harestonesdown
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 17, 2013, 20:17
|
|
megalith6 wrote:
With regard to the possible symbolic pairing of the avenue stones - Aubrey Burl, ‘Prehistoric Avebury’ (2002) page 76: Alexander Keiller and Stuart Piggott had noted that “along the rows of the [West Kennet] avenue ... the ... long thin pillar and a broader diamond [shape perhaps] ... denoting male and female symbols ... a fertility cult ... one of the first objective interpretations of what Avebury might have been used for”.
Bests,
Ric
Not having read it i wasn't aware of that, not that it gives the theory any more validity in my mind using the current standing stones of the WKA. All the more reason to find and re-erect the missing ones then. :)
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 17, 2013, 20:46
|
Thanks for this Ric.
I suspect the Grade II listing is unlikely to be relevant, unless the stone was part of the building or a recognised (i.e. recognised by the listing body) part of the landscaping.
I must admit, having read this thread, I don't know what restrictions being within the WHS boundary has on things like removing a sarsen stone, if it's just part of the natural drift (and at the moment it's not clear whether that's all it was). Are we assuming the sarsen (whatever its status) was on the land of the people who "supplied" it? Or did they take it from someone else's land?
Stupid people though, surely they should have gone to Cornwall if they wanted granite? I reckon one of those big stones at Trethevy would have been just the job.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 17, 2013, 21:16
|
|
thesweetcheat wrote:
Stupid people though, surely they should have gone to Cornwall if they wanted granite? I reckon one of those big stones at Trethevy would have been just the job.
You might be able to have the choice from eight soon Alken, look at the lean outward on the front closure stone and how 'upright' the buttress stone is getting :-(
https://picasaweb.google.com/100525707086862773355/LeaningClosureStone?authkey=Gv1sRgCK3fqfbgit3CxQE#5846032428629282578
|
Littlestone
|
Edited Feb 18, 2013, 12:11
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 12:09
|
|
megalith6 wrote:
I've just checked with an online pdf and "West Kennet" which is mentioned at the Bosham page is indeed well within the Avebury WHS, thus the removal of this stone - if unauthorised - would surely constitute a violation of the Heritage Site.
Thanks for the info Ric.
It really does go to show that even stones within the WHS are not as safe from ‘removal’ as some might think.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 12:21
|
|
Littlestone wrote: megalith6 wrote:
I've just checked with an online pdf and "West Kennet" which is mentioned at the Bosham page is indeed well within the Avebury WHS, thus the removal of this stone - if unauthorised - would surely constitute a violation of the Heritage Site.
Thanks for the info Ric.
It really does go to show that even stones within the WHS are not as safe from ‘removal’ as some might think.
VBB will know the answer to this no doubt but has every household within the WHS been advised as to their responsibilities with regard to the non-shifting of sizeable stones without permission that they have or might discover on their land or in their gardens?
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 17:40
|
That's the point I was trying to make yesterday Roy, but my throwaway Trethevy remark probably cost me seriousness points :) - what are the restrictions?
There's a lot of sarsen drift all over the downs, does the WHS status prohibit any moving or interference with any of it, or is it limited to stones that are clearly (or even speculatively) part of "something"?
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 18:31
|
|
thesweetcheat wrote: That's the point I was trying to make yesterday Roy, but my throwaway Trethevy remark probably cost me seriousness points :) - what are the restrictions?
There's a lot of sarsen drift all over the downs, does the WHS status prohibit any moving or interference with any of it, or is it limited to stones that are clearly (or even speculatively) part of "something"?
Yep we've marked your card now Alken. You'll have to bribe your way into Cornwall through the Cornish Border Patrol with a healthy supply of pasties...made with swede mind you, not carrots or you'll end up in Bodmin Jail :-)
VBB won't let us down you'll see. He'll be Googleing away right now for sure!!
|
tjj
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 19:27
|
|
thesweetcheat wrote: That's the point I was trying to make yesterday Roy, but my throwaway Trethevy remark probably cost me seriousness points :) - what are the restrictions?
There's a lot of sarsen drift all over the downs, does the WHS status prohibit any moving or interference with any of it, or is it limited to stones that are clearly (or even speculatively) part of "something"?
I don't know for certain but would imagine there are restrictions on moving stones from within the World Heritage Site (am sure I could find out if no one else does). Like you said there are hundreds of stones lying around in the valley of Fyfield Down and Lockeridge Dene, again I don't know what the restrictions are, if any. Fairly certain someone could sell a sarsen from their own land with a certain amount of impunity. The point of the original post was that the stone in question bears a marked similarity to the West Kennet Avenue stones and therefore may be a lost part that ancient monument.
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 19:47
|
|
tjj wrote: Fairly certain someone could sell a sarsen from their own land with a certain amount of impunity. The point of the original post was that the stone in question bears a marked similarity to the West Kennet Avenue stones and therefore may be a lost part that ancient monument.
Yes, that's the crux of it I guess. The stones that make up the monuments at Avebury and WKA were selected for whatever reason, but there must have been (still are) lots of similarly shaped stones that weren't selected or used in anything.
If the stone was "just" a sarsen, there may be no issue with any of this, other than the obviously loopy reasoning behind fetching it in the first place (especially as they were directed to find a piece of granite by the superpowerful spirit and have singularly failed to do so).
I'm feeling a bit prejudiced about this particular incident because of the utter nonsense (in my opinion, obviously) behind the moving of this particular stone, so on a slightly less New Age Bollocks front, what would be the deal, restrictions-wise, if you wanted to use a piece of sarsen as a gatepost or something? In an ideal world, you would probably have to get the County archaeologist or someone out to assess your stone before you think about moving it, but I don't suppose that's likely to happen.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: The Bosham Stone
Feb 18, 2013, 19:49
|
|
tjj wrote:
The point of the original post was that the stone in question bears a marked similarity to the West Kennet Avenue stones and therefore may be a lost part that ancient monument.
Yes that is the most interesting part because if that is a fact and it is typical of an Avenue stone, then it tells us a little more...that the stones selected/shaped really meant something and weren't just random picked. Amateurs showing their worth once again!
|
