142 PROCEEDINGS COTTESWOLD CLUB 1905 
be apt to scare the deity or spirit abiding in it. And 
hence, though some of the Indian races who raise these 
monuments are able to hew and carve, they naturally _ 
cling to the old traditional type. 
Hence, too, we are able to understand the different 
views taken by some observers of the purpose of the 
Indian menhirs. Some have regarded them as funereal 
monuments; others say that they have no connexion with 
death rites, but are purely monumental. Both views may 
fairly be maintained. The Khasi monuments appear to be 
disconnected with the cult of the dead in so far as they are 
not usually erected over burial places or ossuaries. They 
are, as Major Godwin-Austen says,’ “intended to perpetu- 
ate the memory of a person long deceased, who, as a 
spirit, has watched over or brought good fortune to a 
descendant, his family, or clan.” The size of the monu- 
ment depends “on the wealth of those who erect such 
mementoes, and on the benefit the deceased has conferred 
after passing into the world of spirits or demons.” 
This exactly supports the theory of the evolution of the 
menhir which I have suggested. Such a standing stone is 
in a way a memorial of the dead: but in its original inten- 
tion, itis rather, as among the Khasis, the home of a spirit 
which has proved by its providential care of the interests 
of his family or clan that it is worthy of respect and 
propitiation. 
These Khasi monuments have an additional interest in 
the fact that they enable us to realise how edifices like 
Stonehenge may have been erected by people possessed of 
few mechanical appliances. In erecting them all members 
of the community are bound to assist, and none, except 
the skilled stone-dressers, are paid. The others receive 
only a little food or beer from the family who are respon- 
sible for the monument. Hence, as among the Kols, the 
r “Journal Anthropological Institute,” i., 126. 
i" 7s" " =P, we ee ee ee ee 
