Over Barrow cemetery  .

close
more_vert
Evergreen Dazed E
Evergreen Dazed Jun 2, 2014 12:20:14
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
'...cremations in turf mounds followed by later inhumations (once the barrow cemetery began the barrows were built and used chronologically in a period between 110 -260 years , one being built after the previous had been “used up” )'

A new barrow built only after the later inhumations? Is that what is meant by "used up"? Am I reading that right?

Yes, the authors used the term "used up " so I kept it .

The sequence was initial inhumations in flat graves followed by cremations in a turf mound then after that barrow was "used up" there were further and later inhumations in one case above earlier (a century )inhumations , but still in a flat grave . This was then covered with a turf mound which then incorporated cremations .
It is not a straightforward linear sequence of burial type but it is for the barrow construction .
Because of the finer detail in dating it shows that variabilty was key ,without it , it would probably have been read as inhumation followed by cremation and the sequential barrow building unrecognised .

I see. So there were inhumations in 'new' flat graves (of both earlier and later date) after the turf mounds?

So rather than being sequential in the sense of flat graves moving to turf mounds over time as a new burial 'fashion' for want of a better word(!), it was a sequential process from flat grave to barrow within that particular sites own 'life'? with a new sequential process starting from flat grave again after the barrow was, as they've said, "used up"?

T tiompan
tiompan Jun 2, 2014 13:17:21
Replying to Evergreen Dazed

Evergreen Dazed wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
'...cremations in turf mounds followed by later inhumations (once the barrow cemetery began the barrows were built and used chronologically in a period between 110 -260 years , one being built after the previous had been “used up” )'

A new barrow built only after the later inhumations? Is that what is meant by "used up"? Am I reading that right?

Yes, the authors used the term "used up " so I kept it .

The sequence was initial inhumations in flat graves followed by cremations in a turf mound then after that barrow was "used up" there were further and later inhumations in one case above earlier (a century )inhumations , but still in a flat grave . This was then covered with a turf mound which then incorporated cremations .
It is not a straightforward linear sequence of burial type but it is for the barrow construction .
Because of the finer detail in dating it shows that variabilty was key ,without it , it would probably have been read as inhumation followed by cremation and the sequential barrow building unrecognised .

I see. So there were inhumations in 'new' flat graves (of both earlier and later date) after the turf mounds?

So rather than being sequential in the sense of flat graves moving to turf mounds over time as a new burial 'fashion' for want of a better word(!), it was a sequential process from flat grave to barrow within that particular sites own 'life'? with a new sequential process starting from flat grave again after the barrow was, as they've said, "used up"?

Yes ,to both .

The you can add to that the later inhumations were not associated with beakers whereas the earlier ones were , the variety of cremation burials with and without urns ,large number of child burials (half of the total)and high proportion of female to male in both cremations and inhumations .The one obvious linear chronological element was from beaker to collared urn .