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 .
|