of the mark when cut on the face of the stones, and reduces its meaning in this usage to what Da Silva supposes them to be,-mere marks for the identification of work done. It would also be possible for the stones prepared by some of the masons being so built into the wall that not one example of their marks would remain visible. As a personal badge for use on a seal or for any other such purpose, the value of the mark naturally remained as great as ever. Nothing but the careful examination of a number of buildings will satisfactorily settle this point, which does not seem to have been the same in every country. I have quoted Mr. Waller with regard to Gloucester, and such an opinion is decisive with regard to at least one English cathedral; and as far as my own small experience goes, I have rarely found a mark in any position but on the face. Is it possible that upon a certain number of stones each workman cut his mark, and on the remainder of the same batch the mark was painted, like those of very ancient times already mentioned ?

I cannot agree with the opinion given by Gwilt (Encyclop. of Architecture, 1876, p. 130), that "the "marks which by some have been supposed to be

personal marks of the masters of the works, but "which are in fact nothing more than directions to "the setters, and, indeed, are used by masons up to "the present hour." They certainly have other uses, and although this solution is eminently practical, it is the result probably of confusion between two kinds of marks. I think few persons, looking at the very elaborate and beautifully-cut designs so often found, would ever believe for a moment that so much skill, trouble, and time would be wasted for so simple an object. That there was a kind of mark used for this purpose is clear. Prof. Hayter Lewis, in the admirable paper read before the

Lodge Quatuor Coronati (p. 68), already quoted, mentions some marks "from the beds of the decayed "stones which had to be removed from the west "front of Wells. They are less elaborate than "usual, and I think it likely that they marked the "intended position of the stones." He has very kindly furnished me with copies of these marks, thirteen in number; one of them, a form of the letter, occuring twice. Mr. J. T. Irvine, who copied them, states that the stones upon which they were found were so decayed that they had to be removed; and that there must be many more, as no stone was removed which could possibly be preserved.

These marks would date from the thirteenth century, and certainly to some extent resemble masons' marks. From the drawings, I should imagine they were much more rudely cut than the ordinary masons' marks of the period.

An interesting example of external key or guide marks for the builders is referred to by Mr. Klotz, the architect of Strasburg Cathedral. (Ann. Arch., iii., 1845, p. 54.) The west door of Reims Cathedral is covered with carving, the decoration being a continuous design. In order to prevent any stone being misplaced, a regular system is used, by which each of the three doorways are distinguished, as well as the sides of each. All the stones for the central door are marked with a crescent and a T; the left-hand door with an arrow-head and a cleaver, the arrow-head marking the left side of the door and the cleaver the righthand side. The position of each stone is also pointed out. For example: the first stone on the left-hand side bears an arrow-head and a foot-sole; the second stone an arrow-head and two soles; to the sixth stone, with the arrow-head and six soles.

On the right-hand side, the cleaver is the fixed mark to indicate the right side, and the number of the foot-soles again varies to mark the courses of the stones. The same system is used for the right door, a pickaxe being the mark for the right-hand side and an A for the left, the courses of the stones are again marked by foot-soles. On the central or great door, the left jamb bears a crescent and the right jamb a L. On both the right and left sides is a circle divided by a cross, which, according to number-like the foot-soles-distinguishes the position of each stone. The same system is followed in the arches, only each stone bears three signs instead of two,-for example: the stones of the right-hand side of the left door are marked with a lozenge, a key, and foot-soles, the latter always marking the course of the stone. The left side of the same arch has a wheel, a key, and foot-soles.

The right-hand side of the right door is distinguished by a crossed circle, the outline of a little house, and foot-soles.

These signs are of course not masons' marks proper, though each of them was used by itself for that purpose elsewhere; they simply show a very curious system of defining the arrangement of stones, where it was specially required.

Colonel Howard Vyse (Pyramids of Gizeh, i., 279-284) quotes, with regard to quarry marks, the observations made by my valued friend, the late Dr. Birch:"A curious sequence of symbols "occurs upon the blocks of the northern and "southern sides of Campbell's Chamber. "The mason has marked upon those of "the south the symbol (fig. 4) 'good' or "'excellent'; perhaps likewise used in Fig. 4"these instances as a cipher, for it is accompanied

"by numerals. The first instance presents (fig. 5) NOFRE, eight,' where the recurved "line indicative of the decimal has probably "been rubbed off, since the block next but Fig. 5. "two in succession has (fig. 6) NOFRE, 21,'

ՓՈ

which would make the number of the preceding block 18.' After 21, a single Fig. 6. "unmarked block occurs, then (fig. 7), "which signifies 'NOFRE, 2, 3.' No analogy "between NOFRE and South has yet been "discovered. The blocks on the opposite quarter are marked with a Koucoupha Fig. 7. sceptre (fig. 8), called gom, or tom, appa"rently with reference to strength, power, &c. "One block bears this symbol by itself, and Fig. 8. the other with the numerals IV. gom. IV. (fig. 9) At the East end the symbol NOFRE again occurs, with some other "marks, apparently numerals, but imperfect "and indistinct, and at the joint is a gazelle "couchant, having before it a sword or glaive."

Fig. 9.

Another form of instructions to the builders was used in India in early times. Mr. C. Horne, in a letter to the Builder (1869, vol. xxvii., p. 504), mentions some Indian masons' marks, from the Buddhist monasteries at Benares, Bukharya, Khùnd, etc., which he states are of the Gupta Dynasty. Many of the stones bore directions in Sanskrit characters, such as right hand, bottom of pillar, upright, etc.

On p. 131 of Gwilt's Cyclopædia will be found what appears to be the generally received opinion of the primary object of marks. "Perhaps the fact of "their occurrence, as in the present day, is simply "due to their being the marks or signs by which "each mason recognizes the particular stone for "the correct workmanship of which he is answer"able." Rather, I would say, by which the head

of the masons recognized the stone prepared by each workman. Chalmers, in the paper already quoted, published in 1852, has recorded some interesting particulars gleaned from masons of his own time."I have often asked intelligent and "experienced masons on what principle, or according to what rule, these marks are formed; "whether they are symbolical, and of what? The "answers I have generally got amount to this: that they are supposed to be as old as the human race itself; that they probably had in early times a "meaning now unknown, and are still regarded "with a sort of reverence, and as something mys"terious; that the only rule for their formation is "that they shall have at least one angle; that the "circle must be avoided, and cannot be a true "mason's mark, unless in combination with some "line that shall form an angle with it; that there "is no distinction of ranks-that is, that there is "no particular class of marks set apart for and assigned to master masons as distinguished from "their workmen; if it should happen that two masons meeting at the same work from distant parts should have the same mark, then one must "for a time assume a distinction, or, as heralds say, 'a difference.'

Last year, when collecting marks in Yorkshire, a working mason of thirty-five years' standing informed me that modern banker-marks, so called from the stone bench upon which the stones are worked, were always cut on the top bed of the stone; that he himself during his apprenticeship used his master's mark, but never cut it in the centre of the stone but always at the right-hand top corner. This he appeared to consider a matter of course, the centre position being reserved for the master mason; the apprentices cutting their marks only in the right and left-hand top corners.