Whittle, A. W R., Bayliss, A. and Wysocki, M. (2007). Once in a lifetime:. Histories of the dead:. Vol 17, pp. 103-121.
 Title The title of the publication or report |
Once in a lifetime: | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Subtitle The sub title of the publication or report |
the date of the Wayland's Smithy long barrow | |||||||||
Issue The name of the volume or issue |
Histories of the dead: | |||||||||
Series The series the publication or report is included in |
Cambridge Archaeological Journal | |||||||||
Volume Volume number and part |
17 | |||||||||
Page Start/End The start and end page numbers. |
103 - 121 | |||||||||
Biblio Note This is a Bibliographic record only. |
Please note that this is a bibliographic record only, as originally entered into the BIAB database. The ADS have no files for download, and unfortunately cannot advise further on where to access hard copy or digital versions. | |||||||||
Publication Type The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book |
Journal | |||||||||
Abstract The abstract describing the content of the publication or report |
twenty-three radiocarbon results from the Wayland's Smithy long barrow are presented within an interpretive Bayesian statistical framework. Four alternative archaeological interpretations of the sequence are considered, each with a separate Bayesian model, though only two are presented in detail. The differences are based on different readings of the sequence of Wayland's Smithy II. In the authors' preferred interpretation of the sequence, the primary mortuary structure was some kind of lidded wooden box, accessible for deposition over a period of time, and then closed by the mound of Wayland's Smithy I; Wayland's Smithy II was a unitary construction, with transepted chambers, secondary kerb and secondary ditches all constructed together. In the Bayesian model for this interpretation, deposition began in the earlier thirty-sixth century cal. BC, and probably lasted for a generation. A gap of probably forty to a hundred years ensued, before the first small mound was constructed in 3520--3470 cal. BC. After another gap, probably of only one to thirty-five years, the second phase of the monument was probably constructed in the middle to later part of the thirty-fifth century cal. BC (3460--3400 cal. BC), and its use probably extended to the middle decades of the thirty-fourth century cal. BC. Results are discussed in relation to the local setting, the nature of mortuary rites and the creation of tradition | |||||||||
Year of Publication The year the book, article or report was published |
2007 | |||||||||
Locations Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published. |
|
|||||||||
Note Extra information on the publication or report. |
[OS SU 2811 8536] | |||||||||
Source Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in. |
BIAB
(The British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (BIAB))
|
|||||||||
Created Date The date the record of the pubication was first entered |
11 May 2007 |
