We made a small investigation, of the ditch and rampart, by cutting a trench 3 ft. wide from one of the Aubrey holes through the rampart till we met the edge of the ditch. We found the vallum to be a very low one of chalk and rubble, only 2 ft. 6 in. high from its crest to the chalk rock. Just under the humus were three sarsen chips, ten of foreign stone, and two small pieces of Romano-British pottery. These were all that were found.

We continued the trench 9 ft. farther to the opposite side of the ditch, meeting the solid chalk beyond. We excavated this part of the ditch and found it 39 in. deep, measured from the centre of the ditch to ground-level. At 12 in. from the top we found five sarsen chips, thirty-two of foreign stone, three rough flints, one flint flake, a small piece of Bronze Age pottery, and two of Romano-British, also a strap ornament of bronze and a bronze bead, also of the Roman period.

In the next layer down to 22 in. were two sarsen chips, six of foreign stone, seven of bone, three pieces of Romano-British pottery, one flint flake, and a Lee-Enfield rifle cartridge case at 1 8 in. below ground-level. The next layer down to 30 in. contained five flint flakes and part of a jawbone of a deer.

The lowest layer yielded 14 roughly worked flints, 26 flint flakes, and a fragment of deer antler.

Subsequently we carried the excavation of the ditch farther west in an area 9 ft. by 12 ft. Here we found that the depth of the ditch which had been previously 39 in. increased on the west to 54 in., and probably future excavation may show its course to be similarly irregular. We found no object of interest beyond a cremation in a bowl-shaped cavity in the solid chalk at the bottom on the side below the vallum. Stone chips were present in the upper layers, but disappeared below 25 in., and there were a few rough flints and a deer bone at the lowest level. The edges of the ditch are perpendicular from the humus through hard chaJk to about 24 in. down, where the chalk takes a curve to the bottom, which is roughly flat. From this it rises again in a corresponding curve and meets a corresponding perpendicular chalk bank, from the top of which the vallum begins (fig. 12).

Figure 12. Sections through Rampart and Ditch: No. 1 east end, NO. 2 west end of ditch.

Aubrey's plan does not show the Slaughter Stone lying in its present position, but shows two large upright stones inside the vallum and one outside. These no longer exist, and we have not yet been able to discover their sites as indicated by him. We have only lately been examining this spot, so perhaps a later search may reveal them.

In dealing with the Slaughter Stone [Map] we already knew that Cunnington had examined it in 1801, so we thought it best to remove his spoil from around it to get further information. We found a cavity for about 3 ft. or 4 ft. around the stone, evidently his work, but one could see that the stone had been buried earlier in a pit very roughly dug in the solid chalk and just deep enough to allow the soil to cover it at ground-level. Perhaps the intention had been to bury it deeper, but the hole was not made long enough, consequently the top and bottom rest on sloping chalk and cause a void of about 10 in. under it. This void was filled with dirty rubble containing much modern rubbish, evidendy returned by Cuiinington. There could be little doubt about this, as we found a botde of port wine left under the stone, presumably by him out of consideration for future excavators. The seal was intact, but the cork had decayed and let out nearly all of the contents.

I should have mentioned that those who dug the pit cut into an Aubrey hole on the west close to the stone, but fortunately three parts escaped and it is still well defined. It was full of Cunnington's spoil, so he certainly emptied it, and might have been responsible for the damaged side.

Measurements having been taken, we examined the bank west of the stone, but found hardly any of Cunnington's debris upon it. It was composed of loose rubble, and we were surprised to find it descending well below ground-level : the result being that we came upon a very large hole roughly lo ft. in diameter by 62 ft. deep which we gradually excavated. We found a coin of Claudius Gothicus in the upper layer, but nothing interesting until we reached the bottom, where two deer-horn picks were resting against the curved side (fig. 13).

Figure 13. Sections through Slaugter Stone [Map]: Lower section shows large hole which may have once contained the Slaughter Stone.

There was a large slab of stone standing on end near the middle, resting on the bottom. The material was very soft sarsen which crumbled if pinched between thumb and finger. There can be no doubt that a large stone once stood in the hole, but when it was taken out, and why, cannot be stated. The impressions of irregularities on the stone's base are very noticeable, both on the sides of the hole and upon some firmly compacted rubble on the bottom, which have rather a resemblance to an impression of the base of the Slaughter Stone, but I cannot state definitely if this is so, and the movement of taking the stone out must have distorted some of the impressions. The slab at the bottom appears to be too perishable for a standing stone and may be a piece flaked off a packing block. This is as far as our operations have taken us up to the present time.

I should like to say something about the foreign stones. Possibly they once stood in the Aubrey holes, for if the number of the holes proves to be what we expect there would have been just about sufficient of them to make the inner circle and horseshoe. The Aubrey circle was presumably earlier than Stonehenge, perhaps of the Avebury period, and would have been of undressed stones which were dressed on removal to their present position.

This of course does not bring us any nearer their place of origin, but Mr. Tapp has very kindly undertaken to enlist the services of the Geological Survey on this point.

In conclusion I should like to express my thanks to my friend and colleague Mr. R. S. Newall for the great help he has given throughout the work. He has made all the drawings, and the excavation of the Aubrey holes was all his labour. Also I should like to record my thanks to all the members of the Office of Works staff for their constant and courteous assistance.