Part 6

The cell is form’d by a radius of 12 cubits and a half, from the two centers _a_ and _b_, as to the inward curve; the outward takes a radius of 15 cubits; for these stones are two cubits and a half thick. The two circles are turn’d into an oval, by a radius of 30 cubits, (after the usual manner) set in the two centers _c_ and _d_, where the two circles intersect. The former centers are 12 cubits and a half distant from each other, the length of the radius. The same oval is obtain’d by a string of 60 cubits, the ends ty’d together, and turn’d round upon two centers, according to the gardiners method. An oval form’d as this is, upon two centers coinciding with each other’s circumference; or, which is the same thing, whose centers are distant from each other the length of their radius, is most natural and most beautiful, being the shape of an egg. Most probably these religious philosophers had a meaning, in thus including an egg-like figure, within a circle, more than mere affectation of variety. Whatever that was, we may reasonably conclude, that from the method in antiquity, of making the _kebla_ of a curved figure, the christians borrowed theirs of turning the east end of their churches in that manner; and that the Druids in the work before us, have produc’d the noblest _kistvaen_ or _kebla_ that is known.

My purpose in drawing many prickt lines upon the plate, is not difficult to be understood. Nor does it require particular explanations. To avoid affectation or tediousness, I leave them to the readers amusement: only observe, that Mr. _Webb’s_ equilateral triangles have no hand in forming the cell. The intent of it is very distant from a regular polygon. But that it is incomparably more beautiful; than such a one would have render’d it. It is as a magnificent niche 27 cubits long, and as much broad, measuring in the widest place.

This part is call’d Σηκος or _concha templi_ and _adytum_, into which, we may suppose, none but the upper order of priests, together with the high-priest, were commonly to enter, during the time of ministration, in religious rites. We may imagine the beauty of the appearance here upon those occasions, when an innumerable company of the Druids assisted, all in white surplices. The center of the excentricity of this oval is but three cubits nearer the entrance, than the center of the whole work. And they have cut off but one _trilithon_, which they make the opening of the _adytum_; meeting the eye to great advantage, from the grand entrance. By the aforesaid contrivance, there is left a space of five cubits between the jambs of the opening of the _adytum_, and the inner circle in front, just the same as is between the inner and outer circle. The inner circle there performing the office of _cancelli_ to it, as we observ’d before. If a choir of this form was put in practice, and executed by a masterly hand, it would have a very extraordinary effect, and perhaps excel the too similar concave of a cupola. Our Druids had undoubtedly such a notion, in placing this within a circle. And for the sake of this, they turn’d the two circles into a smaller species of an ellipsis.

[Illustration: _P. 24._ TAB XIII.

_Stukeley. delin._ _G. Vander Gucht Senl._

_Prospect of_ STONEHENGE _from the Southwest_.]

There’s a Druid antiquity like our _adytum_ in shape, call’d _Eglwys Glominog_, on the top of _Arennig vaur_ in _Lhanykil_ parish, _Merionydhshire_, but made of a continued wall. The ancients thought the world of an egg-like shape, and as the world is the temple of the Deity, they judg’d it proper to form their temples, so as to have a resemblance thereto. The ancient hieroglyphic of the Deity is a circle, and I have reason to believe it more ancient than the flood. _Plato_, who learnt much from the ancestors of our Druids, says in _Diogenes Laertius_, that God is spherical, which he must mean hieroglyphically. So our Druids, as well as he, may mean the infinity of nature in the Deity, who made the world, by this scheme of _Stonehenge_; at least they understand by the circle, the seat and residence of the Deity, the heavens, which include all things.

It seems to me, that _Inigo Jones_ from this _adytum_ projected the plan of the _Surgeons_ theatre in _London_, a fabric for seeing and hearing much admired by all good judges. And which my Lord _Burlington_, out of a spirit truly noble, and a great love for the architect’s memory, has lately repair’d, with his own charges and excellent skill. I find the _Surgeons_ theatre (or rather amphitheatre) is form’d from the same proportion as our _adytum_, the transverse and conjugate diameters being as 4 to 3, _viz._ 40 foot and 30 foot. And this appears to me a strong presumption, that _Inigo Jones_ did not make the ground-plot of _Stonehenge_, publish’d under his name. The _Surgeons_ amphitheatre is a good deal less than our cell.

Such is the noble and easy geometry of the _adytum_ of _Stonehenge_. The stones that compose it, are really stupendous, their height, breadths and thickness are enormous, and to see so many of them plac’d together, in a nice and critical figure, with exactness; to consider, as it were, not a pillar of one stone, but a whole wall, a side, an end of a temple of one stone; to view them curiously, creates such a motion in the mind, which words can’t express. One very remarkable particular in the construction of this _adytum_, has escaped all observers: which is this. As this part is compos’d of _trilithons_ (as I before call them) sett two and two on each side, and one right before; they rise in height and beauty of the stones, from the lower end of the _adytum_, to the upper end. My meaning is this. The two hithermost _trilithons_ corresponding, or those next the grand entrance, on the right hand, and on the left are exceeded in height, by the two next in order; and those are exceeded by the _trilithon_ behind the altar, in the upper end of this choir. So that in laying down the measures of the parts, that compose this place, the reader must be content to take my word. Mr. _Webb’s_ measures cannot be precise in all of them, seeing he knew nothing of this particular; and that his notion of an hexagon, is contradicted by it, as well as by fact. “He says p. 60. the stones of the greater hexagon seven foot and a half in breadth, three foot nine inches thick, and twenty foot high, each stone having one tenon in the middle.” His measure of seven foot and a half in breadth, only shews the vastness of the stones, it is no precise measure, for the founders regarded not any preciseness in their breadth: because two together were design’d to make a _compages_, whereon to set the impost, and this I call a _trilithon_. Each _trilithon_ stands by its self, independant of its neighbour, not as the stones and imposts of the outer circle, link’d together in a continued _corona_, by the imposts carried quite round. Indeed the breadth of a stone at bottom is seven feet and a half, which is 4 cubits and a half. Two stones therefore amount to nine cubits, and there is a cubit of interval between them, making in the whole ten cubits. But they were not careful of the particulars, only of the whole, in one of these _compages_ or _trilithons_.

The stones of the cell are made to diminish very much, towards the top, most apparently with a design, to take off from their weight, and render them what we call top-heavy, in a less degree. Hence the interval between the two upright stones of the _compages_ widens so much upwards. This must certainly contribute very much, to their stability. In assigning 20 foot for their height, Mr. _Webb_ has well taken the _medium_. A very small matter more than 20 feet makes exactly 12 cubits of the _Hebrews_, _Egyptians_ and Druids. The reader remembers the proportion I assign’d between the _English_ foot and this cubit. 20 inches and ⅘ make a cubit, therefore 20 feet and ⅘ make 12 cubits. The true case as to the height of the _trilithons_, is thus respectively, and which may be seen in TAB. XV. with the harmony and symmetry, in the proportion of the whole. We may observe their gradual rising in height, all from the same base, like pillars of higher orders and more diameters. But the intelligent reader must needs see, that our founders never had sight of _Greek_ or _Roman_ pillars, and never pretended to imitate them, or take any one idea from them. And of these three different orders or degrees of altitude, in these _trilithons_, one exceeds the other by a cubit. So that their heights respectively are 13 cubits, 14 cubits, 15 cubits.

The imposts of these _trilithons_ are all of the same height. Mr. _Webb_ p. 61. “informs us, the architrave lying on the top of the great stones of the hexagon and mortaised also into them sixteen foot long, 3 foot 9 inches broad, 3 foot 4 inches high.” Mr. _Webb’s_ 16 foot long, is too scanty, it amounting to 9 cubits and 2 palms, but the intent of the founders was to make these imposts equal both in length and breadth to the foundation of the upright stones that supports them, I mean the two stones at bottom, the sustaining part of the _compages_, which in its whole breadth makes 10 cubits; and 10 cubits long the imposts are to be assign’d. Most certainly whoever undertake to measure them, whether from those fallen on the ground, or still in their proper place, will be apt to fail in giving them just length. Both because 1. ’tis observable that these imposts are form’d somewhat broader upwards, than in their bottom part; but this may not be taken notice of by every one. This was done very judiciously upon an optical principle, which it is plain the founders were aware of. For a stone of so considerable an elevation, by this means only, presents its whole face in view. Therefore they that measure it at bottom will not take its true length. 2. If they take the dimension, either from a stone still in its proper place, or from one fallen down, they will be very liable to shorten the measure. For in the first case, the upper edge of these imposts, must needs have suffer’d from the weather, in so elevated an exposure, thro’ the space of 2000 years. It is very apparent they have suffered not a little. Large and deep furrows of age are visible all around them. But if they measure those fallen, they must well imagine such have doubly suffered, from weather, and from the people every day diminishing all corners and edges, to carry pieces away with them. So that in this case, analogy and symmetry only can supply these defeats. Thus we found before, that the breadth of the imposts of the outer circle is equal to their ichnographical breadth: so it is here, being 10 cubits. Besides, the outer face of these imposts is longer than the inner, as being in the larger circle. Therefore ten cubits is to be understood their medium measure.

[Illustration: _P. 26._ TAB. XIIII.

_The orthographical Section of Stonehenge upon the Cross diameter._]

Mr. _Webb_ gives it as a general measure, that they are 3 foot 9 inches broad. He has before told us, the uprights which support them were 3 foot 9 thick; take that twice, it makes 7 foot and a half, which he assigns for the breadth, of the uprights. This is all just within a trifle, and it is not expected that he who was not aware of the cubit, by which these works were made, should do it with greater accuracy. The truth of the whole is this: _Webb_’s 7 foot and half is 4 cubits and a half, as we said before; the half of it is 3 foot 9, and a very little more. But this must be taken for the least breadth of the imposts, that at the ends. For in the middle they are somewhat broader. Tho’ the inside faces are strait, yet, as we observ’d, in proper place, of the imposts of the outer circle; so here, they are rounded behind: their outer circumference answering to the great oval upon which they are founded. So likewise their ends are made upon a _radius_ of that oval, whence the inner face of the impost is somewhat shorter than the outer, and is another reason why their lengths may easily be taken somewhat too short. I have drawn the imposts in their true shape in the ground-plot. The artifice of the tenons and mortaises of these _trilithons_ and their imposts, what conformity they bear to that of the outer circle, is exceedingly pretty, every thing being done truly geometrical, and as would best answer every purpose, from plain and simple principles. In the bottom face of the impost, if divided into three squares, the two mortaises are made in the middle of the two outermost squares. Draw diagonal lines from corner to corner; where they intersect, is the center of the mortaise; which central distance from one to the other, is seven cubits of the Druid measure. Each tenon is a cubit broad upon its longest diameter, for they are of an oval figure. An admirable contrivance, that the imposts should lie firm upon the heads of the uprights, and keep the uprights steady in their places, to strengthen and adorn. We may remark this pretty device, in the management of the tenons and mortaises. Cut an egg across upon its shortest diameter or conjugate; one half thereof represents the shape of the tenons of the outer circle. Cut it across upon its transverse diameter, one half is the shape of the tenons of the _adytum_. ’Tis evident the meaning of it is this. The tenons of the outer circle are higher in proportion, than the others, because the imposts are less and lower than the others, and on both accounts more liable to be disturb’d, either by accident or violence, than the others: therefore more caution is us’d for their preservation. This is an instance of art, noble and simple withal. Mr. _Webb_ says the imposts are 3 foot 4 inches high, which is precisely 2 cubits, a sixth part of the height of the _medium_ order of _trilithons_; as the imposts of the outer circle are a sixth part of the height of the stones of the outer circle. The medium order of _trilithons_ is above 24 foot high, _i. e._ 14 cubits. The lower order is 13 cubits, _viz._ those next the entrance. The upper _trilithon_ behind the altar was 15 cubits. Each rising a cubit higher than the other, as we before observ’d.

I promis’d to show the reader what _Stonehenge_ is, and what it was. The latter, I presume, is done in the four prints, TAB. XII, XIV, XV, XVI. being geometric orthographical sections of the whole work, all necessary ways, such as architects prepare in design, when they set about a building. ’Tis wholly needless to spend many words in explaining them. What the work is, of our _adytum_ at present, is shown in the subsequent prints, TAB. XVIII, XXI, XXII. The Vth corresponds with the XIIth. The one shows the front of the temple when in perfection, the other as now in ruins. The XVIth may be compar’d with XIX and XX. all presenting a view from the _adytum_ toward the entrance. TAB. XVIII. is a contrary view, when one standing by the entrance, looks toward the _adytum_. The same is presented in _Plate_ VII. which I call a peep into the _sanctum sanctorum_. XXII. is the same, but a little oblique. This plate shows at present, what the XIVth does in its original. _Plate_ XV and XXI. correspond, showing the _adytum_ on one side, in its perfect, and in its ruinous state.

## Particularly they explain, what I spoke of, as to the orderly rising of

the _trilithons_ in height, one above another, from the lower end to the upper end of the _adytum_. TAB. XXII. illustrates it, by exhibiting to view, the other and most perfect side of the _adytum_. ’Tis an oblique prospect of it, from the entrance.

The quantity of the solid is well adjusted, in proportioning the stone-work of this _adytum_, to the intervals upon the ichnography. Each _trilithon_ is 10 cubits, and each interval about 6. The jambs, or _vacuum_ of the entry expand themselves to 25 cubits, which is about 43 feet. From which measure my Lord _Pembroke_ demonstrated the falsity of _Webb_’s hexagonal scheme, when his Lordship first did me the honour to discourse about _Stonehenge_. In Mr. _Webb_’s designs, we find two jambs (taking one _trilithon_ away) expand but little above 31 feet, by his own scales. Tho’ I don’t pretend, but that some of my foregoing measures, may here and there possibly vary a little, upon a very strict trial, and where proper judgment is not us’d, because the stones in some parts may protuberate, or great parts of them may have fallen off; yet 10 foot difference from truth cannot be allow’d of. In the _Plates_ XIX and XX. observe the inside of that upright stone, which makes the northern jamb of the chief entrance of the outer circle. A very great piece is fallen off towards the top, which discovers its tenon and the mortaise of the impost above it. And in the management of such prodigious stones as these are, fix’d in the ground, and ramm’d too like posts: ’tis not to be wonder’d at, if by chance we find some little variation. Tho’ for my own part, I observ’d none; rather wonder’d, how it was possible for them, without lewices and the like devices, to set them in their places to such preciseness. And the reader, whose mind has receiv’d no prepossession, cannot but be abundantly satisfy’d, that the multitude of measures I have given from Mr. _Webb_’s own account, are perfectly agreeable to the scale of cubits, deduc’d from works of the _Egyptians_ and others: and that in round and full numbers, not trifling fractions. If we collate the numbers given, with the _Roman_ scale, the measures appear very ridiculous and without design; and that is a sure way of confuting the opinion, of its being a _Roman_ work. But as these stones are generally rough, and by time must suffer in all dimensions, ’tis not practical to take their true measure, without necessary judgment, and relation had to symmetry.

Of these greater stones of the _adytum_, as I observed before, there are none wanting. They are all on the spot, 10 upright stones, 5 cornishes. The _trilithon_ first on the left hand is entire _in situ_, but vastly decay’d, especially the cornish. There are such deep holes corroded, in some places, that daws make their nests in them. The next _trilithon_ on the left hand, is entire, compos’d of three most beautiful stones. The cornish happen’d to be of a very durable kind of _English_ marble, and has not been much impair’d by weather. My Lord _Winchelsea_ and myself took a considerable walk on the top of it, but it was a frightful situation. The _trilithon_ of the upper end of the _adytum_, was an extraordinary beauty. But alas through the indiscretion probably, of some body digging there, between them and the altar, the noble impost is dislodg’d from its airy seat, and fallen upon the altar, where its huge bulk lies unfractur’d.

_Recidit in solidam longo post tempore, terram Pondus, & exhibuit junctam cum viribus artem._ Ovid _Met._

The two uprights that supported it are the most delicate stones of the whole work. They were, I believe, above 30 foot long, and well chizell’d, finely taper’d and proportion’d in their dimensions. That southward is broke in two, lying upon the altar. The other still stands entire, but leans upon one of the stones of the inward oval.

_Jamjam lapsura cadentique Imminet assimilis_——————

The root-end or unhewn part of both, are rais’d somewhat above ground. We cannot be sure of the true height of this, when it was perfect: but I am sure 15 cubits, which I have assign’d, is the lowest. The next _trilithon_, _that_ toward the west, is intire, except that some of the end of the impost is fallen clean off, and all the upper edge is very much diminish’d by time. As _Lucretius_ says,

————_Minui rem quamque videmus, Et quasi longinquo fluere omnia cernimus ævo, Ex oculisque, vetustatem, subducere nostris._

[Illustration: _P. 28._ TAB. XV.

_The Orthographic Section of Stonehenge upon the Chief diameter_]

The last _trilithon_, that on the right hand of the entrance into the _adytum_, has suffer’d much. The outer upright being the jamb of the entrance, is still standing, the other upright and impost are both fallen forwards into the _adytum_, and broke each into three pieces. I suppose from digging near it. But from one piece of the impost lying loose, in the middle, between the jambs of the _adytum_, Mr. _Webb_ in the plan of his ruins of _Stonehenge_ (being his 6th _Scheme_) forms the remains of his imaginary 6th _trilithon_, supposing it one of the stones of the inner or lesser hexagon, as he calls it. Yet if this fragment was really a stump of such a stone, as he would have it, still it would not create an hexagonal form of the cell, but stand just in the middle of the entrance, and block it up in a very absurd, unseemly, and incommodious a manner. And nothing can be more certain, than that there never was such a thing in being. That stone of the _trilithon_ which is standing, has a cavity in it which two or three persons may sit in, worn by the weather.