Featured Title:
Stone Circle Greetings Cards |
 |
| Prehistoric Cumbria |
 |
| Login |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 123 guests and 5 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : davidmorgan , TimPrevett , Andy B , Klingon , MickM , bat400 , sem , Runemage , TheCaptain
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries >> Intervisibillity and Communication via Burial Mounds
|
 |
| Page 2 of 3 ( 1 | 2 | 3 ) |
| Author |
Intervisibillity and Communication via Burial Mounds |
aknifethatfellfromthesky
Joined:
01-05-2008
Messages: 85
from within and without
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 24-02-2013 at 15:30
could it be something as simple as valley bottoms in the bronze age were undesirable because of natural conditions? maybe people were forced to use the high ground and therefore it is not surprising that many cairns are visible from one to the next
dean
 Profile
 Reply
|
rogerbhutchins
Joined:
08-10-2006
Messages: 3
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 10:42
Mankind has been using fire for long distance signalling and early warning of danger from the earliest of times. By the Bronze Age he was sufficiently organised to have created complex systems.
All organised societies need to have a defence system and the first line of defence is early warning of danger. Information can be transmitted at the speed of light by fire beacon. However any complex system would need to be properly surveyed and controlled. It is obvious that they would have needed to mark beacon positions in some way. Perhaps the simplest method would be a circle of whatever material was locally available. Earthen circles or henges are common in the British Isles, as are stone circles. These I suggest were the first beacon systems , and I can show that inter visible chains of circles still exist in the landscape.
Inter-visibility of beacon sites is obviously essential for any system and the maps which I have posted show a few examples. It is sad that these lines of inter-visibility have been mistaken for "Ley Lines" which they certainly are not.
Ley Lines as invented by Alfred Watkins do not always inter connect important strategic sites and Watkins denies that beacon signalling existed in prehistoric times. (see page 110 of The Old Straight Track) I believe that the Ley Line Theory with all its modern implications is a huge mistake, and has muddied the waters of our prehistoric landscape.
An excellent source of information concerning early signalling systems can be found in the Bodliean Library entitled "Telegraphing Among The Ancients" by Augustus C. Merriam, written for the Archaeological Institute of America in 1890.
I know that the round barrows are considered to be of Bronze Age construction and that the strategic sites that they inter connect are considered to be Iron Age constructions. However I have noticed that when a serious excavation is done there are sometimes reports of earlier occupation.
A strategic site is chosen for its defensibility and I suggest its ability to communicate with a similar site. A srategic site is a strategic site whatever period it was modified. I can also demonstrate that a chain of Hill Forts, earthworks or settlements was capable of communicating from Lands End to Old Sarum and on to the Midlands. This inter-visible chain can hardly be accidental but carefully designed. Any isolated Hill Fort, Earthwork or Settlement would be very vulnerable if it could not communicate to another similar site.
Inter Visible communication systems can be found in most countries and from most periods. The Persian Empire could communicate through to India by fire beacon. Why should we be so surprised that complex systems were set in place in Britain?
Profile
Reply
|
rogerbhutchins
Joined:
08-10-2006
Messages: 3
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 10:56
Many Cairns and barrows are not on hilltops, but are placed in a carefully chosen positions for inter-visibility. Hill top chains were also used, but a hill top fire could be seen from all directions. The system that I suggest was used was more subtle so that messages could be targetted to specific destinations. Long Barrows are rarely set on hill tops but always in a position with a distant view.Take a look at the Map of Dartmoor that I have posted and you will see that many of the cairns are on a spur of a hillrather than the hill top.
Profile
Reply
|
rogerbhutchins
Joined:
08-10-2006
Messages: 3
from Devon
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 12:23
Yes there is plenty of evidence that fire was used on barrows. Quoting from "A Study Of Some Devon Barrows" by Alison Allden.
page 4 "No burials were found in either, but it was noted that the mounds appeared to be made up from layers of clay interspersed with charcoal, and that both had a particularly thick
layer of charcoal not far below the surface of the barrow. A similar stratigraphical sequence was described for barrow no 6 and 26, as well as one of the barrows excavated in North West Devon."
The fact that there were alternate layers of charcoal and clay suggests that fire were lit and then extinguished by smothering with soil. Once a beacon signal is answered then it would make good sense to stop the fire as soon as possible .
Profile
Reply
|
karloff
Joined:
20-10-2006
Messages: 604
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 13:15
Quote:
|
On 2013-02-23 12:57, Elijah wrote:
In Scotland they still light their Bone-fires atop of these ancient mounds, but you have to ask where this tradition originated?
I think the crucial suggestion made here is that the passages of these mounds channeled the light from a fire so that it could only be seen by someone in its line of sight. Does the archaeology support this idea?
John
|
|
Hi
There is some evidence of fires on barrows and there is also evidence of fires in cursus and other late Neo enclosures. Lots of barrows that have no indivisibility with other barrows. Most of the evidence from barrows (and their environs) point to them being associated with burial (not always primary burials) and other monuments not indicative of settlement.
I tend to think that barrows fulfil different functions at different times and in differing places. Some for example are placed at the edge of a hill so that they are highlighted against the skyline from below but invisible from the other side of the hill. Some are isolated features on headlands next to watercourses.
Some are located in valleys with no apparent visual connection to anything (but perhaps near rivers).
Some barrows have no primary burial and some have secondary burials and some have surrounding cremation cemeteries. Some are earthen mounds others are piles of stones. Some have internal stone cysts, some possible wooden structures, some are modified, some are not.
I do think it's interesting that beaker burials are often inserted into existing mounds as if to link on to a tradition or place physically. Perhaps because some barrows are old when the later burials take place to revive an ancestral rite, maybe to show the right to use the land associated with the barrow by being part of the tribe/clan that have always lived in the area.
It does seem that early Neo chambered tombs divide landscapes up and perhaps the internments are part of a collective "ownership" by physically associating people with a landscape.
In summary, they’re bl**dy complicated and I tend to be wary of any idea that seeks to pin a single use on them as it ignores both time depth and variability.
[ This message was edited by: karloff on 2013-03-01 13:20 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 6998
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 13:25
> I'm not aware of any excavations of barrows that have shown fires being lit on top of them.
I would agree with this and think this is a fundamental problem with the theory.
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
Jimit
Joined:
31-05-2002
Messages: 289
from winchester
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 15:15
This may be of interest to some as to the intervisibility of various things around Stonehenge.
http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/mapview/MapView.html
Read the instructions!
Jimit.
Profile
Reply
|
davep
Joined:
05-07-2009
Messages: 28
from Exeter
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-03-2013 at 15:24
Roger,
"A Study Of Some Devon Barrows". Hm - I have not read this, I must get up to the Westcountry Studies library sometime and have a look.
My inclination is to reject this idea for the Bronze Age but I don't dismiss it for the Iron Age.
A few thoughts ...
As I mentioned previously there is no evidence of defensive structures during the Bronze Age on Dartmoor.
There are two known Neolithic hilltop or tor enclosures on Dartmoor, namely, Dewerstone and White Tor. These have huge banks to create defensive structures. Around the country there are similar Neolithic enclosures - for example in Cornwall Carn Brea in Penwith and the Cheese-wring on east Bodmin. These monuments are thought to be early neolithic and are clearly defensive structures.
Of the vast number of monuments on Dartmoor from the later neolithic and bronze age none of them show such defensive features. It is not until the Iron Age that such defensive structures reappear.
So there is a period of perhaps three thousand years (late neolithic and Bronze Age) when people are living in farming communities with little evidence of conflict. So what would be the purpose of a warning system of beacons? Of course that doesn't rule out the possibility that beacons could be used for other purposes.
BTW, the presence of charcoal in cairns is common. For example the 1903 dig of the Laughter Tor cairn (by the standing stone) revealed a "wheelbarrowful of charcoal" - yet this cairn is on lower ground overlooked by Bellever and Laughter Tor.
I think if we move into the Iron Age period then things change. Conflict is clearly commonplace as evidenced by all of the forts. There were presumably two sources of major conflict - one is raiding parties by outsiders (could be from overseas) and the other is more local i.e. neighbouring territories carrying out raids (like the legendary cattle raids in Ireland). The use of beacons in this period seems quite likely.
On another matter you mention Polwhele. Some of his material is from accounts by Rev John Swete. One of these is a fascinating account of the excavation of a massive stone cairn on Haldon Hill (near Exeter - sort of north of Dawlish). One interesting thing about this is that these enormous cairns barely exist today as they have been plundered for road building materials. This makes me wonder how many have vanished away from moorland. Of course in terms of your theory this could have made such cairns more widespread than they appear today. The other fascinating thing is what was found inside - a large urn of ashes, see image on Wikipedia entry for John Swete. See Rev John Swete
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2013 at 20:23
Hi Karlof
You wrote... "In summary, they’re bl**dy complicated and I tend to be wary of any idea that seeks to pin a single use on them as it ignores both time depth and variability. "
I must disagree with this final assertion of yours, I find the work of Paul Devereux and Pierre Mereaux quite inspirational in pointing towards an environmental constant.
John
Profile
Reply
|
karloff
Joined:
20-10-2006
Messages: 604
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 12:38
Quote:
|
On 2013-03-03 20:23, Elijah wrote:
Hi Karlof
You wrote... "In summary, they’re bl**dy complicated and I tend to be wary of any idea that seeks to pin a single use on them as it ignores both time depth and variability. "
I must disagree with this final assertion of yours, I find the work of Paul Devereux and Pierre Mereaux quite inspirational in pointing towards an environmental constant.
John
|
|
Hi
Sorry, could you elucidate your comment because I don't see the connection between environmental constraints and the use, social function, date and locations of barrows.
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 13:11
Quote:
|
On 2013-03-01 15:24, davep wrote:
Roger,
"A Study Of Some Devon Barrows". Hm - I have not read this, I must get up to the Westcountry Studies library sometime and have a look.
My inclination is to reject this idea for the Bronze Age but I don't dismiss it for the Iron Age.
A few thoughts ...
As I mentioned previously there is no evidence of defensive structures during the Bronze Age on Dartmoor.
There are two known Neolithic hilltop or tor enclosures on Dartmoor, namely, Dewerstone and White Tor. These have huge banks to create defensive structures. Around the country there are similar Neolithic enclosures - for example in Cornwall Carn Brea in Penwith and the Cheese-wring on east Bodmin. These monuments are thought to be early neolithic and are clearly defensive structures.
Of the vast number of monuments on Dartmoor from the later neolithic and bronze age none of them show such defensive features. It is not until the Iron Age that such defensive structures reappear.
So there is a period of perhaps three thousand years (late neolithic and Bronze Age) when people are living in farming communities with little evidence of conflict. So what would be the purpose of a warning system of beacons? Of course that doesn't rule out the possibility that beacons could be used for other purposes.
BTW, the presence of charcoal in cairns is common. For example the 1903 dig of the Laughter Tor cairn (by the standing stone) revealed a "wheelbarrowful of charcoal" - yet this cairn is on lower ground overlooked by Bellever and Laughter Tor.
I think if we move into the Iron Age period then things change. Conflict is clearly commonplace as evidenced by all of the forts. There were presumably two sources of major conflict - one is raiding parties by outsiders (could be from overseas) and the other is more local i.e. neighbouring territories carrying out raids (like the legendary cattle raids in Ireland). The use of beacons in this period seems quite likely.
On another matter you mention Polwhele. Some of his material is from accounts by Rev John Swete. One of these is a fascinating account of the excavation of a massive stone cairn on Haldon Hill (near Exeter - sort of north of Dawlish). One interesting thing about this is that these enormous cairns barely exist today as they have been plundered for road building materials. This makes me wonder how many have vanished away from moorland. Of course in terms of your theory this could have made such cairns more widespread than they appear today. The other fascinating thing is what was found inside - a large urn of ashes, see image on Wikipedia entry for John Swete. See Rev John Swete
|
|
You have stated in a fact like manner that these "Are clearly defensive structures"
And later that this is" evidenced by all of the forts"
Is this just Your opinion, perhaps an accepted opinion????
Or that there are steep embankments, or later roman structures???
What if they had NOTHING whatsoever to do with conflict at all until many milleniums later???
And that there first design criteria were to interact with none visable flows , that travel across the land like a wave, and the fires could have been to alert downstream of this wave of invisabilty arrival by those who could detect such things at locations where the ability to detect such was hightened and those able to detect were located at??
cropredy
[ This message was edited by: cropredy on 2013-03-04 13:43 ]
Profile
Reply
|
davep
Joined:
05-07-2009
Messages: 28
from Exeter
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 15:40
Cropredy wrote:
Quote:
|
You have stated in a fact like manner that these "Are clearly defensive structures"
And later that this is" evidenced by all of the forts"
Is this just Your opinion, perhaps an accepted opinion????
Or that there are steep embankments, or later roman structures???
What if they had NOTHING whatsoever to do with conflict at all until many milleniums later???
And that there first design criteria were to interact with none visable flows , that travel across the land like a wave, and the fires could have been to alert downstream of this wave of inviabilty arrival by those who could detect such things at locations where the ability to detect such was hightened and those able to detect were located at??
|
|
I was pointing out that there are no defensive structures in the Bronze Age on Dartmoor. You could be right though about the earlier Neolithic tor enclosures, (early fourth millennium) maybe it would have been better to say have the appearance of being defensive. See for example:
Stowe's Pound (around Cheese Wring on east Bodmin moor))
There is an interesting, rather lengthy, thesis on their purpose on line, see:
The Early Neolithic Tor Enclosures of Southwest Britain
The assumption that their primary function was defensive - is disputed. Interestingly, these neolithic tor enclosures are typically located on the edge of highland areas overlooking lowland.
I think the evidence for conflict in the Iron Age is far more established.
My point remains - the Bronze Age cairns appear to have been constructed at a time of little conflict - so no need for a network of warning beacons.
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 16:54
I appreciate that they have an appearance of been defensive, but I have been to numerous so called hillforts and they all are designed to fit around a series of detectable vortexs that leads to specific circulations zones that are shaped relative to the complexity of these vortexs and their individual circulations co-joining to the shape of the ditchs and embankments.
I more than realise that this is none visable, but I cannot help but detect what is there.
IMHO the stones will have been very carefully arranged to act in the self same manner as stone circles do which is to almost become a capacitor or storage system to uprate these flows, with the ditch helping to tease apart the two opposite spin flows which naturally run one on top of the other.
I can easily understand over time why these places may have been adapted for their defence capabilities, but that which I detect leads to another and quite bizzare understanding of what was been undertaken, and it certainly doesn't fit into our current comprehensions of life and death.
The barrows were the target of the uprated and seperated flows, and there is also a very specific detectable set of geometries that give exact location of the barrows and their local orientation , with the long barrows facing stones on an alinment which is unique.
I have checked and checked this at known locations, then can wander about the exterior of the henges to identify the location that fits what I detect, it has taken Me years to puzzle it all out just about totally on My own, and always been doubted and ridiculed.
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
Elijah
Joined:
21-03-2012
Messages: 86
from Spain
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 18:14
Quote:
| Karlof wrote.... Hi
Sorry, could you elucidate your comment because I don't see the connection between environmental constraints and the use, social function, date and locations of barrows. |
|
I actually wrote "environmental constant" not "environmental constraint".
Unfortunately I can't answer your question; the moderators would censor me if I were to tell you why I believe that the work of Paul Devereux and Pierre Mereaux may point towards a universal explanation for megaliths! All I will say is that evidence of fires and cremations at megaliths and mounds, is an important aspect of my thesis.
Strange that you write "social function" and not "spiritual function"?
John
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 19:54
Elijah,
How is magnetism induced???
The word ELECTRICITY is thought of as inducing magnetism, and I do have the burn marks where stones have discharged through Me.
But what is electricity????
Please don't REPEAT any assumptions based on invented ideas such as electrons and protons, they simply do not know what electricity is, or life, or energy, or light.
If instead one puts yourself a megalithic time hat on and wonder what they will have thought of such occurances???
And just what would they have reason to locate any megalithic site where they did??
And what if they knew of variations at very specific locations where such variations were noted to coincide with daily/weekly /monthly /yearly specific locations of the moon and sun?
And that these variations were involved with womens menstrul cycles and when they could become pregnant, would they not be super close to natures ways??
To been super intimate with creation and death?
And as the moon glides along, may they not have been able to signal speedily along the length of the country a variation occuring relative to the moons movement, they didn't have cell phones after all.
What better( if not only) method of signalling could they utilise??
But more importantly , and the fire altars in vedic scriptures give hints into something else about fires and what is released by fire from the deceased??
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1704
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2013 at 21:07
Hi Cropredy,
You said "I appreciate that they have an appearance of been defensive, but I have been to numerous so called hillforts and they all are designed to fit around a series of detectable vortexs that leads to specific circulations zones that are shaped relative to the complexity of these vortexs and their individual circulations co-joining to the shape of the ditchs and embankments."
Could it be that your rods/you are picking up the natural goelogy/geography of the forts?
Profile
Reply
|
karloff
Joined:
20-10-2006
Messages: 604
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-03-2013 at 10:28
Quote:
|
On 2013-03-04 18:14, Elijah wrote:
Quote:
| Karlof wrote.... Hi
Sorry, could you elucidate your comment because I don't see the connection between environmental constraints and the use, social function, date and locations of barrows. |
|
I actually wrote "environmental constant" not "environmental constraint".
Unfortunately I can't answer your question; the moderators would censor me if I were to tell you why I believe that the work of Paul Devereux and Pierre Mereaux may point towards a universal explanation for megaliths! All I will say is that evidence of fires and cremations at megaliths and mounds, is an important aspect of my thesis.
Strange that you write "social function" and not "spiritual function"?
John
|
|
Hi
Sorry about misquoting you.
I wrote social function not spiritual because all spiritual aspects in a society are based on human belief structures which are social constructs. A modern cemetery is a burial ground where a society inters their dead, it is not in itself a spiritual place as non-believers are buried there alongside many other faith groups.
It is entirely possible that the internment of Bronze Age people into barrows had No spiritual connotation at all. They may simply be acts of respect for certain individuals, or indicators of land ownership by internment of dynastic members into landscape features. Any defined religious interpretation placed on them is reflective of the religious understanding of the individual/society rather than actually knowing about the BA beliefs. Perhaps it’s possible to make general statements concerning BA beliefs but not to “understand” them.
Therefore, as it’s virtually impossible to understand in any detail the religious motivations behind burial in the BA (unless somebody invents a time machine) it’s better to try and understand how those beliefs fit within the society as a whole through contextual study of settlements, industrial activities, farming practices, and landscape use. At least that way instead of trying to interpret the BA simply by focusing on visible upstanding monuments we get a holistic view with a much more representative dataset rather than a biased dataset consisting of only certain types of monument that happened to have survived as upstanding features.
For every barrow still upstanding there are dozens that only survive as buried archaeological sites and those need to be taken into account in any interpretation. Indeed, as many of the buried sites are in valleys (and may outnumber the ones on hills) there is a very strong counter argument to the idea that they were beacon sites.
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-03-2013 at 11:58
Quote:
|
On 2013-03-04 21:07, sem wrote:
Hi Cropredy,
You said "I appreciate that they have an appearance of been defensive, but I have been to numerous so called hillforts and they all are designed to fit around a series of detectable vortexs that leads to specific circulations zones that are shaped relative to the complexity of these vortexs and their individual circulations co-joining to the shape of the ditchs and embankments."
Could it be that your rods/you are picking up the natural goelogy/geography of the forts?
|
|
I do not consider most were origonally forts... they were henges to locally manipulate the natural flow currents there.
The natural is what is there henge or no henge.
The henge was located to fit the natural, but to tease apart and accumulate the two opposite flows.
cropredy
Profile
Reply
|
TheCaptain
Joined:
30-10-2003
Messages: 1482
from near Bristol
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-03-2013 at 12:36
I don't normally post down here, but am intrigued enough to ask what mankind gained for their enormous efforts of building these hillforts/henges/whatever.
What was to be gained by "interact with none visable flows, that travel across the land like a wave" or "manipulate the natural flow currents" ?
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 06-03-2013 at 17:46
Quote:
|
On 2013-03-06 12:36, TheCaptain wrote:
I don't normally post down here, but am intrigued enough to ask what mankind gained for their enormous efforts of building these hillforts/henges/whatever.
What was to be gained by "interact with none visable flows, that travel across the land like a wave" or "manipulate the natural flow currents" ?
|
|
As You have descended down here.
It needs first that You are able to consider a far better comprehension of what human life and death entails, and the journey at death downstairs as such.
Then how to ensure that Your soul ( for want of a better description) journeys back up into a new vehicle( body) directly back to the self same location one journed downstairs.
To achieve this desired return to ones previous locality( possibly to then REMEMBER lots of previous incarnations, hence a rapid jump in humans abilities???) needs very carefully constructed huge resistors against the dominant implosion from our solar system, hence the cap stones and insulated covering of same.
Then what is further required is an increase and decrease in the local duality of flows at very specific timings relative to the moon and the sun at their solstice and equinox times( the moon basically having 13 such times to the suns yearly such)
These timings are switching points that nature knows full well, and I consider We did when all of these constructions were been built.
Our current thinking is of our souls as such hopefully to be heading into the heavens, and any downward journey seen as going to hell, it is therefore very difficult for our present selves to contemplate a totall different comprehension of life/death( right or wrong, or whatever?)
But by following all of this admittadely none visable flows and the geometry it all occurs upon, and then comparing where all of the variant constructions are located upon this system I have been able to REMEMBER what has been forgotten ( either naturally, or more likely indoctrinated out of the masses by a ruling priest hood and then kept secret to themselves, for whatever reason good or bad ???)
Of course This does lead to easy ridicule by those who will dismiss anything that they consider counter to which they themselves all knowledgeable about.
Basically it leads to a KNOWING that the life force and the creation and dissolvement of living entities is far far different to what is INDOCTRINATED presently, the flows enable life, but it needs a balance of these flows, which may have existed naturally for several past milleniums, thus a forgetting could easily have occured of something seemingly irrelevant, but that may be ending( the balance) so it may be time to remember or become extinct( this may coincide with far larger galatic solstice and equinox switching times which We cannot remember due to the extreme time frames of these)
cropredy
Profile
Reply
| |
| Go to Page: 1 | 2 | 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTES: This site uses COOKIES. Please do not use this web site if you do not agree to our Terms and Conditions of use.
If you plan to visit ancient sites in person, please make sure you follow our Charter.
Articles, photographs and comments are the property of their respective authors or contributors, please contact them for permission to reproduce. Site design ©1997-2012 Andy Burnham.
|
Main News