|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » What's acceptable when interacting with sites? |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Littlestone 5386 posts |
May 18, 2011, 10:23
|
||
|
In one episode he was measuring the RH inside the Great Pyramid and, up near the top, it reached 80%. He shut it to visitors from then on. Wow! High enough to start the stone delaminating?
|
|||
StoneGloves 1149 posts |
May 18, 2011, 10:47
|
||
Cracking - and there's ancient graffiti - red ochre brushwork - right at the top which shows that the builders weren't slaves. I don't understand relative humidity levels much. I can remember working in a cotton mill that had RH gauges - always stuck at around 90%.
|
|||
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
May 18, 2011, 20:23
|
||
|
tjj wrote: moss wrote: [quote="moss I would also pose the question do we have a right to demand to see every prehistoric monument - just because it happens to be there?[/quote] Well I'll answer my own question; it suddenly struck me looking at the Countryside Code, that in pursuit of stones we often have to go across farmland to seek out stones, barrows, etc. Sometimes arable but often fields with animals in, and the farmer has every 'right' to demand of us that we don't frighten cattle, sheep, etc and cause an accident, we don't leave gates open, and we don't scrabble under barbed wire thereby makin it loose. After all this is his livelihood. He has a 'duty of care' to his land, a set of restrictions, as we all do, that is what I was getting at, its a contractual understanding, if we want freedom of access to stones on farm land we should be prepared to abide by the rules! No responsible person with disagree with a farmer's right to ask walkers to keep their dogs under control, shut gates behind them and not damage fencing. Quite. I gave my instinctive reply above, which is that sites should be open to everyone to visit. But that obviously doesn't mean there aren't good reasons why some sites should be restricted, for instance at certain times of year, lambing season, when in crop, etc. But it's a pretty poor do if "heritage" becomes the preserve of the landed classes unless the monument is in state guardianship. Respect should be a two-way thing, between the landowner whose land contains the monument and the general public. No-one is suggesting that freedom to visit means freedom to dig up/metal detect etc. But similarly the landowner doesn't have the right to damage/plough a monument just because it's on his or her land. Landownership carries responsibility and I agree with Moss that there is a contractual sense to this. Additionally, to use the Dickens' house example, I agree that privacy should also be a factor. Personally, I think the Scottish law has it exactly right and the English/Welsh version is poor in comparison. Scottish access laws are much more based on mutual respect. The bloody English can't trust one another, it seems.
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
May 18, 2011, 20:29
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: The Law of Property is complex and we all benefit from it so are we to say just a bit of it, where old stones are involved, should be amended to suit our particular hobby? I can just see the next cry: "It's everyone's heritage so there should be Freedum to metal detect"! ;) Actually property law has nothing to do with access by the public, or to do with trespass. The law of property only deals with creation of estates and interests in land (i.e. ownership, private rights, mortgages, etc), it doesn't really have any bearing on public rights of access, which are covered by an entirely different set of legislation.
|
|||
Howburn Digger 986 posts |
May 18, 2011, 21:23
|
||
|
Oh what can I say? What is acceptable? Take only photos? Well mibbe not! Where shall I begin? On Arran a few years back, I'd trudged from Glenashdale Falls over the top of Glas Choirein and wound my way through the last bit of forestry to emerge in the clearing at the mighty Carn Ban. I almost tripped over a couple interacting with one another (and presumably the site's ambience) in the clearing right in front of me. There was the inevitable awkward moment or two as I stumbled over the heather and bracken to walk around them. I had to climb up to the top of the slope and wait till they'd finished before I could take photo's. I felt to have started taking photos immediately would have been unacceptable. About 15 years ago the highway robbery of the Skye Bridge Tolls was still in full force. I held no truck with such nonsense and always took the wee swing-on chain ferry from Glenelg to Kylerhea. On one occasion the ferryman was having lunch and there were a couple of loads of cars ahead of me so me and my OH took a ramble up to the pair of brochs in nearby Gleann Beag to kill and hour or so. I'd always wanted to see them again since my dad took us there when I was a wee boy. How quickly those exciting childhood memories of playing in the ruined brochs with my wee brother were dashed. I cannot for the life of me now remember whether it was poor unfortunate Dun Telve or poor unfortunate Dun Troddan, but when my OH and I entered the structure there was a Goretexed chappie at his toilet, sitting on the edge of the well-preserved dry-stone walling, bog roll in hand. Again we had to retreat and wait to take our photos. But let's put the "taking photos" angle aside... I've found broken bottles, fag ends, joint butts, sandwich boxes, tin cans and just about every form of food and drink packaging you could name on sites. I've visited chambered cairns where people had used the actual chamber as a hearth. I usually pick up and carry out any garbage other people have left behind (the Dun Telve/Dun Troddan example excepted). In many ways I am glad people still head for sites and have some kinda wee celebration there. I am often disappointed that they simply cannot clean up after themselves.
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
May 18, 2011, 22:17
|
||
|
[quote="Howburn Digger"]Oh what can I say? What is acceptable? Take only photos? Well mibbe not! Where shall I begin? I cannot for the life of me now remember whether it was poor unfortunate Dun Telve or poor unfortunate Dun Troddan, but when my OH and I entered the structure there was a Goretexed chappie at his toilet, sitting on the edge of the well-preserved dry-stone walling, bog roll in hand. Again we had to retreat and wait to take our photos. You should have had me with you that day HD as I always carry poo bags with me for when my Chief does a dump!! :D
|
|||
drewbhoy 2559 posts |
May 19, 2011, 00:23
|
||
|
What a shitty thing to happen. At least you waited for him to finish before you took photos. What did you take pics (no pun intended) of, I suppose the brick(s) (no pun again) were in good condition, were any recent? Now soaking rock art with different types of water. Is that the same thing?
|
|||
|
Resonox 604 posts |
May 19, 2011, 05:37
|
||
A while ago, I found what looks like a ploughed out roundhouse or tumulus in Sussex, whilst browsing GE.....I posted the coordinates on TMP and someone kindly "flagged it". Now this is in the middle of a field....I assume I have no rights at all just to go there and investigate (without the landowner's permission)...regardless of whether or not I claim it as part of our/my/Sussex/the UK's heritage. So that brings us full circle in the question...do we actually have ANY rights to access ANY sites just because they exist and we claim them as "heritage"?
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
May 19, 2011, 06:01
|
||
|
Resonox wrote: So that brings us full circle in the question...do we actually have ANY rights to access ANY sites just because they exist and we claim them as "heritage"? No - not on the grounds they are "our heritage" anyway. Worse, although c. 30K sites are protected, a million archaeological sites aren't, and can be ploughed up or otherwise destroyed with impunity.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
May 19, 2011, 06:46
|
||
|
Inserting coins into cracks in stones can result in the stone cracking Nicki. The use of t-lights can also damage stones (not to mention just how environmentally unfriendly the little critters themselves are). As for the old ‘tat’ chestnut; food and drink can and does attract vermin, and one person’s offering is another person’s rubbish. Best to leave nothing, not even footprints (and the resulting erosion of sites from same by frequent or mass intrusion). In the context of the ‘free access’ argument, there is a worrying parallel between the increase in visitor numbers to a site and the damage that can cause. Ten or fifteen years ago, for example, there was hardly anything left at the Swallowhead Spring, and what was left there was mainly a few, hardly noticeable, wicker objects in the tree. Now the place has reached tipping point (pun intended ;-) outdone only by the mess left at Stonehenge after the ‘celebrations’ there at solstice time. In other words, as visitors to sites increase so too does the increase in tat and the erosion of those places - re: this recently photographed scene at the Rollright Stones. Most people on this board are aware of the problems of tat, and erosion at sites, and follow the guidelines of not climbing on structures or leaving things. Sadly not every visitor to a site is a Stonehead, and climbing on stones etc is seen by some as a bit of a lark - in some cases even a god-given right. IMHO the only right thing is the intrinsic right of a site (or in the wider context our cultural and environmental heritage) to survive undamaged, and our obligation to future generations to preserve those places and things as best we can...
|
| Pages: 15 – [ Previous | 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
