extended beyond the point. It seems to me possible that they represent the head of an arrow or javelin. No. 15 is an evident arrow-head, crossed by a vertical line.

No. 16 to 21, to which I have already referred, may be an M. No. 22 to 27 show the same form of sign reversed. It is possible that the letter W is intended, which is found of a somewhat similar form at Veruela and Benavente (twelfth and thirteenth centuries) in Spain. The curved marks, though so different from the usual straight lines, still contain the necessary angle. The two series are so much alike that it is doubtful whether both the letters M and W are intended, or only one of them. I am inclined to think they all have the same basis. No. 26 brings to mind the sail of a boat or a banner. (Cf. fig. 31, p. 168.)

No. 28, commonly called the hour-glass, has also been in use from the earliest times. Commencing with Egypt, it is found in Persia, Syria, England and elsewhere. As Prof. Hayter Lewis says, "in some form very slightly modified, it has been "used in every age down to the present," and, it might have been added, and in almost every country.

Nos. 29 to 35 are all formed on the same basis, but there are marked differences. Nos. 30, 31, 33 and 34 are the simple ordinary form, in different positions. In No. 32, one of the lines has been extended so as to destroy the perfection of the centre triangle; No. 35 is short of one of its legs. These signs are common. They appear at Pompeii, where the marks must have been cut earlier than A.D. 79. No. 29, it will be observed, has been differenced by extending one of the legs, and marking it with a cross line. Curiously enough a very similar mark was sketched from a stone at Pompeii in 1870 by Mr. William Simpson (Trans.

N

Lodge Quat. Coronat., No. 2076, vol. ii., p. 127), with the variation that the cross, instead of forming a portion of the lines of the mark, was cut separately within one of the external angles.

No. 36, a very simple form, I have not yet met with elsewhere. No. 37 seems to be monogramatic, carrying the letter H; it is at the same time the sign No. 35, with a side line added.

No. 38, like No. 15, is upon a loose stone, and brings to mind some of the loose straggling marks at Gloucester (eleventh century) and on some of the Cheshire churches. If not a form of monogram, it seems to be a combination of two marks.

No. 39 is somewhat similar, and is of a most unusual form. The number of angles they both contain appear to be purposely arranged.

It is a

No. 40 resembles the Arabic numeral 4. very common and universal form, having been found on the pavement of the Dome of the Rock Jerusalem, and at Baalbec. (Prof. Lewis, Journ. Brit. Arch. Association, vol. xlv., p. 152.) In some examples the triangle is so extended as to resemble an unfinished hour-glass. (No. 27.)

No. 41 seems to be associated with Nos. 42, 43, and 44. The standard or crutched stick occurs in several different marks, sometimes with the angle line, and sometimes with three or more lines so drawn as to resemble a pennon or ribbons.

No. 45 is clearly a workman's tool with a saw edge, very well represented. Such a one is figured in use from a window in the Cathedral of Chartres, executed in the thirteenth century. (Annales Archéologiques, vol. ii., pp. 143, &c.; and Essays on Archæological Subjects, Thomas Wright, 1861, vol. ii., p. 133.) So far, although my collection of marks numbers several thousands, I have been unable to find another example exactly similar. It is particularly interesting as a mark, when it is

remembered that the founder of Burscough Priory died in 1174, as it shows that this particular tool was in use at about that date. With regard to the tool itself with a serrated edge, the very valuable and interesting paper by Prof. T. Hayter Lewis, F.S.A., already quoted, bears directly on the point. (Trans. Lodge Quat. Coronat., vol. iii., p. 72, etc.) In this communication, entitled "Masonry and "Masons' Marks," Prof. Lewis shows "that there "was a distinct style of masonry as well as archi"tecture both here and in Palestine at about the "middle of the twelfth century; secondly, that "there was another peculiar type of masonry and "tool-marks of the thirteenth century scarcely "known in England until near the time at which "the Crusaders were driven out of Jerusalem, viz., "in 1187." The first of these is what is usually called Norman, developed at the end of the eleventh century, more refined in the middle of the twelfth, and was then superseded by the beautiful Early English. This appeared at quite the end of the century, and the regular diagonal tooling of the Normans was put aside for altered tools and altered modes of working. The claw tool, mentioned above, was used, and the deep scores of its teeth still remain upon the stones, although the surface is partially worn away. A similar manner of working stones was used as early as the sixth century at Ravenna, Jerusalem in the first century, and even on the stones of the Jews' waiting place, the date of which is a matter of dispute. This distinct kind of tool-marking, says Prof. Lewis, was used in Eastern Europe and Asia from very early times, and was introduced into England at the end of the twelfth century, viz., at the earliest time of our beautiful Early English architecture, and that it quickly superseded another style, whose origin had been in the West. Space will not allow

me to abstract more of this valuable paper. It is interesting, however, to note that this kind of tooling-which Prof. Lewis states is "usually upright "where the surfaces are flat"-appears to be cut diagonally on the stones at Burscough Priory, upon which the masons' marks are found.

No. 46, my brother tells me, is uncertain, owing to the condition of the stone.

The marks at Ormskirk Church (some of which were copied for me by my brother, Mr. Bromley very kindly supplying the remainder) seem to be forty-three in number. Had it not been for the iniquities of would-be restorers, their number would be considerably greater. Mr. Bromley informs me that those now living remember many more marks being visible in the chapel, which are now "re"stored" from the face of the stones!

It will be seen from the plates that some of those which remain are very similar to those found at Burscough Priory, for example :

Burscough Nos. 17 and 21 have a more angular representative in Ormskirk No. 10, a late mark from the Derby Chapel. Ormskirk No. 4 may be compared with Burscough No. 36. Ormskirk No. 6 (above) may also be compared with Burscough Nos. 42, 43, and 44.

It must be noticed that in both series of Ormskirk No. 4, &c., one of the legs is longer than the other two. Ormskirk No. 6 only partially agrees with Burscough No. 41; that is to say,