ABURY. 53 



do not naturally occur in Wiltshire. Under these circum- 

 stances, we may surely refer Stonehenge to the Bronze age. 



Abury is much less known than Stonehenge, and yet, 

 though a ruder, it must have been originally even a grander 

 temple. According to Aubrey, Abury "did as much ex- 

 ceed Stonehenge as a cathedral does a parish church." 

 When perfect, it consisted of a circular ditch and em- 

 bankment, containing an area of 28 1 acres ; inside the ditch 

 was a circle of great stones, and within this, again, two smaller 

 circles, formed by a double row of similar stones, standing side 

 by side. From the outer embankment, started two long 

 winding avenues of stones, one of which went in the direc- 

 tion of Beckhampton, and the other in that of Kennet, where 

 it ended in another double circle. Stukely supposed that the 

 idea of the whole was that of a snake transmitted through a 

 circle ; the Kennet circle representing the head, the Beck- 

 hampton avenue the tail. Midway between the two avenues, 

 stood Silbury Hill, the largest artificial mound in Great 

 Britain, measuring no less than 170 feet in height. 

 From its position, it appears to form part of the general 

 plan, and though it has been twice examined, no primary 

 interment has been found in it. On the whole, this appears 

 to have been the finest megalithic ruin in Europe ; but, un- 

 fortunately for us, the pretty little village of Abury, like 

 some beautiful parasite, has grown up at the expense, and in 

 the midst, of the ancient temple, and out of 650 great stones, 

 not above 20 are still standing. 



In a very interesting article,* Mr. Fergusson has attempted to 

 prove, that both Stonehenge and Abury belong to post-Roman 

 times. Some of his arguments I have already replied to, in dis- 

 cussing the age of Stonehenge. There is one, however, which 

 relates specially to Silbury Hill. " The Roman road," he 

 says, "from Bath to Marlborough, either passes under the hill, 

 * Quarterly Review, July, 1860, p. 209. 



