tiompan
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 14:18
|
|
Sanctuary wrote: faerygirl wrote: How about the use of barrows as tripping chambers. There is a reasonable amount of evidence that caves were used to experiment with mushrooms and psycadelic plants,
It makes sense that barrows and things would be used before they became houses for the dead. This is why I have a problem with the dates put on burial chambers and stone monuments. Basing the age of something on the age of the corpse inside seems a bit silly to me; you could bury me in my house, it wouldnt make this Victorian house 28years old!
Good point...now I hope you're not lying about your age?? heh heh
What evidence do we have for "tripping chambers " ?
We don't have dates for builds unless there is a dateable deposit underneath the structure which can only provide a terminus post quem date , the dating otherwise has to be an assumption based on typology and guesswork .If you were buried in a Victorian house then we would at least know that the build date of the house predated the burial but a victorian house would provide an immense amount of info to help date it that we simply don't have with prehistoric monuments .
|
StoneGloves
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 17:08
|
|
Ok, suppose there were a long barrow that had escaped the attention of over-enthusiastic clerics and assorted antiquarians and had remained intact and undug. What would we hope to find by excavation there that would further our understanding of the prehistoric? DNA, of course, but what else?
|
tiompan
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 17:20
|
|
StoneGloves wrote: Ok, suppose there were a long barrow that had escaped the attention of over-enthusiastic clerics and assorted antiquarians and had remained intact and undug. What would we hope to find by excavation there that would further our understanding of the prehistoric? DNA, of course, but what else?
Not sure what your'e suggesting .There are quite a lot of them . East Kennet being the most obvious . DNA and tooth enamel , if the chamber(s) was really secure like the recent results from Prisse La Chariere would be good but I think there is a chance that most arcaheologists would be happy to leave things as they are for future generations and technological advances .
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 17:33
|
|
StoneGloves wrote: Ok, suppose there were a long barrow that had escaped the attention of over-enthusiastic clerics and assorted antiquarians and had remained intact and undug. What would we hope to find by excavation there that would further our understanding of the prehistoric? DNA, of course, but what else?
Yes East Kennet would be top of my list and the DNA top of the 'wanted' list. It would be hoped that we could finally determine if it was families that were laid to rest there or a mixture of bloodlines.
|
StoneGloves
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 17:54
|
|
I don't think that with Richards and Thomas twelve miles to the south and MPP forty miles to the northeast that my long barrow will stand a chance of remaining undug. There's a front to it and six feet behind that a concave depression in the ground that could very well be a wooden chamber that has subsided. It never occurred to me that there may be drystone walling underneath the mound itself, which is about ninety metres long. I'd forgotten about EKLB, but thanks for the link to Prisse La Chariere.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 17:57
|
[quote="tiompan
Not sure what your'e suggesting .There are quite a lot of them . East Kennet being the most obvious . DNA and tooth enamel , if the chamber(s) was really secure like the recent results from Prisse La Chariere would be good but I think there is a chance that most arcaheologists would be happy to leave things as they are for future generations and technological advances .[/quote]
Not sure about the unwillingness of an archo to disturb the EKLB, I would have thought they'd be fighting over the chance to get stuck in there and make a name for themselves!
|
tiompan
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 17:58
|
|
Sanctuary wrote:
Yes East Kennet would be top of my list and the DNA top of the 'wanted' list. It would be hoped that we could finally determine if it was families that were laid to rest there or a mixture of bloodlines.
The results from Prisse La Chariere show that the individuals in the chamber were not related .
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 18:01
|
|
tiompan wrote: Sanctuary wrote:
Yes East Kennet would be top of my list and the DNA top of the 'wanted' list. It would be hoped that we could finally determine if it was families that were laid to rest there or a mixture of bloodlines.
The results from Prisse La Chariere show that the individuals in the chamber were not related .
Good to see that tests were positive
|
tiompan
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 18:02
|
|
Sanctuary wrote: tiompan wrote: Sanctuary wrote:
Yes East Kennet would be top of my list and the DNA top of the 'wanted' list. It would be hoped that we could finally determine if it was families that were laid to rest there or a mixture of bloodlines.
The results from Prisse La Chariere show that the individuals in the chamber were not related .
Good to see that tests were positive
Positive ?
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Houses for the dead...what about the living?
Sep 06, 2010, 18:37
|
|
tiompan wrote: Sanctuary wrote: tiompan wrote: Sanctuary wrote:
Yes East Kennet would be top of my list and the DNA top of the 'wanted' list. It would be hoped that we could finally determine if it was families that were laid to rest there or a mixture of bloodlines.
The results from Prisse La Chariere show that the individuals in the chamber were not related .
Good to see that tests were positive
Positive ?
Yes positive inasmuch that the samples taken were clean.
|
