my law, without audible tongue, was imparted to me by the old giantess darkly smiling in her wrath: but her claim was not regretted when she set sail. I fled, in the form of a fair grain of pure wheat; upon the edge of a coveringcloth, she caught me in her fangs. In appearance she was large as a proud mare,* which she also resembled. There was she swelling out like a ship upon the waters. Into a dark receptacle she cast me. She carried me back into the sea of Dylan. It was an auspicious omen to me when she happily suffocated me. God, the Lord, freely set me at large."+

There are other passages, more or less clear, from Taliesin and other writers, from which may be collected the results which we have described. The subject is altogether, in its various bearings, one of great interest: but, as we are apprehensive it may seem to us more so than to the generality of our readers, we will not pursue it further. It may suffice to intimate the probability that the stone ark [for in some passages it is stated to be of stone], the place of close confinement, the gloomy recess, in which the process of initiation was performed, was no other than the kist-vaen, which may be concluded to have been closed in front on such occasions, and for such purposes. There is certainly nothing else remaining among the Druidical monuments that corresponds to these intimations.

How far the cromlechs and kist-vaens contribute to the illustration of the altars of unhewn stone and the high places mentioned in

Scripture is a point which we may perhaps take another opportunity to consider. Meanwhile, it may be noticed that monuments of this and other classes still exist in Palestine, especially in the country beyond Jordan; although scarcely any of them have been described. Mr. Farren has probably more information on the subject than any other person. In his letter to Lord Lindsay, he says, "On the eastern side of the hills of Jordan, and over the plains of Manasseh and Gad, monuments like those of the Druid age of England still illustrate the rural superstitions of the dim ages, which, denounced in holy writ, were probably imparted to us from them." And Lord Lindsay himself, in one of his 'Letters,' remarks, "Mr. Farren tells me that there are some Phoenician (?) monuments near Soufone of which he showed me a drawing of-as decidedly Druidical as Stonehenge."*

Some of the monuments thus referred to are doubtless the same which attracted the attention of Captains Irby and Mangles near the river Jordan, on approaching that river by a new route from Souf to Bysan (Bethshan). That they call them "tombs," we suppose is on the theory that kist-vaens were sepulchres. They state:

"On the banks of the Jordan, at the foot of the mountain+ we observed some very singular, interesting, and certainly very ancient tombs (?), composed of great rough stones, resembling what is called Kit's Cotty House in Kent. They are built of two long side stones, with one

only five feet. This is occasioned by both the front and back stones being considerably with in the ends of the side ones. There are about twenty-seven of these tombs, very irregularly situated."

Another monument, frequently associated with cromlechs in the centre of Druidical circles, is a large block, or upright stone, which Toland supposes was the pedestal of the idol. It is possible that it might have been such in its ultimate use, and the throne upon the rocky mass, in the open temple near Tartous, gives some support to this conjecture; but we have already expressed the conviction that all these stone monuments were in use long anterior to idols. Cooke conjectures that such upright stones formed the keblu, marking the point to which all attention was to be turned in worship. In this case they were doubtless the stones of observation, that is, observable stones, or stones to be looked to, which, among others, the Israelites were forbidden to set up. Being thus looked to as the point of attention in the most solemn act of worship, they came gradually to be regarded as in themselves the object of worship, and hence the interdiction. With this knowledge, the Syriac and Onkelos render the original in this text by "stones of adoration." From the universal use of a kebla, which even among Mohammedans is still a stone, in the worship of the East, we have no doubt that a kebla was among the stony apparatus of Druidical worship; but it may seem doubtful whether this or the kist-vaen were the true kebla of local worship. The form certainly would seem rather in favour of this stone, especially when the observations which have already been made respecting the veneration paid to such stones are brought to bear upon those which are thus situated.

But, whatever may have been the religious purpose of these stones, their civil use may be collected without much difficulty.

The view taken by Mr. King would lead one to conclude that this stone was the station of the chief person on civil occasions, and was especially used for inaugurations. According to his theory, indeed, the circles in which such pillars only are found, without altars, were solely appropriated to civil uses; but, according to the view which we have been induced to take, as explained in a former note (p. 404), we should rather suppose that, in those cases where the stone alone appears, it owes its longer preservation than the altar which (we assume) once existed near it, to the fact that the judicial and

civil use of these circles was preserved long after the religious use was discontinued. That the stones in question were employed for the purpose which Mr. King alleges, we are very willing to believe, for such an appropriation is more in agreement with Scripture, and supplies a larger amount of Scriptural illustration, than any other which could be proposed.

This ingenious antiquarian thinks that the most complete stone of this kind seems to be that described by Borlase, at Boscawen in Cornwall. In some cases the stones are such as those on which the chief person, or a prince to be inaugurated, might be supposed to sit or stand; while others are such as, by their form, could only mark the station at or near which he was to stand or sit. Of both customs,-standing or sitting upon a stone, and sitting or standing by a pillar, ample historical evidence may be produced, and may indeed be traced down to recent times, if not to the present day. Thus, in the Western Islands, where, from their sequestered situation, old customs have longer been preserved than in our island, remains of the crowning or inauguration stone are still found. In the isle of Isla there was fixed a large stone seven feet square, in which was a cavity or deep impression to receive the feet. Standing on this stone, with his feet in the cavity, Macdonald stood when he was crowned king of the Isles, and, thus standing, swore to continue all his vassals in the possession of their lands, and to render exact justice to all his subjects. Having thus sworn, the sword of his father was put into his hands, and the Bishop of Argyle, assisted by seven priests, anointed him king in the presence of all the heads of the clans in the isles and in the continent [as they call the larger isle of Great Britain]; and at the same time an orator rehearsed a catalogue of his ancestors. Here also sat the high court of judicature, consisting of fourteen members, to which there was an appeal from all the courts of the isles; and the eleventh share of the sum in debate was the due of the principal judge.* We have in all this a very remarkable instance of the preservation of ancient customs, which seem to have been derived from times coeval with the erection of the circle of stones.

Spenser affirms that among the Irish of his time, immediately after the death of any of their chiefs or captains, it was their custom to assemble in a well-known and appointed place to choose another, who was not generally the eldest son, but the next of blood who was eldest and worthiest. Him they placed upon

Martin's Western Islands,' p. 9.

a stone, which commonly stood upon a hill. Some of the stones used for this purpose bore the impress of a foot, said to be the measure of that of their first chief or captain. Standing thus, the elected chief took an oath to maintain the old laws and customs of the country. A wand was then presented to him by a proper officer, bearing which in his hand, he descended from the stone, and turned himself around thrice forward and thrice backward.*

We are greatly pleased with this statement, as it conveys the only satisfactory account we have met with of the stones, found in different parts of the world, bearing the impress of feet. These are nowhere more common than in Palestine and in other countries of southwestern Asia; and, the original use being forgotten, the impress which such stones bear have been ascribed by the superstitions of the people to their several saints and holy persons -Adam, Elias, Mohammed, and others. Some of these impressed stones, objects of high veneration to the people, have been noticed in the descriptive portion of the present work.

Of this use of erected stones for purposes of inauguration there are many instances in Scripture. But, as they are duly noticed in the history, it will suffice to indicate the passages in which these instances are offered.

Indeed a marked instance of this use of a stone in a temple is continued very conspicuously to this very day in the case of the stone under the chair in which our sovereigns are

View of the State of Ireland.'

+ Judges ix. 6; 1 Sam. xi. 14, 15; 1 Sam. xiii. 4, 22; 1 Kings i. 9; 2 Kings xi. 14, 17; 2 Kings xxiii. 3.

crowned. This is supposed to be the same stone on which the supreme kings of Ireland were to be inaugurated in the times of heathenism on the hill of Tarah. It was a persuasion of the ancient Irish that one of their blood should reign in whatever country this stone remained. Hence it was sent to confirm the Irish colony in the north of Britain, where it always continued to form the coronation chair of the Scottish kings, until it was removed by our Edward I. from Scone, and placed under the coronation chair in Westminster Abbey, where it has ever since remained, being, as Toland observes, "the ancientest respected monument in the world; for, although some others may be more ancient as to duration, yet thus superstitiously regarded they are not."*

Although we have in most instances cited the authorities we have had occasion to produce, a collected view of them may not be useless:

Stukeley, Abury and Stonehenge; Rowland, Mona Antiqua Restaurata; Borlase, Antiquities of Cornwall; King, Munimenta Antiqua; Hoare, Ancient History of Wiltshire; Olaus Magnus, Epitome Hist. de Gent. Septentrionalibus, 1588; Olaus Wormius, Danicorum Monumenta, 1643; Toland, History of the Celtic Religion and Learning; Pelloutier, Histoire des Celtes; Mallet, Northern Antiquities, translated by Bishop Percy; Davies, Mythology of the Druids; Cooke, Inquiry into the Patriarchal and Druidical Religions, Temples, &c.; Asplin, Alkibla; Faber, Origin of Pagan Idolatry; Ancient Universal History, b. iv. ch. 25, seet. 2 (vol. xviii.); Fosbroke, Encyclopædia of Antiquities; Archæologia, passim; Brayley, Graphic Illustrator; Maundrell, Journey from Aleppo to Damascus; Pococke, Description of the East; Ouseley, Travels in the East; Irby and Mangles, Travels; Buckingham, Travels among the Arab Tribes; Lord Lindsay, Letters on the Holy Land. Some curious intimations on the general subject of such monuments as have engaged our attention may also be gathered from Major Moor's Oriental Fragments.' He calls them Hindruidic,' and in all cases contends for their Oriental origin.