Hence I find, that where the stones are 15, 16, or 17 feet high above ground, and as much broad, as for the most part they are, about 43 _English_ feet measures, from the center of one stone to the center of another; there the square of the solid or stone is ten cubits, the void or interval is 15: the whole central distance 25. Therefore the proportion of the solid to the void is as two to three. But before I found out this key to the work, I met with a good deal of difficulty, because the central intervals and the voids were different, for they proportion’d these to the breadths of the stones, as above. Still they chose whole numbers of cubits for that proportion; for instance, in the stones at the northern and modern entrance, where they are but of a moderate bulk, you measure but about 27 feet central distance. This is 16 cubits. Further I observ’d, they took care to make a reasonable gradation, between greater and lesser stones, not to set a great stone and a little one near one another, but make a gradual declension; by this means in the whole, the eye finds no difference. The proportion of solid and void being the same, the whole circle appears similar and altogether pleasing. I thought it adviseable to give a plate of a very small part of this magnificent circle, being 3 stones now standing _in situ_. ’Tis a most august sight, and whence we may learn somewhat of the appearance of the whole. I observ’d further, that as these stones generally have a rough and a smoother side; they took care to place the most sightly side of the stone inwards, toward the included _area_. For this vast circle of stones is to be understood, as the portico inclosing the temple properly. Between this circle and the ditch is an esplanade or circular walk quite round, which was extraordinary pretty when in its perfection. It was originally 25 cubits broad, equal to the central distances of the stones. The quickset hedges now on the place, sometimes take the range of the stones, sometimes are set on the verge of the ditch. Further I observ’d they set the largest and handsomest stones in the more conspicuous part of the temple, which is that southward, and about the two entrances of the avenues. Out of this noble circle of stones 100 in number, there was left in the year 1722, when I began to write, above 40 still visible: whereof 17 were standing, 27 thrown down or reclining. Ten of the remainder all contiguous, were at once destroy’d by _Tom Robinson_, _anno_ 1700, and their places perfectly levelled, for the sake of the pasturage. In the north entrance of the town one of the stones, of a most enormous bulk, fell down, and broke in the fall. ——_nec ipso monte minor procumbit_.—— Virg.