|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Dinas (Blaenrheidol) Forum | Start a topic | Search |
7 messages | Select a forum: |
GLADMAN wrote: Harryshill wrote: Armour was expensive and therefore only owned by the rich and powerful. Which suggests a Knight, but is that a Knights grave and if not, why bury the expensive armour. The Battle of Hyddgen apparently took place a couple of miles north, so perhaps the 'encounter' here - if indeed there was one - might have been connected with that? As you say armour was very expensive, so whoever this chap was his circumstances obviously allowed that cost to be written off for the sake of his honour. But why bury him within a hill fort within a stone cist, that is upon unconsecreated ground? Very wierd..... unless he was an Iron Age chieftain with some experimental early armour? Guess the key resides in what exactly the 'armour' was? Iron Age shield that has rotted?, though mostly they were wooden with iron bits.. Armour is expensive in any age to be buried with perhaps it was a murder, with the evidence hidden, most knights end up as stone effigies. Roman and Saxon burials can be found neatly cached in barrows..... Reply | with quote |  2nd December 2012ce 18:12 In reply to: Re: He we go again... any thoughts? (GLADMAN) |
Messages in this topic: |
|