE, Sir JOHN TOMLINSON BRUNNER, Bart., and WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS PETRIE and the said FRANK TUCKER, THOMAS MERCHANT, The Right Honourable GEORGE JOHN SHAW LEFEVRE, Sir JOHN TOMLINSON BRUNNER, Bart., and WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS PETRIE . . . Plaintiffs
and

Sir EDMUND ANTROBUS, Bart. . . . Defendant.

STATEMENT OF CLAIM.

Delivered the 17th day of March 1904 by Horne & Birkett of 4 Lincoln’s Inn Fields in the County of London Solicitors for the Plaintiffs.

1.  On Stonehenge Down in the Parish of Amesbury in the County of Wilts there are a group of stones and surrounding earthworks which are together known as Stonehenge.  Stonehenge which is of very great antiquity originally formed an ancient building and place of assembly for public worship the burial of the dead deliberation on public affairs or other public purposes and since it has ceased to be so used has remained a national monument and place of resort of great public interest.

2.  Until the acts of the Defendant hereinafter complained of there was and there now ought to be free access for the public to Stonehenge by means of roads running up to and through the same the sites of which roads are shown on the plan hereunto annexed and are thereon coloured green.

3.  The said roads were at the time of the said acts and are public highways for all His Majesty’s liege subjects to go and return on foot and with horses and carriages at all times of the year at their free will and pleasure.

4.  Stonehenge is subject to a trust created by a grant or declaration of trust which if in writing has been lost or by a Statute which has been lost for the free user by the public of Stonehenge as a place of resort and for the free access of the public thereto by means of the said roads and the site of Stonehenge has since the creation of such trust been held by the owners thereof for the time being subject to the said trust.

5.  The Defendant has lately erected and maintains and threatens and intends to maintain upon Stonehenge Down aforesaid fences along the lines shown upon the said plan and thereon coloured red.  The said fences obstruct the said roads or some of them at the points marked respectively A. B. C. D. and E. on the said plan and are obnoxious to and interfere with the rights and privileges of His Majesty’s liege subjects referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 hereof.

6.  The Defendant has been requested to remove the said fences but he has refused and still refuses to do so and threatens and intends to maintain the same and the obstructions hereinbefore complained of.

The Plaintiffs therefore claim—

1.  An order that the Defendant remove the said fences where they respectively obstruct the said roads or any of them.

2.  An injunction to restrain the Defendant his servants workmen and agents from erecting upon the said lands or any part thereof any fence or other erection so as to obstruct and from in any way obstructing the said roads or any of them.

3.  Costs.

C. GURDON.

R. B. FINLAY.

1904.  A. No. 335.

In the High Court of Justice.
CHANCERY DIVISION,
MR. JUSTICE FARWELL.

Between HIS MAJESTY’S ATTORNEY-GENERAL at and by the relation of FRANK TUCKER, THOMAS MERCHANT, The Right Honourable GEORGE JOHN SHAW LEFEVRE, Sir JOHN TOMLINSON BRUNNER, Bart., and WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS PETRIE and the said FRANK TUCKER, THOMAS MERCHANT, The Right Honourable GEORGE JOHN SHAW LEFEVRE, Sir JOHN TOMLINSON BRUNNER, Bart., and WILLIAM MATTHEW FLINDERS PETRIE . . . Plaintiffs
and

Sir EDMUND ANTROBUS, Bart. . . . Defendant.

DEFENCE.

1.  As to paragraph 1 of the Statement of Claim it is not admitted that Stonehenge was made or ever used for such purposes as in the said paragraph mentioned or any of them or for any public purpose.  Stonehenge is and has been from time immemorial and in fact at all times private property and not national or public property and resort thereto by the public has always been by permission of the owner of the land and not as of right.

2.  As to paragraph 2 the principal part of Stonehenge lies in an angle between and near to two public roads leading from Amesbury to Shrewton and to Winterbourne Stoke respectively.  A public way or track leading from Netheravon to Lake crosses these two roads and also crosses part of Stonehenge but except the right to use this way or track (which is outside the fence erected by the Defendant and has not been in any way obstructed by him) there never has been any access for the public to Stonehenge otherwise than by permission of the owner of the land on which it is situate.  The alleged road running up to and through Stonehenge the sites of which are purported to be shown on the plan annexed to the Statement of Claim and are thereon coloured green (except the way or track from Netheravon to Lake aforesaid) do not exist either in law or in fact and never have existed.

3.  Paragraph 3 of the Statement of Claim is denied except as to the way or track from Netheravon to Lake aforesaid.

4.  Paragraph 4 is altogether denied.  Stonehenge is not and never was subject to any trust for user or access by the public or to any public trust.

5.  As to paragraphs 5 and 6 the Defendant has for the better preservation of Stonehenge erected and maintains a fence round the land lying within the triangle formed by the said two public roads and the way or track from Netheravon to Lake not obstructing or interfering with any public right of way.  Save as aforesaid paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Statement of Claim are denied.

F. VAUGHAN HAWKINS.

Delivered the 27th day of April 1904 by Farrer & Co. of 66 Lincoln’s Inn Fields in the County of Middlesex Solicitors for the Defendant.

This case commenced in the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, on Tuesday, March 28th, and continued on the 29th and 30th.  Again on the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 11th and 12th of April.  Mr. Justice Farwell delivered his considered judgment on the 19th, concluding as follows:—

“I hold, therefore, that the access to the circle was incident only to the permission to visit and inspect the stones, and was, therefore, permissive only, and, further that the tracks to the circle are not thoroughfares, but lead only to the circle, where the public have no right without permission, and, therefore, are not public ways.  The action accordingly fails, and ought never to have been brought.  It is plain that the vicinity of the camp and the consequent increase of visitors compelled the defendant to protect the stones if they were to be preserved; and he has done nothing more than is necessary for such protection.  I desire to give the relators credit for wishing only to preserve this unique relic of a former age for the benefit of the public, but I fail to appreciate their method of attaining this.  The first claim to dispossess the defendant of his property is simply extravagant, so much so that, although not technically abandoned, no serious argument was addressed to me in support of it.  The rest of the claim—for rights of way over the network of tracks shown on the plaintiffs’ plan—if successful would defeat the relators’ object.  If these ways were left unfenced and heavy traffic passed through the circle, there would be great risk of injury, and even without such traffic there is great risk from the increased numbers of passers-by.  As Sir Norman Lockyer (whose interesting application of the Orientation theory to Stonehenge has recently appeared) says in one of his articles:—‘The real destructive agent has been man himself—savages could not have played more havoc with the monument than the English who have visited it at different times for different purposes.’  I feel no confidence that the majority of tourists have improved, nay, rather,—‘Aetas parentum, pejor avis, tulit Nos nequiores.’  It is only fair to the defendant to say that he is not acting capriciously but on expert advice for the preservation of the stones.  If, on the other hand, the roads are all fenced off, the general appearance would be ruined, and no human being would be in any way the better.  It is not immaterial to remark that this is not the action of the District or the County Council to preserve rights of way, but is brought on the relation of strangers on the score of the public interest in Stonehenge.  The action is dismissed with costs.”

Mr. Warmington:—“My Lord, there is only one matter with regard to costs I think, and that is the question of the Commission. [52]  My Lord, those were reserved, and they will be costs in the action.”

Mr. Justice Farwell:—“Yes.  I may say this—it sometimes saves trouble, and it is not unusual, I have done it before, and I think I may say it now—that this is a case in which the taxing master should allow three counsel.”

Mr. Warmington:—“If your Lordship pleases.  I was instructed to apply; but according to the practice it is done after taxation.”

Mr. Justice Farwell:—“I know it is.  But I have done it before.  You see the matter is now fresh in my recollection, and a summons to vary might come before other Judges.”

Mr. Warmington:—“If your Lordship pleases.”

HOTELS AT SALISBURY.

THE WHITE HART (near the Cathedral).

Carriages and horses for Stonehenge, Wilton, and the New Forest may be had.

Prices for Stonehenge, &c.—The complete drive viâ Amesbury to Stonehenge and back by Lake House and the Valley.

£

s.

d.

One horse carriage,

for 2 persons

0

13

0

,, ,, ,,

,, 3 ,,

0

18

0

Two ,,

,, 2 ,,

1

1

0

„ „ „

„ 3 „

1

5

0

„ „ „

„ 4 „

1

10

0

These prices include the driver and waiting, baiting, &c.

Tariff of Prices:

Per day.

s.

d.

Sitting-rooms from

5

0

Bedrooms from

2

6

Per head.

Plain breakfast

2

0

Breakfast with chop or steak

2

6

,, fish, ham and eggs

3

0

Luncheons:

Bread and cheese

0

9

Sandwich

1

0

Light soups

1

0

Cold meat

2

6

Dinners:

Soup and chop, vegetables, and cheese

3

6

With either soup or fish and entrée

4

0

Ditto with sweets

4

6

Teas:

Plain

1

6

With eggs

2

0

Single cup of tea

0

6

Servants’ board, 5s. per day.

Gentlemen’s coffee-room, ladies’ drawing-room, smoking and billiard-room.

Visitors are requested, if possible, to write to the Manager for accommodation.

Table d’Hôte, Breakfasts, 3s.; Luncheons, 2s. 6d.; Dinners, 5s.  These meals run for two hours, and are served at separate tables.

CATHEDRAL HOTEL.

Per day.

Bedrooms from

2

6

Sitting-rooms

3

6

Breakfasts or Teas:

Per head.

Plain

1

3

With eggs

1

6

With meat or fish

2

6

Dinners:

From 3s. per head.

Cold baths

0

6

Hot

1

0

Servants’ board, 5s. per day.

Carriages with experienced drivers for Stonehenge and other places of interest.

RED LION HOTEL, SALISBURY.
(Headquarters of the Cyclists’ Touring Club.)

Apartments:

s.

d.

Bedrooms per day

2

6

Double bedroom

4

0

Baths in bathroom

1

0

Baths in bedroom

0

6

Breakfast:

Per head.

Plain

1

3

With eggs

1

9

With fish, steak, ham and eggs

2

6

Luncheons:

Soup

1

0

Sandwiches

0

6

Cold joint, cheese and salad

2

0

Ditto, sweets

2

6

Chop and vegetables

2

0

Dinners:

Joint and vegetable

2

6

Ditto, with sweets

3

0

Ditto, soup or fish, joint, and sweets

3

6

Teas:

Cup of tea or coffee

0

6

Teas with eggs, &c. same as breakfast.

Servants’ board per day, 5s.  Bedroom, 1s. 6d.

Excellent Chemists: Messrs. Read & Orchard, Market Place, Salisbury.

Sly, Watch-maker, Market Place.

Good Booksellers: Brown, Canal, & Simmonds, High Street.

Messrs. Pinckney, Bankers, Market Place.

AMESBURY.

“Queensberry House”—Boarding House, Tea and Luncheon Room

F. Tucker.

“Ivy Dene”—Private Hotel

A. Fleming.

“The Phœnix”—Temperance House

E. Cockle.

Drapery and Millinery

F. Tucker.

Drapery and Fancy Bazaar

B. Hale.

THE GEORGE INN.

Good flys, one and two horses, can be procured here, also bedrooms and sitting-rooms, luncheons, and dinners, and teas.

PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LTD., LONDON AND BECCLES.

FOOTNOTES.

[10]  Aurelius Ambrosius succeeded to the kingdom of Britain on the death of Vortigern in the year 465; he was of Roman extraction, though educated in Britain.

[18]  The Avon is the beloved haunt of thousands of wild duck, many herons, kingfishers, &c.

[24]  Trilithon, a monument (or part of a monument) consisting of three large stones.

[43]  “Nature,” vol. 64, p. 602.

[52]  This refers to the Committee of the County Council appointed to hear the complaint against the enclosure of Stonehenge, and it met early in 1902.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SENTIMENTAL & PRACTICAL GUIDE TO AMESBURY AND STONEHENGE ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

Table of Contents

- A SENTIMENTAL & PRACTICAL GUIDE TO AMESBURY AND STONEHENGE, COMPILED BY LADY ANTROBUS

- PREFACE.

- GUIDE TO AMESBURY AND STONEHENGE.

- OLD SARUM.

- STRATFORD-SUB-CASTLE.

- THE CHURCH, AMESBURY.

- AMESBURY ABBEY.

- AMESBURY ABBEY: ITS HISTORY, ANCIENT AND MODERN.

- THE FEMALE PHAETON.

- PRICELESS STONEHENGE—SOME IMPRESSIONS.

- THE DATE OF STONEHENGE.

- THE FINDS AT STONEHENGE, 1901.

- PARTICULARS OF THE STONES.

- SARSEN CIRCLE.

- BLUESTONE CIRCLE.

- SARSEN TRILITHONS.

- DERIVATION OF AMESBURY.

- DERIVATION OF DRUID.

- DERIVATION OF BARROWS.

- DERIVATION OF WILTSHIRE.

- MENTION OF AMESBURY IN MALORY’S “MORTE D’ARTHUR.”

- THE AVENUE OR VIÂ SACRA

- THE CURSUS AVENUE.

- THE LONG AVENUE.

- THE PARALLEL BANK.

- THE CURSUS.

- THE LESSER CURSUS.

- EARTHWORKS ON SALISBURY PLAIN.

- VESPASIAN’S CAMP.

- WEST AMESBURY HOUSE.

- WILSFORD HOUSE.

- LAKE HOUSE,

- GREAT DURNFORD CHURCH.

- GREAT DURNFORD HOUSE

- OGBURY CAMP.

- HEALE HOUSE, MIDDLE WOODFORD.

- LITTLE DURNFORD HOUSE.

- ENVOI.

- APPENDIX. THE RECENT WORK AT STONEHENGE. [43]

- In the High Court of Justice. CHANCERY DIVISION. MR. JUSTICE FARWELL.

- STATEMENT OF CLAIM.

- In the High Court of Justice. CHANCERY DIVISION, MR. JUSTICE FARWELL.

- DEFENCE.

- HOTELS AT SALISBURY.

- THE WHITE HART (near the Cathedral).

- CATHEDRAL HOTEL.

- RED LION HOTEL, SALISBURY. (Headquarters of the Cyclists’ Touring Club.)

- AMESBURY.

- THE GEORGE INN.

- FOOTNOTES.

- THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE