North Prospect from Stonehenge
P. a barrow open’d by Lord Pembroke. S. by W. Stukeley.
CHAP. III.
The admeasurement of the ground-plot; and outer circle of the temple, and imposts over it. Of the principal line of the work, running down the avenue, and single entrance, into the area, or court. The imposts are jointed exquisitely by mortaise and tenon. The temple at Persepolis a building of this sort.
LET us now set about an examination of the measures of the temple itself. Take a staff 10 foot 4 inches and ¾ long. Divide it into six equal parts. These are the cubits of the ancients. Each cubit is divided into six parts. These are palms. Thus have we the original measure of the founders of Stonehenge. We will take Mr. Webb’s measures, and compare ’em herewith. [Tab. XI.] the ground-plot.
Mr. Webb says, p. 55. that the whole work of Stonehenge being of a circular form, is 110 foot in diameter. But to be precise, ’tis 108 and somewhat more, and his own scale in his ground-plot shows the same. This is the diameter from outside to outside, which in our ground-plot is the principal diameter. The thickness of the stones of the outward circle, he says, p. 59. are 3 foot and an half. Hence the inner diameter becomes almost 102 feet English. If the reader pleases to measure 102 feet upon the comparative scales, which I gave of the English foot and Hebrew cubit, being the measure us’d by the Druids, or in the scales at the bottom of the ground-plot, he will find that it amounts exactly to 60 cubits. 30 cubits being the radius wherewith they struck the circle upon the turf, which is the inner circumference of that work. That sufficiently defin’d their ground-plot. For tho’ they intended in general, that the thickness of the stones of this outer circle should be 3 foot and a half; but to speak more properly, 2 cubits (which is the same measure) yet they were more careful of one side only, of that dimension. And the chief business being withinside this temple, they set the best face of the stones inwards, upon that ground-line; the other face was suited as well as the scantlings they could get, best answer’d. Webb’s 3 foot and a half is precisely 3 foot 5 inches, and somewhat more, making compleatly 2 Druid cubits, as you find by the scales. They that carefully view Stonehenge, will easily see, that the stones of the inside both of the outward circle and of the cell, are the smoothest, best wrought, and have the handsomest appearance. For so the polite architects of the eastern part of the world, bestow’d more elegance within their temples than without. Not as our modern London builders, who carve every moulding, and crowd every ornament, which they borrow out of books, on the outside of our publick structures, that they may more commodiously gather the dust and smoke. The truth is, good sense and observation of nature, produces the same ideas in all ages and all nations. Our Druids observ’d, that God almighty in forming the body of a man, made all the external parts great, bold, round, with ornament sufficient; but where the beauty chiefly consisted in the fitness of the proportions, in symmetry and plainness. In the inside, he has display’d all the minutiæ of divine skill. They have done the like, according to their way, in Stonehenge. So even as to the outward appearance, I find they took care to set those stones that had the best outward face, toward the front or entrance. And to embarrass the general scheme of the work, they made use of two centers instead of one, but 2 cubits distance from one another; perhaps to make the thing intricate and as magical: besides the advantage it gives to the oval form of the included cell.
Observe, in laying down the ground-plot and projecting this outer circle, we said it was 110 feet, (gross measure) in diameter. We remember what is before-mention’d, that the learned Greaves measur’d two galleries in the greater pyramid, in like manner, each 110 feet. So the bishop of London says, from the grand entrance of Stonehenge, to the work is 35 yards: so he says the diameter of the circle at Rowldrich in Oxfordshire, is 35 yards: all this while 60 Druid or Egyptian cubits are meant. So the length of Solomon’s temple was 60 cubits, whereof the Ædes 40 cubits, the sanctum sanctorum 20.
The intention of the founders of Stonehenge was this. The whole circle was to consist of 30 stones, each stone was to be 4 cubits broad, each interval 2 cubits. 30 times 4 cubits is twice 60: 30 times 2 cubits is 60. So that thrice 60 cubits compleats a circle whose diameter is 60. A stone being 4 cubits broad, and 2 cubits thick is double the interval, which is a square of 2 cubits. Change the places between the stones and their intervals, and it will make a good ground-plot for a circular portico of Greek or Roman work. For supposing these intervals to be square plinths of 2 cubits each side, and columns properly set upon them: it will admit of 3 diameters for the intercolumniation, which is the diastyle manner in architecture. But to talk of pycnostyle with Mr. Webb, and call these stones of ours pillars or pillasters, where they are twice as broad as the space between them, and to call this an order, is monstrous.
Thus a stone and an interval in this outward circle of Stonehenge, makes 3 squares; 2 allotted to the stone, 1 to the interval; which for stability and beauty withal, in such a work as ours, is a good proportion. The curiosity of the work, and the general orthography of the outward circle, I have design’d in [Plate XII.] and it may be seen in the seven stones now remaining at the grand entrance. [Tab. V.] Which show what strictly was the intent of the founders, and where they took the liberty to relax of that strictness, and that with judgment; so as to produce a good effect. I shall explain it from Mr. Webb’s own measures, that I may give the truth its full advantage. P. 59. he says, the stones which made the outward circle are 7 foot in breadth. Observe that 7 foot makes 4 cubits of the Druids. He says, they are 15 foot and a half high. You find that exactly 9 cubits. P. 61. he says, the architraves lying round about upon them, are 2 foot and a half high, i. e. our cubit and half. He mentions their breadth to be 3 foot and half, equal to the thickness of the upright, i. e. our two cubits. They are jointed in the middle of each perpendicular stone. Hence tho’ he has not mention’d the length of these architraves, we gather them to be 6 cubits long. This is spoke of their inward length, for outwardly they must needs be somewhat longer, as being an ark of a larger circle. I must observe about these architraves, as Mr. Webb calls them, that they are more properly call’d imposts or cornishes; for they are not made to support any thing above them, as is the nature of an architrave, but for the stability and ornament of what supports them, which is the nature of imposts and cornishes. Tho’ these bodies of stone here, never had or were intended to have, any mouldings upon them, like Greek and Roman works; they are wrought perfectly plain, and suitable to the stones that support them. I observe further, the chizeling of our upright stones, is only above ground. For the 4 or 5 foot in length below ground, is left in the original natural form. And that the upright stones are made very judiciously to diminish a little, every way; so that at top they are but 3 cubits and a half broad, and so much narrower as to suffer their imposts, to hang over a little, or project (in properer terms) over the heads of the uprights, both within side and without. By this means these uprights are in much less danger of falling or swerving any way: and the imposts, which are not broader than the thickness of the stones at bottom, which support them, have a graceful effect, by projecting a little, without danger of surcharging them. We see here plain, natural, easy geometry, what we may call the first rudiment of art, deduc’d from common reason: but they that can find any Roman delicacy herein, must, I freely own, have a much nicer eye and taste, than I can pretend to. The Druids had, from patriarchal times, made their altars or temples of rude unpolish’d stones. But now hearing, probably from Phœnician traders, of the glories of Solomon’s temple, at least of other temples made artfully in imitation of it; such as those of Sesostris in Egypt, and others about Phœnicia: they thus made a small approach to square scantlings and stones wrought. And this seems to have been the first and the last work of theirs of this kind, that I can hear of, either in the Britanic isles, or on the continent. And no doubt but it must give them so high a reputation, that even the people of Gaul themselves could not help owning to Cæsar, that the discipline of these men was first begun here, and carry’d on with such success, that they sent their youth from the continent hither, as to an academy, to be initiated in their learning. We are not to suppose these words are to be strictly taken, as if the Druids here began their institution: but that being an oriental manner of religion, and much different from that on the Gallic continent, what they had of it there, was deriv’d from Britain. It appear’d as much new to them, who were chiefly idolaters, as in many ages preceding, Abraham’s religion appear’d new to the inhabitants of Phœnicia and Egypt: who were then not much tinctur’d with idolatry. Nor, probably, had the Druids much opportunity of building another such work, as Stonehenge, between its foundation and the Roman times. Because, I apprehend, the encroachments of the Gallic nations from the continent, seating themselves in Britain, about 200 years before Cæsar’s invasion, had molested the Druids much, in these southern counties: and drove them with the old Britons, farther northward and westward. But of this we will treat more particularly afterwards, when we offer our opinion, of the time when it was made.
Stukeley delin.