juamei wrote: BigSweetie wrote: Resonox wrote: The barrows in Reigate Heath have trees planted in them(apparently a Victorian thing....anyone know why??)....and it may have been a common practice elsewhere.
Someone (I forget who) told me that some Victorians considered the lumps and bumps of cairns and barrows to be overtly sexual, and so planted them with trees to try and disguise it.
Well, barrows on top of round hills aka Cley Hill, are certainly breastlike...
I know the Victorians were supposed to be prudish, covering table legs lest they provoke unnatural desires(mind you I used to have a Westie with furniture-fetishistic leanings)...but didn't realise they were quite so Calvinistic regarding bumps in the land.
Reply | with quote | Posted by Resonox 24th September 2011ce 11:35 |
Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (thelonious, Sep 22, 2011, 19:00)- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (thesweetcheat, Sep 22, 2011, 19:05)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (tjj, Sep 22, 2011, 19:18)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (GLADMAN, Sep 22, 2011, 19:41)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (summerlands, Sep 23, 2011, 07:03)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (Howburn Digger, Sep 23, 2011, 08:04)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (GLADMAN, Sep 23, 2011, 23:56)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (GLADMAN, Sep 23, 2011, 23:56)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (Resonox, Sep 24, 2011, 06:03)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (strathspey, Sep 23, 2011, 19:29)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (Megalithics, Sep 23, 2011, 20:50)
- Re: Lack of stone circles north of Inverness? (onecalledk, Sep 30, 2011, 18:29)
|
|