Transcribed from the Brown & Co., Third (c1890?), edition,
BYTHE
REV. EDWARD DUKE,
M.A., F.G.S., &c.
THIRDEDITION.
SALISBURY:BROWN & CO.
LONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, &CO.
PRICE THREEPENCE.
The first thought which is almost sure to present itself tothe mind of a visitor to Stonehenge is this—can wereasonably fix its age?
The author of the accompanying little pamphlet has endeavouredto answer this question as far as, in his judgment, it admits ofbeing answered.
Lake House, near Salisbury.
Will the precise age of the erection of Stonehenge ever beascertained? It seems very unlikely that it ever willbe. Perhaps it is not desirable that it should be. The mystery which enwraps it in this respect adds not a little tothe imposing grandeur of those weather-beaten stones. Butthough we cannot say exactly how old this wonderful structure is,we may, I think, say with confidence that it is not later than acertain era, i.e., that when the Roman legions invaded ourshores (B.C. 55) Stonehenge wasstanding as now in the midst of Salisbury Plain. To theproof of this I am wishful to draw attention, inasmuch as thepost-Roman theory put forth by the late Mr. James Fergusson hasobtained credence with not a few intelligent persons.
Mr. Fergusson’s well-known work, “Rude StoneMonuments,” contains much interesting information on thesubjects of which he treats, and the facts which he adduces wemay presume to be facts collected with care. But thisproves nothing as to the truth of the inferences which he deducesfrom his premises. The observing faculty and the facultyfor drawing correct conclusions do not always meet in the sameindividual, as was notably the case in the late talented CharlesDarwin with respect to his physical evolution theory. Fergusson confidently maintains, in the work to which I refer,that “Stonehenge was erected as a monument to the memory ofthe British chiefs treacherously slain by Hengist.” He supposes that its building commenced about A.D. 466, and p. 4may have been completed about A.D. 470. And on what authoritydoes he chiefly rely historically for this theory? On themediæval historian Geoffrey of Monmouth, who wrote aboutA.D. 1140. But what does hehimself say of the credibility of this writer? To quote hisown words: “he was a fabulist of the most exuberantimagination” (p. 106), and again he says of him (p. 88),“he is a frail reed to rely upon”; and yet, strangeto say, we find him building much on the uncorroborated statementof Geoffrey that Stonehenge was erected in memory of theslaughter of certain British chiefs.
But no less weak and inconclusive is his reasoning when hebrings his reader within the area of Stonehenge. He pointsattention to the fact that Sir R. C. Hoare had stated in his“Ancient Wilts,” I. p. 150:—“We havefound in digging (within the circle) several fragments of Romanas well as coarse British pottery, part of the head and horns ofdeer an