The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian
Home Latest Posts Forums Maps Help
Browse Sites News Blog Contributors The Books
Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   Trethevy Quoit Forum Start a topic | Search
Trethevy Quoit
Re: Similarities elsewhere?
391 messages
Select a forum:
No, I'm not suggesting it's exactly as it originally was. It seems perfectly likely that the chamber was sealed, but that could be achieved without a major re-structuring/moving of all the pieces.

What I'm suggesting is that the current structure could have been arrived at by various pieces slipping or falling, rather than by the whole thing being re-built "wrongly".

I assume that large parts of the structure (if not all) would have been covered in a mound? In which case, pieces could shift and move over time underneath, while being kept from collapse by the weight of the earth. (See for example Hetty Pegler's Tump for a chambered barrow where the internal structures gradually weakened and shifted while being kept generally in place by the mound).

It seems more likely to me at least that the current arrangement simply reflects 1000s of years of movement, worsened by the protecting mound disappearing, etc, than a wholesale re-build in a different, "wrong" configuration.


Reply | with quote
thesweetcheat
Posted by thesweetcheat
1st April 2013ce
15:54

In reply to:

Re: Similarities elsewhere? (Sanctuary)

2 replies:

Re: Similarities elsewhere? (thesweetcheat)
Re: Similarities elsewhere? (Sanctuary)

Messages in this topic:

Terms & Conditions  |  Home  |  Julian Cope presents Head Heritage Top of page