Chun's a little bit difficult to judge. There are clear traces of a (circular) mound, but as far as I know we have no way of knowing whether it covered the chamber or not.
Besides which, any stones from the mound could easily have been taken away and swallowed up in the building of the nearby hillfort rampart.
It looks like the fort people respected the quoit though, if lots of stone were taken away it would probably be for the dry stone walls.
Yeah, entirely possible. I have to say I've always assumed there was a mound, just not sure whether it covered the capstone completely. But I guess we'll never know. Although there are loads of chambered tombs where the structure is covered by the mound, that doesn't prove that the ones that aren't covered ever were!
Reply | with quote
|Posted by thesweetcheat|
5th August 2012ce
Modern not antiquarian (texlahoma, Aug 01, 2012, 11:49)
- Re: Modern not antiquarian (Littlestone, Aug 01, 2012, 12:15)
- Re: Modern not antiquarian (goffik, Aug 01, 2012, 12:59)
- Re: Modern not antiquarian (Chris Collyer, Aug 01, 2012, 13:18)
- Re: Modern not antiquarian (CARL, Aug 01, 2012, 13:45)
- OT: That's you! OMG! (thesweetcheat, Aug 01, 2012, 21:24)