perforated stones, {82b} he publishes
an uninscribed triangular stone, with a perforation, apparently for
suspension. This is one of several such Scottish stones, and though we
cannot prove it, may have had a superstitious purpose. Happily Sir
Walter Scott discovered and describes the magical use to which this kind
of charm stone was put in 1814. When a person was unwell, in the Orkney
Isles, the people, like many savages, supposed that a wizard had stolen
his heart. "The parties' friends resort to a cunning man or woman, who
hangs about the [patient's] neck a triangular stone in the shape of a
heart." {82c} This is a thoroughly well-known savage superstition, the
stealing of the heart, or vital spirit, and its restoration by magic.

This use of triangular or heart-shaped perforated stones was not
inconsistent with the civilisation of the nineteenth century, and, of
course, was not inconsistent with the civilisation of the Picts. A stone
may have magical purpose, though it bears no markings. Meanwhile most
churinga, and many of the disputed objects, have archaic markings, which
also occur on rock faces.

XXI--QUALITY OF ART ON THE STONES

Dr. Munro next reproduces two _wooden_ churinga (_churinga irula_), as
being very unlike the Clydesdale objects _in stone_ {84a} (figures 5, 6).
They are: but I was speaking of Australian _churinga nanja_, of _stone_.
A stone churinga {84b} presented, I think, by Mr. Spencer through me to
the Scottish Society of Antiquaries (also reproduced by Dr. Munro), is a
much better piece of work, as I saw when it reached me, than most of the
Clyde things. "The Clyde amulets are," says Dr. Munro, "neither strictly
oval," (_nor are very many Australian samples_,) "nor well finished, nor
symmetrical, being generally water-worn fragments of shale or clay slate.
. . ." They thus resemble ancient Red Indian pendants.

As to the art of the patterns, the Australians have a considerable
artistic gift; as Grosse remarks, {85a} while either the Clyde folk had
less, or the modern artists had _not_ "some practical artistic skill."
But Dr. Munro has said that any one with "some practical artistic skill"
could whittle the Clyde objects. {85b} He also thinks that in one case
they "disclose the hand of one not altogether ignorant of art" (p. 231).

Let me put a crucial question. Are the archaic markings on the disputed
objects better, or worse, or much on a level with the general run of su