Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Hillforts & Barrows
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 22 – [ Previous | 14 5 6 7 8 9 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 20:27
thesweetcheat wrote:
Patient? In these days of instant gratification? :-)

Fascinating though.




There has been quite a step back in stuff like excavataion and not only due to financial restraints . Developers have to do it and we get results from that . Extraction techniques will improve and I think that leads to restraint .
The Eternal
924 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 21:52
Evergreen Dazed wrote:


...........Ford-Johnston suggested the builders of early Hillforts may have used the 'sacredness' of the barrows as part of the sites defences.

At ivinghoe in Beds, along with a few other examples I can think of, there is a huge bowl barrow within the hillfort itself. This seems strange to me. I could undetstand using the barrows outside of a fort as defence, in the sense that Ford-Johnston used the word, but to have something of such 'power' within the living space itself seems at odds with the idea of 'sacredness'.

Of course, the function of Hillforts in general is far from clear and Ivinghoe is a very early example, so I wonder what the 'non avoidance', if you like, in this instance could indicate?

If the builders of Ivinghoe were airily unconcerned about the ancestor(s) outside their huts front door, you might imagine they would have destroyed the thing. The hillfort is small, the barrow is not.
On the other hand, if they felt it sacred, had great respect, as appears to be the case (it's still there!) it is hard to imagine them 'living among it'.

Even if it is a totally different scenario, and the people of Ivinghoe hillfort raised the barrow themselves, it is hard to imagine why they chose to put it within the living space when there are others dotted around the hill, outside of the fort.............

Hi ED,

Firstly, I like your style of writing - very enjoyable, and a pleasure to read.

Secondly, and more to the point, it's an interesting topic that you raise. My opinion on barrows within hillforts is that of superstition. I really believe that they respected the barrows as places that housed the dead. And that the reason was because they were afraid of the spirits of the departed, and the vengeance that they would deliver upon anyone desecrating their tombs.

When the first hillforts were built people still lived in a time when so much wasn't fully understood, and the basic beliefs were almost the same as they had been for a few thousand years.

Maiden Castle at Dorchester is another example, and the site has been used since the neolithic.

A healthy respect for the dead, by superstition, is what it was.

Cheers,
TE.











tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:07
The Eternal wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:


...........Ford-Johnston suggested the builders of early Hillforts may have used the 'sacredness' of the barrows as part of the sites defences.

At ivinghoe in Beds, along with a few other examples I can think of, there is a huge bowl barrow within the hillfort itself. This seems strange to me. I could undetstand using the barrows outside of a fort as defence, in the sense that Ford-Johnston used the word, but to have something of such 'power' within the living space itself seems at odds with the idea of 'sacredness'.

Of course, the function of Hillforts in general is far from clear and Ivinghoe is a very early example, so I wonder what the 'non avoidance', if you like, in this instance could indicate?

If the builders of Ivinghoe were airily unconcerned about the ancestor(s) outside their huts front door, you might imagine they would have destroyed the thing. The hillfort is small, the barrow is not.
On the other hand, if they felt it sacred, had great respect, as appears to be the case (it's still there!) it is hard to imagine them 'living among it'.

Even if it is a totally different scenario, and the people of Ivinghoe hillfort raised the barrow themselves, it is hard to imagine why they chose to put it within the living space when there are others dotted around the hill, outside of the fort.............

Hi ED,

Firstly, I like your style of writing - very enjoyable, and a pleasure to read.

Secondly, and more to the point, it's an interesting topic that you raise. My opinion on barrows within hillforts is that of superstition. I really believe that they respected the barrows as places that housed the dead. And that the reason was because they were afraid of the spirits of the departed, and the vengeance that they would deliver upon anyone desecrating their tombs.

When the first hillforts were built people still lived in a time when so much wasn't fully understood, and the basic beliefs were almost the same as they had been for a few thousand years.

Maiden Castle at Dorchester is another example, and the site has been used since the neolithic.

A healthy respect for the dead, by superstition, is what it was.

Cheers,
TE.



But what if there were no dead , as is often the case in BA barrows and sometimes earlier Neolithic barrows ?
thesweetcheat
thesweetcheat
6218 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:09
tiompan wrote:
The Eternal wrote:
A healthy respect for the dead, by superstition, is what it was.


But what if there were no dead , as is often the case in BA barrows and sometimes earlier Neolithic barrows ?


I guess that wouldn't have always been apparent though. You might assume the presence of bodies in a barrow, even if there aren't any.
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:30
thesweetcheat wrote:
tiompan wrote:
The Eternal wrote:
A healthy respect for the dead, by superstition, is what it was.


But what if there were no dead , as is often the case in BA barrows and sometimes earlier Neolithic barrows ?


I guess that wouldn't have always been apparent though. You might assume the presence of bodies in a barrow, even if there aren't any.


Not if you belonged to a culture that for millenia would recognise that many barrows and deposition sites did not have human remains in them .
thesweetcheat
thesweetcheat
6218 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:39
tiompan wrote:
thesweetcheat wrote:
I guess that wouldn't have always been apparent though. You might assume the presence of bodies in a barrow, even if there aren't any.


Not if you belonged to a culture that for millenia would recognise that many barrows and deposition sites did not have human remains in them .


Yeah, that's true. But it still might not be apparent whether a particular barrow had a body in it, even if you knew that some did and some didn't. Unless there's an obvious way of knowing?
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:43
thesweetcheat wrote:
tiompan wrote:
thesweetcheat wrote:
I guess that wouldn't have always been apparent though. You might assume the presence of bodies in a barrow, even if there aren't any.


Not if you belonged to a culture that for millenia would recognise that many barrows and deposition sites did not have human remains in them .


Yeah, that's true. But it still might not be apparent whether a particular barrow had a body in it, even if you knew that some did and some didn't. Unless there's an obvious way of knowing?



The important thing might be the presence of the barrow not necessarily what's underneath .
thesweetcheat
thesweetcheat
6218 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:48
tiompan wrote:
The important thing might be the presence of the barrow not necessarily what's underneath .


Slightly off at a tangent, but any theories about why build a barrow other than for funereal reasons? A cham bered long barrow has lots of possible uses I suppose, a cairn might be a boundary marker (but still quite a lot of effort to go to).

But are there examples of earthen barrows (long or round) which are known to have never contained any remains, even cremation? I guess it would have to a very intact barrow, in soil that was not damaging to bone.
harestonesdown
1067 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:55
thesweetcheat wrote:
tiompan wrote:
The important thing might be the presence of the barrow not necessarily what's underneath .


Slightly off at a tangent, but any theories about why build a barrow other than for funereal reasons? A cham bered long barrow has lots of possible uses I suppose, a cairn might be a boundary marker (but still quite a lot of effort to go to).

But are there examples of earthen barrows (long or round) which are known to have never contained any remains, even cremation? I guess it would have to a very intact barrow, in soil that was not damaging to bone.



The mother of them all ? Silbury ?
juamei
juamei
2013 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 22:57
South Street LB iirc (and I probably dont)
Pages: 22 – [ Previous | 14 5 6 7 8 9 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index