[Sidenote: _Hollinsh. l. 5. Speed lib. 7. Stow fo. 53. 4ᵗᵒ._]
With this relation of the _Saxons_ treachery, _Mathew Westminster_ (in his _Flores historiarum_) seems to agree. And it wholly destroys the opinion commonly received, That the said Treaty with the _Saxons_, the massacre of the _Britans_, and likewise their interment, were at _Stoneheng_; and that in memory, those matters so transacted there, _A. Ambrosius_ in the same place erected this Antiquity. Wherefore, I much wonder, our modern historians should cite the aforesaid Authors in confirmation thereof, especially, when they affirm directly, the treaty was held in _Ambresbury_ Town, and that the _British_ Nobility fell by Treason there. _Jussit_ Vortigernus _& cives &_ Saxones Maiis _Kalendis, quæ jam instare incipiebant, juxta_ Ambrii _cœnobium convenire_ (saith _G. Monmouth_) Vortigern _commanded both his own people, and the_ Saxons, _upon the Calends of_ May _then approaching, to appear near to the Monastery of_ Ambresbury. _In Pago_ Ambri _convenire, to meet in the Town it self of_ Ambresbury (saith _Mathew Westminster_) In order to which summons, (that I may proceed with _Geffrey Monmouths_ story explaining himself positively concerning the place) _statuta die instante convenerunt omnes intra nominatam urbem, &c. the appointed day being come, all of them met together within the forenamed Town, and there treated_. The issue whereof was, that upon the word given (as before related) _The_ Saxons _drew their knives, and falling upon the_ Britans _standing by, slew them_. And, lest posterity should doubt those sacrificed for their Countreys cause neglected in their funerals, he leaves not there, but gives us the direct place, and manner of their buriall, affirming plainly they were buried by a Metropolitane of those times, even in a Church-yard, as Christians should. _In cœmeterio, quod est juxta cœnobium, In the Church-yard, close by the Monastery._ (saith he) There is not one word mentioned (I pray observe) of _Salisbury plain_, where this _Antiquity Stoneheng_ remains, throughout all their Story.
But, it’s objected, although they were buried at the Monastery, the monument for their memory might be set up elsewhere, in a place more proper, and more conspicuous; even, as in the most properly conspicuous places where great actions happened _Trophies_ were erected by the _Romans_, whose customs _A. Ambrosius_ living long time amongst them, knew very well. I answer, _A. Ambrosius_, is suppos’d by _Bede_, and the best Authors, descended from the _Romans_; who, living many years under their subjection, in forrain parts, had fully inform’d his judgement, no doubt, with whatever customs, civill or martiall, then in use amongst them. For, though the _Romans_ in those times, had utterly lost all knowledge of Arts, questionlesse civill, and martiall customs in some sort continued with them. Neverthelesse, if _A. Ambrosius_ did erect any monument for the _British_ Nobility, he rather, doubtlesse endeavoured to observe the rules of his own Religion, being a Christian, then the Heathenish customs of his Ancestors. However, in erecting it, at the place of their interment, he pursued both. As for the Christians honouring to posterity their famous men after death, it being so well known, I need not relate it. And, as concerning the ancient _Romans_ manner in burying their Emperours, and those that had triumphed, or otherwise deserved well of the Common-wealth, though they burned their bodies abroad, the place for sepulture of their Ashes, was within the City, monuments to their memory being erected, upon the same place where buried; so was _Publicola_ honoured, so the _Fabritii_, the _Cæsars_, and others. And, after the same fashion it seems, was the monument for the _British_ Nobility (if any) set up where they were interred; as in the place of all others most proper for it, all the considerable circumstances touching their deaths, happening there in like manner.