|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Spittal of Glenshee Forum | Start a topic | Search |
4 messages | Select a forum: |
| visited this lovely wee circle in glorious sunshine today, and it left me with a question: CANMORE (http://www.rcahms.gov.uk/canmore/details_gis?inumlink=29594) reports that the mound on which it sits on was excavated in 1894 and found to be naturally-deposited sand and gravel - how reliable is this likely to be? as Nick mentions in his fieldnotes, it does look incredibly like a barrow. and if you look at this photo http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/16324 it shows how it rises out of a flat area - I might buy the morain deposit theory if this was low-lying flat ground, but this flat area is on the top of a flat-topped hill, nestling in one corner. is that usual for glacial deposits? Cheers Andy Reply | with quote |  27th June 2005ce 00:10 2 replies: Re: how reliable are reports from 1894? (Moth) Re: how reliable are reports from 1894? (FourWinds) |
Messages in this topic: |
|
Top of page