|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Ancient sites: Protect or Use? |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 17:11
|
||
|
Mustard wrote: What's the harm with biodegradable offerings though? I can see the objection to plastics or anything that might linger and disturb future archaeology, but if it's just a corn doll or something...... Something that has pissed me off for a long time is leaving memorials on remote hill tops , places like the top of Ben Nevis are covered in people wishing to show their grioef in some material form , there are appropriate places for these sort of demonstrations , graveyards and Buck House . I recently came across a memorial cairn on the top of an Argyllshire hill fort ,worse it was built on top of rock art . It seems to be getting worse post Di , But today I came across a wooden sculpture near Dunkeld providing a seat too and a place for brass plaques , this I thought totally appropriate and not a selfish maybe pagans could find some sort of similar construct .Perhaps if they became more aware of the little we do know of thes sites they believe were "for " burials they might go elsewhere . A church has burials but there is a lot more to it than that most of it relatively positive but maybe a few cleft skulls and possible sacrifices should be highlighted never mind the weirdo "lets swap the jaws of that one with this one and take away the feet " that happened at their fave sites .
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 17:29
|
||
|
How about a compromise, clearing stuff before adding stuff, making for an offerings-neutral environment? Or even, better still, adopting the idea "Leave less than you find" which is offerings-negative! That way, everyone's a winner. ;)
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 18:23
|
||
|
Depends how you define litter. ;) Something that shouldn't be where it is? And, by extension, governmental bodies and certain individuals who, for the time being, may remain anonymous ;-)
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 18:28
|
||
|
I believe there are people out there in the ether who find all the romanticism and panglossian caricatures of the old ancestors a bit nauseating in the first place. They would argue that it's as apporpriate as future followers of the Smorgasbord Trinity Cult leaving boiled sheep ears on the ruins of Old Trafford. In Newgrange, for example, they do not allow ceremonies even, as to do so may imply that people of a certain persuasion today have more of a claim to the site than anyone else when such a continuity simply does not exist. Brilliant! And brings us neatly back to English Heritage's nauseating idea of a 21st century time capsule buried in Silbury (just after they've finished 'conserving' it).
|
|||
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 18:49
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Brilliant! And brings us neatly back to English Heritage's nauseating idea of a 21st century time capsule buried in Silbury (just after they've finished 'conserving' it). An admission that the guy they uphold as a shining figure, Mr Atkinson, brought the conservation about because he screwed the job badly the first time would be welcome too. The earlier tunnellers share some responsibility, but they were not in possession of the equipment and 20th century knowhow, and there was no evidence of any subsidence before 1969.
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 19:02
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: How about a compromise, clearing stuff before adding stuff, making for an offerings-neutral environment? Or even, better still, adopting the idea "Leave less than you find" which is offerings-negative! That way, everyone's a winner. ;) Sounds good to me!
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 19:03
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Depends how you define litter. ;) Something that shouldn't be where it is? You mean like a bunch of rocks ripped from the earth and then dumped in the middle of a location of outstanding natural beauty? ;)
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 19:10
|
||
|
CianMcLiam wrote: Why leave something there though at all, what's the pain in leaving a place just as it was found and where's the gain in leaving detritus behind? Even that involves a tacit imposition of a subjective belief set on other visitors though. I would suggest that the simplest approach would be for everyone to show some consideration the beliefs of others, and to avoid behaving in a way that unreasonably impacts upon other people's enjoyment of a site. Not leaving non-biodegradable offerings would seem a reasonable expectation, as would the notion that people who do leave offerings should clear up the gathered detritus occasionally. Equally, a tolerance of some respectfully placed, non-destructive offerings would seem like a reasonable level of reciprocation. A little tolerance on both sides would go a long way. PS. I'm not a leaver of offerings or a follower of neo-pagan mysticism.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 19:42
|
||
|
You mean like a bunch of rocks ripped from the earth and then dumped in the middle of a location of outstanding natural beauty? ;) Perhaps you are referring to the collection of stones that form Stonehenge. Or the four and a half thousand year-old mound we call Silbury. Or Perhaps you are even referring to the Pyramids or to the Uffington White Horse? With respect, those things, and others like them, are examples of mankind's harmony with the earth - not something 'dumped' in the middle of a location of outstanding natural beauty. To equate the tat of plastic dolls, rotting bananas, crystals and tea candles left at our ancient and sacred places with the beauty of the earth and some of the finest statements that man has made upon it is... well, a little tatty to say the least.
|
|||
tuesday 280 posts |
Jun 26, 2007, 19:51
|
||
|
CianMcLiam wrote: ...imply that people of a certain persuasion today have more of a claim to the site than anyone else when such a continuity simply does not exist. Wise Words. But the Neolithics were very messy weren't they? I don't think our notions of cleanliness being next to godliness really applied to them. And look at some of their offerings - a kid with an axe through its head, lots and lots of dead animals etc. What's much more interesting than litter is that feeling of the need to do / make / leave something. I know that feeling. If you aren't conventionally religous there aren't many ways to do that now. Still, it's probably best to take it with you - I mean otherwise it's just some narcisistic idea that the the place is 'yours'. That of course is impossible at Avebury and Silbury these days - With all these cameras and stuff about, I'd be absolutley terrified of dropping something - in case it got reported here!
|
| Pages: 23 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
