Long Barrows and Settlements

[CShark]

While reading up on Stonehenge, I came across a passage that says something to the effect that the long barrows that surround SH (there are 16 within a three mile radius), have no settlement nearby. As these barrows predate the henge by centuries, the presence of the future stone circle would obviously have no effect on where the locals lived.

What I would like to know is: does this apply to most/all long barrows, i.e. are these early sepuchres placed away from settlements by design ? If true, perhaps the reason has to do with their choice of location and purpose. One theory as to why they are generally positioned on high ground, to be seen from as far away as possible, is to have the ancestors overlook or guard the area claimed by the locals, as well as to act as border or land division markers.

Which in itself begs another question: if this is true, then you would think there would be settlements nearby...?

If you have a reference, please include it in your response.
Thanks for your time.

[Digit]

An interesting thing about those Long Barrows Shark is that they tend to be located only in southern England. Though Henges are located all over the British Isles Long Barrows seem to be a more local phenomenom.
As for nearby, that depends on what they define as nearby. Salisbury Plain was originally heavily wooded apparently and was cleared in antiquity for farming, and that of course means settlements. Perhaps they simply haven't been located yet.
Apart from anything else a Long Barrow wasn't created over night!

[CShark]

Good point Re: Salisbury plain being covered in trees. An interesting observation is that no barrows are within a kilometer (or is that a mile...) of Stonehenge. Did the henge builders pick this spot because of an absence of other important burial sites ?

I was not aware that the long barrow is a southern England phenomenon: thanks for that. Looks like I may have to do more research on this myself, and simply start looking up lists of barrows, then corolate with known neolithic to bronze age settlements nearby. Oh, by nearby, I meant within sight. As barrows tended to be on hill tops, anything withing a couple of clicks or maybe more would probably classify as 'nearby'.

[Digit]

And don't forget Shark that the area is also littered with Round Barrows.

[CShark]

Yes, I am aware of the round little buggers! This has to be one of the most crowded, archeologically-speaking, areas in southern England.

As the long barrows predate pretty much everything else, thought it would be the logical place to start a study of Wiltshire's monuments. My original intent was to stick with the henge itself, but as there is so much more - two cursus (or is that cursae ?), pits coming out the wazoo, at least two barrow cemeteries no less, it makes no sense to concentrate solely on the main event.

Some long-barrow facts that blew me away:

- they were inuse for roughly 1500 years!
- there are over 300 in Great Britain alone
- variou stheories as to their use: memorials, houses for the dead, ancestor worship/religioius 'churches', land demarkation, community centres.
- Some have pits surrounding them that were likely used to hold food and drink, perhaps for those partying in the area...


By the way, I am finding articles that imply there are long barrows in other parts of Britain, including Scotland. To a far lesser concentration that the south, but they apparently are there, never the less.

Very intersting stuff

[Digit]

I agree with you on that Shark, the Henge appears to be part of a complex, therefore any study must be of the entire thing.
The problem then is which is, or is not, part of the Henge complex.
It seems to me that the Round barrows may well have been there because of some associations with the Henge but much later.
Next to the Valley of the Kings that area is probably the most archaeologicall crowed area in the Old World. Why?
And to return to earlier, where did the people live if not nearby?
You are starting on a life long investigation my friend.

[CShark]

Your comment regarding the extent of the Stonehenge area is something I have recently come to realize cannot be clearly defined. Heck, it can't be defined at all! If one were to decide to limit the area of study to say, sites that are chronologically entwined, that would take in pretty much all of the British isles! Logically, my personal voyage has to begin at the centre, working outwards till I reach whatever I consider is 'the end'.

Since I am baring my archeological soul, may as well continue
although there are many many area of British history I love, prehistory has taken the front seat. Stonehenge, as the world's most interesting (IMHO) site, is a perfect place to spend my time exploring. There are others that are a close second (Avebury, the Orkneys, Flag Fenn...) but they will have to wait.

One of the enticing parts of all this is that so much is conjecture, which leads to great arguments/debates, which in turn forces one to think.

Great stuff!

[Digit]

Conjecture has been frowed upon on this forum in the past Shark but I personally consider it an extremely useful tool. By throwing up ideas, and letting others knock chunks off of them we can often eliminate some less obvious, and occasionally the more obvious errors in our, and other's ideas.
Like in the past I have rubbished the idea that the Henge was designed to tell farmers when to start sowing crops on the basis that you cannot plant by calender.
What we know for certain about the entire complex is actually rather small, as by now I imagine you have discovered for yourself.
Have you ever visited by the way?

[Minimalist]

Conjecture has been frowed upon on this forum in the past

It has?


I thought it was what we did best?

[Digit]

I agree Min, and without it there could be no interpretations of available facts IMO.

[CShark]

Conjecture has been frowed upon on this forum in the past Shark but I personally consider it an extremely useful tool. By throwing up ideas, and letting others knock chunks off of them we can often eliminate some less obvious, and occasionally the more obvious errors in our, and other's ideas.
Like in the past I have rubbished the idea that the Henge was designed to tell farmers when to start sowing crops on the basis that you cannot plant by calender.
What we know for certain about the entire complex is actually rather small, as by now I imagine you have discovered for yourself.
Have you ever visited by the way?

Well, if conjecture was/is frowned upon, then perhaps this is not the forum for me. As you state, it can be a very useful method for 'discovering' the truth, or put another way, it's a way of beating down iincorrect ideas until only one remains standing. Conjecture is not blind argument for argument's sake...perhaps that is was going on in the past here ?

Anyway...

Yes, I have been fortunate enough to visit Stonehenge, albeit well before I became interested enough to learn something about the site. Am planning a return visit, perhaps next spring, at which time I will likely
see it with open eyes, and not a tourist's narrow vision.

Cheers
Bob

[Digit]

going on in the past here ?

Yes, was. Not now Bob, I'm glad to say.
The reason I asked if you had visited was that not everybody is impressed, my elder sister commented, 'is that all it is? Not very large is it?'
As an engineer I looked at as a construction challenge, and what a challenge? I first visited as a student, stopping off of on a motor cycle tour, I knew nothing about it and wasn't particularly interested, seeing it roused my interest, which I have maintained ever since.