Lodge Park forum 1 room
Image by tjj
Lodge Park

Lodge Park Long Barrow

close
more_vert
tiompan T
tiompan Aug 24, 2012 13:19:43
Replying to bladup

bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
When there don't forgot the low bowl barrow 100 m to the SE, there seemed a real connection between the two when i was there, take a look at baza's picture [ lodge park longbarrow 3 rd picture] and i think this shows that well, and i just went though the side gate around the winter solstice, they aren't stopping me visiting the ancesters, it's a great place and i'm surprised it isn't more well known.
The long barrow is presumably earlier than the bowl barrow so the 'connection' could be purely the location possibly which is always interesting and worth following up.
The LB is, of course, much older than the RB but if you visit you will see how the RB seems to have been aligned (could get myself into trouble using that word, perhaps 'placed' is a better choice) to almost "accept" the LB as its reason for being there.
A little like a monument in front of a natural outcrop. You do feel there is definitely some relationship or as bladup says, a connection.
The bowl barrow could have been built on an earlier mortuary enclosure [or something similar], a place where the bodies were laid before some of the bones were deposited in the little chamber, therefore explaining the strong feeling of connection between the two, and the reason for the position of the later bowl barrow, i'm not saying this is true but is just a thought.
Yes that's possible and would help explain any 'feelings' one would have between the two. The older I get the more I am appreciating that 'some' people do have these genuine feelings although proving it to the sceptics or in a practical way is another matter. As long as we all appreciate each others personal views there's nowt wrong with any of that IMO.
Hey thats the thing the people who have genuine feelings are maybe the people who feel they have nothing to prove to the sceptics, in this case the sceptics are just the opposite of the people who "feel", chalk to their cheese if you like, but both important and needed, and i think everyone will feel connected to one side or the other, i myself [like yourself and others on here] try to a look at it from both sides of the fence, even though i'm clearly on the feelings side.
Everyone has " 'feelings ", all are genuine .
Very often these feelings are shown to be wrong and we subsequently learn to find other methods of providing a better model of reality .There is also another method of of providing a good model of reality ,intuition ,this is not a "feeling "but an everyday of fact of mental life based on knowledge and experience but requiring no mental effort .
I have met people with no feelings, feelings are real and models are mainly in time proved wrong, i've definitely got a feeling now, round and round the garden we go, i thought it was best we agree to disagree- please!!!!
People with no feelings are extremely rare , although it is often suggested as form of demonisation by opponents .I didn't say feelings are not real ,what I did say was "Everyone has " 'feelings ", all are genuine ." quite the opposite .
As every gambler knows and is reluctant to admit the accuracy of "feelings " is fleeting ,maybe it's time for the Lodge Park "bowl barrow " model to have a reality check . The latest assesment of the barrow is that
"The circular mound identified by the previous authorities is visible on aerial photographs as an earthwork. Centred at SP 1433 1251, the mound is approximately 9m in diameter. This circular mound appears to sit on top of a possible early field boundary bank aligned north-west to south-east (UID: 1502716). This bank is cut by later Medieval / Post Medieval ridge and furrow on a WSW-ENE alignment (UID: 1442466), and is therefore likely to be Early Medieval / Medieval at the latest. The tree mound on top of the bank may date from this period, although it does not appear to have been cut by the ridge and furrow cultivation of the Medieval/Post Medieval period; neither does the ridge and furrow appear to deviate around it. In addition, as authority 5 noted above, as there was a tree still extant on the mound in 1995, it could be an even later feature. It is possible that the tree mound was deliberately created as part of the landscaping of Lodge Park in either the 17th or 18th centuries. These features were all mapped from aerial photographs as part of the South Cotswolds NMP project (6-8) "

B bladup
bladup Aug 24, 2012 13:25:14
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
When there don't forgot the low bowl barrow 100 m to the SE, there seemed a real connection between the two when i was there, take a look at baza's picture [ lodge park longbarrow 3 rd picture] and i think this shows that well, and i just went though the side gate around the winter solstice, they aren't stopping me visiting the ancesters, it's a great place and i'm surprised it isn't more well known.
The long barrow is presumably earlier than the bowl barrow so the 'connection' could be purely the location possibly which is always interesting and worth following up.
The LB is, of course, much older than the RB but if you visit you will see how the RB seems to have been aligned (could get myself into trouble using that word, perhaps 'placed' is a better choice) to almost "accept" the LB as its reason for being there.
A little like a monument in front of a natural outcrop. You do feel there is definitely some relationship or as bladup says, a connection.
The bowl barrow could have been built on an earlier mortuary enclosure [or something similar], a place where the bodies were laid before some of the bones were deposited in the little chamber, therefore explaining the strong feeling of connection between the two, and the reason for the position of the later bowl barrow, i'm not saying this is true but is just a thought.
Yes that's possible and would help explain any 'feelings' one would have between the two. The older I get the more I am appreciating that 'some' people do have these genuine feelings although proving it to the sceptics or in a practical way is another matter. As long as we all appreciate each others personal views there's nowt wrong with any of that IMO.
Hey thats the thing the people who have genuine feelings are maybe the people who feel they have nothing to prove to the sceptics, in this case the sceptics are just the opposite of the people who "feel", chalk to their cheese if you like, but both important and needed, and i think everyone will feel connected to one side or the other, i myself [like yourself and others on here] try to a look at it from both sides of the fence, even though i'm clearly on the feelings side.
Everyone has " 'feelings ", all are genuine .
Very often these feelings are shown to be wrong and we subsequently learn to find other methods of providing a better model of reality .There is also another method of of providing a good model of reality ,intuition ,this is not a "feeling "but an everyday of fact of mental life based on knowledge and experience but requiring no mental effort .
I have met people with no feelings, feelings are real and models are mainly in time proved wrong, i've definitely got a feeling now, round and round the garden we go, i thought it was best we agree to disagree- please!!!!
People with no feelings are extremely rare , although it is often suggested as form of demonisation by opponents .I didn't say feelings are not real ,what I did say was "Everyone has " 'feelings ", all are genuine ." quite the opposite .
As every gambler knows and is reluctant to admit the accuracy of "feelings " is fleeting ,maybe it's time for the Lodge Park "bowl barrow " model to have a reality check . The latest assesment of the barrow is that
"The circular mound identified by the previous authorities is visible on aerial photographs as an earthwork. Centred at SP 1433 1251, the mound is approximately 9m in diameter. This circular mound appears to sit on top of a possible early field boundary bank aligned north-west to south-east (UID: 1502716). This bank is cut by later Medieval / Post Medieval ridge and furrow on a WSW-ENE alignment (UID: 1442466), and is therefore likely to be Early Medieval / Medieval at the latest. The tree mound on top of the bank may date from this period, although it does not appear to have been cut by the ridge and furrow cultivation of the Medieval/Post Medieval period; neither does the ridge and furrow appear to deviate around it. In addition, as authority 5 noted above, as there was a tree still extant on the mound in 1995, it could be an even later feature. It is possible that the tree mound was deliberately created as part of the landscaping of Lodge Park in either the 17th or 18th centuries. These features were all mapped from aerial photographs as part of the South Cotswolds NMP project (6-8) "
I have been and it's as clear a bowl/ring barrow as you get, the boundry clearly went up to not over and used the barrow on the boundary line [ as they often do ].