Ancient Royal Tomb Unearthed in Scotland

[Snapdragon]

Ancient royal tomb found in Scotland

Archaeologists stunned as dig unearths 4,000-year-old burial treasures unrivalled anywhere in Britain

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ancient-royal-tomb-found-in-scotland-1771875.html

[Nuadu]

That is a great find and a great post. Credit where its due well done.

[talamh]

This is yet another indication that a whole lot more was going on in what is called "pre-history" then we have even imagined. Forgotten cities and sites from more then 10 centuries ago are being found... India, Cambodia, China, Europe... I was taught a version of "history" that said essentially that long ago there were knuckle-draggers who lived in caves and everything has been getting better and better since then and that right now is the pinnacle of all culture and knowledge. Now we are beginning to see that there were great cities and great cultures long before we even guessed. I really love it when grand accepted self-serving wisdoms are disproven.

[Tiberias]

talamh - that whole "great line of history, with us at the pinnacle" model got thrown out a long time ago outside of high school history teachers who can't keep up.:)

The site sounds amazing, especially on the preservation side. I'd love to see if the labs at Aberdeen or Glasgow can pull any residue out of the bowl and bag.

I think, though, as per usual, the press is misrepresenting the archaeology. From what the archaeologists are saying and from the description, we don't know that it was a "royal" tomb. And "ultra-high-status" is pretty strong wording to describe a tomb that, while very impressive sounding, is largely so due to good preservation which tends to dim the brilliance of similar complexes elsewhere. To be honest, unless there are a lot of grave goods not mentioned in that article, I'd venture a guess that it's not a "ruler" at all, unless the individual was ruling a pretty small group of people. The grave goods, while definitely high-status, don't sound THAT extraordinary for the period.

[Seren_]

talamh - that whole "great line of history, with us at the pinnacle" model got thrown out a long time ago outside of high school history teachers who can't keep up.:)

The site sounds amazing, especially on the preservation side. I'd love to see if the labs at Aberdeen or Glasgow can pull any residue out of the bowl and bag.

I think, though, as per usual, the press is misrepresenting the archaeology. From what the archaeologists are saying and from the description, we don't know that it was a "royal" tomb. And "ultra-high-status" is pretty strong wording to describe a tomb that, while very impressive sounding, is largely so due to good preservation which tends to dim the brilliance of similar complexes elsewhere. To be honest, unless there are a lot of grave goods not mentioned in that article, I'd venture a guess that it's not a "ruler" at all, unless the individual was ruling a pretty small group of people. The grave goods, while definitely high-status, don't sound THAT extraordinary for the period.

The Beeb have a slightly better article that doesn't spin it so much:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/tayside_and_central/8195357.stm

It's a great find, Professor Driscoll was one of my lecturers when I was at uni :)

[Tiberias]

Yeah, the BBC article is way better. Thanks for the link.:)

I think this is probably the most interesting aspect of the entire story:

"This burial provides the strongest evidence of the presence of ancestral graves which may have been regarded as mythological heroes by the Picts who were also buried nearby in Forteviot."

Gold and bronze is nice, yeah, but it's the context that makes for exciting archaeology. Fits in nicely with the sort of work done at Yeavering lately, for instance, and that whole school of thought that suggests early Medieval (Anglo-Saxon, for instance) rulers were appropriating bronze age burial sites to help create their gens and claim territory.