196 RUDE STONE MONUMENTS OE CORNWALL. 



The negative evidence of Caerwynen is that the structure was 

 free-standing, and its features may afford some slight ground for 

 regarding it as a memorial reproduction of the more ordinary 

 type. But then instead of looking upon it, with Mr. Borlase, as 

 of the most primitive character, I should be inclined for once to 

 agree with Dr. Fergusson, that it is of the most modern. 



Cromlechs are much less frequent in Devon than in Cornwall. 

 The only one yet standing, and that, like Lanyon and Caerwynen, 

 rebuilt, though on more careful lines, is the Drewsteignton 

 "Spinsters' Eock," which may be looked upon, curiously enough, 

 as supplying a link between the columnar and the kist types, 

 and which possesses no trace of an investing mound. Another, 

 now ruined, at Coryndon Ball, was, however, buried in a cairn of 

 great size, demolished to build an adjacent wall. The Drews- 

 teignton cromlech was associated with circles and stone rows, 

 which have disappeared, a noteworthy point, since none of the 

 Cornish examples seem to have been ; though circles round the 

 smaller kist-vaens are by no means uncommon in the county. 

 The importance of this fact is that it brings the cromlechs in 

 line with the rows and circles generally, which, we have already 

 seen, are of Neolithic date. 



Mr. Borlase had not such advantages as we have from the 

 recent explorations on Dartmoor ; but he seems to have had a 

 glimpse of what might be in store — though missing the exact 

 point — when he wrote, of the Chywoon cromlech, which stands 

 at a distance of only 250 paces from the hill castle, close to a 

 British village, the castle itself containing foundations of huts, 

 — "What does this imply? Either that the cromlech is a more 

 recent structure than the castle, or else that the builders of the 

 castle allowed the cromlech to remain unharmed while engaged 

 in their work, and put themselves to the labour of obtaining 

 stone from a greater distance rather than disturb the structure."* 

 But surely the correct reply here is "neither earlier nor later, but 

 (as in the case of the circles and stone rows and the kist-vaens 

 of Dartmoor associated with them) contemporaneous." That 

 alternative was always open ; but we need not wonder it was not 

 recognised. 



* Naania, p. 269. 



