| By William Long, Esq., U.4., FP.8.A. 329 
: 
: 
: 
: 
| 
of much interest as being the only direct evidence as to the nature 
of this cove, when complete. The most central of the stones in his 
plan of the southern temple is probably intended for the large fallen 
one, which, by Stukeley, was regarded as a central obelisk ; though, 
that there was originally only a single stone in this situation, as 
Stukeley supposes, and not a cove of three stunes as in the northern 
temple, there is certainly no proof. The vallum has among the 
villagers the popular name of the “ Wall-dyke.” It is generally 
described (as in the text, p. 19, 1. 16) as having a flat ledge, twelve 
feet wide, midway between the top of the mound and bottom of the 
fosse. This ledge, however, only exists in the south-eastern portion 
of the vallum, viz., between the entrance of the Kennet avenue and 
that of the modern road to Rockley. 
Tue Kennet AVENUE AND “ Sanctuary.” 
The inaccuracies in Aubrey’s sketch (plate ii. fig 2), entitled by 
him “The whole view of Aubury with the Walkes and the lesser 
Temple appendant to it,’ are best explained by accepting it as a 
“draught of it donne by memorie only.” 
of the avenue appears to have been interrupted; and this interruption, 
His more careful survey 
he says, “hindered me from measuring it,’ and the survey seems 
never to have been resumed. His sketch is probably too rectilinear, 
and inaccurate therefore as regards the angle which it makes at West 
Kennet, before ascending Overton Hill, to join the circles there, 
called the “ Sanctuary.” “From Kynet,” he says, “it turnes with 
a right angle eastward crossing the river and ascends up the hill to 
another monument of the same kind.” Aubrey, who tells us he 
“ writt upon the spott from the monuments themselves,” must here 
indeed have “ writt,’’ as he says, “ as he rode a gallop; ” the state- 
ment that the avenue crossed the river being at variance with his 
own plan (perhaps we should read “crossed the road,” instead of 
“crossed the river’”’). The angle must certainly have been very 
w from a right angle. The stones which formed it near the village 
West Kennet had many of them in Stukeley’s time been removed 
and destroyed, as he himself tells us (p. 30). Notwithstanding 
ese defects, Dr. Stukeley had clearly sufficient evidence for his 
