Our question, then, is this—Does the position of the barrows in reference
to Stonehenge, enable us to infer that they have been located with a
special view to the temple which they surround so numerously? In
answering this question we may at once admit that no regular order of
position is observable. They do not appear to be placed in concentric
lines, or avenues. This, however, will at once strike an observer, that
the eminences rather than the depressions or hollows between the hills
have been chosen as sites for these sepulchral mounds. The instances are
very rare indeed in which barrows are to be found in any of the numerous
little valleys where they would be out of sight.
But more decided evidence than this is of course needed. And for such
evidence we have not far to seek. The pedestrian may obtain it without
any great difficulty. Let him visit, as I have done myself, every barrow
on the surrounding plain within the above-mentioned radius, and then
mount to the summit of each, whether it happens to be a bowl or
bell-shaped barrow, or any of the more elevated tumuli, and I can promise
him a view, in almost every instance, of the old stones from the top.
There are indeed a few exceptions, but only of such a nature as in fact
to “prove the rule.” In some cases plantations, or similar modern
intervening objects, hide the view. One or two cases also I noticed in
which a barrow in the foreground obstructed the view from one further
back. But this was not, as I think, that the later barrow-builders acted
uncourteously towards the earlier ones, but simply that they did it
inconsiderately—they did not notice that they were thus obstructing the
line of view. Again, there are other cases in which you do not perhaps
get the view from the base of the barrow, but as you ascend to the top,
to your surprise and pleasure you find the grand old stones suddenly
burst into sight. But do there still remain a few instances unaccounted
for? There are a few, but they are very few, and I do not think we need
feel the slightest difficulty in explaining these exceptional cases.
Bear in mind that these barrows were the burying places, not of the
common people, but of the chieftains and other distinguished persons, as
is evidenced by their contents. They thus represent in all probability a
considerable lapse of time, during which the deceased bodies were
conveyed—some it may be from long distances—to this grand unfenced
cemetery. It is therefore very probable that the interments may have
occupied a considerable number of years, and may have, in some instances,
even _preceded_ the time-honoured temple of Stonehenge. But I again
repeat that these exceptions are very few in number, nor do they in any
degree shake the conclusion, which really is _irresistible_, that these
said barrows do not occupy chance positions, but that the selection of
the sites, as they became needed, was governed by a sacred feeling, such
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account