Harris sculp
The Geometrical Ground plot of Stonehenge
Viro doctissimo et Britan̄icæ Antiquitatis peritissimo Rogero Gale Ar̄. Geometriæ Celticæ specimen dedicat W Stukeley 1723
There are but nineteen of the whole number left; but eleven of them are standing in situ. There are five in one place standing contiguous, three in another, two in another. The walk between these two circles, which is 300 foot in circumference, is very noble and very delightful. Probably it gave Inigo Jones the idea of designing that fine circular portico, which is one great beauty, among many, in his drawings for White-hall, publish’d lately from the originals by my Lord Burlington; who has a true notion of the extraordinary merit of that great man: and very commendably has reviv’d his memory. Such a circular portico put in execution, would have a marvellous effect, much exceed a common gallery in use, because ’tis a perpetual walk, without turning back, and well becomes a royal residence. The best view of this sort, to be had from our work, is from the north, as in [Tab. XVII.] the reader cannot but observe, how little pretence here is for an imitation of Greek or Roman portico’s, notwithstanding the grand and agreeable curve of the outward circle. But when we see the disproportion of the inner circle in regard to any purpose of this sort, we must own the invention of Hermogenes in contriving the pseudo-dipteros, is here apply’d with an ill grace. The founders of Stonehenge cou’d have no need of make-shifts for want of room on Salisbury plain. Or how could a concentric row of little stones, or pillars if he will so have it, bear any resemblance to the contrivance of Hermogenes, which consisted in having none; in taking away the whole inner row of pillars, so as to add to the convenience of room, and preserve the aspect, at the same time? Most undoubtedly the Druids had no further meaning in it, than to make use of the even numbers of 30 greater stones, and 40 lesser stones; and this was to produce a more perplexed variety, by the interstices having no regard to one another. So far were they from having a notion of Grecian beauty, in the pillars of circular portico’s being set on the same radius; pillar answering to pillar, intercolumniation to intercolumniation. And this will be shown repeatedly in the progress of this work, to be the common practice of the Druids in other like instances.
But when we consider the cell, as Mr. Webb names it, we find him guilty of great disingenuity, in ill conceiving the form of it, and in distorting his ground-plots, to colour it over the better. The minute you enter this adytum, as in [Tab. XVIII.] you discover ’tis not a hexagon, nor ever was intended for one, and there can be no greater absurdity than to imagine it one. It is in truth compos’d of certain compages of stones, which I shall call trilithons, because made, each of two upright stones, with an impost at top: and there are manifestly 5 of these trilithons remaining. But the naked eye easily discovers, they are very far from making 5 sides of a hexagon. They cannot be brought to any approach, of a truly circular polygon. 3 trilithons of the 5 are remaining entire, 2 are ruin’d indeed, in some measure, but the stones remain in situ. And nothing is easier, than to take the ground-plot, from symmetry and correspondency. We see the two trilithons on the wings or sides of the adytum, are set almost in a strait line, one of another; when in a hexagon form, they ought to make a considerable angle. If you examine them trigonometrically, the true angle of an hexagon is 120 degrees, but here is an angle of near 150. And by making it an hexagon, he supposes one trilithon entirely gone, that nearest the grand entrance, when there is not the least appearance that ever there were such stones there. No cavity in the earth, no stump or fragment visible, nor is it easy to imagine, how 3 stones of so vast a bulk could have been clean carried away, either whole or in pieces. There is no room for them to have been carried away whole, no traces of their having been thrown down, broke in pieces and so carried away. This outer side of the work being the most perfect of the whole. Of the ruins of the other trilithons, there is not the least part wanting. What has been thrown down and broke, remains upon the spot. But this trilithon in dispute, must needs have been spirited away, by nothing less than Merlin’s magic, which erected it, as the monks fable. Besides, if it were still standing, it would be very far from making this adytum a regular hexagon, to which he has accommodated his peripteros scheme: p. 87. Further, granting it was a regular hexagon, it would be very far from corresponding with that scheme, or have the least appearance, of its being taken from such a one. For our editor there, has converted the cell quite from the nature of that at Stonehenge. He has made the upper end of his cell at the letter H opposite to the grand entrance G, not a trilithon as it is notoriously at Stonehenge, but an angular interval between 2 trilithons. It is not the side of the figure, but the angle. Whereas it is most notorious at Stonehenge, that the upper end of the adytum opposite to the grand entrance, and to the whole length of the avenue and entrance between it and the area, is a trilithon; not an angle or interval. And that trilithon is exceeding stately, tho’ in ruins, one of the upright stones being fallen, the other leaning. So that here, we have the cell converted full a 6th part of the whole compass, from its true and original situation, and so in all the schemes of Mr. Webb’s book, not one excepted. In that, for instance, Scheme I, p. 56, the high altar is plac’d at D not against a trilithon, as it ought to be, opposite to the grand entrance in the front of the temple, and to the (only) entrance below, into the area, but against an angle between two. If then you suppose that hexagon remov’d back a 6th part, so as that a trilithon be set behind the high altar, as it is really in the thing its self, and upon the principal diameter of the whole work: then this absurd consequence follows, that the opposite trilithon of the cell stands in the very midst of the entrance into the cell, upon the same principal ground-line or diameter of the work, and quite obstructs the view and entrance into it. It is altogether as ridiculous, as if a dead wall was built under St. Paul’s organ-loft, which is and ought to be the chief entrance into the choir. Besides, by Webb’s ground-plots and uprights, it seems as if, when you entered this adytum, there were 3 trilithons on the right, and 3 on the left, whereas it is most obvious, there are but two on the right, and two on the left; when you advance into it, the orderly way, from the north-east grand entrance of the avenue; which he himself p. 55. owns to be the principal. But I am tired of so ungrateful a talk, which necessity alone could have extorted from me.
P. 22. TAB. XII.
The Orthography of Stonehenge