Hillforts & Barrows

close
more_vert
Evergreen Dazed E
Evergreen Dazed Sep 18, 2012 18:49:17
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
tiompan wrote:
harestonesdown wrote:
thesweetcheat wrote:
tiompan wrote:
The important thing might be the presence of the barrow not necessarily what's underneath .
Slightly off at a tangent, but any theories about why build a barrow other than for funereal reasons? A cham bered long barrow has lots of possible uses I suppose, a cairn might be a boundary marker (but still quite a lot of effort to go to).

But are there examples of earthen barrows (long or round) which are known to have never contained any remains, even cremation? I guess it would have to a very intact barrow, in soil that was not damaging to bone.

The mother of them all ? Silbury ?
South Street , Beckhampton Raod and Horslips Long Barrows and countless Round barrows didn't have burials .Both quite different , one open the other closed and probabaly different function too .
Interesting. Is that no primary or just nothing at all at Beckhampton rd Tiompan?
Three possibilities that come to mind when there is no bone found in a barrow , 1)there never was any , 2) it has not survived 3) there was some but it was removed . In the case of Beckhampton road there was no human deposits primary or otherwise .Noteworthy that nearby South Street had no human bone either but there were cattle deposits .
Just had a look at the HER.
Animal bones incl 3 Ox skulls at Beckhampton rd. Interesting that south st and beckhampton rd had animal remains only (when opened). 'beckhampton roundabout' had no Neolithic burial, only late BA urn with burnt bone. Could lead you to think all 3, when raised, were not intended to take human remains.
Although, as you've said, there are other possibilities.

T tiompan
tiompan Sep 18, 2012 19:18:29
Replying to Evergreen Dazed

Evergreen Dazed wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
tiompan wrote:
harestonesdown wrote:
thesweetcheat wrote:
tiompan wrote:
The important thing might be the presence of the barrow not necessarily what's underneath .
Slightly off at a tangent, but any theories about why build a barrow other than for funereal reasons? A cham bered long barrow has lots of possible uses I suppose, a cairn might be a boundary marker (but still quite a lot of effort to go to).

But are there examples of earthen barrows (long or round) which are known to have never contained any remains, even cremation? I guess it would have to a very intact barrow, in soil that was not damaging to bone.

The mother of them all ? Silbury ?
South Street , Beckhampton Raod and Horslips Long Barrows and countless Round barrows didn't have burials .Both quite different , one open the other closed and probabaly different function too .
Interesting. Is that no primary or just nothing at all at Beckhampton rd Tiompan?
Three possibilities that come to mind when there is no bone found in a barrow , 1)there never was any , 2) it has not survived 3) there was some but it was removed . In the case of Beckhampton road there was no human deposits primary or otherwise .Noteworthy that nearby South Street had no human bone either but there were cattle deposits .
Just had a look at the HER.
Animal bones incl 3 Ox skulls at Beckhampton rd. Interesting that south st and beckhampton rd had animal remains only (when opened). 'beckhampton roundabout' had no Neolithic burial, only late BA urn with burnt bone. Could lead you to think all 3, when raised, were not intended to take human remains.
Although, as you've said, there are other possibilities.
If pushed I'd go for 1) for the Avebury examples and lots of later barrows .