of the Great Trilithon, at Stonehenge. 271 



unreasonable to search on the stones of the most remarkable and 

 celebrated of these monuments — Stonehenge, for traces of the same 

 or of analogous symbols or sculpturings. There was the more 

 reason for such a search from the fact, that although no marks pre- 

 cisely similar to those found on the rocks near the British camps 

 of Northumberland, and on the celebrated standing stone near the 

 Eden, had been observed in the south of England or in France, 

 yet that incised marks, perhaps intended only for ornament, 

 but certainly archaic, though in some cases probably of the nature of 

 symbols, and engraved at a great expenditure of time and labour, 

 are found on the inner surface of the stones of cromlechs, sepul- 

 chral chambers and cists, in England, France, and Ireland. The 

 only instance, to the best of my knowledge, in which such markings 

 have been found in the south of England, is on two covering stones 

 in a large barrow at Came in Dorsetshire, which was opened by 

 Mr. Charles Warne, F.S.A., nearly twenty years ago.' This case 

 is important, as showing that such graffiti are not confined to North 

 Britain, but may be expected to reward the search for them on 

 megalithic monuments and on rocks in the south of the island. 

 It was in February, 1861, that Dr. Gc. R. Tate, M.D., of the Royal 

 Artillery, visited Stonehenge as he informs us,' with a principal 

 object of looking for incised markings such as he was familiar with 



bear a comparison with Stonehenge, I must say, I have not seen any other 

 relique of those dark ages, which can pretend to rival it in singularity and 

 dignity of appearance." Wordsworth had not seen the remains of our Avehury 

 Circles. 



* Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc, vol. iii. p, 51, Celtic Tumuli of Dorsetshire. 

 By Charles Warne, F.S.A. p. 37 ; where see a cut of the concentric circles. 



* Proceedings at Meetings of the Archceological Institute, December 6, 1861. 

 Arch. Joum, vol. xix, 1862, p. 78. 



It is stated in the ArchECological Journal, that " one of the stones of this 

 trilith and the impost fell about one hundred years ago." This is incorrect. 

 We are told expressly by John Aubrey, that it had fallen before his time, nearly 

 two centuries and a half since. From the pages of his Monumenta Britannica, 

 we learn that in the year 1620, when James the First was at Wilton, the Favouiite 

 Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, " did cause the middle of Stonehenge to be 

 digged, and this under-digging was the cause of the falling downe or recum- 

 bency of the great stone there, twenty-one foote long." " Hoare, Ancient Wilts, 

 vol. i. p. 174. 



