irregular distances, are several smaller stones disturbed and broken up by the masons building the house of Nant y Clawdd....A crûg, or tumulus, of large circumference adjoins the temple....A wide flat, now a turbary, surrounds it....The large stones are not the stones of the country." He adds that the sea at high water is visible from this point.

A general plan of the so-called temple (for even the good vicar doubted its having been an observatory) is here given in cut No. 1. What the whole arrangement was at the time that this description was given must be considered ambiguous. The crûg, or mound, has entirely vanished, for it is almost impossible that the one Mr. Lewis saw could have covered the principal group of stones now remaining, as the cromlech he describes is certainly the one now remaining, although it is not very easy to identify his account of all the details with those examined by the Association on the occasion of its visit. How far his estimation of the weight of the big stones was correct is also dubious, as that of the one given is certainly much under ten or fifteen tons.

The circle is formed by a low bank which may have been higher. It is rather oval than circular, the diameters being 70 and 50 feet. The rough heap figured in cut 2 is evidently the remains of a ruined cairn once containing a stone cist of some size. Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, are the supporters of the large stone, and most probably those described by Mr. Lewis. 5 and 6 are two large stones in a trench, and which seem to have been parts of the side of the chamber nearest them. The capstone is still supported by four stones as described; but Mr. Lewis mentions four similar but smaller stones of about four or five tons each, which surround it; "but these are all slipt from their respective fulcra, and lie now in a shelving position". This brief account is not very clear, nor is it certain what is meant by "surrounding it". If he meant the chamber, this would not have been practicable, as it

was not detached, as the present remains show. It could not then have been surrounded in the full meaning of the term. It is more likely that the stones 5, 6, were two of them. The other two, now missing, may have been on the opposite side, and served the same purpose, namely, of forming the sides of the chamber. But it may fairly be inferred that they were parts of the sides of the chamber; for not being in contact with or supporting the capstone, they may have been easily removed. It is very rare to find the actual supporters of a capstone to be more than four. They are sometimes only three. All the other stones placed merely to enclose the chamber, and supporting no weight, are generally found wanting, as they could be removed without danger to the rest of the structure.

On referring to the plan (cut No. 1) it will be seen that a line of chambers ran across a part of the circle, something like, although on a much smaller scale and more imperfect condition, to the line of the Trefigneth chambers near Holyhead, so well made known to the public through the description of them by the Hon. W. O. Stanley of Penrhos, illustrated from his accurate drawing. If these were originally three chambers, as those of Trefigneth, there must have been much difference in their size and importance. They have, however, been so disturbed and dislocated that it is not certain whether they formed one long, continuous, or three smaller and separate ones. Both systems were practised, although in Wales we have no instances like those of the elongated chambers in France and Spain.

In addition to this group, a few large stones are scattered about in the other part of the circle. They are possibly the relics of another chamber or chambers which must have been removed long before 1800, as otherwise Mr. Lewis could hardly have passed them over. does, indeed, mention a crûg or tumulus; and that it existed in his time there can be no doubt. He describes it as near the Temple, and surrounded by "a wide, flat

He

turbary". The ground now surrounded by the present circle was boggy even in August, and must be the wide, flat turbary mentioned. But in describing his temple, Mr. Lewis evidently confines himself to the chamber given in cut 3, and takes no notice of the continuation of chambers to the further edge of the circle. How is the omission to be explained? The only explanation that can be offered is that the whole line had been originally buried under a long mound of earth, only one part of which had been removed at some early time, the other portion being still covered while Mr. Lewis lived. It would in this case certainly adjoin the temple, and would be surrounded by a flat turbary. Its disappearance, however, within this century, is remarkable.

It is true the same remarks might apply to a tumulus covering the five or six large detached stones; but its removal within so short a space of time must have been still more rapid. All that can be positively affirmed is that these chambers were at one time covered up. Whether a second chamber stood where the detached stones now lie is uncertain; but probably there was, as the grouping together chambers within an enclosed space is common enough.

Cut No. 2 represents the third chamber furthest from the large one. A marks two capstones, both dislodged, and resting one end on the ground. A third (marked 2), and still smaller, inclines in the opposite direction. Portions of the original carn still remain as shown in the cut, so that the size of this smaller chamber is tolerably clear. The space between this and the large chamber is occupied by stones in such confusion that nothing except the length of the supposed chamber now destroyed can be ascertained. That the whole line once comprehended three distinct chambers seems much more likely than that it consisted of a large chamber with a covered passage leading to it.

Imperfect as the monument in its present state is, yet it is of considerable interest as adding one more confirmation of the circle-theory so elaborately set forth

by the learned and judicious Dr. Stuart in his valuable volumes of The Sculptured Stones of Scotland.

Mr. Lewis remarks that the stones of the principal chamber are not those of the district, but have been brought from some distant spot. No very great importance can attach to such a circumstance. They were probably the nearest at hand available for the work. When it is remembered what immense weight the bearers must carry, and what care was taken that the resting-places of the dead should be as secure and lasting as possible, great caution would be required in their selection.

On the way to Ystrad, on the left hand of the road leading to Carmarthen, are four stones, one of which is smaller than the others. The stone to the right is of coarse grit; the small one and the stone next to it are of quartz-conglomerate, the largest one being of old red sandstone. The three largest ones formed the walls of a chamber, and may have aided in supporting the capstone. Their denudation is complete, nor is there the slightest vestige of the former mound. The variety of character of the stone is probably the result of chance. (Cut No. 4.)

Within the grounds of Ystrad are two or three ancient pillar-stones, one of which was said to have been Roman, but is an ordinary maenhir. They are not remarkable as regards dimensions. No other remains exist near them. They may, perhaps, have been ancient boundary-stones, but are more likely to be ordinary meini hirion.

On the left hand of the road from Llanboidy Church to Dolwilym is a more important group (cut 5), concealed by a high and thick hedge from the road. The stones lie in a field called "Parc y Bigwrn", a portion of Pensarn Farm. The original chamber is easily made out, although only two of its stones remain erect. The fallen ones, with the exception of one, have not been removed, so that their original position, when upright, is easily ascertained. The stones average about 7 feet