|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Ancient sites: Protect or Use? |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Mirla 10 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 15:18
|
||
|
What do people know about this group! They are putting up signs around local penwith monuments such as Tregeseal stone circle. These signs are ugly lumps of stone with bold writing warning people that they will be prosecuted if they are found to be damaging these sites.....in their opinion "damaging" includes -Lighting fires (Understandable-i agree) -Dropping litter (I agree) -Camping (depending on the respect of the campers) But the next one i find stupid... -No leaving offerings of any kind!!!!! From early childhood, even though neither my parents or i are religious in any way, i have been brought up to respect these places and have often left a small gift of plaited grasses, wildflowers or interesting natural items that have been found on the walk. I DO NOT however agreee that non-bio degradable objects such as plastic flowers, toys and other items should be left as these can spoil the natural beauty and atmosphere of the site. However some of these sites are still in use by groups who practise alternative beliefs such as Pagan groups. They use these sites as sacred places and respect them, as this is what they were built for, i see no problem in them being used as they should be. It shows that there is still respect for the old Ways and beliefs, i believe this protects the site more than the threat of prosecution. In my opinion, this way of 'protecting' these sites is just evidence of a breakdown in communication between different grups of people and i know that many people have been discoraged from visiting these places and that in general, local people are disappointed with the way that things have been done. Anyone have any views on this subject? Should Ancient sites still be used as they were built for? Why does protection always include prosecution? Is is right? Your thoughts either Agreeing or Disagreeing would be great! Cheers Mirla
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 16:30
|
||
|
Mirla wrote: However some of these sites are still in use by groups who practise alternative beliefs such as Pagan groups. They use these sites as sacred places and respect them, as this is what they were built for, Anyone have any views on this subject? Should Ancient sites still be used as they were built for? Why does protection always include prosecution? Is is right? Your thoughts either Agreeing or Disagreeing would be great! Cheers Mirla Hello Mirla , I'm one who would rather see these sites left as you found them . Although a plaited daisy chain is hardly offensive .I am intrigued as to how those pagans know what these sites were "built for " . Maybe the ycan enlighten those of us who have been puzzling over this for ever .
|
|||
bigfoot_66 6 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 17:10
|
||
|
Yes there is no 'concrete' evidence for much of the actual and specific original uses...but I find the votive aspect of folks' trips to sites and significant locales a hopeful sign that not all humanity thinks upto the Big Brother(C4) level and no further. That perhaps folk are looking for depth and reflection in their lives...although I have encountered my share of incredibly gullible new agers. I'd say let people access the 'numinous' in their lives at their significant locales and acknowledge it by tokens/prayers etc. But I'd definitely go along with leaving all your plastics and nylons at home.
|
|||
Hob 4033 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 17:18
|
||
|
Mirla wrote: What do people know about this group! Which group would that be?
|
|||
ocifant 1758 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 18:35
|
||
|
I suspect the reference is to CASPN, the Cornish Ancient Sites Protection Network. See http://www.cornishancientsites.com/ The group is diverse, and includes many Pagans - I know several of the main players in the group personally. They have nothing but respect for the sites and do a lot of good work,in league wih other organisations, making sure that the sites are accessible and available to all. The other side of access is of course protection - making sure that the sites are not overrun and worn away by visitors. Hence the requirement to leave the site as you find it. I've been in Cornwall this weekend, and myself removed some leftover 'offerings' from some sites,which otherwise would have rotted in place and left a mess for the next visitor. As a Pagan myself, I have no problem with anyone using the sites in this way, but I do get annoyed at having to clear up mess left behind by others.
|
|||
|
postman 848 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 19:16
|
||
We always tidy up when on a visit, not our mess of course just othr doll's eds, although Ive gotta say I don't understand pagans anymore than I understand anyone else, Religion who needs it? it's hard enough just being human
|
|||
|
scubi63 463 posts |
Jun 25, 2007, 19:44
|
||
|
In my opinion (for what it is worth) I am in favour of anybody who can help keep our ancient sites in good order. I have been to many places where they are simply being left to disappear back into the earth or where people treat them as a playground with the same result. If a group is willing to do this sort of work then they should be able to ask visitor to treat them with respect they deserve. As for leaving offerings, I think small floral items do not harm, but may give a sign for others (who probably don't know any better) to leave any sort of rubbish behind. :o) Chris
|
|||
|
Mirla 10 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 11:26
|
||
|
Wow, some varied opinions here! i have read your messages and comments closely and i have thought about the very intelligent points that have been made. i have learnt loads from them, and am glad to find that people with different beliefs have been included in the attemp to protect the sites. I hope that no-one got the wrong idea, I am not saying that theses sites should not be protected and kept in good condition. i am all in favour for this as i hope that they will be there for many more generations to enjoy and to feel a conection with the past. As to keeping sites tidy for visitors this is also fair enough. i wouldnt want to visit if they were messy as this would destroy the atmosphere. As to My point as to "What they were used for" that was meant in a more symbolic way. As far as Archeaological survey and excavation can conclude many sites were not defensive, settlement nor agricultural. All through history there has been a respect for the dead and in many of the sites in question have relationship to burial, this helps to explain the belief systems of the past. The sites not directly related to Death and Burial are harder to interpret, but evidence shows that they were used in other ways. The relevence of this is that these places are still used in a respectful way in the practice of a belief system. thanks for you're views, they are very helpful to me in the development of my understanding a more personal view on Archeaeology! Cheers Mirla!
|
|||
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 12:34
|
||
|
postman wrote: We always tidy up when on a visit, not our mess of course just othr doll's eds, although Ive gotta say I don't understand pagans anymore than I understand anyone else, Religion who needs it? it's hard enough just being human There is obviously a need for individual paying of respects without imposing that on any subsequent visitor, which appears to be the main problem. Too many bits of tat that have little real meaning discarded and left for others to dispose of, fires in the middle of circles and on top of barrows, creating an overall impression that implies nobody cares who does what. Next thing you know, damage to places like Belas Knap is seen, elsewhere at least, as common and in time becomes acceptable.
|
|||
doktoratomik 379 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 14:15
|
||
It does raise the interesting question of the degree to which these sites should be pickled and preserved, or maintained in a tradition of continuing use. Which in turn, goes hand-in-hand with the issue of restoration. Who would suggest that Avebury should be closed to public access to prevent erosion, for example? And who would suggest that none of the Dartmoor circles (or Wayland's Smithy, or Stonehenge....) should have been restored? Our interaction with these sites is complex, and the archaeological case for preserving them as we find them is compelling, but not conclusive.
|
| Pages: 23 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
