used precisely similar marks and for a like
object, so that the idea of their having a mystical meaning, or being
utilized for any other object but the one named, seems groundless.

The late George Godwin, F.R.S., F.S.A., &c., drew attention to the subject
of "masons' marks in various countries" in a communication to the Society
of Antiquaries in 1841, and also at a little later period (vide
_Archaeologia_, vol. xxx. p. 113). To him is the credit due of first
drawing attention to "these signs" in England. It is noteworthy how little
such marks are noticed, even in buildings which are visited by
archaeologists quite frequently, until a few are pointed out, and then they
meet the eye to an astonishing number. In the _Sessional Papers_,
1868-1869, of the Royal Institute of British Architects, No. 9, may be
found numerous samples of the marks from various parts of Europe in
illustration of the paper by Godwin.

No better plan has been followed in modern times to connect the work done
with the worker in stone, and it is probable that a second mark, observable
on some blocks, may serve to indicate the overseer. There are even three or
more sometimes.

The same system was adopted at the building of Truro cathedral, only the
marks were inserted on the bed of each stone instead of at the side as
usual, the result being that they ceased to be seen after being placed _in
situ_. Mr Hughan obtained copies of these marks from Mr James Bubb, the
first clerk of the works, and from his successor, Mr Robert Swain, and had
them published in the _Freemason_, 13th of November 1886. He remarked at
the same time that "many of these designs will be familiar to students of
ancient ecclesiastical and other buildings at home and abroad." Some are
interesting specimens.

_A Historical Treatise on Early Builders' Marks_ (Philadelphia, U.S.A.,
1885) by Mr G. F. Fort, and _Masons' Marks from Buildings in the Counties
of Lancaster and Chester, with Notes on the General History of Masons'
Marks_ (Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, vol. vii. N.S.), by W.
Harry Rylands, F.S.A., may be consulted with advantage. The latter declares
that "the Runic theory is as unlikely and as untenable as that which places
the origin of these marks in the absurd alphabets given by Cornelius
Agrippa, who died early in the 16th century." Victor Didron copied some
4000 during a tour in France in 1836 and pointed out their value (_Ann.
Arch_., 1845).

(W. J. H.*