Aye, i've absolutely nothing against anybody wanting to do it, if the thought of it makes them happy and they feel its right for them then good luck to them, absolutely.

But, yes, it seems whatever was going on at, say, West Kennet in 3600BC was pretty specific and those bones being in the chambers could represent a hundred thousand different things in terms of culture. And like you've said it may very well be that it was a community with shared beliefs etc, and they would have had very clear ideas about (I imagine) what they 'were at'.

Buuuuut.. a thought has just struck me. (2 in 1 day, christ, oops, no i mean god, oops, no, i mean blimey).
I suppose later cultures DID bury their dead at older sites.. Buuuut.. they were actual special sites with a history. The beaker folk (lovely drinking vessels they had) didn't construct new Long Barrows on new sites.. they re-used the old ones.

Oofph, i'm getting confused now.

I think my point is, a continuation of a tradition is 'acceptable' but this is a new thing acting as if its a continuation. I think. Am i right?