|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Avebury » Alexander Keiller's Avebury |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Edited Jan 22, 2013, 12:57
Jan 22, 2013, 12:49
|
||
Using the 'recent' work carried out in the Beckhampton Avenue where lost stones were re-united with daylight as an example, it shows that as long as there is funding the job can be done even though we have been offered 'excuses' why it can't. Those excuses have all been ignored in this instance...why? Anyone care to explain why this 'overlooking' can't be extended to re-erecting those buried stones in the circle?
|
|||
|
Harryshill 510 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:03
|
||
|
I said If I were a archaeologist. I would draw the conclution.. Which is true, I did and do.
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:08
|
||
|
Harryshill wrote: I said If I were a archaeologist. I would draw the conclution.. Which is true, I did and do. Well you're not an archaeologist, so you can't know what conclusion you'd reach if you were, can you? That's like me saying what my opinion on your car would be if I was a mechanic. And if you *did* draw any conclusions based on a handful of people discussing a subject on an internet forum, that wouldn't be very smart, would it?
|
|||
|
Harryshill 510 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:11
|
||
|
LOL. Suport to maintain the Statis Que is not really required until there is a move to change it. To make a change requires suport.
|
|||
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:13
|
||
|
You might like to have a read of this http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/archaeological-research-agenda-avebury.pdf I've just cast my eye over the beginning chapter very quickly but it stands out that the plan is to undertake excavations only in a disciplined way where it fits into proper research. And that research has to be done in a sustainable way ie "meeting today's need for improved knowledge and understanding of the WHS without jeopardising the ability of future generations to do the same". So I reckon that doesn't include reerecting all the buried stones just to satisfy the aesthetic sensibilities of visitors. Whereas maybe excavating the beckhampton stones finally proved something major that hadn't been proved before (the resistivity surveys weren't conclusive http://www.eng-h.gov.uk/reports/beckhampton/ ) ie that the avenue really did exist. Anyway I dunno, why don't you email Josh Pollard and Mark Gillings, then you won't have to speculate.
|
|||
tjj 3606 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:17
|
||
|
Mustard wrote: tjj wrote: Sanctuary wrote: Good try. So you think you speak for all archaeos Nigel? I bet if most were asked to oversee the re-raising of all the stones they couldn't agree fast enough. Same applies to the EKLB as you brought it into the discussion. 'Most' archaeos never get a shot of making a name for themselves and if the project was offered to them they'd jump at the chance I suspect. It didn't stop them 'destroying the archaeology' when they dug for and exposed the stones in the BH avenue did it because it was not destroyed but thoroughly investigated as the work progressed. How come they didn't feel bad about digging there? But that's just my view. Roy, I know you love Avebury as do others but I don't quite get the urgency to this. All anyone with an opposing view is saying is 'now is not the time' ... for which there are many reasons, most of which Nigel Swift and Rhiannon have detailed in their posts. Which is well and good, but I've not seen any argument for leaving the stones buried that isn't spurious. Maybe I missed something. What, in your view (and I apologise if I'm asking you to repeat something, but it's a long thread) would be the most compelling reason for leaving the stones buried? Perhaps I do sound like I'm just being awkward - I have read through LS's piece on HA and of course it is persuasive - he is nothing if not articulate and does know a thing or two about conservation. No argument there. Also no argument that the buried stones should be lifted and erected at some point in the future - when that time comes it will be very exciting for all involved and I'm sure there are younger people here, like Bladup, who may see it happen in their lifetime. I'm not going to try and list the reasons why it shouldn't be rushed, they have already been stated (better techniques in the future etc). Avebury is part of a World Heritage Site, along with Silbury, WKLB and Stonehenge. I may be wrong on this, I'm sure someone will correct me (and I hope they do if needs be) but I understood this status means nothing substantial should be changed. Would it mean therefore the WHS status would have to be relinquished in order to dig up the stones and erect them - this is a question not a statement. I would be happy to see Avebury further restored and my only point is that this feels as though it belongs to the future. Why the rush?
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:17
|
||
|
Harryshill wrote: LOL. Suport to maintain the Statis Que is not really required until there is a move to change it. To make a change requires suport. And deciding either way whether that support exists on the basis of a very small forum discussion would be idiotic. I mean seriously... do you honestly imagine an archaeologist wandering into TMA and thinking "well on the basis of eight people bickering amongst themselves, I can now form an opinion on the relative support or lack thereof for re-erection of stones at Avebury!"? I would really *hope* that no archaeologist would be that stupid.
|
|||
|
Harryshill 510 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:17
|
||
|
Lol. Of course I'm not a archaeologist. But I can say if I were, That judging from the lack of support there is (So far) for change. that I could conclude that there is no real support for it from tma'ers Trying to make me look a arse, will not help you win the argument.
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:20
|
||
|
Rhiannon wrote: You might like to have a read of this http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/archaeological-research-agenda-avebury.pdf I've just cast my eye over the beginning chapter very quickly but it stands out that the plan is to undertake excavations only in a disciplined way where it fits into proper research. And that research has to be done in a sustainable way ie "meeting today's need for improved knowledge and understanding of the WHS without jeopardising the ability of future generations to do the same". So I reckon that doesn't include reerecting all the buried stones just to satisfy the aesthetic sensibilities of visitors. Whereas maybe excavating the beckhampton stones finally proved something major that hadn't been proved before (the resistivity surveys weren't conclusive http://www.eng-h.gov.uk/reports/beckhampton/ ) ie that the avenue really did exist. Anyway I dunno, why don't you email Josh Pollard and Mark Gillings, then you won't have to speculate. Wasn't speculating just wondering why one hole being dug is 'destroying the archaeology' when another one isn't! Can't have it both ways, but apparently you can!
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Jan 22, 2013, 13:20
|
||
|
tjj wrote: Mustard wrote: tjj wrote: Sanctuary wrote: Good try. So you think you speak for all archaeos Nigel? I bet if most were asked to oversee the re-raising of all the stones they couldn't agree fast enough. Same applies to the EKLB as you brought it into the discussion. 'Most' archaeos never get a shot of making a name for themselves and if the project was offered to them they'd jump at the chance I suspect. It didn't stop them 'destroying the archaeology' when they dug for and exposed the stones in the BH avenue did it because it was not destroyed but thoroughly investigated as the work progressed. How come they didn't feel bad about digging there? But that's just my view. Roy, I know you love Avebury as do others but I don't quite get the urgency to this. All anyone with an opposing view is saying is 'now is not the time' ... for which there are many reasons, most of which Nigel Swift and Rhiannon have detailed in their posts. Which is well and good, but I've not seen any argument for leaving the stones buried that isn't spurious. Maybe I missed something. What, in your view (and I apologise if I'm asking you to repeat something, but it's a long thread) would be the most compelling reason for leaving the stones buried? Perhaps I do sound like I'm just being awkward - I have read through LS's piece on HA and of course it is persuasive - he is nothing if not articulate and does know a thing or two about conservation. No argument there. Also no argument that the buried stones should be lifted and erected at some point in the future - when that time comes it will be very exciting for all involved and I'm sure there are younger people here, like Bladup, who may see it happen in their lifetime. I'm not going to try and list the reasons why it shouldn't be rushed, they have already been stated (better techniques in the future etc). Avebury is part of a World Heritage Site, along with Silbury, WKLB and Stonehenge. I may be wrong on this, I'm sure someone will correct me (and I hope they do if needs be) but I understood this status means nothing substantial should be changed. Would it mean therefore the WHS status would have to be relinquished in order to dig up the stones and erect them - this is a question not a statement. I would be happy to see Avebury further restored and my only point is that this feels as though it belongs to the future. Why the rush? *Why* does it belong to the future though? *What* archaeology is at risk from re-erection? At *what point* do we decide that current techniques are sufficient to support restoration? LIke yourself, I'm not being awkard - I just struggling to see what the objection is.
|
| Pages: 77 – [ Previous | 1 … 14 15 16 17 18 19 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
