2 INTRODUCTION. 



them, and the huge mounds, so common in some parts of that con- 

 tinent, are the evidences of an early civilisation, to which the 

 marvellous ruined cities of Central America bear a stronger wit- 

 ness; cities which, in their elaborate and profuse though strange 

 sculpture, give indications of an art developement so distinctive in 

 its character, that it could scarcely have had its origin in the mmd 

 of any of the races of the Old World. 



They abound in Great Britain and Ireland, differing in shape and 

 size, and made of various materials; and are known as barrows 

 (mounds of earth), and cairns (mounds of stone)\ and popitlarly in 

 some parts of England aslows, houes, and tumps. They vary in 

 size from a few feet in diameter to a miniature mountain, like Sil- 

 bury Hill in Wiltshire, which covers above five acres of ground, 

 and measures 130 ft. in perpendicular height ^. 



The manner in which the dead have been disposed within them 

 differs very considerably. Sometimes the body, whether burnt or 

 unburnt, has been placed in the mound without anything to protect 

 it from the surrounding- earth or stones. Sometimes it has been 

 placed in a small box of stone, a cist ; at other times in the hollowed 

 trunk of a tree, or in a grave sunk below the surface of the ground ; 

 and, when a burnt body, often in an urn ; whilst in some instances 

 the mound encloses a large structure, suggestive rather of an abode 

 for the living than of a resting-place for the dead ^. Of this last 



^ Barrows and cairns often occur in close proximity, there being nothing in the 

 mode of interment or in the remains found in them to imply that there was any 

 difPerence in point of time between the two kinds of mound. 



^ Silbury Hill has been twice examined \vith the view of ascertaining whether it 

 was sepulchral or not. First in 1777, when a shaft was sunk from the top to the 

 bottom ; and again in 1849, when a tumiel was cai-ried up to the present centre, as 

 nearly as it could be ascertained, at the level of the surface of the ground. Though it 

 was satisfactorily proved to be artificial, no remains, which indicated that a burial had 

 taken place beneath it, were discovered. These examinations caimot, however, be con- 

 sidered satisfactory as affording any conclusive evidence that it is not a sepulchral 

 momid. The area which it covers is very large, and the primai-y bm-ial, even if it was 

 at the centre, might very easily have been missed, and by many yards, dui-ing the 

 course of both the investigations. In the process of throwing up so large a mass of 

 earth, the original centre could scarcely have been retained, and it is probably a con- 

 siderable distance from the present one. 



Stukeley mentions that an iron bridle-bit and some armour were found on the 

 summit, the remains probably of a Saxon intennent, placed there certainly long after 

 the mound was thrown up. The occm-rence of Saxon burials in the upper parts of 

 British barrows is by no means infrequent. I have myself met with three, and very 

 notable instances. 



' Some writers, and with much probability, have regarded the sepulchral chamber 

 as a copy of the habitation of the li\dng, and the way in which the dead are some- 

 times found, arranged upon a stone bench roimd the chamber, as representing the 

 maimer in which they sat in their huts when alive. There certainly is a gi-eat 



