Imprimatur.  
Ex Aed. Sab. 11 Sept. 1662. Geo. straddling S. Th. P. Rev. in X to Pat. Gilb. Episc. Lond. à Sac. Domestic.   

CHOREA GIGANTUM, OR, The most Famous Antiquity of GREAT-BRITAN, Vulgarly called stonehenge, Standing on Salisbury Plain, Restored to the DANES;  
By Walter Charleton, Dr in Physic, and Physician in Ordinary to His Majesty.  
Quae per constructionem lapidum, & marmoreas moles, aut terrenos tumulos in magnam eductos altitudinem, constant; non propagabunt longam diem: quip & ipsa intereunt.  Seneca, de Consolat. ad Polyb. 
LONDON, Printed for Henry Herringman, at the Sign of the Anchor in the Lower Walk of the New Exchange. 1663.   

To the KING 's Most Excellent MAJESTY.  
YOUR Majesty's Curiosity to survey the Subject of this Discourse, the so much admired Antiquity of stonehenge, hath sometime been so great and urgent, as to find a room in Your Royal Breast, amidst Your weightiest Cares; and to carry You many miles out of Your way toward Safety, even at such a time, when any Heart, but your Fearless and Invincible one, would have been wholly filled with apprehensions of Danger. For, as I have had the Honour to hear from that Oracle of Truth and Wisdom, Your majesty's own Mouth; You were pleased to visit that Monument, and, for many hours together, entertain Yourself with the delightful view thereof, when after the defeat of Your Loyal Army, at Worcester, Almighty God, in Infinite Mercy to Your three Kingdoms, miraculously delivered You out of the bloody Jaws of those Monsters of Sin and Cruelty, who taking Counsel only from the Heinousness of their Crimes, sought Impunity in the highest Aggravation of them; desperately hoping to secure Rebellion by Regicide, and by destroying their Sovereign, to continue their Tyranny over their Fellow-Subjects.  
This, as at first it animated Me, to make strict Enquiry into the Origine, and Occasion of the Wonder (so the Vulgar call it) so far as the gloomy darkness of Oblivion would admit; so hath it now emboldened me, to lay at Your Majesty's Feet the following Account of my Success in that Enquiry: in all possible Humility and Reverence, beseeching You to Honour, with Your Gracious Acceptance, the RESTORATION of that Gigantic Pile, whose dead Remains You so highly Ennobled by Your Presence. Once You made it Your Divertisement, to look upon it sleeping in deep Forgetfulness, and well-nigh disanimated by the Lethargy of Time (which often brings the River Lethe to flow as well above ground, as below): Disdain not, therefore, now to cast an Eye upon it, when it appears to lift up its massive Head again, and offers, in plain Language, to tell You the Story of its Life, from whence it was derived, by whom it was form, for what noble Use it was intended, and how it hath since been sacrilegiously violated. Which Story, though grounded only on Conjecture; is nevertheless neither Unpleasant, nor Unprofitable.  
Having diligently compared stonehenge with other. Antiquities of the same Kind, at this day, standing in Denmark; and finding a perfect Resemblance in most, if not in all Particulars observable, on both sides; and acquainting myself moreover with the Uses of those rudely-magnificent Structures, for many hundreds of years together: I now at length conceive it to have been Erected by the DANES, when They had this Nation in subjection; and principally, if not wholly Designed to be a Court Royal, or place for the Election and Inauguration of their Kings; according to a certain strange Custom, yet of eldest Date, most sacred Esteem, and but late Discontinuance among that Martial People.  
Whether, or no, my Authorities and Reasonings for this New Opinion of mine, be such, as may be allowed sufficient to render it highly Probable (for, further I pretend not): as becomes me, I most humbly, most freely submit to Your Majesty's most Excellent Judgement, in which You are no less Supreme, than in Your Power; and than which, none can be either more Discerning, or more Equitable. So that if it prove so fortunate, as to receive Your Approbation, I need not fear the Censure of any Understanding Reader: if not, I shall however gain this advantage, to have my Mistake rectified by a King, whose Reasons are Demonstrations, whose Inquiries are the best Directions unto Truth, whose Assent always is a sign of Truth, and to whose other Regal Prerogatives an admirable Wisdom hath superadded this, that He is less subject to be imposed upon, than any other Man!  
In the meantime, and ever, according to my Duty, I shall earnestly pray to Almighty God, that He would be pleased to enrich Your Sacred Majesty, with all Blessings answerable to the Largeness of Your Mind, to the Sublimity of Your Condition, to the Weight of Your Charge, to the Multitude of Your Virtues, and to the Hopes and Wishes of all Your Good Subjects.  
April the 27th 1662. Your Majesty's most Loyal, most Obedient, most Humble, Subject and Servant, WALTER CHARLETON.   

To my worthy Friend, Dr Charleton, on his clear Discovery of stonehenge to have been a DANISH Court-Royal, for the Election of Kings, and not a Roman Temple, as supposed by Mr Inigo Jones.  

HOw much obliging is Your learned Care!  
Still busy to preserve, or to repair;  
Which unto Men not only life can give,  
But makes their Monuments themselves to live.  
Health comes to them by Your immortal aim:  
And to their Actions Truth, the health of Fame.  
The sickly World seems thus Restored by Thee;  
Whilst thy large Soul, like its Eternity,  
On wasting Time atchieus new Victories,  
Which buried now in its own ruins lies.   

Nor wert Thou to engage with Time alone;  
But that which kept the Wonder more unknown,  
men's Errors; which are still the greatest crime,  
And more destroy the truth of things, than Time.  
For, if unskilful hands too rashly take  
In antique rubbish, every bold mistake  
Hides what they seek, and loses it far more,  
By the new ruin, than the old before.   

Nor is Thy stonehenge a less Wonder grown,  
Though once a Temple thought, now proved a Throne:  
Since we, who are so blest with Monarchy,  
Must gladly learn, from Thy Discovery,  
That great Respects not only have been found  
Where Gods were worshipped, but where Kings were Crowned.   
Rob. Howard.   

To my Honoured Friend, Dr Charleton, on his learned and useful works; and more particularly this of stonehenge, by him Restored to the true Founders.  

THe longest Tyranny that ever swayed,  
Was that wherein our Ancestors betrayed  
Their freeborn Reason to the Stagirite,  
And made his Torch their universal Light.  
So Truth, while only one supplied the State,  
Grew scarce, and dear, and yet sophisticate.  
Until'twas bought, like Emp'rique Wares, or Charms,  
Hard words sealed up with Aristotle's Arms.  
Columbus was the first that shook his Throne;  
And found a Temperate in a Torrid Zone:  
The feurish air fanned by a cooling breeze,  
The fruitful Vales set round with shady Trees;  
And guiltless Men, that danced away their time,  
Fresh as their Groves, and Happy as their Clime.  
Had we still paid that homage to a Name,  
Which only God and Nature justly claim;  
The western Seas had been our utmost bound,  
Where Poets still might dream the Sun was drowned:  
And all the Stars, that shine in Southern Skies,  
Had been admired by none but Savage Eyes.   

Among th' Assertors of free Reason's claim,  
The English are not lest in Worth, or Fame.  
The World to Bacon does not only owe  
Its present Knowledge, but its future too.  
Gilbert shall live, till Loadstones cease to draw,  
Or British Fleets the boundless Ocean awe.  
And noble Boil, not less in Nature seen,  
Than his great Brother read in States and Men.  
The Circling streams, once thought but pools, of blood  
(Whether Life'sfewel, or the body's food)  
From dark Oblivion Harvey's name shall save;  
While Ent keeps all the honour that he gave.  
Nor are You, Learned Friend, the least renowned;  
Whose Fame, not circumscribed with English ground,  
Flies like the nimble journeys of the Light;  
And is, like that, unspent too in its flight.  
What ever Truths have been, by Art, or Chance,  
Redeemed from Error, or from Ignorance,  
Thin in their Authors, (like rich veins in Ore)  
Your Works unite, and still discover more.  
Such is the healing virtue of Your Pen,  
To perfect Cures on Books, as well as Men.  
Nor is This Work the least: You well may give  
To Men new vigour, who make Stones to live.  
Through You, the DANES (their short Dominion lost)  
A longer Conquest than the Saxons boast.  
stonehenge, once thought a Temple, You have found  
A Throne, where Kings, our Earthly Gods, were Crowned.  
Where by their wondering Subjects They were seen,  
Chose by their Stature, and their Princely mien.  
Our Sovereign here above the rest might stand;  
And here be chose again to sway the Land.   

These Ruins sheltered once His Sacred Head,  
Then when from Wor'sters fatal Field He fled;  
Watched by the Genius of this Kingly place,  
And mighty Visions of the Danish Race.  
His Refuge then was for a Temple shown:  
But, He Restored, 'tis now become a Throne.   
John Driden.   

stonehenge RESTORED TO THE DANES.  
OF all MONUMENTS built by Mankind since the beginning of the World, there seem to be only two General Causes.  
The FIRST Natural, namely a certain desire of Immortality, inherent in, and as it were Essential to the Human Soul. Which being an Immaterial Essence, participant of Divinity both in its Creation, and Hopes, perpetually carrieth about it this impress or character of that Eternal Being, from whence it was derived; that it abhorreth Oblivion, and as not contented with that perpetuity in posterity, which Nature hath ordained by propagation of the Species, (an institution common also to Brute Animals) it aims at another kind of Eternity, by seeking to deliver the Remembrance of some notable actions to all succeeding Generations. So strong are the incitements of this our congenial Ambition, that the Dullest Souls are not altogether insensible of them, and Heroic ones feel a sort of felicity in suffering themselves to be transported by them: Yea, many have preferred the Imaginary life of Glory, to that Real one of Nature; and through most horrid dangers and pains exposed themselves to death, merely out of an obscure hope of being soon revived by Fame, and obtaining a better subsistence in the immortality of their Names. With such sentiments as these Old Ennius doubtless was touched, when he rejoiced in the perpetuity of reputation, that he fancied to himself from the merits of his Verses, and exultingly exclaims  — Volito viun ' per or a virum. 
And Ovid, when he towers himself with  
Ore legar populi, perque omnia saecula famâ,  
Si quid habent veri vatum praesagia, vivam.  
Nay, the grave Roman Orator himself was not exempted from the secret titillations of the same proleptical persuasion, when (Pro Mare.) he broke forth into this pathetic expression: Non haec vita dicenda est, quae corpore & spiritu continetur; illa, inquam, illa vita est, quae viget memoria saeculorum omnium, quam posterit as alit, quam ipsa aeternitas semper intuetur. This is not to be accounted life, which consisteth in the conjunction of Body and Soul: that, I say, that is life indeed, which flourisheth in the memory of all ages, which Posterity nourisheth, which Eternity itself ever looketh upon. And into another of the like height (Philip. 12.) in these words: Brevis vita data est, memoria benè redditae vitae sempiterna; quae si non esset longior, quam haec vita, quis esset tam amen, qui maximis laboribus & periculis ad summam laudem, gloriamque contenderet? Now, albeit this Affection of the Mind, in some persons meeting with the humour of Vain Glory, becomes an ignis fatuus, and misguides them to a false Eternity (for, the last cold we catch in our graves, makes us deaf to even the loudest praises of men: and if it did not, yet would the pleasure of those praises be as short and transitory, as the breath that gives them being:) yet cannot it be easily denied to be a considerable argument of the Souls Immortality; forasmuch as the most rigid of Philosophers find it to be Natural (Aristotle 2. de Anima, terms it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, most Natural) and confess, that Nature hath implanted in us no Appetite in vain, or which is not capable of satisfaction, if rightly addressed to its proper objects. However, thus much may modestly be affirmed, that there is no man but thinks himself somewhat concerned in times that shall come after him; and that the most excellent works of men had their first beginnings from this Appetite of posthume Fame. For, whence came the foundations of Empires, the institutions of Republics, Sects, Societies, and Laws to govern them? Whence the building of Cities, the erection of Pyramids, Mausoleas, Obelisks, Temples, Amphitheatres, Statues, Palaces, and the like costly Monuments? Whence, those many Volumes of History, Annals, Philosophy, Arts and Sciences, and all other kind of Knowledge? Whence all the brave performances and achievements in War? Whence the liberality of Testaments, the adoption of Heirs, the affiancing of great Families, the desire of Islue? Whence, I say, can we derive all these, and in truth all other the principal designs and actions of Mankind, if not from that which Cicero (1. Tuscul) calls saeculorum quoddam augurium futurorum, a certain implanted Ambition of men to extend the prospect of their hopes beyond the dark vale of Death, and have their names survive their Funerals? so that though some sceptics may perhaps dispute, whether this Ambition be purely Natural, or merely Opinionative: yet, I presume, none will contradict this manifest truth, That all Nations are beholding to it for their chiefest Ornaments and Memorials; especially if due consideration be had of the near affinity betwixt this their First Cause, and  
The OTHER, which is Politic; namely an incitement of men to hazardous undertake, and erterprises of difficulty, by setting before their eyes the glorious Examples of such among their Predecessors, who by actions of eminent fortitude, prudence, justice, knowledge, piety to their Country, or other the like Virtues, have highly obliged mankind. For, since Glory and Renown is one of the sharpest spurs to Heroical spirits; and that glory is always greatest, that is most permanent: it was a high point of Wisdom and Policy in our Forefathers to erect public memorial of great and worthy men, such as being looked upon by their Successors, might inspire them with a generous Emulation to achieve the like meritorious actions, that so they may attain to the like honour and esteem, with those that shall come after them. Virtue, though a sufficient reward to itself, would yet have but few followers, unless attended on by Fame. Whereupon Cicero (in 1. Tusculan.) discoursing of gallant men, says positively, Eorum nemo unquam, sine magna spe immortalitatis, se pro patria offerret ad mortem; no man, however magnanimous and brave, would for the good of his Country offer himself to death, without great hope of immortality; and Euripides (in Ajace) not indecently cries out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Among the most durable Memorials of worthy Men and Actions, by which generous spirits are animated to tread in the rough and craggy ways of Virtue, upon expectation the Gratitude of posterity will endeavour to vindicate their names and deserts from the devouring jaws of Oblivion; the first place belongs to those, which the Grecians call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Romans Monumenta, and we in imitation of them Monuments: because they serve to instruct the present and future ages, in things done in ages past; and remain to succeeding generations, as certain Memorials of the famous performances of their Ancestors. The word Monumentum deriving itself from Moneo; and that again holding from Memoria; as Varro (de lingua Latin. lib. 8. ) monere est a memoria dictum, quod is, qui monet, perinde sit ac memoria. So that a Monument, in propriety of signification, is an Admonition by putting in remembrance. In which sense Cicero speaking to Caesar, saith, sed Ego, quae monumenti ratio sit, nomine ipso admoneor, ad memoriam magis spectare debere posteritatis, quam ad praesentis temporis gratiam. And in a Manuscript Registre of the Grey Friars in London, kept in Sir Robert Cottons Library, there is this agreeable definition of a Monument; Monimentum est quasi monens mentem, & sic solet a doctioribus Etymologiari: monet namque bifariàm humanam mentem, cum aut mortis memoriam incutit, visis praecedentium sepulchris; aut eisdem conspectis, alii ad virtutis iter strenue calcandum incitantur & animantur.  
Hence it comes, that notwithstanding the things invented to give notice to posterity of the laudable achievements of their Progenitors, be almost infinitely various in their natures, materials, forms, etc. yet still hath the word Monument been used, as a general name, to denote them: which Festus long since observed in this saying; Monumentum est, quod mortui causa aedificatum est, & quicquid in memoriam alicujus factum est, ut fana, porticus, scripta, & carmina, etc.  
To enumerate the several Kind's, or Differences of these inanimate Remembrancers; and deduce each of those differences from its proper Causes and occasions, is neither necessary to, nor consistent with my present design, which is confined within the circle of one single monument. Let it suffice, therefore, if I in the general advertise, that their Variety is owing not only to the diversity of Peoples and Nations, that founded, erected, composed them of different Materials, after sundry manners, and with various artifices, each according to their proper Genius, Belief, Customs, Commodities, and the like: but also to the circumstances of Time, Place, Fortune, and Occasion. So that no wonder, if these (as all other the works of Man) are vastly different among themselves, in Matter, Form, Magnitude, Artifice, Cost, Magnificence, Situation, and Design.  
Nor is it more a wonder, that this great Difference sometimes turns to the Confusion of ancient Monuments, and makes them no Monuments at all; by rendering their particular significations so indistinct, that even the best Antiquaries (those Masters of the Rolls of time) fall into contention not only concerning the Authors by whom, and the Times wherein; but also about the Ends, or Purposes for which they were at first set up. For, the Monuments of even one and the same Nation, in one and the same Country, having been now and then varied in fashion, magnificence, etc. according to the several vicissitudes of Time, mutations of Religion, and other revolutions of Fate: it cannot but be highly difficult for late posterity, who are left in ignorance of the respective occasions and motives of those changes, to search into the intentions of their Founders; especially, where History hath been either altogether silent, or (what's as bad) full of uncertainties concerning their Originals. And where the darkness of Oblivion hath been added to that of aged Time; certainly, our Curiosity can hardly find the way to truth, nor is the glimmering light of Reason likely to afford other discoveries, but what are Conjectural. So true it is, that Monuments themselves are subject to Forgetfulness, even while they remain: and that when neither the Writings of men living in the same age, or not long after their erection, nor uncorrupted Tradition hath concurred to give them life; they usually stand rather as dead objects of popular wonder, and occasions of Fables, than as certain records of Antiquity.  
Do you require an Instance, or Example of the truth of what I here say? Please you to convert your eyes upon that most notable Antiquity, commonly called STONE— HENG, on Salisbury plain; you shall there find one most eminent, most fit for your purpose, most worthy your contemplation. For, though this Gigantique Remain be wonderful as well in respect of the strangeness of its Form, as of the vastness of the stones, of which it is composed; and therefore among all the Antiquities of this our Island, none seems better to have deserved the commemoration of our ancient Writers: Yet such hath been its Fate, that it hath outlived itself, and buried as well the Names, as Bones of those Worthies to whose memory it was consecrated; nor can you meet with any story of credit to inform you when, or by whom it was erected. Having raised horror and astonishment in the Beholder; it leaves him to entertain himself with thoughts as various, as the plain it stands upon is wide, and as confused, as Ruin hath made it stones: the prospect of it at a distance not more delighting the eye, than the near survey doth perplex the brain, or the date of it amuse the understanding. What the vulgar idly feign of the stones of it, namely that they are innumerable, not in respect of the greatness of their number, but of I know not what magical enchantment supposed impressed upon the whole pile, that deludes the attempts of Arithmetic; I find true of the Years of its continuance, its Beginning being as obscure, as the Fable of Merlin's transportation of it out of Ireland, by witchcraft, is absurd and ridiculous; yea so far hath oblivion prevailed, that now we are in doubt, not only what King, Prince, or General, but also what Nation it was, that bequeathed us this Wonder for a Legacy.  
The consideration of this, together with a certain deep resentment of the misfortune of the Founders of this prodigious Fabric, who in despite of its greatness and durability, seem utterly lost and forgotten, as if they had been entombed in the bowels of the deepest Ocean, or in the sandy deserts of Arabia: as it hath often raised in me a kind of indignation against the enviousness of Time, (which hardly endures that Creatures subject to mortality in their Nature, should be above it in their memory, and, in derision of man's greatest works, sometimes brings the River Lethe to flow as well above ground, as below;) so did it enkindle in me an ardent desire to contribute my mite toward the researching, who or what those Worthies were, that entrusted their remembrance to this forgetful Heap. And in compliance with this desire, having from the necessary employments of my profession borrowed some hours, for the reading of such Authors, as well ancient, as modern, who have either lightly mentioned, or professedly treated of this venerable piece of Antiquity, or others resembling it; and equitably examined the respective probability, or improbability of their different opinions touching its Origine, by comparing them with the agreeableness, or disagreeableness they hold to the parts and proprieties of the building itself, and with the concurrence of History, Time, Place and other circumstances: I at length believed, I was arrived, though not at perfect satisfaction, yet at reasonable grounds for a Conjecture, that most probably it was a Monument anciently erected by the Danes, at such time as that warlike Nation usurped the sovereignty of this our fertile Island. After this, being further animated by this meditation; that if it be, as doubtless it is, a kind of Inhumanity and Sacrilege, to despoil the dead of the glory due to them, by alienating the memorial they studiously left behind them, and transferring the honour of their works upon strangers, who have no better title thereunto, than what the mistake, or flattery of after ages gave them; on the contrary, it must be a sort of Piety to endeavour to restore the true owners to the possession of their Merits, by reviving the justice of their claim: I indulged myself the liberty to conceive, the Candid and Ingenious would take it in good part, if by publishing the Reasons that induced me to be of that Opinion, I modestly made them also judges of its probability; contenting myself only with the simplicity and innocence of my devoir, and submitting my collections to their wiser examination. And thus you have the Occasion, Motives, Design, and Equity of the following discourse. As for the Method, and Style of it; you will soon perceive the One to be somewhat confused, the Other altogether rude and unpolished: so that it cannot be denied, but I have in some sort observed a decorum with the Monument I speak of; the parts thereof being now in great disorder, and the stones always unhewn, as they come from the Quarry. But both being Natural and unaffected, I hope you will bear with their other defects; especially when you shall consider, that in Arguments of this nature, cleverness of proofs, and authority of testimonies, and faithfulness of quotations are much to be preferred before exactness of Method, and Elegancy of Phrase.  
You, perhaps, have not yet beheld this Monument, or at least not taken a survey of it in its stately ruins; and, therefore, it behoveth me to prepare you the better to judge of its Antiquity, and Design, by entertaining you in the first place with the  Description of stonehenge, by Mr. Camden. 
About six miles from Salisbury, northward (saith He) on Salisbury Plain, is to be seen a huge and monstrous piece of work, such as Cicero termeth insanam substructionem. For, within the circuit of a ditch, there are erected, in manner of a Crown, in three ranks or courses, one within another, certain mighty and unwrought stones; whereof some are twenty eight foot high, and seven foot broad: upon the heads of which others, like overthwart pieces, do bear and rest crosswise, with small tenants and mortescies, so as the whole frame seemeth to hang; whereof we call it stonehenge, like as our old Historians termed it, for the greatness, Chorea Gigantum, the Giants Dance.  
Then, to illustrate his description, He subjoins this Draught, or Figure.  
Place this Piece in Folio 8.  
Whére A. denoteth the Perpendicular stones, called Corse-stones, weighing twelve Tunn, carrying in height twenty four Foot, in breadth seven Foot, and in compass sixteen: and  
B. the Overthwart stones, called Cronets, of six or seven Tunn weight.  
Here in all likelihood, You will a little wonder, both by what way Mr. Camden could attain to the weight of these so ponderous masses, so as to be positive in the assignment of it: and why, having first made the altitude of the Erected stones, or Columns to be twenty eight foot, he immediately, in the explication of his portrait, brings it down to only twenty four foot. Nor, indeed, can I ease you of that wonder; otherwise than by referring the former to his mere Conjecture, and the other to his Forgetfulness. But this transitory remark is of as small importance to our main scrutiny; as His description comes short of that satisfaction, which is required to an exact survey of all parts of the wonder. Let us pass, therefore, if your curiosity and leisure permit, to the more ample  Description of stonehenge, by Mr. Inigo Jones. Who being, and not unworthily, called by Mr. Web (in his preface to Mr. Jones his Book, entitled stonehenge Restored) the English Vitruvius; and having, as Himself professeth, in the 56. page of the same Book, with no little pains, and charge, measured the whole work, and diligently searched the Foundations of it: seems to promise us a more full account in all particulars. 
This Antiquity (saith He) because the Architraves are set upon the heads of the upright stones, and hang as it were in the air, is generally known by the name of stonehenge. The whole work, in general, being of a Circular form, is 110. foot diameter; double winged about, without a roof; anciently environed with a deep trench, still appearing about thirty foot broad. So that betwixt it, and the work itself, a large and void space of ground being left; it had from the Plain three open Entrances, the most conspicuous whereof lies North-east. At each of which was raised, on the outside of the Trench aforesaid, two huge stones, Gate-wise; parallel whereunto, on the inside, two others of less proportions. The Inner part of the work, consisting of an Exagonal figure, was raised, by due symmetry, upon the bases of four Equilateral Triangles, which form the whole Structure. This Inner part likewise was double, having within it also another Exagon raised; and all that part within the Trench, sited upon a commanding ground, eminent, and higher by much than any of the Plain lying without, and in the midst thereof upon a foundation of hard Chalk, the work itself was placed. Insomuch, that from what part soever they came unto it, they rose by an ascending hill.  
In the inmost part is a Stone appearing not much above the surface of the Earth, and lying towards the East, four foot broad, and sixteen in length. Which, whether an Altar, or no, I leave to the judgement of others.  
The Great stones, which made the Entrances from the outside of the Trench, are seven foot broad, three thick, and twenty high.  
Their Parallels, on the inside of the Trench, are four foot broad, and three thick; but so broken, their proportions in height cannot be exactly measured.  
The stones, which make the Outward Circle, carry in breadth seven foot, in thickness 3 and ½, and in height 15 and ½: each stone having two Tenons mortaised into the Architrave continuing upon them, throughout the whole circumference. For, these Architraves being jointed directly in the middle of each of the Perpendicular stones, that their weight might have an equal bearing; and upon each side of the joint a Tenon wrought (as remains yet to be seen): it may positively be concluded thereby, the Architrave continued round about this Outward Circle.  
The smaller stones of the Inner Circle are two foot and ½ in breadth, 1. thick, and 6. high. These had no Architrave upon them, but were raised perpendicular, of a Pyramidal form.  
The stones of the Inner Hexagon, 2. foot 6. inches broad, 1. foot and ½ thick, and eight foot high; in form Pyramidal, like those of the Inner Circle.  
The Architrave lying round about upon the Perpendicular stones of the Outward Circle, is three foot and ½ broad, two foot and ½ high or thick.  
The Architrave on the top of the great stones of the Outward Hexagon, 16. foot long, 3. foot 9 inches broad, 3. foot 4 inches high. This Architrave continuing only from stone to stone, left betwixt every two and two, a void space, free to the air, uncovered.  
After this Survey (and some other Designs, that he fancied correspondent thereunto) He obligeth his Readers with the whole work in Prospective, as it now lies in its ruins, representing itself to the eye thus.  
The Figure.  
In which P. represents the manner of the Tenons, of a round form, mortaised into the Architrave of the Outward Circle: and  
Q. the Tenons of the like form, in the middle of the stones of the Greater Hexagon.  
Reflecting upon these two Descriptions, and comparing them together with due care: You'll find them at open variance, and differing in so many, and so considerable particulars, that 'twill be a hard task for you to keep them from mutually discrediting each other. For  
(1.) Mr. Camden expressly affirms, He observed the Ranks, or Courses, in which all the Stones were erected, to be only Three, one within another; and Mr. Jones as confidently avouches, He found them to be Four.  
(2.) The Former saith all those three Courses are Circular: the Later saith, of his Four, two only are Circular, the other two Hexagonal.  
(3.) This gives you a punctual account of Three open Entrances, marked with two huge stones perpendicularly raised on the outside of the Trench, and other two of lesser dimensions in like manner sited on the inside, in position parallel: That is utterly silent concerning any such matter; yea implicitly denies it, in that he delivered, that all the stones observed the circumferences of their proper Circles.  
(4.) In like manner, the One stumbles upon an Altarstone (for such He conceived, and such He would have us believe it to be, notwithstanding his seeming to leave men to the liberty of their own judgement in that point:) over which the Other leapt clearly, without so much as ever touching it.  
(5.) Mr. Camden assigns to the Perpendicular stones of the largest size, twenty four foot of Altitude: but Mr. Jones will not allow them to exceed twenty foot.  
Behold, here, a notable Example of the discrepancy of men's judgements, even in things easily determinable by the sense! and how hard it is to discern truth with others eyes! What, then, shall we conclude on in the case? Upon whose relation may we, with greatest security to our belief, depend? If we compare the Reputations of these two Authors; we find them equally high and venerable: the One being worthily esteemed one of the principal Antiquaries, and most Learned men of his time; the Other as worthily reckoned among the most excellent Architects this Nation ever bred, and a general Scholar. If we balance their several Abilities respective to the matter in hand; no great advantage of weight appears on either side: for if Mr. Jones were more conversant in Vitruvius, and more exact in the Rules of Geometry; Mr. Camden was not ignorant of the Art of Designing taught by the one, nor unacquainted with the use of the Other, as is evident from many passages in his immortal Writings. However, He was certainly skilful enough in the common ways of measuring and surveying, not to be mistaken in the dimensions and platform of stonehenge. If we compute the Times, in which they severally took their draughts of this Wonder; the difference will be so small, as not to solve the variousness of them: for, they were Contemporaries, and not above forty years, at most, seem to have intervened betwixt the Writing of one and the other, concerning this Argument. A small space of time to wear off four foot of hardest stone from the heads of the Perpendiculars or Columns; especially considering not so much as an inch is diminished from their sides. And much too short a time, for so many new stones to grow up in, as Mr. Jones discovered more than the other perceived. Lastly, as for their Veracity; that's a thing sacred, admitting of neither dispute, nor comparison; and 'twere breach of Charity not to be confident of this; that both of them had so great devotion and reverence toward the majesty of Truth, as neither would dare to offend her, by willingly deluding the present and future ages, with counterfeit Certificates, or by adding or diminishing, where they pretend to exactness and fidelity. And yet notwithstanding, such is their misfortune, and our trouble, we cannot give credit to both at once: that one hath mistaken, is manifest; that both were mistaken, and about the same particulars, is improbable; to determine on which side the Error lies, is difficult, but by a new survey; and to reconcile them in all points, seems impossible. Wherefore, though the clue of my slender Observations upon the place, be not strong enough to conduct you out of this Labyrinth: yet, I hope, my zeal to truth may excuse my plainness and freedom, if I adventure to assure you, that having more than once or twice delighted myself with viewing this admirable Antiquity, and with all possible attentiveness of mind contemplated the form, order, and parts of it; I always observed Mr. Camden's Draught to come much nearer in resemblance both to the work itself, and to the idea thereof form in my Imagination out of its ruins, than that bequeathed to the world by Mr. Jones, though much more elaborate and artificial. Nevertheless, the Model I have conceived of the whole Fabric in General, being not cast in the mould of Architectonical Principles, nor adjusted by the maxims of Geometry; but rude and simple, such as my Eyes delivered in to my brain: I think it not worth the labour of Copying; but leave every man to the liberty of fancying as he pleaseth, when he hath sufficiently gazed upon the Original. In the mean time, let us proceed to our Capital Enquiry, Who were the Authors of this stupendious Building, that doth so amaze and amuse its beholders.  
What Scaliger wittily and truly said, in one of his Exercitations, concerning the nature of Colours; viz. that objects most clear and manifest to the Sense, are often most full of difficulty and obscurity when brought home to the Understanding: holds true also of this Monument, which is not more conspicuous to the Eye, for its greatness and eminency, than dark to the Mind, in respect of its original and foundation, of which no certain remains are to be found. So that we are not more beholding to Time, for suffering the Sceleton or Bones of this Giant to stand so long; than injured by it, in that it so soon extinguished the life, or story of it.  
For, first, our most ancient, and most authentic Historians, who committed to record the most memorable actions and traverses of Fortune among the Britain's; and who may with good reason be allowed to have been not much above one age younger than stonehenge itself: have passed it over in silence, as a thing, either of whose Being they were utterly ignorant, or of whose Beginning they were utterly uncertain. So that from their Writings, nothing can be deduced toward our information.  
And then, as for such others of our Countrymen, as well Historiographers, as Antiquaries, who living at less or greater distance of time after the former, have treated expressly of it; they deliver reports so various and inconsistent among themselves, and severally so embroiled with improbabilities and incongruities; that they appear to have taken up their respective opinions either from obsolete and darksome traditions, or from slender and questionable authorities, or at best from plausible conjectures. So that from these Authors likewise, little is to be borrowed toward our determination. However, it being my duty to presume, you are not unwilling to hear these Opinions, what and whose they are; I shall not decline the labour of collecting and reciciting them sincerely and faithfully: especially for as much as many things are well worthy our Knowledge, that cannot yet deserve our Belief; and even Fictions sometimes have accidentally given light to long obscured verities.  
The Eldest and most vulgarly received Opinion, then, concerning the first Foundation of stonehenge, is, that it was erected by that so much renowned Brittish-roman (for, a Roman He was, materna ex parte, by the Mother's side) Aurelius Ambrose, in memory of those four hundred and sixty Noble Britain's, in peaceable manner invited to a treaty of accommodation, to be held in or near the Town of Ambresbury, by that bloody invader and leader of the Saxons, Hengist; and upon a watchword given, most treacherously murdered by him and his equally inhuman confederates, upon the place in which they were assembled. And the principal, if not the first Author of this report, was Geoffrey Monmouth (in lib. 6. Histor. Britannic.) to whom I remit you for a more full narration of the manner how this perfidious Massacre was designed and executed, and how the Monument of stonehenge was set up, as a perpetual Memorial of those many Worthies, who there suffered a Civil Martyrdom, being sacrificed in honour of their Country.  
The Next (near of Kin to the first, as to Time; though è diametro contrary, in all other respects) is, That the same Aurelius Ambrose being deceased, his sorrowful subjects, the Britan's, to testify to succeeding Ages how high an honour they had for the relics of Him, under whose valiant and prudent conduct, and by whose couragein-spiring Example, they had so often repulsed and defeated their savage Enemies, raised this Magnificent structure over the place of his sepulture, as a most durable witness of his Heroical Virtues, and their own grateful piety. And this conceit seems derived chiefly from Polydore Virgil, who (in lib 3.) relating the passages of war, betwixt the Britan's and Saxons of those times, expressly affirms it as a memorable truth, in words of this sense. In memory of his achievements for the liberty and good of his Country, the Britan's set up a magnificent Sepulchre for their General, Ambrose, made of great square stones, in form of a Crown (observe here, how exactly Polydor's description of the general Aspect of stonehenge agrees with that of Mr. Camden formerly mentioned) in that very place, where He was slain in fight; that the fortitude of so noble a Chiestain, might be neither forgotten among themselves, nor left unremembered to posterity. Which Monument is yet remaining in the Diocese of Salisbury, near to the Town called Amesbury.  
A Third Conjecture we meet with, which though of much younger date, doth yet pretend to be grounded upon an Accident of War so ancient, that we have scarcely any records of the actions betwixt the Britan's and Romans in this Island, of certainty above it; and it is, that stonehenge was built by the old Britain's as a Sepulchral Monument for their Magnanimous, but unfortunate Queen, Bunduca or Boadicia, Dowager of Prasutagus, King of the Iceni; who with all her principal Nobility, and a numerous Army, was fatally overthrown in battle by that handful of Romans, under the command of Suetonius Paulinus, than Lieutenant in Britanny. The Father of this more partial, than probable fancy, was the Translator of Lucius Florus (one Mr. Bolton, as I have been told by several Stationers) and Author of that ingenious Book, entitled Nero Caesar, published no longer ago, than in the year 1624. who out of a certain excess of devotion to the Fame of that British Amazon (as each Historian must have his particular Heros, or Heroine, whose virtues he delights to magnify above all others) willing to heighten her glories by all means possible; and taking advantage of these words of Dion Cassius concerning her funeral rites, Britanni humavernnt Eam magnifice, the Britan's inhumed her with solemn and magnificent pomp: rather than suffer her to want a Toomb proportionate to the grandeur of her birth, sovereignty, and spirit, would needs be so courtly, as to bestow that huge pile of stones upon her, to which the laws of History gave her no right at all. But let us hear with what fervour of Zeal, and freedom of vote, He conferreth this favour upon the Lady. The Story of Bunduca, saith He, [Nero Caesar p. 182, & 183.] than which neither our own noble Country, nor the whole globe of Earth, hath a rarer, was so little understood by Monmouth, as it doth not appear at all, that ever the bare sound thereof arrived within his hearing. But had the precious volumes of the Cornelian Annals, and Dio Cassius, and John Xiphiline (where her Heroic deeds are upon record to all posterity) been within the sphere of his studies; not Aurelius Ambrose, nor those four hundred and threescore noblemen of Britain murdered in Vortigers Reign, should perhaps have carried away with him the fame of this Material wonder, but Her Magnanimous self. Higher than to Her no Books do reach, with any probability of a Person more capable of such a Testimony, than she; and the profound oblivion which covers the Author, and the first intention of rearing them, where now they still defy the weather, doth strongly fortify my suspicion, that the stones were consecrated to the glory of Bunduca, and of her Captains slain in her Quarrel, so long time since as Nero Caesar's days, much above fifteen hundred years, etc.  
Here, after the recital of these Three so different Suppositions, I should immediately have proceeded to the Examination of them in order: but Mr. Inigo Jones having, not many years past, with singular judgement, and great pains, fully detected the particular weaknesses of each, and improbabilities of all; and my Genius being always averie to the dull and unprofitable drudgery of transcription; I think it sufficient, if I refer You to His elaborate discourse upon the same abstruse Argument, while I apply myself to the serious consideration of a Fourth opinion, to which His fruitful Imagination seems to have given birth, and His ample skill in Architecture, credit.  Mr. Jones his Opinion, then, of the Founders, Antiquity and Design of stonehenge, is 
That it was a work of the ROMANS, built by them, when they flourished here in greatest peace and prosperity, and happily betwixt the times of Agricola's government, and the reign of Constantine the Great, about 1560 years ago; not as a Sepulchral Monument, but as a Temple, and particularly consecrated to the imaginary Deity of Coelus, or Coelum, from whence their superstitious belief derived the original of all things.  
The Grounds whereon He advanced, and Reasons with which He endeavoured to support this so new and strange surmise; being brought into order, and few words, are these that follow.  
First, that the Romans were, and no other Nation could be Founders of stonehenge, He argueth from (1.) the Magnisicence; (2.) the Order; (3.) the Architectonical Scheme; (4.) the double Portico in the greater Circle of Stones, and another Portico in the Cell, or Hexagon; (5.) the Manner and Position of the Columns of the Building; and (6) from the Roman Relics frequently found near the place.  
Secondly, that it was a Temple, He would infer from (1.) the Interval, or spacious Court round about; (2.) the Cell, and its Porticoes; (3.) the Altar, and its position Eastward; (4.) the Mixed, or Compound Order; (5.) the Aspect of the whole Fabric; and (6.) from the Skulls of Beasts digged up in the circumjacent ground.  
Thirdly, that this so plausibly imagined Temple was consecrated in particular to the God, Coelus; He concludeth from (1.) the Situation; (2.) the Aspect Hypaethros; (3.) the Manner, or Form; (4.) the Order; (5.) the Decorum of the structure; (6.) the Pyramidal Figure of the stones; and (7.) from the Kind's of Beasts customarily offered in sacrifice to that Deity. And this is the Summary of all those particulars, from whose concurrent hints He seems to have deduced his Invention.  
An Invention exceedingly fine and subtle, I confess; savouring of a pregnant Wit, and no small Learning, especially in the mysteries of ancient Atchitecture in use among the Romans; and therefore much applauded by some of more than vulgar judgement: yet not so firmly founded, as to be impregnable; nor so closely compacted in all its parts, as to keep out all weather of Contradiction. Wherefore though it be far from my design to batter and demolish it (for, in truth, it deserves to stand, though merely for the pleasantness:) yet my devotion to truth, and the interest of my present disquisition concur to excuse my boldness, if having brought you to it, I adventure to show you the several Flaws, chinks, and defects discoverable therein; leaving it at last to your own judgement, whether it be strong enough to secure any man's belief, that shall set up his rest in it.  
Let us, therefore, begin at the First Partition, viz. That stonehenge was a piece of Roman Architecture; and carefully view the strength of those Reasons alleged to prove it so to be.  
(First,) As for the Magnificence thereof; what Aristotle (4. Eth. cap. 2.) terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Latins Magnificentia & Majestas, doth not consist alone in the Magnitude or Massiness of either the Materials of a Building, or the whole Pile (for, than those huge stones lying one upon another, called Wringchees, in Cornwall, would be a magnificent structure): but in an artificial Decorum, or agreeable pulchritude conjoined with greatness of bulk. Which two Qualities meeting together in any Fabric, cause it to present itself to the eye with a certain twofold gracefulness or majesty, that instantly raiseth a kind of Respect, and where it is rare and excellent, a kind of delightful Wonder also in the beholders. So that we use not to call Great things, Majestical, in respect of their large dimensions alone: nor Little things, Magnificent, notwithstanding their Elegancy. And this I conceive to be the adequate notion of Magnificence among all Architects. Now, according to this notion, though the stones of stonehenge be, indeed, extraordinarily big and ponderous; yet forasmuch as they are rude, rough, craggy, and difform among themselves, and destitute of any great Art or Elegancy in their general disposition and construction; I perceive myself under no constraint or necessity of apprehending it as a Magnificent building, at least in so high a degree, as Mr. Jones would have us believe, when He affirms, that betwixt Rome and our Island, there is no Monument, in which the Roman Magnificence is more conspicuous, than in this. If by Magnificence He meant Magnum apparatum, the difficulty of the Means, strength of Engines, multitude of hands, length of time, etc. necessarily made use of in bringing together, and raising so many and so large stones; then doth his Inference fall to the ground: there being many antique Monuments yet remaining, some in England, others in Scotland, others again in Denmark and Norway; which consisting of the like materials, and those perhaps further fetched too, could not but require like strength, labour, and art to their erection, and yet the Romans had no hand in setting up either of them; as shall be made appear, when the thread of my discourse hath brought me to mention them more opportunely. Furthermore, what judicious Eye, that hath once beheld the remains of Diocletian's Baths, Nero's Palace, Marcellus his Theatre, Vespasians Temple of Peace, the great Cirque, or other the monstrous buildings of the Romans in Italy; can afterward fancy any such thing as Roman Magnificence in this formless Uniform Heap of massy stones at stonehenge? there being as little of proportion or resemblance betwixt this and those, as betwixt St. Pancras Church, and St. Paul's; or as betwixt a Welsh montaineers cottage, and the Royal Palace of Hampton Court. Nor am I alone of this judgement; for the Author of the life of Nero Caesar, formerly cited, apprehended so little of Magnificence in the thing, that from the very Rudeness thereof He concludes it (though erroneously) to have been a work of the Britain's.  
(Secondly,) As for the Order, which Mr. Jones affirms to be the Tuscan; that you may the more clearly discern, whether any such thing was observed by the Builders of stonehenge, in that work, or not, it i needful for me to put you in mind at least, What that Tuscan Orde is, what Conditions it hath that are Common to the other orders also and what distinct Proprieties. The Ancient Roman Architects generally divided their structures in parietes continuos, & intermissos, into Entire or Continued walls, and Intermissions made by Columns or Pillars. Of these Columns they had, partly from the Grecians, partly of their own invention, Five different Kind's, or sorts; which reckoned according to their respective dignity and perfection, are the Tuscan, Doric, jonic, Corinthian, and Compound, or (as it is commonly named) Italic. The Tuscan (which alone relates to our present business) est plana, massiva, seu rustica columna, similis robusto alicui & benè artuato ruricolae, viliter amicto, is a plain, massive, or rustical Column, carrying some resemblance to a strong and well-limbed Countryman, meanly clad; as Vitruvius (lib. 4. cap. 1.) not unfitly describes it. The Conditions common to this Pillar with the rest, are principally Three, according to Sr. H. Wotton's enumeration of them, in prima parte Elementorum Architecturae, for the Excellency thereof translated into Latin by John de Laet. First, the Pillars of all the Orders are Rotundae figurae, of a Round figure. For, though some conceive the Column Atticurges, of which Vitruvius speaks (lib. 3. cap. 3.) was Square; yet was it looked upon as irregular, and never admitted into the orders, but among other extravagant inventions, condemned by Him. Secondly, Omnes diminuuntur & contrahuntur insensibiliter, plus aut minus, secundùm proportionem suae altitudinis, ab tertiae parte scapi sui sursum, All are Contracted or lessened insensibly, more or less, according to the proportion of their altitude, from the third part of their Escape, or lower part, upward. Which Guilielm. Philander, (one of the best Interpreters of Vitruvius,) from the exact dimensions of sundry antique Remains surveyed by himself, prescribes tanquam venustissimam diminutionem, as the most comely and graceful diminution; and most resembling the Taper growth of Pinetrees, from whose pattern the Figure of all Columns was first taken. Thirdly, Omnes suos habent Stylobat as, altitudine tertiae partis totius Columnae, comprehensa basi & capitulo; All have their Pedestals, of the height of the third part of the whole Column, from the base to the head. The Proprieties of the Tuscan order (to omit others of less importance) consist principally in two things, viz. the Proportion of the Longitude of the Pillar itself, and the Intercolumnium, or distance betwixt Pillar and Pillar. The Hight, or Length of the Pillar ought to be Sex diametrorum crassissimae partis inferioris ipsius scapi, six Diameters of its thickness in the biggest part a little above the bottom. For Vitruvius' (lib. 3. cap. 1.) accounts the length of a Man's foot to be the sixth part of his whole body, in ordinary dimension: and Man, according to Protagoras, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; of all exact Symmetry the Prototype, or first Exemplar. And the Intercolumnium, or Interval betwixt the Pillars, is required to be circiter quatuor illius diametrorum, of about four Diameters. Now, these Qualifications of the Tuscan order being thus set down, on one side of the parallel: let us turn our Eyes upon stonehenge and see what Analogy is to be found therein, to make up the other. (1.) At stonehenge, very few, or none at all of the Upright stones, or Columns are Round, no nor in any degree related to that figure; but broad and flat, and mostly resembling Parallelipipeds, rather than Cylinders; as the eye witnesseth. So that here is a manifest inconformity to the Figure required indifferently in all the five orders. (2.) Their Contraction, or Lessening upward is not Uniform, but rudely various, in some greater, in others less, in none insensible, in all irregular: so as therein likewise they want the due proportion of Diminution common to all genuinely figured Columns. (3.) They have no Pedestals at all, being set in the ground; which is a third incongruity. (4.) The Perpendiculars of the Greater Circle are, according to Mr. Jones his measure, in altitude 15. foot and ½, in depth 3. foot, and in breadth seven foot. Where then is to be found the proportion of Longitude to six Diameters of the thickest part of the Column? (5.) Their intervals, or middle spaces seem to be about nine foot. For, Mr. Jones himself computes the length of each Epistylium, or Architrave, continued in round from Column to Column, to be precisely 16. foot; and there must be half the breadth of the Column, at each end, allowed for the meeting of the two Architraves in the middle, if not for the more firm bearing of their weight: so that measuring the distance of the supporters, by the remaining part of the Architrave, it will be nine foot. Which agrees not with the Intercolumnium of Tuscan Pillars. To conclude this paragraph, therefore; either the Conditions of the Tuscan Order here recited, are not according to the rules of Architecture taught by Vitruvius, and his excellent Interpreter. Sr. H. Wotton: or Mr. Jones was mistaken, when He conceived the Order of stonehenge to be Tuscan.  
(Thirdly,) As for the Architectonical Scheme, in use among the Romans, consisting of four Equilateral Triangles inscribed within a Circle by which He thought the whole work of stonehenge designed and form; it is much easier imagined, than demonstrated to be really therein. For (1.) that Rule of Vitruvius (lib. 5. cap. 6.) to which He refers us for certification; if you take it entire, and not the later half only, as He cunningly did, runs thus. Ipsius autom Theatri conformatio sic est facienda, ut quam magna futura est perimetros imi, centro medio collocato circumagatur linea rotundationis; in eaque quatuor scribantur trigona paribus lateribus & intervallis, quae extremam lineam circinationis tangant, quibus Astrologi, ex musica convenientia astrorum, ratiocinantur. By the very first words whereof it is most manifest, the Rule itself concerns the designation, not of a round Temple, but of a Theatre; and the Context of the whole Chapter following declares it to have been invented for a threefold use, namely the most advantageous disposition of the Proscenium, Scena, and Orchestra; the equal diffusion of the voices of the Singers and Actors; and the convenient ordering of Seats for the Spectators. But, what's this to Mr. Jones his conceit of a Temple; and such a one too, as must bear the Aspect Hypaethros, sive sub divo, i e. open at top? However, conceiving this Text might serve his turn, and the great name of Vitruvius give some authority to his Fancy, that otherwise would hardly pass among judicious men; he industriously usurped the quotation of it, by perverting the genuine sense to a wrong purpose; and to the end his Readers might be the longer in finding out the fraud, artificially omitting the citation of the particular Chapter, he leaves them to a tedious research through the whole Book; a labour so great, the patience of most, though Learned, would not extend to the enduring of it, upon so slender an occasion. (2.) The Question is, not whether this kind of Architectonical Scheme were anciently used by the Romans, in some of their public Aedifices; but whether stonehenge was form according to such a Scheme, or not? Mr. Jones, indeed, hath expressly affirmed it: but, how hath he made it appear? That he hath drawn four Equilateral and Equidistant Triangles within the circumference of the Greater Circle of stones, so as all the Angles are terminated in the circular line, is not sufficient to prove it: forasmuch as every Novice in Geometry understands how to inscribe not only 4. but 400. and many more such Triangles, in the area of a Circle much less in diameter, than that he describes. Nor is it sufficient, that he tell's us, the intersection of the several Triangles fully demonstrateth after what manner the Greater Hexagon, made open at stonehenge, was raised from the solid wall environing the Cell of the Peripheros: because our sense assures us, there are no footsteps or remains of any such solid wall of a circular form, raised where the intersections of the Triangles are supposed to be made; and because we have no evidence, but his single word, that there is any Hexagon at all in the work; whereas, neither Mr. Camden, nor the Author of Nero Caesar, nor Myself, nor any other (for aught I could ever learn, and yet I have enquired of many Gentlemen who had carefully surveyed the Antiquity, and were well able to discern a Hexagon from a Circle) could ever perceive any such matter. Again, though he speaks of Three Entrances leading into the Temple of stonehenge from the Plain, and those likewise comparated by an Equilateral Triangle: yet is it manifest even from his own Draughts of the work, and its Platform, that all the Perpendiculars or Columns of the Outward Circle are equidistant each from other; and if so, where are those Three Entrances? or how should we distinguish them from the other intercolumniary, or void spaces? All which considered, there remains (as I think) no tye upon any man's belief, that stonehenge was a Roman Structure, in respect of the Scheme, by which it was designed and composed.  
(Fourthly,) As for the Double Portico reported to be in the outward Circle, and another within the Greater Hexagon, form after the Roman fashion in structures of great Magnificence: that you may be the better able to judge, whether He were in the right, yea or no; give me leave to acquaint You, what a Portico properly is, what the Roman Architects called a Double Portico, and what Mr. Jones termeth Porticoes in this place. Vitruvius (lib. 5. cap. 9) setting down precepts for the construction of Porticoes belonging to a Theatre, begins his discourse thus. Post scenam Porticus sunt constituendae, uti cum imbres repente ludos interpellaverint, habeat populus, quo se recipiat ex theatro: Behind the Scene are to be made Porticoes, to the end the people may have whither to withdraw themselves out of the Theatre, when sudden showers disturb their sports. And Philander commenting upon these words, saith thus; Porticus additae sunt sacris aedibus, illustrium virorum domibus, & publicis aedificiis, necessitatis, aut ornamenti, animive caussa; sub eis repentinas pluvias vitabant, umbr as ac frigora captabant, variis sermontbus diem consumebant, a meridie solemn hyeme, a septentrione aestivas umbras excipientes: To sacred buildings, to the houses of great personages, and to public aedifices are added Porches, for necessity, or ornament, or delight; under them they sheltered themselves from sudden rains, they retired for shade and coolness, and talked away the day; receiving Sunshine from the south in winter, and in summer shadow from the north. From whence it is most clear, most certain, that all Porticoes are additional structures, wherein men may be protected from rain and sun; such as the memorable Porticoes of Apollo Palatinus, of Augustus in campo Martio, of the Pantheon, of Antoninus Pius, of the Capitol on the side of the Capitoline hill, in Rome. Of these Porticoes some are made with parietibus continuis, solid walls on one side, and Pillars on the other; as in all Peristylia, or paved walks enclosed with Columns, such as the costly Palace of Urbino at Rome is adorned with, such as the Cloisters in Monasteries, such as the walks under the Old Exchange, and those commonly called the Piazzaes' of Covent-Garden. Others consist of solid walls on both sides, with rows of Pillars set at distance from the walls; of which sort we have a glorious example in the Portico at the west end of St. Paul's Church, in designing and raising of which Mr. Jones himself was principal Architect. But all are Tectae, Roofed or covered at top; otherwise how should they satisfy the use or end for which they were intended, namely to shelter men from excessive heat in summer, and from wet weather in all seasons of the year? As for Double Porticoes, they are no ways different from single ones, except in this only, that they have a double order or range of Columns. For, Philander interpreting these words of Vitruvius (loco citato) circa theatra sunt Porticus & ambulationes, quae videntur ita oportere collocari, uti duplices sint, habeantque exteriores columnas Doricas, cum Epistyliis & ornamentis, ex ratione modulationis Doricae perfect as; expressly saith, Porticus Duplices appellatae sunt a duplici columnarum ordine, Porches are termed Double, from the double order of Pillars, of which they are composed. And these, doubtless, are the adequate notions of Porticoes, both simple, and double: and what every man understands, when he hears them spoken of. But what Mr. Jones intendeth by Porticoes in stonehenge; is difficult to be conceived from his own discourse; and more difficult to be found in the work itself: so that we are confined to the liberty of conjecturing. By the double Portico, therefore, in the outward Circle or wing of stones; He means either the double row of Pillars set in round, of which the inner consisteth of smaller stones, such as he compares to Pilasters: or the space between each two Columns, with an Architrave over head. If the first; than it may be demanded, why the inner order of Columns are not equal in altitude to the outward, as they ought to have been by Vitruvius' directions, and as they always were in Roman double Porticoes? and why is one order covered with Architraves, the other not? If the other; it may be objected, the Portico than can be but single, contrary to what it is supposed to be. The same may be said likewise of the other Portico imagined in the Greater Hexagon. But, whatever part of the Fabric He fancied to be a Portico; thus much is evident, that it will not afford defence against the injuries of immoderate heat or rain; and therefore deserves not that Title, in strictness of speech. And it seems, He that took the liberty so to call it, was put to a hard shift to blanche over the singularity of his conceit: For, striving to assert it, to be customary among the old Roman Architects, to form the like Porticoes in their Temples, and more particularly in such Temples, as properly belonged to the Aspect Hypaethros, or were Roofless; rather than want the Patronage of Vitruvius in the case, he was forced to deprave the Text he alleged toward his defence. The words there lying in this order, (lib. 3. cap. 1. sub finem) Reliqua omnia eadem habent quae Dypteros, sed interiore parte columnas in altitudine duplices, remotas à parietibus ad circuitionem (ut porticus) Peristyliorum: not as He (pag. 70.) unfaithfully recites them, thus (observe I pray) Hypaethros in interiore parte habet columnas remotas à parietibus, ad circuitionem (ut porticus) Peristyliorum; adding and omitting what he thought fit. A course highly disingenuous, and in the end as highly scandalous. For, whoso usurps the licence of falsifying the Text of any Author, much more of one so grave and oraculous, as Vitruvius, whatever advantage he imagines may arise from thence to his private opinion, in case the imposture be not detected: certainly it cannot countervail that shame and discredit that inevitably follows, when the judicious and examining Reader shall come, by having recourse to the Original, to find how grossly he might have been deluded, had he trusted to the Quotation. And he that makes no scruple to impose an error, by corrupting fewer Doctrine, forfeits the credit he expects to his own, and is almays to be suspected of partiality to his Tenants, especially where he broacheth Novelties, and venteth them upon no other Reputation, but that of his single testimony. It is but justice, therefore, if meeting with nothing in our Antiquity, that answers to any form of Porticoes, which, as Appendages to their Temples, were anciently erected by the Romans, and described by Vitruvius; nor having any other obligation to grant the being of any Portico there, besides Mr. Jones his bare conjecture, and that upon grounds obscure and fallible: I say, it is but justice if we suspect, that He only imagined them to be such.  
(5) As for the Artifice, or Manner of Workmanship shown in stonehenge, by which you are to understand only the placing of the Upright Stones, answerable to Columns; most true it is, indeed, the old Romans used to set the Columns of public Fabriques', at so much the less distance one from another, by how much greater the Columns were in Diameter, naming that particular kind of range, Pycnostylos, i. e. Crebris Columnis, the close order, from the close or thick standing of the Pillars. Nor is it less true, that in our Monument, the Perpendiculars, though extraordinary great in compass, have their intercolumnary spaces little in comparison; because of the weight of the incumbent Architrave, which might otherwise break of itself. And yet nevertheless I think it scarce warrantable thence to conclude, those Perpendiculars were erected by a Roman Artist. For, if you consult Vitruvius (lib. 3. cap. 2.) about the true proportions of the Close order; you may soon be informed by him in these few words: Pycnostylos est, cujus intercolumnio unius & dimidiatae columnae crassitudo interponi potest; The Pycnostyles is that, where the Intercolumnium, or Interval, is equal to the thickness, and half the thickness of the Column itself. To whom Bernaldinus Baldus fully assents, in his explanation of the word Pycnostylos, (Lexic. Vitruvian. pag. 96.) where he saith; Ind species ista nomen adepta est, quód intercolumnium sit moduli unius tantum cum dimidio: Then if you estimate the interval from Perpendicular to Perpendicular, in the great Round of stonehenge, by the length of the Architrave betwixt its two Supporters, according to my manner of computation formerly given, you will find it to be about 9 foot, and so inconform to the Rule of the Close order. After, perchance, you may give ear to my conjecture, That the Builder had respect chiefly to the length of the overthwart Stones, placing the Supporters accordingly, without any other consideration or precept of Art, rather of Necessity, than Choice: and that if he could have been furnished with Stones fit for Architraves, of larger dimensions in length and depth, (otherwise they could not have born their own gravity) in all likelihood he had proportionably enlarged the spaces of the Columns; it being evident, he made use of the greatest Stones he could get, of both sorts. But this is not material; it being sufficient, that the Rule of the Pycnostylos was not exactly followed in the position of the Columns at stonehenge; and consequently, that the Manner is not Roman, as Mr. Jones would persuade.  
(6) As for the manner of fixing the Architraves upon the head of the Perpendiculars by Tenons and Morteses; that likewise seems but an uncertain sign of Roman Masonry. For, those Architraves being to be placed in Aequilibrio, so as the point of Rest at each end ought to be there, where the weight was found equal on each side: all the Workman had to do toward their continuance in that posture, was, to contrive so to fasten them, as that no force of wind or tempest, nor any other (unless extreme) violence, by diminishing the gravity on one side, might incline or sway them to sink down on the other; which could not otherwise be effected, but by corroborating the Aequilibrium by Tenons made in the Supporters, and let into holes or Morteses in the Architrave, no kind of Mortar or Cement being strong enough for that purpose. And thus much common reason might teach the Masons, without any great skill in Geometry, or having recourse to either the Rules or Patterns of Roman Architecture. Which, perhaps, was the cause why Vitruvius spoke so little of this way of confirming great stones in buildings, as taking it for granted, the contrivement was so plain and obvious to men, even of but common understanding, as that it was needless for him to insist upon any Precepts concerning it: For, all I can meet with in his whole Volume, relating thereunto, is only a slight, transitory, and obscure touch, (lib. 2. cap. 8.) which is this, Quod si quis noluerit in id vitium incidere, medio cavo servato secundùm Orthostratas intrinsecus, ex rubro saxo quadrato, aut ex testa, aut silicibus ordinariis, struat bipedales parietes, & cum ansis ferreiss, & plumbo frontes vinctae sint: it a enim non acervatim, sed ordine structum opus poterit esse sine vitio sempiternum, quòd cubilia & coagmenta eorum inter se sedentia, & juncturis alligata non protrudent opus, neque Orthostratas inter se religatos labi patientur. From whence nevertheless little can be collected, that is capable of application to the manner of banding stones together in our Antiquity: all that is, we must be beholding to the industry of Philander for, who, after his interpretation of the word Orthostratae, which signifies upright Props, such as the Italians term Speroni, Philastri contraforti, addeth, Inciduntur in his canales, in quos, veluti in foeminas, aliud quidpiam, ceu masculum, ineat committaturque: cujusmodi sunt, quas nostri Mortesias, quasi Mordesias, à mordendo, vocant; commissurae scilicet genus, cum perpetuo canali induntur, inserunturuè tabulae, aut quippiam simile. Besides, though Mr Jones alleged the authority of Leo Baptistá Albertus, the Florentine, to prove, that in mighty Structures, where the stones were of extraordinary greatness, the Romans used to lay them without any unctuous incorporating Matter between: yet he neither hath, nor could bring under the hand of any Author a Certificate, that no other Nation did the like before, or until after the Romans had, by Conquest, or Commerce, civilised them. And, therefore, it was somewhat boldly done of him, to infer that stonehenge was a Roman structure, because the Architraves were compacted to their Supporters by Tenons and Morteses: when the Examples of the like way of Holdfasts for huge stones, among other Nations, (some of which were at that time barbarous) are infinite, and stand in the roadway of every man's observation.  
(7. And lastly) As for the frequency of Roman Relics in Wiltshire, such as Camps, Fortresses, Trenches, and the like, some of which are even to this day discernible, at least by their prints or footsteps, in places not far from stonehenge; I shall willingly allow thus much, that conjoined with History, they may be good testimonies of the lodging of Roman Armies in those places, and of their military traverses, during their War with the Britan's; yet, seeing they carry no face of similitude, nor show of relation to our Antiquity, the Laws of Logic will justify my wariness and unbelief, if I doubt them to be so much as probable Arguments of the Romans being Authors also of that Work.  
Having thus▪ thread after thread, unravelled Mr Jones his long Web of Reasons, which he thought so closely and artificially woven, as to be strong enough to bind his Readers to a belief of his Opinion, that stonehenge was a Roman Structure: give me leave to add an Argument or two of mine own, of so much weight, as would have alone been sufficient to break asunder his whole contexture, had I not weakened it at all.  
Mr. Camden, in the close of his Discourse concerning stonehenge, makes report of a certain Table, or plate of Metal, as it had been Tin and Led commixed, found in or by the Monument, in the time of King Henry the viij. whereon were engraven many Letters, but in so strange a Character, that neither Sir Thomas Eliot, nor Mr. Lily Schoolmaster of St. Paul's, could tell what to make of it; and so took no care to preserve it. Now certain it is, this Inscription was not left by the Romans, who generally wrote all their Memorials in their own Language, whose Character hath long out-lasted their Empire, continuing the same in all Ages; as appears even by their Coins of greatest Antiquity, and all their Monumental Epigraphs, of which Camden hath collected a great number, such as have been found in England, and Gruterus a large volume of others, dispersed not only through Italy, but all parts of the Earth, where ever the Roman Eagle parched. Nor doth it appear to have been either Greek, or Hebrew, or British, or Saxon; because all these Languages, and their several Characters, were well known to Sir Thomas Eliot and Mr. Lilly, who were excellent Linguists, and good Antiquaries, as the yet living Fame of one, and Writings of the other testify. It remains, therefore, that these were Barbarous Characters: and if so, what hinders, but that we may guests them to be Litterae Runicae, sive Gothicae, the Runic or Gothic Characters, such as were constantly used by the Danes in all their antique monumental Inscriptions, or Ingravements? Especially since John Speed, in his Description of Devonshire, writes, That near Exmore are certain remains of an ancient Work, namely, mighty Stones, set some in form of a Triangle, others in round, orderly disposed; and that upon one of them was an Engravement in Danish Letters, which could not be read by men most learned. And that grave and universally learned man, Olaus Wormius, (Physician to the present King of Denmark, and not above four years past deceased, and who hath vouchsafed sometimes to honour me with his Epistles) in his first Book, cap. 9 de Monumentis Danicis, taketh special notice of this Inscription, and deploreth the unfortunate loss of it, with Utinam bono publico communicatum fuisset; sorsan de rebus praeclaris à nostratibus ibidem gestis testaretur. That the Danes of old, affecting (as all other Nations of the world, however rude and illiterate) to perpetuate the remembrance of their notable actions and successes, delighted to raise Monuments of their Battles, Victories, and other Achievements, as also of their Kings, principal Commanders, and great Persons; and leave short Records of the particular occasions of those Monuments, engraven in Runic Letters; besides this, that they had none but the Gothic Language in use among them, is manifest from the testimony of Saxo Grammaticus, who (in Praefation. Histor. Danic.) recommends the observation thereof to his Readers, as a thing necessarily conducing to their understanding many, otherwise obscure passages in his History. Nec ignotum volo, saith He, Danorum antiquiores, conspicuis fortitudinis operibus editis, gloriae emulatione suffusos, Romani styli imitatione, non solum rerum à se magnificè gèstarum titulos exquisito contextus genere, veluti Poëtico quodam opere perstrinxisse; verum etiam majorum acta patrii sermonis carminibus vulgata, linguae suae literis saxis ac rupibus insculpenda cuirass. And as for Precedents or Examples of that kind, they are so numerous, that Olaus Wormius his two Vòlumes, De Monum. Danic. & de Literis Runicis, mostly consist of such: otherwise perhaps I should have exercised your patience in reading some of those more conspicuous ones commemorated by Saxon Grammaticus, his Commentator, Stephanus Stephanius, John Crantzius, and other Writers of Danish Antiquities; that so I might have assisted the probability of my conjecture, that the Characters on the Plate found by stonehenge, were Runic or Gothic. However, you have seen upon what fair grounds you may entertain a persuasion, that they were not Latin, and therefore not left by the Romans.  
Again, This our Monument consisteth wholly of Stones unwrought, rough, and rude, as they lay in their beds of earth, (their Tenons and Morteses only excepted) and of such various shapes, that the most curious eye can scarcely find a perfect similitude in any two of them: and Mr. Jones ought to have evinced, either by Testimonies authentic, or by Examples, that the Romans had ever raised any public Structure of the like Materials; which being above his power (as I conceive at least) he warily omitted to attempt it, as he did the proof of many other particulars equally important toward the verification of his grand Position. Whereas Olaus Wormius hath been so liberal in his Contributions toward the maintenance of my Supposition, as to furnish me with not only verbal Descriptions, but lively Draughts or Pictures also of sundry Antique Danish Monuments, as well in the Bulk and Rudeness of the Stones, as in the Order and Manner of their position and situation, much resembling our stonehenge; and (as may be not obscurely collected from a Conference of Times, Actions, Histories, Ruins, etc.) not much different as to Antiquity. And this I think an Argument not unworthy your serious consideration; if not weighty enough to counterpoise all the reasons urged by Mr. Jones, to enforce his Dream, that the Romans were Authors of stonehenge.  
Having thus long entertained you, with examining the solidity of the First Story of our Architect's fantastical Building; Time and Order jointly command me to usher you up to the Second: wherein I shall no longer detain you, than while I try the soundness of those Beams, upon which He imposed his so lofty conceit, that stonehenge wasa TEMPLE. Which he presumes  
(1) From the spacious Court lying round about it, agreeing with those of Roman Idolatrous Temples, wherein Beasts brought for Victims were slain, and into which none but Priests might enter. To which it may be objected, first, That the void space betwixt the utmost Circumvallation or Trench, in stonehenge, and the Building itself, doth not exactly correspond with the Atria of Roman Structures; and therefore cannot, without corrupting the severe Dialect of Architects, be termed a Court. For, whoso attentively peruseth Vitruvius his Discourse De Atriis, (lib. 6. cap. 4.) will soon perceive, that He by the word Atrium, constantly means primum aedificium, quod anteriori janua intrantibus occurrit, the first Building that offers itself to the sight of those who enter by the foregate: And Bernaldinus Baldus, in his Note upon the first line of that Chapter, saith, Arbitramur nos vetera Atria, nostrarum aedium parti illi respondere, quam vulgo Anditum dicimus, Andatam, Caminatamve; quae quidem prima post ingressum ostii introgredientibus occurrit; eaque non quidem subdivalis, sed tecta & concamerata. To which may be annexed the agreeable judgement of Claudius Salmasius (in Solinum, pag. 1218.) apparet Atrium, primo non fuisse vestibulum; neque aream Hypaethram; sed partem aedis sub tecto, atque adeo penetrale, & fortasse concameratam porticum. Seeing therefore, that the Roman Atrium always was covered at the top, and most frequently arched also; and that there is no such thing betwixt the outward Circle of Stones, and the great Trench environing it: Where is the Analogy or Resemblance supposed? Again, Indulging Him the liberty of our vulgar phrase, according to which the Area, or plot of ground, betwixt a Building and its Boundaries, may rightly enough be called a Court: yet, where is the necessity, yea, where the probability, that that Court was originally designed and marked out for a place for the slaughter of Victims? Must all Structures environed with such Areae be Temples? or all Roman Temples be accommodated with the like outlets? If so, what will become of our Author's fancy, that those vast Stones standing in a Circle near Long-Compton in Oxfordshire, called Roll-stones, were anciently a Temple, and a Roman one too? For, these are destitute of all outward circumvallation or entrenchment. But the force of this Argument depends, perhaps, upon its conspiracy with its fellows; and therefore, if from them all put together, it shall appear, that our Monument was intended for a Temple; I shall no longer doubt, whether the void space of ground within the Trench be the Court belonging to it.  
(2) From a large Stone, 16 feet long and 4 broad, appearing not much above the surface of the earth, in the Eastern part of the lesser Hexagon, which He takes for an Altar. Whereunto I cannot assent, for two considerations. First, the Humility of the Altar destroys the supposed Dedication of the Temple. For, the Rule of Vitruvius, how Altars ought to be placed in Temples, so as to carry a due Decorum, and visible Analogy to the nature and proprieties of that particular Deity therein to be worshipped, is this, (lib. 4. cap. 8.) Altitudines Ararum sic sunt explicandae, ut Jovi, omnibusque Coelestibus quam excelsissimae constituantur; Vestae, Terrae, Marique humiles collocentur. Altars consecrated to Jupiter, and all Celestial Powers are to be made exceedingly tall or high; and those to Vesta, Tellus, and Neptune, humble or low; as in some sort representing the dwelling and dominion of the respective Deity. So that, this Stone was either no Altar at all, or not ordained for Oblations to the god Coelus. If it be objected, that the Stone perhaps was set upright; I answer, Than it was as much too narrow on the top, for the use assigned, as now too low for the God to whom it is ascribed. Secondly, Mr Jones, in his Description of the Monument (as you may remember) speaks of three open Entrances leading from the Plain into the work itself, the most conspicuous of which lay North-East: which is openly inconsistent with the custom of the Romans, who always made the grand Entrance into the Temple, whatever it were, è regione Altáris & Signi, in that part, which was directly opposite to the place where the Altar and Statue stood erected; and the reason was, Ut adoratum venientes Divinitatem suspicerent, That the people coming up to make their adoration, might at their entrance have both Altar and Image in front, so as to behold them at first elevation of their eyes. Would you have Authority for this? Hear Vitruvius himself, Aedes autem sacrae Deorum immortalium, ad regiones quas spectare debent, sic erunt constituendae, uti, si nulla ratio impedierit, liberaque fuerit potestas aedis, Signum quod erit in Cella collocatum, spectet ad vespertinam coeli regionem: uti qui adierint ad aram immolantes, aut sacrificia facientes, spectent ad partem coeli orientis, & simulachrum quod erit in aede; & it a vota suscipientes contueantur aedem, & orientem coeli, ipsaque simulachra videantur exorientia contueri supplicantes & sacrificantes; quodque Aras omnes Deorem necesse esse videatur ad orientem spectare, (lib. 4. cap. 5.) Whence we may safely conclude, that if the position of the Altar were right, yet that of the principal Entrance leading up to it was wrong. But should we grant this to have been originally an Altarstone; yet doth it not follow, that therefore the rest of the Building was a Temple: because in Stories, as well Sacred, as not, we read of many Altars standing alone, without Temples; and because it was one of the barbarous customs of the Danes, even in the stony Sepulchers of their mighty men, to erect Altars, and thereon to sacrifice to their Manes; witness Olaus Wormius, (Monum. Danicor. lib. 1. cap. 6. ) Diversi ab his cernuntur Tumuli, saxis grandioribus undique cincti, ita ut utramque extremitatem mole vastiora reliquis claudant. In medio utplurimum Ara extat. In hisce vulgus Gigantes sepultos credit, quorum ossa etiam haud raro'e talibus effodiuntur. Sed ego ejusmodi integris etiam familiis destinatos puto, unde & in his Arae, quae communia sacrificia pro totius gentis incolumitate immolata excipiant. With which if you compare stonehenge, together with our vulgar tradition of Giants there interred, and the skulls of Oxen or Bulls ploughed up in the adjacent fields: You will find as much reason to believe it a Sepulchral Monument set up by that warlike and ambitious Nation, in the time of their tyranny here, with an Altar in the middle, for their Pagan and impious sacrifices, as, with Mr Jones, to conceive it a Roman Temple.  
(Thirdly,) From the use of the ancient Romans to erect the like Round Temples, that lay open without Walls, surrounded only with Pillars, and uncovered also on the top, or Roofless. Which being his part to prove, and he finding it impossible; he betook himself to multiplication of Fictions, confusion of things clearly distinct, and other disingenuous shifts; such as have indeed amuzed and imposed upon vulgar heads, but can never convince the Learned and judicious, who are not ignorant, how strictly constant the Roman Architects were to their set Forms and Orders of Building, upon no occasion commixing or confounding them in public structures, especially sacred ones, where the passenger was to be instructed at first sight, what Deity was adored within, by the peculiar form of the Temple apparent without; that so he might prepare and address his devotion accordingly, without being mistaken either in the Object, or ceremonies of it. But, let us not judge Him unheard. He allegeth, out of Vitruvius' (lib. 4. cap. 7.) that the Romans had round Temples of two divers Forms: whereof the one, named Monopteros, had neither continued walls about, nor Cell within, but was encompassed only with a round of Columns; the there, termed Peripteros, had a Cell enclosed with a continued wall, and Columns set at convenient distance, so as to make a Portico round about on the outside. And this I allow to be true: but what though? our stonehenge resembles neither of these Forms: not the Monopteros, because it hath a Cell, as Himself supposeth; not the Peripteros, because it wants a continued wall to encompass that Cell, as our eyes witness. Where then is the Similitude and Conformity? Why, rather than fail, our Author shall adventure to make that like to both, which really is like to neither. For stealing the outward Circle from the Monopteros, and the Cell from the Peripteros, and then again surrounding that same Cell (not with a Circle, as he ought, but) with a Hexagon of Pillars: of both Forms He makes a Third, not being able to withhold from confessing (so much had the joy of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, transported him) in the end, that it was a New Invention, which yet he needed not to have told us. So here you find him guilty of a double fault; confounding of two perfectly and irreconcilably distinct Forms of sacred Edifices; and converting a Circle, the essential and proper figure of all such Cells, as belonged to the Peripteros, into a Hexagon. Is this fair and candid dealing, think you, in a man of Letters? Doth it become one of the most famous Architects of our age, thus to build Castles in the air, and fly to a sanctuary made up of Fictions? But this is not all. From a strange and unheard of confusion of several Forms, He proceeds to blend together also several Orders of consecrated Buildings. For, He will have the Order, of which his Temple of stonehenge must consist, to be partly Tuscan, partly Corinthian: affirming, that as the plainness and solidness of the Tuscan order, appears eminently through the whole Work, so the narrowness of the spaces betwixt the Stones, visibly discovers the delicacy and softness of the Corinthian. Where (not to take notice of the manifest contradiction in the very terms) He incurs a grand Error, in commixing, in one Temple, two so different Orders; when, by his own confession, (pag. 90.) the Romans had for each of their Deities a certain particular Order of Temples, and observed that distinction of Orders so strictly, that they seldom or never varied them. According to that of Vitruvius, (lib. 4. cap. 7. ) Non omnibus Diis iisdem rationibus aedes sunt faciendae, quòd alius alia varietate sacrarum Religionum habet effectus. And had they not done so, How could the Roman Architects of old, have been able, at first sight, to judge to what Divinity this or that Fane was peculiarly devoted? or, How could the Modern Architects of Italy, at this Day, by seeing only the ruins of them, give such probable conjectures, concerning their antiquity and proper Dedication, as are very hardly to be contradicted? But, why am I thus prodigal of my time and pains, in shaking an opinion, that hath no foundation of either Precept, or Precedent from ancient Architecture? especially when the Founder Himself was forced to excuse the fragility and weakness thereof, with this Plea; The learned in Antiquities very well know, those things, which oblivion hath so long removed out of mind, are hardly to be discovered. (Pag. 77.)  
(4 And lastly) From the Heads of Bulls, or Oxen, of Hearts, and other such Beasts, digged up in or near this Antiquity; as if no man could imagine other, but those were the Heads of such Beasts, as were anciently made Holocausts in that place. Why, is it not equally probable, they might be the skulls of cattle slain for the sustenance of some one or other of those many Armies, that encamped on the adjacent Plain, where the Lines of their Entrenchments and Fortresses are yet visible? Was it not a common thing for Armies to carry along with them whole Herds of Beasts for their Provision, and to bury the bones of such as they killed, in places somewhat remote from their Camps? And, as for Hearts; it is well known, both by tradition among the Inhabitants of the neighbouring Villages, and by other testimonies yet remaining, that all the Plain from stonehenge to Ambresbury, was, till within these 200 years, a Forest full of great Trees: and therefore not improbable, but the Heads of Deer might lie there, without any relation at all to stonehenge. But grant them to be the Offal or Resiques of Sacrifices; yet what reason, they should be Roman Sacrifices, when the Danes also used the like, as may appear from what I lately delivered out of Olaus Wormius, of the custom of that Nation to offer Beasts in Sacrifice to the Ghosts of their deceased Commanders, upon their Sepulchral Monuments? This Argument, therefore, being as invalid as the rest, and altogether very unsatisfactory: it plainly appears; that Mr Jones his Imagination had too powerful an Influence over his Reason, when He judged, upon such slender Evidences, that our Antiquity was anciently a Roman Temple.  
We should, in the next place, consider His Reasons for the entitling this Structure to the God Coelus: but seeing it doth not appear to have been a Temple; 'twere in vain to be solicitous about the Dedication of it. Omitting, therefore, to take notice of sundry Defects and Incongruities, as well Architectonical, as Historical, observable in that Later part of our Author's conceit; as Errors that stand naked to every enquiring eye, and cannot hide themselves from even the Emblem of Justice: I here take my final leave of his so vulgarly admired Book; having, in memory that I perused it, first subscribed this short Animadversion, at the end of it. Nunquam mihi placuit audaculorum quorundam ratio, quibus nihil est tam obscurum, tamque abstrusum, & procul ab hominum memoria positum, quod suarum conjecturarum sagacitate non fiat clarum, apertum, & cognitum. Nimium credulis ingeniis, & discendi cupidioribus rogati ultrove praestigiis & officiis imponunt, mentiuntur effossa marmora, atque adeo inscript as uruas, quae nusquam fuerint, into quae nec per somnum quidem viderint. Which, though spoken by the grave Philander, in reproof of certain overweening and audacious Wits, that thinking themselves quicksighted enough to see through the darkness of oblivion, and make discoveries where Time had long since interposed its sable curtain; had pretended to find a Temple of the Sun, in the confused ruins of a Tower that stood upon the Mons Quirinalis in Rome, to that purpose counterfeiting Marble Pillars, and Urns, with formal Inscriptions: may yet be well accommodated to Others, who, ambitious to be thought Argosies in the ruins of Antiquity, spare not to point at things invisible, to descry in Monuments more than the Founders themselves ever designed, to form to themselves Examples that never were, and in favour of their own extravagant imaginations, to corrupt the testimonies of Authors most venerable, and falsify the Records of ancient Customs.  
What the Romans claim was, You have heard, at large: Hear now, in short, also  

The Title of the DANES to stonehenge;  
Which is grounded chiefly upon Custom, and Precedents. For that they, more than any other Nation whatsoever, were in old time, and even a good while after the refinement of their barbarous Manners, and conversion to Christianity, accustomed to erect Monuments of huge Stones, upon several memorable occasions; and such Monuments, that compared to our (or their) stonehenge, seem to agree there with in most, if not in all points of resemblance; whereof many are at this day extant in Denmark and Norwey: is not hard to prove, from the undoubtable testimonies of their best Historians and Antiquaries.  
Olaus Wormius (lib. 1 more Monum. Danic.) being to reduce into order that great multitude of Stony Monuments in his Country, of which, as the most worthy to be commemorated, He had proposed to himself to treat; first makes a general division of them into Two Classes: namely, Literata, quae ex saxis constabant literatura prisca, vulgo Runica, exteris Gothica, exaratis, Lettered Monuments, such as consisted of large stones, with Inscriptions of Runic, or Gothic Characters, speaking their occasions and intentions; and Illiterata, quae ex rudibus quibusdam illiteratis, certo tamen ordine & serie dispositis, Unlettered, which were composed of rude stones, without ingravements, but so disposed after a certain manner, as th●t the Beholder might from the order of their position collect, upon what Accidents, and for what Ends or Uses they had been set up. So that These, though destitute of the Elements of Language, were not absolutely Dumb, but spoke their particular purposes in a more obscure Dialect of Figures, and were read in the Alphabet of their proper Platforms. Then he subdivides this later sort into Five distinct Ranks; namely, into Sepulchra, Tombs containing the bones of eminent persons defunct: Fora, places of Judicature, where Right and Justice were administered, according to the Laws and Customs of the Country: Duellorum Strata, Cirques or places of Duels, or Camp-fights: Trophea, Trophies, where Battles had been fought, and the Enemy defeated: and Comitialia loca, places wherein Kings and Supreme Commanders were elected by the general Suffrages of the People, and Inaugurated with great Pomp and public Solemnity, such as the rudeness of that Nation, and the simplicity of those times afforded. This Scheme being drawn, as the rule of his Method; He thenceforward proceeds to Examples of each kind. And we are obliged therein to follow Him step by step; that so we may the sooner, and without deviation, arrive at a competent degree of satisfaction, whether any, and which of all those different sorts of Antique Monuments hath so near a resemblance of stonehenge, as that we may, from the apparent similitude of their Forms, infer a probable affinity in their Origines and Designations; which is the period of our travail.  
As for the Literata, which carry their Age and Titles engraven on their fronts; they lie not in our way, our Antiquity having no Inscription on any of its Stones: and though that Plate of Metal with barbarous Characters, of which we have formerly taken notice, might probably appertain unto it; yet is not that sufficient to appropriate it to the order of Monuments, whose dignity and value consist chiefly in their Epigraphs. Ranging it, therefore, among the Illiterata; let us a while insist upon a particular survey of those: beginning at the Antique Danish   

Sepulchers.  
Whereof I meet with some, in Olaus Wormius, that are in more than one point of analogy correspondent to stonehenge.  
One Stands in Seland, on a plain, near the highway leading to a certain small Town, called Birck; formed according to this description of our Author. Ex saxis rudioribus mediocribus, quadrata in longitudinem tendens, ductaest area; huic tres colles seu Tumuli inclusi, undique circa radicem, ejusdem fermè magnitudinis saxis cincti. Major meditullium occupans, in apice aram habet ex saxis quatuor stupendae magnitudinis exstructum, it a ut tria quartum maximum & planum sustineant. A plot of ground, of a square running out in length, is impaled with rude stones, not of the largest scantlings: in which are included three Mounts of Earth, circumscribed at their bases with stones of the like bigness. The greatest Mount, standing in the middle, hath on its top an Altar made up of four stones of stupendious magnitude, so as three standing in Triangle, support the fourth upon their heads, which is the greatest of all, and plain or flat.  
A Second, situate not far from the same place, and somewhat more eminent, consisteth of a Tumulus, or mount of earth cast up, under which, the common people have a Tradition, that a Giant, whose name was Langbeen Kiser, was anciently buried; and encompassed with fifty six stones of prodigious bulks. Moles haec saxo percussa, reboat, ut concameratum opus subesse colligere facile quis possit, saith our Author; this massive Structure being knocked hard with a stone, yields a great sound like the Echoes of Vaults, so that it is easily to be collected, that there is an arched or vaulted hollowness underneath.  
Here let us make a stand for a minute or two, and reflect upon a few particulars that offer themselves to our observation. First, these two Sepulchral Monuments are situate in Campis patentibus, in open and spacious fields; a clear evidence, the Danes (as many other Nations) anciently used to bury in large and wide plains. Secondly, they threw up mounts of Earth over their dead: and those of two sorts, according to the qualities of the persons inhumed. For, of these Tumuli, such as were simple and naked, served to denote the interment of Common Soldiers, together with their inferior officers, slain in battle upon the place: but those compassed about with great stones, set in single, double, or treble order, were designed to conserve the memory of great Captains or Generals. For, Wormius touching upon these Tumuli, left this remark concerning their Distinction. Qui rudiores sunt, ex sola terra in rotunditatem & conum congest a constant; ex iis, qui una vel multiplici Saxorum serie circa basin cinguntur, exercituum Imperatoribus, aliisque Magnatibus dicati creduntur; ut Simplices nullis ornati lapidibus, militibus strenuis, & athlet is de patria bene meritis. Howsoever, in those Martial times, when no virtue could render any man noble or great, but Fortitude, and Honour lay in the strength rather of the Arm, than of the Head; the Armies of this Nation constantly preferred monuments of mighty stones, much above those Tumuli, or (as we call them) Burrows; nor ever entrusted the fame of their Worthies to such simple and homely conservatories, but only in places where Rocks and Quarries were scarce. This we learn from a very remarkable text in the Commentaries of Petrus Lindebergius. Sciendum autem, quòd Dani, cum propter defectum saxorum Pyramides ac Obeliscos extruere minime potuerint, olim in memoriam Regum & Heroum suorum ex terra coacervata ingentem molem montis instar eminentem statuerint. From whence it is very plain, that the old Danes used not to inhume their Chieftains and highest Commanders under Tombs of Earth, but in case of necessity, where neither the place of the battle, in which they were slain (if they died in war) not the Country near it, afforded them stones of dimensions fit for Pyramids and Obelisques. Otherwise they made use of stones of the largest size they could possibly get: sparing no pains nor cost to raise them up into the most magnificent Fabriques', their little skill in Architecture could amount to. Hereupon Wormius; Aetatis progressu plus operae in Magnatum tumulis positum videtur. Name, non solum iis grandes cippos patriis literis notatos imposuerunt, defuncti titulos exhibentes: sed etiam tumulos ipsos tam in aepice, quam circa basin visendae magnitudinis cinxere saxis, aream insuper quadratam adjicientes, quae totam molem grandioribus includeret, etc. To which we may opportunely subjoin a parallel record of Christianus Cilicius (lib. 1. Belli Dithmarsici.) Erant, saith He, Magnatum Danicorum sepulturae in sylvis & agris, tumulosque aggestis lapidibus vestientes muniebant; quod genus complures passim adhuc visuntur, qui Gigantum Strata vocantur. Mark here the near affinity of the very Name; stonehenge being by all our Authors, who have mentioned it, called Chorea Gigantum, the Giants Dance, and the most magnificent Stony Monuments of the Danish Princes, Strata Gigantum, the Giants pavements or paths. The last observable is, that in many of their Sepulchral piles they placed an Altar; eo fine, saith Wormius, ut ibidem in memoriam defuncti quotannis sacra peragantur; that they might yearly offer sacrifices to the defunct, at least in memory of them, upon the place of their inhumation. Of this we have a sufficient confirmation from a note of Ubbo Emmius, (lib. 1. Histor. Fris. pag. 21.) Commemoratione dignum videtur, quod in Regione hac ingentis molis saexa complura, quae nulla vectatione, nulla vi hominum illac deportari potuisse, ob magnitudinem credas, congesta inveniantur, quorum ea dispositio est, ut Aras refer videantur. Nam jacentibus nonnullis, alia iis imposita sunt plana, relictumque foramen, per quod reptare homo possit: it deserves commemoration, that in this Country are found multitudes of Stones congested of so vast masses, that you would believe them impossible to be removed by any Engines, by any the greatest strength of Men; and so disposed, as to represent Altars. For upon the heads of some, others are imposed, of a plain figure, and a hole or empty space left underneath, through which a man may creep. Nor ought it to seem so singular and strange a piece of Superstirion, for a phlegmatic and dull-headed Northern Nation, to set up Altars in the midst of such ampse and massive Tombs: when Temples themselves first grew up out of meaner Sepulchers, even among the Grecians. This perhaps, you'll smile at, as a paradox; and therefore it behoves me to produce some credible Authority to assert it. Clemens Alexandrinus (in Protreptico) is the man, who both expressly avoucheth it, and brings several Instances to prove it, thus. Superstitio templa condere persuasit. Quae enim prins hominum sepulchra fuerunt, magnificentius condita, Templorum appellatione vocata sunt. Nam apud Lariscam civitatem in arce, in templo Palladis, Acrisii sepulchrum fuit, quod nunc sacrarii loco celebratur: in arce quoque Atheniensi, ut est ab Antiocho in nono Historiarum scriptum, Cereris sepulchrum fuit: in templo vero Palladis, quem Poliada Graeci appellant, jacet Erichtonius, etc. But we have made too long a Halt in this place, and it more imports us, to proceed to  
A Third notable Example of Stony Sepulchers in Denmark. Which composed of a Tumulus or Burrow cast up in the middle, and three orders of huge Stones set in manner of Columns, at equal distance, the outmost making a large quadrangle of fifty paces length in each side, the other two perfect Circles one within another; presents itself to the admiration of passengers, on a plain, about a mile from Roeschild, and near the high way that leads from thence to Frederisksburgh. Of this Ol. Wormius hath given a perfect Draught, (Monument Danicor. pag. 35.)  
For a Fourth, I have, among many others, chosen the notable Monument of King Harald Hyldetand (whose courage, continency, and wisdom, together with his happy successes in war, are highly celebrated by Saxon Grammaticus) which yet remains near Lethra, or Leire, in Seland, anciently the seat of Kings, now a decayed obscure village: saxis grandioribus stipatum, in meditullio immensa mole quadrata, minoribus aliis innixa exornatum; compassed about with stones of extraordinary greatness, and in the middle ennobled with one Square stone, or rock, of an immense bulk, resting upon the heads of others of inferior magnitude; whose picture, though in too small a module, is taken also by our Author.  
Now, from the various structure of these four grand Sepulchers, neither of which doth fully quadrate with other; it is manifest, the Founders were not strict in observing any such set form of placing their stones, that might at first view distinguish them from other Monuments; unless in this only, that the Exterior Muniment or pale of great stones was commonly either exactly square, or nearly approaching that regular figure. And yet sometimes they varied from that also, as Wormius himself confesseth. For, albeit in his general description of the fashion of this sort of Sepulchers, he tells us, they had aream qùadratam, quae totam molem grandioribus saxis includeret: yet afterward, in the same Chapter, he mentions some, that had not been form according to that rule. His words are, Diversi ab his quidam cernuntur tumuli, figura oblongiori congerie depressiori, saxis grandioribus undique cincti, ita ut utramque extremitatem mole vastiora reliquis claudant, etc. But of this first Kind of Unlettered Danique Monuments, we have taken a sufficient survey. Let us pass, therefore, to the Second, viz. Fora, or   

Places of Judicature.  
Where judgement was publicly given concerning Right, and litigious suits determined betwixt subject and subject, according to the Known laws and constitutions of the country; and that either immediately by the King himself, where the parties concerned were Noble, or the matter in controversy important; or otherwise by his deputed Judges, in cases of less moment. These Courts were, like Justice herself, naked, and open; standing, not in Cities, nor Towns, but in fields and spacious campanias; nor covered with roofs, but with a kind of rude magnificence made only of a certain plot of ground, of a Quadrangular, or Oval figure, set apart by an enclosure of the vastest stones, that could possibly be had, placed like Columns, at equal distance; with one great stone, for a judgement seat, in or near the middle: as appears from the remains of Two (anciently very eminent) yet visible in Denmark.  
The One in Seland, near the City Drething; whose manner of structure, and capacity Ol. Wormius having with great diligence surveyed, he thus describes it. Vidi illud quadraginta sex saxis stupendae magnitudinis cinctum fuisse, eminente in ejus meditullio grandiusculo quodam; omnia vero in ovalem disposita erant figuram, it a quidem, ut utrinque ad latera, circae medium porta quasi, vel aditus pateret meridiem & septentrionem versus. Longitudo nonagint a passus aequabat, latitudo viginti. This Forum, or Ting (in the Danique language) was begirt about with forty six stones of wonderful magnitude, and had one great stone standing in the middle: all the stones of the Enclosure were disposed into an Oval figure, so that about the middle, on each side, was left as it were a gate, or Entrance, one toward the South, the other toward the North. The length of the oval was ninety paces, the breadth twenty.  
The Other near Aasmuntory, undique cautibus septum, hemmed in on all sides with stones equal to Rocks: which gave name to the place where it stands, that being called Tinget, to this day. Many other of the same kind are to be seen in other Provinces of Denmark; saith our Author.  
As these Courts of Justice were rude in their Fabric, so for many Ages together, were the ways of Trial practised in them. For, from Frotho Magnus, who swayed the Danish Sceptre, about the most happy time of our Saviour's Nativity, down along until the Reign of Suenotto, in the year of our Lord 986. all weighty and difficult controversies were decided per Monomachiam, by Duel; the Defendant being obliged to combat the Plaintiff openly within the lists of the Court, and prove the goodness of his cause by the sharpness of his weapons, without other Advocate but his own courage. A very savage and unequal manner of trial this! where always the Sword of Justice was put into the hand of the Criminal, where many times Right had no Vindication but from Fortune, and the most Innocent, if overcome, was either to die upon the place of his purgation, or, what's more grievous, to become Slave to his unjust Accuser. Yet men were hereto bound by a severe Law, made by the said Frotho, and recited by Saxon Grammaticus, (Hist. Danic. lib. 5.). After, the Beams of the Christian Faith shining on those northern Nations, and in some degree overcoming the gloominess of their barbarous Manners and Customs; that Law was abrogated, and in the place of Duels, the somewhat less cruel, but not much less uncertain way of Trial per Ordelium, by Fire-Ordeal, succeeded; and was continued in the same Courts, till about the year of Christ 1350. it was condemned by a decree of the Lateran Council, and an Edict of King Woldemarus II. an Extract of which you may find in Wormius, (Monum. Danic. lib. 1. cap. 11.) Then began all causes to be determined by the judgement of twelve Jurors, as here with us in England; not but this way was much more ancient, (for it is ascribed to Regnerus surnamed Lodbrog, who ruled in Denmark about the year of Christ 820; and as some Danish Writers boast, was derived from him to our Etheldred) but it seems not to have been either by universal custom established, or by strict and penal Laws enforced, so as totally to exclude the Ordeal in all cases, until the said Woldemarus his days. And Harald the vijth, after the abolition of Duels, introduced a new, but pernicious manner of determining contentions, by which the Party accused might purge himself of whatever Crime charged upon him, Solo juramenti sacramento, by only his own single Oath, idque contra omnem testium fidem, and that against the clearest testimony of Witnesses: as Saxo Grammat. hath left upon record, (lib. ij.) But the unreasonableness hereof was so great, and the evil consequences so many, that it could not continue long. Notwithstanding the ways of Trial were thus various; yet the places were still the same, namely, these open and rude Courts here described. From which we pass to the Third sort of Danique unlettered Monuments, viz.   

Places of Combats, or Fights.  
These were, indeed, always designed by Great stones, but not constant to any one Figure, so as to be thereby alone distinguishable, without the help of Tradition. For, though Saxon Grammat. (lib. 1. cap. 29.) willing to give some directions, how, from the several Ordinations of the Stones, Posterity might guests aright at the several Occasions, upon which they were set up; delivers this as a general Rule: Recto & longo ordine pugilum certamina; quadrato turmas bellantium, & sphaerico familiarum designantia sepulturas; ac cuneato equestrium acies ibidem, vel prope, fortunatius triumphasse: yet Wormius professeth, he much doubted whether this order were every where strictly observed, or not; afterward alleging Examples of different Figures.  
One he mentions out of the Author of Histor. Bremensis, (lib. 2. cap. 9) that consisting of one mighty Stone, was erected in memory of a Duel fought near a place named Agrimeswedel, in which a famous Combatant, Biurguido, overcame and slew a Champion of the Slavi, and acquired immortal honour.  
Others he speaks of that were marked with many huge stones set equally distant each from other, in a straight line; some that were truly Girques, and some Quadrangular: all which, together with the Laws and Manner of such Camp-fights betwixt the Champions of several Kings, You may see fully described by him, (Monum. Danic. lib. 1. cap. 9) In the mean time I hasten to the Danish   

Trophies,  
Or Monuments of great Battles fought, and Victories obtained. Which, though agreeing among themselves, in their durable and massy Materials, are nevertheless irreconcilably discrepant in their Forms. So that in these, as well as in the other sorts hitherto surveyed, the Founders seem to have entrusted the remembrance of their glorious Successes, as much to the voice of Fame, and popular Tradition, as to the obscure signification of any one Figure or Scheme observed in the Monuments themselves: or else varying the Platforms of their Triumphal Piles, according to the various circumstances of their Encounters, and fortunate Achievements, and the commodities of the place; they left Posterity, who could not arrive at certain knowledge of those Circumstances, to grope after their particular Stories, in the darkness of uncertain conjectures. This our Author, Ol. Wormius, was too ingenuous to excuse, or conceal; and therefore though, in compliance with the former persuasion of his Country, he tells us, Integri exercitus stragem lapidum quadrata in plano dispositione indicasse, That the ancient Danes by stones disposed into a Quadrangle, showed the overthrow of a whole Army of their Enemies, upon or near that place: yet he immediately subjoins, Verum non ubique ab omnibus praecise observatnm fuisse hunc ordinem ac dispositionem saxorum, plane mihi persuadeo; But I persuade myself fully, that this order or disposition of the stones, was not precisely observed by all, in all places. However, it imports us not to pretermit an Example, or two, of these huge Triumphal Antiquities.  
In the Diocese of Bergen, on a wide mountainous place, near a Village, called Tysnes, you may, with a delightful wonder, behold six stones of an incredible magnitude, resembling Pyramids, erected at equal distances, in two semicircles, one within another; each environed with two entire circles of lesser stones of Oval figure; and in the middle of the intercolumnary spaces in each semicircle, a great multitude of the like stones heaped one upon another, till they amount toward a Cone: and all in a most elegant order, set up in memory of a bloody Battle fought upon the place; as the people of the Country report by hear-say from their forefathers, though their relations differ in many circumstantial particulars. After this description, our Author addeth, Plura ejusdem generis & alibi in eadem Dioecesi videre & observaré licèt, figura quidem diversae, sed eundem in usum fabrefacta.  
But, what need we travel into Denmark, for Patterns of this kind of Monuments, when we have two most notable ones here at home, one in Cornwall, another in Oxfordshire? which, if you have not beheld with your own eyes, and dare give credit to M ● Camden's, you may have them represented to you in these his Descriptions.  
Near St Neoths in Cornwall (saith he) upon a plain adjacent to a wondrous pile of Rocks heaped up together upon one stone of lesser size, fashioned naturally in form of a Cheese, so as it seemeth to be pressed like a Cheese, whereupon it is named, Wring-Cheese; are to be seen many great stones, in some sort foursquare, of which seven or eight are pitched upright, of equal distance asunder. The neighbour Inhabitants term them Hurlers; as being by a devout and godly error persuaded, they had been Men sometimes transformed into Stones, for profaning the Lord's Day with hurling the Ball. Others would have it to be a Trophy or Monument, in memorial of some Battle. And so doubtless this was, and not improbably left by the Danes.  
Not far from Burford, upon the very border of Oxford-shire, is an ancient Monument, to wit, certain huge stones placed in a circle. The common people call them Roll-rich stones, and dream they were sometimes Men, by a miraculous Metamorphosis turned into hard stones. The Draught of them, such as it is, portrayed long since, here I represent unto your view. For, without all form, and shape they be, unequal, and by long continuance of time much impaired. The highest of them all, which without the Circle looketh into the earth, they call the King; because he should have been King of England (forsooth) if he had once seen Long Compton, a little Town lying beneath, and which one may see, if he go some few paces forward: other five, standing at the other side, touching as it were one another, they imagine to have been Knights mounted on Horseback; and the rest the Army. These would I verily think to have been the Monument of some Victory, and haply erected by Rollo the Dane, who afterward conquered Normandy. For, what time He with his Danes troubled England with depredations, we read, that the Danes joined Battle with the English thereby, at Hoch Norton; a place for no one thing more famous in old time, than for the woeful slaughter of the English in that fought field, under the Reign of King Edward the Elder.  
To these may be annexed another eminent Trophy, known by the name of Stipperstones, standing upon Huckstowe Forest in Shropshire, consisting of great piles of stones, and others like Rocks perpendicularly erected thickly together, and set up to perpetuate the renown of a fatal defeat given to the Britan's by Harald. Concerning which Giraldus Cambrensis hath this clear testimony. Harald in person being himself the last footman, with footmen, and, light arms, and victuals answerable for such an Expedition in Wales, valiantly went round about through all Wales, so as that he left few or none alive. And for a perpetual memory of this Victory, you may find very many great stones in that country erected after the antique manner upon hillocks, in those places wherein He had been Conqueror, with these words engraven, Hic fuit Victor Haraldus: Here was Harald Canqueror. Now these being sufficient instances of Danique Triumphal Monuments, it remains only that we search after some of their Loca Comitialia, or   

Places designed for the Election and Inauguration of their Kings.  
In which, not only their Noblemen and Grandees, but also the Commons being upon summons assembled from all parts of the Nation; used to consult and vote about matters of State of greatest importance, more especially upon the death of the Prince; and in that case, to give their Suffrages for the next in blood, or power, to succeed him. This business, as being of most concernment to the Public, was performed with pomp and solemnity answerable; the manner and Ceremonies whereof are concisely set down by Saxon Grammaticus; thus. Lecturi Regem veteres affixis humo saxis insistere, suffragiaque promere consueverunt, subjectorum lapidum firmitate facti constantiam ominaturi: Our Forefathers being to elect their King, used to stand upon stones pitched upright in the ground, and to give their suffrages; by the firmness of the stones upon which they stood, tacitly declaring the firmness of their act, and as by a good Omen foreshowing the durability of his government. And Ol. Wormius more fully describing the manner, both of the open Senate-House, and of the Election itself, saith, Reperiuntur in his oris loca quaedam, in quibus Reges olim solemni creabantur pompa, quae cincta adhuc grandibus saxis, utplurimum duodecim, conspiciuntur, in medio grandiore quodam prominente, cui omnium suffragiis-electum Regem imponebant, magnoque applausu excipiebant. Hic & comitia celebrabant, & de regni negotiis consultabant. Regem vero designaturi, Electores saxis insistebant forum cingentibus, decreti firmitudinem pronunciantes: in this Country are beheld certain Courts of Parliament, in which heretofore Kings were elected with solemn state; which are surrounded with mighty stones, for the most part twelve in number, and one other stone exceeding the rest in eminency, set in the middle, upon which (as upon a Regal Throne) they seated the new elected King, by the general suffrage of the assembly, and inaugurated him with great applause and loud acclamations. Here they held their great Councils, and consulted about affairs of the Kingdom. But when they met together to nominate their King, the Electors stood upright upon the stones environing the Court, and giving their voices, thereby confirmed their choice.  
This rudely-magnificent Custom of Electing the supreme Magistrate, in such open circles of huge stones, and after such a manner; as it was of highest Antiquity, so was it likewise of greatest Duration among the Danes. For, Bernhardus Malincrot (in libr. de Archicancellariis, p. 158.) through a long, series or descent of their Kings, brings it down to the time of the Emperor Charles the fourth, who publishing that so renowned golden Bull de Electione Imperatorum, gave occasion to the abrogation of it.  
Yea, so sacred were these Courts, and in such high esteem and veneration were they held, for many hundreds of years together; that even in time of public peace and tranquillity, the Candidate King was de jure obliged there to receive his solemn Inauguration, and assume the Ensigns of Royalty: as if the Place and Ceremonies were essential parts of his right to sovereignty, and the votes of his Electors much more valid and authentic, for being pronounced in that Forum. And if it happened that the King fell in some foreign expedition, by the hand of the Enemy, or by a less glorious death; there ensued an Inter-regnum, till such time as his surviving Army had in some convenient plain brought together a multitude of the largest stones they could possibly find, and set them both for the interment of his Corpse, and the election of his Successor: and this as well because they reputed an Election in such a place, a good addition of Title; as because many great and irreparable incommodities might redound to the Republic during that pause or respite of Government, in case the new election were deferred, until they had returned into their own Country, and assembled the best part of the Nation in some one of their ancient Kings-benches, as they may be properly enough termed, considering their dignity and use. To authorize this, which otherwise might be thought somewhat romantique, I am provided of a text out of a very grave and faithful writer of that Nation, Suaningius; which is well worthy my recital, and your special consideration; being that which gave me the first hint for my conjecture touching the End or purpose, for which stonehenge was built. The text is this; Locum publicae Regiae electionis postquam incolis convenientem, ad quem, nulla obstante itineris difficultate, omnes qui erant vocati, venire possent, elegissent; saxa grandia singulari opera atque studio conquiri, atque in eundum locum, quem electioni Regiae destinarant, comportari curarunt. Neque enim tum, quemadmodum hodie, destinata electioni Regum certa erant loca, sed pro arbitrio sententiaque eorum, qui autoritate & potentia alios antecellebant, eligebantur. Huc comportata saxa conscendentes high, quibus eligendi jus commendatum erat, circumstante populo, suffragia ex iis ferebant: and may be thus Englished. When for the public election of the King, they had made choice of a place convenient, to which all that were summoned might, with the least difficulty of travail, repair; they took care, that stones of extraordinary greatness should be, with singular labour and diligence, sought forth, and brought together in the same place, which they had appointed for the Royal Election. For, there were not then, as now a days, certain appointed places for that affair; but such were chosen, at the pleasure and judgement of those, who excelled others in authority and power. Upon the stones brought hither, those to whom the right of electing was delegated, mounting up, delivered their suffrages, the people standing round about below. The same in every particular is confirmed by the learned Stephanus Stephanius, in his Commentaries upon the first Book of Saxo Grammaticus his History of Denmark; whither I remit the unsatisfied.  
As for Examples of this noblest and most magnificent sort of Monuments; Olaus Wormius hath furnished us with Three very conspicuous ones; one in Seland, near Leire, called Kongstolon, or King's throne; another in Schoneland, not far from Lundie, in which homage was annually paid to King Olaus, and Christianus the first was with royal solemnity inaugurated and invested with regal ornaments; a third near Viburg, in the Cimbric territory, in which common tradition will have Dane the first to have been likewise elected, and inhroned, as the name Danerliung, which to this day it bears, seems to witness. And the reason he gives, why there is one in each of these three Provinces, is, that anciently they were distinct Principalities, and under the dominion of as many petty Kings; though now reduced under the sovereignty of a Monarch, the present King of Denmark.  
Nor are we destitute of the like in England. For, in Cornwall, on a large plain, called Biscaw Woun, near a village named St. Buriens, stand erected, in a circle, nineteen huge stones, distant each from the other about twelve foot; with one stone far higher and greater than the rest in the Centre. Which though Camden supposeth to be some Trophy left by the Romans, under the later Emperors; or else by Athelstane the Saxon, when he had subdued the Cornish men: yet considering, on one side, that the Romans used not to eternize their victories here, or else where, by any such Trophies; and, on the other, that there was a time, when the Danes also had not only Cornwall, but all England beside, under their barbarous subjection; and that this Monument doth in all particulars correspond with the Courts of Elections Royal in Denmark, of which I am now speaking; considering this, I say, no reason appears to the contrary, but I may assent to the opinion of Wormius, that it was, after a great defeat of the English Saxons, by his Countrymen, erected for the Election of their own King, and the investiture of him with the sovereignty of his newly acquired Principality.  
Here, perhaps, You'll be a little surprised, if I adventure to make our stonehenge itself bring up the rear of this last and most Gigantique division of Danique Antiquities. But, it is my Conjecture; the ultimate scope of my so laborious Enquiry; the point in which all the lines of this long discourse concentre. Wherefore, having now at length brought you to a place, where You may at once behold the strength of all those several Reasons, that conspired to suggest that opinion to me: it is fit I should draw them together in as small a compass, as I can, and so present them to your consideration, while what hath been delivered both of all the Danish Unlettered Monuments in general, and in particular of their Courts for Election of Kings, is yet fresh in your memory. And this, I conceive, may be most concisely, and most advantageously effected, by way of Parallel, or Comparison, in this plain and easy Method.  
The Ancient Courts of Parliament in Denmark always stonehenge likewise I. I. WEre situated in large and open Plains not far from some Town, of competent reception, at least for people of the best Quality: and STands in a spacious Plain, about two miles distant from Ambresbury, anciently a Town of great note: and II. II. In, or near to the middle of the Kingdom; that such as were summoned to convene, upon the Election of a King, or other affair of public importance, might repair thither with equal conveniency: and In a mediterranean or midland Country; for so Camden calls Wiltshire: and III. III. Upon a gently rising ground, for the advantage of prospect, and that the Common people assembled to confirm the suffrages of the Electors, by their universal applause and congratulatory acclamations; might see and witness the solemn manner of the Election. Upon a plot of ground somewhat more eminent, than the circumjacent Plain, which enlargeth the prospect of the Pile, and which cannot be approached but by an easy ascent, on all sides. IV. IV. Were open on the Top, and sides; that so the King elect standing in the middle, might be beheld from all quarters of the neighbouring Plain; and the Votes of the Electors the better heard by the multitude, standing round about, at a becoming distance. Is uncovered above, or roofless, and environed not with continued walls, but stones pitched upright; so that such as stand on any side without, may perceive what's done within. V. V. Made only of huge stones, the largest that could possibly be found any where in the Country; rude, unhewn, of no certain figure. Made of stones of vast magnitude; and unhewn, as they came from the Quarry, of no regular figure: and VI VI And these set upright, at equal distance each from other, in a Circle; that so the Electors standing upon them might make a round: These set in round, equally distant among themselves, and perpendicular; VII. VII. With one stone taller and bigger than the rest, erected in the Centre, for the King to stand upon, and show himself to the people, at the time of his Inauguration, and receive their joyful Acclamations, wishes of felicity, and other testimonies of submission and fealty. With one Stone, in the inmost circle (now lying along and broken, but at first set upright, and then probably placed at the very centre of the whole work) whose remaining fragments put together make, according to Mr. Jones his account, sixteen feet in length; Which is as likely to have been a Bongstolon (as the Danes call theirs) or Kings throne, as an Altar. VIII. VIII. Without any Inscription, o Letters engraven upon any one of the Stones: because the Fabric was sufficiently Known by its proper Form; and the Use in a peculiar manner customary to the Danes. Having no Epigraph, cut, or trenched in any of the Stones; as carrying a sufficient evidence of its Designment and use, in the figure of its platform, and perfection in all essential parts; and speaking its Founders, in the (in these days) well-understood language of its vastness, and the similitude it bore to others erected by the same Nation in their own Country.  
Thus far, You see, the Parallel holds in all particulars, even to a high degree of Resemblance; there being no one thing in the Antique Courts of Parliament yet remaining in Denmark, which is not to be found also in our stonehenge. Somethings, I must acknowledge, are observed in This, more than in those: and lest I might be thought overfavourable and partial to my own Conceit; if I should omit to note them; I shall particularly observe what they are.  
The First apparent Difference, then, consists in this; that in stonehenge the number of stones is much greater. Which notwithstanding may without much difficulty or straining be reconciled, by reflecting upon the Examples of the Courts of Elections Royal in Denmark, newly alleged. For, though Ol. Wormius saith, that those consisted for the most part of twelve huge stones set upright, after the manner of Pyramids, or Columns, in the circumference of a Circle, and one, more eminent, in the Centre: yet so far is he from confining all of the same sort to that, or any other definite number, that he brings several instances of some that came short of, and others that much exceeded it. So that from thence we may safely collect, that in old time the Danes made their Courts of this Kind, sometimes of fewer, sometimes of more Columns; according to the scarcity, or abundance of fitting stones, in the Country, in which they occasionally raised them; if not also according to the lesser or greater number of Electors, who were to stand and vote upon them. Nor is it to be unregarded, that at stonehenge, the inmost Circle (if, at least, that may be called a Circle, which really is a Polygon; such flat and broad Pillars, being, in respect of their want of Convexity on their outsides, incapable to make a perfect Circle) contains only twelve stones; which agrees exactly with the most ancient patterns.  
The Second is this, that stonehenge hath Three circular orders of Stones, whereas the Others have no more than one. Which nevertheless may receive a satisfactory Solution, as the former, either from the greater plenty of convenient stones in Wiltshire, yea in sundry places not very remote from the work itself, of which we shall shortly have occasion to take particular notice: or from the greater number of Electors, who being of the Nobility, and principal Officers of Armies, in process of time were multiplied to a more numerous list, than in former ages, as may be observed in all other nations also: or perhaps from hence also, that stonehenge was designed both for a Sepulchral Monument of one King, or General, there slain in battle; and for a Court of Election for his immediate Successor. For, you may remember, I have already acquainted You, how usual a thing it was amongst the Danes, to celebrate the Funeral of one Prince, and solemnize the Inauguration of another, at one and the same time, and in one and the same place; perpetuating the memory of both, by circles of vast stones: and that I exemplified this in the massive Tomb of King Harald Hyldetand, which was both a Sepulchral Monument for Him, and a Court of Election for succeeding Kings, for many ages after. Nor have I omitted, to supply you with descriptions of two famous Danique Antiquities, that consist of a Threefold order of Stones, all of magnitude equal to, if not much transcending those of stonehenge.  
The Third, and last point of Disparity is, that in stonehenge, the outmost and inmost rounds of Columns are furnished with Epistyles, or Architraves, resting upon their heads; but none such are found upon the upright stones in any of the Courts of Election in Denmark. But, this, as the two former, may be referred to the great abundance of such stones in Wiltshire, more than in any province of Denmark; where they were not to be had but rarely, as is intimated in that text of Petrus Lindebergius formerly quoted, Dani cum, propter defectum Saxorum, pyramids & obeliscos extruere minime potuerint, olim in memoriam Regum & He onum ex terra coacervata ingentem molem montis instar eminentem statuêre; The Danes when they could not, for want of stones, erect Pyramids and Obelisces, heretofore they cast up a huge Mount of Earth, in memory of their Kings and Heroes. Nor was it unusual to them, to raise up from the ground stones of wonderful scantlings, and impose them, in manner of Architraves, upon the tops of others; especially in their works of greatest Magnificence, and where they intended to raise admiration in posterity, at the prodigious strength, and extraordinary means required to advance such huge weights, to so great a height: as I have formerly proved both by authentic Testimonies, and agreeable Examples. Being, therefore, through the fortunate success of their Arms, in possession of England, and assembling in Wiltshire, where they met with store of materials fit for their purpose; and proposing to themselves to erect a stately Monument, after the fashion of their own Country, with some addition of vastness correspondent: it is not improbable, that they made choice of this kind of Superstructure of Architraves, or plain long stones laid overthwart upon the tops of the Columns; as that which might both hold some analogy with other Monuments in their own Nation, and also be of considerable use, in affording more convenient and firm footing for such persons of honourable condition, who were principally to give their Votes at the Election of the King, standing in round upon the stones; especially when their late Victories had augmented the stock of their Nobility, and who, perhaps, were by this time more than could stand upon the single Columns, and needed the addition of Architraves to support them at the Solemnity.  
And thus you see, how the points of Dissimilitude or Inconformity betwixt stonehenge, and its more antique Patterns in Daneland, may be reasonably solved. However, it cannot be denied, but they are, both in number, and weight, much inferior to the particulars of the precedent Parallel or Resemblance: and therefore ought not to be put in the Balance against them, nor to be thought of such importance, as to detract from the verisimility of my Conjecture, that stonehenge was principally, if not wholly, designed and raised for a Court-Royal.  
But, this Discovery (at least, if it may deserve that name) is a work of Supererogation, my undertaking from the first, having been only to make it appear highly probable, that stonehenge originally was a building of the Danes. Which, if I mistake not, I have to a competent degree of satisfaction effected.  
Nevertheless, I must not forget to observe one thing more, not unworthy serious consideration: which is this, That among all our ancient Historians, who wrote of the state of Britain as well before, as under the Romans and Saxons, recording not only all the most memorable actions, passages, and memorial whatever, but also inferior occurrents, and that even to superfluity; no one hath so much as mentioned stonehenge, until a long time after the Danes had conquered England, and were afterwards forced to resign it to the English again, upon the decease of Hardi Canute. For, the first Author, in whom any word is found concerning it, was Geoffrey of Monmouth, who (together with his fellow Historiographers, William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon, and Simon of Durham) lived in the days of King Stephen. No contemptible Argument, that in England no such Monument, as stonehenge, was extant, until the Danes had overrun and conquered this Nation: it being hard to conceive, that those Writers, who committed to record matters of much smaller moment, and (according to the Monkish humour of those darker times) so much delighted themselves in relating wonderful accidents, and extraordinary adventures; would have condemned to oblivion so eminent a thing as stonehenge, and in a deep silence have passed over the most admirable Antiquity of Great Britain.  
And as for the vulgar conceit, that the great decay of the Structure shows it to have been more antique, than the Danish Invasion and Conquest here; it may be easily solved by answering, that the ruins evidence themselves to be the effect, not of Time, (the stones themselves being of a temper so compact and hard, that the iron teeth of that consuming Enemy cannot gnaw or corrode them; nor any force of tempests impair them in the least) but of the sacrilegious violence of Men, who have thrown down most of the Architraves, and removed many of the more portable stones, converting them to private uses in Buildings, Landmarks, etc. as appears by some yet to be seen in the neighbouring Villages and Fields.  
And if the greatness of its ruins since cannot, certainly, much less ought the Vastness and Stupendious Dimensions thereof, when it was entire and complete, to be thought sufficient to dispossess the Danes of the honour of its Extruction. For, of all Nations in the world, they appear to have taken the most both of Delight and Pains, in searching after, and bringing together mighty stones, whereof to make their Monuments: sparing nor time, nor cost, nor labour, yea many times engaging the whole Nation almost, to contribute their hands and purses together, toward the advancing such prodigious Piles. To testify this, the History of Norwey assures us, in the life of Haraldus Harfagre, that two petty Kings of that Country, consumed three whole years, and a vast treasure, in casting up a Sepulchral Mount, and fencing it about with stones of Gigantic magnitude. And Saxon Gnammaticus (lib. 10. Hist. Danic.) writing the glorious actions of Harald, surnamed Blaatand, the son of Gormond and Thyra, (daughter of K. Ethelred of England) among other his great exploits, tells us, that He set his whole Army, and another of Oxen, on work, to remove, from the Jutland shore, one immense Stone, or little Rock, and bring it to the place, where the body of his Mother lay inhumed, that by erecting it over her grave, he might at once eternize the memory of her virtues, and of his own filial piety: being so far elevated with the glory of the attempt; that he boastingly demanded of one of the Officers of his Navy,. who was present, An tantam aliàs molem mortali manu tentatam conspexerit, If ever he had seen so mountainous a Bulk undertaken to be transported by mortal hands. Upon occasion of which very relation, Ol. Wormius (Mon. Danic. pag. 39) concludes; Non igitur in sumptibus parentalibus faciendis ulli genti cessisse videntur Nostrates, & pluris hi Tumuli olim constiterunt, quam hodie à nobis aestimantur; Our Countrymen, therefore, seem inferior to no Nation, in sumptuous Funerals for their Ancestors and these Sepulchers heretofore cost much more, than is in our days imagined. To confirm this assertion yet further, give me leave to urge one most pertinent and pregnant testimony, out of the Preface of the same Saxon Grammat. Danicam regionem Giganteo quondam cultu exercitam, eximiae magnitudinis saxa veterum bustis ac specubus affixatestantur. Quod si quis vi monstrosa patratum ambigat, quorundam montium excelsa suspiciat, dicatque? si callet, quis eorum verticibus cautes tantae granditatis invexerit. Inopinabile namque quivis miraculi hujus aestimator advertet, ut molem super plano minimè vel difficile mobilem, in tantam montanae sublimitatis apicem simplex mortalitatis labour, aut usitatus humani roboris conatus extulerit. Utrum vero talium rerum Authores post diluvialis inundationis excursum Gigantes extiterint, an viri corporis viribus ante alios praediti, parum notitiae traditum. That Daneland anciently was inhabited by Giants, stones of wonderful magnitude, affixed to the Sepulchers and Caves of our Ancestors, bear witness. Which if any doubt to have been effected by monstrous strength, let him behold the tops of some Mountains, and tell, if he be able, who brought thither Rocks of such immense greatness. For, every competent Judge of this wonder will perceive it to exceed the imagination of man, how the mere labour of Mortals, or usual effort of human strength could advance to a point of such mountainous sublimity, a weight not at all, or not without extreme difficulty, movable even on plain ground. But, whether the Authors of these mighty works were Giants, living after the Deluge was fallen; or Men endowed with extraordinary strength of body: is not to be known from Story. Now, if any unprejudicate man, having heard these testimonies, shall first inquire of our Historians, what mighty Armies, and numerous swarms of people, were brought out of those Northern Countries to infest Britan, together with their too prosperous successes in many fights; and then consider with himself, what such vast numbers of men employed at once, and ambitiously co-operating in such a work, might be able to perform, in a few years, yea months, and that by mere natural strength, without any great skill in Mechaniques, or the Art of removing great weights by Engines: certainly, he will find no difficulty in admitting it to be as possible, and perhaps more probable, for the Danes to have brought the great stones at stonehenge to that ground, and there erected them in the order described; as for the old Britan's, Romans, Saxons, or any other Nation.  
Especially when it is most probable, that those stones were fetched no farther off, than from Aibury or Rockly, about three or four miles distant from Marleborow in the same County. For, in the Fields adjoining to those two Villages, and principally the later (which as Camden observes, borrowed its name from thence) there stand up great stones like Rocks, infinite in number; all which perfectly resemble those at stonehenge, in colour, grain, hardness, and branching of veins; and many of them also in figure and proportions: brought thither, as is vulgarly, and perhaps not untruly, believed, by the violence of the universal Deluge, and there left in Valleys, as the force of the currents abated. These stones I myself have often seen, in journeys to Bath from London; and comparing them with those at stonehenge, found so great an Analogy betwixt them; that ever since I have retained an opinion, the Founders of that Monument furnished themselves with Materials from the forenamed places; among so great a multitude selecting such, as in magnitude and shape might best comport with their designs; and transporting them from thence. But How? or by what means? That's the greatest wonder of all!  
Concerning this grand Difficulty, therefore, I say; That though the unlearned Vulgar may be dispensed withal, to admire the transportation of such stones, as an effect of more than Human Art and Strength; and accordingly to have recourse to the ridiculous Fable of Merlin's bringing them out of Ireland by Magic Diabolical, and the help of Spirits: Yet to Scholars and Travellers, the matter will appear to come so short of the Miracle, as scarce to attain to a Comparison with sundry other performances, not only of the Ancients, but of the Moderns also, in the like kind.  
For, among the Egyptian Monuments of extraordinary labour and magnificence, we read in Herodotus (lib. 2. cap. 175.) of one huge Pyramid, built by King Cleopes, in which was not one stone less than 30 foot long, and all of them fetched from Arabia the Rocky: and how Amasis, another Egyptian Monarch, had a house of pleasure for himself, cut out of one entire stone, 12 cubits long, 14 broad, and 8 high; and also made the Statue of a Sphinx, or Egyptian Cat, of another single stone, which was in length 143 feet, in height 62, and in compass of the Head 102. And Diodorus Siculus (Biblioth. lib. 1. sect. 2.) reports of Sesostris, a third King of Egypt, that in a Temple of Vulcan at Memphis, he erected two Statues, one for himself, another for his wife, each of one solid Stone, and 30 cubits high.  
Among the Jewish, we read in Josephus (de Bello Judaic. lib. 6. cap. 6.) of three magnificent Towers built by Herod, in which every stone being of white Marble, was 20 cubits long, 10 broad, and 5 high: and which was yet more wonderful, the old wall itself was situated on a steep rising ground: so that 'tis scarce imaginable by what puissant means so many stones of such prodigious weight, should be taken whole out of the Quarry, and conveyed to a place of such eminent altitude.  
Among the Grecian, we read in Pliny (lib. 36. cap. 14.) that in that so famous Temple of Diana in Ephesus, were 127 Columns, each consisting of one stone, 60 foot high; all taken out of the Quatries in Asia: not to insist upon the mighty Rhodian Colossus, of which Fame hath spoken with all her tongues.  
Among the Roman, besides the prodigious brazen Colossus of Nero, described by Suetonius, (in vit. Neron.) we read, in Pancirol. (de deperdit. titul. 31.) of fundry Obelisks, made of so many whole stones; whereof some were 40, some 80, others 90 cubits high; most of them brought from Egypt to Rome, and there set up; with this Distich engraven upon one of them.  

Si lapis est unus; dic, quafuit arte levatus?  
Sed si sunt plures; dic, ubi congeries?   

If this be one stone; How 'twas raised, divine:  
If more than one; show, where they do combine.   
In Rome there stands also an Obelisk of one solid stone, a kind of Ophite, or spotted Marble, anciently consecrated to the honour of the great Julius Caesar, and erected on the left side of the Vatican Temple, in the Cirque of Nero; but, in the year 1586, removed into a more eminent place, at the vast charge of Pope Sixtus Quintus, and by the admirable skill of Dominicus Fontanus, an excellent Architect. Which is in height 170 foot, above the base; in breadth, at the bottom, 12 foot, and at the top 8; in weight 956148 pounds, besides the heaviness of the Instruments or Engines used in raising it, that amounted to 1042824 pounds, according to the computation of Georgius Draudius, (in adnotationib. ad Solini memorabilia, part. 1. fol. 131.) The removing of this Obelisk was so rarea piece of Art, that besides the vast treasure he received in reward, the Engineer got immortal renown thereby; no less than 56 learned men expressly celebrating his praises; as Monantholius (in Comment. in Arist. Mechanic. cap. 19) remarketh. If so; what did those deserve, who first digged the same out of the Marble Quarries of Egypt, and brought it entire to Rome? Doubtless this was much the more glorious enterprise of the two.  
Now, after these superlative Examples, what think you of our stonehenge, betwixt which and those, as to dimensions, is no more proportion, than betwixt a pygmy and a Giant? Can you allow it to have been so wonderful a task, for a whole Army of Men, and multitudes of Oxen, to transport the stones thereof, in a plain and champain Country; especially seeing the biggest of its stones exceed not 12 Tun weight, and many of them not 2 Tun; and that the distance from Rockley, and Aibury, from whence, it seems, they were fetched, to the place where they were set up, is not above 20 miles at most? You'll object, perchance; that those mighty works were performed by Nations, among which were many excellent Mathematicians, and great Masters in the Art of Mechaniques, to which all weights are easily movable, and which containeth Demonstrative Rules how the strongest Oak may be torn up by the roots with a Horsehair, as the learned Author of Mathematical Magic hath well observed, and clearly proved, (book 1. chap. 14.): but this of stonehenge by a rude and barbarous people, utterly ignorant of such Machine's and artificial helps. To this, therefore, I answer; That it doth not appear the Danes were so rude, as to have no acquaintance at all with the use of Engines for the elevation of monstrous weights: but rather the contrary, insomuch as their carrying even Rocks themselves from the Seashore to the very heart of their Country, of which I have formerly spoken, sufficiently intimates their being versed in the use of the Leaver, Roller, Wheel, Pulley, Wedge, and Screw, which are fundamental Faculties of Mechaniques, it being scarce conceivable, how otherwise they should raise such portentous Monuments, as they did. But allowing them to have been as Unskilful, as You please, in such Instruments; yet consider how Numerous they were, and how strenuously great swarms of them used to join hands together in such attempts; and you have not forgot the old Verse, Multorum manibus grande levatur onus, Many hands make light work. What prodigious matters may be effected by mere strength and hand-force of great Multitudes, without Rules of Art, may be discerned from the savage Indians; who being destitute of other Mathematics, but what Nature dictated to them, and wanting the advantage of Engines, did yet by their simple toil and indefatigable diligence, remove stones of incredible greatness. For, Acosta (Histor. Indic. lib. 6. cap. 14.) relates, that he measured one stone brought to Tiaguanaco, which was 38 foot long, 18 broad, and 6 thick: and that in their stateliest Edifices were many other of much vaster magnitude.  
To conclude, therefore, with a short review of what hath hithert been delivered at large, and assist your Judgement, by relieving your Memory; considering (1) that of all Nations in the world, none was so much addicted to Monuments of huge and unhewn stones, as the Danes appear to have been, for many hundred of years together; (2) that they used to set such up, not only in their own Country, but in all other places also, wherever the fortune of war had at any time made their adventures and achievements memorable; and more particularly in England and Scotland; (3) that in Denmark, at this day, there stand many stupendious Piles of stones, in most particulars agreeing with that, of which I have now discoursed; (4) that upon a strict and impartial inquest, neither the ancient Britain's, nor Romans, nor Saxons, are found to have any justifiable title to the honour of founding that of stonehenge; (5) that no one of our old Historians made mention of any such work, until long after the Danes had acquired the Sovereign Power in this Island, and left sundry memorial of their victorious Aimies; (6) that the great impairment of the Fabric since that time of the Danique conquest, doth not evince it to be of greater antiquity; (7) that neither the Magnificence of the same, at first; (8) nor the vastness of strength, and skill in Engines, required to the transportation and elevation of stones of such prodigious weight; are sufficient Arguments to the contrary: considering these things, I say, why may I not conjecture, that the Danes, and only the Danes were the Authors of stonehenge? Sure I am of thus much, that this Opinion of mine, if it be erroneous, is yet highly plausible: having this advantage over the others concerning the same obscure subject, that it is not so easily to be refuted. Nor is it arrogancy in me, to affirm, that if I have been deceived in entertaining this conceit in the place of Truth; it was because I found it in the livery and colours of Truth. However, I expect you should consider; it is no dishonour to even the best Marksman, not to hit the white, when he is forced to shoot in the dark. Which consideration being alone sufficient to secure my wel-intended endeavours, from too severe and disingenuous censure, in case it shall hereafter be discovered, that I have been mistaken in the Main thing sought after, namely, the Authors of our Antiquity: I doubt not, but your Candour will extend it also to the favourable construction of my suppositions concerning the Circumstances.  
In the strength of this confidence, therefore, I adventure to acquaint you moreover with my conjecture concerning the TIME, when stonehenge was first set up: which I take to be in the beginning of the reign of that Excellent Prince, Alfred, or Alured; who as he was the first anointed King of this Island, so was he the first Learned King, and most munificent Patron to Scholars, that ever swayed the Sceptre of Britain. For, all our Chronicles agreeingly deliver, that He was scarcely seated in his throne, when there came over greater swarms of Danes, than ever before, to infest his dominions; and that after many unfortunate battles with them, he was reduced to that extremity, that leaving his large Monarchy to the rage and rapine of those insulting Pagans, he fled for safety of his life into the Marshes of Sommersetshire, where for two years he lay concealed in a poor disguise, sustaining himself by fishing and fowling. Among other adventures that befell this glorious person in this dark Eclipse, it is not unworthy remembrance, that on a time as he was sitting in the chimney corner in the cottage of a Cowherd (who had entertained him into his service) and busied in trimming his bow and arrows; a Cake of dough lying to be baked on the hearth before him, chanced to be burned; which the goodwife imputing to his neglect, in great fury cast away his bow and arrows, and sharply checking him, said; Thoufellow, dost thou see the bread burn before thy face, and wilt not turn it? and yet thou art glad to eat it, be sore it be half baked. Shortly after this, learning policy from adversity, and deriving courage from necessity; he ventured, in the habit of a common Minstrel, to enter into the Danes Camp (in Wiltshire, and probably not far from the place, where stonehenge stands) and having viewed the manner of their encamping, and observed their security, he returned back to several of his Lords retreated into the Island called Edlingsey, environed with two Rivers, Thane and Parrot, in Somersetshire, and acquainting them in how careless and open a posture he found the Enemy; recollected the scattered remains of his forces, and with these surprising the Danes, and putting them first into a panic terror, and then to flight, gave them so considerable a defeat, that they immediately submitted to a Treaty, and delivered Hostages for performance of conditions.  
Now, considering the extreme low ebb of Fortune, to which this excellent King was at that time brought; and the high flood of prosperity that in the mean while had advanced the Danes over all parts of his Dominions, insomuch that nothing seemed wanting to complete their conquest, but only to find out the few Defendants who remained in obscurity; and withal reflecting upon the former mentioned Custom of that: ambitious and martial Nation, to erect Courts Royal of huge stones, according to the manner described, for the Election of their Kings, in all Countries, where the happy success of their Arms had given them a title to Sovereignty: I am apt to believe, that having then overrun the whole Kingdom, except only Somersetshire, and encamping their main Army in Wiltshire, for near upon two years together; and setting up their rest in a confidence to perpetuate their newly acquired power; they employed themselves, during that time of leisure and jollity, in erecting stonehenge, as a place wherein to elect and inaugurate their supreme Commander, King of England: the weakness of the distressed Alfred affording them a fit opportunity, and that country yielding them fit materials for so great and stupedious a work. Nor is it improbable, that the great supinity and disorder, in which the Royal Spy found them, when the magic of his Fiddle had charmed them into an imperception of the majesty of his person, and procured him a free welcome into their Camp; might be occasioned by the jubilee they celebrated, after they had finished that laborious task, and therein newly crowned their King, after a triumphal manner, such as at once corresponded with the fashion of their Ancestors, and expressed the profuseness of their public joy. For many of our Historians relate, that the Danish Army was at that time let loose to luxury and revelling; and that the unknown Musician was brought to play before their King, Gormund, in his tent, during a long and magnificent feast. But, perhaps, I may be thought too bold, in daring, from such slender passages and circumstantial hints, thus precisely to guests at the Age of this Antiquity; concerning whose Original neither History, nor Tradition hath left any glimpse of light, whereby the inquisitive might be guided through the darksome vale of Uncertainty, to the delightful mansion of Truth. Leaving every man, therefore, to the liberty of his own thoughts, touching this particular, as also whatever else hath been said of the Monument itself, and its original Designation; I here put a period to this Discourse, wherein though I have adventured to contend with Oblivion; I had no design to usurp upon the Judgement of others.  
〈◊〉