[3] “Dr. Smith says that he has tried a bit of this stone, and found that it would not stand fire.  It is, therefore, very improbable that it should have been used for burnt sacrifices.”

The theory put forward in this article has in late years been upheld by no less an authority than Sir Norman Lockyer, who thinks that the practice of visiting Stonehenge on the longest day of the year—­a pilgrimage that goes back before the beginnings of recorded history, essayed by a country people not addicted to wasting a fine summer morning without some very strong tradition to prompt them—­goes far to bear out the theory that Stonehenge was a solar temple.  If this is so, the mysterious people who erected it were civilized enough to have a good working knowledge of the movement of the heavenly bodies, and probably combined that knowledge with a not unreasonable worship and ritual.  Sir Norman Lockyer’s calculations give the date of the erection as about 1680 B.C.

Lord Avebury considers that it is part of a great scheme for honouring the famous dead, and many modern writers have adopted the same view.  That the Plain near by is a great cemetery is beyond doubt, but then so are more or less all the chalk hills of Britain.

There is more than one explanation of the probable method of the construction of the trilithons.  A writer in the Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine (W.  Long) puts forward the theory that an artificial mound was made in which holes were dug to receive the upright pillars.  When these were in position the recumbent block could easily be placed across the two and, all the trilithons being complete, the earth could be dug away, leaving the stones standing.  Professor Gowland, however, does not favour this view in the light of his recent discoveries and is inclined to credit the builders with a greater knowledge of simple engineering.

[Illustration:  STONEHENGE DETAIL.]

In 1918 Stonehenge, which hitherto had formed part of the Amesbury Abbey estate of Sir Cosmo Gordon Antrobus, was sold to Sir C.H.  Chubb, who immediately presented it to the nation.  The work of restoration is being carried out by the Office of Works, and the Society of Antiquaries are, at their own expense, sifting every cubic inch of ground under those stones that are being re-erected—­to the dismay of many of that body—­in beds of concrete!  Much apprehension has been felt by archaeologists that this renovation will have deplorable results, but it is promised that nothing is to be done in the way of replacement which cannot be authenticated.  At the time of writing the work is still in progress and all is chaos.  When the hideous iron fence is replaced by the proposed ha-ha, or sunk fence, and new sward grows about the old stones the general effect will be greatly improved.  The excavators have re-discovered certain depressions shown in Aubrey’s Map (1666) and which had long since disappeared to outward view.  There is little doubt that they held stones more or less in a circle with the “Slaughter Stone.”  It is conjectured that, as in the case of the inner blue stones, this outer ring was constructed before the more imposing trilithons were erected, perhaps at a period long anterior.  Each of the holes already explored contain calcined human bones.