Well, I was a bit at a loss as to what 'designation' to apply to this one - isn't it curious how we humans always have the need to define things? - seeing as that shameful qualifier 'Destroyed' seems most inappropriate here.
To attempt to clarify/explain: it would seem - or at least appear highly likely to me - that once upon a time, the natural feature that is Barrow Hill was crowned by an earthen barrow covering a cist. Kent's HER informs us that: "As the result of denudation of a burial mound of marsh turf, the outline of a collapsed oblong cist of Kentish ragstone was visible on Higham Marshes. It was excavated in 1880 by Mr E.L.Arnold and found to contain a crouched skeleton (very crushed) accompanied by 79 beads which lay as if they had originally been around the neck. the beads were Porosphaera globularis (a fossil sponge common in the Upper Chalk and taking a globular form), ranging from 7 to 26 mm. in diameter and naturally perforated. The mound stood on a gravelly hillock which probably stood out of the water when all the surrounding district was swamp".
Now, although there appears to be no conclusive proof that Barrow Hill was the location of said cist, the fact that: 1) Barrow Hill is the only such feature (as described) in the locality; 2) The locals saw fit to name the place 'Barrow Hill'... suggests it is a pretty good bet.
So, should one focus upon the destroyed round barrow that once was... or the natural feature that simply HAD to be the site for it back then? Sacred Hill seems fair enough, don't you think?
You can see a picture of the Porosphaera beads (mentioned above by Gladman) in this article by Christopher Duffin: 'Herbert Toms (1874–1940), Witch Stones, and Porosphaera Beads'. Herbert Toms collected lots of folklore about naturally perforated stones. It's in Folklore v.122, April 2011.
Log in |
Register
0 discussions
Show map (inline Google Map)
Add an image 
Posted by GLADMAN
Posted by Rhiannon
Top of page