|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Silbury updates |
This topic is locked
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jun 30, 2007, 17:59
|
||
|
Plus...there is no need, other than an emotional one, to place anything there at all. We are not living in an age where documents are unique and can be lost forever. With the internet, computer records and the archaeological reports, the contents of the capsule will be known and recorded. Our modern history will be [and is being] documented in more detail than ever before, and is available to all, and unless the internet and all power fails, that is always going to be the case. Yes, it's nice to read old newspapers, to touch something placed there in the past, but when you know it's there, you know its contents, there seems absolutely no point digging it up. In fact, I'd wager that if you said you'd placed it there, but actually hadn't, but went along with the whole procedure, nobody would ever know, because nobody will be digging for it anyway!
|
|||
|
scousemaiden 160 posts |
Jun 30, 2007, 20:11
|
||
|
Thank you, yes my children and I had a lovely time. I will always be of the opinion that a time capsule belongs in Silbury Hill. Who are we to say that the artifacts we are finding/have found were not purposely left by our Neolithic ancestors as their own time capsule. At the time Silbury was built "time capsules" as we know them weren't readily available. The Pyramids in Egypt contained items to be found by future generations; items now treasured and if they were to "shore up" the pyramids would anyone object to more treasures being left? We tend to think we "know"what our ancestors wanted/beieved. Who are we to be so arrogant? As i said perhaps Silbury was meant to contain treasures to be found in the future; so who are any of us to say a time capsule is wrong? Scousemaiden xxx
|
|||
Pilgrim 597 posts |
Jun 30, 2007, 23:44
|
||
|
Hi scousemaiden, scousemaiden wrote: I will always be of the opinion that a time capsule belongs in Silbury Hill. Who are we to say that the artifacts we are finding/have found were not purposely left by our Neolithic ancestors as their own time capsule. Hmm.. bits of broken antler and such left in a disparate manner? I thinketh not. Sorry. scousemaiden wrote: At the time Silbury was built "time capsules" as we know them weren't readily available. ...which is all the more reason not to inflict our societical paradigms on Silbury. It should be left alone. As was; as is. As Joey Ramone said: I'm against it. Peace Pilgrim X
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 05:39
|
||
|
"We tend to think we "know"what our ancestors wanted/beieved." Actually, isn't that the whole issue - not just with Time Capsules but offerings. We really DON'T know what our ancestors wanted/believed. That being so, the only "safe" thing to do is nothing. But its not really for us here, or EH or the Avebury parents to decide. Silbury is a World Heritage Monument "of universal cultural value to humanity". How it should be treated is governed directly and indirectly by a whole bookshelf full of international treaties, conventions, conferences and the like. Tens of thousands of fancy words, but if you care to have a look at them they ALL actually simply say "if in doubt, do nowt". EH should read them, not try to tell us there are "many conflicting conservation issues" here. When they finally do, they'll see. I doubt if they'll go ahead in the end.
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 06:39
|
||
|
EH should read them, not try to tell us there are "many conflicting conservation issues" here. When they finally do, they'll see. I doubt if they'll go ahead in the end. As well as bringing ethical and professional pressure on English Heritage, there should be a way to stop them on legal grounds. They are obviously contravening international agreements with this time capsule nonsense - time for a couple of well drafted letters to the appropriate international bodies methinks.
|
|||
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 08:15
|
||
|
'Perhaps' and 'maybe' don't work. It's a purely emotional response to a daft EH invitation to one and all, one which was withdrawn when they saw sense. Quite how the TC slipped through is a mystery, one which EH have yet to explain. Ultimately there are a lot more reasons NOT to insert anything into the hill than there are for. And none of the pro arguments are based on anything other than media exposure and emotional 'wouldn't it be lovely if...' wishes by people who should know better.
|
|||
|
scousemaiden 160 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 08:16
|
||
|
We have no way of stopping excavations in the future no matter whether we are for or against them. Human nature makes us curious, which is a good thing. Without curiosity we have only ignorance. The intent of English Heritage is for the good of Silbury Hill and its all about ones intentions. I still stand by my beliefs that the Time Capsule is of no harm to Silbury Hill; it will be put in with love and contain objects placed in there by people filled with excitement, enthusiasm and the desire to give something as a gift or a gesture. I also strongly believe that given half a chance most of you would have loved to be in my position on Friday.Me thinks too many people who feel they should be involved have been overlooked, and as their two penneth isn't wanted, are taking the proverbial hump. Don't worry I can feel the hate," how dare she"'s, and" who does she think she is" already....................................and it bothers me not!!!! Happy and proud to be involved Scousemaiden xxx
|
|||
|
Robert Carr 84 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 08:20
|
||
|
Pilgrim wrote: Hmm.. bits of broken antler and such left in a disparate manner? I thinketh not. Sorry. I thinketh that the deposition of artefacts (some deliberately broken prior to the act) at prehistoric monuments has been established as fact by archaeologists. But hell - what do they know! Sorry.
|
|||
|
Robert Carr 84 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 08:32
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: As well as bringing ethical and professional pressure on English Heritage, there should be a way to stop them on legal grounds. They are obviously contravening international agreements with this time capsule nonsense - time for a couple of well drafted letters to the appropriate international bodies methinks. Hi boss. Forget the letters to 'appropriate international bodies'. Put your money where your mouth is and go and see a lawyer if you believe you have a legal case.
|
|||
|
VenerableBottyBurp 675 posts |
Jul 01, 2007, 08:33
|
||
|
[quote="nigelswift I doubt if they'll go ahead in the end.[/quote] I wouldn't count on it, not without a fuss. VBB
|
| Pages: 67 – [ Previous | 1 … 30 31 32 33 34 35 | Next ] | This topic is locked |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
