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

213 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Evergreen Dazed
1881 posts

Re: Hillforts & Barrows
Sep 16, 2012, 19:30
harestonesdown wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
tiompan wrote:
harestonesdown wrote:
thesweetcheat wrote:


Bit of a rambling waffle, but my gut-feeling is simply that previous burials were left alone because it was viewed as either morally wrong or likely to incur the displeasure of the gods to disturb them,


To throw a spanner in the works, how would Gib Hill fit into that, with the round barrow having being built on top of the former long barrow. ?
Some may say it's enhancement, others desecration of an ancestral grave.




It is odd , but typically Bronze Age mounds were often complex sites sometimes literally built up over generations including depositions as well mound materials . They often referenced older monuments and were also often built on older neolithic and mesolithic sites , in this case it may have started off as a typical BA deposition in an older monument then taken to it's common concluson of eventual mound covering albeit on a barrow .


It might seem the BA folk in that area had a particular taste for it, as there is also the barrow on the henge bank at Arbor Low.




Twice now i've had to tell you to keep up, detention with R*man history next time.

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=66595&message=843787


Yes sir, sorry sir!
(nobody deserves to be put through an hour of roman history) :)
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index