|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Hillforts & Barrows 213 messages | Select a forum: |
tiompan wrote: TE , I agree that those sites where there are no funereal deposits seemed to be as important as those that did and may well have had the same "power" .But my comment was in response to your , "A healthy respect for the dead, by superstition, is what it was. " which omitted the the non funerary aspect . Tiompan, True, my comment didn't take into account empty barrows. It seems like we both agree that they held a similar importance. Why that was is the intriguing question. Gladman has stated that maybe banks and ditches around sites that weren't hillforts were doffing their caps to past traditions. It's a good theory, and maybe the importance of empty barrows was to keep with contemporary tradition in terms of stating territory. It all seems to come down to respecting present and past traditions in the years prior to the Roman invasion. Respect for ancestors, and a fear of disrespecting them is what I feel was going on. All the best, TE. Reply | with quote |  30th September 2012ce 22:20 In reply to: Re: Hillforts & Barrows (tiompan) |
Messages in this topic: |
|