reach some legendary spring, until at last, far, far away, the
winding track stood still upon the shore, where St. Michael of the
Mount rebuked the dragon from his throne of rock above the seething
sea. But what was the wanderer's guide along the bleak unpeopled
surface of the Cornish moor? The Wayside Cross! . . ."

Very pretty, no doubt! but, unlike the Wayside Cross, this kind of writing
leads nowhere. We want Mr. Hawker's authority for what 'the forefathers
said, in their simplicity'; without that, what the forefathers said
resembles what the soldier said in being inadmissible as evidence.
We want Mr. Hawker's authority for saying that these paths '_in truth_,
were trodden, and worn by religious men.' Nay we want his authority for
saying that there were any paths at all! The hypotheses of symbolism are
even worse; for these may lead to anything. Mr. Langdon was seriously
told on one occasion that the four holes of a cross represented the four
evangelists. "This," says he plaintively, "it will be admitted, is going
a little too far, as nothing else but four holes could be the result of a
ring and cross combined." At Phillack, in the west of Cornwall, there is
_part_ of a coped stone having a rude cable mounting along the top of the
ridge. Two sapient young archaeologists counted the remaining notches of
this cable, and, finding they came to _thirty-two_, decided at once that
they represented our Lord's age! They were quite certain, having counted
them twice. In fact, there seems to be nothing that symbolism will not
prove. Do you meet with a pentacle? Its five points are the fingers of
Omnipotence. With a six-pointed star? Then Omnipotence has taken an
extra finger, to include the human nature of the Messiah: and so on.
It reminds one of the Dilly Song:--

"I will sing you Five, O!"
"What is your Five, O?"
"Five it is the Dilly Bird that's never seen but heard, O!"
"I will sing you Six, O! . . ."

And six is 'The Cherubim Watchers,' or 'The Crucifix,' or 'The Cheerful
Waiters,' or 'The Ploughboys under the Bowl,' or whatever local fancy may
have hit on and made traditional.

The modern researcher is honest and sticks to facts; but there are next to
no facts. And when he comes to a tentative conclusion, he must hedge it
about with so many 'ifs,' that practically he leaves us in total
indecision. Nothing, for instance, can exceed the patient industry
displayed in th